The 9/11 Truther Credo

[orphia nay]

The 9/11 Truther Credo.

a.k.a.: The 9/11 TWOOfer Credo

(Inspired by (and text in blue shamelessly stolen from) The Woo-Woo Credo (http://www.watchingyou.com/woowoo.html).)



Google “9/11 truth”. Think, “Wooooo”. Keep clicking on googlebombed links. Think, “Woo” some more. Refer to your googling as “real research”. Keep thinking, “Woo”.


Connect the dots. Read about “holes in the official story”. Make leaps to conclusions between one “hole” and another. Those dots just don’t connect themselves, you know.


Never look for the simplest, most obvious cause of something. Refrain from mentioning Occam's Razor (it's your nemesis). Instead, use Smacco’s Razor. “It couldn’t have been 19 hijackers – it must have been one big, corrupt gubmint/media.”


Fight strawmen valiantly. Repeatedly state that 9/11 was not caused by “Arabs in caves”, and that burning jet fuel alone did not bring down the buildings. Accuse your opponents of being George Bush-lovers, and dismiss their evidence accordingly.


Misuse technical terms as often as possible. The terms “squib” and “pyroclastic flow” are your friends.


Use one myth to support another myth.
“They were going to create a false-flag operation (Northwoods) in the Sixties therefore 9/11 was an inside job”.
“Oswald didn’t kill Kennedy therefore 9/11 was an inside job”.
“9/11 was an inside job therefore anyone who disagrees with me is a disinformation agent”.


Smoke weed copiously. You can never have enough paranoia and crazy thoughts.


Embrace paranoia. When someone uses facts to prove one of your claims wrong, call them a “disinformation agent”, “shill”, or say that they are “spinning”.


Always claim that the other guy is "closed-minded" and that you're as free-thinking as a newborn baby. Other woo-woos love the concept of "open-mindedness" and will take you into their inner circle without question. They have no tolerance for those "mean old nasty" types who demand evidence for everything.


You must believe that the word "anomaly" means proof of sinister gubmint activity.


Use the word "anomaly" as often as possible. If you can’t spell it, say ‘holes in the official story’.


Pontificate, use diatribe and rhetoric. Call your opponents, “sheeple” and urge them to “wake up”. They may have gone to sleep during your rants. They also need urging to “connect the dots” as you have.


Use Caps-Lock in the word “TRUTH” wherever possible, or at least capitalize the first letter of “Truth”. Better still, SHOUT TO GET YOUR POINT ACROSS. Bystanders may be as easily swayed as you are, you hope.


Call the “official story” (the scientific, evidence-based, professional investigation and conclusion) the “official conspiracy theory” so that easily swayed people will, in one fell swoop, stop using logic, science and evidence to analyse the material.


Call yourself a “skeptic”, so that easily swayed people will, in one fell swoop, think you are using logic, science and evidence in your discussion.


Accuse your opponent of being a liar, or try some other tactic that will (hopefully) make him angry. If he responds in kind to your endless taunts, change the subject to his anger, and accuse him of name calling. If he accuses you of provoking him, then you have changed the subject of the debate. If he stays on topic, keep the heat up. The Believers in the audience will forgive the worst verbal attacks you use, but they will think even the mildest replies he makes to you are personal attacks that undermine his argument.


Change the subject. When discussing the WTC, quote the reports of loud explosions and Steven Jones’ theory of therm*te, and then when someone points out those quotes are incompatible, refer to or post a long cut’n’pasted article from rense.com about Bush needing to be impeached.


Use incredulity.
Re: WTC7:
“I can’t believe that a WTC building not hit by a plane collapsed!”
So WTC1 & 2 collapsed?
“Er, no, they had to be demolished too.”


Ask questions. That makes it look as though you’ve done some thinking (or parroting).


Ignore answers. Keep asking the same questions. Think, “Wooooo”. It’s fun to say, “Wooooo”. 9/11 is all about fun, right? And feeling like you’re doing some “real research” and investigation. Because. They’re. Never. Going. To. Re-open. 9/11. Based. On. Your. “Investigation”.


Have inflated self-esteem. “All the structural engineers in the world are wrong, but I know the TRUTH”.


Derail. In discussion forums, when others are discussing a topic, introduce a 9/11 twoof-related question. When someone replies with a quick debunk, make a huge post uploading all your brain’s delusions, and expect everyone to debunk them succinctly yet in depth, and to not refer to physics, engineering, FEMA, NIST, etc, or 9/11 Myths, Popular Mechanics, Mark Roberts, Wikipedia, etc, etc. When they try, accuse them of being disinformation agents. If they don’t try, claim you’ve proven the “inside job”.

[Oliver]

... Never use the suggested quote-button - it´s a trap!

[T.A.M.]

I love it. Add in a bit about "Experts are useless" and we will have it complete.

TAM:)

[defaultdotxbe]

and play Come Join Us by Bad Religion over and over and over and over and over again

[NickUK]

Learn these words!

"Obviously"

"Clearly"

"Common sense"

"Doesn't add up"

[LashL]

Excellent, orphia nay!

Also, could add the usual tWOOfer mantra that they "don't need no stinkin' evidence" because all they need is "common sense" to totally debunk hundreds of real live experts in all of the relevant fields, because they personally just "know" more than all of those actual experts in physics, engineering, communications, aeronautics, mechanics, videography, photography, military operations, and all manner of numerous branches of science, technology, arts, humanities, law - you name it, they just "know" it.

[Curnir]

Learn these words!

"Obviously"

"Clearly"

"Common sense"

"Doesn't add up"

and.

"stands to reason"

"some bloke at the pub told me"

[defaultdotxbe]

Learn these words!

"Obviously"

"Clearly"

"Common sense"

"Doesn't add up"

and.

"stands to reason"

"some bloke at the pub told me"
its like truther mad libs

[orphia nay]

Thanks, T.A.M. and LashL. :) :)

"Mad libs"... hehehe. :)

---

Claim that you are “obviously” and “clearly” using “common sense” and that “experts are useless”. Ignore the fact that experts in physics, engineering, communications, aeronautics, mechanics, videography, photography, military operations, and all manner of numerous branches of science, technology, arts, humanities, and law disagree with the twoofer version, and be adamant that “it stands to reason” that the official story “doesn’t add up”. Use common sense and be incredulous that WTC2 fell first, and don’t “add up” the fact that the plane’s impact site was 20 floors lower than WTC1’s.

(With acknowledgement to T.A.M., NickUK, LashL and Curnir.)

[Blackadder_no]

and that you're as free-thinking as a newborn baby.

I.e. completely devoid of any form of knowledge about real life... :)

[Firestone]

... Think outside the box !

[PerryLogan]

The news is controlled, unless you like the story.
Government officials are liars, unless you like what they say.
Use your own assumptions to prove your theory (i.e., you can ignore all government reports because the government did it).
FACT typed in caps means NOT EVEN REMOTELY TRUE.
Self-contradiction? OK!
When in doubt, smear.

[Architect]

Put as many people as you can on "ignore", esp. if they actually identify the many gaping flaws in your "evidence"

[Horatius]

Claim that you are “obviously” and “clearly” using “common sense” and that “experts are useless”. Ignore the fact that experts in physics, engineering, communications, aeronautics, mechanics, videography, photography, military operations, and all manner of numerous branches of science, technology, arts, humanities, and law disagree with the twoofer version, and be adamant that “it stands to reason” that the official story “doesn’t add up”. Use common sense and be incredulous that WTC2 fell first, and don’t “add up” the fact that the plane’s impact site was 20 floors lower than WTC1’s.


Don't forget the follow-up:

Once your "obvious" "common sense" has been shown to be insane gibberish, create a sock, and then make the exact same arguments, but this time claiming you can't use "common sense", you MUST use physics! Accuse anyone using "common sense" of being a small-minded idiot sheeple.

But be sure to never, ever, actually use any physics (or math! Blech!). Just make broad claims about "physics states this" and "physics dictates that".

[TjW]

NEVER engage people who respond politely and factually. Only engage those who are clearly irritated with having rebutted the same tripe over and over. Then complain that they have resorted to taunts and insults because they can't rebut your claims.

[defaultdotxbe]

NEVER engage people who respond politely and factually. Only engage those who are clearly irritated with having rebutted the same tripe over and over. Then complain that they have resorted to taunts and insults because they can't rebut your claims.
as a corrollary to this, dont bother searching past threads and topics to see what issues have been discussed previously, your evidence is rock solid and anyone who sees it cant help but be convinced of an inside job, since the folks you are engaging dont believe in an inside job, they could not have seen the evidence you have

[NickUK]

Also, any professional qualifications you or your fellow conspiracists have can be misrepresented, bolstered or simply plucked from thin air during a debate.

Remember - the shills have the entire NWO apparatus on their side; you're allowed some leeway too.

[Kage]

Never post on topic - when backed into a corner change the subject. This prevents any subject's being resolved and allows debunked material to be recycled.

Bring up previously debunked material. This cycle of the same material will prevent anyone from realizing that any one of the many theories lacks a cohesive narrative or makes sense globally.

