ABC News Vs. Loose Change

reply to post by Darth Logan


So then why give an interview??? And was the passion in his eyes all an act??? You should read your own signature.

Im sorry if I am jumping the gun on this post, for I have not went back yet to see if I heard what I thought I heard by the cameraman or a producer in the backround saying "Great emotion" to the newsguy while they were changing tapes.

If so that is truly disturbing. It would prove once and for all that these 'news'guys and girls are nothing but puppets serving a higher master.

If I am wrong, and misheard it, please, forgive me.

EDIT TO ADD- After listening to it a couple times, I hear him say "Good Emotion".

[edit on 8-3-2010 by Common Good]

reply to post by predator0187


Great post, s+f.
I agree that the reporter from ABC should have interviewed everyone there for a full scope of things.
It is obvious of their preconceived agenda to interview the two Loose Change producers.
They did their best to hold their own and I can understand the frustration of knowing everything you say will likely be twisted against you.

A true reporter would make the two feel comfortable and at ease and really listen to their statements and then after actually thinking about it, follow up with questions relating to not slanting the story.

This is the problem with media.
There was a whole room of professionals and patriotic citizens who just want some answers with some legitimate claims and ample reasons.
Wouldn`t a real reporter want to really investigate?
ABC media with this reporter had a preconceived agenda. They went there for the story they wanted and that is part of the problem.
Way too much commentary in media to say the very least, but to report from one angle instead of painting an entire picture of who and what was actually going on and being said by whom at that event is a representation of their biased agenda.
I get what the guy on the left was saying and how he was becoming so frustrated.
I see how many are just going to write him off as arrogant or something else but he is emotionally ripped with this whole situation and feels as if he is being attacked. A true reporter would want to report facts and get the viewpoints of many if not all in the room without trying to slant the story.

This is the problem and why it is so hard to trust Corporate media, its all connected. That`s not to say all reporters are fronting, but decisions ultimately come from the top on what is aired and what demographic the network is looking to fill.

Many people need to release their brain of all the coaxed thinking and prejudgments based upon verbal utterances from respected individuals and just allow yourself to be free and absorb any logical useful information put together with the purpose of rationalization.

The facts are all there.
Twin Towers and Building 7 all fell at free fall speed.
Nano-thermite found in samples of WTC dust.
Explosions heard by first responders and citizens but omitted from debate and OS.
Building 7 collapsed.
War games mimicking hijacked planes exercised on morning of 9/11.


The sh*t is very deep, and it stinks pretty bad.
That`s my logical rational viewpoint.


[edit on 3/8/2010 by csulli456]

Dylan, Jason and Korey rock. i've spoken to, and have always supported their view, for years.

anybody who still thinks 9/11 was perpetrated by some men faraway in caves is blissful with ignorance. nuff said.

www.enirnabu.blogspot.com...

They really handled this quite well. Just wish the exchange at the very end of the interview played out a little bit longer. Kinda curious to see what the ABC reporter would of said then, since it was kinda of obvious why he was there.

Here is another great link with some excellent background and history.

There is a lot of information on this site.

www.serendipity.li...

Those Loose Change kids look to me like real heros. People who do what is right, and let their egos take a back seat to doing the right thing.

I especially admire that they've figured out that "speculating on what happened" is a trap -- and it's really best to say; "Look at this FACT -- it directly contradicts what the Bush government wanted us to believe."

The thing is, there are still too many of the guilty, embedded in power in our government to let a real investigation happen. But there should be a few ways to gradually erode their power.

We need to do more investigations of the CIA and Cheney's hit squad -- it's the "loyalists" in administrative and bureaucratic functions that have to be removed BEFORE we can even get to the point of having trials.

>> I was actually happily surprised by ABC, because those "stupid questions" are really par for the course, and as far as reporters today go -- I though they gave them a fair shake. It will be interesting to see if this is ever broadcast and the Editors feel the same way, however. I don't think the Loose Change guys gave them much that could be used to make them seem unreasonable.

