• 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.

Loose Change

Status
Not open for further replies.
Huntsman said:
ID-10-T forms, TR double E's, looking for weak spots in armor, collecting exhaust samples, finding a PRC-E-7 (PRC pronounced Prick, stands for Personal Radio Communicator...E-7 is also a designation of rank-so send them to Commo to ask for a Prick E-7), cans of squelch, tone-down remover, 500 feet of flight line, sent to the Aid Station for a box of Fallopian Tubes, etc, etc, etc.

I figure these were always the people who were told "We need you to go here (points to spot on map 10 miles behind enemy lines) and blow this fog horn. That'll be the signal for the rest of us to attack here (points to spot 10 miles away). You'll be our Deco...um...Deep Cover person."
Click to expand...
Just remembered an almost appropriate one that was popular in the Met Police a while back - getting someone to ring up the station at Heathrow Airport and ask for D.C. Tenn.

(for those the other side of the pond - D.C.=Detective Constable)
 
chipmunk stew said:
Clearly, Mark Roberts is a DISINFORMATION TERRORIST who was payd to write this pile-o-dung.
Click to expand...

Watching the LC forum is like watching a reinactment of the inquisition. They've nicely summarized what is considered to be heretical thought, they excommunicate those that disagree with them, and they are trying to push their agenda onto everyone else. It would fascinating if it was so terrifying and annoying.
 
When the CTs claim that there are debunkings of Gravy's debunking, are they being complete and total liars or are there some actual attempts to counter his points?

Also -

Let's take bets on the over/under of how many LC supporters actually have read Gravy's work in it's entirity. Where should we set the lin 4.5?
 
senorpogo said:
When the CTs claim that there are debunkings of Gravy's debunking, are they being complete and total liars or are there some actual attempts to counter his points?

Also -

Let's take bets on the over/under of how many LC supporters actually have read Gravy's work in it's entirity. Where should we set the lin 4.5?
Click to expand...

From what I've read, the extent of their debunking is (1) taking Gravy's quotes out of context to set up strawmen (go figure) and (2) saying, "nuh-uh!"
 
chipmunk stew said:
Clearly, Mark Roberts is a DISINFORMATION TERRORIST who was payd to write this pile-o-dung.
Click to expand...
Wait, according to Hufschmid, Dylan Avery and "99% of all CTs" are DITs (disinformation terrorists):
If you want a more diabolical possibility, consider that Dylan Avery and/or Jason Bermas are connected to the criminal network through relatives. In such a case, their relatives may have encouraged Avery or Bermas to create this video in order to give them something to push aside "Painful Deceptions." [Hufschmid's video]
Click to expand...
 
senorpogo said:
When the CTs claim that there are debunkings of Gravy's debunking, are they being complete and total liars or are there some actual attempts to counter his points?
Click to expand...
There doesn't seem to have been an actual attempt to counter Gravy's critique, just a few attacks on his sarcasm, and a misreading of one of his paragraphs which makes it look like he got one of his facts wrong.
Most outers just claim that it's the same old points, that where countered before gravy did his piece. In short their claims of a rebuttal of gravy's analysis stand up to scrutiny to the same degree as the rest of their claims.

Your post does raise one other interesting point, how should we refer to a counter argument to a debunking? A re-bunking perhaps?
 
brodski said:
...
Your post does raise one other interesting point, how should we refer to a counter argument to a debunking? A re-bunking perhaps?
Click to expand...

In the case of the LC group, I think, "The monkeys are shrieking again." works well. Or perhaps, "An exercise in demonstrating logical fallacies".
 
I love the fact that one of them said how poor my transcription was, when in fact it was cut and pasted directly from the Loose Change site. I just didn't correct their typos and other errors.

Somebody please tell them that I'd be glad to defend my work, but I'm banned from their site, so they'll need to come over here for discussion or email me.
 
I have the same question for these conspiracy nuts as I do for the moan-hoaxers: Why?

The level of effort and expense to fake these events dwarfs any value anyone could extract from them. What does Bush get out of the war in Iraq, other than the worst poll numbers in history?
 
Yahzi said:
I have the same question for these conspiracy nuts as I do for the moan-hoaxers: Why?

The level of effort and expense to fake these events dwarfs any value anyone could extract from them. What does Bush get out of the war in Iraq, other than the worst poll numbers in history?
Click to expand...
This is what I argue when the CTs talk about the PNAC's "New Pearl Harbor" statement. What's happening now is exactly the opposite of what the neocons who wrote that document wanted. They wanted hundreds of billions of dollars for a missile defense shield around the U.S. Their document explicitly states that the shield should be the #1 priority for the military and for tech R&D. The last thing they wanted was to spend that money on a ground war with people armed with RPGs and old artillery shells turned into IEDs.

And that's all for the abbreviations for now.
 
Whatever happened to Xraye? He sounded relatively reasonable, said something about taking a little time to catch up with the arguments, but I haven't seen him post here in several days.
 
I'm less concerned with most who vigorously cling to the belief in a 9/11 conspiracy, regardless. That they do so as an infant does to its mother's teat is not surprising. Human history shows there never has been a shortage of the credulous, and there likely never will be. This alleged conspiracy, requiring, by its parameters, immeasurable amounts of planning, execution, and follow-up, is so outlandish on its face, I can only be amused and saddened by its adherents, but not surprised. There is, simply, a sucker born every minute.

But what of the more intelligent? I don't mean to say that people who possess an above-average bag of smarts can't be taken in at various times during their lifetime. Absolutely not. What I can't account for is those with a brain perched above their spinal cord who could view Gravy's analysis and deconstruction of "Loose Change" and still go on shouting, "Conspiracy! Inside job! TRUTH!"

Which leaves the thought that there is simply a greater agenda at hand for certain of our fellow citizens. And this little video we've been discussing is merely one tool being used for its construction.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom