Upcoming Debate: Jon Gold Vs. Pat Curley

[SpiritMolecule]

Part 3 is now up, but i do not have enough posts to post a link yet

 

[Brainster]

Here's Part III:



I went for the nuclear option on the closing statement; that seems to be getting the most commentary at 9-11 Blogger, with a lot of people griping about my bringing up Nico. They don't get the point. Yes, Nico's crazy, but no more so than Gage and Griffin and Jones and Ryan.

 

[funk de fino]

That coin toss was faked.

 

[JAMartell]

Yeah, sorry about the poor audio/production quality. The show was done right before thanksgiving break and most of our crew had already left, so we were working with a crew of three people when we should have had eight. If we do more we'll have a full crew so we won't have those kind of problems...

We're looking to set up more debates like this between other representatives from each side. Some of the people we thought about from the side of the debunkers are James B, Mike W, Ron Wieck, Ryan Mackey, Kryptos, and Gumboot. Obviously, we would cover other topics and topics that are of particularly interest to those debating.

Pat has told me that we were fair and impartial. We would, of course, provide others with the same courtesy should we do another debate. Any takers?

 

[DGM]

Yeah, sorry about the poor audio/production quality. The show was done right before thanksgiving break and most of our crew had already left, so we were working with a crew of three people when we should have had eight. If we do more we'll have a full crew so we won't have those kind of problems...

We're looking to set up more debates like this between other representatives from each side. Some of the people we thought about from the side of the debunkers are James B, Mike W, Ron Wieck, Ryan Mackey, Kryptos, and Gumboot. Obviously, we would cover other topics and topics that are of particularly interest to those debating.

Pat has told me that we were fair and impartial. We would, of course, provide others with the same courtesy should we do another debate. Any takers?

With no disrespect intended, What's left to be debated? You have to admit no one (mostly) is listening to your side.

 

[Walter Ego]

Yeah, sorry about the poor audio/production quality. The show was done right before thanksgiving break and most of our crew had already left, so we were working with a crew of three people when we should have had eight. If we do more we'll have a full crew so we won't have those kind of problems...

We're looking to set up more debates like this between other representatives from each side. Some of the people we thought about from the side of the debunkers are James B, Mike W, Ron Wieck, Ryan Mackey, Kryptos, and Gumboot. Obviously, we would cover other topics and topics that are of particularly interest to those debating.

Pat has told me that we were fair and impartial. We would, of course, provide others with the same courtesy should we do another debate. Any takers?

You did a good job moderating and even with the technical problems it was a good debate. Kudos for your efforts, Justin.

My only question is what is that framed certificate Jon Gold was holding?

 

[JAMartell]

I believe that there are enough people listening to warrant further debates...In previous debates I don't think that the people that represented the truth movement, while they are influential, were not the best choices. I want to do debates with people that I feel can better represent the truth movement...

Walter, the framed certificate is an award given to Jon by the FealGood Foundation.

 

[T.A.M.]

I would love to see Pat and Mark Roberts debate David Ray Griffin and Richard Gage combined. That would be a good debate (even if the issues are long dead).

TAM

 

[Walter Ego]

I believe that there are enough people listening to warrant further debates...In previous debates I don't think that the people that represented the truth movement, while they are influential, were not the best choices. I want to do debates with people that I feel can better represent the truth movement...

Walter, the framed certificate is an award given to Jon by the FealGood Foundation.

Jon's efforts of behalf of the first responders is to be commended. Good luck on organizing further debates. I don't doubt your or Jon’s sincerity on the 9/11 issue. I just think you’re both dead wrong in your conclusions.

 

[RedIbis]

I believe that there are enough people listening to warrant further debates...In previous debates I don't think that the people that represented the truth movement, while they are influential, were not the best choices. I want to do debates with people that I feel can better represent the truth movement...

Walter, the framed certificate is an award given to Jon by the FealGood Foundation.

Technical issues aside, you did a great job moderating and pulling off a civil debate is an accomplishment.

My main criticism was that the questions were far too broad. A more formal approach might be to set up a proposition and then the negative. For instance, The NIST WTC 7 report conclusively explains the collapse of Bldg 7. One side would argue yes and another no.

 

[SpiritMolecule]

I want to see Gumboot and FAA's Robert Hordon Debate NORAD. That'd be fantastic

 

[JAMartell]

My main criticism was that the questions were far too broad. A more formal approach might be to set up a proposition and then the negative. For instance, The NIST WTC 7 report conclusively explains the collapse of Bldg 7. One side would argue yes and another no.

We want to discuss more in depth topics in future debates. Right now we're trying to organize a debate with Michael Berger. Right now Ron Wieck is slated to oppose him. We haven't discussed any topics yet. Wieck said he would do it if no one else wanted to take his place. He specifically suggested Gumboot if we're going to talk about the flights. I wouldn't mind doing a show on the flights (norad's response, the wargames, etc.) and the Mineta controversy. Neither of these have been discussed in depth in a debate setting (that I know of).

Some ideas we were throwing around (but haven't talked to anyone about yet) would possibly Sander Hicks V.S. someone regarding the whistleblower and even though CD has been beat to death, maybe Kevin Ryan V.S. Ryan Mackey...

 

[DaN K. StAnLeY]

Okay, I haven't posted here in a while but I had to post a comment when I saw Martell crawl out of twoofer retirement and try the debate scene again. I can't believe the debate actually happened for one, and secondly I thought it was funny that Martell proposed the same topics he wanted to debate me about, but never did.

