How exactly would a truther victory happen?

[CHF]

Like all movements, the TM has goals - things that truthers hope to accomplish through action.

The most commonly sighted ones would probably be: "bring down the NWO!", and (more specifically) "get a new investigation into 9/11" and "bring the real criminals to justice."

How do truthers think any of these things will actually happen?

By what scenario would they "win?"

When truthers stage a "street action," spam a message board, heckle a public figure, or make/download a "documentary" surely they must have some vision in their heads as to how this hard work of theirs will bring their goals to fruition.

So can anyone give me a scenario (preferably a realistic one) where the truthers realize their goals?

Do they hope to stage mass protests that cause governments to "investigate 9/11?" Is the plan to "awaken" enough people so that pro-truther parties/candidates get elected? Or is it at the point of desperation where the only option is a coup against the neo-cons and their Democrat "puppets" like Obama?

Perhaps it's a case of waiting for the right person to hear their message - someone who will have the influence and power to do something?

Or have they come to terms with their irrelevance and have now downgraded their goal to simply "informing people?"

[GStan]

This seems to be a bit of a paradox. The most devoted conspiracy theorists, though not all, openly cling to a belief system that fundamentally includes such constants like "the elites control the media, the elites control the government, the government controls all the evidence, bankers and big business control the political agenda, everyone is in on it, disinformation, scientists all get government funding etc. etc." (I think Ultima, 9/11-investigator and Alex Libman currently best represent this stereotype here at JREF). They've convinced themselves that the only reason their ideas are not accepted as mainstream is because the enemy is hyper-competant, hyper-powerful and pretty much omnipotent. Basically, they haven't won because the enemy is impossible to defeat. So even if they win, that also means that they were so very wrong about their enemy in so many ways.

What would they win? At worst, cranial implosions started by the failure of column 79 in their medula oblongata[sp?].

Best case victory scenario: Learn critical thinking skills, abandon fallacious arguments, get a prescription for anti-depressants to avoid dwelling on how much time was invested in being wrong, move on with life.

[Brainster]

It varies by age. I think the older Truthers--who are largely leftist--still fantasize that they'll see Bush and Cheney frog-marched to the gallows. The younger ones may think they'll bring down the Patriot Act, or end the war, or whatever, but they'll be famous and feted and hang out with Charlie Sheen.

Of course for some, like David Ray Grifter, the victory is that his next novel sells. Box Boy is hoping to visit Asia sometime next year, on the heels of his triumphant Eurotour 2008.

But overall, Obama's victory is probably the death knell, because it means the paranoid left, which has flourished in the last eight years, is going to be without a bogeyman. The idea that the 9-11 Truth message is going to sell with the Democrats in power is absurd. For awhile the Truthers will still try to press the "He'll never be allowed to take power, Bush will declare martial law," button, but that only works until Inauguration Day.

[abenja1]

According to a recent post on Prison Planet, it won't be until all the politicians are hung (excluding Ron Paul of course).

[Cl1mh4224rd]

According to a recent post on Prison Planet, it won't be until all the politicians are hung (excluding Ron Paul of course).


Someone should ask those folks for a list of qualities that they feel are possessed by politicians.

Then, someone should take all of those qualities and match them up with instances of Alex Jones' behavior.

[JamesB]

Gravy rips off his mask, revealing that it was Dick Cheney all along, and yells out, "I would have gotten away with it, if it weren't for you meddling kids!"

Why, what were you expecting?

[AJM8125]

But overall, Obama's victory is probably the death knell, because it means the paranoid left, which has flourished in the last eight years, is going to be without a bogeyman. The idea that the 9-11 Truth message is going to sell with the Democrats in power is absurd. For awhile the Truthers will still try to press the "He'll never be allowed to take power, Bush will declare martial law," button, but that only works until Inauguration Day.

Yes, but some are still trying to paint Obama as a troofer:

On the September 11 broadcast of San Francisco radio station KSFO's The Lee Rodgers Show, guest host Brian Sussman suggested that Sen. Barack Obama believes the September 11 attacks were "an inside job." Sussman quoted from Obama's statement on the seventh anniversary of the 9-11 attacks -- in which Obama said: "Let us remember that the terrorists responsible for 9-11 are still at large, and must be brought to justice" -- and later stated: "I bet you a buck, man to man, that Obama believes this was an inside job." Sussman later added: "Yeah, we haven't gotten [Osama] bin Laden yet, to our knowledge, but you know what I wonder if what he's saying right here: 'Let us remember that the terrorists responsible for 9-11 are still at large.' I just told you: Some of them are dead, some of them are behind bars, et cetera. I'm wondering if he's saying the terrorists responsible for 9-11 are Bush and Cheney." In fact, Obama has repeatedly noted that bin Laden and other members of Al Qaeda were responsible for the September 11 attacks and are still at large, a fact Sussman did not mention.

http://mediamatters.org/items/200809120016


Brian Sussman is a local media personality who for years was a meteorologist then transformed into a shock jock when the market got hot.

[Travis]

How do the Truthers win? Well, it would be quite messy. It begins with trumpets sounding from the skies and a purple robed tyrant invades Europe from the Middle East. Then David Ray Griffin opens the sixth seal, and one would look, and behold the sun become black as sackcloth, the full moon become like blood, and the stars of the sky fall to the earth like how the fig tree sheds its winter fruit when shaken by a gale. Then there is much unpleasantness as there is forty years of darkness! Earthquakes, volcanoes, the dead rising from their graves, human sacrifice, dogs and cats living together... mass hysteria! It might be like during the rectification of the Vuldrini, when the traveler came as a large and moving Torg! Then, as during the third reconciliation of the last of the McKetrick supplicants, they chose a brand new form for him: that of a giant Slor! As a result many Shuvs and Zuuls knew what it was to be roasted in the depths of the Slor that day.

At this point giant turtles march in from the sea and eat our forests as if they were kelp, trample our cities under their legs and drown our lakes in their excrement. This is followed by the Retribution Moths descending from the Peaks of Malice whereupon they suck the humor from our eyes and gouge our skin with their salt spears. They leave only as storms of Nihl arrive and strip the soil from the ground and replace it with jagged glass. After this all the remaining food is placed on a giant mound of hot charcoal and we are forced to climb it to eat and after reaching the top Alex Jones materializes and lets us know that things will be okay. Many hot pockets are brought forth along with much premium ganja and everyone chills out and waits for their moms to clean up the mess.

[T.A.M.]

I think many of the younger truthers want nothing short of a post government anarchy state, where they can grab their gun and go around like their favorite 1st person shooter hero. Sounds crazy, but I bet you I am not far off.

TAM:)

[Alex Libman]

A truther victory is an impossibility. At very most 9/11 will be remembered like the Reichstag fire or Nero burning Rome - no conclusive evidence either way, but most people are willing to take a position based on the current reputation of the government in question.

[cludgie]

But overall, Obama's victory is probably the death knell, because it means the paranoid left, which has flourished in the last eight years, is going to be without a bogeyman. The idea that the 9-11 Truth message is going to sell with the Democrats in power is absurd. For awhile the Truthers will still try to press the "He'll never be allowed to take power, Bush will declare martial law," button, but that only works until Inauguration Day.

There are no shortage of wingnuts who already think Obama is just another Zionist puppet.

[bje]

But overall, Obama's victory is probably the death knell, because it means the paranoid left, which has flourished in the last eight years, is going to be without a bogeyman.

There might be an interim stage where, by necessity, Obama becomes part of the government plot, having been "groomed" by Cheney since 2001 and put in as president by the NWO and....

[CHF]

They've convinced themselves that the only reason their ideas are not accepted as mainstream is because the enemy is hyper-competant, hyper-powerful and pretty much omnipotent. Basically, they haven't won because the enemy is impossible to defeat. So even if they win, that also means that they were so very wrong about their enemy in so many ways.

Back in 2006 I remember a lot of confident TM talk of "We're gonna win! We're gonna take down the NWO!"

The excuse that "the NWO controls everything" is just something they came up with to explain away their complete failure to get anything done.

So are truthers admitting they can't win or do they still have a plan/vission as to how they will reign triumphant?

I'd love to see some local truthers weigh in on this.

[BenBurch]

I have reached the conclusion that many have no goal - rather they have a perverse or romantic need to champion a hopeless cause against all logic.

[Seanette]

I'd guess there's some lure in being among a select few who have knowledge the masses do not (from their POV, naturally).

[Brainster]

There are no shortage of wingnuts who already think Obama is just another Zionist puppet.

