IPFS News Link • 911 / World Trade Center
-
Special Editions
- Global
- Due Diligence
- Love Bus Liberty Tour
- Vaccine Education Summit
- Bitcoin Summit
- US-Arizona
- US-Tennessee
- Ernie's Favorites
- THE R3VOLUTION CONTINUES
- "It's Not My Debt"
- Fascist Nation's Favorites
- Surviving the Greatest Depression
- The Only Solution - Direct Action Revolution
- Western Libertarian
- S.A.F.E. - Second Amendment is For Everyone
- Freedom Summit
- Declare Your Independence
- FreedomsPhoenix Speakers Bureau
- Wallet Voting
- Harhea Phoenix
- Black Market Friday
IPFS News Link • 911 / World Trade Center
Current News | Contents By Subject
Additional Related items you might find interesting:Related items:
News Link •
Worlds Wealthiest People
Interview 1848 - The Meaning of Population Control on The Fact Hunter
News Link •
911 / World Trade Center
Media silent: Whistleblowers claim CIA recruited hijackers for 9/11 and hid it from the FBI…
News Link •
911 / World Trade Center
Ground Zero Memorial Illustrates "Self-Conscious Expectations for America's Future"
News Link •
TERRORISM
Understanding U.S. "Government" False Flag Terrorism for War and Domestic Police State
News Link •
911 / World Trade Center
Death by a Thousand Cuts: The Many Ways Our Rights Have Been Usurped Since 9/11
News Link •
Investigations
The Bin Ladens and the Bushes: On 9/11 George Herbert Walker Bush Meets Osama's...
News Link •
Investigations
9/11 Unanswered Questions: Mysterious September 11, 2001 Breakfast Meeting on Capitol Hill
News Link •
911 / World Trade Center
Aaron Rodgers Debuts as a Jet, Waves American Flag on 9/11 Anniversary...
News Link •
Biden-Harris Deep Fake Administration
The White House Excuse for Biden Being MIA on 9/11 Is So Bad I Can't Even
News Link •
911 / World Trade Center
Death by a Thousand Cuts: The Many Ways Our Rights Have Been Usurped Since 9/11
News Link •
911 / World Trade Center
2 Comments in Response to Was 9/11 an Inside Job? In depth look at Loose Change and the people who made it.
"It is pretty bad when an article sets out to debunk a claim by stating they never actually viewed the claim. Which means they must have surmised or been told of the claim(s) by a third party."
Oh, man, Powell. I could not agree more! Like, in this article, where Wong says, "Meanwhile, I had a good chuckle the first time I saw the Loose Change end credits, where they boast research done by 'Killtown.'" Who the hell skips directly to the end credits of a movie and writes an article?
More precisely, who skips directly to the end credits of a movie MULTIPLE TIMES and then writes an article?
Of course, nowhere does Wong actually say he didn't watch the movie, but, as you point out, it's obvious that he hasn't otherwise why mention watching the end credits MULTIPLE TIMES?
I mean, seriously, why can't the humor 'zine Cracked provide point-by-point refutation of Loose Change like thousands of other websites across whole damn internet?
It is pretty bad when an article sets out to debunk a claim by stating they never actually viewed the claim. Which means they must have surmised or been told of the claim(s) by a third party.
They then proceed to "debunk" the claim(s) not by refuting the presented evidence, but with ad hominem arguments. Attacking the presenter is not a refutation of the claims, it is a lack of refutation.