Thursday, May 25, 2006

Three Hour Radio Show on Loose Change & 9-11

Dr Mike Newcomb of the Phoenix Air America station dedicated a full show to the Loosers and Truthers yesterday. Unfortunately, their producer did not return my email requesting to be allowed on the show and I was unable to get through on the listener lines. I did manage to email the host on the cellphones versus Airfones issue, and he read my comments on the air, even mentioning Screw Loose Change.

You can download the MP3s of the show here. Sadly, Dr Mike, who had been a skeptic of Loose Change only a week or two ago, is now at least something of a convert to the "Truth" movement. This highlights the problem with Loose Change; it's slick and entertaining enough that it can convince intelligent people (and although I disagree with Dr Mike's politics, he's a smart guy). Obviously if he were to dig deeper with a skeptic's attitude, he'd pretty quickly realize that it's all a con job. But how many people are going to dedicate the time and effort?

During the second hour, Jason Bermas (one of the producers) appears, I believe about 20 minutes into the segment. My email gets read over the air during the third hour starting at about 27:28. That hour mostly features Stephen Jones, the BYU physicist, who claims that he hasn't seen Loose Change (hence no need to critique it).

57 Comments:

At 25 May, 2006 10:42, Blogger BG said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 25 May, 2006 10:44, Blogger BG said...

I know this comment will not be welcomed here, but I make it for the same reason I make all my comments. I beieve I am offering the best evidence to represent the truth that I am capable of.

Those who don't want to acknowledge the truth about 9/11, namely that "something is rotten in Denmark", seem to mirror the thinking of those who have had a kind of cult-like devotion to George W. Bush. At every turn of Bush's incompetence and dissembling, there have been his defenders, from R. Limbaugh to C. Krautheimer, who have insisted his leadership is sound, and his actions based on the conservative agenda he was elected to implement.

Most Americans now see the sham of that contention about our President. How much longer can you keep on denying reality about the evidence that, at the very minimum, there has been a cover up of the true facts of 9/11?

 
At 25 May, 2006 10:57, Blogger LT said...

BG
While many Americans may question the leadership and judgment of our president, I doubt that anyone can prove those same people doubt the evidence surrounding 911. Also, questioning positions and judgment is far different from asserting government involvement in 911. Thats what you guys seem not to understand. Don't expect there to be a huge rally of support anytime for Loose Change, or the ideas that you and others here perpetuate. One reason is that people who come here to read, view your logic, reasoning, and judgement, and equate that the rational of the people invovled in this "sham-as you put it" of a movie. I'm still hung up with you and the Jesse Macbeth thing BG. How do you expect people to take you seriously if you won't admit that you are wrong about that. Please tell me, do you STILL think that he is an a "special forces ranger-as he so incorrectly puts it"? Its just poor judgment BG

 
At 25 May, 2006 11:05, Blogger undense said...

Those who incessantly claim to be presenting "truth" seem to mirror the thinking of the crowd afflicted with Bush derangement syndrome as well. It's no secret, or coincidence, that virtually every CT exhibits that particular syndrome.

Someone from a forum I participate in used to have a sig line that stated:

Many people don't hate Bush because they hate the war. They hate the war because they hate Bush.

That statement poses a cause and effect about bias. It's the same cause and effect that drives CT thinking as well. And when one has that sort of bias, there's no way in hell they'll ever have a firm grasp on truth. Truth, as you've vividly demonstrated in here bg, get's tossed out the window or ignored in order to adhere to belief.

So please stop misusing and abusing the word "truth." You represent nothing of the sort. All you have and present is your biased beliefs, nothing else.

 
At 25 May, 2006 11:12, Blogger BG said...

It,

I have many points to address your comments. Only time to address one now.

My contention has never been that Jesse MacBeth was any particular animal, mineral, or vegatable.

My contention has been that if he is speaking about true event accurately, then this is damning evidence. The truth of his contentions about atrocities need not have any dependence on

a) whether he is who he say he is
b) whether he knows how he should dress
c) whether he's lying about other things

My point isn't that he is telling the truth, or even whether one should judge him credible.

My point is and has always been, that the supposed discrediting of him to the extent to claim that nothing his says could be true, is just the most inane logic possible.

