• 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.

Interview with Charlie Veitch - The truther who changed his mind (part 1)

Edx

Philosopher
Edx
Joined
Feb 1, 2008
Messages
5,642
Sorry if this has already been posted. Myles Power (powerm1985) on YouTube interviewed Charlie Veitch recently, if you're interested.

 
Thanks Edx, I was going to post this the other day but completely forgot :o

Looking forward to Part 2.

For others who want to see Myles debunking videos, there is a thread here.
 
Interesting. I haven't seen the 9/11 Conspiracy Road Trip program. The Irishman who presented that did a similar thing with the July 7th ("7/7") London bombings conspiracy theorists. A few of them changed their mind, or at least wavered somewhat.
 
Hey Cjnewson88,

I was shocked at some of the things that people said and did to him.

Myles
 
The truth movement is very much like any other cult.... driven by little to no rational thinking/science and led by charismatic people who exploit weak minds. Yet you do find several educated and intelligent people who allow themselves to accept irrational arguments because they sound convincing... such as Lynn Margulis. These people then seem to reinforce the cult-like believers that the truth movement is a rational position to take. The events were very complex, unseen and so there is no basis for comparison to other real world events and so the truth guys can make extraordinary claims and get away with it with many people who accept their framing.
 
JSanderO said:
"The truth movement is very much like any other cult....

...driven by little to no rational thinking/science and led by charismatic people who exploit weak minds.

Yet you do find several educated and intelligent people who allow themselves to accept irrational arguments because they sound convincing... such as Lynn Margulis.

These people then seem to reinforce the cult-like believers that the truth movement is a rational position to take.

The events were very complex, unseen and so there is no basis for comparison to other real world events and so the truth guys can make extraordinary claims and get away with it with many people who accept their framing."
Click to expand...

I bolded your gross generalization because it is incoherent.

Your scorn seems at odds with your believing there was an "engineered collapse"?

You need a tough skin to survive the consequences of asking unpleasant questions.

Which has a lot to do with why the truth movement is such a disorganized mix of people.

People that do not share much in common other than a sincere wish to better understand what happened on 9/11 and enough concern to keep looking for the important answers.

They are people who want to know what really happened to WTC7 and are brave enough to accept knowledge that may be extremely unpleasant to hear.

They are people who want Dr. Millette to take a moment from his busy day and settle what he started, debunk or not debunk the 2009 Bentham paper which found nano-thermite to be permeating all of the 9/11 WTC dust.

And you insult such people by branding them as cultists.

MM
 
Calling people a cultist in this situation is being polite. They are deranged imbeciles.
 
Miragememories said:
I bolded your gross generalization because it is incoherent.
Click to expand...
Seems clear to me. "9/11 was complex and atypical enough for truthers to get away with selling nonsense." Maybe there was an omitted "because" toward the end, I dunno.

Your scorn seems at odds with your believing there was an "engineered collapse"?

You need a tough skin to survive the consequences of asking unpleasant questions.
Click to expand...
Mere idiocy has often sufficed.

Which has a lot to do with why the truth movement is such a disorganized mix of people.
Click to expand...
Absolutely none of whom has been able to put together a physically possible theory in twelve years.

People that do not share much in common other than a sincere wish to better understand what happened on 9/11 and enough concern to keep looking for the important answers.
Click to expand...
Nothing you've said yet has actually contradicted Sander, I'd like to point out.

They are people who want to know what really happened to WTC7 and are brave enough to accept knowledge that may be extremely unpleasant to hear.
Click to expand...
Unless it disagrees with their preconceived biases.

Also, do you count yourself among that number? Because you seemed pretty darn certain what happened, oh, a week ago.

They are people who want Dr. Millette to take a moment from his busy day and settle what he started, debunk or not debunk the 2009 Bentham paper which found nano-thermite to be permeating all of the 9/11 WTC dust.
Click to expand...
And would you care to take a half hour out of your day to watch and comment on the subject of this thread?

And you insult such people by branding them as cultists.

MM
Click to expand...
Many deserve insult. Like that one guy who said cardboard boxes were accurate representations of one of the Twin Towers. And makes a living off of such a claim.
 
First off, a great set of videos! I'm glad I saw the "9/11 Conspiracy Road Trip" video a couple years ago, because it really does show how Charlie's mind gets changed over time...and how shrill and annoying Charlotte (the blonde) was.

In the second video, Charlie spoke of being 'interrogated' by high level persons in the 9/11 Truth movement for 30 minutes. Two months after that exchange, one of the members committed suicide. Charlie touched on one thing that jumped out at me, the 'fetishisation of evil' that conspiracy theorists are constantly exposed to perhaps lead to this young man's suicide.

His comments on Alex Jones were brilliant.
 
Miragememories said:
I bolded your gross generalization because it is incoherent.
......
And you insult such people by branding them as cultists.

MM
Click to expand...

The truth movement has failed to describe any mechanisms of an engineered destruction... or CD. They treat the events as black boxes with little bits of things emerging from the black box which to them all spell CD. They can't and don't explain what's inside the black box.

ROOSD is an example of a reasonably coherent attempt to explain what we see... a look inside the black box. Truth position begins with the BELIEF that the towers could not come down as they did without devices.... and go right to their conclusions. Sloppy at best and confirmation bias.

You know... if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck... it IS a duck.
 
Miragememories said:
"You need a tough skin to survive the consequences of asking unpleasant questions.

Which has a lot to do with why the truth movement is such a disorganized mix of people.

People that do not share much in common other than a sincere wish to better understand what happened on 9/11 and enough concern to keep looking for the important answers.

They are people who want to know what really happened to WTC7 and are brave enough to accept knowledge that may be extremely unpleasant to hear.

They are people who want Dr. Millette to take a moment from his busy day and settle what he started, debunk or not debunk the 2009 Bentham paper which found nano-thermite to be permeating all of the 9/11 WTC dust.

And you insult such people by branding them as cultists."
Click to expand...
JSanderO said:
"The truth movement has failed to describe any mechanisms of an engineered destruction... or CD.

They treat the events as black boxes with little bits of things emerging from the black box which to them all spell CD.

They can't and don't explain what's inside the black box.

ROOSD is an example of a reasonably coherent attempt to explain what we see... a look inside the black box.

Truth position begins with the BELIEF that the towers could not come down as they did without devices.... and go right to their conclusions.

Sloppy at best and confirmation bias.

You know... if it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck... it IS a duck."
Click to expand...

I think that's what the ducks were thinking when the hunters opened fire.

Well there are ducks that you appear to be purposely ignoring.

The NIST explanation for WTC7 has been debunked.

There has been no debunking of the finding that nanothermite permeated all the WTC dust from 9/11.

But you are entitled to believe what you wish to believe.

MM
 
JSanderO said:
The truth movement has failed to describe any mechanisms of an engineered destruction... or CD. They treat the events as black boxes with little bits of things emerging from the black box which to them all spell CD. They can't and don't explain what's inside the black...
Click to expand...
CD is a mechanism for engineered destruction.

I have a question to the JREF, can anyone explain JSanderO's position on the collapse of WTC 1?
 
Miragememories said:
I think that's what the ducks were thinking when the hunters opened fire.

Well there are ducks that you appear to be purposely ignoring.

The NIST explanation for WTC7 has been debunked.

There has been no debunking of the finding that nanothermite permeated all the WTC dust from 9/11.

But you are entitled to believe what you wish to believe.

MM
Click to expand...

How exactly does one go about debunking something so laughably inaccurate?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom