Gravy's "Loose Change" Critique, part deux

[chipmunk stew]

Ah. I knew he was a kook, but I didn't know he was that far gone. He's another one who bad-mouhted me on LC but refused my challenge to debate here.

YESTERDAY

LMAO! The guys are the JERF must be pissed off to be telling Mark Roberts what is being said here. Anyway, here's my last message to him but case in point, I suggest everyone who believes 9/11 was an inside job, to stay off of the JERF forum. You will just get yourself in time consuming flame wars and we know the "skeptics" (although they readily believe the official farce) might never come around to admitting to themselves the truth about 9/11. Our time is better spent spreading the message to those who will listen. Let the OS'ers stay in their limited space and keep hating those who hold different opionions than they do.

This was my last message to you and you did not reply so therefore by your silence, you have failed to prove your point on Osama and therefore your cause.
There's nothing more to say, you guys are simply pushing the official myth to fight those who are exposing them, that's pretty circular if you ask me.
Regardless, I feel the folks over at JERF think of themselves as high and mighty and I could probably never prove my case there. You guys have convinced yourself the government lies are true and there's not much more that folks like me can do about that.
I purposely stay off the JERF site because I know it would simply be a waste of time. I've had many flame wars over the years and know when not to engage in them. I suggest you do to same. And if you feel so strongly about fighting the terrorist, please sign up at your local recruiter as soon as possible, they are looking for people such as yourself who don't dare question authority.
Have a great day!
-----Original Message-----
Nestor,
Someone on the JREF forum pointed out this post of yours to me:
http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_F...dpost&p=5577268
I'm sure you know that I am banned from posting on the LC forum. Many people there have sworn that they were going to "take me on." None have attempted to do so.
Let's go, Nestor. This is your chance to show everybody how you "Stumpped" me. As you said, it's easy to "debunk" my work.
Just sign up here
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/
and we'll discuss what LC got right that I got wrong, okay? I'll let you choose the topics.
I look forward to seeing you on the JREF forum.
Mark Roberts

TODAY

And where is your debunk of Gravys intake on Loose Change they stil waiting for it or what?

The whole thing has been debunked in that he and the other skeptics believe Osama pulled of 9/11. But the only link ever made to him was a video many suspect of being faked and after Bin Laden is known to have died. That shoots a massive hole in the skeptic's arguments they cannot get around. Because if Osama didn't order 9/11, who did?

 

[hurdygurdy]

Here's another guy from LC who has "debunked" Gravy's guide:

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?showtopic=6881&st=0&#entry5618047

Impressive work, huh?

 

[Sal The Butcher]

i DO believe there is a coverup ogf some sort by our government pertaining to 911, but i think loose change being the most well known film is a bad thing, ive got one critique, not sure if someones already mentioned it, there is a picture that supposedley shows agents removing a 'suspicious package' from the pentegon...

whne the picture is examined you can tell the object is infact one of the tents set up on the lawn, and its actually being carried TOWARDS the pentegon, not from it


its obvious when you examine it closley, the colors are consistent (there is a white cloth on a certain part) and the thing obviously weighs VERRY little based on the way its being carried

 

[greyfeather75]

les raphael has proven himself to be quite formidable in his idiocy...tom cruise better watch out....

how about a few of these conveniences:

1. this morning I woke up at 7am to go to work.
why 7am? why not 8am or 6:30am?

2. I saw an accident at such and such intersection.
why did I see it? Why wasn't I looking away? Why wasn't I at that or this intersection instead?

3. I arrived at work late, at 8:45am.
Why not 8:30am or 9:00am? Why did I go to work instead of the hospital, movie, or whorehouse?

His "69 conveniences" are the most blatant affront to intelligence I've ever encountered.

 

[Orphia Nay]

Exactly, greyfeather75, and welcome.

I find it interesting that after I posted my analysis of Les Raphael's 69, he stopped posting, and his buddy Ray Ubinger turns up.

 

[Axiom_Blade]

YESTERDAY


TODAY

Why does he keep spelling it J-E-R-F? Is this some kind of put-down?
Or does he just not know any better?

 

[Gravy]

He is to bin Laden and al Qaeda what Christophera is to steel cores. And the main bin Laden video I directed him to was NOT the one he mentioned, but the one from November, 2004: http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/79C6AF22-98FB-4A1C-B21F-2BC36E87F61F.htm

Actually, the more I think about it, NesNyc acts a LOT like Christophera. Completely immune to reason and evidence. I wonder how they turn that feature on and off. I mean, it wouldn't serve them well at work or the supermarket, would it?

 

[RandFan]

les raphael has proven himself to be quite formidable in his idiocy...tom cruise better watch out....

how about a few of these conveniences:

1. this morning I woke up at 7am to go to work.
why 7am? why not 8am or 6:30am?

