LCFC - Coming soon to a cinema near you...

[Moving On]

Important to keep in mind: we're not the ones accusing people of mass murder without a shred of evidence, while excusing the real murderers. My $0.02.

Did they lie about the premise(s) for invading Iraq?

Did they have a desire to invade Iraq pre-9/11?

Did they know US soldiers would die in advance of a flasely justified invasion?

Did the soldiers die?

You do the math.

Refresher Course: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2052384&postcount=78

 

[Moving On]

Russell you will never find out how radars are used to estimate altitude, you did not even notice the raw data available at the NTSB on flight 77.

It has many points of estimated altitude but then you are not an engineer, or are you?

Engineers explain to Russell Doppler. Engineers explain to Russell multiple radar antenna and how they could be used to estimate a targets altitude.

For over 50 years radars have been used to calculate altitude of aircraft. Think that is before MODE C.

Bet you can not find it because you are missing the simple things. Your research is still shallow. You have grabbed the low fruit and declared victory and yet the game is still afoot, Sherlock Holmes would never declare victory with out the whole truth. You have come up short and you are hanging the wrong man over and over again.

Good luck, but as Chuck would say "NO JOY"

It does appear that specially configured primary radar can do it +/- 3000 feet.

I learn every day.

 

[Moving On]

The only person I have seen come over from LC and actually try to sanely, and rationally discuss anything is Russ, so why should we do them the honor of engaging in such conversation at that site, the site that to me, still needs to prove itself as a place for honest, uncensored debate and discussion.

last I checked you could not even view the posts without registering. So I can not decide whether I want to become a member via lurking. Not getting off to a good start...unless this part has changed.

TAM

Thank you.

I am supporting JREFers there as an admin.

It is becoming a tougher case because some of them act so poorly.

I wish more balanced ones like yourself would participate intelligently.

 

[Regnad Kcin]

Hi there, Russell, et al.

I never bother coming in here, mainly because we're so far from the action over here that we don't really have much interest in the whole deal. I do, however, recognise that lots of the CT surrounding 9/11 is pure bunkum.

Yup.

Despite that, it's clear that many people aren't happy with the official story, to a greater or lesser degree.

So?

The reason I have had a look at this thread is because I was staggered that a thread had moved to 200 posts in around 12 hours.

Also, just for fun, I joined Loose Change Forum last week to see whether the "Loosers" were the rabid maniacs I had been led to believe. Comments like this: made me think that the LC members were obviously just a lunatic fringe.

Lo and behold, the TRUTH about LC forum members is exactly the opposite to what the above would suggest.

And you've been shown your error. Will you concede you were wrong?

I told the forum in my first post that I am a member here and nobody banned me, or even cried about it. In fact, most people merely wanted to know why JREF members were so unfailingly rude and obnoxious to anyone who comes in here and mentions LC!

"Unfailingly rude?" Please.

I have found them to be no more than misguided at worst, and strangely, most of them actually don't believe half the bollocks that JREF's "9/11 heroes" would have us think they believed.

You've determined this over months of lurking and posting, yes?

For instance, not one person I've found so far doubts that WTC 1 and 2 were brought down by anything other than passenger jets crashing into them. Most of them simply don't trust the official story. Many of them doubt the official line on WTC7, and who could blame them? The manner of its collapse was unique and while I'm not suggesting it was anything other than a result of the attacks, its uniqueness does open a can of worms for those who wish to doubt the official story - and let's face it, if 80-odd percent of people have questions about some part of the story, it's as good a place as any to start asking questions. On the whole, the way the affair has been handled begs too many questions for people to be comfortable with, and clearly, they aren't.

That's nice.

Not being one of the "9/11 heroes" gives me, I believe, an ability to look at the whole thing impartially and I have been fascinated by this thread in particular. In Russell, I see a polite, determined man, who is receiving nothing but abuse and biased criticism from people who should know better.

Nonsense. From your first sentence to your last.

Well, okay, I'll concede you are fascinated by the thread.

Just a quick recount of a few of the posts from the last two pages reveals these gems, from JREF members who are determined to discredit Russell, but alas, are being outclassed in every respect.

This is an example of the excellent "analysis" attempting to counter Russell:

From a "muse":

While this is from a "scholar":

This, from a "critical thinker" is worth re-quoting almost in its entirety:

Yep, that's "thinking" for you!

Another, "critical thinker":

This one's a "Ninja", apparently. Better stick to Ninja-ing!

Here's that "scholar" again:

And here's the "scholar", again! Some institution you're studying in! (I'd recommend asking for a refund.)

And, to round it out nicely, some more "critical thinking":

The titles you so cleverly use are largely administered by the forum software. You do know that, yes?

Had Russell posted stuff like this, the screams of "ad hominem" and rushing to report the posts would have blown Darat to Scotland.

If you say so.

To an impartial observer, this thread looks like a lot of spoiled little kids crying, while Russell has preserved his dignity throughout.

Who would that "impartial observer" be?

It amuses me more and more every day that the JREF forum, championed by its own members as the home of critical analysis, seems to be more a group of immature little wannabes who are scared crapless that someone else might be receiving more attention than they are.

How's the atmosphere way up there atop your steed? Thin, I'll wager.

Keep it up, Russell, this is the kind of stuff which will turn ever more people to your way of thinking - flawed, in my opinion, though it may be.

Yes, Russell, please turn even more people to your flawed way of thinking! Huzzah!

 

[Moving On]

Okay Russell, so then explain what in the hell that has to do w/ proving that 9/11 was an inside job - the purported purpose of LCFC. You brought up the Burlingame name in this thread - for what purpose? I'll give you a chance to explain, but it sure as hell seems like you're making a transparent attempt to associate the Burlingame name w/ the 9/11 CT movement.

LC has had many errors.

It has also pointed out things that need further investigation.

Even the chair and co chair of the Commission have admitted that.

LC will be accountable to its errors as it will be recognized for getting issues discussed.

 

[Gravy]

I didn't say you had to agree with, or support, them. You might be pleasantly surprised.

Doesn't the fact that they've dropped some of the loonier ideas suggest that they are actually able to accept evidence? To modify their views?

Look, I'm on the outside looking in, but they have clearly changed ground and Dylan Avery is just one person. The other ones there seem to be quite open to factual evidence and I would have thought that genuine, critical analysis - in layman terms - might even bring them closer to your own.

Fine and good, but I've put my analyses in writing, which as you say many of them are aware of. They are welcome to respond, but they do not. And if your definition of reasonable is someone like Russell, I beg to differ. The more he is corrected and exposed to evidence here, the more he believes in his conspiracy theory. Wow.

 

[Gravy]

LC will be accountable to its errors as it will be recognized for getting issues discussed.

Riiiight.

"We know there are errors in the documentary, and we’ve actually left them in there so that people discredit us and do the research for themselves."

– Korey Rowe, Loose Change's producer http://tinyurl.com/qruh7

 

[bjb]

Did they lie about the premise(s) for invading Iraq?

Did they have a desire to invade Iraq pre-9/11?

Did they know US soldiers would die in advance of a flasely justified invasion?

Did the soldiers die?

You do the math.

Refresher Course: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2052384&postcount=78

Based upon the evidence, I believe the Bush administration lies about pretty much everything. I even believe some of them may be guilty of war crimes. I do aknowlege they are a bunch of criminals but to believe this is evidence of a 9/11 conspiracy would be an ad hominem fallacy.

By the way, I don't believe they thought US soldiers would die in large numbers. They figured it would be a 'slam-dunk' like the previous Iraq war. In this respect they are not liars, just incompetent.

 

[beachnut]

Did they lie about the premise(s) for invading Iraq?

Did they have a desire to invade Iraq pre-9/11?

Did they know US soldiers would die in advance of a flasely justified invasion?

Did the soldiers die?

You do the math.

