A document examining the personality of the guys behind Loose Change

Written by Gravy, who wrote the Loose Change 2nd Edition Viewer Guide has written another document that goes through the public interviews of the three teens and examines their lies once again.

www.megaupload.com...

rapidshare.de...

A great read, as always.

Why are you so hellbent in discrediting guys like alex jones and documentaries like loose change.Do you have some personal vendetta against them or do you think that the 9\11 commision report is true and everyting that opposes the commision is false?.Plz read the 9\11 poll thread before making new thread that makes poeple believe more lies

A good job by Mark to expose the idiocy and hypocrisy of Dylan rt all.

Just the fact he interviewed on Jack Blood’s radio show is enough to discredit him.

Originally posted by warthog911
Why are you so hellbent in discrediting guys like alex jones and documentaries like loose change.Do you have some personal vendetta against them or do you think that the 9\11 commision report is true and everyting that opposes the commision is false?.Plz read the 9\11 poll thread before making new thread that makes poeple believe more lies

Again,because they are not working in "truth".The real question is why CTers keep attaching their "beliefs" to every sad theory they present.Think for your selves look at the evidence of their lies.We do not have to dissprove anything they say really.They have not proved anything.But hey everyone needs a hobby,some more than others.LOL again!

A document examining the personality of the guys behind Loose Change

So in other words, just a big ad hominem?

Kind of creepy that someone would spend their time doing something like that.

Originally posted by bsbray11So in other words, just a big ad hominem?

Yeah, just like this is.

Explain the terror drills coinciding with all three of the main attacks(9/11, Madrid, London), for the London bombings alone the odds were 1 in 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000.
The drills were identical to all of the attacks and started at the exact same time as the attacks, please try and explain how that isn't suspect.

For the London bombings they targeted the same bus at the exact same location. That bus wasn't in its normal spot and was rerouted by Scotland yard that morning (probably for the drill) so how did the terrorists know that. People on one of the trains said the metal was pointing upwards, which means the bomb was underneath the train and not in the backpack.

1000 people were taking part in the 7/7 drill, the guy on the bus started to panic and that is why he looked inside his bag. He didn't see a bomb so thought he was alright, seconds after the explosion a Kingstar van was photographed driving past the bus, it must have remotely detonated the bomb. Kingstar is a controlled demolition expert company.

Who hijacked the planes because many of the hijackers have been found alive by the BBC? How did they get on the planes if their names weren't on the flight manifests? If the US was wrong in identifying the hijackers don't you think it is important to find the true identities then? Because Bush doesn't, we're already at war so everything turned out just peachy.

Originally posted by HowardRoark
Yeah, just like this is.

A software engineer by background, Jim Hoffman has made many contributions to 9/11 research, including a critique of Popular Mechanics' defense of the "official" government account and an analysis of the NIST "Final Report". I liked them so much that they are included on the home page of the web site of Scholars for 9/11 Truth (st911.org), where they are accessible to this day. He co-authored a booklet, Waking Up from Our Nightmare (2004), which deals with the collapse of the towers and has been well-received. Other students of 9/11, including David Ray Griffin and Steve Jones, both of whom I admire, often cite him. My past impression of him has therefore been quite favorable. Certainly, I have had no reason to bear him malice.

That's a hell of an ad hominem, Howard. You can really pick them.

Not that it has anything to do with this thread, as no one hear has anything to do with the exchanges between Fetzer and Hoffman, which I would describe as far from consisting of only ad hominems.


So, yeah. This thread is still a complete ad hominem.

It's fallacious logic, it has nothing to do with major issues at hand, and frankly it worries me that someone would be so obsessed with this stuff that they've 'examined the personality' of a creator of LC, let alone that they're apparently trying to use it as evidence against an inside job.

Originally posted by bsbray11
Kind of creepy that someone would spend their time doing something like that.

I agree. Whether or not one believes these guys, this "profiling" reminds me of the kind of crap the CIA and FBI used to do on people, and probably still do.

Originally posted by NinjaCodeMonkey
#1Explain the terror drills coinciding with all three of the main attacks(9/11, Madrid, London), for the London bombings alone the odds were 1 in 100000000000000000000000000000000000000000.
The drills were identical to all of the attacks and started at the exact same time as the attacks, please try and explain how that isn't suspect.
--
#2Who hijacked the planes because many of the hijackers have been found alive by the BBC? .

#1 is proof of nothing,I do love the made up Odd though.Jimmie the greek would love that one.

#2 Get real even the BBC realized,John Smith is gonna be lots of people.You use wrong facts yet again.Jeeeezeee!

I'm not using wrong facts, you're just ignoring them. The statistics were done over a 10 year mean, watch terrorstorm for more info on that. I know you are new and think you know everything but you seriously have to up your game. The "terrorists" they found were the exact people, the photos released by FBI matched, not just people with similar names. I like how you just make up stuff and call them facts. You seem to be working overtime, how much do they pay you? ATS won't put up with people like you, you either provide proof or stop calling people names and using the bully tactic, if you are so mart prove it like an adult.

All rightee then! Link please.I have the BBC article do you? That was done before they even had pictures to go with all the names .Would love to see proof of another one.I double dog dare ya!Love to see some math on your probabilities of something that has never happened before,according to some one?I can make odds huge for tons of things than should be nominal,and make them out there.It is the info you choose to use that is suspect.Well,Ok not just that!Show some math and the inputs you are use'en!!!

[edit on 18-7-2006 by Duhh]