Can anyone help me identify the source of this video?

freud · 10th December 2012, 01:33 PM

This is something I've seen being passed around by nutters on Youtube as a legit video that was "leaked". Naturally, they have no clue where it came from but accept it as gospel. I'm assuming it's CGI from a documentary but I'd like to pinpoint the source. It's about 20 seconds into the video where he humorously asks "where did this video surface?" and doesn't think twice about attempting to answer his own question. Can anyone help?

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Axxman300 · 10th December 2012, 02:01 PM

It's crappy CGI. The hole is the exit hole from INSIDE of the inner ring wall. Ironically it's smaller than the 'hole who posted this sad delusional video.

Then there's the whole problem of the blast having too much fire to come from any US cruise missile.

File under comedy.

freud · 10th December 2012, 02:50 PM

But why is this video not more abundantly found on the internet?!

The video is laughable, but I'm particularly curious about the CGI. I'd like to be able to say "umm...that's from a TV show" and hopefully cause a chain reaction of common sense.

And yes, I know I'm naive for expecting common sense from anyone the truther crowd.

I suspect it was pulled from a documentary depicting AA 77 or it's an artist's extra truthy rendition of what a missle would look like hitting the Pentagon, but I'd like to be able to name the source just for the sake of shutting down an argument. I was hoping someone here had seen it before.

Redwood · 10th December 2012, 02:57 PM

Originally Posted by Axxman300

It's crappy CGI. The hole is the exit hole from INSIDE of the inner ring wall. Ironically it's smaller than the 'hole who posted this sad delusional video.

Then there's the whole problem of the blast having too much fire to come from any US cruise missile.

File under comedy.

The video quality is so poor, it could be CGI added to existing video or a even still photo, or the whole thing might be original CGI. It's impossible to tell. It seems to me to have been deliberately degraded. Poor quality video is stock-in-trade for truthers.

BCR · 11th December 2012, 02:03 PM

First hint. "Flies" in from north side of helipad, not the south side as only a few minutes of Googlinvestigation would demonstrate.

Second hint. Conspicuous absence of generator and construction trailers.

How many more kids in their parents basements will demonstrate their utter ignorance on Youtube?

cjnewson88 · 11th December 2012, 03:13 PM

They'll believe it because they want to believe it. Just like the fake WTC7 video. Truthers are idiots.

Lenbrazil · 11th December 2012, 04:16 PM

Also note that left and right are switched, some truthers pimped this a few years back

Redwood · 11th December 2012, 05:09 PM

Originally Posted by Lenbrazil

Also note that left and right are switched, some truthers pimped this a few years back

Not to mention the hovering flying saucer! (It's easier to see if you reduce brightness.)

BCR · 11th December 2012, 07:46 PM

I posted a comment on the video pointing out the obvious. My comment was deleted and I was blocked from further comments. Strange how 'truthers' don't want to hear the truth

freud · 11th December 2012, 10:28 PM

Originally Posted by BCR

I posted a comment on the video pointing out the obvious. My comment was deleted and I was blocked from further comments. Strange how 'truthers' don't want to hear the truth

Here's my comment that was just deleted.

Took him two whole minutes. The truth does not tolerate dissent!

pgimeno · 12th December 2012, 05:48 AM

It's somewhat old.

This video shows the original footage where that was taken from:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3tMbY9E5gc

And this thread deals with the video too:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=174346

Blaupunkt69 · 12th December 2012, 10:49 AM

Originally Posted by pgimeno

It's somewhat old.

This video shows the original footage where that was taken from:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3tMbY9E5gc

The music is scary enough for me to believe it was a missile afterall!

The Platypus · 12th December 2012, 02:45 PM

Very telling that not a single 911 cult kiddie will even try to answer where this obvious fraud of a video came from.

booNyzarC · 12th December 2012, 04:00 PM

Originally Posted by pgimeno

It's somewhat old.

This video shows the original footage where that was taken from:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3tMbY9E5gc

And this thread deals with the video too:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=174346

Thank you for that. It is an obvious fake, but I hadn't seen the debunking before with the original footage. Much appreciated.

Cheers.

The Platypus · 12th December 2012, 04:10 PM

If 9/11 conspiracy is all about "the truth" then why do they embrace lies by making and spreading all sorts of these fraudulent videos?

Bell · 12th December 2012, 04:24 PM

Originally Posted by The Platypus

If 9/11 conspiracy is all about "the truth" then why do they embrace lies by making and spreading all sorts of these fraudulent videos?

They have to. Since the FBI refuses to release all the dozens of Pentagon videos, truthers are forced to show us what we would see on those.

By the way, obvious fake since even the explosion doesn't resemble anything that was seen in the two Pentagon videos.

Dash80 · 12th December 2012, 04:46 PM

I *********** love truthers! Endlessly entertaining, so quick to cry fake on many things then cracking out this pile of ********. Excellent!

booNyzarC · 12th December 2012, 05:23 PM

Originally Posted by The Platypus

If 9/11 conspiracy is all about "the truth" then why do they embrace lies by making and spreading all sorts of these fraudulent videos?

