I'll bet a lot of Truthers are criminals

[PerryLogan]

When you get down to it, the 9/11 Truth Movement is mostly a case of anti-government bigotry, often raised to the level of psychosis.

Alex Jones probably says "The government did it!" the instant he wakes up every morning. If Alex doesn't like a sandwich, he blames the government.

Other Truthers are less flamboyant than Alex. But they all seem to feel about the same way. The government did it--no proof required. The government is assumed to be behind everything, and the "evidence" is cooked up later. We've seen it over and over. This is how Truthers think.

Well then...if you believe the government is utterly corrupt--the font of all evil--you have a full-blown rationalization for committing all sorts of crimes.

To speak bluntly, I'll bet Truthers break the law to a degree way above the norm. With their belief that everyone at all levels of the government are devil-worshiping monsters or compartmentalized shills, the Truthers would naturally tend to think it's OK to break the law.

I'm not talking about political acts of protest committed in order to get arrested, which the Truthers rarely do. I'm talking about good old-fashioned, crime, especially petty crime. (One suspects there are no Truther master criminals.)

If a Truther doesn't pay his traffic fines, he's just striking a blow against The Man, right?

This is just a hypothesis. Perhaps someone has some information on how many Truthers have glove compartments full of unpaid traffic fines, how many Truthers have rap sheets, how many Truthers are career criminals--that sort of thing. Such a cynical world view would naturally lead a person to crime--especially if that person is a paranoid white male, pig-ignorant, and given to delusional beliefs.

[Walter Ego]

Most of them just look like kids seeking some kind of identity and retired academics who want attention. Then there are the ‘professional’ truthers like Alex Jones who were peddling this stuff before 9-11 (New World Order, JFK assignation, etc.). There’s been a nutbar subculture in America for a long time. 9-11 is just the current obsession.

[CptColumbo]

Most of them just look like kids seeking some kind of identity and retired academics who want attention. Then there are the ‘professional’ truthers like Alex Jones who were peddling this stuff before 9-11 (New World Order, JFK assignation, etc.). There’s been a nutbar subculture in America for a long time. 9-11 is just the current obsession.Agreed, except it's not exclusively American.

[T.A.M.]

Most of them just look like kids seeking some kind of identity and retired academics who want attention. Then there are the ‘professional’ truthers like Alex Jones who were peddling this stuff before 9-11 (New World Order, JFK assignation, etc.). There’s been a nutbar subculture in America for a long time. 9-11 is just the current obsession.

Nice nutshell assessment...welcome to the forum.

TAM:)

[Brainster]

Most of them just look like kids seeking some kind of identity and retired academics who want attention. Then there are the ‘professional’ truthers like Alex Jones who were peddling this stuff before 9-11 (New World Order, JFK assignation, etc.). There’s been a nutbar subculture in America for a long time. 9-11 is just the current obsession.

Agreed. What I do find interesting about the current fruitcakes is that it's attracted a lot of left-wingers; with the exception of the late 1960s and early 1970s, the nutbar subculture has mostly been right wing. Think "black helicopters" and "jackbooted thugs". There's of course a substantial libertarian portion of the 9-11 "Truth" Movement, but as the poll of Truthers (http://wtc7lies.googlepages.com/2007truthpollquestions24-37%3Ayouandthenew) discovered, this is largely a left-wing movement:

32. U.S./Canada residents,are you politically

1) Far left of center (very liberal) 26%
2) Somewhat left of center 21%
3) Middle-of-the-road 7%
4) Somewhat right of center 5%
5) Far right of center (very conservative) 8%
7) Libertarian 27%
8) Anarchist 4%
9) Socialist 2%
10) Not political at all
Other:

[nicepants]

If truthers legitimately believe that we are part of a government conspiracy that killed so many people and are assisting in the cover up of same, they would definitely agree that we are traitors and therefore probably have few qualms about treating us as such.

I recall one truther who was accused of calling Gravy with a death threat whose position was defended by another truther as not threatening gravy, but "promising to uphold the constitution". He refused to elaborate.

[Walter Ego]

[QUOTE=Brainster;3367199]Agreed. What I do find interesting about the current fruitcakes is that it's attracted a lot of left-wingers; with the exception of the late 1960s and early 1970s, the nutbar subculture has mostly been right wing. [QUOTE]

I think it more of a case of the loony left meeting up with the loony right. Note that CounterPunch and others on the far left have rejected the ‘truth’ movement.

BTW, I found my way to the forum thanks to your blog.

[sackett]

Something puzzles me. When this handful of fearless trootheroids have uncovered the plot of the century, naming names and broadcasting their irrefutable evidence all over the place, why hasn't the gigantic and all-powerful Illuminati-Mossad-Wall Street-CIA-Bush Family-New Cosmic Order turned them into Soylent Green a long time ago?

I may only be a lowly NWO shill, but I have to say: That's a helluva way to run a railroad.

[Viper Daimao]

If truthers legitimately believe that we are part of a government conspiracy that killed so many people and are assisting in the cover up of same, they would definitely agree that we are traitors and therefore probably have few qualms about treating us as such.

I recall one truther who was accused of calling Gravy with a death threat whose position was defended by another truther as not threatening gravy, but "promising to uphold the constitution". He refused to elaborate.

I believe that was Kevin Barrett a former university lecturer for the University of Wisconsin-Madison. He has also threatened a reporter who covered a truther event and was not sufficiently positive about the group.

[cludgie]

'stupid' isn't a crime; for some its a genetic disorder and for others its a lifestyle choice.

[cisco]

This thread was posted a year ago and got its first reply today? Record?


As for the overabundance of lefties . . . I think it's because a righty happens to be in charge right now. Hopefully this means the trooth will lose big numbers if/when a Democrat gets elected this fall.

[Walter Ego]

This thread was posted a year ago and got its first reply today? Record?

That was me (a newbie) responding to an old post. I’m still learning how to use this board. ;-)

[leftysergeant]

Now that you have brought it up...

I like your thinking in re the nutbar sub-culture.

I don't think it's really all that much a lefty thing. I think they are actually more anarchists.

The twoofers have invaded a lot of the Air Armerica Radio sites and are trying to sell Ron Paul to the lefties.

Libertarians are a big element in trhe movement. They are liberal on social issues, but, where it really counts, they are a little right of the John Birch Society, but just don't realize it.

Extreme right wingers who mistook their pudenda for a moral compass.

Alex Jones is a far, far right loony.

[Tweeter]

A lot? I dont doubt there are a few, but they`re also fathers, mothers, sons, daughters, pilots, military officers, engineers and so on. You get the point.

[DGM]

A lot? I dont doubt there are a few, but they`re also fathers, mothers, sons, daughters, pilots, military officers, engineers and so on. You get the point.
Nut-bars come from all walks of life?

[JimBenArm]

Nut-bars come from all walks of life?
Unfortunate, but true.

[Tweeter]

When you guys go out tonight, to your bingo or your AA meeting,
just remember that granny might be packing.

[Manly Man]

What's interesting to me is when I look at Alex Jone's Myspace page I see a very wide range of ideology expressed by his followers on everything but 9-11. Everyone posting comments over there seems to either be a far right-wing religious nut who quotes the bible and accuses the gub'ment of being Moloch worshiping occultists while everyone else is some pierced and tatooed emo punk whose parents didn't pay enough attention to them and now they're out to rebel against whatever anyone's got. 9-11 denial and paranoia about the government are the only things keeping them from protesting eachother. They all want to elect Alex Jones for president, but if he ever were I'm sure we'd see a bloodbath and I don't think those emo-kids would like who Alex sides with.

[T.A.M.]

Nut-bars come from all walks of life?

Actually Nut-bars are the offspring of a Hershey's Bar, and a pack of peanuts.

TAM;)

[CptColumbo]

Nut-bars come from all walks of life?

Actually Nut-bars are the offspring of a Hershey's Bar, and a pack of peanuts.

TAM;)They also rarely walk.

[Mobyseven]

That was me (a newbie) responding to an old post. I’m still learning how to use this board. ;-)

Even still, that was some serious thread necromancy going on! I wouldn't expect a reply from Perry by the way...he questioned Baal's authority and I had to have an assassin take him out. Of course it was all rigged to look like he was just banned from the forums, thank Moloch...

Welcome! :D

[CptColumbo]

Everytime a newbie comes here and ask questions that have already been asked, he/she is told to use the search function and read other threads. Now Walter does that and responds to an old thread, and you're now criticizing him/her. Granted it's an old thread, but give'em a break.

[Brainster]

I think it more of a case of the loony left meeting up with the loony right. Note that CounterPunch and others on the far left have rejected the ‘truth’ movement.

BTW, I found my way to the forum thanks to your blog.

Welcome; always glad to bring more solid thinkers over here. Yes, the far left have done some excellent work in debunking the kooks; Counterpunch, George Monbiot, Noam Chomsky and the DailyKos have been forthright in denouncing the crackpottery. So when I point out the fairly high (50%+) percentage of folks from the portside, I am not trying to score points on the Left. As others have observed, the starting point for believing in 9-11 nonsense is believing George Bush & Co are capable of great evil. Clearly that belief is stronger on the Left than it is on the Right, but it's also very strong among Libertarians. But then, Libertarians have always been prone to nuttery; see Ron Paul's newsletters.

Indeed, if we assume that the population is distributed normally along the political axis in a Bell Curve pattern (with only a small percentage at either end and most people in the middle), we can see that the 26% of Truthers who described themselves as "Far left of center" makes up a larger percentage of the overall group of "Far left of center" political types, than the 21% who describe themselves as "Somewhat left of center" make up of that cohort. We can see this anecdotally, as well. After Counterpunch published their series, I saw an interview with Jeffrey St. Clair, the co-publisher of that newsletter. St. Clair indicated that the backlash from that series had been devastating; he estimated that fully half of their readers were "Truther". Again, Counterpunch targets a very far left audience. It's not mainstream liberals who believe this in any great percentage; it's the "way out there" folks.

And the 27% of Truthers who say they're libertarian probably make up a huge percentage of libertarians overall. Hence the push by the Ronulans to try to infiltrate the Air America Board.

[Walter Ego]

Welcome; always glad to bring more solid thinkers over here. Yes, the far left have done some excellent work in debunking the kooks; Counterpunch, George Monbiot, Noam Chomsky and the DailyKos have been forthright in denouncing the crackpottery. So when I point out the fairly high (50%+) percentage of folks from the portside, I am not trying to score points on the Left. As others have observed, the starting point for believing in 9-11 nonsense is believing George Bush & Co are capable of great evil. Clearly that belief is stronger on the Left than it is on the Right, but it's also very strong among Libertarians. But then, Libertarians have always been prone to nuttery; see Ron Paul's newsletters.

Yes, the ‘government is evil’ crowd, both far left and libertarian, buy into it. Most of the young people in the movement seem politically naïve, however. Sadly, most of these kids seemed to have learned their politics from Alex Jones. Hardcore ‘hate America’ types like Kevin Barrett and Uncle Fetzer didn’t have to be sold a bill of goods to hop on board. For the conspiracy kooks of whatever stripe, it was a banquet not to be missed. Fetzer was an old JFK assassination hand. (The Zapruder
film was faked!)

[WildCat]

http://home.mindspring.com/~chitaper/b-r_zombie.jpg


And Perry Logan to boot! :p

[tsig]

Something puzzles me. When this handful of fearless trootheroids have uncovered the plot of the century, naming names and broadcasting their irrefutable evidence all over the place, why hasn't the gigantic and all-powerful Illuminati-Mossad-Wall Street-CIA-Bush Family-New Cosmic Order turned them into Soylent Green a long time ago?

I may only be a lowly NWO shill, but I have to say: That's a helluva way to run a railroad.

Bureaucracy. Your check will be adjusted for this answer. their order is being processed.

[tsig]

A lot? I dont doubt there are a few, but they`re also fathers, mothers, sons, daughters, pilots, military officers, engineers and so on. You get the point.

I bet they all use the bathroom too.

[tsig]

When you guys go out tonight, to your bingo or your AA meeting,
just remember that granny might be packing.

If she's ready to leave I'll open the door.

[GregoryUrich]

When you get down to it, the 9/11 Truth Movement is mostly a case of anti-government bigotry, often raised to the level of psychosis.

Alex Jones probably says "The government did it!" the instant he wakes up every morning. If Alex doesn't like a sandwich, he blames the government.

Other Truthers are less flamboyant than Alex. But they all seem to feel about the same way. The government did it--no proof required. The government is assumed to be behind everything, and the "evidence" is cooked up later. We've seen it over and over. This is how Truthers think.

Well then...if you believe the government is utterly corrupt--the font of all evil--you have a full-blown rationalization for committing all sorts of crimes.

To speak bluntly, I'll bet Truthers break the law to a degree way above the norm. With their belief that everyone at all levels of the government are devil-worshiping monsters or compartmentalized shills, the Truthers would naturally tend to think it's OK to break the law.

I'm not talking about political acts of protest committed in order to get arrested, which the Truthers rarely do. I'm talking about good old-fashioned, crime, especially petty crime. (One suspects there are no Truther master criminals.)

If a Truther doesn't pay his traffic fines, he's just striking a blow against The Man, right?

This is just a hypothesis. Perhaps someone has some information on how many Truthers have glove compartments full of unpaid traffic fines, how many Truthers have rap sheets, how many Truthers are career criminals--that sort of thing. Such a cynical world view would naturally lead a person to crime--especially if that person is a paranoid white male, pig-ignorant, and given to delusional beliefs.

Interesting fantasy! Unfortunately, this is the Conspiracy Theory forum, not the totally ridiculous pig-ignorant prejudicial accusation forum.

[CptColumbo]

Interesting fantasy! Unfortunately, this is the Conspiracy Theory forum, not the totally ridiculous pig-ignorant prejudicial accusation forum.
You will notice that Perry was banned. So apparently he didn't understand that.

[deep]

I don't think it's really all that much a lefty thing. I think they are actually more anarchists.


Do you have any sort of evidence to support that assumption?

Similarly, I could say something along the lines of, "I believe that most debunkers are actually child molesters", and people would jump all over me. Yet, at the same time, nobody said a thing about your statement (i.e., asking for evidence or otherwise challenging you).

Obvious double standards like that one only hurt the credibility of the JREF Conspiracy sub-forum, making it less and less attractive to those who are seeking to participate in some form of intellectually-honest debate.

[tomwaits]

I think "survivalist" is a better term for most of them. It seems far beyond your normal libertarianism. I consider myself a libertarian but these people are the kinds who would join the texas militia. This is Lyndon LaRouche territory. I think people on the left were at first attracted by the idea that Bush had purposely done this, but it's different now.

And LOL at the revival of this OP. Perry Logan is always good for a laugh.

[HereticHulk]

:dl:

Yes people who ask questions of authority are anarchists and criminals. This is a new low for JREFers! Laughable man!

I remember a day when people who dissent or ask questions were Patriots.

[parky76]

Criminals? No.

Plethera of schizophrenics and bi-polar folks? Absolutely.

Just go to Loose Change Forums. A good 20% of them clearly have some sort of serious mental disorder.

By the way, Heretic, since when does simply asking questions make someone more of a Patriot then someone who doesn't?

[WildCat]

Yes people who ask questions of authority are anarchists and criminals.
No, but when they ignore the answers by qualified experts in favor of opinions by charlatans and frauds it exposes them seriously lacking in judgement.

There's nothing intrinsically patriotic about being a moron.

[tomwaits]

:dl:

Yes people who ask questions of authority are anarchists and criminals. This is a new low for JREFers! Laughable man!

I remember a day when people who dissent or ask questions were Patriots.

It's pretty ironic you bolded "new", since this thread was started february 2007.

[deep]

No, but when they ignore the answers by qualified experts in favor of opinions by charlatans and frauds it exposes them seriously lacking in judgement [sic].


It's worth noting that your one and only way of identifying those "charlatans and frauds" is to first learn what they believe with regard to 9/11.

[Par]

I remember a day when people who dissent or ask questions were Patriots.


When was that? When was anyone who dissented or asked questions (regardless of the content of that dissent or whether they listened to answers) considered a “patriot”? If there ever was such a time, I’m glad it’s gone now.

[Par]

It's worth noting that your one and only way of identifying those "charlatans and frauds" is to first learn what they believe with regard to 9/11.


That’s certainly one (but not the only) way of making such an assessment.

[deep]

That’s certainly one (but not the only) way of making such an assessment.


OK, I'll bite - what's the other way of making such an assessment?

Alternatively, can you name an architect, engineer or scientist who supports 9/11 truth, but isn't a "charlatan or fraud" in your eyes? If not, can you name one that you identified as a "charlatan or fraud" before they showed any public support for 9/11 truth?

I tend to believe what I see with my own eyes, so unless you have a few concrete examples, I'll stand by my original statement.

[T.A.M.]

Do you have any sort of evidence to support that assumption?

Similarly, I could say something along the lines of, "I believe that most debunkers are actually child molesters", and people would jump all over me. Yet, at the same time, nobody said a thing about your statement (i.e., asking for evidence or otherwise challenging you).

Obvious double standards like that one only hurt the credibility of the JREF Conspiracy sub-forum, making it less and less attractive to those who are seeking to participate in some form of intellectually-honest debate.

Actually, the comparison you make is not quite fair.

If you called most debunkers "shills" or "Neo-Cons" or "Fascists", you might get a few minor quips, but you would not be blasted. That is about the same degree of insult as what lefty stated.

The "child molester" comparison, would be more fair if we called truthers "rapists" or some such.

TAM:)

[T.A.M.]

:dl:

Yes people who ask questions of authority are anarchists and criminals. This is a new low for JREFers! Laughable man!

I remember a day when people who dissent or ask questions were Patriots.

Strawman much?

TAM:)

[Mobyseven]

Everytime a newbie comes here and ask questions that have already been asked, he/she is told to use the search function and read other threads. Now Walter does that and responds to an old thread, and you're now criticizing him/her. Granted it's an old thread, but give'em a break.

Whoa there - 'twas just some light-hearted ribbing...thought the tone of my post conveyed that.

Sorry if I came across the wrong way Walter - welcome to the forums!

[LashL]

No, but when they ignore the answers by qualified experts in favor of opinions by charlatans and frauds it exposes them seriously lacking in judgement [sic].




[Pedant mode, since deep44 raised it]

What's with the "[sic]" addition there, deep44? The spelling of "judgement" is entirely acceptable in the context in which Wildcat used it. While the word is correctly spelled "judgment" in the context of legal proceedings, "judgement" is a perfectly valid spelling in other contexts, including the context in which Wildcat used it above.

Perhaps you should pay more attention to detail yourself before back-handedly attempting to criticize others on such a trivial matter, particularly when your attempted criticism is invalid.

[/Pedant mode]

[leftysergeant]

Do you have any sort of evidence to support that assumption?

Similarly, I could say something along the lines of, "I believe that most debunkers are actually child molesters", and people would jump all over me. Yet, at the same time, nobody said a thing about your statement (i.e., asking for evidence or otherwise challenging you).


Actually, there are anarchists on either end of the spectrum. (Or perhaps dangling tangentally from the left-right axis.)

There are Anarcho-syndicalists like the Loosers WAAAAY off to the left, and Anarcho-capitalists just a little right of the big-L Libertarians, like the Paulbots and AJ fans.

Remeber the twoofer idea of creating their own currency on Loose Screws? Anarcho-syndicalist.

[Walter Ego]

Whoa there - 'twas just some light-hearted ribbing...thought the tone of my post conveyed that.

Sorry if I came across the wrong way Walter - welcome to the forums!

No offense taken. I’m still learning to use the forum but the reason I responded to the thread even though it was a year old is that I thought the question was a good one and some of the replies have been enlightening to me at least.

I should add here that I’ve never paid much attention to the 9-11 Truth movement until last month when I found the Screw Loose Change blog through which I came to this forum.

While ‘old hands’ here have heard many issues discussed, perhaps some allowance should be made for newcomers who may be curious about the ‘truthers’ and their motivations and methods and who may bring up ‘old’ questions. It’s all a matter of learning.

[e^n]

OK, I'll bite - what's the other way of making such an assessment?
A review of theories / papers put forward? When someone clearly takes evidence out of context, manipulates it to make it fit their predetermined goals etc we can identify them as a fraud, either knowingly or unknowingly.

Alternatively, can you name an architect, engineer or scientist who supports 9/11 truth, but isn't a "charlatan or fraud" in your eyes? If not, can you name one that you identified as a "charlatan or fraud" before they showed any public support for 9/11 truth?
It's unlikely that there will be a case where someone identifies an engineer/architect etc as being a charlatan or a fraud before they show public support for 911 truth for one good reason. This is a forum about conspiracy theories. We don't go looking through the work of every engineer in the world to ensure they are genuine, we review claims which arise from various conspiracy movements.

As for naming an architect, engineer or scientist who supports 9/11 truth but is not a charlatan, I would have to ask for a clarification. Are you asking me to find someone who supports a MIHOP theory and is not a fraud? I think this is likely impossible as believing seriously in such a theory requires an incredibly distorted perspective or a willingness to ignore the evidence. If you're asking for an architect, engineer or scientist who simply is interested in finding the truth about issues at 911 I could name many. Dr Frank Greening would be a good example, despite his flamboyant style I have had few problems with the work he presents.

I tend to believe what I see with my own eyes, so unless you have a few concrete examples, I'll stand by my original statement.
A poor choice of words perhaps, 'what I see with my own eyes' is tantamount to 'what I believe'. You must admit your own vision can easily be distorted by wishful thinking. You should instead believe what the evidence supports.