Yes, but that's just going to hold some of the current Troofers; it's not a growth strategy. The only hope for the "Truthers" to grow was for them to become an accepted part of the Left. With Bush winning Florida in 2000 and Ohio in 2004 narrowly, the paranoid Left flourished, making it possible for the Troofers to sell their theories at least somewhat.

And the Troofers sensed that was their growth market; hence all the griping about "Left Gatekeepers". But with Obama in the White House, it becomes a much harder sell, because the paranoid Left is going to be a lot smaller than it used to be without the Bush bogeyman.

[T.A.M.]

I think many of the younger truthers want nothing short of a post government anarchy state, where they can grab their gun and go around like their favorite 1st person shooter hero. Sounds crazy, but I bet you I am not far off.

TAM:)

I have reached the conclusion that many have no goal - rather they have a perverse or romantic need to champion a hopeless cause against all logic.

I'd guess there's some lure in being among a select few who have knowledge the masses do not (from their POV, naturally).

All of these points are closely related, and I think are fundamental to the impetus behind the 9/11 truth belief in a lot of angry young men.

TAM:)

[Bobert]

When hell freezes over?

[beachnut]

9/11 truth is pure stupid. Truth-ers are victorious at being the dumbest people on earth on 9/11 issues. They win by an order of magnitude over Bigfoot and other nut case groups who chance pure fantasy. Truth-ers have to make up fantasy about an actual event, and their incompetence and ignorance enables them to ignore evidence proving them wrong.

The worse truth-ers are those who compare their fantasy undefined 9/11 Conspiracy Theory to the Reichstag fire or the burning of Rome. How stupid do the ideas have to be before they are adopted by so called “9/11 truth-ers”? Ignoring, no apologizing for terrorist, 9/11 truth failed from day 1.

[parky76]

as i have said many time before, I do not believe "victory" was ever their goal. its very reverse psychology, but I believe it.

[JihadJane]

By what scenario would they "win?"




In many countries it is now frowned upon and/or illegal to use violence as a way to keep your wife in her place. How did that happen?

In some countries it is frowned upon and illegal if you hit your children. How did that happen?

Who "won"?

[Foolmewunz]

In many countries it is now frowned upon and/or illegal to use violence as a way to keep your wife in her place. How did that happen?

In some countries it is frowned upon and illegal if you hit your children. How did that happen?

Who "won"?

Interesting you bring that up. It's a little known fact in the ongoing crusade for human rights that most such progress was made because of the efforts of a couple of barely post-pubescent kids in their mom's basement in Oneonta, NY. Posting punchy little videos on YouTube and draping banners across exit 17 on the New York Thruway.... definitely the way to go.

Really, JJ. How dare you put the likes of the TM in with people who've devoted their lives to human rights, equal rights, voter rights, etc.... What "right" are these S-disturbers fighting for. The right to carry a bullhorn and chase Dick Cheney up the block? Don't you think there's a better chance of Sir David Frost getting Cheney to sit down for a hard interview for two hours than, say, Alex Jones or the We Are Change guys by standing in front of the CFR and screaming?

[Cl1mh4224rd]

I have reached the conclusion that many have no goal - rather they have a perverse or romantic need to champion a hopeless cause against all logic.


It's the journey, not the destination... :p

[stilicho]

In many countries it is now frowned upon and/or illegal to use violence as a way to keep your wife in her place. How did that happen?

Through government intervention and legislation. Although it didn't work so well for OJ Simpson's wife--a high profile example yet hardly unique.

[parky76]

In many countries it is now frowned upon and/or illegal to use violence as a way to keep your wife in her place. How did that happen?

Who "won"?

Wow...I would say...women won. And those who believe in humanity and human freedom.

Honestly, who supports the right to beat one's wife?? Are they property?

[JamesB]

Well with all of your al Qaeda buddies you certainly won't have to worry about womens' rights now, will you?

[twinstead]

Well with all of your al Qaeda buddies you certainly won't have to worry about womens' rights now, will you?

Ouch.

[abenja1]

In many countries it is now frowned upon and/or illegal to use violence as a way to keep your wife in her place. How did that happen?

In some countries it is frowned upon and illegal if you hit your children. How did that happen?

Who "won"?

JJ, do you believe murdering US politicans is part of the victory for truthers? I doubt you will answer but it was worth asking.

[parky76]

oooh...what a loaded question.

[Homeland Insurgency]

There are victories all the time.

Quintere and his statements on the NIST investigation flaws.

The Kean and Hamilton statement on how their investigation was obstructed.

The fact that there are people coming here everyday devoting their life to snuff out the "Twoof" is not only a victory for me but pretty damn funny as well.

Oh and watching Gravy get his butt handed to him by Gage? That was just classic.

[PhantomWolf]

A truther victory is an impossibility. At very most 9/11 will be remembered like the Reichstag fire or Nero burning Rome - no conclusive evidence either way, but most people are willing to take a position based on the current reputation of the government in question.

Well actually there is quite conclusive evidence that Nero didn't burn down Rome (http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/rome.htm)

[parky76]

There ares victories all the time.

The Kean and Hamilton statement on how their investigation was obstructed.
.

ahh...so you follow the "baby steps" mentallity.

Good for you!! Enjoy those very..very...small....baby steps.

:p

[twinstead]

There are victories all the time.

Quintere and his statements on the NIST investigation flaws.
The Kean and Hamilton statement on how their investigation was obstructed.


Is your position so tenuous that you have to hijack legitimate gripes with the investigation that have nothing to do with 'inside job' to try to bolster your support artificially?

I mean seriously. Quintere doesn't think 911 was an inside job at all, for example. In fact, he thinks it is MORE likely that the impact and subsequent fires brought down the fires than NIST does. Is your movement THAT desperate?

[parky76]

[quote=twinstead;4246849]Is your position so tenuous that you have to hijack legitimate gripes with the investigation that have nothing to do with 'inside job' to try to bolster your support artificially?

I mean seriously. Quintere doesn't think 911 was an inside job at all, for example. In fact, he thinks it is MORE likely that the impact and subsequent fires brought down the fires than NIST does. Is your movement THAT desperate?/]

hmmm...ummm..YES.

[fuelair]

Q: How exactly would a truther victory happen?




A: The average IQ of the world woud need to drop around 35 to 50 points.

[Homeland Insurgency]

Is your position so tenuous that you have to hijack legitimate gripes with the investigation that have nothing to do with 'inside job' to try to bolster your support artificially?

I mean seriously. Quintere doesn't think 911 was an inside job at all, for example. In fact, he thinks it is MORE likely that the impact and subsequent fires brought down the fires than NIST does. Is your movement THAT desperate?

My only position is that there are legitimate gripes with the investigation that you are basing your truth on.

Glad you agree.

[dtugg]

Oh and watching Gravy get his butt handed to him by Gage? That was just classic.

LOL. You mean when Gage unveiled his cardboard box demonstration? That was definitely classic. He forever destroyed whatever credibility he may have had with that one. You call that a victory?

[Grizzly Bear]

LOL. You mean when Gage unveiled his cardboard box demonstration? That was definitely classic. He forever destroyed whatever credibility he may have had with that one. You call that a victory?

Gage's experiment is not a failure, it's simply a redefinition of success... ;)

[Homeland Insurgency]

LOL. You mean when Gage unveiled his cardboard box demonstration? That was definitely classic. He forever destroyed whatever credibility he may have had with that one. You call that a victory?

Yes his demonstration of the ridiculous official version was a victory. But the real victory was him beating up on Gravy on every point during the debate.

[PhantomWolf]

My only position is that there are legitimate gripes with the investigation that you are basing your truth on.

Glad you agree.

But the gripes aren't with the conclusion of the investigations, they are with the details of the investigation. The likes of Quintere don't dispute NIST's conclusion, they dispute part of how they reached it, Quintere doesn't even dispute the pulling in on the columns of the deforming of the truses, his entire dispute is how that occured. NIST says the fireproofing had to be removed, Quintere says it didn't. This dispute while interesting for engineers that need to know if they need better fireproofing or more fireproofing is totally irrelevant to the mechanism that cause the buildings to fall down, the bowing and failing failure of the outer columns. If you think your win is people quibbling over minor details that don't affect the over all picture, you have a serious problem.

[parky76]

Gage's experiment is not a failure, it's simply a redefinition of success, yes that's it... ;)

i have yet to see a scientific theory or rule they have NOT sought to redefine.

[PhantomWolf]

Yes his demonstration of the ridiculous official version was a victory. But the real victory was him beating up on Gravy on every point during the debate.

wow you really are in another universe aren't you. Care to explain how a cardboard box is a good representation of a building? Perhaps while you are about it could you explain why his box fell in freefall while the buildings clearing didn't?

[dtugg]

So you believe the cardboard box demonstration actually proved something other than the fact that Richard Gage is a moron? Wow, that is amazing! But then again, you are a twoofer, so such idiocy can be expected from you.

[Bobert]

LOL. You mean when Gage unveiled his cardboard box demonstration? That was definitely classic. He forever destroyed whatever credibility he may have had with that one. You call that a victory?
Apparently anything is a victory as long as it involves a truther putting a video on youtube.

[Homeland Insurgency]

Thanks for all your responses and all those victories on something you claim is dead.

Goodnight

[parky76]

Apparently anything is a victory as long as it involves a truther putting a video on youtube.

Ding Ding Ding!!!

give that man a silver star!!

[Cl1mh4224rd]

My only position is that there are legitimate gripes with the investigation that you are basing your truth on.

Glad you agree.


What an insanely hollow victory. I mean, no one's ever claimed that there aren't legitimate gripes; only that those legitimate gripes in no way support the idea that the NIST reports are fundamentally flawed, let alone support any of the numerous truther fantasies.

Are you actually OK with the fact that Quintiere's criticisms would take the truth about the building collapses even further from the fantasies concocted by many of the people you implicitly align yourself with (including Gage himself)? Or is this just a case of some bizarre "the critic of my enemy is my friend" stance?

wow you really are in another universe aren't you.


He's clearing trolling with that particular statement. Let it go, folks.

[Bobert]

Ding Ding Ding!!!

give that man a silver star!!
:D

[Foolmewunz]

Thanks for all your responses and all those victories on something you claim is dead.

Goodnight

(I love what passes from snappy-witty-comebacks in HI country.)

I like this constant denial thing. It's a tactic that I'm going to employ for my favorite sports teams. I'm just going to post often in the sports threads, "The All Blacks Won the Rugby World Cup". If I say it often enough, it'll be true. (Or at least HI will believe it, obviously.)

[UNLoVedRebel]

Homeland Insurgency, you've got more cognitive dissonance than someone who just watched Gigli.

[parky76]

Thanks for all your responses and all those victories on something you claim is dead.

Goodnight

Victory???

God almighty...I would HATE to see what defeat looks like.

:D

[CHF]

In many countries it is now frowned upon and/or illegal to use violence as a way to keep your wife in her place. How did that happen?

In some countries it is frowned upon and illegal if you hit your children. How did that happen?

There are victories all the time.

Quintere and his statements on the NIST investigation flaws.

The Kean and Hamilton statement on how their investigation was obstructed.

Hmmmm....

So I guess parky76 is right: the TM is opting for a slow-motion, baby-steps path to success.

They're hoping that one day all their "victories" will add up to.....something. Not sure what that something is; they won't say.

So just how far off are they from that big moment?

HI is still insisting that Quintere's beliefs on WTC fireproofing constitute a victory for the TM, even though Quintere is even more against the CD theory than NIST is.

:dl:

If that's a "victory" then perhaps HI is really on our side.

[AJM8125]

To answer the OP, I'm going to suggest an idea that as far as I know no truther has come up with. I don't believe I'm violating the NWO Charter as I've seen nothing in the handbook regarding this, though admittedly I've only skimmed through "Volume IX: Things We'll Enslave Your Future Generations For". If our resident debunkers have issue with this then I'll retract this post and report to the nearest FEMA "re-education" center post haste.

OK, out with it then. Your only chance a victory at this stage of the game is bribery.

Think about it. You've always accused us of being paid shills, but in your quest for the truth have you never had the notion to make us a counter offer? Why not? It only seems logical to me because nothing else has really worked out for you guys. I know, I've seen your track record.

I know you guys are cash strapped but that might not be an issue. We can work out the terms that will be beneficial to all involved. For instance, when your parents go on vacation without you (for good reason), do they leave with a stocked bar at your disposal? Maybe Dad has a Corvette ZR1 in the garage that needs a shakedown cruise? Perhaps you have an attractive relative (or in some cases, farm animal) that's new in town and wants to be shown the sights?

Use your imagination. You might find that working with us is far better than trying to work against us. It sure the hell beats the crap out of anything you've tried so far. I won't promise anything, but if we can come to an agreement then I might be able to persuade some of our more prominent debunkers to write a "Maybe they're right" thread.

I'm really sticking my neck out here so please reply with serious bribes only.

Thank you.

[Seanette]

Q: How exactly would a truther victory happen?

A: The average IQ of the world woud need to drop around 35 to 50 points.

Ever see "Idiocracy"?

[Stupid]

How exactly would a truther victory happen?


I have thought about this before (the aftermath), and I believe they have no idea how devastating the consequences would be, if indeed they "won".... (as in, "if they were correct").

In a nutshell, if the conspiracy were true, it would mean an utter breakdown of the US government, probably the UK, maybe others. The US government would fall apart at it's seams. (which makes the whole conspiracy idea preposterous)

Are the truthers prepared to form neighborhood gangs to protect themselves when lawlessness breaks out ? Are they OK with no more gasoline, no more $2 hamburgers or a dead connection to their MySpace page?

I really don't think most of them understand the severity of their accusations.
Which is why I think they don't fully believe their claims either.

If they truly believed that all this happened, they would do more than post blogs and scour message boards. Some DO protest in the streets or attend meetings and lectures, but this is such a minority.
If I "knew" my government had killed thousands at home, many thousands abroad, and allowing more deaths as we speak...all based on "super lies", you bet your sweet ass I'd be pounding on their walnut doors with stick-in-hand.
These PUSSIES who call themselves "truthers" are nothing but game-playing yellow-necks who live without a clue to the privilages and freedoms they currently enjoy.

They remind me of all the college age kids who play video-war games for fun and entertainment, while the kid down the street is now overseas, in real battle, with real bullets.

[JihadJane]

How exactly would a truther victory happen?


I have thought about this before (the aftermath), and I believe they have no idea how devastating the consequences would be, if indeed they "won".... (as in, "if they were correct").

In a nutshell, if the conspiracy were true, it would mean an utter breakdown of the US government, probably the UK, maybe others. The US government would fall apart at it's seams. (which makes the whole conspiracy idea preposterous)

Are the truthers prepared to form neighborhood gangs to protect themselves when lawlessness breaks out ? Are they OK with no more gasoline, no more $2 hamburgers or a dead connection to their MySpace page?

I really don't think most of them understand the severity of their accusations.
Which is why I think they don't fully believe their claims either.

If they truly believed that all this happened, they would do more than post blogs and scour message boards. Some DO protest in the streets or attend meetings and lectures, but this is such a minority.
If I "knew" my government had killed thousands at home, many thousands abroad, and allowing more deaths as we speak...all based on "super lies", you bet your sweet ass I'd be pounding on their walnut doors with stick-in-hand.
These PUSSIES who call themselves "truthers" are nothing but game-playing yellow-necks who live without a clue to the privilages and freedoms they currently enjoy.

They remind me of all the college age kids who play video-war games for fun and entertainment, while the kid down the street is now overseas, in real battle, with real bullets.

It is ridiculous to pretend that twoofers are a homogenous mass called "they" but I, for one, am perfeclty aware that "if the conspiracy were true, it would mean an utter breakdown of the US government, probably the UK, maybe others."

State power and State terrorism are fed and faciltated by the fear that you feel, Stupid.

[CHF]

I, for one, am perfeclty aware that "if the conspiracy were true, it would mean an utter breakdown of the US government, probably the UK, maybe others."

But how do you envision that happening, Jane?

Do you see a revolution in the streets, as more people "wake up?"

Will there be a coup within the government by people who oppose 'false flag' attacks?

How would an eventual "victory" come about? Give me a scenario.

[T.A.M.]

How exactly would a truther victory happen?


I have thought about this before (the aftermath), and I believe they have no idea how devastating the consequences would be, if indeed they "won".... (as in, "if they were correct").

In a nutshell, if the conspiracy were true, it would mean an utter breakdown of the US government, probably the UK, maybe others. The US government would fall apart at it's seams. (which makes the whole conspiracy idea preposterous)

Are the truthers prepared to form neighborhood gangs to protect themselves when lawlessness breaks out ? Are they OK with no more gasoline, no more $2 hamburgers or a dead connection to their MySpace page?

I really don't think most of them understand the severity of their accusations.
Which is why I think they don't fully believe their claims either.

If they truly believed that all this happened, they would do more than post blogs and scour message boards. Some DO protest in the streets or attend meetings and lectures, but this is such a minority.
If I "knew" my government had killed thousands at home, many thousands abroad, and allowing more deaths as we speak...all based on "super lies", you bet your sweet ass I'd be pounding on their walnut doors with stick-in-hand.
These PUSSIES who call themselves "truthers" are nothing but game-playing yellow-necks who live without a clue to the privilages and freedoms they currently enjoy.

