Did the U.S. government plan and execute the 9/11 attacks?

[sunsettommy]

Did the U.S. government plan and execute the 9/11 attacks?

Does one internet video hold the shocking evidence?

http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/911truth.html

Go read the link.

[jbg]

Did the U.S. government plan and execute the 9/11 attacks?

Does one internet video hold the shocking evidence?

http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/911truth.html

Go read the link.

Good counterpoint to someone else I know. Even if I am guilty of saying that Katrina is a GOP conspiracy (link).

[PolyNewbie]

Watch 911 Mysteries for something sensible. See my signature below.

Neither of these guys can argue the case. They do everything but that to confuse the issue.

[kuzadd]

Did the U.S. government plan and execute the 9/11 attacks?

Does one internet video hold the shocking evidence?

http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/911truth.html

Go read the link.

Good counterpoint to someone else I know. Even if I am guilty of saying that Katrina is a GOP conspiracy (link).

I read through the entire piece, and the point of it was?????

All this piece article is , clearly, is an attack, on, largley one person, who made the film -"loose change "and then draws the whole 9/11 movement into the picture, linking them to holocaust denial. It is in essence a piece of propaganda.

It uses basic propaganda techniques of name calling: " Name Calling seeks to make us form a judgment to reject and condemn without examining the evidence"

or transference: making a connection between alleged holocaust deniers and 9/11 truther

How is it a counterpoint to anything??

[PolyNewbie]

Its just a bunch of kids

[sunsettommy]

Did the U.S. government plan and execute the 9/11 attacks?

Does one internet video hold the shocking evidence?

http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/911truth.html

Go read the link.

Good counterpoint to someone else I know. Even if I am guilty of saying that Katrina is a GOP conspiracy (link).

I read through the entire piece, and the point of it was?????

All this piece article is , clearly, is an attack, on, largley one person, who made the film -"loose change "and then draws the whole 9/11 movement into the picture, linking them to holocaust denial. It is in essence a piece of propaganda.

It uses basic propaganda techniques of name calling: " Name Calling seeks to make us form a judgment to reject and condemn without examining the evidence"

or transference: making a connection between alleged holocaust deniers and 9/11 truther

How is it a counterpoint to anything??

So you are willing to overlook the fact that it was a good expose of that "one person"?

He he...

[sharkman]

Its just a bunch of kids

I'm sorry but this is kind of funny. Poly pooh-poohing whacko evidence when he's produced reams of the same on his 911 conspiracy thread.

[kuzadd]

Did the U.S. government plan and execute the 9/11 attacks?

Does one internet video hold the shocking evidence?

http://www.pointlesswasteoftime.com/911truth.html

Go read the link.

Good counterpoint to someone else I know. Even if I am guilty of saying that Katrina is a GOP conspiracy (link).

I read through the entire piece, and the point of it was?????

All this piece article is , clearly, is an attack, on, largley one person, who made the film -"loose change "and then draws the whole 9/11 movement into the picture, linking them to holocaust denial. It is in essence a piece of propaganda.

It uses basic propaganda techniques of name calling: " Name Calling seeks to make us form a judgment to reject and condemn without examining the evidence"

or transference: making a connection between alleged holocaust deniers and 9/11 truther

How is it a counterpoint to anything??

So you are willing to overlook the fact that it was a good expose of that "one person"?

He he...

well, in your mind you may see it that way, an "expose", if you may.

was it a good expose?

All depends what one thinks is a good expose. i guess?

Bottom line it is not a counterpoint to anything, and barely qualifies as an expose, IMO.

I'll reiterate, it is a good piece of propaganda, meant to sway the reader, not by attacking FACTS, or anomolies, the movie is bringing out, but, meant to smear (name call) the person who made the movie and by extension the larger truth movement.

Looking at how the piece is set up....right of the top , it sets the entire premise of the article which it wraps up in the conclusion.

It uses a CLEARLY FICTIONAL dialogue, right at the beginning between Avery and "Mr Soprano" , who is a FICTIONAL character in a t.v series. (there is no link to the conversation, that works) and from the reading of it, if Mr Avery said it that way, it is CLEARLY tongue in cheek.( hence a fictional dialogue)

I mean can one have a conversation with a fictional character?????

Am I to assume, you think that's is possible?

The one statement , directly attributed to the conversation between the actor James Gandolfini

Is this "James told me, "If you want to be a successful director, you have to have something to say to the world." not to be snide, but, wow, how 'cryptic' (facetious, completely)

I can dissect the piece further, but, I am not going to bother, all in all, it is an article emplying classic propoganda techniques, name calling ,association.

"Name-calling is a form of ad hominem attack that draws a vague equivalence between a concept and a person, group or idea. By linking the person or idea being attacked to a negative symbol, the propagandist hopes that the audience will reject the person or the idea on the basis of the symbol, instead of looking at the available evidence."

This use of propoganda, also demonstrates, or should demonstrate to the reader, weakness.

That if the promoter was to engage in an actual factual debate on the subject, the promoters evidence would be weak or non-existent, so the promoter , must engage, in manipulation to sway opinion. Think Bush regime propaganda leading up to the attack on Iraq.....

What one should ask oneself, is why this writer, did this piece?

It should be obvious.

Hint: it's not REALLY, to challenge the questions raised in the movie.

[PolyNewbie]

Sharkman: Poly pooh-poohing whacko evidence when he's produced reams of the same on his 911 conspiracy thread.

Unless you can back that up you are shown to be a fool.

[obsidian]

wow i know loose change is shit. what do you expect from teenagers.

but does one video ruin the rest?

and those pictures of scrap metal, where the f*** is the pentagon?anyone? that doesnt prove shit

and that website seems credible to you? its just as blatantly trying to sway your oppinion as loose change.

no citations, anything. no backing. n-o-t-h-i-n-g

i never believed it word for word, and i always research what ive watched. there are wholes in both stories, on both sides. and what does that tell us? ITS NOT THE TRUTH

[PolyNewbie]

wow i know loose change is shit. what do you expect from teenagers.

Loose Change was one of the first so it doesn't look good now. But Loose Change 3 will hit the theaters in the summer and has a multimillion dollar budget. It will make the current best, 911Mysteries look ameteurish - although I cannot imagine a movie on 911 being too much better thaqn 911Mysteries.

[obsidian]

anything that isnt 100% credible is a step back imo.