Wednesday, December 31, 2014

Permanent Top Post--Scroll Down for Newer Posts

(Note: The date on this post is intentional; it keeps this post pinned to the top. Thanks for asking!).

11/11/07 Update: Loose Change Final Cut has just been released and so we have not prepared a full debunking. Both James and I have many comments about the movie below and I started a thread over at JREF with some examples of mistakes in the film. Much of the rest of the information in this particular post concerns the earlier versions of Loose Change.

Because this blog is getting so much traffic from Google searches and referrals from various forums and Wikipedia, we decided to put one post up top to link to information our newest visitors are apparently looking for.

First, if you have not seen the film and want to watch it, be sure to watch the annotated version, which was named after this blog, Screw Loose Change. The creator did a terrific job on this, and we strongly recommend watching this version rather than Dylan Avery's cut.

James has put together a list of major lies in Loose Change. Here's Part 1. Part 2. Part 3. Part 4.

I compiled three very easily refuted lies in the movie. I also showed three tricks and distortions that are used throughout the film.

A friend of the blog named Mark Roberts (aka Gravy at the JREF forums) compiled this amazing Viewer's Guide to Loose Change, (now HTML) which includes a complete transcript of the movie, pictures and links that refute many of the claims, and which highlights the changes between Version 1 and Version 2.

The hot new film in 9-11 Denial is called 9-11 Mysteries. One of our JREF buddies, The Doc, has put together a rebuttal video called (you guessed it!) Screw 9-11 Mysteries, and assembled a viewers' guide to 9-11 Mysteries.

Many 9-11 Deniers focus on the collapse of World Trade Center 7, which fell at 5:20 PM on September 11, almost seven hours after the North Tower. If you want a really detailed analysis of WTC 7, I recommend Mark Robert's WTC 7 and the Lies of the 9/11 Truth Movement. I also recommend the BBC's terrific video on The Third Tower.

If you'd like to discuss the ideas about 9-11 you've encountered here or elsewhere, another friend of the blog started a Screw Loose Change Forum. It's a very lively place with lots of opinion back and forth between both sides. There's also a Screw Loose Change MySpace page, with some animated commentary. Of course, we also welcome comments on our posts.

If you're looking for detailed rebuttals of other aspects of 9-11 Denial, I heartily recommend 9-11 Myths, Debunking 9-11 and Internet Detectives.

Markyx has also put together a video (note: graphic images and strong language) called 9-11 Deniers Speak. If you think Dylan Avery and Jim Fetzer have any respect for the victims of 9-11, just watch this film. There are five parts. Part II, Part III, Part IV, Part V.
There's also a Google Video which is all in one part.

This should be enough to get you started debunking Loose Change to your friends. We have a lot more content below this post.

Notes on unusual terms/abbreviations: Looser (not a misspelling of Loser)=Believer in Loose Change. CT=Conspiracy Theory, Conspiracy Theorist. Truther=9-11 Conspiracy Theorist (all Loosers are Truthers, not all Truthers are Loosers). OS=Official Story. CD= Controlled Demoliton. LIHOP: Let It Happen On Purpose; theory that the government knew the 9-11 attacks were coming but allowed them to happen to further other goals of theirs. MIHOP: Made It Happen On Purpose; theory that the government planned and orchestrated the attacks. Most Truthers are MIHOP.

Update: Comments closed on this post, which is intended solely as a pointer. Because Haloscan will not let us close comments on a particular post, be forewarned: Don't leave a comment in this post or it will be deleted.

Update II: Note on comments: Because some of our commenters have chosen to act like children, we are no longer allowing comments.

Labels: , ,

Monday, April 21, 2014

GOP Senate Candidate Flirts With Troof, Endorses Infowars

Greg Brannon, a contender in the Republican primary for the US Senate, certainly seems like a fruitcake.  He danced close to the edge of Trooferism in a radio interview in 2012 (when he was running for Congress):

Greg Brannon: These questions, again, actually, that's what [9/11 commission vice-chair] Lee Hamilton said. And he just said, there's other questions that need answering. The guy who got all the information…a Democrat and a Republican, were the co-chairmen of the 9/11 commission, and when they got done, they did not put their stamp of approval on the commission. They said, 'There's data that we did not put in there.' So things like this have to be asked.
 Of course, the notion that Hamilton and Kean did not put their stamp of approval on the commission report is a bunch of BS.  Troofers love to quote that passage in their book about the commission being set up to fail, but they always miss the conclusion the two reached, that the commission did not fail due to the hard work of their staffers.

More troubling than that, however, is that Brannon's response came to a particularly buffonish Troofer question:

John, caller: I'm a 9/11 truther. And I had a friend of mine…tell me, look on the internet, Google "the Pentagon" and show me where the plane hit the Pentagon. Where is the plane? There's all kinds of pictures of that building smoldering, and fire trucks everywhere. There's no plane. So I did research on the size of planes, of the engines that ran this plane. These things are 12,000 pounds, these engines that would have flown off—that's six tons—and put a hole in something. There's nothing there.
 Hunt the Boeing in 2012?  Seriously?