Has the creator of this particular video been identified as a member of the truth movement? I'm just curious because there is another well known hoax video of WTC7 which was not created by a member of the truth movement (though it fooled more than a few...), so I think jumping to the immediate conclusion that all fakery is from the truth movement is premature.

The Platypus · 12th December 2012, 06:55 PM

Originally Posted by booNyzarC

Has the creator of this particular video been identified as a member of the truth movement? I'm just curious because there is another well known hoax video of WTC7 which was not created by a member of the truth movement (though it fooled more than a few...), so I think jumping to the immediate conclusion that all fakery is from the truth movement is premature.

I didn't jump to any such conclusion, how did you get all that from what i said?

booNyzarC · 12th December 2012, 09:57 PM

Originally Posted by The Platypus

I didn't jump to any such conclusion, how did you get all that from what i said?

Hi Platypus.

I didn't intend to suggest that you had jumped to any conclusions, and please forgive me if I used your statement in order to illustrate a general point.

That said, it does seem to suggest that fakery like (and possibly including) the subject of the OP can be attributed to followers of the truth movement when you stated the following (emphasis mine):

Originally Posted by The Platypus

If 9/11 conspiracy is all about "the truth" then why do they embrace lies by making and spreading all sorts of these fraudulent videos?

Though I realize that you are simultaneously mentioning embracing, making, and spreading lies like this hoaxed video, I simply wanted to clarify that attributing the creation of this particular video to the truth movement would be unwise without something significant to substantiate such an accusation.

Hope that clarifies.

Cheers.

16.5 · 13th December 2012, 02:01 PM

Originally Posted by booNyzarC

Has the creator of this particular video been identified as a member of the truth movement? I'm just curious because there is another well known hoax video of WTC7 which was not created by a member of the truth movement (though it fooled more than a few...), so I think jumping to the immediate conclusion that all fakery is from the truth movement is premature.

Uh, yes. You know you can watch the video on his You tube page, along with a bunch of other idiocy.

beachnut · 13th December 2012, 03:06 PM

Originally Posted by booNyzarC

...
I simply wanted to clarify that attributing the creation of this particular video to the truth movement would be unwise without something significant to substantiate such an accusation. ...

It would be a waste to fake the video and blame 911 truth. 911 truth needs no help pushing fantasy and lies.

Does 911 truth need help looking terminally stupid?

booNyzarC · 15th December 2012, 11:23 AM

Originally Posted by 16.5

Uh, yes. You know you can watch the video on his You tube page, along with a bunch of other idiocy.

Does the fact that the video is on his YouTube page directly indicate that he created the fakery? Though it is possible, this isn't in itself a convincing argument that he made it. Many people host videos on their YouTube channels that they did not make themselves.

Originally Posted by beachnut

It would be a waste to fake the video and blame 911 truth. 911 truth needs no help pushing fantasy and lies.

Does 911 truth need help looking terminally stupid?

Of course not, but that isn't my point.

Here is my point. The following video was not created by a member of the truth movement:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

When this video initially came out it was almost immediately suspected of being fake and many people pointed the finger of blame at the truth movement. Though it was/is indeed fake, it wasn't made by anyone associated with 9/11 truth. Here is the guy who actually created it:

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the ISF. The ISF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

Considering that nobody has come forward to explain the faking of the Pentagon footage, it is unlikely that the faker is as well intentioned as Edward Current was, but this is still inadequate to attribute the fakery to the truth movement. It is possible and perhaps even likely, but not proven as far as I can tell.

Does that clear up any questions about what I was intending to convey?

grandmastershek · 17th December 2012, 09:57 AM

Originally Posted by BCR

I posted a comment on the video pointing out the obvious. My comment was deleted and I was blocked from further comments. Strange how 'truthers' don't want to hear the truth

Indeed....he blocked me too, and he replied to each post with a nice little "**** off". Oh to be "open minded".

16.5 · 17th December 2012, 10:22 AM

Originally Posted by booNyzarC

Does the fact that the video is on his YouTube page directly indicate that he created the fakery? Though it is possible, this isn't in itself a convincing argument that he made it. Many people host videos on their YouTube channels that they did not make themselves.

You are totally missing the point. The person hosting that video is promoting it as the real thing, and he is a truther.

freud · 17th December 2012, 12:45 PM

Originally Posted by pgimeno

It's somewhat old.

This video shows the original footage where that was taken from:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3tMbY9E5gc

And this thread deals with the video too:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=174346

A belated thank you from me as well.

The gentleman I was discussing this with has fled the conversation, but I will keep this handy in case someone passes me that video again. I'm already cringing at what I expect the response to be: "the gubmint must have edited out the missile!"

booNyzarC · 17th December 2012, 06:18 PM

Originally Posted by 16.5

You are totally missing the point. The person hosting that video is promoting it as the real thing, and he is a truther.

Show me where I've argued whether or not the person hosting the video is presenting it as the real thing.

After you discover that I haven't been discussing that point, perhaps you'll want to ask yourself who is actually missing the point.

Cheers.

16.5 · 17th December 2012, 06:54 PM

Originally Posted by booNyzarC

Show me where I've argued whether or not the person hosting the video is presenting it as the real thing.

After you discover that I haven't been discussing that point, perhaps you'll want to ask yourself who is actually missing the point.

Cheers.

Show me where I said you argued it, because as I pointed out, bro, you are kind of missing the point. The point being..... The source of the ******** video linked in this thread is.... A truther!

Yay, you've learned something.

booNyzarC · 17th December 2012, 07:21 PM

Originally Posted by 16.5

Show me where I said you argued it, because as I pointed out, bro, you are kind of missing the point. The point being..... The source of the ******** video linked in this thread is.... A truther!

Yay, you've learned something.

The question I raised was whether or not it has been established that a member of the truth movement created the video. Being that I was the one who raised the question, I would humbly suggest that this just might possibly be the actual point of my raised question... maybe... ?

Or do you feel that you should be the one to dictate to me what the point of my raised question was?

I suggest contemplating that for a time before you unleash another knee-jerk response.

Cheers.

16.5 · 17th December 2012, 07:39 PM

Originally Posted by booNyzarC

The question I raised was whether or not it has been established that a member of the truth movement created the video. Being that I was the one who raised the question, I would humbly suggest that this just might possibly be the actual point of my raised question... maybe... ?

Or do you feel that you should be the one to dictate to me what the point of my raised question was?

I suggest contemplating that for a time before you unleash another knee-jerk response.

Cheers.

See the thread title up there, friendo? The source is one of your truther buddies. And whether that scum ball actually made the piece of garbage, well, now that is quite beside the point. It is like asking who painted a forgery, when we know who is selling it.

Now, the next time y'all want to call me a jerk, try to be a wee bit more subtle about, huh sport?

Prosit, baby.

booNyzarC · 17th December 2012, 07:47 PM

Originally Posted by 16.5

See the thread title up there, friendo?

I do indeed see the title. Pal.

Originally Posted by 16.5

The source is one of your truther buddies.

Oh really? Tell me then, who exactly created the video?

While you're at it can you tell me who "my truther buddies" are?

Originally Posted by 16.5

And whether that scum ball actually made the piece of garbage, well, now that is quite beside the point.

Beside the point of my question? No, actually, that is precisely the point of my question. So again I ask, who created the video?

Originally Posted by 16.5

It is like asking who painted a forgery, when we know who is selling it.

Who is selling it is not in question. I didn't ask about who is selling it. Who is selling it is rather beside the point of my question.

Originally Posted by 16.5

Now, the next time y'all want to call me a jerk, try to be a wee bit more subtle about, huh sport?

I didn't call you a jerk. I suggested contemplating the actual point before tossing out another knee-jerk response. Pity that you chose not to do that.

Originally Posted by 16.5

Prosit, baby.

Cheers.

16.5 · 17th December 2012, 08:00 PM

Originally Posted by booNyzarC

I do indeed see the title. Pal.

Oh really? Tell me then, who exactly created the video?

While you're at it can you tell me who "my truther buddies" are?

Cheers.

Absolutely! The d-bag's name seems to be Andy Rogers. No need to thank me.

Still gotta work on your subtlety, chief.

Knee-jerk! Har, I get it! Rolls eyes.

booNyzarC · 17th December 2012, 08:04 PM

Originally Posted by 16.5

Absolutely! The d-bag's name seems to be Andy Rogers. No need to thank me.

Can you provide me with some kind of evidence that someone named Andy Rogers created the video?

And yes, I will thank you if you can provide that.

Originally Posted by 16.5

Still gotta work on your subtlety, chief.

I wasn't attempting to be subtle.

Originally Posted by 16.5

Knee-jerk! Har, I get it! Rolls eyes.

No, I don't think that you do get it actually.

16.5 · 17th December 2012, 08:06 PM

Originally Posted by booNyzarC

Can you provide me with some kind of evidence that someone named Andy Rogers created the video?

And yes, I will thank you if you can provide that.

I wasn't attempting to be subtle.

No, I don't think that you do get it actually.

Aw, bro, you mad. You seem mad! Don't be like that. Yes Andy made the video. Take care!

booNyzarC · 17th December 2012, 08:26 PM

Originally Posted by 16.5

Aw, bro, you mad. You seem mad! Don't be like that.

Mad? Too funny. I'm not mad, though it is quite disappointing to observe your failure in post after post to understand, acknowledge, and address my actual point.

Originally Posted by 16.5

Yes Andy made the video. Take care!

If you claim Andy made the video, you must have something to back that claim up with, right?

Perhaps he admitted to it somewhere in the comments? Maybe he divulged it to an undercover agent while he was being secretly filmed -- and you have the footage? Or did he write it in his diary and you snuck in with a spy camera to obtain microfilm of the page that has his shameful admission? Surely you have something substantial that corroborates and confirms your claim... right?

You aren't just assuming he made it because it is on his YouTube channel, right?

We've already been over that part, remember?

To be clear, I'd be perfectly fine with the knowledge that he created it. I'm not defending whoever created it, whether it is Andy as you suggest or someone else. Nor am I defending whoever pushes this rubbish as genuine. If you take the time to read through the (rather short) thread, pause and consider my words, and attempt to understand the "why" behind my raised question you just might realize the purpose and intention (or should I say the point) I was bringing up. I encourage you to do so.

As an aside...

The extent to which some people on forums will go in an effort to avoid admitting their mistakes never ceases to amaze me. Is it a pride thing? Is it that much harder because I'm a newb here?

Are you still under the apparent impression that I'm a member of the truth movement? Does the thought that I'm a "twoofer" make your general rudeness to me "okay" in your book? I'm seriously curious about that.

Cheers.

I Am He · 17th December 2012, 09:44 PM

Originally Posted by booNyzarC

Mad? Too funny. I'm not mad, though it is quite disappointing to observe your failure in post after post to understand, acknowledge, and address my actual point.

If you claim Andy made the video, you must have something to back that claim up with, right?

Perhaps he admitted to it somewhere in the comments? Maybe he divulged it to an undercover agent while he was being secretly filmed -- and you have the footage? Or did he write it in his diary and you snuck in with a spy camera to obtain microfilm of the page that has his shameful admission? Surely you have something substantial that corroborates and confirms your claim... right?

You aren't just assuming he made it because it is on his YouTube channel, right?

We've already been over that part, remember?

To be clear, I'd be perfectly fine with the knowledge that he created it. I'm not defending whoever created it, whether it is Andy as you suggest or someone else. Nor am I defending whoever pushes this rubbish as genuine. If you take the time to read through the (rather short) thread, pause and consider my words, and attempt to understand the "why" behind my raised question you just might realize the purpose and intention (or should I say the point) I was bringing up. I encourage you to do so.

As an aside...

The extent to which some people on forums will go in an effort to avoid admitting their mistakes never ceases to amaze me. Is it a pride thing? Is it that much harder because I'm a newb here?

Are you still under the apparent impression that I'm a member of the truth movement? Does the thought that I'm a "twoofer" make your general rudeness to me "okay" in your book? I'm seriously curious about that.

Cheers.

Well? What's your point?

I Am He

booNyzarC · 17th December 2012, 10:14 PM

Originally Posted by I Am He

Well? What's your point?

I Am He

If you can't figure out my point from what I've already said, I'm not sure what else to suggest except perhaps to read it again. It wasn't a big and important point, nor was it even slightly complex, but I believe that I've already made myself clear. If you have specific questions about what I've said, feel free to ask and I'll be more than happy to answer.

Cheers.

Oystein · 17th December 2012, 10:59 PM

I, too, am curious: Who created this video fakery? And what is the evidence supporting the answer?

The Platypus · 17th December 2012, 11:45 PM

Maybe it was those mysterious and always elusive "agents" that CTers are always claiming are following them around, doing things to make them look bad

LMAO!

16.5 · 18th December 2012, 12:17 PM

Originally Posted by Oystein

I, too, am curious: Who created this video fakery? And what is the evidence supporting the answer?

As I explained, it doesn't matter, the question is who is publishing this obvious fake video compilation as factual, and the answer is a truther.

Lets break it down, there are at least four major falsehoods in the linked video:

1. the written description on You Tube
2. the fake missile at the Pentagon
3. the false description on the punch out hole in the inner ring
4. the fake painted "cruise missile."

I've seen the false description of the punch out on a hundred truther sites, for an example. I've seen the fake painted cruise missile on no planer sites. But who put all four together? A truther.

Asking who created any one aspect to call into question the whole is pure pedantry because we know how is the proponent of the entire fakery: a truther.

10th December 2012, 02:50 PM	#3
freud Scholar Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 93	But why is this video not more abundantly found on the internet?! The video is laughable, but I'm particularly curious about the CGI. I'd like to be able to say "umm...that's from a TV show" and hopefully cause a chain reaction of common sense. And yes, I know I'm naive for expecting common sense from anyone the truther crowd. I suspect it was pulled from a documentary depicting AA 77 or it's an artist's extra truthy rendition of what a missle would look like hitting the Pentagon, but I'd like to be able to name the source just for the sake of shutting down an argument. I was hoping someone here had seen it before.
freud Scholar Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 93