Refresher Course: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2052384&postcount=78

so you couple 9/11 to your political goals

you do not like iraq war, no one likes war,

so you blame 9/11 on those who you blame the war on

you car gets hit my an unknown driver, you hate your neighbor so you blame him, in fact you hate your neighbor who you loved before the accident but a year late your hate him , so he did your car in

logic to me

I am now a CT guy

I figured it out. 9/11 happened. My grandson threw bbs into my new 7500 dollars dipole speakers, Nemo sounds like the end of a tv exploding in fire, therefore my grandson did 9/11, I hate bbs in the voice coil ploy

logic shall prevail

we can all use this logic, and it saves having to dig up evidence to hang your neighbor with.

Not so sure you can take current events and make them causes for past events.

Russell you keep telling me to stop living in the past or something

Darn example of you once again debunking your own stuff.

About the radar, you looked up stuff to prove your assertion wrong on your web page, did you mean to agree with me, your web page was poor research so you looked it up and you are going to fix it, or did you miss the fact your page is wrong. I am not sure but you never said anything about your statement from the web page maybe you thought it was may statement you were proving wrong, but it was from your web page.

http://www.pentagonresearch.com/77.html

Your reply to me can help you fix this page but I am not sure you know what is wrong now.

 

[T.A.M.]

Well for starters, if someone were able to speak to the obnoxious CT nutbars that have been posting rediculous things here lately, with no other intent than to be malicious and disruptive, I might consider going to LC. Right now I have little patience for any of this...to be honest.

TAM

 

[stateofgrace]

Did they lie about the premise(s) for invading Iraq?

Did they have a desire to invade Iraq pre-9/11?

Did they know US soldiers would die in advance of a flasely justified invasion?

Did the soldiers die?

You do the math.

Refresher Course: http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2052384&postcount=78

Russell the answers to your questions are yes by enlarge.As for knowing there would be so many deaths, I doubt it.

Please watch.

http://www.informationclearinghouse....rticle6456.htm

http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article12555.htm

Now we have got this out of the way and established that some people support the Iraq war and some don't, can you please tell me the exact connection between 911 being an inside job and the Iraq war?

stateofgrace

 

[Moving On]

Do you have access to this evidence.

I was in the Air Force there was no stand down of NORAD. I flew the next day on business, as a military flight. NORAD never stands down. Where is evidence of this? How can they say that and insult every service person on duty that day.

I still have not seen any evidence of incendiary devices used by the government in the WTC.

Where did they get their information? I do not think they have any real evidence.

They may have gotten some of it here in the 9/11 oral histories that the Bloomberg administration fought to suppress despite the fact that it was the families who fought for it.

http://911research.wtc7.net/wtc/evidence/oralhistories/explosions.html

Also note that this is only a partial release of the oral histories. The feds now are suppressing the remainder.

Keep in mind too that it is the families trying to get the last voices of their loved ones released in the 911 audio tapes as well.

The USG is fighting that too. What don't they want you to hear from inside the building? Don't say it is the privacy issue they cited. Families are fighting it. 911 audio is also generally considered public property. That is why you hear them often.

 

[Moving On]

Riiiight.

"We know there are errors in the documentary, and we’ve actually left them in there so that people discredit us and do the research for themselves."

– Korey Rowe, Loose Change's producer http://tinyurl.com/qruh7http://tinyurl.com/qruh7

Nice try.

That was instead of correcting LC 2.

LC Final Cut will be a further correction.

Have you spent several days with them investigating something watching how they work?

 

[beachnut]

Riiiight.

"We know there are errors in the documentary, and we’ve actually left them in there so that people discredit us and do the research for themselves."

– Korey Rowe, Loose Change's producer http://tinyurl.com/qruh7http://tinyurl.com/qruh7

I never use this, but I do tell my student not to trust me for answers.

But then I am training my students how to think and use their minds.

Seems like CT movement has errors, they know it, and they want to mislead. RP has seconded this behavior. Errors, who cares, figure it out yourself, use your mind, and if we can fool you too bad.

