Ronald Wieck on fire!

Over at 911 researchers, there is 'debate' going on in the comments section for the Roberts vs Loose Change guys. Well, hardly a debate, but this post by Ronald I thought was particularily good:

Conspiracy Theorist: You said REAL scientists haven't spoken up. I explained that REAL scientists HAVE spoken up. I supplied proof.

Ronald Wieck: And that "proof" was what, exactly? Dental engineer Judy Wood's Keebler elves and her Star Wars laser beams? Steven Jones, the man who wrote about Jesus's visit to North America; the man who assumes that traces of a thermite reaction proves controlled demolition, although he understands nothing about the use of thermite in demolition and his alleged reaction has several far more plausible explanations?

"And because you couldn't rationally counter my proof, you needed to BS your way out by saying the NIST scientists are the only real scientists (or something to that effect.)"

Sorry, but your "scientists" are laughingstocks. Over two hundred researchers contibuted to the NIST report. What errors did they make?

"You can't even address my comments rationally! You're so hysterical that you think the NIST report did not need to analyze the collapses!"

Uh, TEN THOUSAND pages analyzing the collapses and you think they kinda forgot to analyze the collapses. Do you want to rethink this statement?

"You'll do anything to believe the government's fairytale, eh?"

You'll do anything to wave away a mountain of inconvenient evidence. You'll do anything to obscure the FACT that the conspiracy liars have produced ABSOLUTELY NO EVIDENCE for their insane and pernicious nonsense.

Incidentally, when Dr. Greening writes a paper or Popular Mechanics publishes an article and a book, they are somehow "the government"? I'm afraid I don't believe you.

http://911researchers.com/node/19#comment-145

16 month investigation shows that...

Able Danger claim is baseless!

Many conspiracy theorists claim that they're chasing a new investigation for 9/11... well, here is a new investigation that shows what CTers considered to be a strong arguement is false.

The Senate Intelligence Committee has rejected as untrue one of the most disturbing claims about the Sept. 11 terrorist strikes — a congressman's contention that a team of military analysts identified Mohamed Atta or other hijackers before the attacks — according to a summary of the panel's investigation obtained by The Times.

The conclusion contradicts assertions by Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Pa.) and a few military officers that U.S. national security officials ignored startling intelligence available in early 2001 that might have helped to prevent the attacks.

Read the full story here.

Of course this is all NWO/Illuminati media disinfoing the truthers because they're getting too strong ;)

More Loose Change Guides

http://www.trinity.edu/adelwich/documentary/guides.html

Just scroll down past the first set and you'll see the Loose Change guides.

I guess they're all lies too! =)

A question to skeptics.

Do you honestly believe America, global hegemon, imperial leader, sole superpower & colonial collossus is so bereft of enemies who want to kill them that they have to invent them?

That one goes out to all the deniers.

Sciencespeed, James.

$2.3 trillion, in simple terms.

This is a heavily used arguement by the conspiracy theorists. For the uninformed, on September 10th 2001 Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfield announced that the pentagon could not track $2.3 trillion. CTers use this as some sort of evidence that 9/11 was an inside job in as much as it was announced before the tragic day, so as to cover it up or something. Points to consider:

• The entire defense budget for 2001 was about $292 billion, so in order to believe that the government lost $2.3 trillion you'd have to believe that over 8 years' of spending had gone for nothing. (Thanks SLC blog)
• Why would Rumsfield even announce this?
• Since CTers can't really claim that 9/11 was a HUGE cover up in as much as literally THOUSANDS of people would have had to have kept shut about it, they can't say that this money would go to 'paying people off'. They have to resort to saying about '7 people' were in on it, which completely disregards the paying off issue.

So the next time someone brings this your way, you can counter them.

Sciencespeed, James.

NY911Truth.org Promotes Appearance by Man Who Applauded the 9/11 Attacks.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=70200

I have nothing to say to these horrible people.

The 'Pull it' bullshit.

Browsing loose change forums, woody250 makes a post generally discussing a 9/11 issue, and he closes his post with

"we decide to pull, then we watched the building collapse"


common sense.

Amazing. He's using the quote to his advantage, by misquoting Silverstein. They can't even get the quote that they rant and rave about correct. It's mad. Here is the correct quote:

EDIT: For some reason this quote wont show on my background, regardless of what colour I make it, so highlight it to see it.

"I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, uh, telling me that they were not sure they were gonna be able to contain the fire, and I said, 'We've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it.' And they made that decision to pull and then we watched the building collapse." –Larry Silverstein

Bolding mine,

Pathetic. Get your facts right.

Conspiracy Theorists Debating.

I made a post at at Loose Change forums, unfortunately I won't link to it, because I'm using a proxy to access the website and I don't want to give away my ID (thus getting banned...for the 4th time). This post was a 'debunk' of the Norman Minetta testimony regarding the shoot down order. Since there was no real CTers answers to this, I got two interesting replies. The first two replies with REAL truthers agreeing with the 'debunk' of his statement, a few later were good examples of debating:

Denial. It aint just a river in Egypt.
Check this out, for starters.
9/11 The Myth and the Reality: Dr. David Ray Griffin

- Arrowhead

The post links to the video of David Ray G. Ok, you might want me to see this video, but to post it in a thread regarding Norman Minetta? Way to change the subject.

