Truther Speaks.............So Nobody listen!!!!

[jvalens]

I'll admit it, I was a truther. I held the signs, talked the nonsense, and believed i needed to wear a tinfoil hat from all the times i heard it. But honestly, I haven't changed much, but realized how far this " truther" stuff is been going on. I mean, some of these theories are just ridiculous.

Out of all the things I learned from being on the hot table for about 3 years now, its that we as Americans ( Truthers, Non-Truthers) are all equally ignorant. Truthers always under mind the fact that there is an official document that explains SOME of the things quite clearly, while the non-truthers fail to question the evidence that doesn't make any sense. Not to say that this was an inside job, or that there were no planes. But that there was some backs turned, and some wallets did get fat that day.

I guess the only thing I have to say about this is so called Truther movement is that even though i like the spirit, I really dont agree entirely to what they say. We as Americans have the right to question the government, and have the right to demand not for the truth, but clarity on that awful day. I know how easy it is to read the last page of the 9/11 commission report and walk away, but to question something that seems unusual to you takes something else. However ,this in mind, it is not rightful for us Americans to make outrages claims, theories, and statements without seeing all sides of the story. Until this day, I have not seen all perspectives, i only go on with what i know.

Until today, there is still many debates on whether there were planes, whether it was a controlled demolition, whether a missile hit the pentagon, why the government hid the tapes, if anybody made money, and even if terrorist planned the attack in the first place. If there's one thing that I do know, is that thousands of innocent people lost their lives that day. And truther or not, you have to pay respects to these people.

[sinclairmcevoy]

So what do you believe happened? Seriously.

[Justin39640]

I'll admit it, I was a truther. I held the signs, talked the nonsense, and believed i needed to wear a tinfoil hat from all the times i heard it. But honestly, I haven't changed much, but realized how far this " truther" stuff is been going on. I mean, some of these theories are just ridiculous.

Out of all the things I learned from being on the hot table for about 3 years now, its that we as Americans ( Truthers, Non-Truthers) are all equally ignorant. Truthers always under mind the fact that there is an official document that explains SOME of the things quite clearly, while the non-truthers fail to question the evidence that doesn't make any sense. Not to say that this was an inside job, or that there were no planes. But that there was some backs turned, and some wallets did get fat that day.

I guess the only thing I have to say about this is so called Truther movement is that even though i like the spirit, I really dont agree entirely to what they say. We as Americans have the right to question the government, and have the right to demand not for the truth, but clarity on that awful day. I know how easy it is to read the last page of the 9/11 commission report and walk away, but to question something that seems unusual to you takes something else. However ,this in mind, it is not rightful for us Americans to make outrages claims, theories, and statements without seeing all sides of the story. Until this day, I have not seen all perspectives, i only go on with what i know.

Until today, there is still many debates on whether there were planes, whether it was a controlled demolition, whether a missile hit the pentagon, why the government hid the tapes, if anybody made money, and even if terrorist planned the attack in the first place. If there's one thing that I do know, is that thousands of innocent people lost their lives that day. And truther or not, you have to pay respects to these people.

Some truthers don't think ANYONE died on that day.
Google the "Vicsim report" and prepare to meet your lunch again.

[Edx]

I know how easy it is to read the last page of the 9/11 commission report and walk away, but to question something that seems unusual to you takes something else.

The thing is you need a reason to question 911 being an inside job.

And all of the "reasons" provided by truthers have been 100% wrong back to front.

Some have been frauds, a great many have been lies, a greater number have been misrepresentations, many have been based on out of context quotes, a great number have been based on incompetence and then dishonesty to try and cover that up.

The problem is truthers have a mentality that there must be something fishy about 911 because they have been told there is by other truthers.

They don't want to believe the "official story" because they don't want to believe the government. So if they don't want to believe the government, who else are they going to turn to? The "alternative" opinions of truthers of course.

And even when you start to realise that at least most of what truthers say is wrong you still think that surely some of what they said was correct... right? Surely they can't be wrong about e-v-e-r-y-t-h-i-n-g?

I see it now like Creationism, its amazing to think that Creationists could be 100% wrong about every single claim they make, but they really are.

[Thunder]

um...what's with this self-made-martyr title????

"I am speaking!!!!! nobody is listening to me!!!! waaa!!!!!"

9-11 truth, part deux...is crap. that's why i don't believe it. its that simple.

bring me some real evidence, and i will take a look. until then....

[jvalens]

Has anybody seen the Movie Tora!Tora!Tora! I think that something similar to that happened. Obviously not the same place and time, but in the same manner at which there were varies of under minded events, ignored threats, and little action done to what was going to happen. Yes there were planes that day, yes there was terrorist who are now dead, and yes, 9/11 was a planned attack. But how much of this did our government let slip through the cracks? Do you think that our government, let alone all the Goverments in the world are kids sitting in the classroom,with their hands crossed with little halos over their heads? No. Not to say that they are devils bound to destroy human life. Its merely business and politics.And anyone who pretends to understand politics(without being in the system itself) for the mere fact of saying that something is 100% wrong just doesn't seem justified.

[jvalens]

I never asked this to anybody else, but what do you guys think happened. Usually i see truthers do most of the senseless talking, while the others just disprove things but never really explain what they believe in. One of my friends once said that.... " Maybe non-truthers believe that 9/11 happened when the 9/11 report came out." Really didn't get what he meant by that, but he always thought is was funny for some reason.

[Edx]

Do you think that our government, let alone all the Goverments in the world are kids sitting in the classroom,with their hands crossed with little halos over their heads? No.

EDIT: OK I totally misread the above. I thought you were saying something about Bush in the classroom. Doh! Anyway I'll leave the post as it is :D

See that has to be one of the silliest arguments for an Inside Job.

If you went to the trouble of carrying out the attacks on 911 including coordinating all kinds of fake reports media involvement, emergency service involvement, putting explosives in buildings, inventing silent explosives and demolition methods never used before or since, paying off and/or scaring witness' and so on...

... if you do all that, is it reasonable to think they would not have a plan to act in a competent way in that classroom when the attack happens?

No. The fact that Bush did nothing for so long on 911 in that classroom is a reason AGAINST belief in an inside job, not for it.

But truthers like to believe in the stupid-genius' idea of a conspiracy theory so they usually have this backwards logic.

[Dumb All Over]

I never asked this to anybody else, but what do you guys think happened.
What do you think happened?

[Scott Sommers]

Its merely business and politics.And anyone who pretends to understand politics(without being in the system itself) for the mere fact of saying that something is 100% wrong just doesn't seem justified.

I'm confused by this last part. You seem to be saying that 'politics' is some secret world that can't be understood by 'outsiders'. Is that correct?

And to quote Dumb All Over
What do you think happened?

[njslim]

Perusing the lunacy on ABOVE TOP SECRET came across this gem

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread33943/pg6

Scroll down to bottom post and let the insanity wash over you....

[jvalens]

Well, I never mentioned anything about putting explosive in buildings, nor Bush having any actual involvement in the physical attacks. I just said that our government let this slip through the cracks. There doesn't have to be any media changing or false medical reports because the event did happen the way it did. It just wasn't prevented, seeing the information that we had on previous days.

[Dumb All Over]

Well, I never mentioned anything about putting explosive in buildings, nor Bush having any actual involvement in the physical attacks. I just said that our government let this slip through the cracks. There doesn't have to be any media changing or false medical reports because the event did happen the way it did. It just wasn't prevented, seeing the information that we had on previous days.
When the government let this slip through the cracks, do you think they let it slip on purpose?

[Edx]

Well, I never mentioned anything about putting explosive in buildings, nor Bush having any actual involvement in the physical attacks. I just said that our government let this slip through the cracks. There doesn't have to be any media changing or false medical reports because the event did happen the way it did. It just wasn't prevented, seeing the information that we had on previous days.

Its funny I was where you were about a year and a half ago.

[Brainache]

I never asked this to anybody else, but what do you guys think happened. Usually i see truthers do most of the senseless talking, while the others just disprove things but never really explain what they believe in. One of my friends once said that.... " Maybe non-truthers believe that 9/11 happened when the 9/11 report came out." Really didn't get what he meant by that, but he always thought is was funny for some reason.

I was aware of Bin Laden before 9/11. I was working as a TV News Director at the time.

I believe some Muslim terrorists hijacked four commercial airplanes and crashed them into buildings and a field in Pennsylvania.

They were able to do this through a combination of good planning, lax airport security regulations and a US intelligence community that had institutional barriers in place which prevented different agencies from sharing information.

There is a lot of evidence to support this belief: http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/index.html

That is just some of the evidence that has been presented in a US courtroom which supports the case that Al Qaeda committed the attacks on 9/11.

Do the Truthers have anything like that?

[DavidJames]

It just wasn't prevented, seeing the information that we had on previous days.Please provide direct evidence there that the government knew planes would be hijacked on 9/11 and flown into buildings.

Direct sources only, no speculation, reading between the lines, they should ha known, etc.

Thanks and welcome to the forum.

LIHOP is much more plausible then MIHOP but still suffers from a serious lack of evidence.

[jvalens]

That' s a very hard question, At first, I used to say that they did do it on purpose for the money. But then I thought, would the government really kill thousands of people for billions. I wouldn't like to think of it that way, and according to many people, its seems ridiculous. Very simple concept and has been human nature, but I then I thought, No. Because the Government just let this slip through the cracks for the mere fact that they didn't take it as a serious threat, and didn't want to say that the most terrible day in America could of been prevented.

[vinniem]

Please provide direct evidence there that the government knew planes would be hijacked on 9/11 and flown into buildings.

Direct sources only, no speculation, reading between the lines, they should ha known, etc.

Thanks and welcome to the forum.

LIHOP is much more plausible then MIHOP but still suffers from a serious lack of evidence.

http://www.911blogger.com/node/20385

http://www.scribd.com/doc/16411947/NORAD-Exercises-Hijack-Summary


*Awaits the hand waving*

[jvalens]

Its funny I was where you were about a year and a half ago.

Where are you now?

[Dumb All Over]

That' s a very hard question, At first, I used to say that they did do it on purpose for the money. But then I thought, would the government really kill thousands of people for billions. I wouldn't like to think of it that way, and according to many people, its seems ridiculous. Very simple concept and has been human nature, but I then I thought, No. Because the Government just let this slip through the cracks for the mere fact that they didn't take it as a serious threat, and didn't want to say that the most terrible day in America could of been prevented.
I guess you are saying hindsight is 20-20, yes?

[jvalens]

20-20?

[Dumb All Over]

20-20?
20-20. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hindsight_bias)

[JimBenArm]

The real reason for 9/11? Bin Laden is jealous that I'm me and he isn't.

[jvalens]

I guess you are saying hindsight is 20-20, yes?

What i meant to say is I dont get the gist of what you are trying to say.

[jvalens]

The real reason for 9/11? Bin Laden is jealous that I'm me and he isn't.

If only we all thought like you my friend.......

[Edx]

Where are you now?

That LIHOP is also unreasonable.

Its much easier to believe in it though than the Young Earth Creationism version of Trutherism which is MIHOP and controlled demolition and the equivilent Flat Earther stance of CGI planes and Beam Weapons.

With basic LIHOP belief you start with the point of view that the government can't be telling you the truth. Then you start to make connections with flimsy reasons you don't really understand and haven't really checked out properly and add that all together to form your opinion that LIHOP is reasonable. Michael Ruppert is great for getting this false impression from, since he makes so many claims implying LIHOP at least, that you think they cant all be wrong, and/or he must be right about some of them, at least.

So add to the general mentality that the government is not to be trusted believers in LIHOP also generally have a few sprinkling of claims like "Cheney was in charge of NORAD and they changed the law less than a year before 911!!!" when they didnt, or maybe you think Rumsfeld admitted Trillions went missing a day before 911 (cue spooky music, waggle your fingers at the camera and make woo woo sounds to imply some nefarious deception) when really that's a claim that's also completely wrong. Or how about the $100,000 wire transfer we have no good evidence for or the Bin Laden have kidney treatment in Dubai story where its claimed he met CIA agents and so on and so on. I also note lot of assumptions stem from incorrect understandings about how NORAD works both as an "entity" and what happened on 911 in this regard.

What I'm saying is if you take a state of mind that wants or is "ready" to believe in some kind of conspiracy add a sprinkling of ignorance and some false claims like the above and you have a nice mix ready to give you a false conclusion.

[Thunder]

there is no evidence that ANYONE other than the perps knew that 4 planes would be hijacked and crashed into NYC and DC, on 9-11-01.

[Dumb All Over]

What i meant to say is I dont get the gist of what you are trying to say.
Let's try something else then. Do you know what a Monday morning quarterback is?

[JimBenArm]

What i meant to say is I dont get the gist of what you are trying to say.
He means it's easy to look back after something has happened and pick out bad decisions, things that someone could have done differently that would have changed the outcome, when the outcome wasn't readily apparent to the people making the decisions in real time.
Another term for this is Monday Morning Quarterbacking. Very easy to do. Not so easy when it's Sunday, and you're the quarterback. See Brett Favre last Sunday, for an excellent example!