I watched Malkin's presentaton on Hot Air. I went to the detailed statements included reference to one about govt. official statement he there has no record of his name matching the service he claims.

I don't want to be misunderstood on this. It's not now or have I ever supported the guy.

No matter what, whether he's lying or not, he needs to be arrested and prosecuted for war crimes (or whatever the military statutes are), or he needs to be arrested and prosecuted for sedition. It's one or the other. Both are serious crimes that should not be overlooked.

 
At 25 May, 2006 11:18, Blogger Alex said...

"The truth of his contentions about atrocities need not have any dependence on a) whether he is who he say he is..."

LOL

Yet another example of Fake but Accurate

BG, you've truly out-done yourself this time.

Please, do explain how his stories of all the atrocities he's commited could be true if he's never served a day in uniform in his entire life. I'd LOVE to hear this one.

 
At 25 May, 2006 11:19, Blogger LT said...

The truth of his contentions about atrocities need not have any dependence on

a) whether he is who he say he is
b) whether he knows how he should dress
c) whether he's lying about other things

How can you say that BG? He's making the contention that HE COMMITTED THE OFFENSES. Surely, if he is not a soldier, which he isn't, than there is no way that he committed the offenses. DO YOU SEE HOW THAT WORKS?

As to my contention. My contention is that no one will every be swayed by any of your arguments because they see your excercise in bad judgment, just like you have proven above. You have several people, credible, professional, etc, explaining to you why the uniform issue is important, and on top of that, others indicating that the individual has NO SERVICE RECORD, yet all of that is not important ACCORDING TO YOU. Do you see how this demonstrates your lack of insight, credibility, and good judgement?

 
At 25 May, 2006 11:20, Blogger LT said...

Alex,
you beat me to it...

 
At 25 May, 2006 11:20, Blogger LT said...

Alex,
you beat me to it...

 
At 25 May, 2006 11:24, Blogger LT said...

i am laughin my ass off. surely you really aren't this dumb are you BG?

 
At 25 May, 2006 11:28, Blogger Alex said...

Sorry Lt, better luck next time :)

Anyway, the clearest indication that MacBeth is not a soldier and never has been has nothing to do with his uniform, his stutter, or his appearance. The clearest indication that he's full of shit from start to finish is that the military hasn't taken any action against him. If he WERE a soldier, and he was lying about the "war crimes" he supposedly commited, he'd be up on charges right now for those lies. Or, if he were telling the truth about them, he'd be up on charges for murder and rape amongst other things, and would spend the rest of his life behind bars. But, being a civ, there's dick all that the army can do to him. If he gets charged it'll have to be by civ police.

 
At 25 May, 2006 11:40, Blogger James B. said...

That is idiotic. Then you would have no problem with me claiming that the World Trade Centers were not demolished, because I have 20 years experience in the demolitions industry, and I was there on September 11th and saw the towers collapse and in no way did their collapse resemble any of the hundreds of controlled demolitions that I have participated in.

The fact that I am not who I say I am has no bearing on that truth.

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:02, Blogger LT said...

LT=still not believing BG's last post...

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:07, Blogger BG said...

re: MacBeth

When anyone can prove definitively that this person on camera has not served in Iraq, I will agree with all that has been said here and elsewhere that he is a fake and there is no doubt that any of his speech should be given a second thought, other than the prosecutive for sedition as a private citizen.

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:09, Blogger Rousseau said...

So let's be clear, the world can be easily devided into those with sense and the ability to distingiush fact from myth and those who cannot. By what authority to you pass this sever judgment upon others? What allows you (or anyone) to know the clear facts while others are blinded. Hmmm, it seems that a self-ordained proopensity to clearly distinguish those who are crazy from those who are not may serve your own ego? Sure, everyone would like to believe that they are on a mission to save the confused who may be miguided by falsehoods, seems pretty similarly to the mission of the filmakers. Oh, but I forgot, you are the one who "really knows". How do I know that, oh, because you said so.

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:10, Blogger LT said...

BG that has already happened dummy. DON'T YOU GET IT. THERE ARE NO PAPERS ON HIM...He could prove it if it were true. How? an ID card. Pay statements (LES). DD214 etc. YOU JUST DON'T GET IT DO YOU? DAMN

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:11, Blogger BG said...