Treat all information and sources as equal. Youtube, AFP, other conspiracy sites, are equal to the NYT, scientific reports, and expert opinion. Anyone who disagrees is calling your sources liars.

Never answer questions, your job is to ask the questions. This allows you to keep enough controll of the debate to prevent the house of cards from falling all around you. Ban anyone who asks too many questions from your forums.

[orphia nay]

:newlol Great additions!!!

I'm going to add most of those replies (there are a couple which are specific only to one or two individual CTists here) to the Credo, giving credit, and upload the whole thing to my blog (small and insignificant that it is), but I'm thinking I might see about getting some free web space for it. If you object, or have any further suggestions, do the post-ish thingy.

[JimBenArm]

:newlol Great additions!!!

I'm going to add most of those replies (there are a couple which are specific only to one or two individual CTists here) to the Credo, giving credit, and upload the whole thing to my blog (small and insignificant that it is), but I'm thinking I might see about getting some free web space for it. If you object, or have any further suggestions, do the post-ish thingy.

When it's up, post a link to it here. Love to see it.

[Tirdun]

(deleted)

[PerryLogan]

"Embrace paranoia" would make a wonderful T-shirt.

[Kiwiwriter]

I would just add these:

Always bring up USS Liberty as proof the US government kills its own people. When someone points out that the Israelis did it, say that was a "false flag" attack orchestrated by Lyndon Johnson.

Accuse firefighters, cops, EMS techs, and rescue workers as being part of the conspiracy, afraid to speak the truth for fear of their jobs and lives. When called out on this gross insult, say you're really on the side of the firefighters, cops, and EMS techs.

Offer no proof as to how the evil conspirators are able to hold thousands of cops, firefighters, and EMS techs in fear of their lives over not speaking the truth about the murder of their brothers in uniform.

Declare every piece of evidence against you as being a forgery or a fraud. But don't explain who does the forgery, and how it was done, with no slip-ups.

Insist that all official investigations are whitewashes, but don't explain how they should be done instead.

Argue that the Bush administration planned 9/11 perfectly, but ignore the fact that they hosed up the search for Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq beyond all measure.

Insist that there is no possibility of anything in the world happening as the result of chance, luck, weather, or other random elements. Everything that has ever been happened in human history is controlled by sinister forces, who have not left any kind of paper or human trail.

Sneer at all scientific evidence that opposes your theory, to cover your ignorance on the subject. Apply "common sense" when it's clear you have no knowledge of the subject.

Repeat ad nauseum. :D

[orphia nay]

Thanks, Kiwiwriter. :) I love your contributions!!

Thanks, Perry, and JimBenArm. I'm still trying to find an ad-free web space I like, and haven't posted to my blog yet, but I'll let you know A.S.A.P.

I've thought of some more too:

Don’t investigate or talk to the organisations you accuse of conspiracy to murder. Post a picture of men in uniforms at the Pentagon or Shanksville and say they were “in on it” or “planting evidence” then walk away.

The few eyewitness reports which you have quotemined are worth much more than the thousands of eyewitness reports that don’t support your beliefs.

And I think I'll finish off with this one, unless it can be improved upon:

Obstinately insist that 9/11 was an inside job, but do not name any names, organisations or methodologies as to how it was carried out, then claim you pity the victims’ families but do not perceive either how you are reopening old wounds or how you wish to rip their world apart again based on a few dumb questions.

[EvilBiker]

Anybody with a higher qualification than you is obviously a government shill.

When asked for your own credentials, obfuscate. Common sense rules!

[orphia nay]

Bumped for forumites who missed seeing this over the holiday season.

I haven't had time to find a site for it yet, so I'm still open to contributions.

[kimota]

From Alex Jones himself about dealing with those that oppose the twoofer view:
Don't respond to them, never respond to them and stick with your talking points.
Try to discredit them first.
If you get into trouble, throw out "strawman" or "yellow journalism".
Before venturing out, inform the group that you will be polite and just talk. Warn that detractors will try to double-team you or engage in a shouting match, but don't fall for that. However, when it comes down to it, double-teaming and shouting down detractors is acceptable.

Pro twoofer message boards are indispensable. You can copiously congratulate each other for your latest YouTube discovery. You can also state that you went to JREF and "totally destroyed Gravy's arguments" when you mean you "totally put Gravy on ignore".

[pagan]

The anti truther credos are:

1. Bush is our friend
2. Bush is a nice guy.
3a. Bush always tells the truth.
3b. Bush may be lying about everything. But when it comes to 9-11 he is truthfull.
4. We don't care about scientific arguments. It is more important for us to be PC.
5. We don't like scepticism if inappropriate. Remember it got to be PC.

This was just a few for ya Bush lovers. Feel free to add some more. I may add a few more later.

[Oliver]

The anti truther credos are:

1. Bush is our friend
2. Bush is a nice guy.
3a. Bush always tells the truth.
3b. Bush may be lying about everything. But when it comes to 9-11 he is truthfull.
4. We don't care about scientific arguments. It is more important for us to be PC.
5. We don't like scepticism if inappropriate. Remember it got to be PC.

This was just a few for ya Bush lovers. Feel free to add some more. I may add a few more later.

*LOL* :D

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=72276
http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=6

[Flo]

From Alex Jones himself about dealing with those that oppose the twoofer view:
Don't respond to them, never respond to them and stick with your talking points.
Try to discredit them first.
If you get into trouble, throw out "strawman" or "yellow journalism".
Before venturing out, inform the group that you will be polite and just talk. Warn that detractors will try to double-team you or engage in a shouting match, but don't fall for that. However, when it comes down to it, double-teaming and shouting down detractors is acceptable.

Pro twoofer message boards are indispensable. You can copiously congratulate each other for your latest YouTube discovery. You can also state that you went to JREF and "totally destroyed Gravy's arguments" when you mean you "totally put Gravy on ignore".


Amateur ... ;)

Television interview technique (1): Go in with something to say and say it--irrespective of the question. You can always say "That's not the real question" and then ask the one you want to answer.
(2): If the interviewer says "A lot of people are worried..." say "What do you mean, a lot of people? Name six!" They can never think of more than two.
(3): If a question is tricky, attack one word in it "Frequently? What do you mean Frequently?"
(4): Attack the interviewer: "You obviously haven't read the White Paper".
(5): Ask a question back. "That's a very good question. Now let me ask you one".
(6): Say "There are ten points I'd like to make in reply." There is never time for ten points, so when they ask you to give just three, say that would be trivializing the issue. Anything that really interests the viewer can be dismissed as trivializing. (Sir Humphrey Appleby - Yes Prime Minister)

[volatile]

I don't know what happened! I'm just asking questions...

[PerryLogan]

When in doubt, use your bullhorn.

Always miss the point. If you always miss the point, they can't defeat you.

If you start to lose, call your opponent a neocon (ouch!).

When you're really whupped, declare a phony victory and quit. Report to Sock Puppet Central to receive new identity.

[westprog]

and.

"stands to reason"

"some bloke at the pub told me"

"I'm just asking questions"

[westprog]

The anti truther credos are:

1. Bush is our friend
2. Bush is a nice guy.
3a. Bush always tells the truth.
3b. Bush may be lying about everything. But when it comes to 9-11 he is truthfull.
4. We don't care about scientific arguments. It is more important for us to be PC.
5. We don't like scepticism if inappropriate. Remember it got to be PC.

This was just a few for ya Bush lovers. Feel free to add some more. I may add a few more later.

Some good new ones there.

"Bush told lies, so he is lying about 911"
"If you don't think the US government carried out the WTC attacks, you are defending Bush. Bush is evil. Therefore you are evil."

CT sillygisms.

There's also the 25k argument from patriotism.

"You think a few cavemen killed thousands of Americans with box cutters. So you are unpatriotic. I think it was the US government, armed forces, police, CIA and fire department. Which means I love my country very much."

[westprog]

When in doubt, use your bullhorn.

Always miss the point. If you always miss the point, they can't defeat you.

If you start to lose, call your opponent a neocon (ouch!).

When you're really whupped, declare a phony victory and quit. Report to Sock Puppet Central to receive new identity.

Sieze on the irrelevant detail. This is important, but it has to be combined with getting all your own details hopelessly wrong - both relevant and irrelevant.

Sometimes this works well. If you can get debunkers discussing the long list of factual errors, they can be distracted from the totally invalid reasoning.

[westprog]

I don't know what happened! I'm just asking questions...

Sorry, duplicated that one. But it is most obvious.

[pagan]

Some good new ones there.

"Bush told lies, so he is lying about 911"
"If you don't think the US government carried out the WTC attacks, you are defending Bush. Bush is evil. Therefore you are evil."

CT sillygisms.

There's also the 25k argument from patriotism.

"You think a few cavemen killed thousands of Americans with box cutters. So you are unpatriotic. I think it was the US government, armed forces, police, CIA and fire department. Which means I love my country very much."


The 9-11 issue is very much tied to the Iraq war and the "war on terrorism". In these events Bush has told only lies. WMD etc etc.
These events were the direct result of 9-11.

So yes, Bush has told so many lies so why trust him (his adm) on the 9-11 issue? You have to be very (extremly) naive to belive the Bush adm regarding 9-11 when it was the catalyst for these clearly desired events.

