9/11 Truthers... What is your smoking gun?

rmcc4444 · 27th May 2009, 11:27 PM

Post the single piece of evidence that you believe proves 9/11 was an inside job. I've seen a lot of information that is suspicious, but what is your smoking gun?

Sword_Of_Truth · 27th May 2009, 11:39 PM

You must be new to dealing with 9/11 quacks.

WTC7 is the answer you will get.

It will be the last simple coherent statement you will hear from them (especially if you ask them to explain it).

rmcc4444 · 27th May 2009, 11:42 PM

I've "debated" with them on other forums and notice one thing they do is go quickly from topic to topic while cherry picking the facts.

I'd like to discuss one single issue and see where it goes.

JoeyDonuts · 28th May 2009, 12:52 AM

Originally Posted by rmcc4444

I've "debated" with them on other forums and notice one thing they do is go quickly from topic to topic while cherry picking the facts.

I'd like to discuss one single issue and see where it goes.

Yeah...well, good luck with that!

Precedent indicates it will go like the wheels on the bus if you catch my meaning.

Scott_Milner · 28th May 2009, 01:35 AM

Out of the many suspicious events that day, I will agree that WTC #7 is the most damning. The recent dust analysis paper, along with witness testimony of explosions and molten steel really drive the point home.

zorro99 · 28th May 2009, 01:42 AM

Originally Posted by Scott_Milner

Out of the many suspicious events that day, I will agree that WTC #7 is the most damning. The recent dust analysis paper, along with witness testimony of explosions and molten steel really drive the point home.

That's ridiculous. There is no substance that can both melt steel and blow it up.

Scott_Milner · 28th May 2009, 01:45 AM

Originally Posted by zorro99

That's ridiculous. There is no substance that can both melt steel and blow it up.

That is to imply only one substance was used?

Sword_Of_Truth · 28th May 2009, 01:46 AM

And so it begins...

zorro99 · 28th May 2009, 01:49 AM

Originally Posted by Scott_Milner

That is to imply only one substance was used?

I don't know. You tell me, bubba, it's your theory.

dtugg · 28th May 2009, 01:50 AM

Originally Posted by Scott_Milner

Out of the many suspicious events that day, I will agree that WTC #7 is the most damning. The recent dust analysis paper, along with witness testimony of explosions and molten steel really drive the point home.

Perhaps you'll be the first twoofer to give a plausible motive for blowing up WTC7 and explain how this was done without arising the suspicions of any officials that were actually there.

No, who am I kidding, you won't be.

Sword_Of_Truth · 28th May 2009, 01:54 AM

Originally Posted by dtugg

Perhaps you'll be the first twoofer to give a plausible motive for blowing up WTC7

Also, be advised, we are aware of the existence of paper shredders and will point out that fact to you in various snarky, sarcastic, mocking and belittling ways should your proposed motive be mentally retarded.

T.A.M. · 28th May 2009, 04:07 AM

Guiliani's secret bunker was not really for Emergency Preparedness, but rather housed a whore house used by all the presidents and politicians. Word got out to Prisonplanet of this on 9/11, so it had to be taken down.

(Cue music)

TAM

FineWine · 28th May 2009, 05:26 AM

Originally Posted by Scott_Milner

That is to imply only one substance was used?

No, zero substances were used.

Disbelief · 28th May 2009, 05:33 AM

Originally Posted by zorro99

That's ridiculous. There is no substance that can both melt steel and blow it up.

But on Mythbusters last night, they had something that actually did that - thermite plus ice. So, the NWO clandestinely brought in tons of ice blocks and thermite, melted the some steel and then caused explosions when the thermite reached the ice. The ice melts away, and the thermite leaves residue that would normally be found in the wreckage.

This theory is better than anything the TM has produced to date.

Jackanory · 28th May 2009, 05:37 AM

Originally Posted by Disbelief

But on Mythbusters last night, they had something that actually did that - thermite plus ice. So, the NWO clandestinely brought in tons of ice blocks and thermite, melted the some steel and then caused explosions when the thermite reached the ice. The ice melts away, and the thermite leaves residue that would normally be found in the wreckage.

This theory is better than anything the TM has produced to date.

Uhhh Ohhhh Here we go. A new theory for the TM to grasp onto. By 2012 we will all be discussing the 'iceberg in the canteen of WTC2' conspiracy. Watch this space folks - you heard it here first.

Jackanory · 28th May 2009, 05:38 AM

Originally Posted by T.A.M.

Guiliani's secret bunker was not really for Emergency Preparedness, but rather housed a whore house used by all the presidents and politicians. Word got out to Prisonplanet of this on 9/11, so it had to be taken down.

(Cue music)

TAM

Yeah Debbie does Dallas intro would be good

Justin39640 · 28th May 2009, 05:41 AM

Originally Posted by rmcc4444

I've "debated" with them on other forums and notice one thing they do is go quickly from topic to topic while cherry picking the facts.

I'd like to discuss one single issue and see where it goes.

a long time ago when i first started "debating" with truthers
i found an article on one of their research sites that was instructions on how to debate debunkers

it included instructions that read something like "dont stay on one subject too long, switch topics often"
"dont rebut things, change subjects"
etc

it was a pretty long read and shows how the "truth" operates (dirty tactics)

i've been looking for it the last few weeks but i fear its been deleted
hopefully at some point someone here has read it too and has a link or a copy

Jackanory · 28th May 2009, 05:43 AM

Originally Posted by Justin39640

a long time ago when i first started "debating" with truthers
i found an article on one of their research sites that was instructions on how to debate debunkers

it included instructions that read something like "dont stay on one subject too long, switch topics etc etc"

it was a pretty long read and shows how the "truth" operates (dirty tactics)

i've been looking for it the last few weeks but i fear its been deleted
hopefully at some point someone here has read it too and has a link or a copy

Its on here somewhere and has been discussed recently. They all use it.

Disbelief · 28th May 2009, 05:44 AM

Originally Posted by Jackanory

Uhhh Ohhhh Here we go. A new theory for the TM to grasp onto. By 2012 we will all be discussing the 'iceberg in the canteen of WTC2' conspiracy. Watch this space folks - you heard it here first.

They'll make up WTC workers who complained about how cold it was in the Towers that day and how there appeared to be so many HVAC and vending machine workers there that day.

Jackanory · 28th May 2009, 05:48 AM

Originally Posted by Disbelief

They'll make up WTC workers who complained about how cold it was in the Towers that day and how there appeared to be so many HVAC and vending machine workers there that day.

Yeah. It will run and run for so long that they will eventually believe the crap that they themselves started. Then come to JREF in 2012 with some wiki article or third hand statement from an unknown WTC employee who witnessed men in black suits carrying large dripping blocks of ice through the lobby. Hey i could get used to this story telling stuff

16.5 · 28th May 2009, 05:57 AM

Originally Posted by Disbelief

But on Mythbusters last night, they had something that actually did that - thermite plus ice. So, the NWO clandestinely brought in tons of ice blocks and thermite, melted the some steel and then caused explosions when the thermite reached the ice. The ice melts away, and the thermite leaves residue that would normally be found in the wreckage.

This theory is better than anything the TM has produced to date.

Yeah I saw that. Very interesting. I was a little disturbed that that they did not really try to guess what caused the explosion. Seemed to me pretty clear that what we were seeing was the explosive release of super heated steam. They suggested water separating into hydrogen and oxygen? Thermite dispersed in the air?

Guess they never saw a steam boiler blow up.

Quad4_72 · 28th May 2009, 06:49 AM

Originally Posted by Scott_Milner

along with witness testimony of explosions

Direct me to one single witness testimony of someone hearing an explosion while WTC7 was collapsing. Oh and just FYI, if there were explosives detonated in WTC7, they would have been heard for miles (Ever been to a controlled demo? Yeah they are LOUD). But yet, not a single piece of audio equipment recording that day picked up any sort of explosions in WTC7. Why is that?

Jackanory · 28th May 2009, 06:54 AM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

Direct me to one single witness testimony of someone hearing an explosion while WTC7 was collapsing. Oh and just FYI, if there were explosives detonated in WTC7, they would have been heard for miles (Ever been to a controlled demo? Yeah they are LOUD). But yet, not a single piece of audio equipment recording that day picked up any sort of explosions in WTC7. Why is that?

Didnt you know..........supasekritsilentnanathermite encased in a invisible shroud of ice. doh

JimBenArm · 28th May 2009, 07:03 AM

No, no, no, you all don't understand. They don't look for smoking guns. They try to smoke the guns. This is the real reason there are so few of them anymore. They put the barrels in their mouth, inhale, and put a lighter to it.