That clear enough, or do I need to use semaphore?

[vinniem]

Edx didn't you say that Odigo employees were warned beforehand?

[Dumb All Over]

The real reason for 9/11? Bin Laden is jealous that I'm me and he isn't.If only we all thought like you my friend.......
We do.

[Edx]

Edx didn't you say that Odigo employees were warned beforehand?

1. No I didn't. EDIT: Ah I see, yes I did say that but see 2.
2. You didn't understand what I was arguing.
3. I accepted I was wrong, I am not longer a truther remember?
4. What relevance did that have when you asked it?

[jvalens]

He means it's easy to look back after something has happened and pick out bad decisions, things that someone could have done differently that would have changed the outcome, when the outcome wasn't readily apparent to the people making the decisions in real time.
Another term for this is Monday Morning Quarterbacking. Very easy to do. Not so easy when it's Sunday, and you're the quarterback. See Brett Favre last Sunday, for an excellent example!

That clear enough, or do I need to use semaphore?

No its clear enough. But do we blame the Monday Morning Quarterback?

[Dumb All Over]

No its clear enough. But do we blame the Monday Morning Quarterback?
Ding! Yes! Good job! You got it on the first try! Good for you. We blame it on the Monday morning quarterback. Case solved.

ttfn

[JimBenArm]

No its clear enough. But do we blame the Monday Morning Quarterback?
Well, when the MMQ states that because the QB got sacked, he must have known that the other team was blitzing, and he deliberately held the ball so he'd get sacked so the other team could win, then yes, yes we do.

[jvalens]

Ding! Yes! Good job! You got it on the first try! Good for you. We blame it on the Monday morning quarterback. Case solved.

ttfn


Well, I guess that ends that. We can now all together walk into the sunset until yet another theory rises up again. When we can all push his false accusations down to the ground, lower his self esteem, and maybe throw in a couple "yo momma" jokes around.

I don't want to say that im not a truther anymore, because theres always going to be that natural skepticism that i have grown throughout the years. To me, those three years in being a hardcore truther is comparable to an ex-alcoholic. Seemed like a good idea at first, but didn't know what the hell i was doing or saying for most of the time.

[Sam.I.Am]

The Monday morning quarterback is everyone (including yourself) that asks "Why they did this and not that?" while standing around the office water cooler the next day.

The government dropped the ball on and before 9/11 and nobody here has ever said otherwise to the best of my knowledge. Some people didn't take the situation seriously enough on the lead up to it and some people were confused as to what the situation was before it was too late. There doesn't have to be intentional malice by anyone in order for this to happen.

[jvalens]

The Monday morning quarterback is everyone (including yourself) that asks "Why they did this and not that?" while standing around the office water cooler the next day..

So can we just close the book by saying that we all ********** up big time, and just let it be?

[JimBenArm]

So can we just close the book by saying that we all ********** up big time, and just let it be?
Nobody did that, and no one suggested that they should.
Maybe they didn't make the changes you wanted, and they didn't do what I wanted either, but changes did occur.
However, demanding changes based on outrageous accusations and stupidity does no one any good.

[DavidJames]

http://www.911blogger.com/node/20385

http://www.scribd.com/doc/16411947/NORAD-Exercises-Hijack-Summary


*Awaits the hand waving*No hand waving, just respond to my request. Your links do not. Here is my request, againPlease provide direct evidence there that the government knew planes would be hijacked on 9/11 and flown into buildings.

Direct sources only, no speculation, reading between the lines, they should have known, etc.

[jvalens]

Nobody did that, and no one suggested that they should.
Maybe they didn't make the changes you wanted, and they didn't do what I wanted either, but changes did occur.
However, demanding changes based on outrageous accusations and stupidity does no one any good.

So what do we make of all this?

[triforcharity]

Well, no. WE did make mistakes before 9/11. We thought we were untouchable on US soil. The asshats that hijacked the 4 planes exposed that we were not.

We need to continue to prevent it the best we can.

I believe incompatence ruled the day. We learned, and moved on.

[jvalens]

We learned, but at what cost?

[WildCat]

Has anybody seen the Movie Tora!Tora!Tora! I think that something similar to that happened. Obviously not the same place and time, but in the same manner at which there were varies of under minded events, ignored threats, and little action done to what was going to happen. Yes there were planes that day, yes there was terrorist who are now dead, and yes, 9/11 was a planned attack. But how much of this did our government let slip through the cracks? Do you think that our government, let alone all the Goverments in the world are kids sitting in the classroom,with their hands crossed with little halos over their heads? No. Not to say that they are devils bound to destroy human life. Its merely business and politics.And anyone who pretends to understand politics(without being in the system itself) for the mere fact of saying that something is 100% wrong just doesn't seem justified.
Before we go further, you are a LIHOPer? If so, then you reject all notions of bombs in the WTC, controlled demolitions, faked plane crashes, a missile hit the Pentagon, faked phone calls, dancing Jews, etc etc, correct?

[jvalens]

Before we go further, you are a LIHOPer? If so, then you reject all notions of bombs in the WTC, controlled demolitions, faked plane crashes, a missile hit the Pentagon, faked phone calls, dancing Jews, etc etc, correct?

Yes that is correct, other than the dancing Jews part.

[Thunder]

Yes that is correct, other than the dancing Jews part.

so you admit that there were 4 dancing Jews, dancing poorly on top of a Mossad van in New Jersey?

:D

[jvalens]

That is why I said other than the dancing Jews part.

[JimBenArm]

We learned, but at what cost?
3000 innocent lives. Duh.

[WildCat]

Yes that is correct, other than the dancing Jews part.
So you think the Mossad was involved?

[Thunder]

That is why I said other than the dancing Jews part.

do you have evidence of them dancing?

were they doing the cabbage-patch..or the Hora?

were they wearing dancing shoes?

[jvalens]

3000 innocent lives. Duh.


Oh crap, thanks for the lesson, I tend to forget from time to time.

:D

[jvalens]

So you think the Mossad was involved?

Wait, what? Is that what the dancing Jews meant?

[Sam.I.Am]

Wait, what? Is that what the dancing Jews meant?

Yes. Part of that story is that they were Mossad agents that knew what was going to happen so they set up a camera and filmed it.

[WildCat]

Wait, what? Is that what the dancing Jews meant?
I don't know, you think this means something. Please, tell me what the Israeli art students had to do with 9/11. And what evidence you have that they were dancing.

[Thunder]

Yes. Part of that story is that they were Mossad agents that knew what was going to happen so they set up a camera and filmed it.

and they danced, just as the Children of Israel danced as they watched Pharoah's soldiers drown in the Red Sea.

but then, God spoke out, and said to his people:

"do not dance and sing, for even the Egyptians are my children"

:p

[jvalens]

What in the hell?! I've heard about Mossad, and dont believe that b.s story, but i never agreed to this whole dancing Jew thing.

[Thunder]

What in the hell?! I've heard about Mossad, and dont believe that b.s story, but i never agreed to this whole dancing Jew thing.

do you now deny that 4 dancing Jews blew up a white van near the WTC on 9-11-01?

[jvalens]

Yes.

[Thunder]

Yes.

can you please expand on this answer. what exactly do you mean by "yes"?

[triforcharity]

We learned, but at what cost?

3000 Americans, and 343 of those being Firefighters.

ETA: damn, someone beat me to it.

[jvalens]

do you now deny that 4 dancing Jews blew up a white van near the WTC on 9-11-01?

I do deny your claim. I f you believe so, whats your basis on it?

[PhantomWolf]

As others have said, at the cost of nearly 3,000 lives.

Unfortunately this is always the way. A level crossing doesn't get barrier arms until someone gets killed there, no matter how often the authorities are warned it's dangerous. Before a fault in an aircraft must fixed, people have to die from it, otherwise it's up to the airlines to decide if they want to take on the cost of fixing it or not.

Yes it's dumb, but until someone dies, no one seems to be willing to listen to the warnings.

[TruthersLie]

Has anybody seen the Movie Tora!Tora!Tora! I think that something similar to that happened. Obviously not the same place and time, but in the same manner at which there were varies of under minded events, ignored threats, and little action done to what was going to happen. Yes there were planes that day, yes there was terrorist who are now dead, and yes, 9/11 was a planned attack. But how much of this did our government let slip through the cracks? Do you think that our government, let alone all the Goverments in the world are kids sitting in the classroom,with their hands crossed with little halos over their heads? No. Not to say that they are devils bound to destroy human life. Its merely business and politics.And anyone who pretends to understand politics(without being in the system itself) for the mere fact of saying that something is 100% wrong just doesn't seem justified.

This has always been my area of contention. How much was known, how much was missed, and what was done about it. There are several great books which go into great depth about the FUBAR that was 9/11.

Perfect Warriors, Looming Tower, and the new one about the NSA (can't remember its name right now).

But it all boils down to time. What made 9/11 such a brilliant attack (and it was) was that it was exceptionally fast. Because they were coordinated attacks, by the time the "system" was reacting to it, it was already too late.

Did people USE the events of 9/11 to their benefit? You bet. Did people immediately go into CMA (cover my ass) mode? You bet. Did people lie about what they knew/did when the 9/11 commission was investigating? Yup. Does any of that change the fact that 19 terrorists hijacked 4 jets and crashed three into buildings and a fourth into a field in pennslyvania? Nope.

[TruthersLie]

Its funny I was where you were about a year and a half ago.

Edx.... me too... about 3 years ago.

[TruthersLie]

What i meant to say is I dont get the gist of what you are trying to say.

Jvalens.
1. Welcome to the forums
2. LIHOP makes much more sense than MIHOP, unfortunately it still doesn't add up, and there is very little direct evidence or proof to support the claim.
3. 20-20 is from the phrase "hindsight is 20-20" where 20-20 vision is considered normal vision. So the phrase means that looking back you can see things more clearly. Another phrase that means something similar is "monday morning quarterbacking."

[beachnut]

We learned, but at what cost?


911 truth is a fraud, the terrorists were a fraud. You were taken in by 911 truth, just like the terrorists were able to trick three out of four flights, are you the fourth flight?

Just remember the passengers on Flight 93 figured out 911 in minutes; are you as good, are any of us as good.

[bill smith]

Please provide direct evidence there that the government knew planes would be hijacked on 9/11 and flown into buildings.

Direct sources only, no speculation, reading between the lines, they should ha known, etc.

Thanks and welcome to the forum.

LIHOP is much more plausible then MIHOP but still suffers from a serious lack of evidence.

LIHOP is high treason and a capital offence no better than MIHOP. There will be no differentiation or allowance made in that regard. Execution by hanging would be appropriate for the perps.

[DGM]

Execution by hanging would be appropriate for the perps.

I agree! 19 are already dead and the trials are ongoing for others. We'll need to wait to see what the punishment will be.

[MRC_Hans]

Well, openness should be appreciated, so I'll listen. And answer.


I'll admit it, I was a truther. I held the signs, talked the nonsense, and believed i needed to wear a tinfoil hat from all the times i heard it. But honestly, I haven't changed much, but realized how far this " truther" stuff is been going on. I mean, some of these theories are just ridiculous.

Actually, they all are.

Out of all the things I learned from being on the hot table for about 3 years now, its that we as Americans ( Truthers, Non-Truthers) are all equally ignorant.

Not all, and not equally. Many truthers are willfully ignorant. I say this with confidence because I have seen them studiously ignore simple and sensible arguments.


Truthers always under mind the fact that there is an official document that explains SOME of the things quite clearly,


Yes.

while the non-truthers fail to question the evidence that doesn't make any sense.

Unfortunately, truthers fail to present a reasonable argument of why the evidence doesn't make sense.

Not to say that this was an inside job, or that there were no planes.

OK, but then what do you say?

But that there was some backs turned, and some wallets did get fat that day.

Probably. Isn't there always?

I guess the only thing I have to say about this is so called Truther movement is that even though i like the spirit,

What do you like about the spirit? Accusing people who argue sensibly and logically of being shills/sheeple? Accusing somebody of high treason and mass murder without proper evidence? Accusing mourning family members of being frauds? .... ?

I really dont agree entirely to what they say.

Good for you. .. 'Entirely' ??

We as Americans have the right to question the government,

Of course!

and have the right to demand not for the truth, but clarity on that awful day.

Why not the truth?

Until this day, I have not seen all perspectives, i only go on with what i know.

Do you really expect, as a lay-man, to see and know all perspectives of such a complex event?

Hans

[tfk]

No its clear enough. But do we blame the Monday Morning Quarterback?

You blame the MMQB for MMQBing.

If someone is taking a serious approach to the issue: "let's look at what really happened, and figure out what went wrong & how to fix it", then they are not MMQBing.

MMQBs do not acknowledge that some people are required to make immediate decisions with limited information and under enormous stress.

You blame the MMQB for having neither the talent, nor the initiative to be, nor (in 99.99% of the cases) to even TRY to be, the Sunday Afternoon QB.

And you blame the MMQB for pompous assertions about what they would have done if they were the SAQB.

