So just who or whaat is Killtown?

[Par]

I would be glad if you start a thread about that in politics...

OK, it's here:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?p=3226931

 

[MG1962]

With all due respect, there is two things wrong with this thread.

1. It doesn't matter in the least who conspiracy theorists are. We should attack the misinformation they present and any motive they may have for presenting it.

2. It singles out killtown as a kind of leader in the movement because JREF is taking about him. He is just a loon like Christophera and his concrete core.

http://www.geocities.com/debunking911/stoplying.jpg

I disagree - he has a reputation from his posting patterns on other forums that have nothing to do with 911

 

[Stellafane]

In my worthless opinion Killtown a sick, cowardly, and despicable example of the worst our internet-enabled society can spew up. I'd label him as Exhibit B for how 9/11 Truthers aren't just harmless loons, they can be potentially dangerous (Kevin "Hang 'em high" Barrett qualifies as Exhibit A). Killtown basically attempted to make a women's life hell, a women who did absolutely nothing wrong, a women who by all accounts still acts honorably and admirably concerning 9/11, simply because she took a picture he didn't like, a picture that exposed the insanity behind his lunatic ideas -- all the time hiding behind his well-guarded Internet anonymity. Sure, plenty of us also post anonymously, but it's to protect ourselves from the Killtowns of the world, not because we want to cowardly take cheap shots at good people with impunity.

I know I sometimes have trouble articulating precisely what I'm thinking, so if from the above any questions remain concerning what I think about Killtown, I'd be happy to elucidate further.

 

[Oliver]

In my worthless opinion Killtown a sick, cowardly, and despicable example of the worst our internet-enabled society can spew up. I'd label him as Exhibit B for how 9/11 Truthers aren't just harmless loons, they can be potentially dangerous (Kevin "Hang 'em high" Barrett qualifies as Exhibit A). Killtown basically attempted to make a women's life hell, a women who did absolutely nothing wrong, a women who by all accounts still acts honorably and admirably concerning 9/11, simply because she took a picture he didn't like, a picture that exposed the insanity behind his lunatic ideas -- all the time hiding behind his well-guarded Internet anonymity. Sure, plenty of us also post anonymously, but it's to protect ourselves from the Killtowns of the world, not because we want to cowardly take cheap shots at good people with impunity.

I know I sometimes have trouble articulating precisely what I'm thinking, so if from the above any questions remain concerning what I think about Killtown, I'd be happy to elucidate further.

The Val McClatchey saga certainly was the most annoying part
of Killtown's activities yet - even if I wouldn't mind about that
as long Killtown would provide his own personal Data as well instead
hiding behind his computer and post other peoples personal Data
instead.

From what I can say using my personal professional experience
with TV-fakery, my opinion is that he's pretty naive about the
complexity of such a stunt. But he didn't reply to my points yet,
so I have to think that he's still the coward he always was -
ignoring facts but spouting his mouth nevertheless...

 

[achtung circus]

With all due respect, there is two things wrong with this thread.

Sorry. As OP and new to the dialogue I had found it somewhat anomalous that Killtown was all over the discussions, to an extent that probably precludes a social life, yet had not made himself known ala Avery.

 

[FactCheck]

In my worthless opinion Killtown a sick, cowardly, and despicable example of the worst our internet-enabled society can spew up. I'd label him as Exhibit B for how 9/11 Truthers aren't just harmless loons, they can be potentially dangerous (Kevin "Hang 'em high" Barrett qualifies as Exhibit A). Killtown basically attempted to make a women's life hell, a women who did absolutely nothing wrong, a women who by all accounts still acts honorably and admirably concerning 9/11, simply because she took a picture he didn't like, a picture that exposed the insanity behind his lunatic ideas -- all the time hiding behind his well-guarded Internet anonymity. Sure, plenty of us also post anonymously, but it's to protect ourselves from the Killtowns of the world, not because we want to cowardly take cheap shots at good people with impunity.

I know I sometimes have trouble articulating precisely what I'm thinking, so if from the above any questions remain concerning what I think about Killtown, I'd be happy to elucidate further.

