Colorado Public Television Channel 12 December 4th Broadcast of Loose Change
Michael Wed, 12/15/2010 - 8:42am
Here is the video from the historic broadcast of Loose Change: 9-11 An American Coup on Colorado Public Television Channel 12 on December 4, 2010. Featured in-studio guest is 9-11 whistleblower Kevin Ryan and members of Colorado 9-11 Visibility manning the phones.
www.cpt12.org
www.colorado911visibility.org
NOTE: There were some issues with youtube involving copyright infringement accusations on part 3 so if you experience difficulty viewing this part, hopefully it will be taken care of soon.
- Michael's blog
- Login to post comments
I am no big fan
I am no big fan of Public Television but every little bit helps especially when they are showing Loose Change. If that video does not convince people that 9/11 was an inside job nothing will. I was surprised at what the de-bunker at the end of the video had to say. It was so obviously a controlled demolition a blind man could see it. He is probably on the NWO payroll.
There we go again
A CIA / NWO agent is somebody who disagrees with me.
It doesn't work like that! Do you want to know how many people I know who talk like this guy? I guess I must be surrounded by NWO agents.
Ask yourself what evidence you really have for claiming this man is an "NWO" agent.
By the way, the "NWO" is not an organization; it's a doctrine, shared by people who think it's benign and people who would like a world hegemony of finance capital. Mind you, David Ray Griffin was once involved in an NWO think tank. Do I think David Ray Griffin is an evil agent? No.
At the end, the bearded guy says "If they allowed it to happen, how did they set the buildings", and there we go again also: The False Dilemma Fallacy.
By the way, part 3 of this series is apparently unavailable (to me, perhaps not to you) because of a copyright claim by Loose Change. Does the Loose Change crew approve of this DRM measure by Youtube?
ETA: When I mentioned Youtube in this comment, this was one of the things I meant.
ETA2: I just got it to play. I guess the DRM measure either works intermittently or was quickly removed. Thankfully.
One of the downfalls...
Of the 9/11 Truth Movement. The notion that unless you believe exactly as I do, then you must be a this, or a that.
Another Positive Development
Great to see the hard work of the film makers and activists pay off.
I'm afraid
.. it goes beyond that Jon.
It's not just name calling of people who don't believe as you do: it's the automatic conspiracy theorizing around people who disagree. That tells me there are fundamental errors of judgment that need to be dealt with. Cognitive biases and flaws that lead to a peculiar, overly suspicious mindset. In my opinion, this is not that different from the so-called 'debunker' community: aggressive rejection of all opinions counter to one's own, in their case a jingoist slash 'patriotic' ad hominem attack, and in our case a conspiratorial narrative. The difference is I have more faith in the good intentions of 9/11 truthers than I have in 'debunkers'. The former might makes mistakes, but will never lie (deliberately and knowingly telling falsehoods) as much as hobbyist 'debunkers' do.
However, In order to protect myself from drawing the wrong conclusions, I tend to think like a skeptic, not a conspiracy theorist.
And if, as a skeptic, there was nothing about 9/11 to worry about, I wouldn't be here.
Aidan, yes, this is a positive development. I fully recognize we tend to seek out comments we disagree with to respond to, rather than offer encouragement. So, I try to thank and encourage people, not forgetting the positivity we should embrace as a movement. Nobody wants to be a spoil-sport, but unfortunately this is what skeptical thinking often entails. A man should be willing to stand alone in his opinions, even among his peers.
I congratulated...
Both Kevin and Dylan yesterday, and thanked Michael Wolsey for getting these videos together.
"overly suspicious mindset"
There is no such thing.
We are suspicious for good reason.
ALL IS DECEPTION.
WE ARE LIVING IN OCEANIA!
But at the same time, let's
But at the same time, let's not be naive and ahistorical. The fact is that we know that the State engages in a practice called counter-intelligence (in which they attempt to counter our intelligence!). I agree that we should not level accusations at people who disagree with us without solid evidence. However, it is certainly not paranoia to assume that the operatives of the most brazen act of psychological warfare in history are also actively engaged in "perception management" post-Event.
NWO payroll
If Chris Mohr is on the payroll, then the NWO must be as broke as Michael Jackson's nose and dumber than a box of rocks.
911 inside job
JET FUEL DOES NOT EXPLODES STEEL BEAM FRAMED CONCRETE BUILDINGS.... PERIOD... THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A FUEL THAT AUTOMATICALLY RIGS CONCRETE BUILDINGS.
THE OFFICIAL CONSPIRACY THEORY DOES NOT STAND SCIENTIFIC SCRUTINY...
WAKE UP AMERICA... BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE...
Massudo
This is not NIST's theory:
"JET FUEL DOES NOT EXPLODES STEEL BEAM FRAMED CONCRETE BUILDINGS"
So you are bayoneting a straw man.
NIST's theory is that dislodged fireproofing and fire-induced weakening of steel columns caused sagging floors to overcome the lateral resistance of the exterior columns, so they snapped.
If you want to critique NIST, this is the theory you should be critiquing, and this is exactly what Kevin Ryan is doing. Screaming in capitals isn't going to convince many people.
what percent of coloradans are truthers
I am wondering if there are a large percentage of truthers in colorado as opposed to other states. I am worried because my own brother is in politics in colorado yet he thinks I am crazy to not believe the official 911 story. Does anyone know what the average coloradan is thinking these days?
