Loose Change Vs ABC News Reporter

[IScreamSundays]

Must see video. These two kids hand ABC reporter his ass.

Part I

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3DqnL8Nv8jg&feature=related

Part II

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxkRiT_w9JE&feature=related

[Bolo Boffin]

1. Incredible.

Dylan Avery looks like Shaggy and Korey's bragging about fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq when his AWOL ass had to be dragged back there to honor his commitment.

These two "kids" are in their late 20's and early 30's. There was no ass-handing here.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Twist_U_Up]

5. They fucking smoked your shill reporter.

What the fuck does their looks have anything to do with this video?
Just out for a lynching boffin?

Smearing a War Veteran.
Go crawl back under your rock.

[undergroundrailroad]

11. He's gone. Thanks everybody for your help. We can't do this job without you!

:hi:

[Bolo Boffin]

15. My goodness.

I always miss the fun.

[greyl]

2. Ratings disabled! lol

Fascist cowards.

[SDuderstadt]

3. Umm Dylan and Korey don't know what the fuck they're talking about....

In the second interview, Korey claims that the 9/11 Commission only interviewed "politicians" and didn't interview a single "family member, survivor or first responder". Here's a partial witness list from the first public hearing:

10:15 - 11:30 AM The Experience of the Attack
Harry Waizer, Cantor Fitzgerald survivor
David Lim, Port Authority
Lee Ielpi, Fire Department of New York (retired)
Brian Birdwell, United States Army
Craig Sincock, United States Army (retired)

11:30 - 1:00 PM Representatives of the Victims
Stephen Push, Families of September 11
Mary Fetchet, Voices of September 11
Mindy Kleinberg, September 11 Advocates
Allison Vadhan, Families of Flight 93

http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/hearings/hearing1.htm

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[SDuderstadt]

7. I just documented that your role models are...

liars, dude.

Still sniping from the sidelines, TuuTuu?

[Twist_U_Up]

31. Treason in America.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-7GCs-2NUg&feature=player_embedded

[SDuderstadt]

10. Let us know when you reach "critical mass"...

TuuTuu.

Does it ever occur to you that if 9/11 was really an "inside job", your "movement" would have reached a tipping point years ago?

[IScreamSundays]

8. You misquoted Korey

he did not say "interviewed"

he said that the commission didn't have a "single family member, survivor, or first responder" on it.

[SDuderstadt]

9. Point taken...

but he didn't say "on it", either...he actually said, "the 9/11 Commision had nothing but politicians", then he goes on to note the lack of family members, physicists or first responders. However, his language is unclear and implies that family members and first responders were excluded. I'm pointing out they were heard from the first day.

But, you are right that I was wrong when I thought I heard the word "interview". But Korey is still wrong when he claims the 9/11 Commission only had "politicians", as shown by Richard Ben-veniste and Jamie Gorelick. Why should it have contained a physicist? And, with all due respect to the family members, the commission should have been comprised of those who could be impartial which, by definition, a family member could not be. Nonetheless, they were well-represented among those called before the Commission.

[reinvestigate911]

12. "well-represented" according to whom?

you distort the facts, sir dude.

www.911pressfortruth.com

[SDuderstadt]

13. How, precisely, am I "distorting the facts", dude?

Please be precise. Take your time.

[reinvestigate911]

14. the case is laid out quite well in the link i provided

or do you need it spoon fed to you?

[SDuderstadt]

16. No, I want to hear it from you...

in your own words, dude.

You might want to think about the idea that, besides the utter lack of concrete evidence for the "9/11 was an inside job" bullshit, the way you treat people who sincerely disagree with you on the facts is, in large part, responsible for the "truth movement" failing to gain traction.

I mean, seriously, do you really think having "We are Change" idiots following Bill Clinton around and heckling him, only to have him skillfully smack them down to the cheers of the audience is, in any way, an effective recruiting strategy? Do you honestly think accusing people, who sincerely disagree with you on the facts, of being "trusters" or sub rosa authoritarians wins friends for the "truth movement"?