Finally, when the MMQB claims that the SAQBs - and the entire team, and the entire organization behind the team - were evil, traitorous, lying mass-murderers, while they have zero proof of their allegations, then "YEAH, you blame the MMQBs".

You blame them for being loud-mouth, arrogant, uninformed punks.

Just my $0.02.

Tom

[Jackanory]

I'll admit it, I was a truther. I held the signs, talked the nonsense, and believed i needed to wear a tinfoil hat from all the times i heard it. But honestly, I haven't changed much, but realized how far this " truther" stuff is been going on. I mean, some of these theories are just ridiculous.

Out of all the things I learned from being on the hot table for about 3 years now, its that we as Americans ( Truthers, Non-Truthers) are all equally ignorant. Truthers always under mind the fact that there is an official document that explains SOME of the things quite clearly, while the non-truthers fail to question the evidence that doesn't make any sense. Not to say that this was an inside job, or that there were no planes. But that there was some backs turned, and some wallets did get fat that day.

I guess the only thing I have to say about this is so called Truther movement is that even though i like the spirit, I really dont agree entirely to what they say. We as Americans have the right to question the government, and have the right to demand not for the truth, but clarity on that awful day. I know how easy it is to read the last page of the 9/11 commission report and walk away, but to question something that seems unusual to you takes something else. However ,this in mind, it is not rightful for us Americans to make outrages claims, theories, and statements without seeing all sides of the story. Until this day, I have not seen all perspectives, i only go on with what i know.

Until today, there is still many debates on whether there were planes, whether it was a controlled demolition, whether a missile hit the pentagon, why the government hid the tapes, if anybody made money, and even if terrorist planned the attack in the first place. If there's one thing that I do know, is that thousands of innocent people lost their lives that day. And truther or not, you have to pay respects to these people.

Bolded - Just to give you an example of the data mining, mis quoting, mis representations and untruths that your friends in tin hats continue to do. Hopefully you can see through it all from your own post. As is normally the case - truthers often write and post information that answers their own stupidity. They just dont realise that they have done so. You have highlighted that very fact.

19 highly motivated and trained terrorists hyjacked commercial aircraft and used them to kill over 3000 innocent people. FACT. It is only gullible crackpots with mental, dellusional or monetary agendas who believe otherwise.

Huge mistakes were made on 911 by all and everyone involved. That is what happens in daily life when we are faced with terrible situations and the unknown. Unfortunately most truthers are either inexperienced in life, social interaction, employment and have little or no comprehension of the extent of panic, disorganisation and decision making and responsibilities placed on those at such a scene of devastation. Its a pity that a truthers own life wasnt as organised as they expect everything or everyone else's to be! They need to experience the real world before they can comment on it - let alone want to question it!

[Edx]

Edx didn't you say that Odigo employees were warned beforehand?

1. No I didn't. EDIT: Ah I see, yes I did say that but see 2.
2. You didn't understand what I was arguing.
3. I accepted I was wrong, I am not longer a truther remember?
4. What relevance did that have when you asked it?

Just bump for vinniem.

[cratorius]

Jvalens.
1. Welcome to the forums
2. LIHOP makes much more sense than MIHOP, unfortunately it still doesn't add up, and there is very little direct evidence or proof to support the claim.
3. 20-20 is from the phrase "hindsight is 20-20" where 20-20 vision is considered normal vision. So the phrase means that looking back you can see things more clearly. Another phrase that means something similar is "monday morning quarterbacking."

well, it seems that MIHOPers are actually trying to prove their case, even though their proofs are false. LIHOPers aren't even in the ring. I can't even name one prominent LIHOPer. Do they even write books?

[tfk]

LIHOP is high treason and a capital offence no better than MIHOP. There will be no differentiation or allowance made in that regard. Execution by hanging would be appropriate for the perps.

And let's take a vote.

What do all the posters here think is the appropriate penalty for years of:

1. baseless slander, i.e., accusations of murder, treason, etc.
2. intentional lying in support of 1) above.
3. creation and/or proliferation of false evidence in support of 1) above.
4. willful disregard of unquestionable disproof of that slander.
5. inciting to commit violence against those falsely slandered.
6. lying to exonerate the real perpetrators of murder and terrorism.
7. publicly enjoying cavalier, revolting lulz at the expense of agony & suffering of those who endured the horror & death, and every rational person who takes those events seriously.

I know what society says is the punishment for that misbehavior. Nothing at all.

If it were up to me, and if we lived in a truly rational society, I think the proper unit of measure for those "crimes" would be counted in "teeth".

To be strung together as necklaces and displayed or worn proudly as an object lesson for the chillun'. To learn 'em to think just a bit before running their mouths. Or their fingers at the keyboards.

But that's just me. :)

Opinions vary...


Tom

[WildCat]

Just bump for vinniem.
You'll have to wait for pdoh's next sock and ask him then.

[Longfellow]

I never asked this to anybody else, but what do you guys think happened. Usually i see truthers do most of the senseless talking, while the others just disprove things but never really explain what they believe in. One of my friends once said that.... " Maybe non-truthers believe that 9/11 happened when the 9/11 report came out." Really didn't get what he meant by that, but he always thought is was funny for some reason.

What happened? 19 religious extremists hijacked 4 passenger jets with the intent to commit mass murder.

They succeeded.

Ain't religion grand?

[jvalens]

What would it take for all of us to be on the same page? I mean, 9/11 happened about 8 years ago, and although the event should not be forgotten, it should be remembered as a tragic day in which thousands of people died. Should there be anything else? Truthers want the truth. but for what? Would it really change anything? Would these 3000 people come to live again? Sure, I too had fallen into senseless speculation, but then i thought that nothing much would come of it. I would just be among the handful of other people who want the truth, but wouldn't know what to make or do with it.

[TruthersLie]

What would it take for all of us to be on the same page?

That would be for people who claim to be "truthers" to educate themselves. 95% of all claims made by "truthers" are false. If you want to be on the same page, then do the research and correct your own movement.


I mean, 9/11 happened about 8 years ago, and although the event should not be forgotten, it should be remembered as a tragic day in which thousands of people died. Should there be anything else? Truthers want the truth.

Then they need to do 5 minutes of REAL RESEARCH on each of these claims. The vast majority of truther claims boil down to personal incredulity and personal ignorance.

Truthers DON"T want the truth. They want a kangaroo court where they feel the people who "did it" are found guilty. That isn't the truth. The truth is out there, and it is pretty simple. 19 highly trained hijackers took over four jets and crashed them killing thousands.


but for what? Would it really change anything? Would these 3000 people come to live again? Sure, I too had fallen into senseless speculation, but then i thought that nothing much would come of it.

This is the utterly perfect example of intellectual laziness. If you actually believe that your government murdered 3,000 people, WTF are you waiting for? Why aren't you in the streets, rounding up people to be outraged, demanding a redress of your grievences as isyour right from the first amendment?

I would just be among the handful of other people who want the truth, but wouldn't know what to make or do with it.

see above. If I had proof or insight that the government murdered 3,000 of my fellow citizens I'd be in the streets. I'd be shouting from the roof tops. I'd have massive demonstrations. Look at the recent elections in Iran. But you just can't be bothered?

The apathetic generation in action.

[bill smith]

What would it take for all of us to be on the same page? I mean, 9/11 happened about 8 years ago, and although the event should not be forgotten, it should be remembered as a tragic day in which thousands of people died. Should there be anything else? Truthers want the truth. but for what? Would it really change anything? Would these 3000 people come to live again? Sure, I too had fallen into senseless speculation, but then i thought that nothing much would come of it. I would just be among the handful of other people who want the truth, but wouldn't know what to make or do with it.

Were you once a Truther Vivalens ?

[Thunder]

Truthers want the truth.

no..they do NOT want the truth.

what they do want, is money, attention, a sense of purpose in their miserable lives, and free pizza.

truth? I think not.

[Sam.I.Am]

What, there's free pizza?!?

[Myriad]

Free pizza? Huh. The Truthers who deliver my pizza always expect me to pay for it.

Respectfully,
Myriad

[jvalens]

I was once a truther. And before posting this thread, I used to be pretty sure that the Goverment let this slip through the cracks. But after hearing many responses, I found it to be very well connected to the whole 20-20 ordeal. My whole truther phase lasted about three years, and I've come to realize that the cause was held up by pure evidenve that held no water whatsoever, lack of acutual resources, and just plain ignorance.

However, someone here said that truthers are 95% wrong. Whats the 5% truth?

[jvalens]

what they do want, is money, attention, a sense of purpose in their miserable lives, and free pizza.

.

Sounds like the reason why we all live, really.

[DGM]

However, someone here said that truthers are 95% wrong. Whats the 5% truth?
Mostly the date, number of people killed and the location of the attacks.

[PhantomWolf]

Mostly the date, number of people killed and the location of the attacks.

Unfortunately I have seen them get those wrong too....

I'm still waiting for the first Truther to complete my challange from 2 years ago, and all I want is them to give me one confirmed and verifiable fact (other than the date of the attack) that the vast majority of Truthers accept as correct.

[Klimax]

Unfortunately I have seen them get those wrong too....

I'm still waiting for the first Truther to complete my challange from 2 years ago, and all I want is them to give me one confirmed and verifiable fact (other than the date of the attack) that the vast majority of Truthers accept as correct.

You mean that idiot with vicsim report? :duck::runaway

[deep]

I'm still waiting for the first Truther to complete my challange from 2 years ago, and all I want is them to give me one confirmed and verifiable fact (other than the date of the attack) that the vast majority of Truthers accept as correct.


Sure - from snopes.com:

On 6 and 7 September 2001, the Chicago Board Options Exchange handled 4,744 put options for United Airlines' stock, translating into 474,000 shares, compared with just 396 call options, or 39,600 shares. On a day that the put-to-call ratio would normally have been expected to be roughly 1:1 (no negative news stories about United had broken), it was instead 12:1.

On 10 September 2001, another uneventful news day, American Airlines' option volume was 4,516 puts and 748 calls, a ratio of 6:1 on yet another day when by rights these options should have been trading even. No other airline stocks were affected; only United and American were shorted in this fashion.

[Thunder]

Sounds like the reason why we all live, really.

i can't speak for you, for I am only myself..

but I do not have a miserable life. and I am not desperate for attention.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Sure - from snopes.com:

On 6 and 7 September 2001, the Chicago Board Options Exchange handled 4,744 put options for United Airlines' stock, translating into 474,000 shares, compared with just 396 call options, or 39,600 shares. On a day that the put-to-call ratio would normally have been expected to be roughly 1:1 (no negative news stories about United had broken), it was instead 12:1.

On 10 September 2001, another uneventful news day, American Airlines' option volume was 4,516 puts and 748 calls, a ratio of 6:1 on yet another day when by rights these options should have been trading even. No other airline stocks were affected; only United and American were shorted in this fashion.

Why don't you provide a link to the article, Deep?

Are you afraid of us seeing the context that you're quote mining from?

[deep]

Why don't you provide a link to the article, Deep?

Are you afraid of us seeing the context that you're quote mining from?


Here you go: http://www.snopes.com/rumors/putcall.asp

I'm not "quote mining" anything - the volume numbers are verifiable facts, as requested.

[Gawdzilla]

NatGeo had a two-hour show on the truthless ones last night. I recorded it as I'd just eaten and the hate would have curdled my stomach.

[TruthersLie]

Here you go: http://www.snopes.com/rumors/putcall.asp

I'm not "quote mining" anything - the volume numbers are verifiable facts, as requested.

Deep you are correct.

Those numbers are true and accurate.

Now then, what does the SEC investigation say about those put orders?
Where did those put orders come from? Who told people to do those put orders? Why did 90% of those put orders come from ONE COMPANY?

So it is a fact that there were put orders in place.

Unfortunately, like with ALL facts that truthers present, they then go off the rails and skew the FACTS into blatant inaccurate and ignorant suppostion with no SUPPORT.

Kind of like David Chandlers excellent work to show the 2.25 seconds of freefall which furthers clarified NIST's work. But then he goes all bat **** crazy and insists it is from explosives.

ETA: http://www.911myths.com/index.php/Put_Options
go to the GENERAL ECONOMIC CONDITIONS section and READ IT. The phrase of "no economic news" is not accurate and in fact not correct.

So your "fact" is in fact inaccurate
On 6 and 7 September 2001, the Chicago Board Options Exchange handled 4,744 put options for United Airlines' stock, translating into 474,000 shares, compared with just 396 call options, or 39,600 shares. On a day that the put-to-call ratio would normally have been expected to be roughly 1:1 (no negative news stories about United had broken), it was instead 12:1.

On 10 September 2001, another uneventful news day, American Airlines' option volume was 4,516 puts and 748 calls, a ratio of 6:1 on yet another day when by rights these options should have been trading even. No other airline stocks were affected; only United and American were shorted in this fashion.

The part bolded and underlined is inaccurate as shown by the 911myths.com article debunking this claim.

[Macgyver1968]

Here you go: http://www.snopes.com/rumors/putcall.asp

I'm not "quote mining" anything - the volume numbers are verifiable facts, as requested.

I guess you missed the part that said Status: False

or the part at the bottom where they explain what happened.

[bill smith]

I was once a truther. And before posting this thread, I used to be pretty sure that the Goverment let this slip through the cracks. But after hearing many responses, I found it to be very well connected to the whole 20-20 ordeal. My whole truther phase lasted about three years, and I've come to realize that the cause was held up by pure evidenve that held no water whatsoever, lack of acutual resources, and just plain ignorance.

However, someone here said that truthers are 95% wrong. Whats the 5% truth?

So when you were a Truther presumably you. like every other Truther alive thought that WTC7 was a controlled demolition.

What made you change your mind about WTC7 ?

[TruthersLie]

I guess you missed the part that said Status: False

or the part at the bottom where they explain what happened.

Again, truthers with datamining (yes deep you datamined it when you ignored the entire article to try to support your bs argument) and poor reading for comprehension abilities.

Mac... how dare you point out that. They can't help it. He was just trying to have ONE FACT.

Now if only they could provide ONE FACT which points to an inside jobby job.

[deep]

Again, truthers with datamining (yes deep you datamined it when you ignored the entire article to try to support your bs argument) and poor reading for comprehension abilities.


My "bs argument"? Which argument is that, exactly?

Like I said - the volume numbers are verifiable facts. That's it.

[TruthersLie]

My "bs argument"? Which argument is that, exactly?

Like I said - the volume numbers are verifiable facts. That's it.

OH don't play coy.

They are verifiable facts that is true.

And how does that play into anything for 9/11 truth? Please don't play obtuse, or the normal truther games of trying to parse words and definitions.

So you can state the date the attacks took place. Maybe look up the exact number of killed, and state there were put orders on that date.

Wowsers!!!! The investagoogling of FACTS is rather weak don't you think? I mean if I was certain I had FACTS which showed that the US government allowed or murdered 3,000 of their citizens, I'm sure that the put orders on 9/11 would be AT THE FREAKING BOTTOM OF THE LIST.

Is that the best detail you can provide?

[MikeW]

Deep you are correct.

Those numbers are true and accurate.
Not necessarily, some of the documents released by NARA explain why some of these reported volumes aren't accurate. See http://media.nara.gov/9-11/MFR/t-0148-911MFR-00138.pdf to begin, and I think there are other Cella/ SEC files there with more information. (Sorry, I'd look myself but I'm horribly busy right now.)

[bill smith]

OH don't play coy.

They are verifiable facts that is true.

And how does that play into anything for 9/11 truth? Please don't play obtuse, or the normal truther games of trying to parse words and definitions.

So you can state the date the attacks took place. Maybe look up the exact number of killed, and state there were put orders on that date.

Wowsers!!!! The investagoogling of FACTS is rather weak don't you think? I mean if I was certain I had FACTS which showed that the US government allowed or murdered 3,000 of their citizens, I'm sure that the put orders on 9/11 would be AT THE FREAKING BOTTOM OF THE LIST.

Is that the best detail you can provide?

Have you seen this video ?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hd0Vwg6DVPI&eurl=Field%20blocked%20by%20ProxyWay%20

[TruthersLie]

Not necessarily, some of the documents released by NARA explain why some of these reported volumes aren't accurate. See http://media.nara.gov/9-11/MFR/t-0148-911MFR-00138.pdf to begin, and I think there are other Cella/ SEC files there with more information. (Sorry, I'd look myself but I'm horribly busy right now.)

Mike.

I'm willing to fully concede the numbers and the volume. I'll completely and utterly take those numbers.

It still leads to a SO WHAT?

We all know this is part of the attempt to use the "put options" to insinuate that people knew in advance and were using that knowledge to make money. Unfortunately there is no proof. Zip, zilch, nada. Like with almost all truther claims.

[DavidJames]

Mike.

I'm willing to fully concede the numbers and the volume. I'll completely and utterly take those numbers.

It still leads to a SO WHAT?

We all know this is part of the attempt to use the "put options" to insinuate that people knew in advance and were using that knowledge to make money. Unfortunately there is no proof. Zip, zilch, nada. Like with almost all truther claims.It also greatly expands the list of people "in on it" which makes the lack of evidence and "whistle blowers" even more telling.

[TruthersLie]

It also greatly expands the list of people "in on it" which makes the lack of evidence and "whistle blowers" even more telling.

DJ.

Exactly.

And when you read the SEC investigation you see that 95% of all the purchases were through Merryl Lynch based on their own newsletter from 9/9. Go figure.

[Jackanory]

DJ.

Exactly.

And when you read the SEC investigation you see that 95% of all the purchases were through Merryl Lynch based on their own newsletter from 9/9. Go figure.



The Jew angle will be in there somewhere.

[MikeW]

Mike.

I'm willing to fully concede the numbers and the volume. I'll completely and utterly take those numbers.

It still leads to a SO WHAT?
Well, yes - I guess I was responding to the idea that these figures are "true" and "accurate". The SEC memo explains why they're exaggerated, which matters because the numbers are really all the truthers have.

But you're right, though, from a debating point of view that's something of a diversion. It's a bit like the "Popular Mechanics" thread: we could get into (and have, actually) a semantic debate over what this or that sentence means, but if the issue doesn't lead anywhere then there really isn't any point.

And actually I think the truthers know that, too. The September 10th AMR puts are supposedly the best example of "inside knowledge", but NARA told us months ago who was responsible for the tip: Steve Sarnoff & his newsletter. What have truthers done, now they have his name? Nothing, from what I can see, perhaps because they realise he just might have the resources to make them pay if they start libelling him as gaining financial advantage from mass murder.

[doobiedoright]

That' s a very hard question, At first, I used to say that they did do it on purpose for the money. But then I thought, would the government really kill thousands of people for billions. I wouldn't like to think of it that way, and according to many people, its seems ridiculous. Very simple concept and has been human nature, but I then I thought, No. Because the Government just let this slip through the cracks for the mere fact that they didn't take it as a serious threat, and didn't want to say that the most terrible day in America could of been prevented.


How could it have been prevented?
Would you ground every plane in the country?
Would you have profiled for muslim terrorist?
Please state just how this could have been prevented!
Short of having air marshals on every plane with orders to shoot and kill I dont see how it could of been stopped!

[PhantomWolf]

Sure - from snopes.com:

On 6 and 7 September 2001, the Chicago Board Options Exchange handled 4,744 put options for United Airlines' stock, translating into 474,000 shares, compared with just 396 call options, or 39,600 shares. On a day that the put-to-call ratio would normally have been expected to be roughly 1:1 (no negative news stories about United had broken), it was instead 12:1.

On 10 September 2001, another uneventful news day, American Airlines' option volume was 4,516 puts and 748 calls, a ratio of 6:1 on yet another day when by rights these options should have been trading even. No other airline stocks were affected; only United and American were shorted in this fashion.

Koodos on having a go, unfortunately the numbers, as Mike pointed out are inaccurate, and as Snopes itself pointed out, they have been verified as having nothing to do with 9/11 other than their timing. You can still try and come up with something that is verifiably connected to 9/11 if you wish though.

[tfk]

Mostly the date, number of people killed and the location of the attacks.

You are going to think that I'm making this up, but I swear to you that it is true.

EIGHT YEARS after 9/11, bill smith, after arguing it 6 days a week for over a year, could not accurately locate WTC7 on a map of the WTC complex.

After being told repeatedly where it was, he insisted that The Winter Gardens was really WTC7.

"5%" may be optimistic...

Tom

[PhantomWolf]

You are going to think that I'm making this up, but I swear to you that it is true.

EIGHT YEARS after 9/11, bill smith, after arguing it 6 days a week for over a year, could not accurately locate WTC7 on a map of the WTC complex.

After being told repeatedly where it was, he insisted that The Winter Gardens was really WTC7.

"5%" may be optimistic...

Tom

We have also had a poster here get the date wrong.

[DGM]

You are going to think that I'm making this up, but I swear to you that it is true.

EIGHT YEARS after 9/11, bill smith, after arguing it 6 days a week for over a year, could not accurately locate WTC7 on a map of the WTC complex.

After being told repeatedly where it was, he insisted that The Winter Gardens was really WTC7.

"5%" may be optimistic...

Tom
Bill's a "special" case. I seriously doubt he/she (yes it's believed by some Bill is a she) believes any of the things he/she says. I think he/she just likes to argue for kicks (or is very bored).

[carlitos]

My theory about bs being 4 drunk German college students on a blackberry has yet to be disproven.

[Horatius]

Bill's a "special" case. I seriously doubt he/she (yes it's believed by some Bill is a she) believes any of the things he/she says. I think he/she just likes to argue for kicks (or is very bored).

My theory about bs being 4 drunk German college students on a blackberry has yet to be disproven.


I will not hear anything bad spoken about The Greatest Performance Artist Of Our Time!

I will not!

[bill smith]

You are going to think that I'm making this up, but I swear to you that it is true.

EIGHT YEARS after 9/11, bill smith, after arguing it 6 days a week for over a year, could not accurately locate WTC7 on a map of the WTC complex.

After being told repeatedly where it was, he insisted that The Winter Gardens was really WTC7.

"5%" may be optimistic...

Tom

I'm looking forward to Vivalenses' answer though. I'm sure we all are...http://forums.randi.org/showpost.php?p=5580134&postcount=95 hyperlink

[jvalens]

So when you were a Truther presumably you. like every other Truther alive thought that WTC7 was a controlled demolition.

What made you change your mind about WTC7 ?

The controlled demolition theory seemed to far-fetched. A lot of explosives are needed in order to collapse buildings, and to "sneak" them in at the base of the building without anybody noticing, or finding anything suspicious, seems a bit odd and quite impossible to do.

But To get in more specifics, many people seem to underestimate the Damage that WTC7 actually had. Stating that WTC7 had very minor damage, therefore, it is impossible for it to had collapse. But in reality, about one third of the face to the center (and about 25 percent of the depth of the building) had been critically damaged. Along with intense fires and these structural damages, it caused what I believe is defined as a "progressive collapse."

Another thing that I dont want to send on this reply as a fact, is that I believe that WTC7 had some unusual structural designs in the columns. I heard this awhile back, so if somebody wants to shed some light on this, by all means go ahead. But im saying right now, im not sure if this is a fact.

[jvalens]

How could it have been prevented?
Would you ground every plane in the country?
Would you have profiled for muslim terrorist?
Please state just how this could have been prevented!
Short of having air marshals on every plane with orders to shoot and kill I dont see how it could of been stopped!

Well, after much discussion, I came to the conclusion that it could of been prevented, but it was all at hand sight 20-20.

[PhantomWolf]

Well, after much discussion, I came to the conclusion that it could of been prevented, but it was all at hand sight 20-20.

I agree that it could have been prevented, but hindsight really is 20/20.

Had the CIA, NSA, and FBI freely communicated instead of seeing each other as opponents and being bound up in red tape about who and how they could communicate and so just not doing so at all then they would likely have picked up the connections between Khalad al-Mihdhar and Nawaf Hazmi and Al Qaeda. They would have been able to track them down faster, or even have prevented their entry into the US.

Had Immigration had the right of search when dealing with overstayers, then they would have found the e-mails on Zacarias Moussaoui's laptop and connected the dots based on them. Even if the courts had allowed the FBI to look at them this might have been found in time.

Had the FBI paid more attention to its field agents and not been so over worked, they might have actually read the memo that recommended checking flight schools for Muslim Extremists and thus located Atta, Jarrah, Hanjour, and Shehhi before they finished up.

Having said that, Al Qaeda did send more opperatives than they managed to get into the country. they had aound another 10 people that were rejected for Visas or turned back at the border, mostly Yemanese and mostly because Immigration was worried they were planning to be illegal migrants.

On the day, the only possible thing that could have been changed was having Fighters get to NYC before Flight 175. Had NEADS found Flight 11, or launched without it eariler (they did so in the end anyway) perhaps because NYATCC had told Boston ATCC that the hijack they were working was 175 and not 11, then had NYATC allowed the fighters into the NYC airspace faster, they might have been in position before 175 got there, though since most believed that 11 was still an accident and there was no shoot down order and the planes were unarmed, it's doubtful they could have done much but watch.

Other things that might have saved lives would be like having not had the WTC Tower roof doors locked. This was done after '93 in case Terrorists landed on the roof, and many have said that it would have been near impossible to land a chopper on the roof on 9/11 due to the heat and smoke, but it may have saved lived.

Unfortunately we really only know these things after the fact....

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Here you go: http://www.snopes.com/rumors/putcall.asp

I'm not "quote mining" anything - the volume numbers are verifiable facts, as requested.

Here is part of the article that you initially tried to hide:

further investigation has revealed that the trading had no connection with 9/11. A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10. Similarly, much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades.


You lied when you said you didn't quote-mine.

[dafydd]

Bill's a "special" case. I seriously doubt he/she (yes it's believed by some Bill is a she) believes any of the things he/she says. I think he/she just likes to argue for kicks (or is very bored).