2. I saw an accident at such and such intersection.
why did I see it? Why wasn't I looking away? Why wasn't I at that or this intersection instead?

3. I arrived at work late, at 8:45am.
Why not 8:30am or 9:00am? Why did I go to work instead of the hospital, movie, or whorehouse?

His "69 conveniences" are the most blatant affront to intelligence I've ever encountered.

I gotta admit, the question about the whorehouse seems to have some validity, I mean, why not?

 

[gumboot]

I gotta admit, the question about the whorehouse seems to have some validity, I mean, why not?

[spotlight]

Where were you on the night in question? Is it, indeed, not true that you were NOT at a whorehouse...

wait...

or was that, not true that you WERE at a whorehouse...

er...

[/spotlight]

-Andrew

 

[brodski]

[spotlight]

Where were you on the night in question? Is it, indeed, not true that you were NOT at a whorehouse...

wait...

or was that, not true that you WERE at a whorehouse...

er...

[/spotlight]

-Andrew

I gotta admit, the question about the whorehouse seems to have some validity, I mean, why not?

Maybe it's a double bluff, and he works at the whorehouse?

 

[MarkyX]

He is to bin Laden and al Qaeda what Christophera is to steel cores. And the main bin Laden video I directed him to was NOT the one he mentioned, but the one from November, 2004: http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/79C6AF22-98FB-4A1C-B21F-2BC36E87F61F.htm

Actually, the more I think about it, NesNyc acts a LOT like Christophera. Completely immune to reason and evidence. I wonder how they turn that feature on and off. I mean, it wouldn't serve them well at work or the supermarket, would it?

He posts often on the Screw Loose Change blogs also. "****ing stupid" isn't a very accurate way to describe him.

He thinks that all the suicide bombings are by Jews and that jews pulled of 9/11

 

[gumboot]

Maybe it's a double bluff, and he works at the whorehouse?

Fiend! Is there nothing to which these people will not stoop!?!

How is an upstanding free democratic society meant to protect against double bluffing? How I ask!

-Andrew

 

[DavidJames]

Someone named "Seabhcan" claims to have written Gravy about his guide. Here is the link. I responded to him asking him to respond with his actual comments and the response he received.

http://s15.invisionfree.com/Loose_Change_Forum/index.php?act=Post&CODE=06&f=27&t=7411&p=5815321

I have personally written to the author of this 'viewers guide' pointing out several errors and mistakes that he has made. He has point-blank refused to correct them.

This is a hit piece - he is not interested in fairness or reality.

 

[Darth Rotor]

various comments

Gravy:
Your analysis of Loose Change is a good read. I'd invite you to tighten up your critique of LC's Pentagon remarks, as they pertain to Captain Burlingame and his Naval Service. The source you link to is all over the map with facts.

BURLINGAME, CHARLES FRANK III CAPT US NAVY VETERAN SERVICE DATES: 06/09/1971 - 06/01/1979 DATE OF BIRTH: 09/12/1949 DATE OF DEATH: 09/11/2001 DATE OF INTERMENT: 12/12/2001

After he left the Navy, Burlingame was hired by American Airlines in 1989.

This appears to be a typo.

He had eluded death before, in his eight years flying F-4 Phantom jet fighters for the Navy and 17 years in the cockpit for American Airlines.

That would put his hiring by American in roughly 1984, which does not make sense, however,

17 years in the Naval Reserve

fits, as he retired in 1996, 17 years after he changed his comission to reserve from active. (1979)

A senior pilot at American Airlines, he began his airline career in 1979 after graduating from the Naval Academy in 1971. Chic served as a naval aviator flying F4 Phantoms and stayed in the reserves and rose to the rank of Captain. He earned the “Defense Superior Service Medal” and retired in 1996 after twenty-five years of distinguished service.

That entry fits the profile of a Navy pilot hiring on with an airline and remaining in the Reserves. He got out in 1979, and hired on with American right away. So, 22 year Captain with American, 17 Years in Naval Reserves, retiring in 1996, drilling at the Pentagon. Which leads us to . . .

October 24th, 2000. The Pentagon conducts the first of two training exercises called MASCAL, which simulate a Boeing 757 crashing into the building. Charles Burlingame, an ex-Navy F4 pilot who worked in the Pentagon, Participates in this exercise before retiring to take a job at American Airlines, where, less than a year later, his Boeing 757 allegedly crashes into the building.
That's wrong. Burlingame had been a pilot with American since 1979. Source (Thanks CurtC)

Please spell out the chronology, as your criticism is incomplete. Don't make your readers look around for the facts, your "source" link has much detail, and but also contains errors. His career profile is easily constructed by someone familiar with how things work from Naval Aviator to Airline pilot, someone like me. I am a USNA graduate. I retired from the Navy after 25 years of being a Navy Pilot. Many of my buddies left after 7 or 8 years to fly with various airlines. Their careeers were very similar to his above profile.

