Roberts to Debate Bermas on 'Hardfire'

[T.A.M.]

This is why I think the new LC"FC will be so vague, speculative, and lite on accusation, that it will really be dead on arrival. It will not have nearly the buzz about it, once it is out there.

It will be like the movies that do well in their first week, but once word gets out that it is shaite, it will quickly die off.

Sucks when all your good stuff is debunked, doesnt it...lol

TAM

 

[Trigood]

There you go Gravy.

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8820426888499996890#40m33s

(you just add "#" and the timing at the end of the link)

As many others have remarked similarly, I think it's very amusing how the Troofers post this video in which Gravy and Abby come off as so much more reasonable than they do. Alex Jones in particular comes off particularly badly. He continually evades questions, by "instructing" his followers on how supposedly disingenuous Mark is. Hey AJ, how about just answering the question?

I also think it's tres amusante how Abby in her quiet way got Bermas to admit that he thinks the firefighters are paid off.

 

[StoneWT]

a load of bull and a bullsh*tter

I don't know the air date. The recording date is December 14. I emailed Bermas and Rowe to be sure they were in. Bermas replied that it's on, "weather permitting." Don't they sell snow tires in Oneonta? I hope I don't have to drive all the way up there to pick them up in my NWO-issue Hummer. It only gets 11 miles to the fetus.

Weather permitting? Huh? Like they couldn't leave a day earlier than the bad weather or take transportation (Greyhound, Amtrak, airplane)? This sounds a great deal like an excuse for not attending. Although, they will try to pull the same crap as the Democracy Now! debate with PM if they attend. Thing is, Gravy specializes in their bullsh*t.

Roxdog is setting out his stall early.....

Dave, you need to realize that Roxdog is an extremely insignificant bit player. He hasn't produced any NWO videos, written any NWO books, given any public speeches at genuine events (ones that require admission and months of planning), or done any research beyond investi-googling. His claim to fame is a pseudo radio show on the Internet that consists of foulmouthed rants and has, literally, a handful of listeners. He also volunteers on several conspiracy forums. He is involved in this stuff because it gives worth to his life. It's all an ego boost for him.

If you choose to engage him in dialogue, you will only enrage him with facts. In his mind, this causes him to lose face and makes him resort to swearing and changing the subject. He'll start attacking you as a person because criticizing his theories is viewed as criticizing him.

Heck, look at the list of questions he used that you quoted. Those are juvenile conspiracy theories. Real beginner-level stuff there. Certainly not on the level of a researcher.

 

[60hzxtl]

They'll need to run that past Ron Wieck first. I'd be thrilled if all three participated. I don't know about this "sitting in for Korey" business. In August Rowe challenged his critics to a debate, and I immediately accepted. Hope he doesn't get cold feet.

Cold Feet? Or Wet Seat?

This is why I think the new LC"FC will be so vague, speculative, and lite on accusation, that it will really be dead on arrival. It will not have nearly the buzz about it, once it is out there.

It will be like the movies that do well in their first week, but once word gets out that it is shaite, it will quickly die off.

Sucks when all your good stuff is debunked, doesnt it...lol

TAM

Sounds like Do Over! to me!

 

[JAStewart]

This is why I think the new LC"FC will be so vague, speculative, and lite on accusation, that it will really be dead on arrival. It will not have nearly the buzz about it, once it is out there.

It will be like the movies that do well in their first week, but once word gets out that it is shaite, it will quickly die off.

Sucks when all your good stuff is debunked, doesnt it...lol

TAM

"LCFC will be BULLET PROOF, trust me on that" - Merc the Jerk (his actual old LC user name) in relation to LCFC being debunked by Gravy.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

They're still talking about the Firemen in on it quote, and here are my thoughts:

Gravy proposes the question "So the firemen were in on it?"

To which Jones says 'No...'.

Later Roberts does say "You said they were in on it", which is wrong, I admit, as Jones never said this, however, what Jones says is peculiar:

"They told them to get out because they were gonna blow it"

Red = my own comments and NOT part of the quote.

