@KeyGuy1967 Steel evaporated on 9/11. I think that makes the whole point you're trying to make moot.
And you're really referring to JREF for answers? Even though I've seen enough evidence to draw my own conclusions I don't shy away from any side of the story. But seriously, if you want good, unbiased information, JREF is the last place you should go. It's nothing but namecalling and childish behaviour.
So now steel evaporated on 9/11? LOL, was that before or after the holograms?
How was this accomplished, let me guess, super secret laser beams?
Your description of JREF is erroneous, it is heavily moderated and personal attacks are not allowed. Either you haven't been there or you're afraid of intelligent debate because you know all truther fantasies have been thoroughly debunked at that site.
@KeyGuy1967 Congrats, you're actually asking the right question. How did it evaporate? I'm sure you'll have to agree that the fire was not able to do this.
Fight the good fight , don't let these liars get away with these atrocities that were perpetrated by wealthy Americans on it's own citizens , you show me a REpublican and I'll show you either a mindless follower or a manipulative liar , both equally evil !
i think the government should come clear about leprachuans. since the government refuses to address this i have to come to the conclusion that leprachuans were behind 911. the cant even address this.
You got heart kid. I hope your caring doesn't leave you tattered. I would suggest getting your info from other sources than from the internet. This internet is like walking around in the medieval times. You got science and half-science and pho-science and clergy and priests and kings and knights all clashing at once. Nothing's more fun than a lynching or a witch burning. People didn't read then and still don't. And as far as these important questions: they're only important on the internet.
I know of some really cool progressive sites that show how it was squib charges and holograms that destroyed the WTC. I can look at a 72 dpi image posted on a really cool progressive Web site and tell you exactly how steel is affected by burning jet fuel and the physics of an impact of 500-plus mph by a large object. That is what the Internet can do for us really cool progressives.
The Internet has allowed the 9-11 Truth Movement to gain a foothold on the Internet. The really cool progressives are now using the Internet to put forth our stories about what really happened that day.
Honestly I think this would NEVER happen. If you watch when people ask people like Bush and Bill Clinton they always just get them thrown out and call them crazy. Honestly instead of Attacking Areas where there is Terrorist groups I think we should just train our Air Force and NAVY better.
LOL lets just say 911 being an inside job its a proven fact. Theres no point of questioning it any longer. do your research right here on you tube, interviews, survivors, footage of explosives, hell we even got a reporter announcing the collapse of building 7 while the building still stands outside her window LOL. Google Spider pt3.
Thanks so much for posting your thoughts.. I watched 3 of your videos so far and man you are as level headed as they get HELL YES you deserve an explanation. Great questions. Keep keeping it up..
great stuff, dont let the bad guys rattle ya ... you care and that counts for everything!
everyone ask yourself why no one is covering this, why no media ferrets out info on TV or print; instead we see britney, anna nicole, vick's dogs etc. ask why the IRAQ war cant be found on TV anymore. The MO is obvious.
Then we have Langley shills come on the NET like falcon who try to bully sheep into keeping official lies status quo.
everyone keep researching, your heart will find the truth.
i can tell you're an intelligent thoughtful person and for that i appreciate your calm message. i hope that dylan and the boys are vindicated years from now for being witnesses to time, but even if that doesnt happen ... keep the faith in what you feel .... not what you know. peace bro
when the corporations own all the mass media its not hard to see they can create a left right thing were people think there is a difference,you see you do debate the issues but the parameters are narrow and you cant talk aboutanything outside of them wake up people!
Personlly, if you want to waste your life trying to prove the 9/11 conspiracy, be my guest. However, our political leaders have to deal with issues that actually matter and are ACTUALLLY happening such as the economony and what to do about Iraq. Thank God our political leaders don't listen to nut jobs.
Listen to what you're saying Jebus. How can you say that truth concerning 9/11 doesn't matter? I also find it ironic that you bring up the war in Iraq (claiming THAT matters) when this war was in large part a link of the chain that was spawned by 9/11 itself.
Wars typically matter, but sure whatever. I'm saying the TRUTH is that pissed off muslims caused the attacks and that 9/11 truthers better be able to show hard evidence and not just grainy video before I start to believe that the US government was willing to kill 3000 cilivans. Also, another point, always remember government cannot do anything right.
There are holes in the theory of evolution, doesn't mean its wrong. Whatever holes exist in the offficial story don't compare to the holes that exist in the conspiracy theory that must have come straight from their ass.
There are holes in the theory of evolution, doesn't mean its wrong. Whatever holes exist in the offficial story don't compare to the holes that exist in the conspiracy theory that must have come straight from their ass.
Oh please give me these "facts" that you believe that you have even though real scientists who arn't crappy film makers prove the mainstream media account.
But who told you about there being no weapons of mass of destruction, oh yeah the mainstream media. You personally believe that liberal biased media wouldn't be all over the 9/11 story if it were true.
Until you can actually give evidence, instead of making up claims, your still not going to convince me because your arguments are based on facts or science.
Lol that made me laugh. Using a document from 1962 to make the connection to 9/11 makes me laugh. Are you actually going to give me evidence or are you just retarded.
"Thank God our political leaders don't listen to nut jobs." you believe your Leaders? the liers that told you they could not imagine flying jets into buildings even if they had held exercises with that scenario since 1998, in 2000 and on 911 itself? That told you Attas mint passport survived the crash and fireball? That Saddam had WMDs? That hinted an Iraq-911 link? Iraq a Cakewalk? Greeted as liberators? Mission Accomplished? over once Saddam cought? Once rigged elections held?
Presidential candidates do not have any obligation to address outlandish conspiracy theories which have minimal objective substantiating evidence, have been discredited by a number of legitimate extensive scientific efforts, and fly in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
I don't know why reasonable people spend their time debunking your theories as it is obvious that not amount of evidence is ever going to sway you off this idea, no matter how overwhelming.
I'm sure you're right. And I don't discount this difficulty. The systems in place, our government and media, are deeply corrupt, and to reach any position to do ANYTHING positive, compromises are obviously necessary. It sucks, but it's the way it is, and no amount of idealism changes it on its own. That's why WE have to allow the people of the US to see these issues clearly and public support will open the door for politicians to provide the oversight we need to make our country safe.
name them brainwashed and call them liars and puppets etc. the real question is with you "truthers" believing that your eyes are already "opened" is their such thing as the truth? or is the belief that terrorists took 2 planes and flew them into the towers...would that be shut eyes? what im saying is no matter what anyone says their will always be people who said terrorists did 9/11 and their will always be the debunkers...it will never end.
Diz, there's no question that terrorists attacked the US on 9/11. The only question is how many people and WHO were the people involved in the conspiracy. I am as disconcerted as you are by the organized 9/11 truth movement's assertion that "Our government" did it. "Inside job" doesn't carry any information, and I think foreign intelligence agencies are likely co-conspirators. I think we need to look closely at Cheney though. The wargames were what let it happen.
all i got to say is this the government is terrible at everything people are more competant would you believe the governemt if they flat out said no we didnt do this and heres why? with all the "truthers" say and desperatly believe their well version of 9/11 would you believe anyone who says otherwise your beliefs? or would u just...
I hear you on the highly visible organized truthers. But people like me (and we are legion) don't "believe" Loose Change's take on events. We're looking critically at all sources. However, one thing we're aware of that you don't seem to be is the media complicity in propagandizing our people and our weak understanding of the history of the actions of our government that (rightly) predicates resentment.
The government is terrible at what they want to be terrible at, and brilliant and what they want to be good at. They want you to believe that the catastrophe in Iraq is the product of mistakes, that their intentions were ever to enable a secure democratic state, but all you have to do is read the planners' writings and statements over the past 30 years. They wanted a base of operations for the US in the middle east. The chaos locks our soldiers in even after the lies have been revealed.
No doubt. The feds agenda has been hiding in the weeds for decades with Exxon, Shell, Chevron, etc waiting with baited breath and coffers full to the hilt for the few politicians(now many line up)with the greed of yesteryears muckrakers.
I was just like most Americans when 9-11 happened. I was shocked angry and fired up to back my government in whatever they proposed to do to the "terrorists". I would get so pissed at anti-american sentiments by "conspiracy" theorists but after I LISTENED(key word)I began to see a that the questions being posed were legit and sadly it looks like the government at the very least allowed this to happen.
As do I. Being an American, a proud American, makes me disgusted that people actually think that members of our government are perpetrators behind the 9/11 attacks. There had to have been a huge number of people in on this attack, it must have been highly coordinated. Do you think that that many people would have been able to keep their mouths shut about this? Don't you think that maybe one person involved realized that this was not right and would come out with information?
It's so clear to me now, how could I have been so stupid? This whole time I thought I was being patriotic by asking questions and exorcising my first amendment rights. Wow was I fucking wrong or what?! I can sleep like a baby now because of your intriguing and intelligent insight. You must have a book out or something. Wow!
My only question is how long have you been sucking Rush Limbaughs cock?
Very reasonable, sane, rational approach to a resolution. Appealing to our congress is a great start. Like you, I am very unsatisfied w/ the gov't story (pre or post NORAD?)+ Commission Rep't (no bldg 7?) You are not alone by a long shot. Thanks for lessening the sting of being an American.
That's great man. Just leave the intelligent and truthful comments to the truth-seekers. All conspiracies aside, any slack-jawed floozie with half a brain can see that many government officials and high-end executives are wreaking huge profit and power from the fallout from the September 11 attacks. I ask you, Cui Bono? Who benifits? Surely not General Electric, who owns NBC, and MSNBC, and is one of the largest weapons contracts companies in the world.
You 'critically' watched loose change, have you 'critically' watched the debunkers account? THATS the only way to be completely informed. All your questions have logical explanations- most of which have already been found. Believing so whole-heartedly in this tripe is a mistake of the foolish and young. Pointing that out is just an honest observation, not the propaganda of a 'government plant' that you think is creepy. If you don't want people to disagree , don't spew idiocy over the internet.
Having the audacity to say "this tripe" in reference to THE ENTIRETY OF THE QUESTIONS that EXIST regarding 9/11, "ALL your questions," is demonstrative of an analytically-halted perspective. You are not processing new information/have made a conclusion from which you will not budge. It's what religious fundamentalists do.
Also, I'm not asking questions of the debunkers (Mark Roberst is the best guy they've got and he has the a lot of the issues he discusses right from my point of view), I am adressing MY GOVERNMENT, who is responsible to give redress for MY GRIEVANCES. Not a corporate employee. I appreciate their perspective, but I want to hear it from the mouths of MY ELECTED OFFICIALS. It was THEIR job to protect us, they did not, they can and will answer my questions.
robin you lie and most people know you lie. so be a sport and quit lying. This country wants truth in politics and truth in our media. This media we call internet will continue to let you lie and you know it. So you continue to lie as we merrily go about our everyday lives. You would rather climb a tree and tell a lie than remain on the ground and tell the truth. Why?
Ketiara is correct, I am not responsible to explain the whole event to have the right to insist on consistancy on the part of our government about this event. That being said, here's my statement: We haven't been told the whole truth about 9/11.
"You are responsible for clarity" ... ANYTHING the government says about 9/11 you won't believe, because you can't, you've made up your mind that they are dirty liers. And about justification of wars. Do you know about the history of Islam and what it entails and the threats we face in the next century?? If your truly open to research, read a book by Paul Berman: 'Terror and Liberalism. Let me guess, your not gonna buy it?
Del, try Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine." You are the only person here making assumptions (yours about ME). The rational people of the world aren't asking you to debate CT's, just to agree that the government is responsible to DEMONSTRATE that its theory is the truth. If you think they ARE telling the truth, why are you afraid to suggest they prove it?
Why should he? So you can say A-HA! Your WRONG! AND I'M RIGHT! Listen to Curiner everybody! He is such a beacon of knowledge. What's your statement Curiner? Do you have an opinion?? Or are you just regurgitating crap with that hand up your ass? Go watch Fox news and get microchipped.
Being an honest person, I would be in favor of an open and transparent investigation into 9/11 whether I believed we had been told the truth or not. Ask yourself why NOT A SINGLE DEBUNKER EVER says "Yes we should have an open investigation to settle these issues." ALL OF THEM just want to go forward without another thought about the EVENT THAT STARTED EVERYTHING GOING ON NOW.
I support government transparency obviously and I have questions. But CT questions are not PRACTICAL questions. Their questions are aimed at splitting hairs until they hear what they want to hear or get something they can exploit to seem that way. This is why I say WTC7 CTs are a red herring. "We're past this. It's been debunked. Move on."
Personally, I think the Pentagon may be a red herring, at least in so far as the theories of "no plane". While people like you are only addressing (and would have all of us only address) the question of "was it flight 77?", the ret of us are asking why, an hour+ into the most spectacular attack on American soil, was ONE PLANE not ordered to cover DC airspace? Do you have ANY answer for that?
And while you're thinking about that one, consider the fact that the Commission report says Cheney got to the presidential bunker to take command after the pentagon was hit, but Minetta and Clarke have confirmed and reconfirmed that they saw him there giving orders to NORAD, FAA, NEADS et al more than a half hour before. Is it crazy to want this inconsistancy probed?...
appendix: I think you are viewing "debunkers" as apologist "boot lickers" (as I've been called) for not believing in conspiracy theories and disliking the theorists so much. I am highly critical of the Bush administration and this whole fiasco, but it is ABSURD to me to follow the lines of CT rationale that call it an "inside job". So much so that I often end up taking to the defense of the administration.
You're making the ENORMOUS mistake of conflating ALL of the alternative theories of 9/11 that have been proposed with ALL OF THE PEOPLE who simply don't believe we've been told the truth. Set ALL of the alternative theories aside. They are not the point. The point is that what we've been told does NOT account for how 9/11 occurred. "Debunking" an alternative theory does NOT confirm what we've already been told. That's completely illogical...
I suggest that you read up on the CIA plotted coup in Chile and the simultaneous raids on Trade Unions as the miltary coup took place. When a population is terrorized, according to the theory in place by those who have run these opperations before, peripheral actions are often undertaken in the midst of the confusion that ensues: perhaps WTC 7 and the evidence of the crimes of Enron, WorldCom and who knows how many other documents were eradicated...
Also, you aren't talking to (nor should you be if you have any honest interest in truth) a hypothetical "CT rationale". You're talking to me, a human being, and one who is not saying "inside job". I am saying that there is more to be known and we'll be safer when we know it. Do you have the integrity to address ME, and what I'M saying here? Tell me why DC wasn't defended.
While you are saying in essence that you are different from other CTs and bringing fresh views to the table, you are not. That is why I have been able to reference your claims to mainstream well-known debunking sites. You are just parroting the same CTs as everyone else. Go read debunk911myths and the Popular Mechanics book with integrity before just shotgunning responses hoping one floats. This is old, there is nothing new here, I'm done. Bye.
Debunking what a 20 year old proposed to account for anomalies does not confirm what the government has told us. Science and consistant testimony under oath from those who were responsible to protect us does. Your attempt to switch which one you are responsible to do should make you quite ashamed. You reference claims I am not making. Tell me why NIST scientists should NOT have to stand at a podium and explain their theories and explain why no plane was sent to cover DC.
Fighter aircraft were over DC shortly after the Pentagon was attacked. Contrary to what you might think, in a pre-9/11 world planes were not often kept aloft to "guard airspace" because they are extremely expensive and we relied on instrumentation to watch the sky with fighters on strip alert, however the airliners' transponders were off so no one knew where they were. GO DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. STOP SHOTGUNNING ACCUSATIONS. GOOD BYE.
Try the CAPS protocol, sir. And the "transponders were off so no one knew where they were" is the most absurd insinuation, and one that we are expected to assume. You mean to suggest that an enemy aircraft (say an f-15 or the like, or for that matter ANY aircraft) is INVISIBLE to our miltary defense if it doesn't do the courtesy of registering a transponder signal? What about the fact that these were the only 4 planes NOT responding to the controllers?
Also, if you had taken the time to read the Commission Report or watch the hearings, you would know that there was real time information, eyes on the planes, THROUGHOUT the morning. NEADS and the FAA were communicating where the planes were for every minute of the attack. Go do ANY research, sir. Which is not to say seek one pre-fab explaination that suits your desired conclusions. Reading the Commission Report would be a good start for you.
you are such a lieing sack of garbage, how do you sleep at night?? knowing that you don't accept the truth, simply because you don't believe the govrnment would ever do somthing like this.
Also, I believe the reason the government is reluctant to recognize conspiracy theories is because they don't want to empower truthers to "preach the controversy". The terrible fact is that no matter the issue, if crackpots and rationalists (using this as a general example, not specific to truthers) are given the illusion of equal footing, people will divide equally on both sides and generally go for whomever has the best rhetorical skill.
I am not, nor do I have to, cherry pick(ing) any evidence. I am suggesting that people look at the information available and decide if they are in favor of an open and transparent investigation into the murder of 3000 people. The government can be as reluctant as it wants. An increasing majority of people agree that this is the right and necessary thing to do.
But anyway, these are the reasons no one will talk to 9/11 Truthers. Old, debunked, and often obscure arguments are pulled up and the track record for CTs is so overwhelmingly false-positive that that is the reputation now. If CTs want to be taken seriously, stop making YouTube videos and start a peer-reviewed publication where ideas can be scrutinized before being lobbed up as proof of government involvement.
After five minutes of Googling I have found the answer as to why bin Laden's list of crimes do not include the WTC attack.
It's a long link so I'll mail it to you. Other members just type in a google for "debunk911myths Osama bin Laden", take the first link, and do a term search for FBI. It's towards the bottom in a box.
Bush and Rice WERE speaking in general terms. Just like how Silverstein was using a common use of the phrase "pull it", but then CTs went batshit crazy saying "OMG! He admitted he said pull the building!" No... that's not it at all. All of these arguments are taking a very cherry picked version of events that is then spun heavily.
And when you're telling someone to prove a negative, then you use purely hypotheticals as ammunition, you can't lose. The scientific method is illegitimized by CTs because they cherry pick evidence. If you only include certain dots, of course you can say it's an obvious line to somewhere.
Where is your evidence. As for Bush and Rice's statements, I believe they were speaking in a general sense of disbelief at what had happened. Not making an "oopsa daisey" blatant lie. That's just occam's razor and the simplest of those explanations makes more sense to me.
Again, you try to turn the responsibility to people OTHER THAN our government to explain how 4 planes flew around and hit their targets without interference. You say it's obvious how the towers fell, so why try and explain it. As for your "massive preponderance" of Islamic involvement, why does the FBI NOT list 9/11 among bin Laden's crimes? Why is there NO evidence linking ANY of the susected hijackers to Al Quaeda? Where's your proof that it was just them?
Which video tape? As far as I know they are all authentic. Please don't give me the "OMG!!! HIS NOSE IS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT!" argument. It's paradolia.
For better pics of WTC7 go to debunking9/11 dot com / wtc7 dot html I'm not the one asserting. Your arguments are so flimsy. You're telling me to prove the government DIDN'T do it.
Wow. You do. That's super. You believe that the "confession" video "found" in Afghanistan is the same man in all other photography of Osama Bin Laden. I'm not telling you to prove anything. I'm saying it's the government's job to explain why they didn't protect us. And they haven't, and anyone who examines the BALANCE of information available comes inevitably to the same conclusion: we are being lied to.
How, specifically, are we being lied to beyond the pail of ordinary political bullshittery? I am no fan of the Bush administration or Cheney in particular, but there is NO solid evidence that they orchestrated 9/11.
Incidentally, I just watched a great Frontline documentary called "The Dark Side" about Dick Cheney's power brokering. Highly recommended.
"9/11 was an inside job" is too broad of a statement, and I'll grant you that it's a slogan adopted by the "organized" (which is to say "most visible") portion of the truth movement, but the majority of people who take issue here are not claiming the whole government was involved, only that we insist on seeing the proof that we've been told the whole story, that these 19 men didn't just "luck out" for 2 hours of a military standdown simultaneous with their plot.
Whether you insist or not, you will continue to be ignored as long as the "most visible" among you continue to make claims based more on their pre-existing hatreds (for Bush, Clinton, Jews, corporations etc.) than on the evidence.
I love how debunkers say all the direct quotes from our leaders contradicting demonstrated facts (like Bush, Rice on failure of imagination), and direct quotes from witnesses contradicting the official story are "metaphors", "similes", "SPEAKING IN A GENERAL SENSE". It's obvious you want the simplest answer. Your commitment to simplicity is similar to other Americans who want to disregard inconvenient realities.
As for my "coyness" or my seeming assertion that "The Government did it", my opinion shouldn't matter to you in the slightest anyway. The information I'm offering should interest you, and you should be reponsibly sorting through it. Like others seeking to reach a pre-determined conclusion, you are looking for ways to weed out information based on your evaluation of the credibility of those relating the information to you, rather than the truth or falseness of the statements.
I believe you are just being coy when you say you haven't reached a conclusion. My evidence is that you have another video on YouTube where you "formally" accuse Dick Cheney of orchestrating 9/11. You have gone from saying "I just want the truth" to "Dick Cheney is a murderer and he is behind all of this."...
... it is very obvious how it collapsed if you look at the pictures taken of the front of it. Contrary to conspiracy theorists' ideas the building was almost engulfed in flame on the forward portion, was missing massive chunks of support structure, and did not fall in on its own footprint when it came down.
"building (7) was almost engulfed in flame" - show me ONE picture proving this
"was missing massive chunks of its support structure" - show me ONE picture proving this
AND FINALLY - EVEN IF YOU'RE RIGHT, show me ONE model of how this exact damage caused the exact collapse we observed. That's how the scientific method works. You don't just get to assert and walk away.
...it is very obvious how it collapsed if you look at the pictures taken of the front of it. Contrary to conspiracy theorists' ideas the building was almost engulfed in flame on the forward portion, was missing massive chunks of support structure, and did not fall in on its own footprint when it came down.
I am unaware of any major changes to NIST's explanations. The last I read actually they had released a 10,000 page compilation of the various working theories they have as to HOW the towers (including WTC7) could collapse. WTC 7 appears to me to be a red herring...
... the massive preponderance of evidence, both material and circumstantial, says it was a terror attack by Islamic fundamentalists who we are STILL fighting. They EXIST and they have done things like this before and most damningly they take credit for it.
This will be a long one. I was going to send it via mail, but what the hell.
I am characterizing 9/11 conspiracy theorists who propose that the U.S. Gov't was behind 9/11. In order to believe that you have to have a valid testable reason. While no doubt there was gross incompetence that led to the Sept 11 attacks, there is no evidence it was insidious. THAT is where I would like to get answers. However...
And I don't mean this as an ad hominem, but it seems that most of the conspiracy theorists are just ravenous adolescents. I think the "lots of people" that are claimed to believe 9/11 was an inside job are mostly just dolts like our friend down there looking to rebel against something by leaping without looking at what they've been conditioned to see as plausible: ie: big evil omniscient government.
Spot on, Semper. Something has happened to millions of brains where reality is distorted and truth is infact anti-truth, it's truly a phenomenon. And frighteningly, what will eventually happen is revolts against our own government, nhilism, chaos, anarchy. Eventually Al-Quaeda will not be our biggest threat. The fact that we must debate these CT's is offensive to any sane mind.
Obviously the kind of comments made here by albertstenton are worse than useless, but they do not represent the majority of people asking questions. Many of us are making concise and intelligent commentary, granting the (again obvious) observation that LC kids do not have the whole thing figured out, and that debunkers make some very good points. The balance of information remains insufficient to dismiss a skeptical look at what we've been told happened.
The official story declares that Bin Laden "conspired" with 19 young men to do everything that happened on 9/11, including the total thwarting of the most advanced and expensive defense system in history. And it ignores the fact that simulations of exactly what occured were going on as the attacks happened. Do you have ANY explaination for why you would disregard the wargame exercises (which provided the opportunity)...
...especially in conjunction with Bush's and Rice's assertion that "No one in our government...could envision flying airplanes into buildings"? They were simulating THAT EXACT SCENARIO THAT MORNING, and had set up anti aircraft weapons at the G8 summit the year prior to defend against THAT EXACT SCENARIO... these are FAIR questions.
The biggest whopper I've seen is the molten steel argument. Yes, there was GLOWING hot steel in the WTC. It was glowing for DAYS after the towers collapsed and it was entire beams. Thermate does not do that, it burns hot quickly to cut, not long. Something was burning hot enough for quite a while to cause the metal to glow... jet fuel and plastics.
And how do you explain the fact that you (and other debunkers) refer to people asking these and other questions as "conspiracy theorists" without acknowledging that the official story is a conspiracy theory? Your selective use of the term? What kind of mental acuity does that demonstrate?
For example on the last part. People often cite things like the government doing an exercise somewhere of a situation similar to this as some kind of evidence, along with FEMA doing a bioterror exercise. The federal government has literally HUNDREDS of exercises going per week about anything you can imagine.
As far as "shall prevail", people are not un-seeing these discrepancies, and the protracted refusal to acknowledge even the simplest of questions, the plainest inconsistancies, feeds people's desire to know what and why. What revision is the NIST on now?
To be short, "conspiracy theorist" has become more than just the sum of its words. It is a derogatory term for people who have a conclusion generally based on paranoia, searching for a way to connect dots to validate that conclusion. Anomalies become "hard evidence", quotes are taken out of context, and understanding of the animal which they are studying becomes extremely subjective.
Of course it is, I probably should have quoted someone out of context or made a wild accusation based on correlation with no evidence of causation. That probably would have made it stronger in the conspiracy theory rulebook for arguments. Please elaborate.
You're accusing people of having reached "a conclusion". The only conclusion I've reached, and I share this characteristic with a majority of Americans, is that it is MORE responsible to investigate what we've been told happened on 9/11 than NOT to investigate. more than half your last response was to issues I had not raised. You bundle people pointing out the inconsistancies in what we've been told...
But see, we HAVE investigated it. We have. We have. We have. What else is there to say to individuals like yourself. I'm not trying to attack you, all I'm saying is your so confused, that you literally cannot understand truth. B/c truth to you is different from reality... Why am I even wasting my time here? This is unreal. What the hell happened to so many minds?
I don't spend as much time debating on youtube these days, I prefer to work on the streets one on one with people. All I can tell you is that you have to be empirical, and if you do so, you'll learn a lot. About religion, politics, and, with any luck, the world around you. Good luck.
I'm sure you've seen Mike Gravel or maybe even Kucinich. Now, why wouldn't at least Gravel ask any questions towards 9/11, who was very direct in the debates and TV coverage I've seen so far?
If he agrees with the research like DelGriffith mentions there is, will you also convict them of being liars, like the LooseChange guys did with the PM people?
Also, you demand clarity. Is a NIST report and thus a lot more scholars than the handful 9/11 "truthers" not enough for you?
Also: Would you accept 9/11 as a successful terrorist attack, if it were indeed the case, or would you rather stick your head in the sand because you dislike confrontations that can lead to a war?
...Would ANYONE disagree that we deserve an explaination as to why a KNOWN CASH transmission from Pakistani ISI to Mohammad Atta has not been investigated and resolved? Pakistan is ostensibly a US ally, but their version of the CIA funded 9/11...
What part about it has not been resolved? So ISI supposedly wired 100k to Atta, but the ISI says it was the CSI. So which side of the story do you prefer?
Sorry, but I don't know anything about this other than the stuff I've seen in the latest Loose Change (which I shut down after about half an hour in, because it's even worse than the first two versions) and I don't dare to judge the situation on just a tiny video clip.
...mrcuda, are you aware that ~5 months ago the NIST completely restructured their explaination for the initiation of the collapse of the towers? They now say the exterior columns failed first. This is the 2nd time they've thrown out their old assertions and given a new explaination. Without broad implication, I think it's fair for me to say "That's strange and should be explained".
Well that's how science works, isn't it? You revise things based on newly gained knowledge that you didn't have previously.
I'm sure people believed that the world's flat, then that it's round and even that was more defined to something like "slightly egg shaped". Do you see a conspiracy in that, too?
I would say that the reason no one in the mainstream media touches 9/11 (except to sy "it changed everything", a vague comment, not commensurate with the magnitude of the event) is that our conversation about 9/11 has been directed to the most extreme alternative theories (and LC/many truthers are responsible in part for this) rather than the discrepancies that resulted in the alternative theories...
It has changed at least your domestic and foreign policies, hasn't it, so how is "it changed everything" a vague statement?
As for the direction towards the most extreme alternative theories: How will you for example answer a person, who seriously believes that no plane crashed somewhere, based on "evidence" like news reporters on scene, seeing nothing much in 2001, although you found evidence that suggests indeed that plane crashed there?
I encourage them to be skeptical of ALL the information they find and to pay careful attention to separate what they have observed conclusively and what they have inferred. I tell them that I am skeptical of that claim, but that I DO support the release of the evidence that PROVES what happened (such as other videos, VA highway, interior/exterior cameras from Pentagon).
I understand everyone's frustration with the way Bermas talks shit in this "debate". I understand everyone's frustration with a lot of the alternative theories proposed about 9/11. I do NOT understand how people who are SO certain that we've been given the truth abjectly refuse to support any new investigation that would SETTLE some of these issues...
Do you admit though, that you can't take those two guys seriously? What serious ground do they have for their assertions, when all they do is stick to old "evidence" and try to ridicule their opponents the way they did *throughout* the entire "debate" like some highschool morons?
Also, how do you explain that the NIST report has been revised so much? Maybe because there were unanswered questions that they tried to settle in a new research process?
See if this makes sense: an idea is not responsible for who believes in it. It doesn't enter into my mind to tether the validity of a claim to the manners of its claimant. So even whether someone is AN HONEST PERSON or not doesn't change whether a statement they make is true or not. Do I find them convincing advocates of the questions they're raising? Honestly, I think Avery comes across as pretty measured, Bermas as pretty crazy...
See if this makes sense: If you claim to have evidence, you produce the evidence, not some theories, nor outright ridicule your opponent and behave the way they did, which can be called either being insecure, an arrogant ass or just crazy in the head.
...It's just deeply disingenuous for you and others (on this issue and others) to turn the conversation to whether some 20 year old kids are calm and collected in a debate rather than toward the issues being debated. Also, if you didn't hear, Miegs compares these young men to holocaust deniers. You're right, he's not singing "liar liar pants on fire", but c'mon? Holocaust denial? Is that not a CHARGED DISTRACTION intentionally slipped into the room?...last point...:
Why not the holocaust? What other event comes to your mind, where a large number of people died, yet people try to blame a government or group (Zionists) for what happened and openly distort events to their benefit (they took part in it, gained Israel from it), although there is a lot of evidence that makes sense and proves it happened the way it did?
...It was NEVER about whether these kids have figured the whole thing out. It was ALWAYS about whether OUR government has demonstrated conclusively and transparently to OUR satisfaction that their explaination of and blame for the murder of 3000 people was 100% accurate. There has, to this day NEVER been a criminal investigation...
Yet they claim to have figured it out or not? Why else would they _yell_ into the PM-Guy's face he's a liar instead of producing hard evidence?
And there you have it: To YOUR satisfaction. What does that mean to you? To me it seem that it has to fit YOUR idea of how things went down. Do you really expect to get an answer to every little detail, when experts might not even be able to explain some anomalies?
...That's absurd, and the majority of people in the US and the rest of the world PERCEIVE the marketing tactic debunkers use to redirect the issue to the character of 2 young men to the exclusion of conversation of ANY of the 100's of legitimate questions and OUR RIGHT TO DEMAND ANSWERS.
I'm sorry, but you make a few false claims in this video.
Molten "steel" was not found, molten "metal" was, two completely different things.
Also the operation you're referring to is vigilant guardian, that exercise in no way simulated planes being used as missles and flown into buildings.
Google: JREF Conspiracy Theories, all the anwers are there.
KeyGuy1967 1 year ago
@KeyGuy1967 Steel evaporated on 9/11. I think that makes the whole point you're trying to make moot.
And you're really referring to JREF for answers? Even though I've seen enough evidence to draw my own conclusions I don't shy away from any side of the story. But seriously, if you want good, unbiased information, JREF is the last place you should go. It's nothing but namecalling and childish behaviour.
Ab4kus 1 year ago
@Ab4kus
So now steel evaporated on 9/11? LOL, was that before or after the holograms?
How was this accomplished, let me guess, super secret laser beams?
Your description of JREF is erroneous, it is heavily moderated and personal attacks are not allowed. Either you haven't been there or you're afraid of intelligent debate because you know all truther fantasies have been thoroughly debunked at that site.
KeyGuy1967 1 year ago
@KeyGuy1967 Congrats, you're actually asking the right question. How did it evaporate? I'm sure you'll have to agree that the fire was not able to do this.
Ab4kus 1 year ago
Fight the good fight , don't let these liars get away with these atrocities that were perpetrated by wealthy Americans on it's own citizens , you show me a REpublican and I'll show you either a mindless follower or a manipulative liar , both equally evil !
brokken50 2 years ago
very well said.
IamgreatsoIam 2 years ago
i think the government should come clear about leprachuans. since the government refuses to address this i have to come to the conclusion that leprachuans were behind 911. the cant even address this.
gabledorf 3 years ago
You got heart kid. I hope your caring doesn't leave you tattered. I would suggest getting your info from other sources than from the internet. This internet is like walking around in the medieval times. You got science and half-science and pho-science and clergy and priests and kings and knights all clashing at once. Nothing's more fun than a lynching or a witch burning. People didn't read then and still don't. And as far as these important questions: they're only important on the internet.
shakinthebushboss 3 years ago
Terminator 4 is coming out!!! HURRAY!
felixschroeder85 3 years ago
If you really think they care about you at all, all I can do is pitty you.
felixschroeder85 3 years ago
I feel bad for u, you should be thinking about other things, seems like stress disorder over this s#^t
Do more research, and open your mind.
I had a really hard time not dissing u. peace.
Teflonmonkeyjumps 3 years ago
I know of some really cool progressive sites that show how it was squib charges and holograms that destroyed the WTC. I can look at a 72 dpi image posted on a really cool progressive Web site and tell you exactly how steel is affected by burning jet fuel and the physics of an impact of 500-plus mph by a large object. That is what the Internet can do for us really cool progressives.
ScottLaughrey 3 years ago
The Internet has allowed the 9-11 Truth Movement to gain a foothold on the Internet. The really cool progressives are now using the Internet to put forth our stories about what really happened that day.