[reinvestigate911]

17. hear it from the family members

in their own words:

In late 2006, the movie 9/11 Press For Truth became a worldwide underground hit. It exposed the story of the "Jersey Girls" and their allies -- the 9/11 families who had fought for the Commission but ultimately failed in seeing 70% of their questions answered.
IN THEIR OWN WORDS: THE UNTOLD STORIES OF THE 9/11 FAMILIES is the new, official companion DVD to 9/11 Press For Truth. Over 2 hours of unseen families' interviews and rare news clips originally intended for inclusion in the movie ended up on the cutting room floor -- until now.

A unique, balanced look at a diverse group of topics includes:

•Top officials' whereabouts and changing stories on the day of 9/11
•Insider trading before the attacks
•War games coinciding with Sept. 11th
•A confrontation between the families and FBI Director Mueller
•British reports that some of the hijackers named by the FBI are simply wrong
•Government whistleblowers' calls for accountability
•The FBI informant who lived with 2 of the hijackers
•A Defense Department program that identified 4 hijackers in 2000
•The families' push to receive the Pentagon crash tapes
•Bin Laden extradition negotiations after 9/11
•The Project For the New American Century
•And much more...

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4399917864007973679

"well represented", indeed.

[Bolo Boffin]

18. I don't think all family members are spoken for in that movie. n/t

[reinvestigate911]

19. and many of the family members don't feel that they are spoken for in the 9/11 commission report

so again, the dude distorts the facts.

[SDuderstadt]

22. Please show me where I said anything like that..

dude. Please quit twisting my actual words.

[Bolo Boffin]

25. You paint with too broad a brush. n/t

[Kesha]

28. Absolutely..

"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.

[reinvestigate911]

20. i should also point out that the family members most dissatisfied with the 9/11 commission...

... are also the same family members who petitioned for the creation of the 9/11 commission.
and so the dude's assertion is even more preposterous in this context.


this seems to be about on par with what passes for truth with you guys.

[SDuderstadt]

23. Dude...

you are twisting the plain meaning of what I actually said. The first four witnesses in a public hearing were family members. That's well represented. No one said anything about whether the family members were happy with it.

I'd also be curious to find out precisely how many family members believe "9/11 was an inside job".

[SDuderstadt]

21. I don't want a link to a DVD, dude...

I want to hear it from you in your own words, not a dvd which, no matter how well intentioned, repeats a number of previously debunked myths. Sloppy research is sloppy research, irespective of where it comes from, dude.

[reinvestigate911]

24. debunked? have you watched the film?

did you know that all of the film material is sourced from mainstream media?
please tell me what in the film has been debunked.

[SDuderstadt]

27. Yes, I watched the dvd, dude...

You realize that even "mainstream media sources" can be used to perpetuate myths when more current information, often reported in the same outlets, is totally ignored in typical "truther" cherry-picking". Examples of this are 1) the insider trading silliness 2) the supposed "hijackers are still alive" nonsense and, especially, 3) the truly hysterical "Able Danger" bullshit which, by the way, is an attempt by a truly goofy former GOP congressman named Curt Weldon to pin 9/11 on Bill Clinton. This is the same Curt Weldon who wanted to go to Iraq to find the WMD himself.

I never cease to be amazed at how people on DU, who should know better, get suckered into RW claptrap.

[reinvestigate911]

29. the put options are interesting

because they were not in fact "debunked"; rather, the commission determined that the individual responsible for the vast majority of these "bets" -- who stood to gain millions if he/she had collected on their bet -- had no link to al qaeda and was therefore not a person of interest in the investigation.

the commission's non-trivial admission of foreknowledge -- and handwaving away the significance of the evidence for foreknowledge -- suggests either incompetency, or outright coverup. in summary, you'd have to be a complete authoritarian -- or just plain fucking stupid -- to not comprehend what the put options actually mean for the official story.

[SDuderstadt]

32. Or, maybe you'd be smart enough to realize that...

the targets of the put options were in trouble well before 9/11 and that the put option activity had peaked well before that time.

You seem to have a problem with "post hoc, ergo propter hoc". The "authoritarian" and "you'd have to be just plain fucking stupid" touches were nice, though.

[reinvestigate911]

34. hmm?

Suspicious trading occurs on the stock of American and United, the two airlines hijacked in the 9/11 attacks. “Between 6 and 7 September, the Chicago Board Options Exchange purchases of 4,744 put option contracts in UAL versus 396 call options—where a speculator bets on a price rising. Holders of the put options would a profit of $5 million once the carrier’s share price after September 11. On September 10, 4,516 put options in American Airlines, the other airline involved in the hijackings, purchased in Chicago. This compares with a mere 748 call options in American purchased that day. Investigators cannot help but notice that no other airlines such trading in their put options.” One analyst later says, “I saw put-call numbers higher than I’ve ever seen in ten years of following the markets, particularly the options markets.”