Syllygisms? Let's see? So Bush is not evil? Hasn't it been proved that 9-11 had nothing whatsoever to do with Saddam? Bush himself have admitted that. Saddam had no WMD's. The reasons for going to war were false.

So, yes if you still believe in Bush and support him. You either have to be real fokkin stupid or plain evil.


Well , we have two competing conspiracy theories here our option that elements within the Bushadm did it or 19 muslim cokeheads directed from a cave in Afghanistan by a kidney patient.

Our version is much more belieable IMO. Who ordered the standdown of NORAD? The kidney patient or Cheney?

[maccy]

The 9-11 issue is very much tied to the Iraq war and the "war on terrorism". In these events Bush has told only lies. WMD etc etc.
These events were the direct result of 9-11.

So yes, Bush has told so many lies so why trust him (his adm) on the 9-11 issue? You have to be very (extremly) naive to belive the Bush adm regarding 9-11 when it was the catalyst for these clearly desired events.

Syllygisms? Let's see? So Bush is not evil? Hasn't it been proved that 9-11 had nothing whatsoever to do with Saddam? Bush himself have admitted that. Saddam had no WMD's. The reasons for going to war were false.

So, yes if you still believe in Bush and support him. You either have to be real fokkin stupid or plain evil.


Well , we have two competing conspiracy theories here our option that elements within the Bushadm did it or 19 muslim cokeheads directed from a cave in Afghanistan by a kidney patient.

Our version is much more belieable IMO. Who ordered the standdown of NORAD? The kidney patient or Cheney?

There was no NORAD standown.

There is evidence that Bush was dishonest about WMDs.

There is no evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.

That's the difference: evidence - not anybody's opinion of Bush, that's irrelevant.

[Oliver]

The 9-11 issue is very much tied to the Iraq war and the "war on terrorism". In these events Bush has told only lies. WMD etc etc.
These events were the direct result of 9-11.

So yes, Bush has told so many lies so why trust him (his adm) on the 9-11 issue? You have to be very (extremly) naive to belive the Bush adm regarding 9-11 when it was the catalyst for these clearly desired events.

Syllygisms? Let's see? So Bush is not evil? Hasn't it been proved that 9-11 had nothing whatsoever to do with Saddam? Bush himself have admitted that. Saddam had no WMD's. The reasons for going to war were false.

So, yes if you still believe in Bush and support him. You either have to be real fokkin stupid or plain evil.


Well , we have two competing conspiracy theories here our option that elements within the Bushadm did it or 19 muslim cokeheads directed from a cave in Afghanistan by a kidney patient.

Our version is much more belieable IMO. Who ordered the standdown of NORAD? The kidney patient or Cheney?

Boy, you need to go to the politics
subforum and you will see that nobody
praises Bush in here.

http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?t=72276
http://forums.randi.org/forumdisplay.php?f=6

So please, stop whining... :rolleyes:

[volatile]

Pagan! I'm British. So is Maccy.

I'm also involved in left-wing activism, and am a carrot-munching vegan hippie doing a liberal arts doctorate with a proto-Marxist supervisor. I'm rabidly anti-war, anti-guns, pro-choice, anti-religious (and atheist). I'm very concerned about the Patriot Act, and laws modelled on it in my country. I have written to my MP on these issues. I believe in non-heirachical, local politics. I'm tattooed from shin to wrist and back again. Basically, I'm about as far from a GOP supporter as it might be possible to get.

Accepting that Arabic terrorism caused 9-11 does not mean accepting that there was no subsequent manipulation of the situation for political ends. You can be very anti-Bush without having to resort to decrying the laws of physics!

As I've stated before in these forums, all this talk of imaginary explosives and pretend conspiracies and NWOs and Illuminati and Satanic Death Cults are actually a distraction from the really bad stuff your (and my) government are up to! You're not helping the cause, you're very much hindering it. And it's very, very frustrating.

You come across as quite young. A teenager, or just slightly older. You'll learn about the world in time, son, and you'll realise that grey is much more interesting, and plausible, to black and white. Left-wing politics is not about claiming the Bush and the GOP are the Devil, and the sooner you realise this, the better!

[maccy]

Pagan! I'm British. So is Maccy.

I'm also involved in left-wing activism, and am a carrot-munching vegan hippie doing a liberal arts doctorate with a proto-Marxist supervisor. I'm rabidly anti-war, anti-guns, pro-choice, anti-religious (and atheist). I'm very concerned about the Patriot Act, and laws modelled on it in my country. I have written to my MP on these issues. I believe in non-heirachical, local politics. I'm tattooed from shin to wrist and back again. Basically, I'm about as far from a GOP supporter as it might be possible to get.

Accepting that Arabic terrorism caused 9-11 does not mean accepting that there was no subsequent manipulation of the situation for political ends. You can be very anti-Bush without having to resort to decrying the laws of physics!

As I've stated before in these forums, all this talk of imaginary explosives and pretend conspiracies and NWOs and Illuminati and Satanic Death Cults are actually a distraction from the really bad stuff your (and my) government are up to! You're not helping the cause, you're very much hindering it. And it's very, very frustrating.

You come across as quite young. A teenager, or just slightly older. You'll learn about the world in time, son, and you'll realise that grey is much more interesting, and plausible, to black and white. Left-wing politics is not about claiming the Bush and the GOP are the Devil, and the sooner you realise this, the better!

If you look at Pagan's profile, you'll see that he is 46 years old.

For the record, I'll state that I have been a peace campaigner, on and off, since 1983. I protested against both Iraq Wars and the Afghanistan one. I have no love for Bush and consider both US parties and American political thinking in general to be too right-wing (to generalise) and a betrayal of America's poor. Furthermore, I consider American foreign policy since 1945 to have been an almost completely unmitigated disaster for the world and that the actions of the CIA, in particular, have been reprehensible. I vote for a left-wing fringe party, the Alliance for Green Socialism, in elections because I can't bring myself to vote for Tony Blair's Labour Party.

All this is just for information, I'm not about to start a debate on any of these issues. I'm just confirming to Pagan how wrong his assumptions are.

[PerryLogan]

I didn't even know I was a Bush-loving neocon till I started talking to Truthers.

What gave me away--the hair, or the sandals?

[pagan]

Pagan! I'm British. So is Maccy.

I'm also involved in left-wing activism, and am a carrot-munching vegan hippie doing a liberal arts doctorate with a proto-Marxist supervisor. I'm rabidly anti-war, anti-guns, pro-choice, anti-religious (and atheist). I'm very concerned about the Patriot Act, and laws modelled on it in my country. I have written to my MP on these issues. I believe in non-heirachical, local politics. I'm tattooed from shin to wrist and back again. Basically, I'm about as far from a GOP supporter as it might be possible to get.

Accepting that Arabic terrorism caused 9-11 does not mean accepting that there was no subsequent manipulation of the situation for political ends. You can be very anti-Bush without having to resort to decrying the laws of physics!

As I've stated before in these forums, all this talk of imaginary explosives and pretend conspiracies and NWOs and Illuminati and Satanic Death Cults are actually a distraction from the really bad stuff your (and my) government are up to! You're not helping the cause, you're very much hindering it. And it's very, very frustrating.

You come across as quite young. A teenager, or just slightly older. You'll learn about the world in time, son, and you'll realise that grey is much more interesting, and plausible, to black and white. Left-wing politics is not about claiming the Bush and the GOP are the Devil, and the sooner you realise this, the better!


We have a lot in common, except that I am a right winger. The rest we have in common, except for the tatoos.

The stange thing here is that the traditional liberals/lefties are practically on the same side as Bush/Blair ( Chomsky, counterpunch , Raimondo, antiwar.) This is paralyzing the anti-war movement. You are no lover of Blair. He acts like Bush little obedient poddle.

I as a rightwing european am totally against this war agaisnt the Arabs. It is an Israeli/American war that we have nothing to do with. Blair the traitor is pushing his European cousins into this war for oil. Basicly this is exactly what it is about, they want to control the oil. That is the bottom line.

[JimBenArm]

I didn't even know I was a Bush-loving neocon till I started talking to Truthers.

What gave me away--the hair, or the sandals?

I think it was the drool and the vacant stare.

[mrfreeze]

Left-wing politics is not about claiming the Bush and the GOP are the Devil, and the sooner you realise this, the better!

Man you really aren't from the states are you? :D

[volatile]

We have a lot in common, except that I am a right winger.

I bet you don't even know what that means.

The stange thing here is that the traditional liberals/lefties are practically on the same side as Bush/Blair ( Chomsky, counterpunch , Raimondo, antiwar.) This is paralyzing the anti-war movement. You are no lover of Blair. He acts like Bush little obedient poddle.

Sorry, WHAT? Noam Chomsky and AntiWar.com are pro-Bush? Are you on drugs?

I as a rightwing european am totally against this war agaisnt the Arabs. It is an Israeli/American war that we have nothing to do with. Blair the traitor is pushing his European cousins into this war for oil. Basicly this is exactly what it is about, they want to control the oil. That is the bottom line.

Not strictly true, but you're on the right lines at least. This shows thermite brought down the WTC how?

[volatile]

Man you really aren't from the states are you? :D

Heh. I live in a country where "liberal" isn't an insult, that's true! :)

[JimBenArm]

Heh. I live in a country where "liberal" isn't an insult, that's true! :)

Yeah, I live in part of the States where if you say "liberal" they pump a round in the chamber, and look at you funny.

[pagan]

I bet you don't even know what that means.



Sorry, WHAT? Noam Chomsky and AntiWar.com are pro-Bush? Are you on drugs?



Not strictly true, but you're on the right lines at least. This shows thermite brought down the WTC how?


For me it basicly means that I am a European nationalist and that I dislike Americans (they are the bad guys) The Arabs and the Palestinians are the victims.
And as you are a Brit that David Irving is an Hero.

Chomsky is a total fraud, this bogus icon for the American left. The stoopid bastid is a common zionist.

[volatile]

Yeah, I live in part of the States where if you say "liberal" they pump a round in the chamber, and look at you funny.

Yeah, I remember watching quite slack-jawed during the last presidential election, as the Republicans accused the Dems of being "liberal" at every opportunity, whereby the Dems went to great lengths to prove they weren't.

I think that'd be an interesting political science graduate study - how did the word 'liberal' cease to have any real meaning in US politics? It's really absurd.

Our third biggest part are called the "Liberal Democrats", and most European countries have a Liberal party. Canada does too, doesn't it? It describes a very sensible, historically important and credibly defensible form of political engagement. It's so strange to see how the word's used in America.

[maccy]

We have a lot in common, except that I am a right winger. The rest we have in common, except for the tatoos.

The stange thing here is that the traditional liberals/lefties are practically on the same side as Bush/Blair ( Chomsky, counterpunch , Raimondo, antiwar.) This is paralyzing the anti-war movement. You are no lover of Blair. He acts like Bush little obedient poddle.

I as a rightwing european am totally against this war agaisnt the Arabs. It is an Israeli/American war that we have nothing to do with. Blair the traitor is pushing his European cousins into this war for oil. Basicly this is exactly what it is about, they what to control the oil. That is the bottom line.

If anything is paralysing the anti-war movement it is an obsession with this conspiracy fantasy. If you really believe that all of the people who reject your inside job nonsense are on the side of Bush and Blair then you are quite simply an idiot.

The truth movement is the opposite of a political movement - it doesn't campaign on any real issues or try to change the world in a direct way it just spreads the word in a quasi-religious way hoping that once enough people wake up to "the truth" everything will be OK. Like a religious movement it is more concerned with propaganda than facts and evidence and so continues to repeat things that have been shown to be false and to use photographs and quotes selectively and out of context. There is no transparent accountable non-profit organisation that represents the movement: no committees, no elections, no public accounts - just a bunch of self-defined leaders with books and DVDs to sell.

It's not a political movement, it's a pyramid scheme of delusion.

This is an article that I think describes the situation well:

http://www.counterpunch.org/jw11282006.html

[Brainache]

For me it basicly means that I am a European nationalist and that I dislike Americans (they are the bad guys) The Arabs and the Palestinians are the victims.
And as you are a Brit that David Irving is an Hero.

Chomsky is a total fraud, this bogus icon for the American left. The stoopid basid is a common zionist.

OK so you mean you're a NAZI?

[volatile]

For me it basicly means that I am a European nationalist and that I dislike Americans (they are the bad guys) The Arabs and the Palestinians are the victims.
And as you are a Brit that David Irving is an Hero.

Chomsky is a total fraud, this bogus icon for the American left. The stoopid basid is a common zionist.

Yep, you're on drugs.

Chomsky's a zionist? Really? You know what a Zionist is? Hell, have you even read any Chomsky?

And you realise that David Irving is a FASCIST? Fascism is a right-wing ideology. How is he a hero of the enlightened left?

It's funny to see how arbitrarily black and white your ideology is. Nationalist? That's not very posi, dude. And America are the "bad guys"? Do you live in a comic book fantasy world?

----

ETA: Oh my word... did you mean that Irving is a hero of yours!!?? European nationalist? Pro-Irving? Anti-Semitic? Yep... you're a Nazi.

[maccy]

For me it basicly means that I am a European nationalist and that I dislike Americans (they are the bad guys) The Arabs and the Palestinians are the victims.
And as you are a Brit that David Irving is an Hero.

Chomsky is a total fraud, this bogus icon for the American left. The stoopid bastid is a common zionist.

David Irving is a disgusting neo-Nazi idiot and so are you.

[pagan]

David Irving is a disgusting neo-Nazi idiot and so are you.

Haha, only waited for that. From the PC guys. You feel good when you can smear your opponent with something Nazi like.

Hey, that is even better then Muslim or Arab.

But, the combo Islamo-fascist that we hear so much these days. Beats everything!!!

[Oliver]

Haha, only waited for that. From the PC guys. You feel good when you can smear your opponent with something Nazi like.

Hey, that is even better then Muslim or Arab.

But, the combo Islamo-fascist that we hear so much these days. Beats everything!!!

Did you read a littlebit within the politics subforum?

[pagan]

Yep, you're on drugs.

Chomsky's a zionist? Really? You know what a Zionist is? Hell, have you even read any Chomsky?

And you realise that David Irving is a FASCIST? Fascism is a right-wing ideology. How is he a hero of the enlightened left?

It's funny to see how arbitrarily black and white your ideology is. Nationalist? That's not very posi, dude. And America are the "bad guys"? Do you live in a comic book fantasy world?

----

ETA: Oh my word... did you mean that Irving is a hero of yours!!?? European nationalist? Pro-Irving? Anti-Semitic? Yep... you're a Nazi.


You are a European leftie??? And you don't think that the Americans are the bad guys???

How many Iraqis have they killed by now a million? That is pretty bad, that is evil!!!

[Firestone]

Haha, only waited for that. From the PC guys. You feel good when you can smear your opponent with something Nazi like.

Hey, that is even better then Muslim or Arab.

But, the combo Islamo-fascist that we hear so much these days. Beats everything!!!You said David Irving was an hero.
So don't complain that people draw conclusions from this.

[Firestone]

You are a European leftie??? And you don't think that the Americans are the bad guys???I think most people on this forum have outgrown this level of generalization and of good guys-bad guys simplicism.

[volatile]

You are a European leftie??? And you don't think that the Americans are the bad guys???

How many Iraqis have they killed by now a million? That is pretty bad, that is evil!!!


Dear me! Dear me! You can't categorise the world as "bad" and "good", and no-one who had even the slightest idea about politics would do this. Yes, America's actions, particularly concerning their conduct prior to and during the Iraq war, were reprehensible. That's not the same thing as saying they're the bad guys.

David Irving is an anti-Semitic, racist, holocaust denier. How the hell does he qualify as a hero of yours?

As a "leftie" I had qualms about his imprisonment... but really, come on, if you're not a Nazi - how is Mr Irving a hero of yours?

[JimBenArm]

You are a European leftie??? And you don't think that the Americans are the bad guys???

How many Iraqis have they killed by now a million? That is pretty bad, that is evil!!!

Yeah, and we're coming for you, next.

[aggle-rithm]

So yes, Bush has told so many lies so why trust him (his adm) on the 9-11 issue? You have to be very (extremly) naive to belive the Bush adm regarding 9-11 when it was the catalyst for these clearly desired events.

Syllygisms? Let's see? So Bush is not evil? Hasn't it been proved that 9-11 had nothing whatsoever to do with Saddam? Bush himself have admitted that.


And you just BELIEVE him?

Sad.

[maccy]

Haha, only waited for that. From the PC guys. You feel good when you can smear your opponent with something Nazi like.

Hey, that is even better then Muslim or Arab.

But, the combo Islamo-fascist that we hear so much these days. Beats everything!!!

I live in Leeds, where the London 7/7 bombers made their explosive devices (I used to live a few streets away from the flat they used) and where 3 of them were born. On the weekend after their identities were revealed I participated in marches through Beeston and Hyde Park in Leeds to show my solidarity with the Muslim communities of those areas and of the city as a whole.

As an atheist, I don't have any more intellectual respect for Islam than any other religion, but there are plenty of Muslims I like and respect and I'm proud to live in an are of the UK with a large Muslim population.

You may also be interested to know that Leeds' Jewish community joined in solidarity with the Muslims after the attacks as well.

I don't consider Radical Islamists to be representatives of Arabic or Muslim culture any more than I consider the British National Party to be representative of British culture.

I think Islamo-Fascist makes no sense in terms of histories of Islam and of Fascism, but it does give a sense of the totalitarian ambitions of the Radical Islamists.

Anyway, that's it for me on politics. If you want to present some actual evidence, please do.

[Flo]

For me it basicly means that I am a European nationalist and that I dislike Americans (they are the bad guys) The Arabs and the Palestinians are the victims.
And as you are a Brit that David Irving is an Hero.

Chomsky is a total fraud, this bogus icon for the American left. The stoopid bastid is a common zionist.



Typical paranoid schizoprenia from European right-wingers ...

On the one hand, they would really love beating on the "Arabs/muslims", and on the other hand, the demons of antisemitism always prove stronger. So they settle for the middle ground and blame America :D

[maccy]

You are a European leftie??? And you don't think that the Americans are the bad guys???

How many Iraqis have they killed by now a million? That is pretty bad, that is evil!!!

I've already given a quick outline of my political views, here it is again:

If you look at Pagan's profile, you'll see that he is 46 years old.

For the record, I'll state that I have been a peace campaigner, on and off, since 1983. I protested against both Iraq Wars and the Afghanistan one. I have no love for Bush and consider both US parties and American political thinking in general to be too right-wing (to generalise) and a betrayal of America's poor. Furthermore, I consider American foreign policy since 1945 to have been an almost completely unmitigated disaster for the world and that the actions of the CIA, in particular, have been reprehensible. I vote for a left-wing fringe party, the Alliance for Green Socialism, in elections because I can't bring myself to vote for Tony Blair's Labour Party.

All this is just for information, I'm not about to start a debate on any of these issues. I'm just confirming to Pagan how wrong his assumptions are.

The point is, I have come to those conclusions on the basis of the evidence for what has happened in the world. There is no evidence for an 9/11 Inside Job - therefore I don't believe it happened. It's really that simple.

[stateofgrace]

Pagan, from your posts I gather you are an Anti American, Anti Jewish, Bush hating, holocaust denying, Right wing Nazi who sympathises with the Palestinians.

Am I right or did I miss something?

[maccy]

Pagan, from your posts I gather you are an Anti American, Anti Jewish, Bush hating, holocaust denying, Right wing Nazi who sympathises with doesn't care about the Palestinians but wants to destroy Israel.

Am I right or did I miss something?

I made a small correction for you. :)

[aggle-rithm]

You are a European leftie??? And you don't think that the Americans are the bad guys???

How many Iraqis have they killed by now a million? That is pretty bad, that is evil!!!

Perhaps it would be, if it were true.

Estimates range from 50,000 to 660,000 "excess deaths" have occured in Iraq since the war started. Coalition forces are directly responsible for 31% of that. So, if we go way out on a limb and say that all coalition forces are American, the figure is, at most, around 200,000.

I don't know what percentage of these were people were actively trying to kill the coalition forces when they died, but I know it's more than zero.

[maccy]

Perhaps it would be, if it were true.

Estimates range from 50,000 to 660,000 "excess deaths" have occured in Iraq since the war started. Coalition forces are directly responsible for 31% of that. So, if we go way out on a limb and say that all coalition forces are American, the figure is, at most, around 200,000.

I don't know what percentage of these were people were actively trying to kill the coalition forces when they died, but I know it's more than zero.

And there's a thorough critique of the 650,000 Lancet figure here:

http://www.iraqbodycount.org/press/pr14.php

[twinstead]

Pagan you are sounding more and more like simply a biased, irrational ideologue the longer you go without actually answering the questions posed to you.

If you truly believe your world view is correct, your unwillingness and/or inability to rationally defend your positions against those who hold opposing viewpoints is putting a bad light on it.

It appears you may not be used to debating these things with articulate people who disagree with you.

This is NOT your local pub. These aren't drunken like-minded buddies you can yell "screw America" and "down with Isreal" in unison between rounds; what you have here for the most part are people of all political persuasions who can defend their beliefs rationally.

Isn't it fun?

[Pardalis]

For me it basicly means that I am a European nationalist


BTW, what's a European Nationalist? Isn't Europe made out of multiple nations?

:confused:

[maccy]

BTW, what's a European Nationalist? Isn't Europe made out of multiple nations?

:confused:


I think he means he's a Nationalist from a nation in the continent of Europe (but doesn't want to say which one). In my experience his kind of nationalist wants to get out of the EU as quickly as possible (just before expelling the ethnically incorrect).

[Oliver]

BTW, what's a European Nationalist? Isn't Europe made out of multiple nations?

:confused:


Well, it´s one big country like Canada - but we have
a lot of Quebecs over here. :D

[twinstead]

So let me get this straight. The left wing Europeans and the right wing Europeans both hate America?

I guess it's nice to have something in common.

[Oliver]

So let me get this straight. The left wing Europeans and the right wing Europeans both hate America?

I guess it's nice to have something in common.

I can not speak about whole europe but even the Media
in germany thinks that Bush is "a little bit dumb". And
people here are still pissed because WMD and Irak.

Personally everytime i hear bad news from Irak, i auto-
matically think "And all of this for a lie".

[twinstead]

I can not speak about whole europe but even the Media in germany thinks that Bush is "a little bit dumb"

See, I have something in common with the media in Germany! ;)

[Pardalis]

I think he means he's a Nationalist from a nation in the continent of Europe (but doesn't want to say which one). In my experience his kind of nationalist wants to get out of the EU as quickly as possible (just before expelling the ethnically incorrect).

Yeah but Europe's nations already have their own independant countries... it doesn't make sense to me.

[Basilio]

From Alex Jones himself about dealing with those that oppose the twoofer view:
Don't respond to them, never respond to them and stick with your talking points.
Try to discredit them first.
If you get into trouble, throw out "strawman" or "yellow journalism".
Before venturing out, inform the group that you will be polite and just talk. Warn that detractors will try to double-team you or engage in a shouting match, but don't fall for that. However, when it comes down to it, double-teaming and shouting down detractors is acceptable.".

Ya know, they certainly learned alot from the Scientologist's "dead agenting" program. Attack and discredit the person and ignore the claim.

basilio

[Oliver]

See, I have something in common with the media in Germany! ;)

Wait a second: Does that mean the american
media says he´s a wise guy? :confused:

[Pardalis]

See, I have something in common with the media in Germany! ;)

You can't really argue with facts. ;)

[maccy]

Yeah but Europe's nations already have their own independant countries... it doesn't make sense to me.

If your a member of the EU you have to pay to fund it and are subject to laws that it passes (although your government can veto them). This isn't popular with some nationalists who want all power to reside at nation state level. The EU also allows the free movement of peoples between states - which extremely unpopular with the extreme-right nationalists. In the UK, we have what you might call mild nationalist (ie not overtly racist) anti-EU party The UK Independence Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Independence_Party). Pagan's brand of Nationalism (fascism, really) is better represented by the British National Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_National_Party) or, in France, by Le Front National (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Front_%28France%29). As well as being anti-EU these parties seek to achieve mono-ethnic nations by stopping immigration and deporting immigrants. That is what they define as Nationalism.

Interestingly, the nationalist parties seeking independence from the UK for Wales (Plaid Cymru (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plaid_Cymru)) and Scotland (The Scottish National Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scottish_National_Party)) support the idea of their newly independent nations being part of the EU. Similarly the parties who want North Ireland to be part of a united Ireland (Sinn Fein (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinn_fein) and the SDLP (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SDLP)) are nationalists in favour of reuniting a country that is already part of the EU. I doubt that Pagan would associate himself with these parties very much.

[orphia nay]

The pagan mini-Credo:

Ask questions.

Ignore answers.

Fight strawmen valiantly. State that 9/11 was not caused by “Arabs in caves”. Accuse your opponents of being George Bush-lovers, and dismiss their evidence accordingly. Illogically claim, "Bush told lies, so he is lying about 911". "If you don't think the US government carried out the WTC attacks, you are defending Bush. Bush is evil. Therefore you are evil."

Use myths to support the myth:
"The Holocaust did not happen so 9/11 was an inside job."
"The hijackers were cokeheads and Osama was mortally ill therefore the US gubmint orchestrated 9/11".

Accuse your opponent of being a liar, or try some other tactic that will (hopefully) make him angry. If he responds in kind to your endless taunts, change the subject to his anger, and accuse him of name calling. If he accuses you of provoking him, then you have changed the subject of the debate. If he stays on topic, keep the heat up. The Believers in the audience will forgive the worst verbal attacks you use, but they will think even the mildest replies he makes to you are personal attacks that undermine his argument.

Smoke weed copiously, or act like you do. You can never have enough paranoia and crazy thoughts.

Derail. When others are discussing a topic, introduce a 9/11 twoof-based question. When someone replies with a quick debunk, make a long post uploading all your brain’s delusions. If they ignore you, keep derailing. If they address your delusions, ignore them.

[pagan]

The pagan mini-Credo:

Ask questions.

Ignore answers.

Fight strawmen valiantly. State that 9/11 was not caused by “Arabs in caves”. Accuse your opponents of being George Bush-lovers, and dismiss their evidence accordingly. Illogically claim, "Bush told lies, so he is lying about 911". "If you don't think the US government carried out the WTC attacks, you are defending Bush. Bush is evil. Therefore you are evil."

Use myths to support the myth:
"The Holocaust did not happen so 9/11 was an inside job."
"The hijackers were cokeheads and Osama was mortally ill therefore the US gubmint orchestrated 9/11".

Accuse your opponent of being a liar, or try some other tactic that will (hopefully) make him angry. If he responds in kind to your endless taunts, change the subject to his anger, and accuse him of name calling. If he accuses you of provoking him, then you have changed the subject of the debate. If he stays on topic, keep the heat up. The Believers in the audience will forgive the worst verbal attacks you use, but they will think even the mildest replies he makes to you are personal attacks that undermine his argument.

Smoke weed copiously, or act like you do. You can never have enough paranoia and crazy thoughts.

Derail. When others are discussing a topic, introduce a 9/11 twoof-based question. When someone replies with a quick debunk, make a long post uploading all your brain’s delusions. If they ignore you, keep derailing. If they address your delusions, ignore them.


Thank you, very interesting indeed!

Is this some kind of manual you anti-truthers use when trolling in honest truth seeking debates?

I must say, I don't envy you. We 9-11 truthers have a much easier job. All we have to do, is to find the truth.:)

[brodski]

If your a member of the EU you have to pay to fund it and are subject to laws that it passes (although your government can veto them). [quote] not quite, you are not subject to EU directives until your government implements them in domestic legislation. If the government fails to do this they may be fined however.
[quote]
This isn't popular with some nationalists who want all power to reside at nation state level. The EU also allows the free movement of peoples between states - which extremely unpopular with the extreme-right nationalists. In the UK, we have what you might call mild nationalist (ie not overtly racist) anti-EU party The UK Independence Party (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Kingdom_Independence_Party). not (overtly) racist, but nutty as hell, and prone to CTs- remember their alleged MI5 infiltration?

[Architect]

I must admit that I find it amusing that the Labour and Conservative parties like to compare the SNP and Plaid Cymru to "nationalist" groups such as the the Serbs or the neo-nazis, when in actual fact both ar emore pro-European and pro-immigration than they are.

Incidentally, and just to add my voice to previous posts. Anyone who believes that David Irving is a hero is an absolute fool; his work has been discredited by real academics, he has been proven a liar in court, and in his post-parole statements his true racist colours have become even clearer.

[uk_dave]

Thank you, very interesting indeed!

Is this some kind of manual you anti-truthers use when trolling in honest truth seeking debates?

I must say, I don't envy you. We 9-11 truthers have a much easier job. All we have to do, is to find the truth.:)

And you're having about as much success with that as you would trying to find your own arse with both hands and a torch.

[twinstead]

T
I must say, I don't envy you. We 9-11 truthers have a much easier job. All we have to do, is to find the truth.:)

The problem is that you wouldn't know the truth if it bit you on the...well, if it bit you. You are so wrapped up in your ideological issues to even have a chance of finding truth, no less so than the worst blind supporter of Bush.

In fact, you and the worst redneck American small town Bush supporter have MUCH more in common than you could possibly ever imagine.

Objectivity. What a concept.

[tsig]

Thank you, very interesting indeed!

Is this some kind of manual you anti-truthers use when trolling in honest truth seeking debates?

I must say, I don't envy you. We 9-11 truthers have a much easier job. All we have to do, is to find the truth.:)

No this is our defensive manual, we have a totally different stratagy for offense but that is listed in the Black Thread seen only by the the Elite Ninjas above the 33rd degree.

If you find the truth will you believe it?

Looking for truth while lieing seems an odd strategy.

[orphia nay]

Thank you, very interesting indeed!

Is this some kind of manual you anti-truthers use when trolling in honest truth seeking debates?

I must say, I don't envy you. We 9-11 truthers have a much easier job. All we have to do, is to find the truth.:)

If you want to prove you're not a troll, start a topic.

If you want an honest, truth-seeking debate, start a topic. Here - I'll help you out:


Hello, my name is pagan. I joined this forum because I am interested in 9/11 conspiracy theories and I am skeptical of the "official version of events".

I learned about the "official version" by _____________________ [insert details as appropriate, such as "reading the NIST/FEMA/9/11 Commission Reports; reading prisonplanet.com; watching "Loose Change"; etc etc"].

The evidence that I have seen does not seem to add up to the story that says that 19 hijackers brought the world's most powerful country to its knees.

I am testing the theory that ______________________.

The strongest evidence towards this theory, in my opinion, is:

A) ___________________________ (Source: ______________)
B) ___________________________ (Source: ______________)
C) ___________________________ (Source: ______________)
etc.
[fill in the blanks with your choices, pagan.]

I wish to find out the truth, and if this evidence can be proved to be false or irrelevant, I will understand that I have been mistaken in thinking my theory and/or sources were correct.

Sincerely,
pagan.

[beachnut]

Thank you, very interesting indeed!

Is this some kind of manual you anti-truthers use when trolling in honest truth seeking debates?

I must say, I don't envy you. We 9-11 truthers have a much easier job. All we have to do, is to find the truth.:)

Name one truther with a truth to be told? NO, all truthers are dolts who make up lies and ask question and most ironically want the government to repeat what they do not believe in the first place; and in addition they claim to have experts who insist!

Then take the experts, who are the biggest nut cases, and investigate yourself and figure it out!!! The funny thing is flight 93 passengers only had minutes to figure out 9/11 and they succeeded and stopped the terrorist! The truthers have had 5 years and they can not find their way out of paper sack or come up with enough facts to find a conclusion anyone with a brain can believe. Facts.

I have found 100 pecent lies from the 9/11 truthers. Anyone have a truth from a truther?

[pagan]

If you want to prove you're not a troll, start a topic.

If you want an honest, truth-seeking debate, start a topic. Here - I'll help you out:


Hello, my name is pagan. I joined this forum because I am interested in 9/11 conspiracy theories and I am skeptical of the "official version of events".

I learned about the "official version" by _____________________ [insert details as appropriate, such as "reading the NIST/FEMA/9/11 Commission Reports; reading prisonplanet.com; watching "Loose Change"; etc etc"].

The evidence that I have seen does not seem to add up to the story that says that 19 hijackers brought the world's most powerful country to its knees.

I am testing the theory that ______________________.

The strongest evidence towards this theory, in my opinion, is:

A) ___________________________ (Source: ______________)
B) ___________________________ (Source: ______________)
C) ___________________________ (Source: ______________)
etc.
[fill in the blanks with your choices, pagan.]

I wish to find out the truth, and if this evidence can be proved to be false or irrelevant, I will understand that I have been mistaken in thinking my theory and/or sources were correct.

Sincerely,
pagan.


Thanks, but no thanks.

Is this an exemple of what you Americans call "to be railroaded"?

To engage myself in such an ambitious way is to ask for too much. This would be to cover the whole spectrum of issues in one thread and to get myself attacked by the rest of you about the tinyest little details.

But, sure I will probably start a few threads in the future about some aspects of the 9-11 issue. Most of them already covered on this forum. For exemple:

The mysterious collaps of WTC7
The NORAD standdown.
Controlled demolition of the towers.
The put options.
The alledged hijackers.
PNAC and the neocons.

And the result of it all, the attack on civil liberties, the war in Iraq, Afghanistan and possily the whole Arab world.

[Anti-sophist]

You should pick a single item that you consider most flagarant and start a topic about it and see how it goes.

I can assure you that all of those issues have been heavily debunked and any rational person when viewing all the evidence will see. I'd suggest searching the forums because they've been dealt with in pretty big details already.

For example, the put-options was investigated by the SEC, and the causes of both stock movements is already known. You should be aware of these facts and be able to add something beyond this.

[beachnut]

Thanks, but no thanks.

Is this an exemple of what you Americans call "to be railroaded"?

To engage myself in such an ambitious way is to ask for too much. This would be to cover the whole spectrum of issues in one thread and to get myself attacked by the rest of you about the tinyest little details.

But, sure I will probably start a few threads in the future about some aspects of the 9-11 issue. Most of them already covered on this forum. For exemple:

The mysterious collaps of WTC7
The NORAD standdown.
Controlled demolition of the towers.
The put options.
The alledged hijackers.
PNAC and the neocons.

And the result of it all, the attack on civil liberties, the war in Iraq, Afghanistan and possily the whole Arab world.

Fire makes building fail; known fact!
NORAD did not stand down, I was in the Air Force at the time; you be wrong!
No evidence of explosives; wrong out of the box.
Put options! are you nuts! they even caught Martha Stewart; do not use stock or put options they keep records and can put you away in a minute! Go ahead try to take on the SEC! Good luck but this is the Dumbest CT idea out there!
Alledged hijackers left dna and their junk behind; sorry out on strikes!
PNAC has no army! Neocons? Serious? NUTS

If this is your area of being an expert you are short on facts.

[twinstead]

Thanks, but no thanks.


The mysterious collaps of WTC7
The NORAD standdown.
Controlled demolition of the towers.
The put options.
The alledged hijackers.
PNAC and the neocons.



Bring it on. You are basing deep ideological beliefs on MYTHS.

If you are truly objective you will use the same standard of judgment for the sources you use as you do the official story.

Do you dare?

[beachnut]

Thanks, but no thanks.

Is this an exemple of what you Americans call "to be railroaded"?

And the result of it all, the attack on civil liberties, the war in Iraq, Afghanistan and possily the whole Arab world.

Name the liberties you miss most that were taken away since 9/11! Please list them?!

Saddam was not very nice; he is dead; someone did good.

Afgahanistan; boy we did good there; took out the taliban; are you in the taliban and mad at us or something?

[stateofgrace]

Thanks, but no thanks.

Is this an exemple of what you Americans call "to be railroaded"?

To engage myself in such an ambitious way is to ask for too much. This would be to cover the whole spectrum of issues in one thread and to get myself attacked by the rest of you about the tinyest little details.

But, sure I will probably start a few threads in the future about some aspects of the 9-11 issue. Most of them already covered on this forum. For exemple:

The mysterious collaps of WTC7
The NORAD standdown.
Controlled demolition of the towers.
The put options.
The alledged hijackers.
PNAC and the neocons.

And the result of it all, the attack on civil liberties, the war in Iraq, Afghanistan and possily the whole Arab world.
So,you can't quite put it all together but so far you think that NORAD stood down, the Towers were demolished, there were no hijackers, and WTC 7 was demolished by explosives. This was carried out by neocons hell bends on a NWO.

Can you tell me exactly what civil liberties you have lost since 911?

Please outline exactly how you are being oppressed

[boloboffin]

If you want to prove you're not a troll, start a topic.

If you want an honest, truth-seeking debate, start a topic. Here - I'll help you out:


Hello, my name is pagan. I joined this forum because I am interested in 9/11 conspiracy theories and I am skeptical of the "official version of events".

I learned about the "official version" by _____________________ [insert details as appropriate, such as "reading the NIST/FEMA/9/11 Commission Reports; reading prisonplanet.com; watching "Loose Change"; etc etc"].

The evidence that I have seen does not seem to add up to the story that says that 19 hijackers brought the world's most powerful country to its knees.

I am testing the theory that ______________________.

The strongest evidence towards this theory, in my opinion, is:

A) ___________________________ (Source: ______________)
B) ___________________________ (Source: ______________)
C) ___________________________ (Source: ______________)
etc.
[fill in the blanks with your choices, pagan.]

I wish to find out the truth, and if this evidence can be proved to be false or irrelevant, I will understand that I have been mistaken in thinking my theory and/or sources were correct.

Sincerely,
pagan.

This form is awesome, and with your permission, I am going to swipe it with full credit given.

Plus, nominated!

[orphia nay]

Thanks, boloboffin!! :) :)


Thanks, but no thanks.

Is this an exemple of what you Americans call "to be railroaded"?
[...]


"Railroading" implies the use of two tracks. I am but one person suggesting a format of approach that would help you find the truth you seek.

I do like the "railroad" analogy, though. This is a discussion forum. If you wish to discuss your beliefs, start a discussion stating them. That way, it is easier for you to keep track of your train of thought. :)

The format I've proposed attempts allows you to use scientific method (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method) to test your theory.

...the process must be objective so that the scientist does not bias the interpretation of the results or change the results outright. Another basic expectation is that of making complete documentation of data and methodology available for careful scrutiny by other scientists and researchers, thereby allowing other researchers the opportunity to verify results by attempted reproduction of them. This also allows statistical measures of the reliability of the results to be established. The scientific method also may involve attempts, if possible and appropriate, to achieve control over the factors involved in the area of inquiry, which may in turn be manipulated to test new hypotheses in order to gain further knowledge.


This method:

1) tests whether your theory can be falsified;

2) details and records your thought processes;

3) enables you to reach a conclusion about the truth you seek;

4) prevents your thoughts being jumbled;

5) prevents you (and others) having to repeat yourself in multiple threads.



I hope you can see that I am trying to help you.

[pagan]

Thanks, boloboffin!! :) :)




"Railroading" implies the use of two tracks. I am but one person suggesting a format of approach that would help you find the truth you seek.

I do like the "railroad" analogy, though. This is a discussion forum. If you wish to discuss your beliefs, start a discussion stating them. That way, it is easier for you to keep track of your train of thought. :)

The format I've proposed attempts allows you to use scientific method (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method) to test your theory.




This method:

1) tests whether your theory can be falsified;

2) details and records your thought processes;

3) enables you to reach a conclusion about the truth you seek;

4) prevents your thoughts being jumbled;

5) prevents you (and others) having to repeat yourself in multiple threads.



I hope you can see that I am trying to help you.


Please orphia, are you stalking me?

If it is your pic on the avatar. I don't mind too much. You look very nice.:)



As I've stated a few times already. We truthers don't have A THEORY. So we don't have a theory to defend. We've a lot of suspicions and guesses. But, we try to avoid speculating, it would not be in our interest to do so.

On the other hand, you guys have a theory to defend. The official conspiracy theory that is. Dubya's little faerie tale? And what a silly little story it has turned out to be.
It has been disproved and debunked by the truther community long time ago.


We truthers with our limited resources cannot prove what happened.The only way to find out what took place on 9-11 is to have a new investigation, as independent as possible from the Bush adm. That is our goal. In order to reach that goal we scrutinize the official story. The one you so ardently try to defend.

I can understand that you feel a bit frustrated. It is not a very nice position to be in, to have to defend Dubya's silly story.


To wrap it up. We don't have any theory. We have strong suspicions that certain elements within the Bush adm were responsible. But, we don't have any proof. One thing that we are absolutly certain of, is that the official story is false, and that is enough.

[Oliver]

... the official story is false, and that is enough.

No, the official story lacks in some parts - but to say
everything is a lie - like that boring [insert here] Griffin
does to sell his Books, is a pure lie or stupidity. And you´re
not better if you are parroting these lies.

Don´t you think the Truthmovement would be able to find
something if the official story is a lie?

All they will tell you is:

"We have evidence. Trust me. We know the truth."
"Trust me. We know the truth. We have evidence. "
"We know the truth. We have evidence. Trust me."

Seriously. Who ever believes in these promises, is the most
stupiest propaganda-sheep i met so far in Lala-Land. Or a
naive Kid who knows nothing about the world.

ETA: Oh, and i live in germany - i give a truck about
NWO-Rebublicans-Democrats-Neocons Fairytales.
I never met such things over here - this BS doesn´t
exist here.

[maccy]

To wrap it up. We don't have any theory. We have strong suspicions that certain elements within the Bush adm were responsible. But, we don't have any proof. One thing that we are absolutly certain of, is that the official story is false, and that is enough.

In other words you do have a theory: a theory that somebody from the US Government was responsible. This is a positive claim and you must back it with evidence. If you don't have evidence for the full story, you must provide sufficient evidence to justify further inquiry.

You can't say because x doesn't make sense y must have occurred. This is a God of the Gaps (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/God_of_the_gaps) argument.

Furthermore, we don't have to justify, to you or anyone else, the evidence-based conclusions about what happened on 9/11 (based not on a single government story but on many investigations and studies worldwide), because the world continues to function on the basis that these conclusions are fundamentally correct: there is consensus.

You have to convince the world that your version is correct and you're doing a terrible job so far. Ultimately, we don't care if you're convinced or not because you're insignificant.

What is annoying, though, is that the truther "argument" is constructed from inaccuracies, misrepresentations and downright lies and that some people are taken in by this. It is to counter this despicable behaviour (lying for "truth") many of us try and expose the nonsense that passes for CT "thought". Nobody likes a bunch of scam artists and, even if they aren't significant enough to make a difference in the big scheme of things (and, believe me, you aren't), it is for the people who are befuddled and exploited by this big lie, and the people who are pained by the accusations you make, that we call you out on your BS.

You have nothing, you are nothing, and we will continue to show this to the world.

[beachnut]

Please orphia, are you stalking me?

As I've stated a few times already. We truthers don't have A THEORY. So we don't have a theory to defend. We've a lot of suspicions and guesses. But, we try to avoid speculating, it would not be in our interest to do so.

On the other hand, you guys have a theory to defend. The official conspiracy theory that is. Dubya's little faerie tale? And what a silly little story it has turned out to be.
It has been disproved and debunked by the truther community long time ago.


We truthers with our limited resources cannot prove what happened.The only way to find out what took place on 9-11 is to have a new investigation, as independent as possible from the Bush adm. That is our goal. In order to reach that goal we scrutinize the official story. The one you so ardently try to defend.

I can understand that you feel a bit frustrated. It is not a very nice position to be in, to have to defend Dubya's silly story.

To wrap it up. We don't have any theory. We have strong suspicions that certain elements within the Bush adm were responsible. But, we don't have any proof. One thing that we are absolutly certain of, is that the official story is false, and that is enough.

Got no facts and no theory! Just do not like W. Great. This make you the most wrong. You know it is wrong because you think it is wrong. (try facts)

You need no debunking you are just plain wrong out of the box. Wrong for up to 5 years. No proof just plain lies. (try facts)

I need no theory. I passed my physics class in high school and college. I need no official story to tell me how the WTC fell. I need no official story to tell me how flight 93 buried itself in the ground. I need no official story to tell me flight 77 crashed into the Pentagon. I found all the information and calculations myself. I can do my independent investigation with little to no help.

I did cheat on flight 93 buried in the ground. I was an Air Force pilot and I went to accident investigation school and that is what happens to planes when they hit the ground over 500 mph! That takes care of that. Darn all the woowoo truthers are so dumb they think it should look different they are wrong. Not sure why they try to make up stuff and show pictures of slow speed crashes when flight 93 was a high speed crash; do you?

Being in the Air Force helps me know the truthers telling lies about NORAD are wrong. Too bad NORAD never was stood down. Not sure why truthers are so dumb they believe this crap.

WTC falling is exactly how it would happen when someone speeds into the building with a jet. Sorry the design was not made for that speed and fuel entering the building. A slow speed crash would have deflected a lot of plane and fuel outside the building. Wrong on all count I have yet to see a truther present facts.

At least you come right out and say you have nothing. Yet you fail to realize most rational people understand 9/11 and how it happened. You must be nuts or just hate W so much your rational mind has taken a vacation. Good luck, no theory, no facts.

Sorry the official story is backed up by facts. I have never heard W's version. W being a pilot he understands a little more than you. Since there are only a handful of engineers and pilots who are dumb enough to make up stories and try to mislead people I do not think anyone should be worried truthers will start hanging rational people.

To wrap it up truthers with no facts and theories are the dumbest truthers to be found. They just want to investigate the most investigated event in history; maybe they can not read 10,000 pages of NIST, or the countless other independent studies all over the world by engineers and other who are improving the world by studying the tragedy of 9/11. What are you doing but failing to find facts published by so many different source you can not put together a simple theory or factual statement on 9/11.

No you just say W did it and save a lot of reading and research. You have an F in research, and an F in reading comprehension.

[uk_dave]

As I've stated a few times already. We truthers don't have A THEORY.

You also don't have a clue.

[orphia nay]

Pagan,

If you don't have a theory, and you don't have any proof, then why don't you shut the f*** up?

Actually... please congratulate yourself... you are about to be the first person on my Ignore List. Don't flatter yourself too much - I've never tried manually ignoring someone before and I'm interested in the experiment. I think I'll keep the option of allowing threads you start to be visible. But I've seen too many twoofers tie themselves in knots despite many rational people's best efforts.

About 10 years ago I went through a stage of believing a lot of weird things, and I was vocal about them and received ridicule, but one day I came to the conclusion that none of them added up to a realistic theory. I hope you find some truth one day.

I just don't care enough about fundamentally negative, holocaust-denying, paranoid ignoramuses such as you to follow every step you take towards backing yourself into a corner and committing Death by Moderator.

Enjoy your life,

Orphia.

[Firestone]

As I've stated a few times already. We truthers don't have A THEORY. So we don't have a theory to defend. We've a lot of suspicions and guesses. But, we try to avoid speculating, it would not be in our interest to do so.I count at least three lies here.
You do have a theory. However, if you formulate it, you know it will look stupid and contain thousand times more "anomalies" and contradictions than the standard theory. Also, it will not account for all the facts, but only for an arbitrary selection of facts, factoïds, exagerations and outright lies. You don't have suspicions and guesses. What you do have is ignorance of the laws of physics, of structural engineering, of the functioning of NORAD, FAA, ... All what "truthers" say is actually baseless speculation.

On the other hand, you guys have a theory to defend. The official conspiracy theory that is. Dubya's little faerie tale? And what a silly little story it has turned out to be.
It has been disproved and debunked by the truther community long time ago.
Two more lies here.
The standard theory is no fairy tale, but backed up by serious studies and by countless investigations (official, academic, journalistic). The truther community hasn't disproved anything.
We truthers with our limited resources cannot prove what happened.The only way to find out what took place on 9-11 is to have a new investigation, as independent as possible from the Bush adm. That is our goal. In order to reach that goal we scrutinize the official story. The one you so ardently try to defend.We defend the truth, the real truth. Backed up by evidence (that's why we defend it). You just invent "facts", ignore most facts, in order to satisfy your misguided ideology.

I can understand that you feel a bit frustrated. It is not a very nice position to be in, to have to defend Dubya's silly story.There is nothing frustrating in defending a theory backed up by facts. A theory that has the backing of 99.9% of the scientific community.

To wrap it up. We don't have any theory. We have strong suspicions that certain elements within the Bush adm were responsible. But, we don't have any proof. One thing that we are absolutly certain of, is that the official story is false, and that is enough.To wrap it up, you have nothing but your prejudice.

[pagan]

Pagan,

If you don't have a theory, and you don't have any proof, then why don't you shut the f*** up?

Actually... please congratulate yourself... you are about to be the first person on my Ignore List. Don't flatter yourself too much - I've never tried manually ignoring someone before and I'm interested in the experiment. I think I'll keep the option of allowing threads you start to be visible. But I've seen too many twoofers tie themselves in knots despite many rational people's best efforts.

About 10 years ago I went through a stage of believing a lot of weird things, and I was vocal about them and received ridicule, but one day I came to the conclusion that none of them added up to a realistic theory. I hope you find some truth one day.

I just don't care enough about fundamentally negative, holocaust-denying, paranoid ignoramuses such as you to follow every step you take towards backing yourself into a corner and committing Death by Moderator.

Enjoy your life,

Orphia.


That's just fine by me orphia.:)

I will not spend that much time on this forum. The more serious debates are happening on other forums.

But, I will probably drop in now and then and make a few "naughty" critical that is, posts.

Because, remember we truthers are the real sceptics and you guys are the true believers.

[PerryLogan]

Heck yes. No two Truthers even believe the same thing about 9/11. They attack one another far more we could ever do--calling one another government shills, traitors, morons, drug fiends, etc. They throw people out of their forums like a bunch of Stalinists. Their organizations constantly split in two and go to war with one another. It doesn't get much more skeptical than that.

[The Doc]

That's just fine by me orphia.:)

I will not spend that much time on this forum. The more serious debates are happening on other forums.


What, like the Loose Change forum?

Start a serious debate then. Pick an aspect of 9/11 - present your theory and a source and we'll get right to it.


Because, remember we truthers are the real sceptics and you guys are the true believers.

Skepticism is based on facts and being skeptical of theories that defy those facts. You are skeptical of the official story - but you have nothing to base that on. Other than "OMFG WTC7 LOOKED LIKE A CD WTF!"

We're skeptical of you because you have failed to produce any kind of peer-reviewed report (The official story has presented many), you have failed to present common information (the Official story is solid fact). You're can't believe each other - what makes you think that we'll believe you?

[Firestone]

That's just fine by me orphia.:)

I will not spend that much time on this forum. The more serious debates are happening on other forums.

But, I will probably drop in now and then and make a few "naughty" critical that is, posts.

Because, remember we truthers are the real sceptics and you guys are the true believers.Let me translate this:

I have no evidence to present.
I don't want you guys and galls to wipe the floor with me all the time, so I retreat to friendly "truth"-forums where sceptics are automatically banned.

(Freely provided by Firestone Translation Services Ltd)

[aggle-rithm]

Thank you, very interesting indeed!

Is this some kind of manual you anti-truthers use when trolling in honest truth seeking debates?

I must say, I don't envy you. We 9-11 truthers have a much easier job. All we have to do, is to find the truth.:)

I suspect this task is much more difficult than you think it is.

[Pardalis]

But, we don't have any proof.

Exactly.

[Architect]

I will not spend that much time on this forum. The more serious debates are happening on other forums.



Hmm? You mean the one where the others all think thad David Irving - convincted anti-semite and proven liar - is a hero? Yes, I think we know all about the kind of people that frequent them, thank you very much.

[The Silver Shadow]

If the government says that the sky is blue, it's a lie!

[Architect]

If the government says that the sky is blue, it's a lie!

Well if you live in Scotland, it generally would be (a lie, that is)

[aggle-rithm]

That's just fine by me orphia.:)

I will not spend that much time on this forum. The more serious debates are happening on other forums.


And what forums would those be? Surely not the ones where any dissenting view is immediately silenced by suspensions, bannings, and deleted posts?

That won't happen here.

[aggle-rithm]

Well if you live in Scotland, it generally would be (a lie, that is)

So, if the US govt. tries to sell you a line of goods that the sky in Scotland is blue, don't you believe it!

[The Silver Shadow]

When I was in Scotland in 2001, the weather was absolutely gorgeous! It wasn't foggy or rainy for the 4 days that I spent there...

[hurdygurdy]

I think that'd be an interesting political science graduate study - how did the word 'liberal' cease to have any real meaning in US politics? It's really absurd.

Our third biggest part are called the "Liberal Democrats", and most European countries have a Liberal party. Canada does too, doesn't it? It describes a very sensible, historically important and credibly defensible form of political engagement. It's so strange to see how the word's used in America.

Here in Spain the world 'liberal' always meant the opposite to conservative. Since a few years ago, 'liberal' is now a term vindicated by the conservatives.

[Architect]

When I was in Scotland in 2001, the weather was absolutely gorgeous! It wasn't foggy or rainy for the 4 days that I spent there...



Just cold and snowy!

[The Silver Shadow]

Just cold and snowy!
in late July?

[Architect]

Bingo.

[orphia nay]

Right, after that little interlude, I have published The Credo to my blog (such as it is):
http://orphia-nay.blogspot.com/

I decided to just use my blog rather than get a free website after noticing that the "Woo-Woo Credo" page's account has been suspended due to exceeding bandwidth. Hopefully Blogger allows more, so feel free to link to it. Thanks again, everyone, for your contributions.