They remind me of all the college age kids who play video-war games for fun and entertainment, while the kid down the street is now overseas, in real battle, with real bullets.

You hit on many valid points, the least of which was not your feline name calling.

I actually think a lot of the truthers in the largest subset (the angry young man subset), have not thought it through beyond the anarchy and destruction of "Big Brother" they want. I think they have this vision of world without authority, where they can go about what ever they want with no rules, no repercussions, no taxes, no law enforcement, no oversight.

They do not, IMO, look beyond that occurrence, into the repercussions of such.

TAM:)

[Stupid]

I apologize to all cats for associating them with truthers.

That post was one of the few times I actually got angry.
I won't retract my feelings, but I will apologize for high volume at which I expressed them.

=FB=

[fezzic]

So can anyone give me a scenario (preferably a realistic one) where the truthers realize their goals?




Someone (a sponsor) with the personal resources, primarily funds, initiates an investigation. Hires engineers, technicians, etc. Locates suitable testing equipment and such, as needed. Gets a reputable and acknowledged expert in disaster, building, or scientific analysis to head the investigation as principal investigator (PI) and goes to it. Or maybe get the PI and let him/her collect the people and facilities. After all, it is mostly a matter of who pays for the investigation that people are at odds with.

All that is required beyond that, assuming that TOS actually is pretty much correct (my assumption), is that the sponsor biases or influences the PI and the conduct of the investigation such that a pre-concieved conclusion is arrived at that has apparent scientific credibility. The idea that the sponsor would expend a large amount of funds and effort to potentially confirm TOS is assumed here to be pretty much a non-starter (as in money waster).

The issue is that anyone with enough money to do this, assuming no particular hidden agenda, is going to want to know specifically what is wrong with the other investigations in detail. No arguments. No suppositions. No innuendo. What is wrong and why. THAT is what the new investigation would focus on. Once that detail is proven (and it would have to be a detail that actually provides a pretty solid contrary result and potentially conclusion changing effect), interest in expanding the investigation is almost certain to follow. It would be interesting and no longer a case of spending a lot of money and effort to "spin wheels".

[JihadJane]

Originally Posted by JihadJane:

I, for one, am perfectly aware that "if the conspiracy were true, it would mean an utter breakdown of the US government, probably the UK, maybe others."

But how do you envision that happening, Jane?

Do you see a revolution in the streets, as more people "wake up?"

Will there be a coup within the government by people who oppose 'false flag' attacks?

How would an eventual "victory" come about? Give me a scenario.


Zbigniew Brzezinski's statement, in 2007, to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, appears to suggest that a false flag terror attack might be used to facilitate military action against Iran. His comment may have represented a shot across the bows of the Cheney/Bush faction of the ruling mafia by Brzezinski's faction :

"A plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran involves Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks; followed by accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure; then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the U.S. blamed on Iran; culminating in a “defensive” U.S. military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan."

http://www.oilempire.us/zbig.html

I don't envisage "victory" for the "911 Truth Movement". The words I quoted describe the hypothetical implications were "911 Truth" to be broadly accepted. The reality is that the truth has been successfully covered up.

I do think, though, that in, say, fifty years time, the consensus is likely to be that 911 was a "false flag" attack. It's also likely that much worse things will have happened by then and that most people in the world, as they are today but more so, will be focussed on raw survival. 911 will be just another distant atrocity in the long list of atrocities committed since the European invasion of the Americas.

We don't know who will be writing history in the future or even if history will exist.

The "utter breakdown of the US government, probably the UK, maybe [definitely- JJ] others" will most likely be caused by the converging disasters of global economic and financial instability, food shortages, climate change, resource depletion and overpopulation well before the truth about 911 can do it.

[abenja1]

Zbigniew Brzezinski's statement, in 2007, to the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, appears to suggest that a false flag terror attack might be used to facilitate military action against Iran. His comment may have represented a shot across the bows of the Cheney/Bush faction of the ruling mafia by Brzezinski's faction :

"A plausible scenario for a military collision with Iran involves Iraqi failure to meet the benchmarks; followed by accusations of Iranian responsibility for the failure; then by some provocation in Iraq or a terrorist act in the U.S. blamed on Iran; culminating in a “defensive” U.S. military action against Iran that plunges a lonely America into a spreading and deepening quagmire eventually ranging across Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan."

http://www.oilempire.us/zbig.html

I don't envisage "victory" for the "911 Truth Movement". The words I quoted describe the hypothetical implications were "911 Truth" to be broadly accepted. The reality is that the truth has been successfully covered up.

I do think, though, that in, say, fifty years time, the consensus is likely to be that 911 was a "false flag" attack. It's also likely that much worse things will have happened by then and that most people in the world, as they are today but more so, will be focussed on raw survival. 911 will be just another distant atrocity in the long list of atrocities committed since the European invasion of the Americas.

We don't know who will be writing history in the future or even if history will exist.

The "utter breakdown of the US government, probably the UK, maybe [definitely- JJ] others" will most likely be caused by the converging disasters of global economic and financial instability, food shortages, climate change, resource depletion and overpopulation well before the truth about 911 can do it.


JJ, you have not answered my question. Do you believe murdering US politicans is part of the victory for truthers? And would you support it?

[parky76]

i think they would say the trial, imprisonment and/or execution of some NWO Neo-Con politicians might be a victory.



though i have seen some truthers say they want no trial...just go straight to the gallows.

[fezzic]

i think they would say the trial, imprisonment and/or execution of some NWO Neo-Con politicians might be a victory.



though i have seen some truthers say they want no trial...just go straight to the gallows.



Gets around that nasty legal thing called a trial where the suspects get a chance to defend themselves against the charges. Since the prosecution has to prove its case, while the defendants only have to show reasonable doubt, why they might be found innocent.

[parky76]

yes. trials can be very pesky...especially if you think the guy to be guilty in the first place.

folks like Silverstein, Wolfowitz, Wermser, Rumsfeld, Cheney, etc.

[JohnG]

State power and State terrorism are fed and faciltated by the fear that you feel, Stupid.


It's all fun and games until someone loses an 'i'.

How does this sound instead? I think it may be more apropos to your situation:

State power and State terrorism are fed and facilitated by the fear that you feel stupid.

[CHF]

The reality is that the truth has been successfully covered up.

I do think, though, that in, say, fifty years time, the consensus is likely to be that 911 was a "false flag" attack.

They successfully covered up, but there will likely be a pro-truth consensus....in 50 years?

Sounds like you think the real 9/11 perps are gonna get away with it after all. Must be pretty demoralizing.

[Stupid]

It's all fun and games until someone loses an 'i'.

How does this sound instead? I think it may be more apropos to your situation:

State power and State terrorism are fed and facilitated by the fear that you feel stupid.

Brilliant. :bananapowerslide:

[Travis]

You have to love a movement that achieves "success" by redefining it to mean doing something so stupid their opponents don't know how to react.

Cardboard boxes! What do you think of that!?!

Rabbit fencing! What do you think of that!?!

Jump on your bathroom scale! What do you think of that!?!

I'm burning a Truth sign tiny piece of steel with huge quantities of thermite! What do you think of that!?!

I'm claiming there's an invisible space station with a huge death ray! What do you think of that!?!

I'm looking for missing hijackers in a plush beach resort in Morocco! What do you think of that!?!

I'm proving a blurry and pixelated news clip is pixelated and blurry! What do you think of that!?!

I'm saying "clunkity-clunk" a 110 times! What do you think of that!?!

I'm harassing a cab driver about a light pole in his car! What do you think of that!?!

I'm yelling things at random people through a bullhorn while I drive around! What do you think of that!?!

I'm hitting a girl in a wheelchair! What do you think of that!?!

Huh? What....nothing......that's what I thought. I so pwned you all.

[PB2007]

It is ridiculous to pretend that twoofers are a homogenous mass called "they"

But don't the Truthers think the US Government is a "homogenous mass called "they""?

[JihadJane]

Originally Posted by JohnG;

It's all fun and games until someone loses an 'i'.

How does this sound instead? I think it may be more apropos to your situation:

State power and State terrorism are fed and facilitated by the fear that you feel stupid.

Brilliant. :bananapowerslide:

Absolute genius.

JJ, you have not answered my question. Do you believe murdering US politicians is part of the victory for truthers? And would you support it?

I am against the death penalty and any other kind of murder.

yes. trials can be very pesky...especially if you think the guy to be guilty in the first place.

folks like Silverstein, Wolfowitz, Wermser, Rumsfeld, Cheney, etc.