Suggested points in the ripping the LC morons a new one:

1. Captain Burlingame was a Navy F-4 pilot until 1979.
2. He then transferred to the reserves and hired on with American Airlines.
3. His reserve duty drills included duty at the Pentagon.
4. Since he retired from the reserves in 1996, he would not have been involved in a Military role in the MASCAL exercise in 2000.

Gravy, a lot of military disaster planning and exercise set ups, since Hurricane Andrew, include civilian participants. It is likely that the MASCAL exercise included representatives from the Airline Industry. MASCAL press release That might be a verifiable fact in a FOIA request, or a letter to the DoD,. or to American Airlines. I suspect that this drill would be built as follows: a 757 from Reagan Airport (whose approach and departure path is rather near the Penatgon) either has a malfunction and crashes into the Pentagon, or is somehow hijacked and crashed. The training audience is The Emergency Response Cell in the Pentagon and in the local area. Note from the article that the Police and Fire Departments were participants. I suspect an Airline company assisted with the set up of how such a crash might occur. Could have been American Airlines.

If industry reps were at the exercise, it is possible that Captain Burlingame was asked by his company, American Airlines, to be their rep at the 2000 MASCAL exercise due to his contacts in the Navy, and at the Pentagon, via the Reserves and his various USNA buddies.

Dylan and the morons cite no source that shows who the MASCAL participants were. My modest prerusal didn't either, with Google, other than cops, firemen, and the usual Pentagon bunch. I offer you a plausible scenario in which Captain Burlingame could have been, after retiring from the reserves, present at the MASCAL exercise in his role as Airline Industry expert. Or, he may have designed a previous exercise before he retired from the reserves. (Source of unknown reliability.)
IN the usual garbage from the MSM, we find an alleged quote from the Washington Post

“The Washington Post reported on 16 September 2001 that the pilot of Flight 77 was former F-4 fighter pilot Charles Burlingame III, who in his last Navy job, developed anti-terror strategies for the Navy before retiring to fly for American Airlines. He drafted the Pentagon’s emergency response plan in case it was hit by a civilian airliner. Flight 77 allegedly struck the Pentagon. It is not clear which MASCAL Charles Burlingame III authored.”

From personal experience: after the 1993 World Trade Center attack, plenty of us in the military had to do exercises like that, the anti terrorism rock drill, and someone has to set up such an exercise. It is no trivial undertaking.

After the embassy attacks in Africa, Tanzania and Kenya, the terrorist drills got more play in exercises. It is extremely likely that Captain Burlingame and some other salty old reservists put together, as one of their drills, a "what if the terrorists attack" exercise. It is one of the things reservists get tagged with doing. Of course, the Post incorrectly characterized Captain Burlingame's Navy and Ariline career tie in, but then, they are the effing Washingto Post, so who is surprised?

LC's presentation juxtaposes his F-4 pilot history, the exercise, and that he at one point worked in the Pentagon as a series of unlinked facts, in the manner of an ignoramus. The LC morons overlook, ignore, or never bothered to research any etail.

As to Captain Burlingame's sister implying that the Pentagon was "holy ground" for a Naval Aviator, I'll call that an overstatement. She loves her brother, but the Pentagon is hardly "holy ground" to anyone in the service. It is more like a necessary evil. Holy Ground for a Naval Aviator is in Pensacola, Florida, and it used to be called Trader John's.

A few points for laymen:

Why do people present aircraft speeds in miles per hour? They are generally measured in knots, aka "Nautical Miles Per Hour" just as wind speeds are. Also in kilometers per hour, on Airpseed guages so calibrated. Everything I ever flew in the Navy was calibrated in knots. (The conversion is simple arithmetic)

The photograph shows Captain Burlingame in his Naval Aviator's uniform of Captain. Drilling as a reservist, and living in Fairfax county,

He remained active in the reserve, working until 1996 as a liaison in the Pentagon.

His sister noted that he was "a Navy reservist who volunteered for the Gulf War. (1990/1991) Probably got stuck on a staff, the poor man, apparently a Pentagon based staff rather than over in the gulf. Lucky him.

Burlingame considered the most difficult job to be landing an F-4 fighter jet on the deck of an aircraft carrier as it pitched at sea in the dark of night. Once, his brothers recalled, he put down a jet without landing gear. No one was injured.