Brannon also fell back on his comments about Hamilton when challenged about a website he ran called Founders' Truth, which included a link to Alex Jones' ridiculous Infowars:

Jim, caller: So I went to your website, and you made a comment about 9/11 a few weeks ago, and I went to your website, and you have a link to [InfoWars]. Can you tell your listeners, where InfoWars got their name on the web? On the internet? What was their claim to fame?
Brannon: Well they've been on [the web] for 17 years, but they think it is an inside job.
Jim: Right. So, do you—do you think it's an inside job?
Brannon: I'm the same as [the commissioners], they want more investigation. I just want more investigations…Don't forget, Lee Hamilton, the chair of the 9/11 committee, he wants more investigations. I just think it's very important we study things thoroughly.
Note particularly that Brannon apparently knew off the top of his head that Infowars had been on the web since 1995.  That certainly indicates more than a passing familiarity with the site.

RCP polling currently has Brannon running a reasonably close second to Thom Tillis, the speaker of NC's house, but Tillis will probably need to face Brannon or whoever finishes second in a runoff .

Brannon has some other skeletons in his closet; a jury found him liable for misleading investors in a tech startup company he co-founded in 2010.

Hat Tip to Consdemo in the comments.

Sunday, April 20, 2014

And John Judge Croaks

Bad week for the Troofers:
 Our society has lost a great activist today with the death of John Judge.  No one spoke more clearly, strongly, and informedly on political power, militarism, and activism for positive change.  While John lived nextdoor to Dennis Kucinich -- and with one of the best views and one of the best collections of political books and documents -- in Washington, D.C., it was as staff person for Congresswoman Cynthia McKinney that he advanced numerous causes of peace and justice and accountability for the powerful on Capitol Hill.  On impeaching Bush and Cheney he was there first.  John's expertise reached back into history and across continents.  From the Kennedy assassination to conscientious objection to how-a-bill-becomes-a-law, he was a person to turn to for information and wisdom who was never anything but helpful, friendly, cheerful, and energetic.  He could describe the hiring of Nazis in Operation Paperclip and the creation of the Cold War and then suggest that perhaps the Nazis actually won World War II.
 Judge is kind of a "kitchen sink" Truther; he appears to believe in every conspiracy theory out there. from JFK to RFK to MLK to Pearl Harbor to 9-11.  Here's a talk he gave in early 2002 that summarizes where the movement was at back then; it's the usual crap about 6 of the hijackers are alive and how his parents pointed out to him the locations of the SAM batteries at the Pentagon.

He claims that NORAD knew about all four hijackings by 8:45, which would be a pretty good trick as Flight 93 had taken off from Newark only three minutes earlier.  In fact, the best evidence suggests that Flight 93 was hijacked around 9:29, while Flight 77 appears to have been hijacked about 8:54.

It is interesting that he was a staffer for McKinney, who is also a Truther moron; one wonders whether she just picked nutbar personnel or if he actually influenced her with his crackpottery.

He apparently died after a stroke.  My mother always said that deaths tend to happen in threes;  famous Truthers might want to be careful in the near future.

Tuesday, April 15, 2014

Another Troofer Offs Himself

Michael Ruppert, an early bigwig in the 9-11 Denial Movement, shot himself.  No surprise, the conspiracy theories are already being propounded:

a guy of this stature that never advocated guns would not have ended it this way....this doesnt make sense...this better be investigated to the highest level!

Ruppert's theories about 9-11 were (as usual) tied into some overarching conspiracy theory having to do with "Peak Oil".  

Friday, April 04, 2014

Congressman Kook

This will come as no surprise to those who've followed his buffoonish career, but Congressman Jim McDermott (D-Seattle) further beclowns himself on C-Span.

Wednesday, March 26, 2014

David L. Griscom Wins A Debate--Against Himself!

Hosted by Holocaust Denier Kevin Barrett, and with a prize donated by... wait for that one.

Okay, so Barrett and Griscom, two of the slimiest toads in Trooferdom set up a debate challenge. 
Griscom, known mostly to us as the guy who posits that all or most of the passengers on the four doomed flights are living it up in Tahiti with handsome Swiss bank accounts, offered to debate anybody who had an a$$hole index of at least 50.

Since Griscom is the only person who has pinned the meter on that particular index, it turns out that nobody else qualified.

But it gets better, much better.  Griscom appeared on Barrett's radio program to accept his major award, during which he gave his physics evidence:

He's a typical drooling senile troofer; I particularly like that his strongest "evidence" wrt WTC-7 includes the fact that it came down into its own footprint (absurd I know) while his strongest evidence on the Twin Towers includes that "beams" (really columns) were ejected hundreds of feet outside their footprints.

Perhaps even better is that the debate offered a $1000 prize (to be donated to the charity of the winner's choice) .  Given that the judges were those buffoons who actually listen to Kevin Barrett's radio show, I have little hope that even if they had waived the a$$hole index requirement, that any debunker could win.