"They told them
(FIREMEN)
to get out because they
(PRESUMABLY WHOEVER CTERS BELIEVE PULLED IT/AUTHORIZED THE PULLING OF IT)
were gonna blow it"

THIS implies that the firemen were TOLD that WTC7 was gonna be blown and are thus, keeping shut about that aspect of 9.11 and as such, ARE in on it. This is according to What Jones is saying of course.

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=1258&view=findpost&p=9791672

 

[MikeW]

David Ray Griffin suggests that at least the senior fire chiefs were "in on it":

Another Explanation: There is, in any case, only one theory that explains both the nature and the expectation of the collapse of building 7: Explosives had been set, and someone who knew this spread the word to the fire chiefs.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=GRI20060129&articleId=1846

 

[Oliver]

http://loosechange911.blogspot.com/

And, the moment that some people have been waiting for, we're going to be on the "Hardfire" show with Ronald Weick, along with our good buddy, Mark "I can debunk your very existence" Roberts. The debate will be Jason and Korey versus Mark and the Host. It'll be filmed on the 14th, and it'll air for the first time on the 25th at 10:30 PM.

Btw, Mark Roberts is the pleasant gentlemen in the video below calling people names and stalking them. It should be interesting.

I might actually sit in for Korey. We'll see when we get there.

It'll repeat on the 26th at 8:30, and then again on the 1st and 2nd of January, at 10:30 PM and 8:30 PM respectively. It'll also stream off their website live.

I didn't want to post details on this until it was 100% confirmed, so I apologize for the delay.

 

[JAStewart]

"Btw, Mark Roberts is the pleasant gentlemen in the video below calling people names and stalking them. It should be interesting."

Hey Dylan, have you read/seen 9/11 deniers speak?

 

[Gravy]

David Ray Griffin suggests that at least the senior fire chiefs were "in on it":

Of course. Like Chief Peter Ganci, who was in charge of the whole operation.

Until he died there.

 

[Gravy]

"LCFC will be BULLET PROOF, trust me on that" - Merc the Jerk (his actual old LC user name) in relation to LCFC being debunked by Gravy.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

They're still talking about the Firemen in on it quote, and here are my thoughts:

Gravy proposes the question "So the firemen were in on it?"

To which Jones says 'No...'.

Later Roberts does say "You said they were in on it", which is wrong, I admit, as Jones never said this, however, what Jones says is peculiar:

"They told them to get out because they were gonna blow it"

Red = my own comments and NOT part of the quote.

"They told them
(FIREMEN)
to get out because they
(PRESUMABLY WHOEVER CTERS BELIEVE PULLED IT/AUTHORIZED THE PULLING OF IT)
were gonna blow it"

THIS implies that the firemen were TOLD that WTC7 was gonna be blown and are thus, keeping shut about that aspect of 9.11 and as such, ARE in on it. This is according to What Jones is saying of course.

http://z10.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=1258&view=findpost&p=9791672

On his websites Jones repeatedly directly accuses the FDNY of "pulling" WTC 7. In person, he only went as far as saying that they followed orders to pull out. "They don't question orders," he said, which means the chiefs on the scene were lying about being in command. Hey! That's being "in on it!" Jones, like all the other deniers who use this argument, don't appear to consider its implications, which I list in my WTC 7 paper:

1. The top people in the FDNY were so corrupt that they called off a search for hundreds of fallen firefighters in order to participate in a crime.

2. The FDNY Chiefs who claim to have made an agonizing decision to stop rescue operations in the area around WTC 7, based on the desire to save lives, are lying.

3. All the people on the scene who claim to have seen massive damage and uncontrolled fires on many floors at building 7, and who claim that they believed the building would collapse, were coerced into inventing those stories in order to cover up the crime of deliberate demolition of a skyscraper.

4. The massive amount of smoke seen billowing from nearly every floor on WTC 7’s south side did not indicate massive fires.

5. None of the 16,000 uniformed or civilian members of the FDNY, or anyone else who was involved in this huge conspiracy, has come forward about these issues in the past 5 years.