......, Osama bin Laden, the “bad guys” in Guantánamo Bay torture camp, the "terrorists" in Abu Ghraib torture prison etc.

Trials can be very pesky.

They successfully covered up, but there will likely be a pro-truth consensus....in 50 years?

Sounds like you think the real 9/11 perps are gonna get away with it after all. Must be pretty demoralizing.

“After all”?

Politics is a long game.

Living with injustice is part of life.

[JihadJane]

But don't the Truthers think the US Government is a "homogenous mass called "they""?

Do they? I don't.

[CHF]

“After all”?

Politics is a long game.

But this isn't politics, Jane.

Politics is Kevin Barrett getting 2% of the vote or the pro-truther Canadian Action Party getting 3,200 votes nation-wide. You guys suck at politics.

And you don't really have a whole lot of time to play with here either.

I mean you're hoping that 50 years from now people will come to see thing as you do. I'd say that lets the 9/11 perps escape justice, don't you think? They'll all be dead by then from old age.

[beachnut]

A truther victory happens when ignorance rules. Lack of logic, like of knowledge and lack of sound judgment, will enable dirt dumb ideas held by 9/11 truth to gain victory.

Got stupid?

[JihadJane]

But this isn't politics, Jane.

Politics is Kevin Barrett getting 2% of the vote or the pro-truther Canadian Action Party getting 3,200 votes nation-wide. You guys suck at politics.

And you don't really have a whole lot of time to play with here either.

I mean you're hoping that 50 years from now people will come to see thing as you do. I'd say that lets the 9/11 perps escape justice, don't you think? They'll all be dead by then from old age.

Politics is about where power resides in society; how it is distributed. Politics is also about defining reality and policing consensus. IMO, in fifty years time, 911 will have long been recognised for what it was but it won‘t matter. The 911 attacks were a manifestation of a political system whose clothes are now falling off. Politically, in 50 years time, the US will be likely be radically different than it is today, at the end of the age of abundance. Maybe much sooner:


"The man who predicted the 1987 stock market crash and the fall of the Soviet Union is now forecasting revolution in America, food riots and tax rebellions - all within four years, while cautioning that putting food on the table will be a more pressing concern than buying Christmas gifts by 2012.

Gerald Celente, the CEO of Trends Research Institute, is renowned for his accuracy in predicting future world and economic events, which will send a chill down your spine considering what he told Fox News this week.

Celente says that by 2012 America will become an undeveloped nation, that there will be a revolution marked by food riots, squatter rebellions, tax revolts and job marches, and that holidays will be more about obtaining food, not gifts."

http://www.commodityonline.com/news/Revolution-food-riots-in-America-by-2012-13062-3-1.html



I think the chances that the "perps" (Funny jargon! Are they made of plastic?) will escape justice are near 100%. I admire those who are still working for an independent, empowered investigation into the attacks. It is important that such efforts are made. They make and preserve history.

"Who controls the past controls the future. Who controls the present controls the past." - George Orwell

[beachnut]

the sky is falling ... what a positive attitude jj has

Oops, no, those are my walnuts. Can I eat my walnuts when the big "sky is falling" jihad jane junk comes to pass?

Peaches, apples, pears are falling in my yard, the sky in Jihad Jane's.

I planted some trees so Al Gore would have so O2

[GStan]

Politics is about where power resides in society; how it is distributed. Politics is also about defining reality and policing consensus. IMO, in fifty years time, 911 Truth will have long been recognised for what a fraud it was but it won‘t matter. The 911 attacks were a manifestation of a political system whose clothes are now falling off. Politically, in 50 years time, the US will be likely be radically different than it is today, at the end of the age of abundance. <snip>

During those 50 years, do you imagine at any point, that the truth movement will begin to find a shred of factual evidence for that which they seem to already know to be true? Will they ever produce something meaningful and convince relevant experts that they are right, based on logic and sound science? Or will they just continue to prey upon the stupidity and childish fantasies of the young and the paranoid and fill their minds with fabrications to the point where they have no hope of ever seeing anything again without the crippling illusion that some omnipotent imaginary enemy is controlling their lives?

ETA, fixed that for you

[JihadJane]

the sky is falling ... what a positive attitude jj has

Oops, no, those are my walnuts. Can I eat my walnuts when the big "sky is falling" jihad jane junk comes to pass?

Peaches, apples, pears are falling in my yard, the sky in Jihad Jane's.

I planted some trees so Al Gore would have so O2

Yes, you can eat your walnuts.




ETA, fixed that for you

Absolute genius

[A W Smith]

Politics is also about defining reality and policing consensus. l

Plane? you suck at politics. and you are a paranoid.

[JihadJane]

Plane? you suck at politics. and you are a paranoid.



:confused:

Where did "Plane" come from?

[A W Smith]

:confused:

Where did "Plane" come from?


avatar suggestion for jane
http://www.planejaneproject.com/

[Cl1mh4224rd]

During those 50 years, do you imagine at any point, that the truth movement will begin to find a shred of factual evidence for that which they seem to already know to be true? Will they ever produce something meaningful and convince relevant experts that they are right, based on logic and sound science? Or will they just continue to prey upon the stupidity and childish fantasies of the young and the paranoid and fill their minds with fabrications to the point where they have no hope of ever seeing anything again without the crippling illusion that some omnipotent imaginary enemy is controlling their lives?

ETA, fixed that for you


You know... I can't help but wonder if many truthers consider the JFK assassination and Apollo moon landing conspiracies to be successful.

I mean, I don't think it's a stretch to say that a majority of the general public are aware of the claims of conspiracy regarding the JFK assassination and the moon landings. A non-trivial number of those people probably even lazily "accept" the possibility that those claims might be true. But that's likely because they just don't care enough to think about it very much. Either way, neither conspiracy movement is making any progress toward bringing the evil perpetrators to justice.

Given JihadJane's "50 years", I wonder if that's her idea of a "victory".

Or perhaps she's expecting that within the next 10 years, the lids will finally be blown off of those two alleged conspiracies. :rolleyes:

[JihadJane]

avatar suggestion for jane
http://www.planejaneproject.com/

Thanks for your suggestion. Did you draw it yourself? I think I’ll stick with the one I’ve got for the moment. Further suggestions welcome.

You know... I can't help but wonder if many truthers consider the JFK assassination and Apollo moon landing conspiracies to be successful.

... Or perhaps she's expecting that within the next 10 years, the lids will finally be blown off of those two alleged conspiracies. :rolleyes:

In a just world, Cl1mh4224rd, your clever and original juxtaposition of moon landings, JFK and 911 skepticism would win you the Nobel prize.

I think the vague conclusion of the House Select Committee on Assassinations review of the Warren Commission and the FBI reports that there probably was a conspiracy is about as much as I would expect from any future, officially sanctioned 911 investigation within the current political set-up.

[dtugg]

I think the vague conclusion of the House Select Committee on Assassinations review of the Warren Commission and the FBI reports that there probably was a conspiracy is about as much as I would expect from any future, officially sanctioned 911 investigation within the current political set-up.

You know that they based their findings of a probable conspiracy solely on the incorrect analysis of one audio recording, correct? They concluded that there were four shots fired based on a police recording. And since Oswald didn't fire four shots, that would mean that there was a second gunmen and thus a conspiracy. But they assumed that the police officer was in a place that he wasn't and that the recording took place during the assassination when it was really sometime after. Their analysis has been proven wrong. Oswald acted alone; there was no conspiracy.

And in the extremely unlikely event that there is another investigation into 9/11, they would definitely say that the attacks were based on a conspiracy. After all, one man can't hijack four airplanes.

[JihadJane]

And in the extremely unlikely event that there is another investigation into 9/11, they would definitely say that the attacks were based on a conspiracy. After all, one man can't hijack four airplanes.

Good point but why is it that 911'sTruers get upset when people call their unsubstantiated Osama bin Laden theory a conspiracy theory?

[dtugg]

Good point but why is it that 911'sTruers get upset when people call their unsubstantiated Osama bin Laden theory a conspiracy theory?

First, it is not unsubstantiated. Osama himself says that his terror organization did it, for Christ's sake.

Second, there is a difference between a conspiracy and a conspiracy theory. A conspiracy is just two or more people working together for a felonious goal. Conspiracy theory implies that there was some powerful shadowy organization that did it and is working to keep the conspiracy a secret.

[JihadJane]

First, it is not unsubstantiated. Osama himself says that his terror organization did it, for Christ's sake.

That's the first time heard bin Laden's terror organisation accused of doing things for Christ's sake.

I wasn't aware that the bin Laden conspiracy theory had been substantiated. When did that happen?

Second, there is a difference between a conspiracy and a conspiracy theory. A conspiracy is just two or more people working together for a felonious goal. Conspiracy theory implies that there was some powerful shadowy organization that did it and is working to keep the conspiracy a secret.

I thought that's what al Qaeda was and did. Shortly after the attacks bin Laden denied he had anything to do with them, on at least three separate occasions. Precisely what made you decide he was lying?

[dtugg]

I wasn't aware that the bin Laden conspiracy theory had been substantiated. When did that happen?

Have you heard of Zacarias Moussaoui? He was charged as a co-conspirator, so they also had to prove that al-Qaeda did 9/11 to convict him. Oddly enough, he is serving a life sentence right now.


I thought that's what al Qaeda was and did. Shortly after the attacks bin Laden denied he had anything to do with them, on at least three separate occasions. Precisely what made you decide he was lying?

Seeing as how they are now numerous confessions, they are not keeping it a secret. If you are the mastermind of a conspiracy that you want to keep a secret, do you go around bragging about it to an Al Jazeera journalist? Osama initially denied it because he was trying to protect his pals in the Taliban. They were nice enough to let him use their country as a base his jihad organization, so it probably seemed like the right thing to do. Once the invasion happened anyway, there was no point in him denying it anymore. I've decided that Osama wasn't being truthful initially since the hijackers have been definitively linked to al-Qaeda and he now proudly admits it.

[A W Smith]

That's the first time heard bin Laden's terror organisation accused of doing things for Christ's sake.



well actually Bin laden had a habit of ending his sentences with "God willing"

it was so annoying

[JihadJane]

Have you heard of Zacarias Moussaoui? He was charged as a co-conspirator, so they also had to prove that al-Qaeda did 9/11 to convict him. Oddly enough, he is serving a life sentence right now.

Your may have misunderstood what Moussaoui was jailed for..



April 13, 2006 :

“...the present legal proceedings are a grotesque farce driven by American thirst for public revenge ... This carnival of a trial against someone who is so obviously insane cheapens and demeans our whole judicial system and the rule of law.

... The Moussaoui trial will haunt the American judicial system for decades to come. History will never forgive us, and we will never forgive ourselves, for this bloodthirsty parody of a trial in which the main evidence we have is the unsubstantiated word of a delusional man who is saying everything he can to get himself killed.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/blake-fleetwood/zacarias-moussaoui-sui_b_19022.html

May. 08, 2006: “The evidence in the case consisted largely of Moussaoui's interviews with the FBI, following his arrest on an immigration violation in August 2001. There was no direct proof that Moussaoui planned much of anything let alone killed anyone. There was only the government's speculation that by not tipping off the FBI agents, Moussaoui did not allow the Bureau to prevent the attack.

To call this attenuated causation is to be polite. Indeed, given what we know about our passivity toward even known intelligence pre-9/11, it is more an expression of wishful thinking than hard evidence. None of us would want to be sentenced to life without parole on the basis of such a paltry theory.”

http://writ.news.findlaw.com/commentary/20060508_kmiec.html



Seeing as how they are now numerous confessions, they are not keeping it a secret.

I am only aware of unauthenicated recordings, and some "confessions" extracted by torture or from the insane.

Which "numerous confessions" are you referring to?

If you are the mastermind of a conspiracy that you want to keep a secret, do you go around bragging about it to an Al Jazeera journalist? Osama initially denied it because he was trying to protect his pals in the Taliban. They were nice enough to let him use their country as a base his jihad organization, so it probably seemed like the right thing to do. Once the invasion happened anyway, there was no point in him denying it anymore. I've decided that Osama wasn't being truthful initially since the hijackers have been definitively linked to al-Qaeda and he now proudly admits it.

Is this fact or a theory?

[dtugg]

I understand perfectly what Moussaoui was jailed for. Conspiracy to commit murder amongst other things. I don't really care what the Huffington Post says about the trial.

The Osama videos are considered authentic by everybody in the world except for you twoofers. Al Jazeera, whom they were sent to thinks that they are real. Al-Qaeda doesn't seem to come out saying they are fakes. Besides this, you have the KSM confessions. He bragged about being the 9/11 mastermind to an Al Jazeera journalist before he was even captured. He was tortured a little at Gitmo, but that had nothing to do with his confessions. They were trying to get information about the current operations of al-Qaeda from him. He admitted his role in front of the tribunal with his lawyer present and makes no claim that he was tortured into confessing

Is what fact or theory? Why Osama originally denied responsibility? Well seeing as how I can't read the man's mind, it would be theory. But it is a very good one that makes sense.

For the life of me, I will never figure out why the hell you people are so vehement in your defense of confessed mass murdering terrorists.

[JihadJane]

I understand perfectly what Moussaoui was jailed for. Conspiracy to commit murder amongst other things. I don't really care what the Huffington Post says about the trial.

Why don't you care what the Huffington Post says about the trial ?

Do you also not care what findlaw.com says about it?

The opinions expressed in those articles are not unique to those web sites.

The Osama videos are considered authentic by everybody in the world except for you twoofers.

Not true (whatever "you twoofers" means) and a strange statement for someone who claims not to be able to read minds.

You only have to spend a little time in the various sections of this forum to be convinced that any number of people believing something to be true is no guarantee that it is true.

Al Jazeera, whom they were sent to thinks that they are real.

What al Jazeera thinks has no bearing on the fact that the recordings have never been (and never can be) authenticated.


Al-Qaeda doesn't seem to come out saying they are fakes.

Where have they said they aren't fakes?

Besides this, you have the KSM confessions. He bragged about being the 9/11 mastermind to an Al Jazeera journalist before he was even captured.

The most blatantly unauthenticated "confession" of the bunch. The interview didn't even survive in its original, video format. When the recording eventually resurfaced from Allah knows where, having allegedly been confiscated by the interviewees, the edited, distorted audio recording was barely decipherable. Even establishment media hacks are skeptical of this "confession".

Even if any of the "confessions" are authentic, it doesn't prove that al Qaeda carried out the 911 attacks unassisted. Patsies are frequently real terrorists /criminals who have no idea who is lubricating their path to atrocity.


He was tortured a little at Gitmo, but that had nothing to do with his confessions. They were trying to get information about the current operations of al-Qaeda from him. He admitted his role in front of the tribunal with his lawyer present and makes no claim that he was tortured into confessing

Please define "tortured a little".

Even the "little" torture (i.e. convincing someone that they are about to die) that the torturers have admitted to can hardly be called "little" unless you have completely lost touch with reality, dtugg.

KSM, likely a broken man by the time he arrived at the tribunal after years of solitary confinement and probable abuse, would have no reason to believe he wouldn't be further abused if he didn't co-operate. Why do you assume he was acting voluntarily?

The ultimate aim of torture is to convince the victim that their torturer is their protector and their saviour.

Is what fact or theory?

Your explanation of Osama bin Laden's contradictory statements.

Why Osama originally denied responsibility? Well seeing as how I can't read the man's mind, it would be theory. But it is a very good one that makes sense.

So, it's speculation then, not fact.

You are, btw, a welcome exception to the rule. Many JREF "skeptics" claim to be experts at mind-reading and ESP.

For the life of me, I will never figure out why the hell you people are so vehement in your defense of confessed mass murdering terrorists.

“You people”? I can only speak for myself. I prefer verifiable facts to propaganda and rabble rousing.

[dtugg]

nevermind

[dtugg]

Why don't you care what the Huffington Post says about the trial ?

Do you also not care what findlaw.com says about it?

The opinions expressed in those articles are not unique to those web sites.

I understand that brother Moussaoui had little to do with 9/11 and they tried him mostly because he didn't tell the FBI what he did know. But they still had to prove that the terrorist organization that he was loosely affiliated with did the attacks to put him in prison.

Not true (whatever "you twoofers" means) and a strange statement for someone who claims not to be able to read minds.

Only people that I have ever seen imply that the videos might be fake are people who like to pretend that Osama's organization had nothing to do with 9/11. I would like to see somebody that actually knows what they are talking about claim this.

What al Jazeera thinks has no bearing on the fact that the recordings have never been (and never can be) authenticated.

I am not sure what you mean by authenticated. I assume that you mean verified by witnesses who saw them being made. Well of course that is impossible. But there is no reason to assume that they are fake unless you get off on defending Osama. Al Jazeera, since they are the ones who receive the videos would be in a better position to tell if they are fake than anybody.

Where have they said they aren't fakes?

Why would they come out and say, yes we really made those videos? To satisfy people like you? If they were fakes however, there would be good motivation to come out in say so. If you were the most infamous man on the planet would you allow fake videos of a confession of complicity to the worst terror attacks ever to be made by your sworn enemies and distributed to the world??