The following, which I just now found, would close the case, if true:
found here: http://www.qando.net/details.aspx?Entry=3934


Real or "MacBeth"?
I am Jesse’s older sister. Let me tell you...I am finally glad someone has finally discovered he is a fraud.

My brother went to army boot camp but got kicked out after four weeks for an inability to adapt to military life and was sent to a mental hospital in Georgia.

We grew up in the Arizona foster care system. Our mother is schizophrenic, a drug addict, and very abusive. Jesse spent the majority of his childhood in mental hospitals.

He convinced me back in 2002 that he was sick from Hep C and in need of surgery. I took him in. When I discovered that he was faking and stealing from me, I asked him to leave. I drove him all they way back to Arizona (I was going to school in California) and by the time I got back he had managed to empty my bank account, my roommates bank account, and charge up my credit card.

He somehow convinced people in Pima, Arizona that we got shot in the back in Iraq and his story just took off from there.

My brother is mentally ill. I don’t know where my cute little baby brother went or how he got replaced by this scary monster. I don’t know how to help him, so I had to stop contact with him all together.

At least now, maybe he’ll be forced to get some help and get back on his medication.

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:12, Blogger LT said...

My other point about your judgment still stands. IT IS HORRIBLE. You have a mountain of evidence PROVING this guy is a phony, but yet you refuse to believe. Do you think that you know better than we(in the military) do? THATS THE WHOLE PROBLEM WITH ALL OF YOU. When presented with expert analysis and evidence, you CHOOSE TO LOOK THE OTHER WAY.

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:17, Blogger LT said...

The following, which I just now found, would close the case, if true:
found here:

Why would you take her word and not ours? After all the proof that we have given you. Here's a heads up; WE'VE BEEN TELLING YOU THIS ALL ALONG!

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:22, Blogger BG said...

It,

Wait a sec,

Here's my judgement,

Everything from the beginning of this has looked like a hoax, or a lie, or a stunt. If I were on a jury, with just evidence given I have I seen, I would convict (meaing beyond a reasonable doubt) of lying.

My point is that I don't think there is proof yet.

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:25, Blogger LT said...

Rousseau,
If you are talking to me. Here's the answer. I'm an full time officer who has served in Iraq, and has 13 years of service. I know what i'm talking about, as do Alex (Canadian military) and James (US Army). We have plenty of military experience between the 3 of us to spot fakes and phonies. If you were in our profession, you would understand as well. Now whats up with all the pseudo-philosophical stuff???

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:26, Blogger LT said...

you're kiddin right?...

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:26, Blogger LT said...

last post directed to BG

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:31, Blogger James B. said...

That is how conspiracy theorists work, all authority is equal.

A dozen career military officers are no more an expert on who is a Ranger, than a single peace activist in Seattle.

One hundred people who specifically describe seeing a plane hit the pentagon are no more authoritative than one witness who said "it sounded like a missile"

An MIT professor of structural engineering is no more an authority on a building collapse than a professor of philoshophy, or a janitor for that matter.

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:35, Blogger BG said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:37, Blogger BG said...

So, given what you all say, rousseau, it, alex, (and I'm no long trying to argue against your contentions)

shouldn't a judge be approached to order it removed from the internet.

I realise it may be posted on the web site out of US jurisdiction, but we should control any US based website.

Shouldn't prosecuters be assigned to indict not only "MacBeth" but also the film production company the original website owners?

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:39, Blogger Alex said...

Can you imagine the uproar from the left if MacBeth gets charged with treason? I don't think the Bush administration has the balls to try it. Don't get me wrong, I'm ALL for it. While they're at it they should charge the New York Times for publishing information about a classified intelligence gathering program. It's about time this administration put it's foot down and said "ENOUGH!". I just don't think it's likely to happen.

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:39, Blogger BG said...

I'm trying to nudge you a bit with the following comment:

Isn't it clear there was a conspiracy to put out false information?

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:41, Blogger BG said...

Alex,

I'll looked up and posted a comment either yesterday or Tuesday about Federal Legal language that called the crime:

Sedition

It seemed to fit perfectly.

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:45, Blogger Pat said...

BG, that it's a lie is undoubted; that we should allow lies in our society as a legal matter is also undoubted. The idea is to debunk lies, not to put the liars in jail (with obvious exceptions for lying under oath, etc).