Irrelevant, other than to show that he was a good stick, could handle pressure, and could handle emergencies. He was a Navy Phantom pilot, so all of that is a given. The Navy and every Airline spend a great deal of time and money training their pilots to handle their aircraft when "things go down the tubes." While flying an F-4 and a 757 are two very different tasks, many a fighter pilot has made the transition to flying a "bus" smoothly.

When his plane went down Tuesday, it ripped through a section of the building that includes the Navy Reserve offices.

Cruel Irony, that.

Warmest regards, Gravy, and a hearty "Bravo Zulu" to you for your work on the rebuttal to the LC Morons. LC's assertion that Captain Burlingame was somehow involved in a nefarious plot to defraud America, and to kill people who were his brothers in arms makes me want to find that little sh** and punch him in his lying, slandering mouth with great force.

Darth Rotor

 

[MikeW]

IN the usual garbage from the MSM, we find an alleged quote from the Washington Post

“The Washington Post reported on 16 September 2001 that the pilot of Flight 77 was former F-4 fighter pilot Charles Burlingame III, who in his last Navy job, developed anti-terror strategies for the Navy before retiring to fly for American Airlines. He drafted the Pentagon’s emergency response plan in case it was hit by a civilian airliner. Flight 77 allegedly struck the Pentagon. It is not clear which MASCAL Charles Burlingame III authored.”

I think that quote is made up. The only story I found in the Post on the 16th that referenced Burlingame says nothing about Burlingame authoring any emergency response plan (see http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A38407-2001Sep15)

 

[Darth Rotor]

I think that quote is made up. The only story I found in the Post on the 16th that referenced Burlingame says nothing about Burlingame authoring any emergency response plan (see http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A38407-2001Sep15)

Thanks, Mike, the site it came from is called "commonsense commonground" or something like that. So, the alleged article is either missing from the WP archives, or never happened, or this was sheer misattribution -- on the internet, who would have thunk it?

DR

 

[MikeW]

Thanks, Mike, the site it came from is called "commonsense commonground" or something like that. So, the alleged article is either missing from the WP archives, or never happened, or this was sheer misattribution -- on the internet, who would have thunk it?

Actually, in retrospect I phrased that badly. The original paragraph you quoted said this:

“The Washington Post reported on 16 September 2001 that the pilot of Flight 77 was former F-4 fighter pilot Charles Burlingame III, who in his last Navy job, developed anti-terror strategies for the Navy before retiring to fly for American Airlines. He drafted the Pentagon’s emergency response plan in case it was hit by a civilian airliner. Flight 77 allegedly struck the Pentagon. It is not clear which MASCAL Charles Burlingame III authored.”

The actual reference in the Post article said only this:

At Dulles Airport, Capt. Charles Burlingame, who had been a Navy F-4 pilot and once worked on anti-terrorism strategies in the Pentagon

So what they've done is quoted the article correctly in the first sentence, but then tacked on some extra bits (from "He drafted the Pentagon's emergency response plan") for themselves, without saying where they've come from. I was wrong to say they made up the quote, then: the real problem is they're making big claims without providing any reference to back them up.

 

[gumboot]

Also worth noticing, the air crash drill they did at the Pentagon (and show pictures of in LC) was an aviation accident designed to test local emergency services and military co-ordination. It did not involve any form of terrorism.

Also, ironically, reports from DoD staff suggest the exercise wasn't so useful - emergency services were unable to cope, freaked out at things like the flash-burns (they look much worse than they really are) and the military ended up taking over.

(From an email my father received from a friend who worked very close to the section that was hit, but was out of his office at the time of impact)

-Andrew

 

[Darth Rotor]

Also worth noticing, the air crash drill they did at the Pentagon (and show pictures of in LC) was an aviation accident designed to test local emergency services and military co-ordination. It did not involve any form of terrorism.
-Andrew

What did you think I meant by this?

The training audience is The Emergency Response Cell in the Pentagon and in the local area. Note from the article that the Police and Fire Departments were participants. I suspect an Airline company assisted with the set up of how such a crash might occur. Could have been American Airlines.

Or, were you repeating for emphasis?

Interesting to hear what some folks inside thought about the exercise.

DR

 

[gumboot]

Or, were you repeating for emphasis?

Interesting to hear what some folks inside thought about the exercise.

More just emphasising clarifying - many of the newspaper articles (especially the stuff the Truthers like to cling to) make the waters a bit murky by trying to pin him to a terrorism exercise.

The ultimate presentation being this recent exercise at the Pentagon was ALSO one of these terrorism exercises (thus replicate the 9/11 attack).

Just wanted to emphasise to everyone that the exercise in question didn't involve terrorism, thus blowing all CT claims out of the water.

-Andrew

P.S. I believe the main reason most people report the aircraft speed in MPH is because it's familiar. Most people don't know what knots are. Likewise, here in New Zealand you'll usually see stuff like this described in km/h.