Let me guess Brainster, he was trying to get you to debate Gold and some other twoofers at the same time but then settled for moderator so he could get some camera time, close? I'm pretty sure he wanted to get you to debate the Daniel Hopsicker nonsense and the Pakistani ISI connection, but then settled for his other vague question about whether the 911 commission answered all the questions, blah, blah! After this he went on and on about how he's single handedly fixing universal healthcare and spending lots of his free time with his "girlfriend" so backing out at the last minute would be easier.

Well that was my experience anyway. This "production" was horrible and the moderation was even worse, but it's pretty much what I expected.

 

[DaN K. StAnLeY]

I really can't believe this is still going on BTW. I'm 100% sure that this is giving a dead movement more attention and now I'm wondering why debunkers are even doing this stuff anymore.

How did this forum and SLC go from laughing at twoofers a month ago, to now attempting to humor their insanity with "serious" debates? I'm starting to wonder if you SLC guys have become too attached to your blog to let it go now.

 

[ref]

I want to see Gumboot and FAA's Robert Hordon Debate NORAD. That'd be fantastic

That would be Robin Hordon, whose latest association with FAA was back in 1981 but he still is considered an expert among truthers.

 

[Brainster]

Okay, I haven't posted here in a while but I had to post a comment when I saw Martell crawl out of twoofer retirement and try the debate scene again. I can't believe the debate actually happened for one, and secondly I thought it was funny that Martell proposed the same topics he wanted to debate me about, but never did.

Let me guess Brainster, he was trying to get you to debate Gold and some other twoofers at the same time but then settled for moderator so he could get some camera time, close? I'm pretty sure he wanted to get you to debate the Daniel Hopsicker nonsense and the Pakistani ISI connection, but then settled for his other vague question about whether the 911 commission answered all the questions, blah, blah! After this he went on and on about how he's single handedly fixing universal healthcare and spending lots of his free time with his "girlfriend" so backing out at the last minute would be easier.

No, that was not my experience. The debate came off exactly as he had first proposed, and it was always those topics and Gold and I as debaters. The only changes that came were minor and logical tweaks to the format; IIRC the coin toss came up as a proposal in the second planning phone call.

Again, I felt Justin was honest and straightforward in the way he handled the debate. I have no complaints.

 

[JAMartell]

Okay, I haven't posted here in a while but I had to post a comment when I saw Martell crawl out of twoofer retirement and try the debate scene again. I can't believe the debate actually happened for one, and secondly I thought it was funny that Martell proposed the same topics he wanted to debate me about, but never did.

Still telling lies, I see. I believe we were going to debate about Able Danger, the ISI, and Daniel Hopsicker. Jon Gold proposed the questions for this debate. I don't know how many times I need to call you out on this lie but the debate didn't happen because you mixed up the time zones and didn't call me. I cancelled the debate once because I was busy, whatever I was busy doing isn't any of your business, and worked with you to set the whole thing set up again. Then the night of the debate I sat and waited for your call and you never did. Then got aggravated when you started claiming I ran from you. How is this my fault? Who is it that messed it up, Justin? You. So get over it. I really don't understand why you continue to perpetuate this distorted view about what happened, liar.

 

[WildCat]

continue to perpetuate this distorted view about what happened, liar.

Which is pretty much all the "truth" movement has ever done.

Lies, distortions, stalking, ignorant fools thinking they know more than accredited experts, this is the legacy of your pathetic movement.

7 years later, not a single truther discovery challenging the accepted course of events. Not a single truther paper in a peer-reviewed journal. Not a single truther narrative of what happened that horrible day.

It's pathetic, and yet the truthers plod on completely oblivious to the fact that nearly everyone thinks they're fools, charlatons, and snake-oil salesmen seeking to profit from tragedy.

About what one would expect from a movement founded by anti-semite Holocaust deniers.

 

[JAMartell]

Ummm, I've supported the family members' call for a new investigation. I don't really see how that falls under what you described, or makes it okay for Justin (Dan K. Stanley) to make things up. If he's on the side of truth and reason, shouldn't he tell the truth? I don't even want to spend too much time on him anyway, we were supposed to debate and he couldn't figure out the time difference between CST and EST. It's not worth discussing beyond that. If anyone wants to discuss further debates I'm here to discuss that.

 

[Arus808]

Ummm, I've supported the family members' call for a new investigation.

And you are looking for a new investigation for all the wrong reasons. The family members wanted to have closure (by NAMING individuals to BLAME) but didn't get it, because the entity that caused 911 was far in another country, nearly untouchable. THEY want to blame someone, so their 'call' for a new investigation is simply a call to 'BLAME and PUNISH' someone; anyone, since they can't get their justice by blaming a group of terrorists that have only one face; Osama Bin Laden.

SEVERAL investigations have been done. THOUSANDS upon THOUSANDS of man hours devoted to invetigating EVERYTHING about why 9/11 happened and the events that followed.

Simply these "family" members DO not like the answers they were given. BEcause they can't SEE justice being served.



By "supporting" them you are only supporting their cause to blame the govt, of which the GOVT has agreed that there was failings from top to bottom (namely the closed communications between the CIA and the FBI) which have been somewhat resolved, concerning 9/11/2001.


Dont put your deluded beliefs that 9/11 was an inside job, and think that the family members want an investigation simply because YOU think they believe that 911 was an inside job.


Debates are over. No one in the Truth movement has put forward any type of sensible timeline and theory, based on ALL the collected evidence and testimony.

Why don't you RALLY your movement to do this FIRST?