10th December 2012, 02:57 PM	#4
Redwood Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,073	Originally Posted by Axxman300 It's crappy CGI. The hole is the exit hole from INSIDE of the inner ring wall. Ironically it's smaller than the 'hole who posted this sad delusional video. Then there's the whole problem of the blast having too much fire to come from any US cruise missile. File under comedy. The video quality is so poor, it could be CGI added to existing video or a even still photo, or the whole thing might be original CGI. It's impossible to tell. It seems to me to have been deliberately degraded. Poor quality video is stock-in-trade for truthers.
Redwood Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,073

11th December 2012, 02:03 PM	#5
BCR Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 2,276	First hint. "Flies" in from north side of helipad, not the south side as only a few minutes of Googlinvestigation would demonstrate. Second hint. Conspicuous absence of generator and construction trailers. How many more kids in their parents basements will demonstrate their utter ignorance on Youtube?
BCR Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 2,276	__________________ "Is your claim that the level of penetration is only governed by distance and not the material that is being penetrated?" - DGM

11th December 2012, 03:13 PM	#6
cjnewson88 Graduate Poster Join Date: Oct 2011 Posts: 1,610	They'll believe it because they want to believe it. Just like the fake WTC7 video. Truthers are idiots.
	__________________ Common sense has clearly been snuck up on from behind beaten several times on the head and left to bleed. Over 140 pieces of evidence showing American 77 hit the Pentagon http://therightbloggerbastard.blogspot.co.nz/ http://www.youtube.com/user/cjnewson88

11th December 2012, 04:16 PM	#7
Lenbrazil Muse Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 974	Also note that left and right are switched, some truthers pimped this a few years back
Lenbrazil Muse Join Date: Mar 2008 Posts: 974

10th December 2012, 02:01 PM	#2
Axxman300 Critical Thinker Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 293	It's crappy CGI. The hole is the exit hole from INSIDE of the inner ring wall. Ironically it's smaller than the 'hole who posted this sad delusional video. Then there's the whole problem of the blast having too much fire to come from any US cruise missile. File under comedy.

11th December 2012, 05:09 PM	#8
Redwood Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,073	Originally Posted by Lenbrazil Also note that left and right are switched, some truthers pimped this a few years back Not to mention the hovering flying saucer! (It's easier to see if you reduce brightness.)
Redwood Graduate Poster Join Date: May 2012 Posts: 1,073

11th December 2012, 07:46 PM	#9
BCR Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 2,276	I posted a comment on the video pointing out the obvious. My comment was deleted and I was blocked from further comments. Strange how 'truthers' don't want to hear the truth
BCR Master Poster Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 2,276	__________________ "Is your claim that the level of penetration is only governed by distance and not the material that is being penetrated?" - DGM

11th December 2012, 10:28 PM	#10
freud Scholar Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 93	Originally Posted by BCR I posted a comment on the video pointing out the obvious. My comment was deleted and I was blocked from further comments. Strange how 'truthers' don't want to hear the truth Here's my comment that was just deleted. Took him two whole minutes. The truth does not tolerate dissent!
freud Scholar Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 93

12th December 2012, 05:48 AM	#11
pgimeno Graduate Poster Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Spain Posts: 1,779	It's somewhat old. This video shows the original footage where that was taken from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3tMbY9E5gc And this thread deals with the video too: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=174346
	__________________ Ask questions. Demand answers. But be prepared to accept the answers, or don't ask questions in the first place.

12th December 2012, 10:49 AM	#12
Blaupunkt69 Scholar Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 78	Originally Posted by pgimeno It's somewhat old. This video shows the original footage where that was taken from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3tMbY9E5gc The music is scary enough for me to believe it was a missile afterall!
Blaupunkt69 Scholar Join Date: Jun 2010 Posts: 78

12th December 2012, 02:45 PM	#13
The Platypus Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 1,883	Very telling that not a single 911 cult kiddie will even try to answer where this obvious fraud of a video came from.
	__________________ I'll go with the qualified experts, over some ranting guy on the internet that claims he has "the truth". Always beware of those that overuse, capitalize and blanket themselves in them word "truth". I may not always know the truth, but i do know when i'm being lied too.

12th December 2012, 04:00 PM	#14
booNyzarC Scholar Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 65	Originally Posted by pgimeno It's somewhat old. This video shows the original footage where that was taken from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3tMbY9E5gc And this thread deals with the video too: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=174346 Thank you for that. It is an obvious fake, but I hadn't seen the debunking before with the original footage. Much appreciated. Cheers.
booNyzarC Scholar Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 65

12th December 2012, 04:10 PM	#15
The Platypus Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 1,883	If 9/11 conspiracy is all about "the truth" then why do they embrace lies by making and spreading all sorts of these fraudulent videos?
	__________________ I'll go with the qualified experts, over some ranting guy on the internet that claims he has "the truth". Always beware of those that overuse, capitalize and blanket themselves in them word "truth". I may not always know the truth, but i do know when i'm being lied too.