 

[Trigood]

On his websites Jones repeatedly directly accuses the FDNY of "pulling" WTC 7. In person, he only went as far as saying that they followed orders to pull out. "They don't question orders," he said, which means the chiefs on the scene were lying about being in command. Hey! That's being "in on it!" Jones, like all the other deniers who use this argument, don't appear to consider its implications, which I list in my WTC 7 paper:

1. The top people in the FDNY were so corrupt that they called off a search for hundreds of fallen firefighters in order to participate in a crime.

2. The FDNY Chiefs who claim to have made an agonizing decision to stop rescue operations in the area around WTC 7, based on the desire to save lives, are lying.

3. All the people on the scene who claim to have seen massive damage and uncontrolled fires on many floors at building 7, and who claim that they believed the building would collapse, were coerced into inventing those stories in order to cover up the crime of deliberate demolition of a skyscraper.

4. The massive amount of smoke seen billowing from nearly every floor on WTC 7’s south side did not indicate massive fires.

5. None of the 16,000 uniformed or civilian members of the FDNY, or anyone else who was involved in this huge conspiracy, has come forward about these issues in the past 5 years.

And that about sums it all up! KA-CHING!

 

[Garb]

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8820426888499996890#40m33s


http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=8820426888499996890#28m33s

Does Bermas say "Expose ed" when he tries to say exposed?


Somebody needs a lesson in English...

 

[chippy]

I think he's subconsciously trying to frame Mr. Ed, that old TV horse, for planning 9/11.

 

[twinstead]

I think he's subconsciously trying to frame Mr. Ed, that old TV horse, for planning 9/11.

HA. I've always suspected that devious horse. Having an evil minion disguised as a human named Wilbur to do his bidding? Brilliant!

I find it suspicious that the 911 Commision never investigated that possibility, by the way...

 

[Quad4_72]

Mark will tear em up.

 

[T.A.M.]

As many others have remarked similarly, I think it's very amusing how the Troofers post this video in which Gravy and Abby come off as so much more reasonable than they do. Alex Jones in particular comes off particularly badly. He continually evades questions, by "instructing" his followers on how supposedly disingenuous Mark is. Hey AJ, how about just answering the question?

I also think it's tres amusante how Abby in her quiet way got Bermas to admit that he thinks the firefighters are paid off.

I think the reason they post this stuff, is the audience they are trying to reach. The young "eminem" wanna be punks that watch this stuff will likely side with the "eminem" wannabe guys that are at the forefront of the video. They would hate sane, calm people, like Mark and Abby, preferring the "boyz" who are in their faces.

trouble is, convincing those guys is the easy part. With videos like that they will NEVER convince the vast majority of the sane adult world.

WRT LC:FC being bullet proof:

Yes well, a Kevlar vest is bullet proof as well, but is boring as shaite, and proves nothing, convinces noone of anything...the same will be true of the watered down, only the facts will be shown, conjecture filled, speculation only LC:FC.

TAM

 

[Skeptic4Sure]

What is Mark going to do when the Northside Citgo witnesses come out?

Are you guys going to admit that 9/11 is an inside job or are you going to "self-correct"?

You people are going to watch history pass you by clutching to these bedtime stories.

... you're going to miss the train.

You better get on or get out of the way.

 

[Gravy]

What is Mark going to do when the Northside Citgo witnesses come out?

I'm going to poo in my pants and cry when you produce all those witnesses who swear flight 77 didn't hit the Pentagon.

Still waiting for your rebuttal, Skeptic. You said you had something to say to me. What seems to be the trouble? Cat got your tongue?

 

[W6102LA]

What is Mark going to do when the Northside Citgo witnesses come out?

Are you guys going to admit that 9/11 is an inside job or are you going to "self-correct"?

You people are going to watch history pass you by clutching to these bedtime stories.

... you're going to miss the train.

You better get on or get out of the way.

 

[beachnut]

What is Mark going to do when the Northside Citgo witnesses come out?

Are you guys going to admit that 9/11 is an inside job or are you going to "self-correct"?

You people are going to watch history pass you by clutching to these bedtime stories.

... you're going to miss the train.

You better get on or get out of the way.

I hate to miss the train but I think it is going crazy, and it was such a short trip for you!

Let see you have proof 77 did not hit the pentagon when all the physical evidence backed up with witnesses prove 77 hit as it did?

What beer do you have? I need some. (more beer)