Nice guys. Not exactly academic masterminds.

 

[Moving On]

ATHIEST,

Did you see my reply to you here?

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2057880&postcount=233

Russell

 

[Moving On]

I never use this, but I do tell my student not to trust me for answers.

But then I am training my students how to think and use their minds.

Seems like CT movement has errors, they know it, and they want to mislead. RP has seconded this behavior. Errors, who cares, figure it out yourself, use your mind, and if we can fool you too bad.

Nice guys. Not exactly academic masterminds.

Purely a very foolish insinuation.

Even if it is only to hide incompetence it is the USG/official story that has decieved with intent. You support that.

LC and myself have made honest errors along the way.

HUGE difference!!!!

 

[Gravy]

Nice try.

That was instead of correcting LC 2.

LC Final Cut will be a further correction.

Have you spent several days with them investigating something watching how they work?

How many chances should they be given to do basic fact-checking, Russell? I took the time to do that for them, and this is how they responded to the corrections I sent to them:

“We respond to our critics with respect." – Jason Bermas, Loose Change’s researcher and webmaster, April, 2006 http://tinyurl.com/hnp82

Email from Jason Bermas to me, July 4, 2006:

“Like I have stated before people such as yourselves are revealed to be one of two things, government agents on a payroll or brainwashed morons who refuse to accept the truth. Have a Nice 4th of July, and remember you won't be portrayed as someone who just mindlessly let something happen in history, you will be portrayed as a Traitor to your own country!”

Jason Bermas said to me when we first met, before he knew my name or read my critique “Why don't you go collect your government paycheck? How can you sleep at night?”

Korey Rowe’s “Official Loose Change Blog” post, August 11, 2006:

[Question to himself] How do you explain the viewers guides?

“I say, "have you read them?" These guides are fact-less, minus the errors that we publicly retracted and that have now been fixed in the second edition re-cut that we just put up on Google video, ONCE AGAIN FOR [expletive deleted] FREE! ...You disgust me Mark Roberts, you spineless worm. Go for it man, attack my military record, have a blast. Where's yours [expletive deleted], and what’s your REAL NAME?”

A few points:

1) My LC Viewer Guide is full of verifiable facts. We’ll see if Loose Change Recut contains 81 or more corrections on factual matters, and we’ll see how many of the other 345 flubs have been cleaned up.

2) I’ve never made any negative comments about Korey Rowe’s military record.

3) My name is Mark Roberts, although the LC guys have insisted for months that it is not, and Dylan Avery just told a reporter from the Israeli paper Haaretz that I’m not who I say I am.

4) Just after writing this, Korey Rowe admitted to me that he has never read any of my critiques. I suppose he hasn’t read them because he’s made up his mind and nothing can change it:

"There is not one thing that they can do that can dissuade me from what I think. I know they did it. ... I'm more sure of it every day." Korey Rowe, Albany Times-Union August 6, 2006

Dylan Avery’s MySpace headline, June, 2006:

“Mark Roberts is CIA.”

Dylan Avery posting on the Loose Change Forum, August 27, 2006:

“mark roberts is either the most ignorant gullible person in the world or an agent. and considering he's a grown man that should have a wife and kids and, you know, a hobby of some kind besides harassing us, i'm going with agent. mark roberts has nothing on this movement. he never has, and he never will, and he knows that deep inside. that's why he results to attacking our character and insinuating. he personally wrote Nancy Jo Sales and accused her of publishing a false record of Korey's military service, without ANY proof.”

He should have talked to his partner Korey, who already knew that I had never contacted Ms. Sales, or anyone else, about Rowe’s military record, but who wasn't man enough to remove that accusation from the LC blog.

These are your people, Russell. Proud to be associated with them? How about the victim-bashing they do, which I catalog in Loose Change Creators Speak (pages 1, then 13-18)? Proud to be associated with people like these three and Killtown, who you call a friend, and whose hobby is harassing a victim of 9/11?