12th December 2012, 04:24 PM	#16
Bell Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 21,318	Originally Posted by The Platypus If 9/11 conspiracy is all about "the truth" then why do they embrace lies by making and spreading all sorts of these fraudulent videos? They have to. Since the FBI refuses to release all the dozens of Pentagon videos, truthers are forced to show us what we would see on those. By the way, obvious fake since even the explosion doesn't resemble anything that was seen in the two Pentagon videos.

12th December 2012, 04:46 PM	#17
Dash80 Rave on, Not Fade Away Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 1,675	I ********* love truthers! Endlessly entertaining, so quick to cry fake on many things then cracking out this pile of ******. Excellent!
	__________________ I see that the No-Planers still travel Air Elastic-Band with their fleet of innovative rubber Boeings.

12th December 2012, 05:23 PM	#18
booNyzarC Scholar Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 65	Originally Posted by The Platypus If 9/11 conspiracy is all about "the truth" then why do they embrace lies by making and spreading all sorts of these fraudulent videos? Has the creator of this particular video been identified as a member of the truth movement? I'm just curious because there is another well known hoax video of WTC7 which was not created by a member of the truth movement (though it fooled more than a few...), so I think jumping to the immediate conclusion that all fakery is from the truth movement is premature.
booNyzarC Scholar Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 65

12th December 2012, 06:55 PM	#19
The Platypus Graduate Poster Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 1,883	Originally Posted by booNyzarC Has the creator of this particular video been identified as a member of the truth movement? I'm just curious because there is another well known hoax video of WTC7 which was not created by a member of the truth movement (though it fooled more than a few...), so I think jumping to the immediate conclusion that all fakery is from the truth movement is premature. I didn't jump to any such conclusion, how did you get all that from what i said?
	__________________ I'll go with the qualified experts, over some ranting guy on the internet that claims he has "the truth". Always beware of those that overuse, capitalize and blanket themselves in them word "truth". I may not always know the truth, but i do know when i'm being lied too.

12th December 2012, 09:57 PM	#20
booNyzarC Scholar Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 65	Originally Posted by The Platypus I didn't jump to any such conclusion, how did you get all that from what i said? Hi Platypus. I didn't intend to suggest that you had jumped to any conclusions, and please forgive me if I used your statement in order to illustrate a general point. That said, it does seem to suggest that fakery like (and possibly including) the subject of the OP can be attributed to followers of the truth movement when you stated the following (emphasis mine): Originally Posted by The Platypus If 9/11 conspiracy is all about "the truth" then why do they embrace lies by making and spreading all sorts of these fraudulent videos? Though I realize that you are simultaneously mentioning embracing, making, and spreading lies like this hoaxed video, I simply wanted to clarify that attributing the creation of this particular video to the truth movement would be unwise without something significant to substantiate such an accusation. Hope that clarifies. Cheers.
booNyzarC Scholar Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 65

13th December 2012, 02:01 PM	#21
16.5 Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,768	Originally Posted by booNyzarC Has the creator of this particular video been identified as a member of the truth movement? I'm just curious because there is another well known hoax video of WTC7 which was not created by a member of the truth movement (though it fooled more than a few...), so I think jumping to the immediate conclusion that all fakery is from the truth movement is premature. Uh, yes. You know you can watch the video on his You tube page, along with a bunch of other idiocy.
16.5 Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,768	__________________ The Fallacy of Pseudo-refuting Descriptions The art of labeling an argument in a dismissive fashion being used as an argument in and of itself. Ex: Labeling facts as a conspiracy theory

13th December 2012, 03:06 PM	#22
beachnut Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 22,009	Originally Posted by booNyzarC ... I simply wanted to clarify that attributing the creation of this particular video to the truth movement would be unwise without something significant to substantiate such an accusation. ... It would be a waste to fake the video and blame 911 truth. 911 truth needs no help pushing fantasy and lies. Does 911 truth need help looking terminally stupid?

17th December 2012, 09:57 AM	#24
grandmastershek Graduate Poster Join Date: Nov 2009 Posts: 1,345	Originally Posted by BCR I posted a comment on the video pointing out the obvious. My comment was deleted and I was blocked from further comments. Strange how 'truthers' don't want to hear the truth Indeed....he blocked me too, and he replied to each post with a nice little "**** off". Oh to be "open minded".
	__________________ For as the NWO are higher than the people, so are their ways higher than your ways, and their thoughts than your thoughts. (A amalgam of Isaiah 55:9 & truther logic)

17th December 2012, 10:22 AM	#25
16.5 Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,768	Originally Posted by booNyzarC Does the fact that the video is on his YouTube page directly indicate that he created the fakery? Though it is possible, this isn't in itself a convincing argument that he made it. Many people host videos on their YouTube channels that they did not make themselves. You are totally missing the point. The person hosting that video is promoting it as the real thing, and he is a truther.
16.5 Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,768	__________________ The Fallacy of Pseudo-refuting Descriptions The art of labeling an argument in a dismissive fashion being used as an argument in and of itself. Ex: Labeling facts as a conspiracy theory