The most blatantly unauthenticated "confession" of the bunch. The interview didn't even survive in its original, video format. When the recording eventually resurfaced from Allah knows where, having allegedly been confiscated by the interviewees, the edited, distorted audio recording was barely decipherable. Even establishment media hacks are skeptical of this "confession".

So now Yosri Fouda might be a liar? You know that he wrote a whole book based on his interview with KSM right? Have you read it?

Even if any of the "confessions" are authentic, it doesn't prove that al Qaeda carried out the 911 attacks unassisted. Patsies are frequently real terrorists /criminals who have no idea who is lubricating their path to atrocity.

Name one time in history that real terrorists carried out attacks while they were actually patsies of their sworn enemies.

Please define "tortured a little".

Even the "little" torture (i.e. convincing someone that they are about to die) that the torturers have admitted to can hardly be called "little" unless you have completely lost touch with reality, dtugg.

He could have had it a lot worse. Frankly, I don't really care.

KSM, likely a broken man by the time he arrived at the tribunal after years of solitary confinement and probable abuse, would have no reason to believe he wouldn't be further abused if he didn't co-operate. Why do you assume he was acting voluntarily?

The ultimate aim of torture is to convince the victim that their torturer is their protector and their saviour.

Do you have any reason to believe he was abused further than what was admitted? Do you have any reason to believe that his abuse had anything to do with getting him to co-operate for trial? Do you have any reason to believe that he was not acting voluntarily? If so, you better contact his lawyer ASAP. The man is on trial for his life. You could save the life of somebody who you seem to believe might really be a pastie.

So, it's speculation then, not fact.

You are, btw, a welcome exception to the rule. Many JREF "skeptics" claim to be experts at mind-reading and ESP.

I assume that you have a better explanation.

“You people”? I can only speak for myself. I prefer verifiable facts to propaganda and rabble rousing.

You prefer to defend evil terrorists.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

Where have they said they aren't fakes?


Every time you hand someone some paper bills, do you follow up with, "Oh, and those aren't fake"?

Does your car insurance company call you up every time you make a payment just to make sure the check you sent them isn't actually fake?

And if the videos were fake, then what's to stop the perpetrators from issuing fake claims of authenticity, too?

[Alt+F4]

Even if any of the "confessions" are authentic, it doesn't prove that al Qaeda carried out the 911 attacks unassisted. Patsies are frequently real terrorists /criminals who have no idea who is lubricating their path to atrocity.

You're right, so why doesn't the "truth movement" follow this avenue of thought? Why, for years, go on with nonsense about faked phone calls, thermite, wired buildings, remote-controlled planes, live passengers, etc.?

19 Muslim hijacked four planes and many people were murdered. If there is more to it than that, well then follow the money. It's much more reasonable to believe that a few rogue elements within the government could control suicidal jhadists then believing that those three buildings could be taken down by thermite and/or explosives.

[JihadJane]

I understand that brother Moussaoui had little to do with 9/11 and they tried him mostly because he didn't tell the FBI what he did know. But they still had to prove that the terrorist organization that he was loosely affiliated with did the attacks to put him in prison.

They didn't have to prove al Qaeda did the attacks, they only had to make an apparently convincing case for it. They didn't prove it.


I am not sure what you mean by authenticated. I assume that you mean verified by witnesses who saw them being made. Well of course that is impossible. But there is no reason to assume that they are fake unless you get off on defending Osama. Al Jazeera, since they are the ones who receive the videos would be in a better position to tell if they are fake than anybody.

It is perfectly logical to consider the possibility that these videos could have been manipulated - a lot rests on them after all. Authenticating evidence is standard legal practice.

"Authenicating" a recording means keeping track of its chain of possession in order to rule out the possibilty of the manipulation of its contents.

It is not a matter of either fake or not fake. Even very small adjustments (or later mistranslations) can profoundly alter a statement's meaning.



Why would they come out and say, yes we really made those videos? To satisfy people like you? If they were fakes however, there would be good motivation to come out in say so. If you were the most infamous man on the planet would you allow fake videos of a confession of complicity to the worst terror attacks ever to be made by your sworn enemies and distributed to the world??

Relying on dodgy videos to propagate one's thoughts suggests a very limited ability to influence public perceptions. Personally I doubt that OBL is even alive, which would also present also an obstacle to his effective self-defence.



So now Yosri Fouda might be a liar? You know that he wrote a whole book based on his interview with KSM right? Have you read it?

I haven't read the book he co-authored. I assume you have. have you considered that there could be a propaganda element to it?

Fouda had no control of the video recording from the time of the interview until the time it resurfaced as an editied and distorted audio recording.

Fouda lied about the claimed date of the interview twice, at least, and gave a ridiculously implausible excuse for doing so. This raises suspicions about his agenda.





Name one time in history that real terrorists carried out attacks while they were actually patsies of their sworn enemies.

British intelligence assets guided IRA attacks. The organisation was infiltrated almost right to the top.



He could have had it a lot worse. Frankly, I don't really care.

If you value truth then you should care because information gleaned from torture is not reliable. That's why it is inadmissible as evidence in a court of law though it was, of course, considered good enough for the 911 Commission, which relied heavily of torture-derived evidence for its "facts" about al Qaeda.



Do you have any reason to believe he was abused further than what was admitted? Do you have any reason to believe that his abuse had anything to do with getting him to co-operate for trial? Do you have any reason to believe that he was not acting voluntarily? If so, you better contact his lawyer ASAP. The man is on trial for his life. You could save the life of somebody who you seem to believe might really be a pastie.

Unfortunately there is every reason to believe that "terrorists" in US custody are routinely and severely abused.

The point of torture is to get people to act involuntarily, against their own will and interests. This effect extends beyond the immediate torture session because of fear of further torture and because of the twisted psychological dymanics that develop between the abused and the abuser.

KSM's abuse could have had everything to do with "getting him to co-operate for trial", including getting him to lie at his trial.

BTW, I do not believe that KSM is a pastie ;)


I assume that you have a better explanation.

Speculation is not explanation.



You prefer to defend evil terrorists.

Why do so many “skeptics” need to rely on ESP to bolster their arguments?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Every time you hand someone some paper bills, do you follow up with, "Oh, and those aren't fake"

I have lived in places where shopkeepers check every single bill with a special pen and machine

Does your car insurance company call you up every time you make a payment just to make sure the check you sent them isn't actually fake?

There is a sophisticated system of checks to guarantee the authenticity of every single banking transaction.



And if the videos were fake, then what's to stop the perpetrators from issuing fake claims of authenticity, too?

Nothing. Indeed they have already issued fake claims of authenicity.

- - - - - - - - - - - -

You're right, so why doesn't the "truth movement" follow this avenue of thought?

The "truth movement isn't an amorphous blob. Some people have followed this avenue of thought.

Why, for years, go on with nonsense about faked phone calls, thermite, wired buildings, remote-controlled planes, live passengers, etc.?

It's not known whether all this is "nonsense" or not . It's easy to be seduced by the physical evidence route (it is more tangible and glamorous), forgetting that one side is hopelessly out-resourced by the other or that physical evidence can be manipulated, removed and destroyed.

It is also wise to assume that Intelligence services will want to take control of the "truth movement" in the same way they seek to infiltrate and control "terrorist" movements.

It is instructive that there have been attempts by members of US Homeland Security to equate the two groups.

19 Muslim hijacked...

Not proved.

....four planes and many people were murdered. If there is more to it than that, well then follow the money. It's much more reasonable to believe that a few rogue elements within the government could control suicidal jhadists then believing that those three buildings could be taken down by thermite and/or explosives.

Reasonable belief would not be the best guide for understanding an operation based on psychologically sophisticated deception.

Big lies are more readily believed than small ones.

Following the money is a very good idea and one which the 911 Commission shamelessly fudged.

[funk de fino]

British intelligence assets guided IRA attacks. The organisation was infiltrated almost right to the top.

Against who and source?

[240-185]

Not proved.
Proved, as we know their names (Passenger manifest), what they were doing during the hijacking (black boxes) and their families admit their death.
Let's not forget the video tapes they recorded.

[cludgie]

British intelligence assets guided IRA attacks. The organisation was infiltrated almost right to the top.

And my bet is you aren't going to back this latest particularly wild claim up with anything. I'm particularly interested to know what purpose you feel guiding IRA attacks actually served and also why you therefore seem to feel the British Government chose to try and assassinate itself in Brighton in 1984.

[dtugg]

BTW, I do not believe that KSM is a pastie ;)



Cool. He was behind 9/11 then. Case closed.

[JohnG]

Cool. He was behind 9/11 then. Case closed.

I think she's kidding you over saying 'pastie' rather than 'patsy'.