SOURCE: http://web.archive.org/web/20020215082158/http://cjonline.com/stories/091901/ter_tradingacts.shtml">Associated Press, 9/18/2001; San Francisco Chronicle, 9/19/2001

“To the embarrassment of investigators, it has also that the firm used to buy many of the ‘put’ options… on United Airlines stock was headed until 1998 by ‘Buzzy’ Krongard, now executive director of the CIA.” Krongard was chairman of Alex Brown Inc., which was bought by Deutsche Bank. “His last post before resigning to take his senior role in the CIA was to head Bankers Trust—Alex Brown’s private client business, dealing with the accounts and investments of wealthy customers around the world.”

SOURCE: http://news.independent.co.uk/business/news/article161862.ece">Independent, 10/14/2001

found at: http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=a090601putsshorts#a090601putsshorts

[SDuderstadt]

44. Start here, dude....

http://www.911myths.com/html/put_options.html

[reinvestigate911]

49. of course! it's just another coincidence, right "dude"?

damn dude, you've obviously done a lot of extra credit research in service of the lie that has enabled the deaths of over one million people.

[SDuderstadt]

50. Dude....

are you accusing me of being complicit in the deaths of 1 million people?

Seriously, you need to dial it back, dude.

[reinvestigate911]

53. simple question "dude"

do you think that the foxes who were charged with investigating the break-ins at the hen house maybe thought it was wise to report on the presence of "blood" and "feathers" but decided to point their paws at the neighbor's dog instead of declaring themselves guilty?

nah, of course you don't. that would be above your paygrade. your caste isn't programmed to accept moral dichotomies. to decent, hardworking, honest folk like you, "the Greater Good" means a Big Mac, Large Fries, and a Super-Sized vanilla shake. cognitive dissonance is quickly suppressed with copious amounts of television, alcohol, and other distractions.

so then, let me ask you this:
do you think that there's even a remote chance that the 9/11 commission report, maybe... just maybe... got it wrong?

no? still in denial? alright then, there's only one question left to ask:
do you subsist off of a fossil-fuel burning economy?

we all have blood on our hands, friend.

[SDuderstadt]

54. Yeah, the 9/11 Commission could have gotten it wrong....

all I'm asking for is concrete proof. So far you've got dick.

My, what a bizzarre, disjointed strawman post. Hint: I don't even own a TV.

[reinvestigate911]

41. you speak of impartiality and yet give philip zelikow, a known bush administration insider, a pass?

and why am i unsurprised?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phillip_Zelikow

Philip Zelikow has co-authored many books. He wrote a book with Ernest May on The Kennedy Tapes, and another with Joseph Nye and David C. King on Why People Don’t Trust Government. He wrote Germany Unified and Europe Transformed with Condoleezza Rice.

Prof. Zelikow's area of academic expertise is the creation and maintenance of, in his words, “public myths” or “public presumptions,” which he defines as “beliefs (1) thought to be true (although not necessarily known to be true with certainty), and (2) shared in common within the relevant political community." In his academic work and elsewhere he has taken a special interest in what he has called “‘searing’ or ‘molding’ events take on ‘transcendent’ importance and, therefore, retain their power even as the experiencing generation passes from the scene. In the United States, beliefs about the formation of the nation and the Constitution remain powerful today, as do beliefs about slavery and the Civil War. World War II, Vietnam, and the civil rights struggle are more recent examples.” He has noted that “a history’s narrative power is typically linked to how readers relate to the actions of individuals in the history; if readers cannot make a connection to their own lives, then a history may fail to engage them at all” ("Thinking about Political History," Miller Center Report , pp. 5-7).

In the November-December 1998 issue of Foreign Affairs, he co-authored an article entitled “Catastrophic Terrorism,” in which he speculated that if the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center had succeeded, “the resulting horror and chaos would have exceeded our ability to describe it. Such an act of catastrophic terrorism would be a watershed event in American history. It could involve loss of life and property unprecedented in peacetime and undermine America’s fundamental sense of security, as did the Soviet atomic bomb test in 1949. Like Pearl Harbor, the event would divide our past and future into a before and after. The United States might respond with draconian measures scaling back civil liberties, allowing wider surveillance of citizens, detention of suspects and use of deadly force. More violence could follow, either future terrorist attacks or U.S. counterattacks. Belatedly, Americans would judge their leaders negligent for not addressing terrorism more urgently.”