17th December 2012, 12:45 PM	#26
freud Scholar Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 93	Originally Posted by pgimeno It's somewhat old. This video shows the original footage where that was taken from: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=x3tMbY9E5gc And this thread deals with the video too: http://www.internationalskeptics.com...d.php?t=174346 A belated thank you from me as well. The gentleman I was discussing this with has fled the conversation, but I will keep this handy in case someone passes me that video again. I'm already cringing at what I expect the response to be: "the gubmint must have edited out the missile!"
freud Scholar Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 93

17th December 2012, 06:18 PM	#27
booNyzarC Scholar Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 65	Originally Posted by 16.5 You are totally missing the point. The person hosting that video is promoting it as the real thing, and he is a truther. Show me where I've argued whether or not the person hosting the video is presenting it as the real thing. After you discover that I haven't been discussing that point, perhaps you'll want to ask yourself who is actually missing the point. Cheers.
booNyzarC Scholar Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 65

17th December 2012, 06:54 PM	#28
16.5 Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,768	Originally Posted by booNyzarC Show me where I've argued whether or not the person hosting the video is presenting it as the real thing. After you discover that I haven't been discussing that point, perhaps you'll want to ask yourself who is actually missing the point. Cheers. Show me where I said you argued it, because as I pointed out, bro, you are kind of missing the point. The point being..... The source of the ******** video linked in this thread is.... A truther! Yay, you've learned something.
16.5 Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,768	__________________ The Fallacy of Pseudo-refuting Descriptions The art of labeling an argument in a dismissive fashion being used as an argument in and of itself. Ex: Labeling facts as a conspiracy theory

17th December 2012, 07:21 PM	#29
booNyzarC Scholar Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 65	Originally Posted by 16.5 Show me where I said you argued it, because as I pointed out, bro, you are kind of missing the point. The point being..... The source of the ******** video linked in this thread is.... A truther! Yay, you've learned something. The question I raised was whether or not it has been established that a member of the truth movement created the video. Being that I was the one who raised the question, I would humbly suggest that this just might possibly be the actual point of my raised question... maybe... ? Or do you feel that you should be the one to dictate to me what the point of my raised question was? I suggest contemplating that for a time before you unleash another knee-jerk response. Cheers.
booNyzarC Scholar Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 65

17th December 2012, 07:39 PM	#30
16.5 Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,768	Originally Posted by booNyzarC The question I raised was whether or not it has been established that a member of the truth movement created the video. Being that I was the one who raised the question, I would humbly suggest that this just might possibly be the actual point of my raised question... maybe... ? Or do you feel that you should be the one to dictate to me what the point of my raised question was? I suggest contemplating that for a time before you unleash another knee-jerk response. Cheers. See the thread title up there, friendo? The source is one of your truther buddies. And whether that scum ball actually made the piece of garbage, well, now that is quite beside the point. It is like asking who painted a forgery, when we know who is selling it. Now, the next time y'all want to call me a jerk, try to be a wee bit more subtle about, huh sport? Prosit, baby.
16.5 Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,768	__________________ The Fallacy of Pseudo-refuting Descriptions The art of labeling an argument in a dismissive fashion being used as an argument in and of itself. Ex: Labeling facts as a conspiracy theory

17th December 2012, 07:47 PM	#31
booNyzarC Scholar Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 65	Originally Posted by 16.5 See the thread title up there, friendo? I do indeed see the title. Pal. Originally Posted by 16.5 The source is one of your truther buddies. Oh really? Tell me then, who exactly created the video? While you're at it can you tell me who "my truther buddies" are? Originally Posted by 16.5 And whether that scum ball actually made the piece of garbage, well, now that is quite beside the point. Beside the point of my question? No, actually, that is precisely the point of my question. So again I ask, who created the video? Originally Posted by 16.5 It is like asking who painted a forgery, when we know who is selling it. Who is selling it is not in question. I didn't ask about who is selling it. Who is selling it is rather beside the point of my question. Originally Posted by 16.5 Now, the next time y'all want to call me a jerk, try to be a wee bit more subtle about, huh sport? I didn't call you a jerk. I suggested contemplating the actual point before tossing out another knee-jerk response. Pity that you chose not to do that. Originally Posted by 16.5 Prosit, baby. Cheers.
booNyzarC Scholar Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 65

17th December 2012, 08:00 PM	#32
16.5 Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,768	Originally Posted by booNyzarC I do indeed see the title. Pal. Oh really? Tell me then, who exactly created the video? While you're at it can you tell me who "my truther buddies" are? Cheers. Absolutely! The d-bag's name seems to be Andy Rogers. No need to thank me. Still gotta work on your subtlety, chief. Knee-jerk! Har, I get it! Rolls eyes.
16.5 Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,768	__________________ The Fallacy of Pseudo-refuting Descriptions The art of labeling an argument in a dismissive fashion being used as an argument in and of itself. Ex: Labeling facts as a conspiracy theory