That sounds more like wanting to label all CT's as loony as killtown. Most are not no planers and most will concider KT a nut anyway. If pointing to the looniest people and saying everyone from their group is as loony as them worked, there would be no republicans or democrats.

 

[Horatius]

Kt is a "friend" of mine, yet if he is doing something inappropriate or wrong I will hold him accountable.

I seriously doubt that, but....

I want to see the private information he posted about Val and the picture of the feces at the gravesite. However, no one seems to be stepping up to provide this information... that's odd.

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2025876#post2025876

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2025559#post2025559

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2025078#post2025078

 

[Good Lt]

If pointing to the looniest people and saying everyone from their group is as loony as them worked, there would be no republicans or democrats.

We shant be so lucky.

 

[Stellafane]

That sounds more like wanting to label all CT's as loony as killtown. Most are not no planers and most will concider KT a nut anyway. If pointing to the looniest people and saying everyone from their group is as loony as them worked, there would be no republicans or democrats.

I'm not sure where you got that idea from what I wrote (and re-reading my post, I still don't). But for the record, I don't think all 9/11 CTers are as crazy as Killtown. Don't get me wrong, I do think a large percentage of them are indeed crazy. (The rest are misinformed, deluded, or opportunitists trying to get attention or make a buck.) But it would be unfair for me to say they're all as crazy (or potentially dangerous) as Killtown.

 

[uk_dave]

That's a political topic and off-topic. Killing 500,000 for flawed
intelligence or imaginary threats is what I call murder. And funny
enough, it's one of the rare things I agree with Killtown.

Well, you raised it to begin with. All I'm saying is that we 'ordinary' people have the luxury of both hindsight and of not having to take decisions which might end up being the difference between life and death for thousands of people.

Perhaps if you or I were in the position of having weak but compelling evidence presented to us that a rogue state with a history of having used wmd against its own people and a desperate, malignant fundamentalist terrorist organisation which had not only carried out an audacious attack against us but was still at large in the mid-east and was looking to aquire some of that wmd from the rogue state, we might act more from a selfish desire to protect our own country rather than give 'the benefit of the doubt' to a brutal, murdering regime.

It's just a thought us 'useful idiots' have from time to time.

 

[Oliver]

Well, you raised it to begin with. All I'm saying is that we 'ordinary' people have the luxury of both hindsight and of not having to take decisions which might end up being the difference between life and death for thousands of people.

Perhaps if you or I were in the position of having weak but compelling evidence presented to us that a rogue state with a history of having used wmd against its own people and a desperate, malignant fundamentalist terrorist organisation which had not only carried out an audacious attack against us but was still at large in the mid-east and was looking to aquire some of that wmd from the rogue state, we might act more from a selfish desire to protect our own country rather than give 'the benefit of the doubt' to a brutal, murdering regime.

It's just a thought us 'useful idiots' have from time to time.

If I was in the position to decide about life and death, I certainly
would compare the facts to get to the decision - including speaking
to both parts of the issue. Not invading a country knowing that
this will cause a lot's of deaths based on flawed information.

Quite frankly - it doesn't look as if there were any concerns
about innocent people or lives. So don't bother me about pointing
this out based on the evidence we have.

But no matter what your opinion is - it surely isn't on-topic or
what is Killtown's stance on that?

 

[uk_dave]

Killclown is boring.

But you raised the issue of 'useful idiots' and I responded to that.

Let's say you are in that position of power and responsibility as head of a nation. You have intel coming in suggesting that a brutal, murdering regime (Iraq) may be concealing wmd.

You also have intel coming in suggesting that the very people who attacked your country on 9-11 and who you have already gone to war with Afghanistan in order to destroy, have started making attempts to get cozy with this brutal, murdering regime (iraq).

How easy then is it to give Iraq the benefit of the doubt?

 

[Oliver]

Killclown is boring.

But you raised the issue of 'useful idiots' and I responded to that.

Let's say you are in that position of power and responsibility as head of a nation. You have intel coming in suggesting that a brutal, murdering regime (Iraq) may be concealing wmd.

You also have intel coming in suggesting that the very people who attacked your country on 9-11 and who you have already gone to war with Afghanistan in order to destroy, have started making attempts to get cozy with this brutal, murdering regime (iraq).

How easy then is it to give Iraq the benefit of the doubt?

How easy was it to believe in Hitler blaming Poland and declaring
them as a communistic threat? This isn't related to the the OP
in any way - and even if I don't have a problem to talk about this
issue, I already got several "Yellow Cards" for answering off-topic
questions. So just start a new thread if you don't want to break
rule 11:

11. Posts must be on topic to the thread subject. On this Forum thread drift is expected but must follow from the discussion.

 

[Brainster]

That sounds more like wanting to label all CT's as loony as killtown. Most are not no planers and most will concider KT a nut anyway. If pointing to the looniest people and saying everyone from their group is as loony as them worked, there would be no republicans or democrats.

I'm with Mark; most of these people are nutty in some way. It may not be obvious at first glance. I had a very interesting conversation with Lynn Pentz, a head of the LA Troofers, where she went through the the litany of nonsense with me. Now Lynn is a very attractive, articulate and intelligent woman, but of course she was spouting nuttery about nine hijackers are still alive and the hole's too small, and I'm thinking, wow, she's an incredibly with-it person and yet she doesn't see through this jazz?

And then she tells me the story of one of the rings on her fingers. The stone on it came from the palm of a statue that an Indian mystic had rubbed it and the stone magically appeared. And maybe she knew it was fake but she herself had witnessed ten miracles in her life.

Look at some of the "adults" in the movement:

Alex Jones: Clearly a manic depressive paranoid.
David Ray Griffin: Also believes in mediums, reincarnation, life after death, remote-viewing, etc.
Webster Tarpley: A major figure in the LaRouche doomsday cult for decades.
Barbara Honegger: Claimed that voices in her head told her to work for Ronald Reagan.
Jim Fetzer: 'nuff said.
Sofia Shafquat: Clunkety clunk.

And these are leadership figures, not fringe hangers-on! Maybe not as wacko as Killtown, but that's a tough standard.

 

[A W Smith]

killtown was banned for publishing personal information here
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=66750

 

[XenaWarriorPrincess]

When they start dumbing down society with their utter crap, distorting science and facts and lying about tragic events for their own misguided, egotistical/financial/political gain. **** 'em.

And don't say 'our' as if you're also a skeptic. You are no skeptic.

You are soooo right about that. Apparently in order to be a skeptic, one must spend the MAJORITY of their time insulting people, rather than actually debunking claims.

But thanks, I consider that an incredible compliment.

 

[stateofgrace]

You are soooo right about that. Apparently in order to be a skeptic, one must spend the MAJORITY of their time insulting people, rather than actually debunking claims.

But thanks, I consider that an incredible compliment.

AND your claim is what , exactly?

 

[Sporanox]

You are soooo right about that. Apparently in order to be a skeptic, one must spend the MAJORITY of their time insulting people, rather than actually debunking claims.

You missed the debunking claims part. Most of that occurred several months ago. It's what the search engine is for.

 

[Foolmewunz]

So, Xena? Just curious, here.

Now that you've seen the evidence, in his own words, in Val's words, and in neutral news articles..... Have you taken your "friend" to task for his heinous behavior? Have you asked your "favorite researchers" to explain just how their smarmy actions in these two cases brings anything to the Truth Movement.

I'd be real curious to know. I think it would be a terrific indication that you really are looking for truth in your porridge if you were to confront them on their own turf. (Of course, I wouldn't give them a home phone number and address.... you might star in their upcoming release, Defamation of Character, the Sequel.)

 

[chillzero]

I have moved some posts to AAH for bickering. Oliver and uk_dave - please take the derail to the appropriate politics thread. Oliver, I can see you have attempted to keep this one on topic - best approach is to point it out once, then not respond further, or report continued off topic posts.

Replying to this modbox in thread will be off topic  Posted By: chillzero