But better still is who put up the money.  It turns out to be ANETA, which stands for Association for 9-11 Truth Awareness, run by Rick Shaddock,  Looks like it's a serious lobbying firm, on K Street in DC no less, the address for major national lobbying firms.  But of course it's just some frigging drop box for letters.

Shaddock came to our attention about four years back; he was one of those experimenters who have provided us with much amusement.  His experiment was to drop a concrete block on another concrete block from five stories up to "prove" that the concrete could not have been pulverized on 9-11.

Shaddock appears to be a big-time phony himself, as pointed out by Muc at JREF

There is the Rick Shaddock we (barely) know who, according to his Linkedin profile, did a Master in Education at the "Maharishi University of Management" (with a thesis on "Critical Thinking, Open-Mindedness, and EEG Coherence in Meditating Students"), a BS in Computer Science at Colgate University and an "online course for developing and managing real estate" at Trump University.

Then there is (or better: was) a Dr. Rick Shaddock with a similar looking resume who, in 1984, also did a Ph.D. in Computer Science at the obscure "Central International University" in Los Angeles (dissertation: Relational database management training methodologies - not available anywhere). Actually the university is so obscure that you can only find it in a number of business listings, most of which point to a "Ste 530" (a PO Box, I guess) in an office building at Wilshire Blvd. It also has another address at 1000 University Manor, Fairfield, Iowa which - and now it's getting entertaining - is also the address of a PO Box of Rick Shaddock's CI Corp. What are the odds? I bet the telephone number of the university - if it still exists - leads to an answering service. At one point they even had a rather crappy and fake looking web site, which linked to an apparently never realized alumni site whose domain was coincidentally registered over Shaddock's "Cosmic Internet Registration".

Need a Ph.D.? Just make up your own university.

There's a third Dr. Shaddock who finished his Ph.D. in the same year as the above (1984) at the equally obscure California Technical University. Actually I can only find a high school by that name, and it appears to be defunct.

There also is another Shaddock who did his Ph.D. at "C.I.T.", which I guess is supposed to create the impression that the university was Caltech.

And there's the lab coat wearing computer scientist (Frede-)Rick Shaddock who did his Ph.D. at Westmar University in Iowa, also in 1984.

There's the 1997 version of Rick Shaddock who was a "PhD candidate in Computer Science" at an unnamed institution. The 1998 Shaddock who had finished his Ph.D. in Computer Science. The year 2001 Shaddock who was currently working on his "PhD dissertation in Computer Science" (title: Database management methodologies, and EEG brain wave correlates - not available anywhere). The 2002 Shaddock who finally had earned back his Ph.D. - institution still unknown. And the 2014 Shaddock who is currently working on a Ph.D ... again (see above quote).

Sunday, March 23, 2014

A Preacher to a Dying Breed

Jonathan Kay, the Canadian journalist who penned Among the Truthers, shares his thoughts after visiting a Richard Gage lecture in Toronto, his third such visit (he is a braver man than I).
Ask Richard Gage how he came to become obsessed with what he calls the “truth” about 9/11, and you hear what sounds an awful lot like a story of religious conversion It was March 2006, and the mild-mannered California architect was driving down the Pacific Coast Highway on his way to a construction meeting. Bored, he flipped on KPFA 94.1 FM, a listener-supported “free-speech” station out of Berkeley — “to hear what the communists were talking about,” as he later told me in a 2009 interview. Up to that point in his life, Gage had been a staunch “Ronald Reagan Republican” (his words) and an Iraq War supporter. But what he heard on KPFA’s airwaves blew his mind. “[The speaker] was talking about the 118 [World Trade Center] first-responders — information that had just come out in 2005 — who said they’d heard explosions and flashes of light, beams dripping with molten metal, all amid the collapse of 80,000 tons of structural steel,” he told me. “It hit me like a two-by-four. How come I’d never heard of any of this? I was shocked. I had to pull my car to the side of the road to absorb it all. I knew I’d be late for the meeting. But I didn’t care.”

Osama bin Laden Brother in Law "Yeah, we did it"

No surprises at the trial of Sulaiman Abu Ghaith. Guess he is on it too, or maybe it is one of those Manchurian candidate brainwashing things.

The defendant's testimony in a stilled Manhattan courtroom Wednesday took a federal jury half a world and many years away, to a mountain cave in the desolation of Afghanistan, to the hours after the September 11, 2001, terror attacks.
In that mountain cave, defendant Sulaiman Abu Ghaith testified, sat the man who had summoned him, his future father-in law: Osama bin Laden.
Bin Laden invited him to sit, Abu Ghaith said, and then asked if he'd heard what happened.
"We are the ones who did it," Abu Ghaith, speaking through an Arabic interpreter, quoted bin Laden as saying. Bin Laden then asked for his opinion of what to expect, Abu Ghaith said.
"America will not rest until it accomplishes two things," Abu Ghaith testified he told bin Laden. "To kill you, and to destroy the Taliban."
"You're being too pessimistic," bin Laden responded.