Tragic, really.

Quad4_72 · 28th May 2009, 07:18 AM

Originally Posted by JimBenArm

No, no, no, you all don't understand. They don't look for smoking guns. They try to smoke the guns. This is the real reason there are so few of them anymore. They put the barrels in their mouth, inhale, and put a lighter to it.

Tragic, really.

Something like this perhaps?

alienentity · 28th May 2009, 09:21 AM

Originally Posted by Justin39640

a long time ago when i first started "debating" with truthers
i found an article on one of their research sites that was instructions on how to debate debunkers

it included instructions that read something like "dont stay on one subject too long, switch topics often"
"dont rebut things, change subjects"
etc

it was a pretty long read and shows how the "truth" operates (dirty tactics)

i've been looking for it the last few weeks but i fear its been deleted
hopefully at some point someone here has read it too and has a link or a copy

You obviously weren't at last month's NWO meeting. It was explained that the guidelines were taken down by NWO operatives and the authors were kidnapped and disposed of at the same Area 51 rendering facility used to get rid of the passengers from the fake 9/11 flights.

This is top secret information, but publishing it online as I am today is part of our psy-ops disinfo campaign. Hiding in plain sight, as it were.

beachnut · 28th May 2009, 09:25 AM

Originally Posted by Scott_Milner

Out of the many suspicious events that day, I will agree that WTC #7 is the most damning. The recent dust analysis paper, along with witness testimony of explosions and molten steel really drive the point home.

You presented hearsay and moronic Jones junk-science.

Evidence is what was asked; do you know evidence. Please do not say explosions were from explosives without evidence, there were zero sounds of explosives on 911 so you will need to bring more than lies and fantasy.

Carll68 · 28th May 2009, 09:32 AM

I have composed a comphrehensive & detailed list of the twoof movements accomplishments & resulting societal impact since 2001:
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-

alienentity · 28th May 2009, 09:37 AM

Originally Posted by rmcc4444

Post the single piece of evidence that you believe proves 9/11 was an inside job. I've seen a lot of information that is suspicious, but what is your smoking gun?

In all seriousness, AFAIK, there is no single piece of evidence which is used to 'prove' the inside job theory.

The term 'smoking gun' was used recently by Dr. Steven Jones, discussing his team's paper 'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe' on Visibility 9/11 this year. As you may know, the paper focuses on the small Red/Grey chips found in WTC dust samples.

I think the paper is one of the most thoroughly and competently researched inquiries made by the 9/11 truth movement to date. As yet, the results are somewhat incomplete - they haven't identified the Grey layer, the 'organic binder', and they haven't yet isolated the Red layer to determine what the energy output of it is by itself. Nor did they get combustion of the chips in the absence of oxygen - now THAT would have been interesting!

As it stands today, you'd probably agree that the term 'smoking gun' is premature for this line of inquiry. More accurately it should be labeled 'potential smoking gun, TBC'

Here's a link to the interview. Also check out the infomercial by A&E for T's Richard Gage! (There is a blurb on the right of their home page outlining the case for CD at WTC7 http://www.ae911truth.org/)

http://cdn4.libsyn.com/visibility911...3d739edfe47394

Carll68 · 28th May 2009, 09:40 AM

Correction...that was the "Loaded gun" not the 'Smoking gun'.
Get your twoof guns straight

Next I can only assume we will have the 'Empty gun' and finally the "new in wrapper never opened resale special' gun

:-)

Carll68 · 28th May 2009, 09:47 AM

Discussing the ~~smoking~~ loaded gun evidence from "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe' Discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe" is akin to discussing the evidence from a checkout rag....Headline reading: "Alien Baby found in Paris Hiltons ear"--neither one is peer reviewed, both are junk, and only fools buy into it

Also, it has not been determined that what they found was:

A)Active Thermitic Material

Nor has it been even remotley concluded to be

B)Discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

So, at face value...it falls all over itself....

BTW--great job on your YouTube vids

JohnG · 28th May 2009, 10:11 AM

Originally Posted by Carll68

Correction...that was the "Loaded gun" not the 'Smoking gun'.
Get your twoof guns straight

Next I can only assume we will have the 'Empty gun' and finally the "new in wrapper never opened resale special' gun

:-)

Or 'The Naked Gun' starring Steven Jones as Lt. Frank Drebin.