SOURCE: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1899443">DU General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007)

[SDuderstadt]

42. So, what, dude?

Can you point specifically where he was partial in his performance as executive director of the 9/11 Commission? Or, are you implying Kean and Hamilton were just figureheads?

Simple question: Have you actually read the 9/11 Commission report? Did you see the parts where they were very critical of the Bush administration?

[reinvestigate911]

43. public myth, "dude"

did you read the following paragraph?

Prof. Zelikow's area of academic expertise is the creation and maintenance of, in his words, “public myths” or “public presumptions,” which he defines as “beliefs (1) thought to be true (although not necessarily known to be true with certainty), and (2) shared in common within the relevant political community." In his academic work and elsewhere he has taken a special interest in what he has called “‘searing’ or ‘molding’ events take on ‘transcendent’ importance and, therefore, retain their power even as the experiencing generation passes from the scene. In the United States, beliefs about the formation of the nation and the Constitution remain powerful today, as do beliefs about slavery and the Civil War. World War II, Vietnam, and the civil rights struggle are more recent examples.” He has noted that “a history’s narrative power is typically linked to how readers relate to the actions of individuals in the history; if readers cannot make a connection to their own lives, then a history may fail to engage them at all” ("Thinking about Political History," Miller Center Report , pp. 5-7).

you did read that, correct?
do you need that explained to you?

[SDuderstadt]

45. Yes, I read it....

and, no, I don't need it "explained" to me.

As I asked before, do you think Zelikow ran the commission? Did you read the parts of the 9/11 Report that were very critical of the Bush administration?

Simple question: have you even read the 9/11 Commission Report?

[reinvestigate911]

47. how does being "critical of the bush adminsitration" somehow make him exempt from bias?

your argument is fucking stupid.
and simple answer: yes.

zelikow, as director, guided much of the core operations of the commission, including what information they reviewed, who they interviewed, etc, etc.

and so who cares if they were "critical"? not one individual was reprimanded, fired, nor was any action whatsover taken to mete out punishment for "failures" on 9/11. really, dude... you are claiming alot here. even the hardcore apologists acknowledge that "mistakes were made" but you seem to be suggesting that being "critical of the bush administration" was enough to let zelikow off the hook for being what everyone recogizes as a bush insider and neocon. how perfectly fucking laughable. does carrying their water ever cause you any pain at all?

[SDuderstadt]

48. Dude....

I am going to ask you politely one last time to quit questioning my motivation simply because we disagree on the facts. I am not a water carrier for anyone. How would you like it if I constantly accused you of carrying water for bin Laden? Knock it off.

Your questions and "answers" show that you don't know very much about the inner workings of the 9/11 Commission. You are smearing Richard Ben-Veniste, Timothy Roemer, Jamie Gorelick, Bob Kerrey and Lee Hamilton with your broad brush smears. If you have evidence of a cover-up, by all means, bring it to the attention of the nearest U.S. Attorney. As it is, you don't have dick and you keep lashing out at me and others because of YOUR shortcomings, dude.

You might want to start by actually reading the 9/11 Commission Report, the interviews, the transcripts of the public hearings, the MFR's and John Farmer's book before you keep shooting your mouth off.

[whatchamacallit]

26. That was cool. Thanks. (n/t)

[Kesha]

30. Same conference, different news organisation – completely different coverage

Watch this video from RT... or let`s say, what is now becoming the modern equivalent of "Radio Free Europe".

I also get the impression that the RT correspondent Marina Portnaya looks a bit shaken.
She is very earnest.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-7GCs-2NUg&feature=player_embedded

[KDLarsen]

33. "Radio Free Europe"? Hardly..

More like the Pravda of the 21st Century :eyes:

[whatchamacallit]

35. Jingo-a-go-go

Can't wait until you dungeon liberals start channeling Reagan:eyes:

[KDLarsen]

37. "Dungeon liberal"?