Debating tactic number two: USE HUGE CAPITALS LETTERS AND CHANGE THE SUBJECT:

Show me the references to Atta, Hanjour, Al Shehi or Jarah contacting ATC on 9/11 and identifying themselves as the pilots.

This aspect of the official story is an assumption.

Where is your critical analysis of this myth?
- Bad Machine

I still can't apologize enough for being associated with that crew.

Wendy Burlingame

Wendy Burlingame sadly passed away in a fire yesterday evening[1]. She was the daughter of Chuck Burlingame, the pilot who's plane hit the pentagon on September 11th.

Russell Pickering, a CTer who I respect made a post about this on the LC forums and has kept the thread under control of "OMFG! CONSPIRACY!", which is good. However, as I suspected, this death appeared on Killtown, a 9/11 CTer's "9/11 coincidences and oddities page". It's a shame that this gets put under the coincidences and oddities page, because I reckon even if she had died in 2011, it would still appear. People die, its a fact, fire kills, its a fact.

I'll admit that even the authorities are calling her death suspicious, but again, this is no reason to relate it the 9/11 conspiracy theory, because there is no evidence to suggest that she was questioning the official account. She infact does not like the "truth" movement at all.

As an Ex-LC forum regular, I know that inside some of the more 'hardcore' 'truthers' they are screaming conspiracy, but thankfully Russell and hopefully the rest of the admin team will eradicate this, if it ever does reach a thread.

I'll look at one of the eye witnesses and give my views:

Shortly before the fire erupted, Mr. Rojas said, there were “louder noises than usual” coming from the apartment upstairs, “like somebody running around up there, like somebody doing something up there in a rush. Then he said he heard a thud — “like somebody dropped something”— and three or four minutes later the building’s fire alarm sounded. Mr. Rojas said that within minutes his apartment filled with smoke. He then safely left the building.” Sebastian Rojas, a downstairs neighbour [1]

No need to question the 'doing something up there in a rush bit' - you've all been rushed before. The thud could be ANYTHING - a lamp knocked off a table, the dogs (2, who both died in the fire) fighting or messing around, a human dropping something. I'm speculating that perhaps it was some sort of cooking accident. I don't think you can rightfully claim that it was, for example, her boyfriend (which some are quick to blame) hitting her/knocking her out and then setting fire to the place, because an autopsy revealed:

Burlingame died from smoke inhalation, and there was no indication of additional trauma to her body [1]

I really hope that any conspiracy theories for this just go away and let a woman who has been through so much now rest in peace.

Rest in peace, Wendy Burlingame, 5/12/06.

Opposing Views.

I'll share a few experiences that I had over on the Loose Change forums which I guess shows the extent of CT'ers mindsets regarding their views on 9/11.

Firstly, the old Loose Change message boards (IE the most popular one) was pretty busy, and it was busy with skeptics too. The skeptics were pretty much thrown into the 'Skeptics' area of the message board - an area hardly ever visited by your average CT'er. I, however, would spend most of my time in this section, because in theory, if CT'ers are so sure that they have real evidence of a conspiracy, skeptics should be CT'ers best friend, but they're not. In my experience, CT'ers don't want to hear the other side of the story. To them, the official story is impossible, regardless of whatever anyone says, because they're so far into what they think is evidence that they just won't accept it.

Getting back to what I was saying. At the LC forums, skeptics (or 'JREF Ninjas'/shills/government agents/trolls as they were called) begun to arrive faster than the rate of CTers were arriving and when the skeptics forum became too active with what they called 'lies' or 'propaganda' that it closed. When I, or other semi-rational CTers raised objections to this section being closed, we were silenced. I don't mean banned, just told to 'shut up and stop complaining'.... sound familiar?

Essentially the Loose Change forums became everything they were protesting; a fascist, 'police forum'. People remain getting banned if they annoy the admin team by debunking their claims. Eventually the team were 'forced' by popular demand to open a 'Debate' forum, which was like the skeptics forum, only if a thread got too far into the REAL truth (or the Official Conspiracy Theory as they called it) then it was closed on that grounds that it wasn't intelligent debate.

Another important thing to note is that Screw Loose Change (1), (2) and Loose Change Viewers Guide (3) were all blocked links on the forum, IE; If you posted "http://www.loosechangeguide.com" your URL would auto-change to something like "http://www.loosechangeguid.com". Looking back, I remember being angry at this because it is blocking opinions that oppose their theory, this is pure fascism in practice!

Due to these links being blocked, people would just not visit, and because people like superzero Dylan said these links are bad, people take that as gospel. So much for going out and doing your own research.

Do what I did, check out the fact that science debunked our precious claims, admit you're wrong and no-one will laugh at you nor ridicule you. Lately the truth movement has been grinding to a halt. Its about to become just like the JFK conspiracy. I'd say that there are more people getting turned off by the conspiracy than onto it. Here is a major thing to consider; why are there no scientific journals regarding 9/11 'truth'? These journals are written by academics, then submitted to many other professors, academics and so on and if they all agree with its findings, it becomes an official scientific journal - one you could cite in say, an essay. Where are these journals? Oh yeah, hidden by the government, thats true, how could I forget.

You're a stronger person if you can admit you were wrong about something.

Embrace common sense. Searching for the truth involves coming to conclusions, not just asking questions. "Ask Questions, Seek Answers."

Conspiracies are as so: If you can't win with reason, win with volume.

Pentagon Doubletree Hotel Security Camera

Apparently this was showing on CNN Pipeline, despite a release date being set for December 21st. And according to batmanchester on the Loose Change forums and Oliver on the JREF forums, no plane is visible.

Regardless of what the video will show, I think that JREF'er Alt+F4 put it best when he said:

If the video shows a plane the CTers will say the video was tampered with. If the video doesn't show a plane the CTers will say the video was tampered with.

End of story

As an ex-conspiracy theorist, I can confirm this reaction.

UPDATE:

Yeah, here it is: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gIw9jrOhT8w

Loose Change Forum Post Of The Day

Screw Loose Change blog does this too, so I figure I'll have one. Maybe not daily, but certainly everytime I see a really dumb post.

Yes Dylan, I can still access your ultrasupermega forum, despite your ban on me.

Here was my favourite post today, made by a new user to the forum "Arrowhead":

Larry [Silverstein] is a heinous criminal of the highest order. "Synagog of Satan" comes to mind. A "Jew" by birth alone.

Bolding is my own work. I hope that he edits his post, 'cause I took a screenshot of it too :).

oops double post

and I don't know how to delete it.

World Trade Center 7

This is the resort issue, if a CTer is losing a debate, I know this because I've seen it in practice and used it personally!

Mark Roberts, who wrote the Loose Change Guide which completely debunked the claims of Loose Change, also wrote an excellent new paper called "World Trade Center Building 7 and the Lies of the 9/11 'Truth Movement'.”. The document is 134 pages and features an extensive study of why WTC7 collapsed, and features an interview transcript between Alex Jones and Roberts. You can find the pdf here.

The first point I'd like to make was something that I never thought about as a CTist. If the Government had really wanted to demolish World Trade Center 7 without any suspicions, why do it 8 hours later at 5pm? Some would argue that this is because WTC7 was the control center for the planning of 9/11, but WTC7 was empty for several hours before it fell, so it could have easily been brought down then, less suspiciously. Mark Roberts has covered Larry Silverstein's 'Pull it' comment extensively in his WTC7 lies paper, so I won't talk about that. All I'll say is read his paper, its very obvious that Silverstein didn't mean to demolish building.

I realise that people won't read long blog posts, so I'll just close with this comment. The South side of WTC7 was where the damage was, and the smoke from there was so thick that you couldn't actually see it! Something to consider. When CTers show you the WTC7, they'll NEVER show you the south side.

What about me?

I was once a 9/11 denier, and I am no longer, thanks to all the lovely people are the James Randi Educational Foundation.

The first thing that caught my eye regarding the 9/11 Conspiracies was the Pentagon Strike. I saw that in 2004. I didn't really follow on much more from that until I saw Loose Change 911 2nd Edition+Extras in February 2006. This DVD, at the time, opened my eyes and I convinced myself that the Government carried out 9/11. Between February and November I was a firm believer of the conspiracy. Posting on many a-forum with what I thought was evidence of an inside job and what not.

Then I found the James Randi Educational Foundation. Over on the Loose Change message boards, this place is deemed as full of trolls, a stupid place, and is used as an insult to people: "Go back to JREF". Pretty much as soon as I saw that they had completely debunked all the 9/11 conspiracy claims, I begun worry regarding the Conspiracy Theory, and after reading many, threads, documents and websites, I reached the conclusion that I was being an idiot.

So here I am now, freshly BANNED from the Loose Change forums (Didn't take them long after I had turned to the 'DARK side', less than 2 weeks) and using this Blog to debunk existing theories regarding the conspiracy. I know there are plenty of 9/11 blogs debunking the CTers, but hey, the more the merrier!

Hope y'all enjoy what I have to say, and I'm very open to arguments from CTers, so please contact me. I don't HATE you all, because I was one of you, I, just like many of you need to do, reviewed over the for and against material and reached my conclusion.

I don't know everything about 9/11, I might just try to cover the main points. I don't believe that not knowing everything is the basis for a conspiracy, because thats following that path of Creationists, who build the theory of Creationism on poking holes in evolution.

For some reason...

My old blog wouldn't let me log it - bummer! As i'm trying to use JAStewart everywhere on the internet, I guess ElectionNightSpecial is Unique too though.