If he is a democrat..
He might be interested in this:
http://911blogger.com/news/2010-10-31/colorado-democratic-party-calls-gr...
Otherwise that would be a good place to put a poll together if anyone is interested or able to do that.
Boulder ranks No. 1 in brainpower
http://www.bcbr.com/article.asp?id=54864
NEW YORK - Boulderites as a whole are the most well-educated of residents living in any city in the country, according to the U.S. Uncovered study conducted by Portfolio.com, a business news website.
In Boulder, five out of six adults, or 82.5 percent, have attended college. In addition, 26 percent of residents have earned a master's degree or other graduate degree. The study looked at education levels of residents in the 200 largest metro areas in the country.
"We often associate larger cities as the centers of education and culture, and therefore epicenters for the country's smartest people," J. Jennings Moss, editor of Portfolio.com, said in a statement. "However, this study shows that smaller cities can attract some significant brainpower. Out of the Top 10 smartest places, six of them have populations of less than one million people."
Colorado is the only state to have two cities in the Top 10 list of the study, with Fort Collins ranking as the fifth most educated city. Ann Arbor, Michigan, came in second on the list, partly due to the prominence of the University of Michigan, according to Portfolio.com. Washington, D.C., ranked third.
cont...
More from Kevin...
The bearded guy makes his case that Al-Qaeda had the motive to take part in 9/11, however the question remains as to exactly who "Al-Qaeda" (the database) is. Furthermore, motive is not sufficient. You must have the means and opportunity to carry out what transpired. IOW, who had the motive, means, and opportunity? And who benefited? And who covered it up?
Pity
the poster on youtube also disses Assange in his writing
BUT
the rest is gold- well done 9 out of 10
Al-Qaeda
Does not mean "the database". This is a myth.
I loved that Kevin Ryan interview.
Thank you PBS, Michael and Colorado 9/11 Visibility
There's a healthy streak of independence in Colorado- the PBS station has been showing 9/11 videos for years (are they still the ONLY PBS station in the country to air a 9/11 truth film?), and consistently experience great support from the public. And Michael W. and Colorado 9/11 Visibility are some of the longest running and most active activists in the country, who've demonstrated a concern for civility, rational inquiry and credible evidence.
Note: I've never watched American Coup, so I hope i didn't put my foot in my mouth, but each subsequent version of Loose Change contained less BS than the previous ones- and the first one was one of the films that got me to go looking for info, anyway.
A natural collapse advocate
I have never heard any debunker refer to themselves as a "natural collapse advocate" before. I think that is a strange to label to give oneself. Instead of 9/11 Truthers, should we start calling ourselves "demolition advocates"?
So PBS sends out invitations to Shyam Sunder and some of the other big wigs who promote the governments position, but they are all apparently still in hiding or to proud to debate us crazies. In the end, the best person they can find is Chris Mohr. His short bio from Colorado 9/11 Visibility states: "Chris Mohr has an English degree and studied journalism. He is the former editor of On The Air Magazine. He was initially skeptical but intrigued by the 9/11 controlled demolition theory but now believes the scientific evidence doesn’t support it."
Word games.
It's neuro-linguistic programming. Listen to how nice and friendly it sounds "natural collapse advocate". Oh, it's NATURAL.... Ah. Like bunny rabbits and organic food. Collapse, not so good, but certainly more neutral than scary "demolition". And ADVOCATE... Oh, you're just someone who cares, how nice.
Controlled demolition theorist
Natural Collapse Advocate
Can I get chocolate sprinkles on that?
If there are any GENUINE Truth seekers left on this website, I suggest you attack and disarm this verbiage. Soft-heads will gravitate towards it because it simply SOUNDS nicer.
advocate
noun
2. a person who speaks or writes in support or defense of a person, cause, etc. (usually fol. by of ): an advocate of peace.
3. a person who pleads for or in behalf of another; intercessor.
4. a person who pleads the cause of another in a court of law.
It also doesn't make sense, grammatically. Definitions 3 & 4 are out. But number 2 seems to fit, right? A person who speaks in support or defense of a cause... So "natural collapses" are a "cause" that this man supports? Yes, I'm sure he and his brethren WOULD like to see more "natural collapses" in the future.
EDIT: The reason they brought out an english prof. and a journalist is because they are now down to their last line of defense. They are relying on their "6000 year long history of literacy". They need to make sure that the bedunkers are seasoned wordsmiths. If they put any old SCHMUCK up there, they risk loosing their hypnotic grip on the sheeple.
Word Games.
Rucker: "MAKE SURE YOU KEEP AN OPEN MIND, open mind, open mind..." So I can insert my false dichotomy, dialectic suggestion in the next sentence. "IF Bush allowed it to happen, THEN they didn't set (rig) the buildings." Oh, thank you Mr. Rucker for providing me with the parameters of acceptable thought.
Rucker and Mohr, huh? Two peas in a pod. Birds of a feather. Looks like only "trusted bretheren" are having the debunker football passed to them nowadays. Too bad word-magic has lost its effect, boys.
By the way, are we still allowed to talk about Phillip Zelikow on this website, or is that VERBOTEN?