 

[Moving On]

"How many chances should they be given to do basic fact-checking, Russell? "

Gravy,

How many shots does the 9/11 Commission, FEMA and Nist need at WTC 7?

Russell

 

[The Atheist]

And you've been shown your error. Will you concede you were wrong?

No, I concede that in the past they may have been different, but I'm talking about now, the present and they are presently not at all rabid.

"Unfailingly rude?"

Hey, I am THE expert on rudeness, I know.

You've determined this over months of lurking and posting, yes?

Not at all, I am working on the present - see above.

The titles you so cleverly use are largely administered by the forum software. You do know that, yes?

Just as I know that they are easily changed. You do know that, yes? Not only that, the top of every page of the forum mentions "critical thinking" and discussing things ina "friendly and lively way". Lively, I'll give you.

Who would that "impartial observer" be?

Me. I'm about as impartial as you could find on this subject. No Kiwis died on 9/11 and none have died in service in Iraq. A lot of people died on 9/11 and a hell of a lot more have died in the name of 9/11 since. None of them are Kiwis either. Impartiality rules when it isn't personal and if you don't think people are taking it very personally, you really are living in ga-ga land.

How's the atmosphere way up there atop your steed? Thin, I'll wager.

It's great! Not often I get the chance to sit on the sidelines and be impartial, I'm usually the guy right in the middle.

Yes, Russell, please turn even more people to your flawed way of thinking! Huzzah!

If you don't think that's a potential result of what's happening here, then the old chestnut, "Methinks thou doth protest too much" will mean nothing to you. The more people vociferously deny something, the more likely bystanders are to believe there is a problem. Maybe you need to read more Mark Twain.

 

[Moving On]

How many chances should they be given to do basic fact-checking, Russell? I took the time to do that for them, and this is how they responded to the corrections I sent to them:

Email from Jason Bermas to me, July 4, 2006:
Jason Bermas said to me when we first met, before he knew my name or read my critique “Why don't you go collect your government paycheck? How can you sleep at night?”

Korey Rowe’s “Official Loose Change Blog” post, August 11, 2006:
A few points:
1) My LC Viewer Guide is full of verifiable facts. We’ll see if Loose Change Recut contains 81 or more corrections on factual matters, and we’ll see how many of the other 345 flubs have been cleaned up.
2) I’ve never made any negative comments about Korey Rowe’s military record.
3) My name is Mark Roberts, although the LC guys have insisted for months that it is not, and Dylan Avery just told a reporter from the Israeli paper Haaretz that I’m not who I say I am.
4) Korey Rowe recently admitted to me that he has never read any of my critiques. I suppose he hasn’t read them because he’s made up his mind and nothing can change it:

Dylan Avery’s MySpace headline, June, 2006ylan Avery posting on the Loose Change Forum, August 27, 2006:

He should have talked to his partner Korey, who already knew that I had never contacted Ms. Sales, or anyone else, about Rowe’s military record, but who wasn't man enough to remove that accusation from the LC blog.

These are your people, Russell. Proud to be associated with them? How about the victim-bashing they do, which I catalog in Loose Change Creators Speak (pages 1, then 13-180)? Proud to be associated with people like these three and Killtown, who you call a friend, and whose hobby is harassing a victim of 9/11?

Gravy,

Truthfully I have tried to give you the benefit of the doubt being aware of the various positions about you.

I have watched you manipulate and use tactics to the same degree you accuse others of.

I have seen you quote one section of an interview and neglect another. I have seen you cast doubt on Mr. Rodriguez and by your own account try to tell him what it was he actually experienced. On one hand you act indignant if a responder is questioned but the ones you disagree with you find an excuse to question yourself.

Yes they are "my people" and I am proud of it. I would not see anybody here so far who could even come close to earning my allegiance.

You do what you accuse others of and maybe that is why you "protesteth" so much in my opinion.

I can't say what your motives are but they seem very exaggerated after watching you work.

Russell