• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Jason Bermas Back-Pedelling.

Steven Merchant: It's a bigger man than many that can admit that.

Ricky Gervais: Or a man that's bang to rights, and obviously caught out and has no choice.
 
Yeah, he made a mistake all right. He made the mistake of saying what he was thinking, even though it was royally retarded to do so.

They seem to make that mistake a lot.
 
realitybites said:
Alex Jones to Gravy: Let me see your identification!!
Gravy: You don't need to see my identification.
AJ: I don't need to see your identification.
Gravy: These are the facts you're looking for.
AJ: Here are the facts I was looking for.
Gravy: You can go about your business being a douche.
AJ: I think I'm gonna get back to being a douche.
Gravy: Here's your megaphone.
AJ. Here's my megaphone. Here's my megaphone.
Click to expand...

Thanks RB for making my day. My coca cola went up my nose again, but beyond that pain, this post was absolutely hillarious.

TAM
 
Dylan is now claiming that the reason it took 3 months for Bermas to withdrawl his statement is because it was just brought to their attention....

..... :jaw-dropp

Something Bermas himself said three months ago just came to Bermas's attention today? Sounds more like "We just found out he said it ON TAPE and therefore can't deny it, so... here's what we really meant."
 
Modern media is a really pain in the butt sometimes, isn't it?

At least if you don't want a record of the crazy things you say.
 
Oh man, we don't deserve a link? I was hoping for the extra traffic, I need to sell t-shirts...

Apparently Dylan needs to keep his other buddy in check too. Rowe is saying unauthorized things:

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=1258&st=60

QUOTE (A very sly denial @ Dec 1 2006, 06:11 PM)
So, could you please clarify whether errant information was purposely left in your documentary? I am not trying to cause trouble... I think that this is an extremely valid question, and I would assume that anyone seeking the truth (skeptic or otherwise) would want to know the answer to this.


No. Thanks for asking.
Click to expand...
 
This is just one other pathetic example of how these troofers are unwilling to face the reality of their accusations, how they don't want to face the consequences of their actions.

They accuse some "entity" of being behind 9/11, but in reality, sooner or later, these accusations involve REAL people: thousands of innocent people, professionals at the NIST, the FAA, NORAD, controlled demolition companies and yes... the NYFD.

Are they really just asking questions? No. They implicitly accuse people of mass murder.

Troofers, do you really want the answers to your questions? Do you really want to know WHO/WHAT/WHERE/WHEN/HOW, or do you just like to accuse people without any proof?

This is real life.

Cretins. :mad:
 
Last edited:
so instead of being paid off, bermas thinks firefighters were "threatened" into maintaining the big lie. gotchya. no apology here.
 
realitybites said:
Dylan is now claiming that the reason it took 3 months for Bermas to withdrawl his statement is because it was just brought to their attention....

..... :jaw-dropp

Something Bermas himself said three months ago just came to Bermas's attention today? Sounds more like "We just found out he said it ON TAPE and therefore can't deny it, so... here's what we really meant."
Click to expand...

I guess Dumbass just has a slow working ehm... mind (for lack of a better word).

Jason Dumbass "Yes please."
Do Over Dylan "Yes what?"
Jason Dumbass "Yes, I like a cup of coffee."
Do Over Dylan "??"
Jason Dumbass "You asked me if I like a cup of coffee?"
Do Over Dylan "That was three months ago."
 
Abby Scott = Yoda? Personally I think she is a lot cuter than yoda but maybe Jason thinks otherwise. I do find it a bit odd that Abby is accused of using a jedi mind trick when it is their own scholars (whackos is a better term) that claim to have a death star. Wonder if that means Fetzer is Darth Vader?
 
I still think this is a prelude to the Loosers chickening out of their debate with Gravy. The face-saving 180 goes something like this:

"Look, they took something we said out of context, and make a big stink about it. But since we're such nice guys, once we found out about it, we apologized for it anyway. Those evil JREFers, though, not only they wouldn't accept our apology, but they're still stretching our words! So debate them? Never!"

Yes, dear. Except it's you who are on tape making the claim.

As I said above, I think this apology is a step in the right direction. Let's be very clear on this. It is, however, only the beginning of a long reckoning:

  • Do you believe the firefighters are participating at all in the coverup?
  • If yes, how do you know this to be true? And do you realize that, even if they were threatened, you are still accusing them of the coverup?
  • If no, how do you explain the fact that they knew hours ahead of time that WTC 7 was going to fall?
I think it's in our best interest to accept this apology, find out what it really means, and go from there. Let's make absolutely sure that they believe in this apology and never let them forget it. Because not only is the apology the right thing to do, but whether they realize it yet or not, this apology ultimately will lead them to reject their entire hypothesis.
 
realitybites said:
Dylan is now claiming that the reason it took 3 months for Bermas to withdrawl his statement is because it was just brought to their attention....

..... :jaw-dropp

Something Bermas himself said three months ago just came to Bermas's attention today? Sounds more like "We just found out he said it ON TAPE and therefore can't deny it, so... here's what we really meant."
Click to expand...

Oh well that explains it all then. It simply slipped their minds and they forgot all about it. Yep I can relate to that one totally.
 
realitybites said:
Dylan is now claiming that the reason it took 3 months for Bermas to withdrawl his statement is because it was just brought to their attention....

..... :jaw-dropp

Something Bermas himself said three months ago just came to Bermas's attention today? Sounds more like "We just found out he said it ON TAPE and therefore can't deny it, so... here's what we really meant."
Click to expand...
Gravy distributed his WTC7 paper, what, 2 months ago?

Which means they still haven't read it.* I hope they don't think they're going to get much mileage out of WTC7 in their new video...

*edit: or maybe they just read it today, in preparation for the debate?
 
Last edited:
R.Mackey said:
I still think this is a prelude to the Loosers chickening out of their debate with Gravy. The face-saving 180 goes something like this:

"Look, they took something we said out of context, and make a big stink about it. But since we're such nice guys, once we found out about it, we apologized for it anyway. Those evil JREFers, though, not only they wouldn't accept our apology, but they're still stretching our words! So debate them? Never!"

Yes, dear. Except it's you who are on tape making the claim.

As I said above, I think this apology is a step in the right direction. Let's be very clear on this. It is, however, only the beginning of a long reckoning:
  • Do you believe the firefighters are participating at all in the coverup?
  • If yes, how do you know this to be true? And do you realize that, even if they were threatened, you are still accusing them of the coverup?
  • If no, how do you explain the fact that they knew hours ahead of time that WTC 7 was going to fall?
I think it's in our best interest to accept this apology, find out what it really means, and go from there. Let's make absolutely sure that they believe in this apology and never let them forget it. Because not only is the apology the right thing to do, but whether they realize it yet or not, this apology ultimately will lead them to reject their entire hypothesis.
Click to expand...
You know, you're right, Mackey. They probably do not actually believe that any firefighters were "in on it", and in that sense, the apology is probably sincere. I think they just haven't thought through the implications of some of their speculating, though. If forced to think it through, they'll have to either abandon the speculation or decide that there really were firefighters involved. Either way, we should find out where they stand.
 
If the FDNY was not involved, does that mean they are going to drop the whole "After talking to Silverstein the FDNY pulled WTC 7" argument?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom