• 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.

Hustler woo

This is what gets me, and a valid question. If you are right, then why even acknowledge the CTers (I mean the alternate CTers)? Why even bother with this topic? Let them all implode and collapse. Let them JAQ off (whatever that means, more insider jargon; anybody? little help?) and make asses of themselves, like I guess I am because I've read 50-60 books on intel and rogue networks, and then fade away into Hustler-land?

You guys feed their fire. You don't really think they're gonna tear down the government, do you? Let them have their hobby! Like you have yours!

I was going to reply, but LashL said it so well, just read below. I agree with all he has said in the following quote.

It makes no sense that you would bother to come here to deliver that little message, no. As long as you twoofers spout BS to people, we will be here to counter your BS. If you've come here to tell those of us who rely upon facts and evidence - instead of woo - to leave you poor little misguided twoofers alone, I fear you're on a fool's errand as it appears you have no idea about why we do what we do.

Skeptics here do what we do for a myriad of reasons, some of which follow. I do not purport to speak for others, and I'm not likely to touch upon all of the reasons of all of the members here, but you'll get the idea and others will correct me or add to what I say if I've left something out or misrepresnted anything. (Because around here, that's what we do. We don't just jump on a bandwagon and cheerlead like the vast majority of the twoof movement adherents are wont to do.)

We do this because we don't like to see people misled by BS, which is all that the twoof "movement" feeds people. We do this because we don't like seeing twoofers disparage the family members of those who died that day. We do this because we will not leave unchallenged the attempts of the twoof "movement" to label everyone who doesn't buy into their unsubstantiated nonsense as "disinfo", "agents", "government shills", etc. We do this because critical thinking is important, so vitally important, and the twoof movement encourages the exact opposite - mindless followers who do not think at all.

We do this because thinking, research, facts, and evidence are important - vitally important - and the twoof movement waves away facts and reality and science and critical thinking as though they matter not a whit.

We do this because we don't like seeing woowoos trying to convince people that they should blindly follow morons like those that are embraced by you twoofers as demi-gods. We do this because lurkers and fence sitters need to see twoofers exposed for what they are, and because we want lurkers and fence sitters to see that facts, evidence, science, proof, expertise, knowledge and experience not only matter but are orders of magnitude above the alternative espoused by the twoof movement (blind belief, blind following, lack of ability or incentive to think, lack of ability or incentive to research, lack of ability or incentive to consult experts, lack of ability or incentive to become experts, etc.)

And mostly, we do this because we find the behaviour of twoofers utterly despicable when they accuse innocent people of mass murder; because we find it utterly despicable that twoofers suggest that firefighters and other first responders were "in on it" or that they are too scared to speak up for their deceased brothers and sisters; because we find the lies of the twoof movement morally repugnant; because we find it reprehensible that twoofers laugh - literally - at the heroic efforts of thoroughly decent people who died that day, in order to further the twoofers' own goals, financial and otherwise; because we never lose sight of the fact that real people died that day. Not cartoon characters, not abstract non-entities, not just a number on a piece of paper, but real people. And because the deceased left behind other real people, also victims - not cartoon characters, not abstract non-entities, but real people. Twoofers disparage these innocent victims and their families every day.

That last paragraph is reason enough all on its own for skeptics and critical thinkers to take it upon themselves to rail against twoofers. I'm surprised you had to ask.

There is much more, of course, but it's late and that will have to do for now.

Ollie:

By the way: Does someone know if this one is true? :

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/111074543b902d0828.jpg[/qimg]

I am guessing, given the covers have their headlines in english, but are serving non-english countries, that they are probably faked.

TAM
 
Ollie:

I am guessing, given the covers have their headlines in english, but are serving non-english countries, that they are probably faked.

TAM

No no, it´s true - it´s a littlebit later within the thread... :)
 
SCG:

Why do I trust CNN and MSNBC etc... well I do so because I have been given no reason not to. Noone has shown me any proof that they are deliberately hiding anything. They can "be in bed" with lobbyists and politicians all they want, it doesnt make them deceitful or liars. This is the problem. I do not have the paranoid mindset...and I refuse to do so. I do not find them ignoring any story that has any kind of solid evidence or credence to it.

What I do find not worthy of my trust is the "Independent" news outlet that almost always has an "agenda" against big government, against "the man". These outlets, can have a tendency to report things as news and gospel based on a single unverified report (worldreports.org and the Paulson article for example). Look at the American Free Press. I have never seen an news agency with so much Bias in my entire life.

Now that I have explained myself, Why not take the advice of those here, pick a single issue or topic within the 9/11 attacks, and lay down your evidence or what you believe to be true and why, and take it from there.

TAM:)
 
Ollie:

ok, then I am assuming the foreign versions of Newsweek must be meant for american travellers visiting those countries (why else have the covers in English). If the fronts are true, than I guess it merely means that what sells in the rest of the world may not be what sells in America.

TAM:)
 
Ollie:

ok, then I am assuming the foreign versions of Newsweek must be meant for american travellers visiting those countries (why else have the covers in English).

Well, Newsweek Asia is for Australia/New Zealand, too - and
Europe includes this tiny island with the funny queen. :p

If the fronts are true, than I guess it merely means that what sells in the rest of the world may not be what sells in America.

TAM:)

Yes - it´s sad, but true...
 
Ollie:

You'll have to excuse my ignorance on the "asia" Newsweek thing. I had no idea it served down under.

As for the Europe thing, my comment, as ignorant as it was in reality, perhaps looked at differently, is the more enlightened approach as it assumes that the majority of Europeans do not speak English as their mother tongue...lol

TAM:)
 
Ollie:

You'll have to excuse my ignorance on the "asia" Newsweek thing. I had no idea it served down under.

As for the Europe thing, my comment, as ignorant as it was in reality, perhaps looked at differently, is the more enlightened approach as it assumes that the majority of Europeans do not speak English as their mother tongue...lol

TAM:)

Frankly - i have no clue why they publish their products
in english all over the world. I also wonder how many
english readers they have in south america but even
all their "local" homepages are in english. :">

http://www.newsweekasia.com/
http://www.nwsub.com/
http://www.newsweeklatinamerica.com/
http://www.newsweekeurope.com/
 
This so-called "skepticalcriticalguy" is obviously a sockpuppet.

Something about his writing style seems familiar to me, and the name I came up with was:

Morphology

Thoughts?
Self-quoting, but nobody responded. No post by SCG since the above. Coincidence? I think maybe not.

Anyway we were talking about Hustler.

How 'bout them Twin Spheroids?
 
Hey!!! Where did he go????

You guys are awful, confusing him with facts and reason all that un-fun stuff.
 
Hey!!! Where did he go????

You guys are awful, confusing him with facts and reason all that un-fun stuff.
Let's not be like the LC crowd. We encouraged him to read the material in the links we provided. That's a lot to digest. Let's hope he's working at it.
 
Hey!!! Where did he go????

You guys are awful, confusing him with facts and reason all that un-fun stuff.
Maybe he realized his cover was blown.

This is the first thread Morphology started:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=70798

He came in with immediate insults and personal attacks with the first post.

That user is Suspended.

I'm seeing similarities in style in some of his later posts here, and those from that thread. If this is Morphology, then he figured to try and come in different this time - "nicer". Notice how he comes into this thread feigning "newness" and "niceness", and then gets more bold and reckless as his posts progress.

He's probably now off somewhere, dreaming up a new persockality, and then he'll be back as somebody else...
 
Well, at least he's willing to admit a foundational reason for believing 9/11 woo - believing JFK woo. Pointing this out in DU and other forums really kicks the anthill over.

Actually, it was an error on my part. I meant Keane Commission. Not Warren Commission.
 
Self-quoting, but nobody responded. No post by SCG since the above. Coincidence? I think maybe not.

Anyway we were talking about Hustler.

How 'bout them Twin Spheroids?

I think I posted at 3am, and then slept and worked. Very impatient. But I'll take the blame for not understanding the forum more's.
 
Maybe he realized his cover was blown.

This is the first thread Morphology started:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=70798

He came in with immediate insults and personal attacks with the first post.

That user is Suspended.

I'm seeing similarities in style in some of his later posts here, and those from that thread. If this is Morphology, then he figured to try and come in different this time - "nicer". Notice how he comes into this thread feigning "newness" and "niceness", and then gets more bold and reckless as his posts progress.

He's probably now off somewhere, dreaming up a new persockality, and then he'll be back as somebody else...

I looked up "sock puppet". I'm not this Morphology.
Come on, a skeptic wouldn't woo like that unless he had proof! :)
 
Let's not be like the LC crowd. We encouraged him to read the material in the links we provided. That's a lot to digest. Let's hope he's working at it.

Yeah, let the guy unwind from work and have dinner. And read a few things.

(Thanks for the links, Gravy, and others.)
 
I looked up "sock puppet". I'm not this Morphology.
Come on, a skeptic wouldn't woo like that unless he had proof! :)
In fact you did not look up "sock puppet". You already knew what it meant.

In another post, you feigned ignorance at the word "woo".

Now you're claiming not to be Morphology.

I don't buy any of it.
 
Nominated. As I stated, "A clear, passionate statement at the very heart of the purpose of the JREF."

jhunter1163 said:
Nominated. Couldn't have said it better myself. :)

Wow - thanks, SezMe and jhunter. I do believe that the first time a post of mine has ever been nominated. I'm flattered. :o
 

Back
Top Bottom