I don't want Dylan Avery to go to jail for lying in Loose Change; I just want folks to understand that he lied.

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:45, Blogger BG said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:46, Blogger BG said...

Pat,

I don't think you are comparing apples to apples.

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:47, Blogger BG said...

Here's the only logical reason I can imagine that it would be smart not to prosecute:

1) They know guy is mentally ill and will plead insanity or diminished capacity.

If this is true, they should announce as much, and make sure he gets treatment would should include incareration.

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:49, Blogger BG said...

If I say:

I believe there have been war crimes committed by US troops in Iraq,

or

I believe the 9/11 Commission helped cover up what really happened on 911, it is 100% different from what MacBeth said in a way clearly with the intent to deceive.

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:51, Blogger Rousseau said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:52, Blogger BG said...

Some of you who believe in the truth about Able Danger would actually have to agree with my second statement.

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:56, Blogger BG said...

Rousseau said...

I agree almost 100% with your comments.

I don't mean this as a pot shot. Honest question,

If you are capable of this quality of rhetoric, why were you "spamming" yesterday. Did you really think that message was so critical to the overall point you beleive needs to be made, that it made sense to post it multiple times?

 
At 25 May, 2006 12:56, Blogger Rousseau said...

It...O.K. so if your in the military that means you know what it's all about. Philoshphy is the pursuit of knowledge through abstract thinking, thus by definition all philosphy is "pseudo", thus the qualifier uneccessary. So far here's what i gather, there is this misinformation out there and this site is intended to save the poor dupes who may be tricked by it from their own ignorance. If the movie created no sizable amount converts this site would not be needed. Thus, you have to save a faily large group of people who are duped. That's the problem, either no one really believes the movie or if a lot of people do than your mission to help them "see the light" (sound familiar?). As an accomplished military man I'm surprised to find you trooling around this site with the nobodys like myself. Go out and make history you knower of what's reallly going on. This is just a bunch insignificant hacks here. Don't waste your time, go save the world from evil. Oh, but that's not messianic?

 
At 25 May, 2006 13:07, Blogger BG said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

 
At 25 May, 2006 13:08, Blogger debunking911 said...

I come here as one who HATES Bush yet have NOT seen any evidence for controlled demolition. Let me be clear, I am a proud liberal. There is more than enough evidence that Bush fixed evidence around policy...

http://www.geocities.com/debunking911/conspiracy.htm

...but ZIP to show controlled demolition. No memo, no detonation device, nothing.

What I find interesting is that one of Bush's appointees are part of this so called truth movement. He thinks NO planes hit any of the buildings. OUTRAGOUS! Jones has also been featured on Tucker Carlson. Who here thinks Tucker Carlson put Jones on because he wants to know the truth? Heh!

So I ask, isn't it possible this whole thing is yet another swiftboat group. "Swiftboat Scholars for misrepresenting 911 truth" should be the name. Because just like the swiftboaters, their evidence doesn't pass scrutiny. They seem to be a political hack group trying to get third party voters and religious fundies to donate and vote third party. If they split the democrat vote they get another 4 year in power.

I beg my fellow liberals to open their mind as they did with the 911 movement. It's possible the conspiracy is to make us look like loons.

We don't need to do to Bush what the right did to Clinton. Charges of selling missile technology to china and Browns murder should have been refutted by other conservatives as the conspiracy theories they were.

There is just no evidence to support this.

 
At 25 May, 2006 13:10, Blogger BG said...

Rousseau,

I'm not trying to debate you or compete with you. You seem like a bright person. Not saying others aren't bright here, just saying you are steping back and making sense apart from the whole 9/11 thing.

I do think I can make the case, that, since Loose Change, the movie, and Loose Change, the search phrase, is such a hot item that I think it makes sense to try to jump in that stream and present hopefully a few facts and comment to be there for those people who are honestly looking for help in trying to decide what they should make of it all.

If you criticize my ability toward actually hitting that target, I'll of course have to leave the possibility open that you are right: my efforts of sticking with enough facts and my comments are working at times to discredit even further the exact cause I believe is worthy.

 
At 25 May, 2006 13:13, Blogger BG said...

Debunking,

I think I can share with you ample evidence of CD thru url's on the internet. Would you prefer I do that privately or should I post them here again, (as I have on other posts of this blog)

 
At 25 May, 2006 13:16, Blogger LT said...