ScottLaughrey 3 years ago
I think we all know the truth..dont you?
nightstep 3 years ago 2
Honestly I think this would NEVER happen. If you watch when people ask people like Bush and Bill Clinton they always just get them thrown out and call them crazy. Honestly instead of Attacking Areas where there is Terrorist groups I think we should just train our Air Force and NAVY better.
dandaman2206 3 years ago
LOL lets just say 911 being an inside job its a proven fact. Theres no point of questioning it any longer. do your research right here on you tube, interviews, survivors, footage of explosives, hell we even got a reporter announcing the collapse of building 7 while the building still stands outside her window LOL. Google Spider pt3.
isreal423 3 years ago
Thanks so much for posting your thoughts.. I watched 3 of your videos so far and man you are as level headed as they get HELL YES you deserve an explanation. Great questions. Keep keeping it up..
ellonche 3 years ago
great stuff, dont let the bad guys rattle ya ... you care and that counts for everything!
everyone ask yourself why no one is covering this, why no media ferrets out info on TV or print; instead we see britney, anna nicole, vick's dogs etc. ask why the IRAQ war cant be found on TV anymore. The MO is obvious.
Then we have Langley shills come on the NET like falcon who try to bully sheep into keeping official lies status quo.
everyone keep researching, your heart will find the truth.
pt1gard 3 years ago
i can tell you're an intelligent thoughtful person and for that i appreciate your calm message. i hope that dylan and the boys are vindicated years from now for being witnesses to time, but even if that doesnt happen ... keep the faith in what you feel .... not what you know. peace bro
tyandambika 3 years ago
"Really quite moderate and reasonable." LOL! Wake up and smell what you're shoveling.
roonalwazlib 3 years ago
this must be one of the people writing fake funny cynicism to debunk truthers. look he's even hip using LOL .... you're cool.
tyandambika 3 years ago
Yes thank you. Indeed I am cool. Dare I try another one.
LMAO!
roonalwazlib 3 years ago
Thanks mate...keep asking for the truth. I reckon its about time we got some answers.
aussierigger 3 years ago
Thx man
sakrantyna 3 years ago
i wouldn't think it possible, but you sound even more disjointed when you read from a script.
shoofirbin 3 years ago
who are you
purpledavo 3 years ago
You do realize that you look like the nuts in this video, right?
gkman 3 years ago
who are you
purpledavo 3 years ago
when the corporations own all the mass media its not hard to see they can create a left right thing were people think there is a difference,you see you do debate the issues but the parameters are narrow and you cant talk aboutanything outside of them wake up people!
lethal1960 4 years ago
Personlly, if you want to waste your life trying to prove the 9/11 conspiracy, be my guest. However, our political leaders have to deal with issues that actually matter and are ACTUALLLY happening such as the economony and what to do about Iraq. Thank God our political leaders don't listen to nut jobs.
Jebusrulez 4 years ago
Listen to what you're saying Jebus. How can you say that truth concerning 9/11 doesn't matter? I also find it ironic that you bring up the war in Iraq (claiming THAT matters) when this war was in large part a link of the chain that was spawned by 9/11 itself.
Chuxter007 4 years ago
Wars typically matter, but sure whatever. I'm saying the TRUTH is that pissed off muslims caused the attacks and that 9/11 truthers better be able to show hard evidence and not just grainy video before I start to believe that the US government was willing to kill 3000 cilivans. Also, another point, always remember government cannot do anything right.
Jebusrulez 4 years ago
Maybe you should look in to the facts & you will find there are hole in the official story
sentyan13 4 years ago
There are holes in the theory of evolution, doesn't mean its wrong. Whatever holes exist in the offficial story don't compare to the holes that exist in the conspiracy theory that must have come straight from their ass.
Jebusrulez 4 years ago
There are holes in the theory of evolution, doesn't mean its wrong. Whatever holes exist in the offficial story don't compare to the holes that exist in the conspiracy theory that must have come straight from their ass.
Jebusrulez 4 years ago
Have you looked in to the facts or do you believe in what fox news & c.n.n tells you
sentyan13 4 years ago
Oh please give me these "facts" that you believe that you have even though real scientists who arn't crappy film makers prove the mainstream media account.
Jebusrulez 4 years ago
Oh & I guess you still believe there were weapons of mass destruction in iraq & yes we do have scientist,physisist professional people.
sentyan13 4 years ago
But who told you about there being no weapons of mass of destruction, oh yeah the mainstream media. You personally believe that liberal biased media wouldn't be all over the 9/11 story if it were true.
Jebusrulez 4 years ago
Your stuck in the left right box,the truth is there are no democrats or republicans,its the people v.s the goverment,in truth its one party.
sentyan13 4 years ago
Until you can actually give evidence, instead of making up claims, your still not going to convince me because your arguments are based on facts or science.
Jebusrulez 4 years ago
You want evidence look up operation north woods a declassified C.I.A document
sentyan13 4 years ago
Lol that made me laugh. Using a document from 1962 to make the connection to 9/11 makes me laugh. Are you actually going to give me evidence or are you just retarded.
Jebusrulez 4 years ago
In that document the goverment admits their willing to kill their citizens & blame the whole thing on cuba its the blue print for 911
sentyan13 4 years ago
In that document the goverment admits their willing to kill their citizens & blame the whole thing on cuba its the blue print for 911
sentyan13 4 years ago
you are the confused sheep... sentyan is about 10 moves ahead of you on the chessboard, hopefully you will find a red pill before you hit 25
pt1gard 3 years ago
Nice comeback. The sheep line works wonders. You sir are a retard.
Jebusrulez 3 years ago
You want evidence look up operation north woods a declassified C.I.A document
sentyan13 4 years ago
Rickdeckard2020 3 years ago
I don't care. Go on living on your fantasy world where you don't control anything. Be my guest.
Jebusrulez 3 years ago
I think they told us such ridiculous lies so they could gauge how stupid the american public is.
AlchemistShaman 3 years ago
Are you joking?
Presidential candidates do not have any obligation to address outlandish conspiracy theories which have minimal objective substantiating evidence, have been discredited by a number of legitimate extensive scientific efforts, and fly in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
I don't know why reasonable people spend their time debunking your theories as it is obvious that not amount of evidence is ever going to sway you off this idea, no matter how overwhelming.
msughrue78 4 years ago
P.S. Don't ever forget that a little anthrax in the mail goes along way toward scaring people into silence and complicity.
primoabruzzi 4 years ago
The side that speaks the longest, the loudest, and most often will win the battle.
Even so there are those patriotopsychos who after hearing ten people confess to it, will say that's not enough.
After a thousand confessions they will say it's not enough..they will still need more proof.
And the next day the war apparatus will blame the whole thing on Batman and these clowns will buy it up.
primoabruzzi 4 years ago
Politicians have two concerns that will make them never deal with this.
1. Addressing this or anything like it would cost them thousands of votes.
2. Addressing this or anything like it would piss off the people who put them in the position to even consider running for office.
primoabruzzi 4 years ago
I'm sure you're right. And I don't discount this difficulty. The systems in place, our government and media, are deeply corrupt, and to reach any position to do ANYTHING positive, compromises are obviously necessary. It sucks, but it's the way it is, and no amount of idealism changes it on its own. That's why WE have to allow the people of the US to see these issues clearly and public support will open the door for politicians to provide the oversight we need to make our country safe.