The reporter NEVER lost his smugness.

the reporter had NO control over who he was going to interview, not that he cared.

Loose change may have some inconsistencies, but the creators are the kind of guys that more people should strive to be.. Americans that care.

b

Hey everyone, first post of mine *bows* Thank you!

I would first like to say that ABC guy was very irritating. He reminds me of almost everyone I've ever tried to get to hear another point of view. They simply do not want to. They don't want the disruption in the lives they like the way are right now. Either this man does not care because of the paycheck or he genuinely believes everyone who suggests 9/11 may not have been the entire doing of "Al Qaeda" is completely nuts and rests easy on that thought.

But I'm sure a lot of you guys would agree, I don't speak of 9/11 much because I simply do not know the technical details. I try to be versed with what i'm portraying but we see this type of attitude with almost anything that is contrary to Fox or CNN... they are the ones who cannot lie, if they report it, it must be true (and imagine what they don't report!)

What REALLY messes me up is the fact this guy goes on about how "If it were true, there must be a lot of people in this cover - up" When he should know full well the best ones are only known by very few. Why didn't he interview any of the other people there? He said he didn't know, perhaps himself un-aware or previously pushed into believing he needed to go in and paint these guys as crazy and maybe only for the paycheck as well.

What he should be asking is why ISN'T he interviewing and investigating? Of course, thats all too much work for what he may already know might get him buried.

I loved those vids, thankyou.

Highly respect them and I think their attitude was appropriate given what they have been through.

Despite their anger, it was anger filled with logical statements.
That's fine by me and I'd like to see more of that here.

This thread and it's overwhelming S&F responses gets me thinking about a couple of things.

1.) Fanaticism
en.wikipedia.org...

Fanaticism is a belief or behavior involving uncritical zeal, particularly for an extreme religious or political cause or in some cases sports, or with an obsessive enthusiasm for a pastime or hobby. Philosopher George Santayana defines fanaticism as "redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim"[1]; according to Winston Churchill, "A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject". By either description the fanatic displays very strict standards and little tolerance for contrary ideas or opinions.

2.) Pretentious
www.merriam-webster.com...

characterized by pretension: as a : making usually unjustified or excessive claims (as of value or standing) .

If most of you believe what these guys claim, and I love how they act all wounded when being interviewed, and the oscar goes to Avery, what are you going to do about it? Please organize your selves with something other than trying to push your agenda on the internet.

This is important to me. I have no love of the government, but in the same breath, I really can't stand fanatics either. Every day I read things like "People are waking up and there is revolution coming". Everyone acts like it's their sole purpose in life to try and convince everyone else of their point of view. If you disagree, you are labelled an idiot, or a disinfo agent. There is no room for debate in most of your minds. Ask your selves this, are you not exhibiting behaviour of a fanatic? If you are I certainly don't want any part of the future you're pedaling. Who's really working for the NWO, I wonder? Imagine a future where there was no debate about facts and only those most sure of themselves called the shots. No thanks.

the fbi watches this. i plan to place claymore mines all over the airport.....
on modern warfare 2 on ps3.

reply to post by davec0021


Wouldn't that apply more-so to the debunkers?

reply to post by Doc Velocity


Doc when did Obama declare the end of conspiracy sites? Do you have a link? Not doubting but I'd love context for that statement. And back on topic I though they did a great job, for their age they show a lot of maturity and poise. Keep it up guys!

Originally posted by T0by
reply to post by davec0021

 

Wouldn't that apply more-so to the debunkers?

As people have pointed out it's both. I can admit it can everyone else here?

Originally posted by PGRacer
reply to post by felonius

 

Do you realise there have been 3 (now 4 iirc) editions of loose change, the latest being "An American Coup" if memory serves. The missile/bomb/pod was only included in the first edition and has been removed in subsequent editions.

Ive watched all four of them and its nice to see the progression of the investigation from day 1, with new evidence comes new information and the loose change team have done a great job of renewing their ideas based on the evidence available.

Personally my mind is still to be made up as to what / who, happened that day. There seems to be many possibilities ranging from The govt did it, through to the govt knew it was coming and couldnt do anything to stop it if they wanted too. or possibly they knew it was coming and just let it happen as it served their own ends nicely.

If it really was that easy for them to attack the pentagon, you would think that people finding this out would be quite embaressing as the largest superpower on earth.

Thanks friend. I'll look them up right now! I had no idea. I guess the rock I've been under was bigger than I thought !

These guys seem to be doing great work.

I said from the begining, there are only two possibilities.

1. Sin of omission ( knew about it (ala john oneil) and did nothing)
2. Sin of commission ( were up to their necks in it for whatever reason (ala warren commision/John Kennedy).

Either are pretty ugly to consider. Neither bode well in any event.

[edit on 8/3/10 by felonius]

The questions being asked by the "reporter" were completely leading and had no other agenda than to smear the person being asked. The LC guys have been through this all before, and they already know what to expect. That is the reason for the "attitude." They repeatedly say they have questions about the investigation and the "reporter" asked not one time what their questions were. He only made statements and then acted as if they were the views of the guys. He had no concern for their questions and instead chose to continue to keep his interview squarely on the 2 guys. They mention nano thermite .. the response .. nothing. They mention the family member and that he has concerns .. the response ... nothing. Instead the reporter tried to frame the LC guys as being involved with the outer parts of the truth movement. And then he tries to lump them in with the crazy shooter.

If anyone watched this and thought this was an "interview", then the media has done it's job in fooling you. This wasn't intended to be an interview, it was an attempt to smear the truth movement. If you watch this and can't see how the media is complicit, then I don't know that you ever will. Just this interview should make you realize the media isn't on your side. Seriously, how can someone say no one can keep a secret? News flash "reporter", a secret means no one knows. So if you know about it, it's not a secret. And he is in the same building with gov't workers giving speeches on things they know ... yet the reporter is sitting there asking "why hasn't anyone talked." Hey reporter, just walk into the other room, and there they are. Does he really think he knows every operation the government has ever executed? Because after all, no one can keep a secret. What a complete waste this reporter is.

"Reporter": With a conspiracy this size, how come no one has talked?

LC guys: They have! There are CIA, FBI, former Congress members, family members right in the next room. You should go check it out.

"Reporter": So what's your next movie going to be about?

LC guys: We are nobodies. We think the family member deserves to have his story told. So why don't you interview him

"Reporter": So what happened to the people on the planes?

Or this one. 'Reporter:" So when is the next terrorist attack gong to happen?

Seriously? The guy actually called himself a reporter and didn't seem embarrassed when he said it.

The piece just aired, but I only caught the end of it. It looks like nightline waits a couple days to upload there programs. If anyone sees it post a link here for everyone to see.

In what I saw, they did include others at the conference and some outside support for the movement. However, I still got the feeling that what I saw was bias.

Originally posted by stephanies-chase
All the people want is a new investigation. It is easy to see that the "truther" movement is here to stay until something is done.

No... Doesn't matter if there is a new investigation. The "Truthers" aren't going to accept an "official" investigation of any kind. The "Truthers" don't base their arguments on facts... I've followed their antics since Day One, and their theories are not based on fact.

Instead, we have amateur sleuths out there, eyeballing low-rez videos and exclaiming "THOSE ARE EXPLOSIONS, TWO NANOSECONDS BEFORE THERE SHOULD BE EXPLOSIONS!!!"

Which is pure nonsense. I haven't seen a "Truther" yet who was qualified to analyze any aspect of the 911 attacks.

So, what makes you think these hysterical amateurs are going to be satisfied with another "official" investigation? They're not going to be satisfied until some crackpot like Alex Jones is placed in charge of a new investigation.

— Doc Velocity

Originally posted by davec0021

Originally posted by T0by
reply to post by davec0021

 

Wouldn't that apply more-so to the debunkers?

As people have pointed out it's both. I can admit it can everyone else here?

Yup.

The planet is covered with a whole spectrum of individuals with all kinds of "quirks" (and worse). Next question?