Video online again: "WTC Not a Demolition"

[Gravy]

I've been too lazy to do anything about the many requests to find a new home for my 47-minute video "World Trade Center Not a Demolition," which had been pulled by Google a couple of years ago.

Mike Williams of 911myths.com contacted me and generously offered to convert and host the video, so here it is again:

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/WTC_Not_A_Demolition

To those of you who haven't taken the time to delve into Mike's site, it is a treasure trove of evidence-based analysis about the whos, whats, and whys of 9/11.

Thanks, Mike!

 

[RedIbis]

Welcome back, Gravy.

 

[A W Smith]

bookmarked, and thanks Mark.
And downloaded via Realplayer Downloader for safe keeping

 

[ElMondoHummus]

Thanks, Mark. And thank you too, Mike. That's really awesome of you to host that for him.

 

[twinstead]

I do like a complete package that painfully illustrates all the evidence that has to be "faked" in order for truthers to be right.

 

[grandmastershek]

I've been too lazy to do anything about the...World Trade Center...Demolition...which had been pulled by Google

Edited for truth.

Thanks!

ETA: Gravy, a while back I emailed you via the email on the WTC7lies page about your video from TAM. Do you know where I can view it?

 

[Sabretooth]

Edited for truth.

Thanks!

So...your saying Google "pulled" the WTC to generate more innernetz search engine queries???


Brilliant!

 

[MikeW]

I've also uploaded a smaller 320x240 version of this, and will be linking it up tonight (probably). So if you can't play the full-sized version because a) your internet connection is too slow, or b) the site doesn't have the bandwidth to stream it smoothly, then that may help. I'll post here with the alternative link when it's done.

 

[grandmastershek]

So...your saying Google "pulled" the WTC to generate more innernetz search engine queries???


Brilliant!

Pffft....just the tip of the iceberg. Wait till I start waking everyone up with how Bing is involved.

 

[Quad4_72]

Gravy! Glad to see you posting. Thanks for the info about the video.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Great to see you dropping in, Mark. Let me give you a quick update on the new and exciting theories proposed by the truth movement while you've been away.



















That's about it.

Dave

 

[ElMondoHummus]

Great to see you dropping in, Mark. Let me give you a quick update on the new and exciting theories proposed by the truth movement while you've been away.

<Great big blank space snipped>

That's about it.

Dave

Oh, c'mon Dave. Surely you can't forget about this:

Hip Hop mogul P Diddy has been blamed for many crazy things over the years -- but a new court filing takes it to a whole new level!...

... According to Turks, the 41-year-old, along with his ex-girlfriend Kim Porter and LAPD brutality victim Rodney King, is responsible for the collapse of the World Trade Center amongst other outrageous alleged atrocities.

Diddy Done DidIt!! Daawwwwwwwww...

 

[alienentity]

Mike Williams of 911myths.com contacted me and generously offered to convert and host the video, so here it is again:

http://www.911myths.com/index.php/WTC_Not_A_Demolition

To those of you who haven't taken the time to delve into Mike's site, it is a treasure trove of evidence-based analysis about the whos, whats, and whys of 9/11.

Thanks, Mike!

May I have permission to put this video on my youtube channel?

thx

AE

 

[A W Smith]

May I have permission to put this video on my youtube channel?

thx

AE

you may risk losing the whole channel as Google had already pulled this video once before, If I were to post it, I would start a separate single video account and favorite or link to it between accounts.

 

[alienentity]

you may risk losing the whole channel as Google had already pulled this video once before, If I were to post it, I would start a separate single video account and favorite or link to it between accounts.

Huh? Does it contain copyrighted material?

 

[Dave Rogers]

Oh, c'mon Dave. Surely you can't forget about this:

Actually, I could, until someone was unkind enough to remind me...

Dave

 

[A W Smith]

Huh? Does it contain copyrighted material?

If i recall that was the original reason given for Google pulling the video. I don't know who complained, Or if the complaint was even valid. Gravy chose not to re-post it for whatever reason. You can PM him and ask as I doubt he will be browsing the 911 CT forums, He's over in community though.

 

[davefoc]

Huh? Does it contain copyrighted material?

I wondered about that.

The thing is brilliantly done and entertaining, but some of that entertainment value comes from the use of songs I assume are copyrighted. Is that the reason Google pulled it?

If so, would it be possible to eliminate the copyrighted material and post it again? It strikes me as good enough that perhaps a talented individual might be found that could provide original music? I wonder if there's anybody here at JREF that could help.

 

[A W Smith]

I wondered about that.

The thing is brilliantly done and entertaining, but some of that entertainment value comes from the use of songs I assume are copyrighted. Is that the reason Google pulled it?

If so, would it be possible to eliminate the copyrighted material and post it again? It strikes me as good enough that perhaps a talented individual might be found that could provide original music? I wonder if there's anybody here at JREF that could help.

without being more specific, I doubt very much its the soundtrack. But if you watch some of the subjects being made fun of in this video by using their own works, Its not hard to figure out which side of the debate the complaints arose from. I know there's fair use and all, But hosting companies would rather not spend their lawyers time defending their users. As we say in contracting, when in doubt rip it out.

 

[davefoc]

without being more specific, I doubt very much its the soundtrack. But if you watch some of the subjects being made fun of in this video by using their own works, Its not hard to figure out which side of the debate the complaints arose from.

I wondered about that also, but not from the perspective of whether Google would pull it for that, just from the perspective of whether it was appropriate. The same kind of questions I wonder about with regards to the Penn & Teller documentary series they produced.

I don't have any great insight on when it's appropriate to ridicule people or not and if any group of people deserve it, it would be the bozo's behind the 9-11 nonsense. Two questions:
1. Does the ridicule add to the entertainment value?
2. Does the ridicule add to the persuasive value?

With regard to question 1: When you are speaking to the choir it probably does. People like to hear there beliefs supported and counter beliefs ridiculed. And when speaking to the undecided there is a certain amount of humor from them because of the wit, but some of the ridicule was just straightforward name calling and probably wasn't that much of a factor with regards to the entertainment value for people without solid opinions on this.

With regards to question 2: I don't know. Candidly identifying the people behind this non-sense as ill-informed nut jobs seems like just a statement of fact to me and thus reasonable and persuasive to a degree. But the other side of that is that it is a bit off putting and makes the presenter seem a bit mean spirited and thus to be a person not completely credible.

Regardless of the above I think it is the single most persuasive piece that I have seen on this issue for a general audience. The detailed documentaries that I've seen are interesting to me because they deal with details of engineering and science while responding to the various theories, but I suspect that your piece would be more persuasive to more people about the idiocy of the 9-11 truther nonsense than the more mainstream documentaries.

As such, I think it would be useful to get the video in a form that could be consistent with U tube standards so that it gets a wider audience.