17th December 2012, 08:04 PM	#33
booNyzarC Scholar Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 65	Originally Posted by 16.5 Absolutely! The d-bag's name seems to be Andy Rogers. No need to thank me. Can you provide me with some kind of evidence that someone named Andy Rogers created the video? And yes, I will thank you if you can provide that. Originally Posted by 16.5 Still gotta work on your subtlety, chief. I wasn't attempting to be subtle. Originally Posted by 16.5 Knee-jerk! Har, I get it! Rolls eyes. No, I don't think that you do get it actually.
booNyzarC Scholar Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 65

17th December 2012, 08:06 PM	#34
16.5 Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,768	Originally Posted by booNyzarC Can you provide me with some kind of evidence that someone named Andy Rogers created the video? And yes, I will thank you if you can provide that. I wasn't attempting to be subtle. No, I don't think that you do get it actually. Aw, bro, you mad. You seem mad! Don't be like that. Yes Andy made the video. Take care!
16.5 Philosopher Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 6,768	__________________ The Fallacy of Pseudo-refuting Descriptions The art of labeling an argument in a dismissive fashion being used as an argument in and of itself. Ex: Labeling facts as a conspiracy theory

17th December 2012, 08:26 PM	#35
booNyzarC Scholar Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 65	Originally Posted by 16.5 Aw, bro, you mad. You seem mad! Don't be like that. Mad? Too funny. I'm not mad, though it is quite disappointing to observe your failure in post after post to understand, acknowledge, and address my actual point. Originally Posted by 16.5 Yes Andy made the video. Take care! If you claim Andy made the video, you must have something to back that claim up with, right? Perhaps he admitted to it somewhere in the comments? Maybe he divulged it to an undercover agent while he was being secretly filmed -- and you have the footage? Or did he write it in his diary and you snuck in with a spy camera to obtain microfilm of the page that has his shameful admission? Surely you have something substantial that corroborates and confirms your claim... *right? You aren't just assuming* he made it because it is on his YouTube channel, right? We've already been over that part, remember? To be clear, I'd be perfectly fine with the knowledge that he created it. I'm not defending whoever created it, whether it is Andy as you suggest or someone else. Nor am I defending whoever pushes this rubbish as genuine. If you take the time to read through the (rather short) thread, pause and consider my words, and attempt to understand the "why" behind my raised question you just might realize the purpose and intention (or should I say the point) I was bringing up. I encourage you to do so. As an aside... The extent to which some people on forums will go in an effort to avoid admitting their mistakes never ceases to amaze me. Is it a pride thing? Is it that much harder because I'm a newb here? Are you still under the apparent impression that I'm a member of the truth movement? Does the thought that I'm a "twoofer" make your general rudeness to me "okay" in your book? I'm seriously curious about that. Cheers.
booNyzarC Scholar Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 65

17th December 2012, 09:44 PM	#36
I Am He Critical Thinker Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 258	Originally Posted by booNyzarC Mad? Too funny. I'm not mad, though it is quite disappointing to observe your failure in post after post to understand, acknowledge, and address my actual point. If you claim Andy made the video, you must have something to back that claim up with, right? Perhaps he admitted to it somewhere in the comments? Maybe he divulged it to an undercover agent while he was being secretly filmed -- and you have the footage? Or did he write it in his diary and you snuck in with a spy camera to obtain microfilm of the page that has his shameful admission? Surely you have something substantial that corroborates and confirms your claim... *right? You aren't just assuming* he made it because it is on his YouTube channel, right? We've already been over that part, remember? To be clear, I'd be perfectly fine with the knowledge that he created it. I'm not defending whoever created it, whether it is Andy as you suggest or someone else. Nor am I defending whoever pushes this rubbish as genuine. If you take the time to read through the (rather short) thread, pause and consider my words, and attempt to understand the "why" behind my raised question you just might realize the purpose and intention (or should I say the point) I was bringing up. I encourage you to do so. As an aside... The extent to which some people on forums will go in an effort to avoid admitting their mistakes never ceases to amaze me. Is it a pride thing? Is it that much harder because I'm a newb here? Are you still under the apparent impression that I'm a member of the truth movement? Does the thought that I'm a "twoofer" make your general rudeness to me "okay" in your book? I'm seriously curious about that. Cheers. Well? What's your point? I Am He
I Am He Critical Thinker Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 258	__________________ I see you're playing stupid again, looks like you're winning

17th December 2012, 10:14 PM	#37
booNyzarC Scholar Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 65	Originally Posted by I Am He Well? What's your point? I Am He If you can't figure out my point from what I've already said, I'm not sure what else to suggest except perhaps to read it again. It wasn't a big and important point, nor was it even slightly complex, but I believe that I've already made myself clear. If you have specific questions about what I've said, feel free to ask and I'll be more than happy to answer. Cheers.
booNyzarC Scholar Join Date: Dec 2012 Posts: 65