23456D 4 years ago
name them brainwashed and call them liars and puppets etc. the real question is with you "truthers" believing that your eyes are already "opened" is their such thing as the truth? or is the belief that terrorists took 2 planes and flew them into the towers...would that be shut eyes? what im saying is no matter what anyone says their will always be people who said terrorists did 9/11 and their will always be the debunkers...it will never end.
JDizzle4ever 4 years ago
Diz, there's no question that terrorists attacked the US on 9/11. The only question is how many people and WHO were the people involved in the conspiracy. I am as disconcerted as you are by the organized 9/11 truth movement's assertion that "Our government" did it. "Inside job" doesn't carry any information, and I think foreign intelligence agencies are likely co-conspirators. I think we need to look closely at Cheney though. The wargames were what let it happen.
23456D 4 years ago
all i got to say is this the government is terrible at everything people are more competant would you believe the governemt if they flat out said no we didnt do this and heres why? with all the "truthers" say and desperatly believe their well version of 9/11 would you believe anyone who says otherwise your beliefs? or would u just...
JDizzle4ever 4 years ago
I hear you on the highly visible organized truthers. But people like me (and we are legion) don't "believe" Loose Change's take on events. We're looking critically at all sources. However, one thing we're aware of that you don't seem to be is the media complicity in propagandizing our people and our weak understanding of the history of the actions of our government that (rightly) predicates resentment.
23456D 4 years ago
The government is terrible at what they want to be terrible at, and brilliant and what they want to be good at. They want you to believe that the catastrophe in Iraq is the product of mistakes, that their intentions were ever to enable a secure democratic state, but all you have to do is read the planners' writings and statements over the past 30 years. They wanted a base of operations for the US in the middle east. The chaos locks our soldiers in even after the lies have been revealed.
23456D 4 years ago
No doubt. The feds agenda has been hiding in the weeds for decades with Exxon, Shell, Chevron, etc waiting with baited breath and coffers full to the hilt for the few politicians(now many line up)with the greed of yesteryears muckrakers.
jay123jd 4 years ago
I was just like most Americans when 9-11 happened. I was shocked angry and fired up to back my government in whatever they proposed to do to the "terrorists". I would get so pissed at anti-american sentiments by "conspiracy" theorists but after I LISTENED(key word)I began to see a that the questions being posed were legit and sadly it looks like the government at the very least allowed this to happen.
lafmassive 4 years ago
The truth people is that sadly, we were taken by surprise by a bunch of clever terrorists with lots of financial backing.
Did the gvt know it was possible and evitable? They did. We simply underestimated the tenancity and viciousness of the killers.
It doesn't get any clearer than that.
cantucit 4 years ago 2
Clear as mud cantushit
jay123jd 4 years ago
Good post. You're a good American. I think that you already know the truth about 911 reguardless of the smaller details. Take care of yourself.
SUBZERO617 4 years ago 2
good man, we're with you, we know we're not crazy. There will soon be a lot more of us than them. Peace.
digitalfilmnutt 4 years ago
Thank goodness for the internet-I hope I live to see the truth.
Keep up the good work
funkmanchu 4 years ago
i feel very satisfied with the government's story, and im a canadian :P
EdandRummy 4 years ago
and also a dumb ass :P
gemsyjoe 4 years ago
I pity your Moose. You really are stupid
funkmanchu 4 years ago
As do I. Being an American, a proud American, makes me disgusted that people actually think that members of our government are perpetrators behind the 9/11 attacks. There had to have been a huge number of people in on this attack, it must have been highly coordinated. Do you think that that many people would have been able to keep their mouths shut about this? Don't you think that maybe one person involved realized that this was not right and would come out with information?
ANPSmoviemaker 4 years ago
It's so clear to me now, how could I have been so stupid? This whole time I thought I was being patriotic by asking questions and exorcising my first amendment rights. Wow was I fucking wrong or what?! I can sleep like a baby now because of your intriguing and intelligent insight. You must have a book out or something. Wow!
My only question is how long have you been sucking Rush Limbaughs cock?
aliendisorder 4 years ago 2
I'm not saying to not ask questions, I'm saying stop complaining about the answers. But good argument, throwing insults and sarcasm. Nice.
ANPSmoviemaker 4 years ago
Very reasonable, sane, rational approach to a resolution. Appealing to our congress is a great start. Like you, I am very unsatisfied w/ the gov't story (pre or post NORAD?)+ Commission Rep't (no bldg 7?) You are not alone by a long shot. Thanks for lessening the sting of being an American.
betagirl5 4 years ago 3
Betagirl5...
I am very satisfied with the government's story and I feel no sting of being an American. Ta ta.
GhenisCanne 4 years ago
Here Here!
ANPSmoviemaker 4 years ago
So you would rather be "satisfied" with the govt.'s story than try to seek the truth?
I'mean, srsly. That's like saying "I'm satisfied with believing that the world is flat". Even if it was flat, you should still want to know more.
GadgicTheHedgehog 4 years ago 2
GadgicTheHedgehog,
Your question is a deception, indicative of the nature of the author. Why can't the government's story be the truth?
GhenisCanne 4 years ago
That's great man. Just leave the intelligent and truthful comments to the truth-seekers. All conspiracies aside, any slack-jawed floozie with half a brain can see that many government officials and high-end executives are wreaking huge profit and power from the fallout from the September 11 attacks. I ask you, Cui Bono? Who benifits? Surely not General Electric, who owns NBC, and MSNBC, and is one of the largest weapons contracts companies in the world.
aliendisorder 4 years ago
alien..
You watched too too much X Files. You will never be normal. Cui Bono? Your shrink. That's who.
GammaRay43 4 years ago
You 'critically' watched loose change, have you 'critically' watched the debunkers account? THATS the only way to be completely informed. All your questions have logical explanations- most of which have already been found. Believing so whole-heartedly in this tripe is a mistake of the foolish and young. Pointing that out is just an honest observation, not the propaganda of a 'government plant' that you think is creepy. If you don't want people to disagree , don't spew idiocy over the internet.
robinandjohncarter 4 years ago
Having the audacity to say "this tripe" in reference to THE ENTIRETY OF THE QUESTIONS that EXIST regarding 9/11, "ALL your questions," is demonstrative of an analytically-halted perspective. You are not processing new information/have made a conclusion from which you will not budge. It's what religious fundamentalists do.
23456D 4 years ago
"You are not processing new information/have made a conclusion from which you will not budge. It's what religious fundamentalists do. "
Your 1st sentence is a run-on catastrophe without a point and your second sentence reveals you for the bigot you are.
GhenisCanne 4 years ago
Also, I'm not asking questions of the debunkers (Mark Roberst is the best guy they've got and he has the a lot of the issues he discusses right from my point of view), I am adressing MY GOVERNMENT, who is responsible to give redress for MY GRIEVANCES. Not a corporate employee. I appreciate their perspective, but I want to hear it from the mouths of MY ELECTED OFFICIALS. It was THEIR job to protect us, they did not, they can and will answer my questions.
