Posted 20 July 2008 - 06:54 PM
I just read the entire article pointing out all the flaws in "Loose Change". I am impressed by the author's fact checking in the first half of the video, but in the second half, he gets a little too overconfident in himself and starts to go on the occasional ridicule, making more frequent one-liners and insults the video more than stating facts.
Also, I'm not amused by his breakdown of the Loose Change rendition of the Osama Bin Laden video... Apparently the author resorted to the same "coulds" and "maybes" that Loose Change did, to fight it.
This is most obvious when Dylan Avery points out that the FBI files say Osama is left handed, and clearly uses his right hand repeatedly in the video. Mark Roberts, the author, seems to only refute this claiming that "He could be ambidextrous" and admits there are other videos where Osama uses his right hand.
Frankly, I would think that chances are the FBI simply got that tiny detail wrong. Instead of claiming that there is some kind of impersonator or actor in the role of Osama, and the FBI database is flawless, it could simply be a mistake someone made in Osama's profile. I mean... If our intelligence tells us there are tons of WMDs in the Middle East, where there aren't any, couldn't they make mistakes elsewhere of a smaller magnitude?
Strong Bob's random Star Trek quote of the year:
*Scans rock* "It's dead, Jim." - McCoy
"Very funny, Bones." - Kirk