Okay, I'm about ready to declare victory...

[beachnut]

It's funny that Mackey declared victory over the CTs and then admits he hasn't heard of some of them. If I could write comedy like this i'd be a rich man.

WT, oops Mackey is now a winner, bigger winner

Wait till he has time to read WT, old WT and nuts of 9/11 junk,

WT does not meet any of the parameters

It is best he has not heard of WT, he may die laughing at even thinking WT is worthy of 1 or 2

 

[Arkan_Wolfshade]

Abby is well known fo characterising all CTs as nuts. I've seen her video.

Further post hoc ergo promptor hoc. You did not make any such statement in your post and your post was in direct reply to her statements.

If she wants to do that then she should read all their work.

I'm sure she'll take your opinion into account, or not.

P.S. why does she need you to respond for her.

Never said she did. You made a fallacious statement; I pointed it out.

I was addressing her.

Then PM her if you don't want people to respond.

Please don't do that again or it's ignoreville for you.

Cry more n00b.

 

[Abbyas]

So if you haven't read the books of all CTs why do you say they are all nuts?

Freshkills is irrelevant.

The hell it is. It's where the evidence was sifted through. You know that.

Whilest making the video, I was showing every conspiracy theorist that I've met. They were all very uninformed and unexcited by actual research.

I have since met through my online and personal experiences only one person that is suspicious of "the official story" has been respectful and articulate. And that person is frustrated by the various ground zero nutters and internet tough guys that make up the movement.

 

[Childlike Empress]

Luckily, we have a very well developed system for figuring out whether some humans took some acts in the past - a trial. In that case, the proponent of the criminal act would be required to present evidence which the oponent would examine and question. The trier of fact would need to be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt.

Yeah, fine. Where is the trial against KSM and Binalshibh? We have a huge farce here in Germany atm with the second revision of the Motassadeq-Trial, the first trial against a suspect in the 911-attacks. Our problem is that the US doesn't allow us to question these people. As the principle of "innocent untill proven guilty" is, unlike in the US, still part of our legal system, we can't put him in jail because they have to testify in front of our court.

Perhaps the Einstein-Rosen debate is a bit far fetched but if i try to break it down, the problem is that we know what we perceived but we don't know why because the source of information is shady and we are not objective.

 

[Docker]

The hell it is. It's where the evidence was sifted through. You know that.

Whilest making the video, I was showing every conspiracy theorist that I've met. They were all very uninformed and unexcited by actual research.

I have since met through my online and personal experiences only one person that is suspicious of "the official story" has been respectful and articulate. And that person is frustrated by the various ground zero nutters and internet tough guys that make up the movement.

So in short you do assert that some are not nuts. May I suggest in the sequel to the video you include some of these for a little bit of journalistic balance?

I did notice your insinuation that I am an internet hardman. I am not. I can't talk to debunkers any other way since I am not in america.

 

[Abbyas]

May I suggest in the sequel to the video you include some of these for a little bit of journalistic balance?

I'm not a journalist. And that sequel would be about 6 seconds long: "I've met one respectful and bright, but sometimes misled person. The end."

And from your posts, I can certainly see that yes, you are an internet tough guy.

I am not. I can't talk to debunkers any other way since I am not in america.

I'm sorry. I really don't understand the above at all.

 

[Loss Leader]

Typical example of "thorough" research

As Abby has not written a book on the subject, I'm not sure why you would hold her to the same standard.

 

[stateofgrace]

I am not. I can't talk to debunkers any other way since I am not in america.

Just testing out my new signature.

 

[Docker]

I'm not a journalist. And that sequel would be about 6 seconds long: "I've met one respectful and bright, but sometimes misled person. The end."

And from your posts, I can certainly see that yes, you are an internet tough guy.



I'm sorry. I really don't understand the above at all.

How am I an internet tough guy? If I was able I would go to ground zero and thrash it out. If your not a journalist, stop banging out biased videos as you accuse loose change of.

Who you have met is not a representative sample. I know many reasonable intelligent people that have those awful things you don't like....questions.

 

[realitybites]

No, I didn't read his book (although I have read others). And that error makes me believe that there are probably other very, very large errors.

The location of Fresh Kills would be very important in a historical piece about 9/11.

I have a feeling that you understand this.

Unfortunately Abby, I sincerely doubt he does.

 

[Abbyas]

If I was able I would go to ground zero and thrash it out. If your not a journalist, stop banging out biased videos as you accuse loose change of.

At what point did you think my mini-movie was a documentary?

 

[RandFan]

Who you have met is not a representative sample. I know many reasonable intelligent people that have those awful things you don't like....questions.

Oh yes, those dreaded "questions". There is a problem though. That's what the ID proponents use against evolution, "awful questions". The Holocaust deniers use against the Holocaust, "awful questions". CT nuts the world over have those awful questions. And they are all reasonable to someone. A lot of people thought that the witnesses for the defense who testified in the Dover School Board case were reasonable intelligent people. They had "awful questions" also. What is your criteria for "reasonable intelligent people"?

 

[Docker]

At what point did you think my mini-movie was a documentary?

Erm the following reasons:

1) it wasn't fictional

2) It documented your visits to ground zero

3) It had narrative

4) It had interviews

5) It was on video and distributed


I would say all criterion for a documentary were met, wouldn't you?

 

[Docker]

Oh yes, those dreaded "questions". There is a problem though. That's what the ID proponents use against evolution, "awful questions". The Holocaust deniers use against the Holocaust, "awful questions". CT nuts the world over have those awful questions. And they are all reasonable to someone. A lot of people thought that the witnesses for the defense who testified in the Dover School Board case were reasonable intelligent people. They had "awful questions" also. What is your criteria for "reasonable intelligent people"?

So in short asking questions is wrong because some anti-semites also ask questions. erm yes that makes sense...

The jersey girls gave 400 questions to the 911 commission. Most weren't addressed. Do you deny these widows the right to ask questions?

 

[gumboot]

Erm the following reasons:

1) it wasn't fictional

2) It documented your visits to ground zero

3) It had narrative

4) It had interviews

5) It was on video and distributed


I would say all criterion for a documentary were met, wouldn't you?

Actually I would classify her films as mocumentary, which is a sub-genre of the drama/comedy genre hybrid.

-Gumboot

 

[332nd]

Erm the following reasons:

1) it wasn't fictional

2) It documented your visits to ground zero

3) It had narrative

4) It had interviews

5) It was on video and distributed


I would say all criterion for a documentary were met, wouldn't you?

It was as much of a documentary and Best in Show.

 

[Docker]

Actually I would classify her films as mocumentary, which is a sub-genre of the drama/comedy genre hybrid.

-Gumboot

Mocumentaries are acted. It was a documentary.

 

[Abbyas]

Mocumentaries are acted. It was a documentary.

No it wasn't. I don't really think I was responsible for 9/11.

 

[gumboot]

Mocumentaries are acted. It was a documentary.

That shows just how little you know about the genre.

-Gumboot

 

[332nd]

Mocumentaries are acted. It was a documentary.

Mocumentaies can be only partialy acted which would have been the wisecracks from her.