What on earth is that supposed to mean? Are you suggesting I'm a Freeper, because I call the RT what it is?

[Kesha]

38. I do

RT is just CNN the other way around. The Russian way.

So what?

Your problem is that RT is not available in the US, but in the rest of the world. Here in Europe,
it is available via SAT & Cable... and why should we trust in CNN, but not in RT?

[KDLarsen]

46. My problem?

My problem is that all of the sudden, Russia Today is being raised as the new standardbearer of 'Truth' and 'independent journalism', simply because it's allowing truthers, birthers, and other assorted tinfoil hatters, a platform from which they can freely spew their pet theories. When in reality, RT is being paid by the Kremlin to promote Russian interests and, by extension, critisize the US government.

I don't give a hoot about CNN, I get most of my news from the internet or via the BBC anyway, but last time I checked, the CNN wasn't being paid by the US State Department to promote US interests.

Oh, and just so you're aware, I'm not in the US ;)

[reinvestigate911]

51. "CNN wasn't being paid by the US State Department to promote US interests"

http://rawstory.com/news/2008/CNN_looks_back_at_Bush_administration_0706.html

[SDuderstadt]

52. Your link is dead, dude....

no video

[Kesha]

55. Talking about propaganda...

Why Were Government Propaganda Experts Working On News At CNN?

3/27/00

Reports in the Dutch newspaper Trouw (2/21/00, 2/25/00) and France's Intelligence Newsletter (2/17/00) have revealed that several officers from the US Army's 4th Psychological Operations (PSYOPS) Group at Ft. Bragg worked in the news division at CNN's Atlanta headquarters last year, starting in the final days of the Kosovo War.

In the U.S. media, so far only Alexander Cockburn, columnist for The Nation and co-editor of the newsletter CounterPunch, has picked up on the story. Cockburn's column on the subject is available at www.counterpunch.org.

The story is disturbing. In the 1980s, officers from the 4th Army PSYOPS group staffed the National Security Council's Office of Public Diplomacy (OPD), a shadowy government propaganda agency that planted stories in the U.S. media supporting the Reagan Administration's Central America policies.

A senior US official described OPD as a "vast psychological warfare operation of the kind the military conducts to influence a population in enemy territory." (Miami Herald, 7/19/87) An investigation by the congressional General Accounting Office found that OPD had engaged in "prohibited, covert propaganda activities," and the office was soon shut down as a result of the Iran-Contra investigations. But the 4th PSYOPS group still operates.

CNN has always maintained a close relationship with the Pentagon. Getting access to top military officials is a necessity for a network that stakes its reputation on being first on the ground during wars and other military operations.

What makes the CNN story especially troubling is the fact that the network allowed the Army's covert propagandists to work in its headquarters, where they learned the ins and outs of CNN's operations. Even if the PSYOPS officers working in the newsroom did not influence news reporting, did the network allow the military to conduct an intelligence-gathering mission against CNN itself?

For instance, one PSYOPS officer worked in CNN's satellite division. According to Intelligence Newsletter, rear admiral Thomas Steffens, a psychological warfare expert in the Special Operations Command, recently told a PSYOPS conference that the military needed to find ways to "gain control" over commercial news satellites to help bring down an "informational cone of silence" over regions where special operations were taking place.

An unofficial strategy paper published by the U.S. Naval War College in 1996 and written by an Army officer ("Military Operations in the CNN World: Using the Media as a Force Multiplier") urged military commanders to find ways to "leverage the vast resources of the fourth estate" for the purposes of "communicating the objective and endstate, boosting friendly morale, executing more effective psychological operations, playing a major role in deception of the enemy, and enhancing intelligence collection."

ACTION: Please write to CNN and ask why the network allowed government propaganda specialists to work in their news division.

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1748

[whatchamacallit]

39. No.

Other than parroting stale RW cold war talking points, what evidence do you have that RT is "Pravda of the 21st Century"?

[Kesha]

40. The case is a simple one...

It`s a propaganda war,

and as the Emperor is obviously naked, they just had to report it.

[Kesha]

36. I was born in West Germany and had relatives in East Germany

Let me assure you... it`s working both ways, and the tools are identical.

RT is just picking up their tool. They would by crazy if they wouldn`t, given that
opportunity.

I would love to see CNN`s news coverage if the Russians would threaten the US with ICBM
bases in Canada and Mexico...