Quad4_72 · 28th May 2009, 10:34 AM

Please tell me everyone knows where that pic is from...

KTB · 28th May 2009, 10:50 AM

I was wondering how the CD of WTC7 would automatically imply an "inside job"?
Why couldn't some redneck anti-gubmint types have blown it up? A few warriors working as security guards set up the magic-o-explosives and blow the thing up. Or some islamic fundamentalists for that matter?
If it was so easy to rig the building without anyone noticing where's the problem in these two scenarios?
So what specifically proves "inside job" if WTC7 was in fact blown up?

Carll68 · 28th May 2009, 11:20 AM

Originally Posted by Quad4_72

Please tell me everyone knows where that pic is from...

Oh, Oh, Oh ---- I know.

Is it from the candid behind the scenes film of Charlie Sheen after he realized what he did to his career talking about 911 being and 'inside job"?????

Quad4_72 · 28th May 2009, 11:28 AM

Originally Posted by Carll68

Oh, Oh, Oh ---- I know.

Is it from the candid behind the scenes film of Charlie Sheen after he realized what he did to his career talking about 911 being and 'inside job"?????

Hahaha. Close...

Sword_Of_Truth · 28th May 2009, 11:33 AM

Hot Shots?

ImANiceGuy · 28th May 2009, 11:40 AM

Originally Posted by Jackanory

Its on here somewhere and has been discussed recently. They all use it.

...this is complete bunk. How you can make such ridiculous generalizations without being totally called out by your fellow members is beyond me. Is there a skeptics handbook that you "all" refer to? Jref, so quick to destroy any mistatement made by a member of alternate theory, and yet so happy to let anyone posting garbage that fits their worldview get a pass.....

Why don't you hold everyone to the same standards? It would lend credibility to any member who did, imo.

Has anyone been able to explain how the fires in the two towers were only hot enough to cause structural failure(ie. not melt steel), yet molten metals were found in the rubble piles? Why was the steel hot enough to melt the worker's boots in the weeks post-collapse?

Could the fires that burned in the damaged sections of the towers spread as the building collapsed, and then grow into larger fires below the rubble that reached hotter temperatures?

alienentity · 28th May 2009, 11:41 AM

Originally Posted by Carll68

Discussing the ~~smoking~~ loaded gun evidence from "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe' Discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe" is akin to discussing the evidence from a checkout rag....Headline reading: "Alien Baby found in Paris Hiltons ear"--neither one is peer reviewed, both are junk, and only fools buy into it

Also, it has not been determined that what they found was:

A)Active Thermitic Material

Nor has it been even remotley concluded to be

B)Discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe

So, at face value...it falls all over itself....

BTW--great job on your YouTube vids

Oh, thanks! Well, the Jones paper was in fact peer reviewed, although people are skeptical about the journal it was published in. I don't think it's fair to characterize the chip testing as junk science, but as I pointed out the conclusions Jones et al. are drawing are not really supported by that evidence.
See where I'm going?

Incidentally, Jones seems confused about what the possible role of any such nanothermite might have been in the collapses anyway. In a discussion with Dr. Frank Greening, he seemed to be favouring the idea that NT was used as a detonator for conventional high-explosives.

But he also speculates that the NT might have been 'painted on', possibly by unsuspecting workers, onto core steel columns.

Either way, he's not really theorizing high temperature steel melting, he's leaning towards a high-explosive effect. There are serious problems with that idea, starting with the fact that there weren't any detonations, blast shockwaves or that type of evidence observed.

Here's a really good illustration of the absence of detonations. It doesn't get any more clear than this video, taken fairly close to the collapse - the camera is zoomed in fairly tight to the burning areas, and captures the beginning of collapse. The only sound heard is a growing rumbling sound as the collapse progresses.

Doesn't look at all like CD to me. Doesn't matter whether it's nanothermite or not.

YouTube Video This video is not hosted by the JREF. The JREF can not be held responsible for the suitability or legality of this material. By clicking the link below you agree to view content from an external website.

I AGREE

HyJinX · 28th May 2009, 11:42 AM

Platoon?

27th May 2009, 11:27 PM	#1
rmcc4444 New Blood Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 14	9/11 Truthers... What is your smoking gun? Post the single piece of evidence that you believe proves 9/11 was an inside job. I've seen a lot of information that is suspicious, but what is your smoking gun?
rmcc4444 New Blood Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 14

27th May 2009, 11:42 PM	#3
rmcc4444 New Blood Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 14	I've "debated" with them on other forums and notice one thing they do is go quickly from topic to topic while cherry picking the facts. I'd like to discuss one single issue and see where it goes.
rmcc4444 New Blood Join Date: Oct 2008 Posts: 14

28th May 2009, 12:52 AM	#4
JoeyDonuts Frequencies Not Known To Normals Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Parts Unknown Posts: 10,636	Originally Posted by rmcc4444 I've "debated" with them on other forums and notice one thing they do is go quickly from topic to topic while cherry picking the facts. I'd like to discuss one single issue and see where it goes. Yeah...well, good luck with that! Precedent indicates it will go like the wheels on the bus if you catch my meaning.
	__________________ _{EXIT STAGE LEFT! EXIT STAGE RIGHT! THERE IS NO PLACE TO RUN; ALL THE FUSES IN THE EXIT SIGNS HAVE BEEN BURNED OUT!}

28th May 2009, 01:35 AM	#5
Scott_Milner Scholar Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 59	Out of the many suspicious events that day, I will agree that WTC #7 is the most damning. The recent dust analysis paper, along with witness testimony of explosions and molten steel really drive the point home.
Scott_Milner Scholar Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 59

28th May 2009, 01:42 AM	#6
zorro99 Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Africa Posts: 282	Originally Posted by Scott_Milner Out of the many suspicious events that day, I will agree that WTC #7 is the most damning. The recent dust analysis paper, along with witness testimony of explosions and molten steel really drive the point home. That's ridiculous. There is no substance that can both melt steel and blow it up.
	__________________ There is nothing as deceptive as an obvious fact.

27th May 2009, 11:39 PM	#2
Sword_Of_Truth Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 11,497	You must be new to dealing with 9/11 quacks. WTC7 is the answer you will get. It will be the last simple coherent statement you will hear from them (especially if you ask them to explain it).

28th May 2009, 01:45 AM	#7
Scott_Milner Scholar Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 59	Originally Posted by zorro99 That's ridiculous. There is no substance that can both melt steel and blow it up. That is to imply only one substance was used?
Scott_Milner Scholar Join Date: Feb 2009 Posts: 59

28th May 2009, 01:46 AM	#8
Sword_Of_Truth Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 11,497	And so it begins...

28th May 2009, 01:49 AM	#9
zorro99 Critical Thinker Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: South Africa Posts: 282	Originally Posted by Scott_Milner That is to imply only one substance was used? I don't know. You tell me, bubba, it's your theory.
	__________________ There is nothing as deceptive as an obvious fact.

28th May 2009, 01:50 AM	#10
dtugg Banned Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: NWO headquarters Posts: 7,898	Originally Posted by Scott_Milner Out of the many suspicious events that day, I will agree that WTC #7 is the most damning. The recent dust analysis paper, along with witness testimony of explosions and molten steel really drive the point home. Perhaps you'll be the first twoofer to give a plausible motive for blowing up WTC7 and explain how this was done without arising the suspicions of any officials that were actually there. No, who am I kidding, you won't be.

28th May 2009, 01:54 AM	#11
Sword_Of_Truth Penultimate Amazing Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 11,497	Originally Posted by dtugg Perhaps you'll be the first twoofer to give a plausible motive for blowing up WTC7 Also, be advised, we are aware of the existence of paper shredders and will point out that fact to you in various snarky, sarcastic, mocking and belittling ways should your proposed motive be mentally retarded.

28th May 2009, 04:07 AM	#12
T.A.M. Keeper of the Kool-Vax Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: The Far East...of Canada Posts: 20,816	Guiliani's secret bunker was not really for Emergency Preparedness, but rather housed a whore house used by all the presidents and politicians. Word got out to Prisonplanet of this on 9/11, so it had to be taken down. (Cue music) TAM

28th May 2009, 05:26 AM	#13
FineWine Suspended Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 2,070	Originally Posted by Scott_Milner That is to imply only one substance was used? No, zero substances were used.
FineWine Suspended Join Date: Apr 2009 Posts: 2,070

28th May 2009, 05:33 AM	#14
Disbelief Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,272	Originally Posted by zorro99 That's ridiculous. There is no substance that can both melt steel and blow it up. But on Mythbusters last night, they had something that actually did that - thermite plus ice. So, the NWO clandestinely brought in tons of ice blocks and thermite, melted the some steel and then caused explosions when the thermite reached the ice. The ice melts away, and the thermite leaves residue that would normally be found in the wreckage. This theory is better than anything the TM has produced to date.
Disbelief Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,272	__________________ Zensmack (LastChild, Laughing Assassin, RazetheFlag, Wastrel, TruthbyDecree) - Working his way up the sock puppet chain, trying to overtake P'Doh. Or, are they the same? Quote me where I said conspiracists use evidence. - mchapman

28th May 2009, 05:37 AM	#15
Jackanory Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: UK Posts: 1,339	Originally Posted by Disbelief But on Mythbusters last night, they had something that actually did that - thermite plus ice. So, the NWO clandestinely brought in tons of ice blocks and thermite, melted the some steel and then caused explosions when the thermite reached the ice. The ice melts away, and the thermite leaves residue that would normally be found in the wreckage. This theory is better than anything the TM has produced to date. Uhhh Ohhhh Here we go. A new theory for the TM to grasp onto. By 2012 we will all be discussing the 'iceberg in the canteen of WTC2' conspiracy. Watch this space folks - you heard it here first.

28th May 2009, 05:38 AM	#16
Jackanory Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: UK Posts: 1,339	Originally Posted by T.A.M. Guiliani's secret bunker was not really for Emergency Preparedness, but rather housed a whore house used by all the presidents and politicians. Word got out to Prisonplanet of this on 9/11, so it had to be taken down. (Cue music) TAM Yeah Debbie does Dallas intro would be good

28th May 2009, 05:41 AM	#17
Justin39640 Illuminator Join Date: May 2009 Location: New York Posts: 3,646	Originally Posted by rmcc4444 I've "debated" with them on other forums and notice one thing they do is go quickly from topic to topic while cherry picking the facts. I'd like to discuss one single issue and see where it goes. a long time ago when i first started "debating" with truthers i found an article on one of their research sites that was instructions on how to debate debunkers it included instructions that read something like "dont stay on one subject too long, switch topics often" "dont rebut things, change subjects" etc it was a pretty long read and shows how the "truth" operates (dirty tactics) i've been looking for it the last few weeks but i fear its been deleted hopefully at some point someone here has read it too and has a link or a copy
	__________________ "I joined this forum to learn about the people who think that 9/11 was an inside job. I've learned that they believe nutty things and are not very good at explaining them." - FineWine "The agencies involved with studying the WTC collapse no more needed to consider explosives than the police need to consider brain cancer in a shooting death." - ElMondoHummus Last edited by Justin39640; 28th May 2009 at 05:42 AM.

28th May 2009, 05:43 AM	#18
Jackanory Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: UK Posts: 1,339	Originally Posted by Justin39640 a long time ago when i first started "debating" with truthers i found an article on one of their research sites that was instructions on how to debate debunkers it included instructions that read something like "dont stay on one subject too long, switch topics etc etc" it was a pretty long read and shows how the "truth" operates (dirty tactics) i've been looking for it the last few weeks but i fear its been deleted hopefully at some point someone here has read it too and has a link or a copy Its on here somewhere and has been discussed recently. They all use it.

28th May 2009, 05:44 AM	#19
Disbelief Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,272	Originally Posted by Jackanory Uhhh Ohhhh Here we go. A new theory for the TM to grasp onto. By 2012 we will all be discussing the 'iceberg in the canteen of WTC2' conspiracy. Watch this space folks - you heard it here first. They'll make up WTC workers who complained about how cold it was in the Towers that day and how there appeared to be so many HVAC and vending machine workers there that day.
Disbelief Master Poster Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 2,272	__________________ Zensmack (LastChild, Laughing Assassin, RazetheFlag, Wastrel, TruthbyDecree) - Working his way up the sock puppet chain, trying to overtake P'Doh. Or, are they the same? Quote me where I said conspiracists use evidence. - mchapman

28th May 2009, 05:48 AM	#20
Jackanory Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: UK Posts: 1,339	Originally Posted by Disbelief They'll make up WTC workers who complained about how cold it was in the Towers that day and how there appeared to be so many HVAC and vending machine workers there that day. Yeah. It will run and run for so long that they will eventually believe the crap that they themselves started. Then come to JREF in 2012 with some wiki article or third hand statement from an unknown WTC employee who witnessed men in black suits carrying large dripping blocks of ice through the lobby. Hey i could get used to this story telling stuff

28th May 2009, 05:57 AM	#21
16.5 Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 4,664	Originally Posted by Disbelief But on Mythbusters last night, they had something that actually did that - thermite plus ice. So, the NWO clandestinely brought in tons of ice blocks and thermite, melted the some steel and then caused explosions when the thermite reached the ice. The ice melts away, and the thermite leaves residue that would normally be found in the wreckage. This theory is better than anything the TM has produced to date. Yeah I saw that. Very interesting. I was a little disturbed that that they did not really try to guess what caused the explosion. Seemed to me pretty clear that what we were seeing was the explosive release of super heated steam. They suggested water separating into hydrogen and oxygen? Thermite dispersed in the air? Guess they never saw a steam boiler blow up.
16.5 Illuminator Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 4,664

28th May 2009, 06:49 AM	#22
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: USA Posts: 5,830	Originally Posted by Scott_Milner along with witness testimony of explosions Direct me to one single witness testimony of someone hearing an explosion while WTC7 was collapsing. Oh and just FYI, if there were explosives detonated in WTC7, they would have been heard for miles (Ever been to a controlled demo? Yeah they are LOUD). But yet, not a single piece of audio equipment recording that day picked up any sort of explosions in WTC7. Why is that?
	__________________ Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken

28th May 2009, 06:54 AM	#23
Jackanory Graduate Poster Join Date: Mar 2009 Location: UK Posts: 1,339	Originally Posted by Quad4_72 Direct me to one single witness testimony of someone hearing an explosion while WTC7 was collapsing. Oh and just FYI, if there were explosives detonated in WTC7, they would have been heard for miles (Ever been to a controlled demo? Yeah they are LOUD). But yet, not a single piece of audio equipment recording that day picked up any sort of explosions in WTC7. Why is that? Didnt you know..........supasekritsilentnanathermite encased in a invisible shroud of ice. doh

28th May 2009, 07:03 AM	#24
JimBenArm Based on a true story! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Kansas City, MO Posts: 12,969	No, no, no, you all don't understand. They don't look for smoking guns. They try to smoke the guns. This is the real reason there are so few of them anymore. They put the barrels in their mouth, inhale, and put a lighter to it. Tragic, really.
	__________________ *"JimBenArm is right"* Hokulele Mom

28th May 2009, 07:18 AM	#25
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: USA Posts: 5,830	Originally Posted by JimBenArm No, no, no, you all don't understand. They don't look for smoking guns. They try to smoke the guns. This is the real reason there are so few of them anymore. They put the barrels in their mouth, inhale, and put a lighter to it. Tragic, really. Something like this perhaps?
	__________________ Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken

28th May 2009, 09:21 AM	#26
alienentity Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Somewhere between Here and There Posts: 4,240	Originally Posted by Justin39640 a long time ago when i first started "debating" with truthers i found an article on one of their research sites that was instructions on how to debate debunkers it included instructions that read something like "dont stay on one subject too long, switch topics often" "dont rebut things, change subjects" etc it was a pretty long read and shows how the "truth" operates (dirty tactics) i've been looking for it the last few weeks but i fear its been deleted hopefully at some point someone here has read it too and has a link or a copy You obviously weren't at last month's NWO meeting. It was explained that the guidelines were taken down by NWO operatives and the authors were kidnapped and disposed of at the same Area 51 rendering facility used to get rid of the passengers from the fake 9/11 flights. This is top secret information, but publishing it online as I am today is part of our psy-ops disinfo campaign. Hiding in plain sight, as it were.

28th May 2009, 09:25 AM	#27
beachnut Penultimate Amazing Join Date: Oct 2006 Location: Dog House Posts: 19,895	Originally Posted by Scott_Milner Out of the many suspicious events that day, I will agree that WTC #7 is the most damning. The recent dust analysis paper, along with witness testimony of explosions and molten steel really drive the point home. You presented hearsay and moronic Jones junk-science. Evidence is what was asked; do you know evidence. Please do not say explosions were from explosives without evidence, there were zero sounds of explosives on 911 so you will need to bring more than lies and fantasy.

28th May 2009, 09:32 AM	#28
Carll68 Critical Thinker Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 298	I have composed a comphrehensive & detailed list of the twoof movements accomplishments & resulting societal impact since 2001: - - - - - - - - - - - -
Carll68 Critical Thinker Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 298

28th May 2009, 09:37 AM	#29
alienentity Illuminator Join Date: Feb 2009 Location: Somewhere between Here and There Posts: 4,240	Originally Posted by rmcc4444 Post the single piece of evidence that you believe proves 9/11 was an inside job. I've seen a lot of information that is suspicious, but what is your smoking gun? In all seriousness, AFAIK, there is no single piece of evidence which is used to 'prove' the inside job theory. The term 'smoking gun' was used recently by Dr. Steven Jones, discussing his team's paper 'Active Thermitic Material Discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe' on Visibility 9/11 this year. As you may know, the paper focuses on the small Red/Grey chips found in WTC dust samples. I think the paper is one of the most thoroughly and competently researched inquiries made by the 9/11 truth movement to date. As yet, the results are somewhat incomplete - they haven't identified the Grey layer, the 'organic binder', and they haven't yet isolated the Red layer to determine what the energy output of it is by itself. Nor did they get combustion of the chips in the absence of oxygen - now THAT would have been interesting! As it stands today, you'd probably agree that the term 'smoking gun' is premature for this line of inquiry. More accurately it should be labeled 'potential smoking gun, TBC' Here's a link to the interview. Also check out the infomercial by A&E for T's Richard Gage! (There is a blurb on the right of their home page outlining the case for CD at WTC7 http://www.ae911truth.org/) http://cdn4.libsyn.com/visibility911...3d739edfe47394

28th May 2009, 09:40 AM	#30
Carll68 Critical Thinker Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 298	Correction...that was the "Loaded gun" not the 'Smoking gun'. Get your twoof guns straight Next I can only assume we will have the 'Empty gun' and finally the "new in wrapper never opened resale special' gun :-)
Carll68 Critical Thinker Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 298

28th May 2009, 09:47 AM	#31
Carll68 Critical Thinker Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 298	Discussing the ~~smoking~~ loaded gun evidence from "Active Thermitic Material Discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe' Discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe" is akin to discussing the evidence from a checkout rag....Headline reading: "Alien Baby found in Paris Hiltons ear"--neither one is peer reviewed, both are junk, and only fools buy into it Also, it has not been determined that what they found was: A)Active Thermitic Material Nor has it been even remotley concluded to be B)Discovered in dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center Catastrophe So, at face value...it falls all over itself.... BTW--great job on your YouTube vids
Carll68 Critical Thinker Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 298

28th May 2009, 10:11 AM	#32
JohnG Pedantic Bore Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Abandon All Hope Posts: 4,389	Originally Posted by Carll68 Correction...that was the "Loaded gun" not the 'Smoking gun'. Get your twoof guns straight Next I can only assume we will have the 'Empty gun' and finally the "new in wrapper never opened resale special' gun :-) Or 'The Naked Gun' starring Steven Jones as Lt. Frank Drebin.
	__________________ Do not weep. Do not wax indignant. Understand. - Baruch Spinoza You are not entitled to your opinion. You are entitled to your informed opinion. No one is entitled to be ignorant. -Harlan Ellison

28th May 2009, 10:34 AM	#33
Quad4_72 AI-EE-YAH! Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: USA Posts: 5,830	Please tell me everyone knows where that pic is from...
	__________________ Looks like the one on top has a magazine, thus needs less reloading. Also, the muzzle shroud makes it less likely for a spree killer to burn his hands. The pistol grip makes it more comfortable for the spree killer to shoot. thaiboxerken

28th May 2009, 10:50 AM	#34
KTB Scholar Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Space Posts: 100	I was wondering how the CD of WTC7 would automatically imply an "inside job"? Why couldn't some redneck anti-gubmint types have blown it up? A few warriors working as security guards set up the magic-o-explosives and blow the thing up. Or some islamic fundamentalists for that matter? If it was so easy to rig the building without anyone noticing where's the problem in these two scenarios? So what specifically proves "inside job" if WTC7 was in fact blown up?

28th May 2009, 11:20 AM	#35
Carll68 Critical Thinker Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 298	Originally Posted by Quad4_72 Please tell me everyone knows where that pic is from... Oh, Oh, Oh ---- I know. Is it from the candid behind the scenes film of Charlie Sheen after he realized what he did to his career talking about 911 being and 'inside job"?????
Carll68 Critical Thinker Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 298