Or is in dire need of attention.

[MikeW]

While we're talking put options, and because no-one else mentions this, here's the newsletter alert that recommended people buy American Airlines puts:

September 9, 2001
Vol. 12, No. 28

Stocks Skid On A Jump In The Jobless Rate. This Week, We Take To The Air

This past week, stocks were pressed to the downside -- with the highlight being Friday's blue chip decline. Wall Street was surprised by a spike, to a four-year high, in the jobless rate. And the market took its lumps. This week, I see opportunity for you to have fun and profit with an airline play. So, without further ado, here's…

This Week's Option Recommendation

Buy the AMR October $30 put for $170, or less, good this week.

Shares of AMR Corp. trade on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol "AMR". The symbol for this option reco is "AMRVF". American Airlines closed the week at $30.15. The 52-week range for AMR is $27.62-$43.93. My downside price target is $22-$26.

The major airline is under pressure. At $25, each $30 put would have $500 of intrinsic value. If AMR is at or above $30 on the third Friday in October, your option will expire worthless. That is your risk. Set your stop-loss at $100, to preserve capital, in case my expectations go awry.

That's buy the AMR October $30 put for $170, or less, good this week.
(No reference link as it's not available online.)

That was the view of Steve Sarnoff, editor of the Options Hotline. Perhaps one day truthers will tell us whether they think he was lying. And if the answer is "no", then cross this particular trade off the "suspect" list.

[Jackanory]

Bill's a "special" case. I seriously doubt he/she (yes it's believed by some Bill is a she) believes any of the things he/she says. I think he/she just likes to argue for kicks (or is very bored).

It is quite possible that Bill Smith also shares the same top draw as Dr Judy. Right next to the knickers/briefs.

Bill transforms once in a while to come here and sprout about beam rays being directed from outerspace and into the arial masts on the WTC buildings then being dissipated down the columns to melt them. The airplanes didnt exist or where holgrams - but Bill wont be drawn on that as he/she is just asking questions and wanting to know the truth.

Ya couldnt make it up! COULD YA?:jaw-dropp

[jvalens]

I found some truthers onlines who "apperantly" have a solid argument(or rather they think they have facts) to the collapse on WTC7. It reads:

"On September 11th, Towers One and Two collapsed after suffering direct hits by airliners. Building 7 was neither hit by an airliner nor damaged severely by flying debris, but at 5:20 p.m. it collapsed in the exact same accordion style of the other two towers. The official explanation by FEMA investigators claimed that WTC 7 fell as a result of burning for 7 hours.

Several weeks after the events of 9/11, Larry Silverstein, the new owner of the WTC was interviewed on TV. At this time he openly acknowledged the decision to pull Building 7. This was a public statement in which the owner of the WTC agreed to the destruction of the building.

This decision was never explained and was never questioned by the Kean Commission. The conflicting report of the FEMA investigators was also never explained. Pulling a building requires weeks, if not months of preparation. Explosives have to be carefully and strategically placed and wired. How was it possible to pull a building without first preparing for its demolition?

Larry Silverstein invested $386 million in WTC 7. On 9/11, by his own admission, Larry Silverstein ordered the demolition of his building. In February of 2002, his company won a settlement of $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers. Do the math. No one investigated. This is a confession to the demolition of Building 7. Let me repeat that, THIS IS A CONFESSION! Checkmate."


No I did not add anything, and yes he did say checkmate.

[BigAl]

I found some truthers onlines who "apperantly" have a solid argument(or rather they think they have facts) to the collapse on WTC7. It reads:

"On September 11th, Towers One and Two collapsed after suffering direct hits by airliners. Building 7 was neither hit by an airliner nor damaged severely by flying debris, but at 5:20 p.m. it collapsed in the exact same accordion style of the other two towers. The official explanation by FEMA investigators claimed that WTC 7 fell as a result of burning for 7 hours.

Several weeks after the events of 9/11, Larry Silverstein, the new owner of the WTC was interviewed on TV. At this time he openly acknowledged the decision to pull Building 7. This was a public statement in which the owner of the WTC agreed to the destruction of the building.


Don't feed the troll.

[TruthersLie]

I found some truthers onlines who "apperantly" have a solid argument(or rather they think they have facts) to the collapse on WTC7. It reads:

"On September 11th, Towers One and Two collapsed after suffering direct hits by airliners. Building 7 was neither hit by an airliner nor damaged severely by flying debris,


1st lie


but at 5:20 p.m. it collapsed in the exact same accordion style of the other two towers.

2nd lie

The official explanation by FEMA investigators claimed that WTC 7 fell as a result of burning for 7 hours.

The original hypothesis from FEMA said that. And so did the 10,000 page NIST report.

Not a lie, but inaccurate.


Several weeks after the events of 9/11, Larry Silverstein, the new owner of the WTC was interviewed on TV. At this time he openly acknowledged the decision to pull Building 7.


3rd lie. Larry S NEVER said he decided to PULL the building. Look it up.


This was a public statement in which the owner of the WTC agreed to the destruction of the building.

This decision was never explained and was never questioned by the Kean Commission. The conflicting report of the FEMA investigators was also never explained.
4th lie


Pulling a building requires weeks, if not months of preparation. Explosives have to be carefully and strategically placed and wired. How was it possible to pull a building without first preparing for its demolition?


5th lie. Pulling is not an industry term unless you are literally PULLING a building over with cables. In fact they had to PULL wtc6 over. YOu don't use explosives to PULL a building.


Larry Silverstein invested $386 million in WTC 7. On 9/11, by his own admission, Larry Silverstein ordered the demolition of his building.


6th LIE. He didn't admit any such thing.


In February of 2002, his company won a settlement of $861 million from Industrial Risk Insurers.


7th LIE. Larry S has lost over $10 BILLION. He didn't make any money.


Do the math. No one investigated. This is a confession to the demolition of Building 7. Let me repeat that, THIS IS A CONFESSION! Checkmate."

mate is right. Matie you are playing the WRONG game. You are playing checkers against Bobby Fischer. You should give up now.

[BasqueArch]

We learned, but at what cost?

As others have said, at the cost of nearly 3,000 lives.

Unfortunately this is always the way. A level crossing doesn't get barrier arms until someone gets killed there, no matter how often the authorities are warned it's dangerous. Before a fault in an aircraft must fixed, people have to die from it, otherwise it's up to the airlines to decide if they want to take on the cost of fixing it or not.

Yes it's dumb, but until someone dies, no one seems to be willing to listen to the warnings.

The US was lackadaisical about Al Qaeda before 9/11. Because of 9/11 the defenses are up, a top defense priority, a number of attempts have been stopped, drones are dissolving Al Qaeda one by one.

Nuclear and biological weapons books and information were found in Afghanistan AlQ camps. It could be worse.

Tragic though 9/11 was, it may have prevented a worse tragedy.

Everyone knows what happened, no one knows what has not happened and may not happen because of 9/11 and the increased defenses.

We just have to get them before they get US.
And the UK, Spain, France, Germany, Far East and so on ...

[TruthersLie]

basque.

As the old saying goes. We have to be right and accurate ALL of the time. Al Q only needs to get lucky once.

[deep]

Here is part of the article that you initially tried to hide:

further investigation has revealed that the trading had no connection with 9/11. A single U.S.-based institutional investor with no conceivable ties to al Qaeda purchased 95 percent of the UAL puts on September 6 as part of a trading strategy that also included buying 115,000 shares of American on September 10. Similarly, much of the seemingly suspicious trading in American on September 10 was traced to a specific U.S.-based options trading newsletter, faxed to its subscribers on Sunday, September 9, which recommended these trades.


Sorry, but those aren't verifiable facts. Who was the single investor? How "much" of the suspicious trading on September 10 was traced back to the newsletter?

You can't answer those questions.

[PhantomWolf]

The US was lackadaisical about Al Qaeda before 9/11. Because of 9/11 the defenses are up, a top defense priority, a number of attempts have been stopped, drones are dissolving Al Qaeda one by one.

However, as the Christmas Day bombing attempt has proven, they are still getting through. Was it not for the fact that AQ are almost as much Keystone Terrorists* as the FBI and CIA play the role of Keystone Cops, there'd have been another set of greiving families and red-faced law enforcement last Dec 25th.





* For example (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USS_The_Sullivans_(DDG-68)#Al_Qaeda_attack_attempt)

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Sorry, but those aren't verifiable facts. Who was the single investor? How "much" of the suspicious trading on September 10 was traced back to the newsletter?

You can't answer those questions.

Read it again, the SEC and FBI did verify that the trades were innocuous.

But that is neither here nor there, you want to nit-pick about the quote that gives the true intent of the article, while ignoring the part that proves you lied about quote-mining.

[tsig]

Sorry, but those aren't verifiable facts. Who was the single investor? How "much" of the suspicious trading on September 10 was traced back to the newsletter?

You can't answer those questions.

Then why ask them?

[deep]

Read it again, the SEC and FBI did verify that the trades were innocuous.


How can you verify that the trades were innocuous? You can't -- therefore it's not a verifiable fact.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

How can you verify that the trades were innocuous?

Contact the SEC and the FBI and ask them.

You still lied about quote-mining.

[PhantomWolf]

How can you verify that the trades were innocuous? You can't -- therefore it's not a verifiable fact.

I personally haven't measured the height of Mount Everest, does that mean that it's not a verified fact that it is 29,029 feet tall?

[Longfellow]

Then why ask them?

But. . .but. . .that's what 'truthers' do. They ask (usually meaningless such as in this case) questions so they can ignore the answers and ask more questions and ignore the answers.

Kind of like that old anti-drug commercial: I buy coke so I can work longer and make more money to buy more coke so I can work longer...

[beachnut]

Sorry, but those aren't verifiable facts. Who was the single investor? How "much" of the suspicious trading on September 10 was traced back to the newsletter?

You can't answer those questions.
You sound like Martha Stewart before she went to prison; you mean there is a paper trail? ... the paper trail is made when you trade stocks and securities, so if you want to hide, don't trade stocks; they fine (take your money) you for the tiny infractions and put you away for big ones.

Only a few fringe conspiracy theories with no real world experience are like you in failing to understand reality. This is an easy debunking, ask Martha.

Why have you failed to take this and run to earn the Pulitzer?

[jvalens]

3rd lie. Larry S NEVER said he decided to PULL the building. Look it up.

Well, he did say "pull the building", technically speaking speaking that is. Here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100


Im thinking he was trying to say something else. I dont think its reasonable to say that he never said it.

[jvalens]

Contact the SEC and the FBI and ask them.

Yeah, Im sure they wouldn't mind.

[TruthersLie]

Sorry, but those aren't verifiable facts. Who was the single investor? How "much" of the suspicious trading on September 10 was traced back to the newsletter?

You can't answer those questions.

Hey Deep did you miss this?

Quote:
September 9, 2001
Vol. 12, No. 28

Stocks Skid On A Jump In The Jobless Rate. This Week, We Take To The Air

This past week, stocks were pressed to the downside -- with the highlight being Friday's blue chip decline. Wall Street was surprised by a spike, to a four-year high, in the jobless rate. And the market took its lumps. This week, I see opportunity for you to have fun and profit with an airline play. So, without further ado, here's…

This Week's Option Recommendation

Buy the AMR October $30 put for $170, or less, good this week.

Shares of AMR Corp. trade on the New York Stock Exchange under the symbol "AMR". The symbol for this option reco is "AMRVF". American Airlines closed the week at $30.15. The 52-week range for AMR is $27.62-$43.93. My downside price target is $22-$26.

The major airline is under pressure. At $25, each $30 put would have $500 of intrinsic value. If AMR is at or above $30 on the third Friday in October, your option will expire worthless. That is your risk. Set your stop-loss at $100, to preserve capital, in case my expectations go awry.

That's buy the AMR October $30 put for $170, or less, good this week.
(No reference link as it's not available online.)


The SEC and the FBI fully investigated this TRUTHER LIE about the put options.

Yet again, 5 minutes of investagoogling.

And considering they had been LOSING money for MONTHS before 9/11... gee go figure.

[TruthersLie]

Well, he did say "pull the building", technically speaking speaking that is. Here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100


Im thinking he was trying to say something else. I dont think its reasonable to say that he never said it.


He did NOT say "pull the building." That is an outright LIE.

Technically speaking he said
"we have had such a terrible loss of life maybe the smartest decision is to pull it. And THEY made the decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

WHO made the decision to pull? Oh the FDNY made the decision to PULL OUT FIREFIGHTING EFFORTS.

Please get your facts and quotes RIGHT because you just lied 2x.

[TruthersLie]

Yeah, Im sure they wouldn't mind.

File a FOIA and ask them for their reports. The SEC and the FBI investigated the put options... and there is NOTHING there.

95% of the put orders came from Merryl Lynch. A huge investment firm.

Did they have foreknowledge? Is that it? Or could it be because of the investor report for 9/9 which says BUY PUT ORDERS?

Could it be the fact that UA and AA were both LOSING MONEY FOR MONTHS?

[bill smith]

He did NOT say "pull the building." That is an outright LIE.

Technically speaking he said
"we have had such a terrible loss of life maybe the smartest decision is to pull it. And THEY made the decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

WHO made the decision to pull? Oh the FDNY made the decision to PULL OUT FIREFIGHTING EFFORTS.

Please get your facts and quotes RIGHT because you just lied 2x.

Objectively it sounds like he said 'pull the building'. That's how it comes over in English. Do you think that Larry just made an error in the way he said it ?

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Well, he did say "pull the building", technically speaking speaking that is. Here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100


Im thinking he was trying to say something else. I dont think its reasonable to say that he never said it.

He didn't say "pull the building".

Watch it yourself and find out.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Yeah, Im sure they wouldn't mind.

Why are 9/11 truthers so afraid of investigating 9/11?

[PhantomWolf]

Objectively it sounds like he said 'pull the building'. That's how it comes over in English. Do you think that Larry just made an error in the way he said it ?

I think that he could have phrased himself better, but following the rules of English, the word "it" comes before the word "building" and therefore cannot be refering to it. "It" always refers to the previous subject, which was the firefighting effort, ie the chief's refering to being unable to contain the fires.

[Scott Sommers]

Objectively it sounds like he said 'pull the building'. That's how it comes over in English. Do you think that Larry just made an error in the way he said it ?

No, no, Bill, don't you know? Larry Silverstein is a member of a worldwide conspiracy, perhaps Jewish in nature and headed in Isreal, that is sometimes known as the New World Order. He destroyed his own billion dollar building as part of an insideous plot for something - it's not quite clear yet what that plot would be, but Scholars for 911 Truth must be on that one and that's what would make them scholars for 911 Truth. Right?

Anyway, the plot was going well. No one suspected except a bunch of high school kids from New York, until he gave it away in a TV interview where he admited it all. That's right, Billionaire Larry of the NWO admitted he had phoned the demolition team responsible for planting all those explosives in WTC 7 and told them to blow up the building. Fortunately, the FDNY and NYPD were all in on it and the building had been evacuated. That is, except for all those dead people Barry Jennings said were in the lobby of the building even though it had, until moments before he entered it, been used as an emergency hospital.

Oh Bill, it's all so confusing. Can you help me out with this? I can't figure out what happened. You've had more than 8 years to think about this and you and your Truth friends all over the world are so clever and well-educated, tell us what happened.

I've always wondered, do you think the NWO punished Larry for letting it slip? I'm new to all this, but you've had almost a decade to figure it out. Maybe some of the other clever Truthers here can help figure out this out. Did the NWO give Larry a detention? Was he grounded? This was pretty bad, though. Maybe the NWO took away Larry's car?

[bill smith]

No, no, Bill, don't you know? Larry Silverstein is a member of a worldwide conspiracy, perhaps Jewish in nature and headed in Isreal, that is sometimes known as the New World Order. He destroyed his own billion dollar building as part of an insideous plot for something - it's not quite clear yet what that plot would be, but Scholars for 911 Truth must be on that one and that's what would make them scholars for 911 Truth. Right?

Anyway, the plot was going well. No one suspected except a bunch of high school kids from New York, until he gave it away in a TV interview where he admited it all. That's right, Billionaire Larry of the NWO admitted he had phoned the demolition team responsible for planting all those explosives in WTC 7 and told them to blow up the building. Fortunately, the FDNY and NYPD were all in on it and the building had been evacuated. That is, except for all those dead people Barry Jennings said were in the lobby of the building even though it had, until moments before he entered it, been used as an emergency hospital.

Oh Bill, it's all so confusing. Can you help me out with this? I can't figure out what happened. You've had more than 8 years to think about this and you and your Truth friends all over the world are so clever and well-educated, tell us what happened.

I've always wondered, do you think the NWO punished Larry for letting it slip? I'm new to all this, but you've had almost a decade to figure it out. Maybe some of the other clever Truthers here can help figure out this out. Did the NWO give Larry a detention? Was he grounded? This was pretty bad, though. Maybe the NWO took away Larry's car?

I don't usually bother going around in circles on the Silverstein thing . But it could be that they were considering admitting to the deliberate demolition of WTC7 at that time. It had been after all a deviation from the original plan and they were still playing catch-up and making it up as they went along.

Then somebody realised it could never bave been done in isolation. The Twin Towers would inevitably have been drawn into the same picture. So thereafter it became a big no-no. That may be why Larry's admission and subsequent explanation/retraction has sounded so tortured for so long. Clawing back is never easy.

Or it could be that this was just a part of getting the conspiracy theories going. It is painfully obvious that the 'depiction of the 9/11 sonspiracy theorist' was a major part of the 9/11 psyop. A donkey to pin the tail on so to speak. It just can't be overestimated how imortant this facet of the operation was.

[Brainache]

I don't usually bother going around in circles on the Silverstein thing . But it could be that they were considering admitting to the deliberate demolition of WTC7 a tthat time. It had been after all a deviation from the original plan and they were still playing catch-up and making it up as they went along.

Then somebody realised it could never bave been done in isolation. The Twin Towers would inevitably come into the same picture. So thereafter it became a big no-no. That's why Larry's admission and subsequent explanation has sounded so tortured for so long. Clawing back is never easy.

Or it could be that this was just a part of getting the conspiracy theories going. It is painfully obvious that the 'depiction of the 9/11 sonspiracy theorist' was a major part of the 9/11 psyop. A donkey to pin the tail on so to speak.

I am so glad I don't live in your world Bill. Is anything ever what it seems?

[Dave Rogers]

Well, he did say "pull the building", technically speaking speaking that is.

Oh, good grief. What bloody year is it?

Dave

[PhantomWolf]

oh, good grief. What bloody year is it?

Dave

2003?

[Scott Sommers]

I don't usually bother going around in circles on the Silverstein thing . But it could be that they were considering admitting to the deliberate demolition of WTC7 at that time. It had been after all a deviation from the original plan and they were still playing catch-up and making it up as they went along.

Then somebody realised it could never bave been done in isolation. The Twin Towers would inevitably have been drawn into the same picture. So thereafter it became a big no-no. That may be why Larry's admission and subsequent explanation/retraction has sounded so tortured for so long. Clawing back is never easy.

Or it could be that this was just a part of getting the conspiracy theories going. It is painfully obvious that the 'depiction of the 9/11 sonspiracy theorist' was a major part of the 9/11 psyop. A donkey to pin the tail on so to speak. It just can't be overestimated how imortant this facet of the operation was.

So the police and fire department are in on it! Thanks for clearing that one up.

[A W Smith]

I don't usually bother going around in circles on the Silverstein thing . But it could be that they were considering admitting to the deliberate demolition of WTC7 at that time. It had been after all a deviation from the original plan and they were still playing catch-up and making it up as they went along.

Then somebody realised it could never bave been done in isolation. The Twin Towers would inevitably have been drawn into the same picture. So thereafter it became a big no-no. That may be why Larry's admission and subsequent explanation/retraction has sounded so tortured for so long. Clawing back is never easy.

Or it could be that this was just a part of getting the conspiracy theories going. It is painfully obvious that the 'depiction of the 9/11 sonspiracy theorist' was a major part of the 9/11 psyop. A donkey to pin the tail on so to speak. It just can't be overestimated how imortant this facet of the operation was.

Yes you certainly are that Donkey (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ass). Without the tail of course.

[funk de fino]

Sorry, but those aren't verifiable facts. Who was the single investor? How "much" of the suspicious trading on September 10 was traced back to the newsletter?

You can't answer those questions.

You do know the documents regarding this were released in the 911 commission stuff recently?

ETA - I see you went into full on semantics mode in later post.

[Sunray Breaker]

jvalens, welcome to the forums. I'd like to let you know that I was ALSO in your shoes less than a year ago. I used to be a full supporter, went to We Are Change meetings, helped them during the DNC, passed out dvd's talked to all my friends about it...But The more reseach I did and the more unanswered questions from the truthers I came across, the more my belief in the whole movement began to shift.

I realized pretty quickly that if you confront truthers about their inconsitancies, they dodge the question. Whereas the skeptic here we're more than happy to answer wholeheartedly any question I had and back it up with mountains of evidence.

The big one that got me was watching a couple of debates on the matter. It was hard for me to watch Dylan Avery, Jason Bermas, Steve Fetzer and Jones get completely pwned by both popular mechanics and Mark Roberts (debates you won't find on infowars by the way) but you can find them in a google video search. I'm currently comiling a dvd to combat the BS claims made by the truther camp in different areas. I wanted to tackle films like Endgame and Obama deception.

I highly recommend that you watch those debates as well as the film Screw Loose Change. I also made a blog on my myspace page, where I comiled various videos that debunk the truther claims pretty well and explain with exceptional sobriety and common sense, what really happened...

Here's the link to that blog if your interested.
http://blogs.myspace.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=blog.view&friendId=5581028&blogId=505365972

I understand what your going through right now. You're having doubts towards everything and feel like there's nothing left to trust out there, because you've seen the deciet from both sides and its frustrating and confusing.

But I encourage you to take many of these things into account:

- Nearly every single firefighter from ground zero (minus 1 or 2 that the turthers claim to have) agrees with the official story

-Roughly 20 or so quotes from firefighters at ground zero detail the inevitable collapse of WTC7 specifically due to fire

- Both WTC1,2 & 7 Architects agree with the official story and pwned A&E9/11TRUTH in a radio interview you can look up on you tube

- The truthers never show you the back end of building 7 in ANY of their films, this is largely due to the fact that it completely destroys their theory, as you can see the entire back end engulfed in flames...It burned for several hours unfought (which in nearly any other steel structured fire in history, would have caused a collapse as well

- The truthers also claim that no plane parts were found at the pentagon, including no bodies. Both we're found and there is photgraphic (and graphic) evidence of both.
I advise you to look here and here (warning...its graphic, but serves an educational purpose) taken from the KSM trial evidence
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/P200045.html
http://www.vaed.uscourts.gov/notablecases/moussaoui/exhibits/prosecution/P200047.html

- There's also confrimation from virtually every firefighter, including those that died, discussing the inevitable collapse of WTC1&2 due to fires that were just burning too damn hot

- The truthers falsely claim that the NIST report says that the fire melted steel. This was never claimed and fire does not melt steel (so this is whats considered a strawman argument) The steel (which loses 50% of its strength at 1800 degrees) began to bow inward, pulling on the surrounding areas and causing severe structural distortion, which led to the floors (which were already damaged by fire and had the weight of several floors above them) collapsing on top of themselves.

There is a tremendous amount of disinfo that the truther camp uses to brainwash people into thinking that their looking at an OBVIOUS inside job. But in reality, the majority if not ALL of their claims are dramatic distortions, misquotes and manipulated imagery.


I'll be trying to work on doing a full video debunking the Obama Deception in the next coupla' months, anyone who wants to help a brutha with some research, let me know!!!

Feel free to send me a personal message if you'd care to discuss anything...

Remember, Alex Jones is the devil (and coming from an atheist, thats a hell of a warning)

[Sunray Breaker]

As far as Larry Silverstein goes....The "pull it" quote is not even remotely an admission of guilt. But the TWOOFERS want you to think that.

In the interview, he's reffering to the being on the phone with the FDNY at the time that "THEY" made the decision to "pull it".

Now, truthers would have you believe that the term "pull it" is a phrase used in demolition circles to bring down a building with explosivs. In reality, this term is used to refer to collapsing a building using chains and construction equipment...Hence the PULL it part.

On the otherhand, In firefighting circles, the term PULL IT is used quite frequently, to refer to a evacuating a building and clearing the area to prepare for collapse. Notice that the truth movement goes out of its way not to mention that part. So unless you think Larry Silverstein conspired with the FDNY to demolish a building that he would have made more money on if he were still collecting rent and generating revenue from it, be my guest. But your in the company of people that can easily be equated to Holocaust deniers (not to mention they have a lot of support for and from holocaust deniers)

[jvalens]

He did NOT say "pull the building." That is an outright LIE.

Technically speaking he said
"we have had such a terrible loss of life maybe the smartest decision is to pull it. And THEY made the decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

WHO made the decision to pull? Oh the FDNY made the decision to PULL OUT FIREFIGHTING EFFORTS.

Please get your facts and quotes RIGHT because you just lied 2x.

I was never promoting the conspiracy that to "pull it," meant that he wanted the building demolished. I was just stating that he did say "pull it", when someone in this thread was saying that he NEVER SPOKE THOSE WORDS, EVER. I agree, that to have said this statement meant demolition makes no sense. With the info that I researched, that says:

"It(WTC7)fell about seven hours after the collapses of the North and South Twin Towers. (WTC-2, the South tower, collapsed around 10:00 a.m. WTC-1, the North, came down about a half hour later.) The unknown quantity of debris from WTC-1 is said to have caused fires in WTC-7 that prevailed on the 11th floor."

I would assume that to "pull it" meant to evacuate any aid that was in that building in affect to the other two towers collapsing.

[jvalens]

Why are 9/11 truthers so afraid of investigating 9/11?


To much money. Considering that their mothers only give them a weekly allowance.

[WildCat]

Well, he did say "pull the building", technically speaking speaking that is. Here it is:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7WYdAJQV100
Nowhere in that video does Silverstein say "pull the building".

Why did you lie?

[jvalens]

I know I digress alot when saying this( just want to get it out there), but one of my friends is a huge MUSE fan. Now, Im not a big fan of music, well at least not to his tastes, but people are telling me that his hardcore Truther lifestyle is in connection with this. I thought he was joking, but, is this true? I know nothing of Muse other than my friend is a fan, and that one of my Sisters likes a song called "Starlight."

[carlitos]

Muse has a stage setup that looks like the twin towers.

[jvalens]

Nowhere in that video does Silverstein say "pull the building".

Why did you lie?

Well, I must have quoted a lie . I just wanted to prove that he did say "pull it". I can honestly say that I outgrown this conspiracy quite awhile ago, so im not lying to prove anything(let alone side with the truthers). Maybe its just my 3 year alto ego truther that is trying to get out again.

I swear, its a sickness.

[jvalens]

Muse has a stage setup that looks like the twin towers.

Is that it? Are truthers digging up more crap from things that look like other things again?

[bill smith]

As far as Larry Silverstein goes....The "pull it" quote is not even remotely an admission of guilt. But the TWOOFERS want you to think that.

In the interview, he's reffering to the being on the phone with the FDNY at the time that "THEY" made the decision to "pull it".

Now, truthers would have you believe that the term "pull it" is a phrase used in demolition circles to bring down a building with explosivs. In reality, this term is used to refer to collapsing a building using chains and construction equipment...Hence the PULL it part.

On the otherhand, In firefighting circles, the term PULL IT is used quite frequently, to refer to a evacuating a building and clearing the area to prepare for collapse. Notice that the truth movement goes out of its way not to mention that part. So unless you think Larry Silverstein conspired with the FDNY to demolish a building that he would have made more money on if he were still collecting rent and generating revenue from it, be my guest. But your in the company of people that can easily be equated to Holocaust deniers (not to mention they have a lot of support for and from holocaust deniers)

I guess when you were a Truther (a pretty dedicated hardworking one too by all accounts) you, like all other Truthers must have thought that WTC7 was a controlled demolition. Now that you are on the other side- what made you change your mind about WTC7 being a controlled demolition ?

[Harpo]

It's not "controlled demolition" it's Explosive Demolition. When are the TM going to actually use the right jargon? :rolleyes:

[Sunray Breaker]

Well, I must have quoted a lie . I just wanted to prove that he did say "pull it". I can honestly say that I outgrown this conspiracy quite awhile ago, so im not lying to prove anything(let alone side with the truthers). Maybe its just my 3 year alto ego truther that is trying to get out again.

I swear, its a sickness.

You will feel that happening from time to time. It still happens to me sometimes to. Its more of an overall wacktivist/CT/Tinfoiler mindset that I tend to fall into. The hardest fanaticisms for me to wrap my head around are that of corporate corruption, data mining and the disturbing psychological effects of market research and digitalization.

I watched a great but disturbing PBS Frontline special that was just released a coupla' weeks ago by Douglass Rushkoff called Digital Nation. The film does its own independent research on the effects that an overwhelming amount of exposure to computers, ipods, iphones and internet has on the average mind.

There's also Frontline's Merchants of Cool. Where he discusses market researchers ways of constantly combing through society to find out the latest cool thing and sell it back to the kids, thus killing whatever cool thing it finds. It also begs the question of privacy and the fact that market researchers are beginning to know more about the average person than they know about themselves, which better enables them to sell someone on nearly anything. Its similar with presidential elections. The polls determine more often than not, what a president will say to get elected. He has analysts go through tons of data and focus groups to determine exactly what words and emotions people will respond positively to, and uses that to write his spech. It to me is an unfair advantage and puts me, sometimes, in that woo mindset, where I feel that our poitical system is merely a joke and the only real voters are those that get the punchline and don't think its funny.

But thankfully, the people here keep me in check.

That kind of stuff tends to lead me towards a bit of a reactionary, knee-jerk rage, similar to the way I felt the first time I saw Loose Change. Whenever you feel that creeping up on you, remember, this is a great place to assess what exactly it is out there you should be worried about. These guys provide great sources for many questions you might have about various things that get your blood boiling. You'll find this place to be quite sobering and relaxing, especially in times of anger and confusion.

Its not really a matter of these folks answering the questions that you might have, its more that they ask important questions, that people in (our) kind of emotional state, don't tend to ask.

My apologies for the rather long and (somewhat unrelated response) but thats my two cents

[Sunray Breaker]

I guess when you were a Truther (a pretty dedicated hardworking one too by all accounts) you, like all other Truthers must have thought that WTC7 was a controlled demolition. Now that you are on the other side- what made you change your mind about WTC7 being a controlled demolition ? Well it was things like what I had just mentioned above. Once I began to look at the skeptics side of the debate, without bias, I was quick to realize just HOW MUCH lying the truth movement did to make me believe what I did.

The biggest shocker was when I first saw the back end of building 7. Up until that point, I was convinced that building 7 was virtually unscathed and had only a couple of small fires that were put out. After seeing the back end of building 7, followed by quotes from FDNY Cheif Daniel Nigro and tons of other firefighters it shocked me to my core. I realised I had been so unbelievably wrong for the last 3 years of my life. I felt compelled to learn everything I could about 9/11. So I read the comission report (almost all the way through, I gave up near the end, in dire need of something fun and fictional) listened to every debate I could get my hands on, came across some GREAT sobering youtube videos (merely entitled "debunking 9/11" and began discussing these things with the people here at JREF.

I had always had a certain admiration and respect for people like James Randi, Richard Dawkins and Penn and Teller, even before I denounced my "twoofism"... And so it really hit home when I realized that I was not only on the opposing side of those who have tremendous credibility and respectability, but I was also in company of Holocaust Deniers, Anti Semites, Christian Fundamentalists, Right wing extremists and neo nazi's (which was not the determining factor for my decision, but definitely a false red flag)

But regardless of all that, if anyone willingly looks at ALL of the evidence (which, realistically will take you a year or two) its hard to see how anyone could draw the conclusion that this was anything more than a devastating terrorist attack by 19 Islamic Fundamentalists, funded by Bin Laden to hijack these planes and fly them into our buildings as a declaration of war against what he percieves to be the "head of the snake" (as Bin Laden put it.)

I also noticed that truthers were very quick to label ANYONE who questions THEM as a paid shill or disinfo agent, which p*ssed me off so much that I dug up whatever info I could on 9/11 to confront them. I've learned enough now, that I can debate almost anyone anytime anywhere on 9/11 and will do so.

Its now my mission to focus on the silly Anti-Obama woo that keeps getting spit out by ppl like Alex Jones and Glenn Beck.

This also quickly challenged my politics. Suddenly Obama was less full of **** and Ron Paul was more full of ****. Suddenly the smokey trails in the sky were just from airplanes and not chemtrails, suddenly the world wasn't this enslaved, doomed place spinning hopelessly downward into a NWO pyramid scheme...Suddenly the world was just a big ball of uncontrollable confusion, where random acts of violence and uncertainty are ALWAYS going to happen and will almost ALWAYS be the more likely cause of tragedy.

[TruthersLie]

delete.

[TruthersLie]

Well, I must have quoted a lie . I just wanted to prove that he did say "pull it". I can honestly say that I outgrown this conspiracy quite awhile ago, so im not lying to prove anything(let alone side with the truthers). Maybe its just my 3 year alto ego truther that is trying to get out again.

I swear, its a sickness.

Again.

Here is the EXACT QUOTE

"we have had such a terrible loss of life maybe the smartest decision is to pull it. And THEY made the decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

WHO made the decision to pull? Oh the FDNY made the decision to PULL OUT FIREFIGHTING EFFORTS.


he never said "pull it." He said, that they (the FDNY) made the decision to pull out the firefighting efforts.

that is truther quote mining and extremely out of context. He didn't order it demolished, he didn't say to pull it (to demolish it).

Drop the LIE. (which I called you on... and others have as well.)

[bill smith]

Well it was things like what I had just mentioned above. Once I began to look at the skeptics side of the debate, without bias, I was quick to realize just HOW MUCH lying the truth movement did to make me believe what I did.

The biggest shocker was when I first saw the back end of building 7. Up until that point, I was convinced that building 7 was virtually unscathed and had only a couple of small fires that were put out. After seeing the back end of building 7, followed by quotes from FDNY Cheif Daniel Nigro and tons of other firefighters it shocked me to my core. I realised I had been so unbelievably wrong for the last 3 years of my life. I felt compelled to learn everything I could about 9/11. So I read the comission report (almost all the way through, I gave up near the end, in dire need of something fun and fictional) listened to every debate I could get my hands on, came across some GREAT sobering youtube videos (merely entitled "debunking 9/11" and began discussing these things with the people here at JREF.

I had always had a certain admiration and respect for people like James Randi, Richard Dawkins and Penn and Teller, even before I denounced my "twoofism"... And so it really hit home when I realized that I was not only on the opposing side of those who have tremendous credibility and respectability, but I was also in company of Holocaust Deniers, Anti Semites, Christian Fundamentalists, Right wing extremists and neo nazi's (which was not the determining factor for my decision, but definitely a false red flag)

But regardless of all that, if anyone willingly looks at ALL of the evidence (which, realistically will take you a year or two) its hard to see how anyone could draw the conclusion that this was anything more than a devastating terrorist attack by 19 Islamic Fundamentalists, funded by Bin Laden to hijack these planes and fly them into our buildings as a declaration of war against what he percieves to be the "head of the snake" (as Bin Laden put it.)

I also noticed that truthers were very quick to label ANYONE who questions THEM as a paid shill or disinfo agent, which p*ssed me off so much that I dug up whatever info I could on 9/11 to confront them. I've learned enough now, that I can debate almost anyone anytime anywhere on 9/11 and will do so.

Its now my mission to focus on the silly Anti-Obama woo that keeps getting spit out by ppl like Alex Jones and Glenn Beck.

This also quickly challenged my politics. Suddenly Obama was less full of Sh*t and Ron Paul was more full of sh*t. Suddenly the smokey trails in the sky were just from airplanes and not chemtrails, suddenly the world wasn't this enslaved, doomed place spinning hopelessly downward into a NWO pyramid scheme...Suddenly the world was just a big ball of uncontrollable confusion, where random acts of violence and uncertainty are ALWAYS going to happen and will almost ALWAYS be the more likely cause of tragedy.

It's perfectly plain that you were ever a Truther of conviction. Others spoke and you followed. No offence but you were a groupie. Maybe you are still a groupie but following another band.

[Sunray Breaker]

It's perfectly plain that you were ever a Truther of conviction. Others spoke and you followed. No offence but you were a groupie. Maybe you are still a groupie but following another band.
Can you please explain how it is that after looking at the evidence of both sides, including pictures of bodies at the pentagon as well as FDNY quotes VERIFYING the collapse that I should have drawn a different conclusion?

Should I have just stuck with the whole "wtc7 had small fires and fell at free fall speed theory" that I used to believe like a good little truther? Despite evidence to the contrary?

How do you suggest I have a firm conviction of something without looking at both sides with stern sincerity. I'd say working closely with We Are Change and protesting right along side them at the DNC in my hometown, passing out flyers and engaging everyoe I knew in a debate regarding 9/11 is about as bonafide truther as you can get.

I'd say excepting the more obvious evidence over the sillier evidence, in the name of REAL truth seeking is the act of a true skeptic. Many Atheists used to Christians, Many doctors used to believein faith healing, why is it that truthers are not allowed to cross over into skepticism...

I abhor your rather simplistic generalization. Care to specify how a TRUE truther comes to the same conclusion I did?

[Sunray Breaker]

Furthermore, if you can explain to me how ALL truthers are not groupies for pseudoscientists, pseudohistorians and wacktivists.

Are you criticising me because I no longer chose to tow the twoofer party line?

[Sunray Breaker]

Also, you just contradicted yourself. One minute I'm a
pretty dedicated hardworking one too by all accounts

next minute I
was never a Truther of conviction.

please sir, make up your mind and get back to me

[Harpo]

Also, you just contradicted yourself. One minute I'm a


next minute I


please sir, make up your mind and don't get back to me

Fixed. :)

[carlitos]

Again.

Here is the EXACT QUOTE



he never said "pull it." He said, that they (the FDNY) made the decision to pull out the firefighting efforts.

that is truther quote mining and extremely out of context. He didn't order it demolished, he didn't say to pull it (to demolish it).

Drop the LIE. (which I called you on... and others have as well.)

I apologize for interjecting, but he (Silverstein) did say "pull it." Maybe that's what he (jvalens) meant. He (jvalens) isn't super-clear with his writing style.

"we have had such a terrible loss of life maybe the smartest decision is to pull it. And THEY made the decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

ETA - obviously Silverstein didn't order his building demolished, nor was it. Why in the world don't Truthers find buildings 5, 6 and the Greek Orthodox church interesting?

[Sunray Breaker]

I apologize for interjecting, but he did say "pull it." Maybe that's what he meant. He isn't super-clear with his writing style.

"we have had such a terrible loss of life maybe the smartest decision is to pull it. And THEY made the decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

I think what they BOTH missed is that whether or not he said it is irrelevant, its what he meant by saying and under what context.

PULL IT as a demo term = Pull down with chains or construction equipment

PULL IT as a fire fighting term = evacuation due to possible collapse or iminent danger

[carlitos]

Noted

[Thunder]

i saw Silverstein make this silly quite. "pull it". i knew it would cause trouble among the paranoid America-haters.

he should have said "end it" or "drop it" or "cut it"...for he was referring to the any remaining firefighting effort or other FDNY activities that was going on around WTC 7.

im sure if he actually meant "pull down the building", the PBS interviewer would have inquired further into how it was done and who exactly did it.

[carlitos]

Is that it? Are truthers digging up more crap from things that look like other things again?

No, Muse has a stage that looks like the Twin WTC Towers because Muse are truthers.

Here is the image (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MuseNIA.JPG). Note that band member B is in between top part A before it crushes down bottom part C.

[Sunray Breaker]

No, Muse has a stage that looks like the Twin WTC Towers because Muse are truthers.

Here is the image. Note that band member B is in between top part A before it crushes down bottom part C.

Its hard for me to not hate a band simply for having an over the top stage decor. This is one of those bands. Skinny Puppy had way cooler music, set design and promoted better woo.

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Here is the image (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:MuseNIA.JPG). Note that band member B is in between top part A before it crushes down bottom part C.

Pure win. :D

[BasqueArch]

The Pull It Whack-A-Mole

The firefighters were pretty sure WTC7 was going to collapse and they pulled the guys back, not the building.
------------------------------------------------------------------------


From Firehouse Magazine April 2002 - Hayden interview

"... but also we were pretty sure that 7 World Trade Center would collapse. Early on, we saw a bulge in the southwest corner between floors 10 and 13, and we had put a transit on that and we were pretty sure she was going to collapse. You actually could see there was a visible bulge, it ran up about three floors. It came down about 5 o’clock in the afternoon, but by about 2 o’clock in the afternoon we realized this thing was going to collapse.

Firehouse: Was there heavy fire in there right away?

Hayden: No, not right away, and that’s probably why it stood for so long because it took a while for that fire to develop. It was a heavy body of fire in there and then we didn’t make any attempt to fight it. That was just one of those wars we were just going to lose. We were concerned about the collapse of a 47-story building there. We were worried about additional collapse there of what was remaining standing of the towers and the Marriott, so we started pulling the people back after a couple of hours of surface removal and searches along the surface of the debris. We started to pull guys back because we were concerned for their safety.
...

Firehouse: Chief Nigro said they made a collapse zone and wanted everybody away from number 7— did you have to get all of those people out?

Hayden: Yeah, we had to pull everybody back. It was very difficult. We had to be very forceful in getting the guys out. They didn’t want to come out. There were guys going into areas that I wasn’t even really comfortable with, because of the possibility of secondary collapses. We didn’t know how stable any of this area was. We pulled everybody back probably by 3 or 3:30 in the afternoon. We said, this building is going to come down, get back. It came down about 5 o’clock or so, but we had everybody backed away by then. At that point in time, it seemed like a somewhat smaller event, but under any normal circumstances, that’s a major event, a 47-story building collapsing. It seemed like a firecracker after the other ones came down, but I mean that’s a big building, and when it came down, it was quite an event. But having gone through the other two, it didn’t seem so bad. But that’s what we were concerned about. We had said to the guys, we lost as many as 300 guys. We didn’t want to lose any more people that day.

Silverstein vindicated
FDNY pulled people back not building down

ETA: This post wasn't specifically directed at anyone here, just a clarification and the origins of "pull it."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can lead a truther to facts but you can't reason him out of something he wasn't reasoned into - Nutso Swift

[Sunray Breaker]

Basque Arch: I saw your little signature quote down there and it gave me an idea for another one...Completely unrelated, but I had to say it:

You can lead the force to Yoda but you can't make him pink.

[BasqueArch]

Basque Arch: I saw your little signature quote down there and it gave me an idea for another one...Completely unrelated, but I had to say it:

You can lead the force to Yoda but you can't make him pink.


Sunray, don't get it :) but you're on the right track.

Surrealism is sure real - Zappa

[A W Smith]

It's perfectly plain that you were ever a Truther of conviction. Others spoke and you followed. No offence but you were a groupie. Maybe you are still a groupie but following another band.


No True Scotsman logical fallacy (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_true_Scotsman) noted.

[jvalens]

Again.

Here is the EXACT QUOTE
"we have had such a terrible loss of life maybe the smartest decision is to pull it. And THEY made the decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

he never said "pull it." He said, that they (the FDNY) made the decision to pull out the firefighting efforts.

that is truther quote mining and extremely out of context. He didn't order it demolished, he didn't say to pull it (to demolish it).

Drop the LIE. (which I called you on... and others have as well.)

As I stated already, two times if you were reading, I wasn't trying to prove ANYTHING. Let me put that in exact quotes:

"Well, I must have quoted a lie"

And also, let me EXACTLY quote the video in which he EXACTLY SAYS( with 100% no changing)

" I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure that they're going to be able to contain the fire. I said, you know, we've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. They( yes I see the "they," im not ignoring it) made that decision to pull, and we watched the building collapse."

Please make sure to include all the information on quotes. Because like I repeated many times, Im NOT trying to prove that he meant to demolish the building. I just wanted to point out where the confusion may be located. That is, that he says " I said" at the start of his recollection.

[jvalens]

Sunray, don't get it :) but you're on the right track.


Well what do you mean by your signature Basque Arch?

[beachnut]

Well what do you mean by your signature Basque Arch?
" I remember getting a call from the fire department commander, telling me that they were not sure that they're going to be able to contain the fire. I said, you know, we've had such terrible loss of life, maybe the smartest thing to do is pull it. They( yes I see the "they," im not ignoring it) made that decision to pull, and we watched the building collapse."

This is a summary of the whole day. They did not pull the fire support and watch the building fall in the same minute, hour, or few hours.

Pull it is a sure sign of woo; good for that you figured out 911 after 8 years. But to argue about pulling fire support which is clearly what he was talking about is lame.

When my wife and I discovered our kid was a 911 truther we decided the smartest thing to do is pull it, and stop funding the education that is failing.

[UNLoVedRebel]

This is a summary of the whole day. They did not pull the fire support and watch the building fall in the same minute, hour, or few hours.

Pull it is a sure sign of woo; good for that you figured out 911 after 8 years. But to argue about pulling fire support which is clearly what he was talking about is lame.

When my wife and I discovered our kid was a 911 truther we decided the smartest thing to do is pull it, and stop funding the education that is failing.
Beachy, was your kid really a 911 truther? I'd like to hear the story if it's true. You should start a thread about it (it'd be your first, you're long overdue).

[BasqueArch]

Well what do you mean by your signature Basque Arch?

You can't reason someone out of something they were not reasoned into. They will ignore facts if the facts contradict what they wish to believe, other factors govern their belief in a proposition. These discussions will not affect true believers, only others who are open to be persuaded by facts and evidence.

[deep]

Here is the EXACT QUOTE

"we have had such a terrible loss of life maybe the smartest decision is to pull it. And THEY made the decision to pull and we watched the building collapse."

WHO made the decision to pull? Oh the FDNY made the decision to PULL OUT FIREFIGHTING EFFORTS.



he never said "pull it."


So, the words "pull it" appear in the text you quoted.. but he never said "pull it"?

Seriously?

[deep]

I personally haven't measured the height of Mount Everest, does that mean that it's not a verified fact that it is 29,029 feet tall?


The methodology & data used to calculate the height is publicly available, which makes it verifiable.

[Jackanory]

Well, I must have quoted a lie . I just wanted to prove that he did say "pull it". I can honestly say that I outgrown this conspiracy quite awhile ago, so im not lying to prove anything(let alone side with the truthers). Maybe its just my 3 year alto ego truther that is trying to get out again.

I swear, its a sickness.

1 - May i suggest that you simply stop reading what truthers say and certainly stop quoting what they say they heard or read. Its a never ending cycle of rehashed hearsay, fact altering or evidence manipulating. That is how conspiracy theories start. Like a dog chasing its own tail.

2 - The term 'PULL IT' is a truther thing. It is nothing more than an overhyped buzz phrase used by truthers to sound knowledgable and to tempt more gullible fools to a dumb idea.

3 - I dont believe for one minute that you have outgrown the 'alto ego truther' thing. Your an addict on methadone at the minute but its easy to go back to the heroine if you keep looking for it.

[beachnut]

Beachy, was your kid really a 911 truther? I'd like to hear the story if it's true. You should start a thread about it (it'd be your first, you're long overdue).
I was giving an example where you would use pull it. Pull their funding!

I had to ask my Grandson to "pull it" one day...
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/keynansubwoofer2.jpg
He went ahead an pulled it, and we had our new sub!
http://i286.photobucket.com/albums/ll116/tjkb/sub1a.jpg

My kids usually call me when they think something is bogus; I suggest they look it up and give them my take. They need to figure it out for themselves.
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/124474606cb5f85019.jpg
Completing college beats hanging out with a high school dropout.
http://forums.randi.org/imagehosting/12447460d8430f0ca9.jpg

[jvalens]

3 - I dont believe for one minute that you have outgrown the 'alto ego truther' thing. Your an addict on methadone at the minute but its easy to go back to the heroine if you keep looking for it.

Well said.

I just thought that this was a place to help me correct myself from my past truther lifestyle. That this place just doesn't say, " Dont be a truther , their wrong." But provide me with really good evidence on why I was wrong. That's all im looking for.

[DGM]

Well said.

I just thought that this was a place to help me correct myself from my past truther lifestyle. That this place just doesn't say, " Dont be a truther , their wrong." But provide me with really good evidence on why I was wrong. That's all im looking for.
And your right, this is the place to "get straight". Some people are going to question your motives but, as long as you stay true to your convictions and are willing to listen (and question)and possibly except answers when they are given, you'll do fine.

[Edx]

So, the words "pull it" appear in the text you quoted.. but he never said "pull it"?

Seriously?

Its silly to say Silverstein never said Pull It, the point is obviously that he never meant what truther's claim he meant.

[sadhatter]

So instead of just redoing the interview without his dead giveaway of an evil plot, they decide to keep the interview.....what to give the truthers something? This is one ot the silliest things i have heard from the truth movement.

Why are those responsible complete idiots when it comes to technology? ( except if it is of the building destroying kind.), They seem to be unable to hit rewind or delete on a camera, have no clue how to stop youtube users from posting videos, and cannot disrupt the communications of any of their enemies.

The pull it thing is a front runner for silliest " proof " of 9/11 being a conspiracy. Only if you admit that the big evil organization is too stupid to do 2 takes , does it make any sense at all.

[Thunder]

Its silly to say Silverstein never said Pull It, the point is obviously that he never meant what truther's claim he meant.

indeed. he did say "pull it". but he meant pull the firefighting and rescue effort...not WTC 7.

it takes WEEKS to put together a successful demolition job. its not something that can just be put together in a few hours. and it would be impossible to do it in a burning building.

[TruthersLie]

So, the words "pull it" appear in the text you quoted.. but he never said "pull it"?

Seriously?

When you don't datamine/quotemine you see the context it appears in. But wait.. you are just JAQ'ing off right?

Don't play coy. Did he order it PULLED?

He never said "PULL THE BUILDING" (which is what I was responding to).

But then again, what do you expect from a twoof except for datamining (like that horrible job with SNOPES and put orders), bad reading comprehension (like the "pull it"), and regular idiocy (like truthers in general).

But thank you for demonstrating how quote mining works. It is greatly instructive.

[PhantomWolf]

The methodology & data used to calculate the height is publicly available, which makes it verifiable.

Who made it publically available?

[Sunray Breaker]

Has Bill Smith always picked little fights and run away before the answer comes to him?

I asked him a question and it seems he's afraid to answer it.

[Telltale Tom]

I often wonder why the Government people who demolished the towers told Larry Silverstein, the BBC and several hundred fireman that they were about to blow up WTC 7, but they didn't give any warning for the other two towers.

What advantage would they get from it.? Several come to my mind:

- They felt sorry for all the firemen, police and other government people they had killed, and wanted to make sure the rest were safe.
- They were embarrassed about the mess they had caused
- They forgot it was a secret and let it slip.

The first one is my favorite, can anyone else think of anything else.?

I just cannot believe the debunkers claim, that the building was groaning and swaying after so many hours on fire and because there were so many casulties people just felt it was about to collapse.

[BigAl]

I just cannot believe the debunkers claim, that the building was groaning and swaying after so many hours on fire and because there were so many casulties people just felt it was about to collapse.

Minus the hyperbole, yes.