Go out and make history you knower of what's reallly going on.

I already have. I was there when my battalion and bde helped secure 2 historic elections in Iraq.

As for this site, i just like it. whats your excuse?

 
At 25 May, 2006 13:19, Blogger LT said...

oh and by the way Rousseau, i forgot to tell you...bite me.

 
At 25 May, 2006 13:21, Blogger BG said...

Debunking,

Since you aren't responding, and there's not way based your profile to verify anything about you,


you, sir or mam,

look to be a fraud.

 
At 25 May, 2006 13:21, Blogger debunking911 said...

BG, I have seen just about every single web site. I have been debating this for months online. I amasted enough information to create my own web site...

http://www.debunking911.com

I doubt you will tell me anything I havent heard in over 10 months of debates.

 
At 25 May, 2006 13:23, Blogger LT said...

I know you just want some attention Rousseau, thats why you posted the same post in 4 different threads. Its OK man, don't get your feelings hurt because nobody really cares what you have to say.

 
At 25 May, 2006 13:23, Blogger debunking911 said...

BG, I gave you no reason to attack me personally, I have a life outside the internet you know. I'm at work and will respond later but instead of paranoid attacks how about some facts...

 
At 25 May, 2006 13:27, Blogger BG said...

debunking,

I went to the web site that you showed, and found the following beginning of a debunk about the molten steel:


Conspiracy sites like to bring up molten steel found 6 weeks after the buildings fell to suggest thermite must have created the effect. The explanation doesn't go into the amount of thermite needed because it would be an absurd amount. There is another explanation which is more plausible.


What you claim as an alternative explanation is preposterous.

Separately, by stiking down the explanation of thermite as being impossible, you prove nothing more than the idea that perhaps some other extremely exothermic material was used.

 
At 25 May, 2006 13:31, Blogger BG said...

debunk911,

Ok, you may not be a fraud.

Possibly just mistaken. I find your narrative very fishy still.

 
At 25 May, 2006 13:37, Blogger BG said...

debunk,

Do you have any association with the web side you pointed to, or

did ya just think it would be fun to have a blogger name that would match that name?

 
At 25 May, 2006 13:45, Blogger debunking911 said...

As I said in the very first post. I have a web site where I accumulated all the information from debates I've had. So YES, that's my web site.

Why should this matter since it was YOU who suggested I go to web sites which were pro CD? I can go to pro CD sites but I can't create one which is pro collapse by fire?

 
At 25 May, 2006 13:48, Blogger debunking911 said...

BG, Saying the alternative explanation of molten steel is "preposterous". doesn't make it so. It's physics. Anyone can calculate it to see it's correct. Can you find any errors in the formulation?

 
At 25 May, 2006 13:52, Blogger debunking911 said...

Do you have any evidence "some other extremely exothermic material was used"? I can say aliens teleported into the towers and lasered them and I would have just as much evidence as "extremely exothermic material" may have been used. There is a difference between what you can imagine and what there is evidence for.

 
At 25 May, 2006 14:10, Blogger BG said...

debunking,

I see your points. I'll stop implying ulterior movtives or criticizing. Just wanted to be clear....

I'm just coming at this from a "on the internet, no one knows you are a dog" kind of thing.

 
At 25 May, 2006 18:00, Blogger Rousseau said...

bg, I feel your vibe, I think this sight is comprised of people (on both sides) who give a damn, and that in and of itself makes the participants on this venue unique vis-a-vis most Americans. I just feel that instead of engaging in competing platitudes and "facts" may miss some deeper and more important insights into the nature of conflict, domestic and international. These is a very troubling times that we live in, and I'm concerned that thoughful folks (on both sides of the issue) are spending more time directing spitful rehtoric towards each other, rather than thinking critically together.

 
At 25 May, 2006 18:07, Blogger Rousseau said...

it, You are correct, I am certainly seeking attention. So what? Are we writing notes on this site to gain the attention of others or to read our own posts? I also want to note that I am certain that your military experience gives you valuable insights into the nature of certain things I cannot understand due to my lack of direct expirience in military matters. I was only pointing out that your perspective does not invalidate all other counter points as off hand. I'm sure you are a good guy, who cares deeply about the U.S.

 

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home