[dtugg]

I think she's kidding you over saying 'pastie' rather than 'patsy'.

Oh, I didn't even notice I did that. Of course, everything that she says is a huge joke.

[Cl1mh4224rd]

There is a sophisticated system of checks to guarantee the authenticity of every single banking transaction.


"And that, little Timmy, is why counterfeiting, bank fraud, and identity theft are things of the past." :rolleyes:

[funk de fino]

There is a sophisticated system of checks to guarantee the authenticity of every single banking transaction.

Of course there is. Thats why my partner is having direct debits setup without her knowledge by a company who will not talk to her because she is not on their books. Thats why the bank have to give her the money back and cancel the direct debit only for it to appear the next month or the month after.

Neither the bank or the company have ever contacted her prior to her noticing these payments. People were just taking money from her account.

[beachnut]

...
Following the money is a very good idea ...
Follow the money all foreign students use to attend flight training? That must be tons of money. I mean the terrorist must of requested a big paycheck for their martyrdom! No, let me see, they are going to be dead, there is no paycheck. Oops, no money here!

I can hear the conversation now, "Yes Mr Atta, we pay you lots of money. Please, fly jet into the WTC, we (will) pay you bunches so the FBI can find us before the event (will is what tense class; the absurd tense… yes). " "Wait, we will hold the money for you at Jetta, so after your big impact, come to Jetta to collect so we will not get caught…"

Room and board while attending flight training just like thousand of other students from around the world $2500/month

One way tickets for 1500 dollars (they sure are cheap to risk this! or did they think spending more money for roundtrip tickets was a red flag, or are they cheap saving money for the next suicide flight on the 10th???)

Flight Training $150 dollars/hour

Box cutters 6 bucks (this was the big weapon expense that should have rung bells?) 6 bucks

cutting throats of sheep for practice – priceless if you are a terrorist

figuring out how to do 9/11 – no cost when you attack the US who thought it was safe to fly a plane and face forward when passengers sneak up behind you to cut your throat…

Cutting pilots throats to bring the world 9/11 by way of UBL –priceless for the terrorist apologists like you; you would not have anything to grip about if not for the 19 terrorist you constantly make excuse for. What would you do with out the terrorist to apologize for? You are one of the best.

Wow, if they had bought their own jets, there may of been a lot of money; but this money trail is typical of many foreign students who think they get the best flight training here. So you follow the money thing is a typical failed terrorist apologist thing.

What a money trail; yep that is the way to be a Monday morning quarterback; follow that money. We should have see the money trail, especially those box cutters at 6 bucks, now that is a money trail of epic proportions.

… truther victory? but in the minds of truthers. They think there is some organized movement, but there are only frauds selling DVDs of false information on 9/11. What a truther victory, one DVD full of junk at a time.

The victory of 9/11 truth, is the followers dumb enough on 9/11 issues to believe the junk ideas proposed by 9/11 truth.

[JihadJane]

Against who and source?


MI5 'helped IRA buy bomb parts in US'

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article742783.ece


“Well-placed security sources are adamant that Mr Scappaticci, 59, was a top agent, paid £80,000 a year by the government for passing information to the army's shadowy Force Research Unit for more than 20 years. They also insisted he was responsible for dozens of murders - many carried out when he was deputy head of the IRA's notorious internal security unit, known as the Nutting Squad, which tortured and executed suspected informers - and that innocent people died to protect his identity.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2003/may/14/northernireland.northernireland

Why MI5 sanctioned the murder of a pensioner

UDA patsies:

http://www.serve.com/pfc/fru/licence/harryMcGee.html


Proved, as we know their names (Passenger manifest), what they were doing during the hijacking (black boxes) and their families admit their death.
Let's not forget the video tapes they recorded.

Names on a passenger manifest do not prove that al Qaeda acted alone (or, incidentlly, that these named people were the hijackers).

What do the black boxes say they were doing during the hijacking?

When banging the drums for their disastrous invasion and occupation of Afghanistan (for which they used the 911 attacks as a pretext), both the UK and US governments promised to present the conclusive secret evidence they claimed to already have to back up the repeated, evidence-free assertions they were making to justify their own proposed acts of mass murder. They have never done so.

"And that, little Timmy, is why counterfeiting, bank fraud, and identity theft are things of the past." :rolleyes:

You seem to have forgotten the point of your original analogy - i.e. to demonstrate how ridiculous it is to question to authenticity of unauthenticated recordings.

Of course there is. Thats why my partner is having direct debits setup without her knowledge ...


Sorry about your partner's banking problems but they do not contradict the fact that "there is a sophisticated system of checks to guarantee the authenticity of every single banking transaction". The fact that they sometimes don't always work (mostly they do) or, indeed, that the financial industry has been exposed as a giant, fraudulent, global ponzi scheme, doesn't mean it's not sensible to ask for authentication of recordings with no know chain of custody.

[funk de fino]

MI5 'helped IRA buy bomb parts in US'

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/article742783.ece


“Well-placed security sources are adamant that Mr Scappaticci, 59, was a top agent, paid £80,000 a year by the government for passing information to the army's shadowy Force Research Unit for more than 20 years. They also insisted he was responsible for dozens of murders - many carried out when he was deputy head of the IRA's notorious internal security unit, known as the Nutting Squad, which tortured and executed suspected informers - and that innocent people died to protect his identity.”

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2003/may/14/northernireland.northernireland

Why MI5 sanctioned the murder of a pensioner

UDA patsies:

http://www.serve.com/pfc/fru/licence/harryMcGee.html

None of which answers my question. Unamed source for a book? After your post about Yosri Foudra this is hypocritical at best.

Propoganda?

It is well known that there were inside men but prove to me they were directing attacks that could have been considered false flags. It is well known that names were fed to terrorists on both sides for religious killings. Nothing however like 911 or 7/7. And none of them were patsies.


Sorry about your partner's banking problems but they do not contradict the fact that "there is a sophisticated system of checks to guarantee the authenticity of every single banking transaction". The fact that they sometimes don't always work (mostly they do) or, indeed, that the financial industry has been exposed as a giant, fraudulent, global ponzi scheme, doesn't mean it's not sensible to ask for authentication of recordings with no know chain of custody.

So there was no point in what you posted. Nice of you to admit it.

[JihadJane]

And none of them were patsies.

Anyone unknowingly directed by an intelligence asset is a patsy.

[funk de fino]

Anyone unknowingly directed by an intelligence asset is a patsy.

They knew.

I take it you knew about the steaknife spoof?

[AWPrime]

Victory???

God almighty...I would HATE to see what defeat looks like.

:D
All the truthers in the world come together to try and build 1:1 replica of the WTC out of cardboard boxes. Inevitably it crashes on top of them, that wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the fact that several are smokers. The boxes catch fire and they all die.

[funk de fino]

All the truthers in the world come together to try and build 1:1 replica of the WTC out of cardboard boxes. Inevitably it crashes on top of them, that wouldn't be so bad if it weren't for the fact that several are smokers. The boxes catch fire and they all die.

All 14 of them.

[JihadJane]

They knew

If "they"'d known the assets would have been killed. In the UDA example, above, the killers thought they were killing someone important.

I take it you knew about the steaknife spoof?

No, but I've heard of the cow that jumped over the moon and the dish that ran away with the spoon.

[240-185]

Names on a passenger manifest do not prove that al Qaeda acted alone (or, incidentlly, that these named people were the hijackers).
We have this name on the UA175 passenger manifest: "Ahmed al-Ghamdi"

We have a photo of him : http://www.911review.com/myth/imgs/fbi_hijackers.jpg (Second picture from the left, fourth line)

We have this video where we can see this guy:
0Fr3rA_KKyk
(Man, youtube is full of woo, for 20 twoofie videos, 1 debunking video :/)
This guy looks like similar on both video and picture.
So what can we conclude, hmmmmm?

Don't even TRY to discuss this point, and no, I don't want to show the same thing for the remaining 18 guys.

What do the black boxes say they were doing during the hijacking?
The black boxes don't say anything.
However, their respective audios reveal that some hijackers told that they had hijacked the planes they were in, and we can even hear "Allahu Akbar" before the crashes. Another failure of yours.

[funk de fino]

If "they"'d known the assets would have been killed. In the UDA example, above, the killers thought they were killing someone important.

They knew. Not patsies. How do you know he was not important. All the UDA and UFF cared about was killing catholics regardless of whether they were involved or not. You really should link to more than speculation, it looks hypocritical otherwise, especially considering earlier posts in this thread.


No, but I've heard of the cow that jumped over the moon and the dish that ran away with the spoon.

As I suspected, you better get your google fu going before you make a fool of yourself again.