23456D 4 years ago
robin you lie and most people know you lie. so be a sport and quit lying. This country wants truth in politics and truth in our media. This media we call internet will continue to let you lie and you know it. So you continue to lie as we merrily go about our everyday lives. You would rather climb a tree and tell a lie than remain on the ground and tell the truth. Why?
jay123jd 4 years ago
Ketiara is correct, I am not responsible to explain the whole event to have the right to insist on consistancy on the part of our government about this event. That being said, here's my statement: We haven't been told the whole truth about 9/11.
23456D 4 years ago
"You are responsible for clarity" ... ANYTHING the government says about 9/11 you won't believe, because you can't, you've made up your mind that they are dirty liers. And about justification of wars. Do you know about the history of Islam and what it entails and the threats we face in the next century?? If your truly open to research, read a book by Paul Berman: 'Terror and Liberalism. Let me guess, your not gonna buy it?
DelGriffith10 4 years ago
Del, try Naomi Klein's "The Shock Doctrine." You are the only person here making assumptions (yours about ME). The rational people of the world aren't asking you to debate CT's, just to agree that the government is responsible to DEMONSTRATE that its theory is the truth. If you think they ARE telling the truth, why are you afraid to suggest they prove it?
23456D 4 years ago
ron paul and kucinich and mike gravel all said they support a new independent investigation into 9/11.
shutdownthefed 4 years ago
Call me maam.
Ketiara 4 years ago
Why should he? So you can say A-HA! Your WRONG! AND I'M RIGHT! Listen to Curiner everybody! He is such a beacon of knowledge. What's your statement Curiner? Do you have an opinion?? Or are you just regurgitating crap with that hand up your ass? Go watch Fox news and get microchipped.
Ketiara 4 years ago
Watch the PBS documentary -- there is a whole section on the analysis of the steel.
sixthousandrpm 4 years ago
Being an honest person, I would be in favor of an open and transparent investigation into 9/11 whether I believed we had been told the truth or not. Ask yourself why NOT A SINGLE DEBUNKER EVER says "Yes we should have an open investigation to settle these issues." ALL OF THEM just want to go forward without another thought about the EVENT THAT STARTED EVERYTHING GOING ON NOW.
23456D 4 years ago
I support government transparency obviously and I have questions. But CT questions are not PRACTICAL questions. Their questions are aimed at splitting hairs until they hear what they want to hear or get something they can exploit to seem that way. This is why I say WTC7 CTs are a red herring. "We're past this. It's been debunked. Move on."
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
Personally, I think the Pentagon may be a red herring, at least in so far as the theories of "no plane". While people like you are only addressing (and would have all of us only address) the question of "was it flight 77?", the ret of us are asking why, an hour+ into the most spectacular attack on American soil, was ONE PLANE not ordered to cover DC airspace? Do you have ANY answer for that?
23456D 4 years ago
And while you're thinking about that one, consider the fact that the Commission report says Cheney got to the presidential bunker to take command after the pentagon was hit, but Minetta and Clarke have confirmed and reconfirmed that they saw him there giving orders to NORAD, FAA, NEADS et al more than a half hour before. Is it crazy to want this inconsistancy probed?...
23456D 4 years ago
appendix: I think you are viewing "debunkers" as apologist "boot lickers" (as I've been called) for not believing in conspiracy theories and disliking the theorists so much. I am highly critical of the Bush administration and this whole fiasco, but it is ABSURD to me to follow the lines of CT rationale that call it an "inside job". So much so that I often end up taking to the defense of the administration.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
You're making the ENORMOUS mistake of conflating ALL of the alternative theories of 9/11 that have been proposed with ALL OF THE PEOPLE who simply don't believe we've been told the truth. Set ALL of the alternative theories aside. They are not the point. The point is that what we've been told does NOT account for how 9/11 occurred. "Debunking" an alternative theory does NOT confirm what we've already been told. That's completely illogical...
23456D 4 years ago
I suggest that you read up on the CIA plotted coup in Chile and the simultaneous raids on Trade Unions as the miltary coup took place. When a population is terrorized, according to the theory in place by those who have run these opperations before, peripheral actions are often undertaken in the midst of the confusion that ensues: perhaps WTC 7 and the evidence of the crimes of Enron, WorldCom and who knows how many other documents were eradicated...
23456D 4 years ago
Also, you aren't talking to (nor should you be if you have any honest interest in truth) a hypothetical "CT rationale". You're talking to me, a human being, and one who is not saying "inside job". I am saying that there is more to be known and we'll be safer when we know it. Do you have the integrity to address ME, and what I'M saying here? Tell me why DC wasn't defended.
23456D 4 years ago
While you are saying in essence that you are different from other CTs and bringing fresh views to the table, you are not. That is why I have been able to reference your claims to mainstream well-known debunking sites. You are just parroting the same CTs as everyone else. Go read debunk911myths and the Popular Mechanics book with integrity before just shotgunning responses hoping one floats. This is old, there is nothing new here, I'm done. Bye.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
Debunking what a 20 year old proposed to account for anomalies does not confirm what the government has told us. Science and consistant testimony under oath from those who were responsible to protect us does. Your attempt to switch which one you are responsible to do should make you quite ashamed. You reference claims I am not making. Tell me why NIST scientists should NOT have to stand at a podium and explain their theories and explain why no plane was sent to cover DC.
23456D 4 years ago
Fighter aircraft were over DC shortly after the Pentagon was attacked. Contrary to what you might think, in a pre-9/11 world planes were not often kept aloft to "guard airspace" because they are extremely expensive and we relied on instrumentation to watch the sky with fighters on strip alert, however the airliners' transponders were off so no one knew where they were. GO DO YOUR OWN RESEARCH. STOP SHOTGUNNING ACCUSATIONS. GOOD BYE.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
Also, FYI, the planes seen in the area following the Pentagon strike were an electronic warfare aircraft and a white unmarked jet.
23456D 4 years ago
Try the CAPS protocol, sir. And the "transponders were off so no one knew where they were" is the most absurd insinuation, and one that we are expected to assume. You mean to suggest that an enemy aircraft (say an f-15 or the like, or for that matter ANY aircraft) is INVISIBLE to our miltary defense if it doesn't do the courtesy of registering a transponder signal? What about the fact that these were the only 4 planes NOT responding to the controllers?
23456D 4 years ago
Also, if you had taken the time to read the Commission Report or watch the hearings, you would know that there was real time information, eyes on the planes, THROUGHOUT the morning. NEADS and the FAA were communicating where the planes were for every minute of the attack. Go do ANY research, sir. Which is not to say seek one pre-fab explaination that suits your desired conclusions. Reading the Commission Report would be a good start for you.
23456D 4 years ago
you are such a lieing sack of garbage, how do you sleep at night?? knowing that you don't accept the truth, simply because you don't believe the govrnment would ever do somthing like this.
mandymac33 4 years ago
Also, I believe the reason the government is reluctant to recognize conspiracy theories is because they don't want to empower truthers to "preach the controversy". The terrible fact is that no matter the issue, if crackpots and rationalists (using this as a general example, not specific to truthers) are given the illusion of equal footing, people will divide equally on both sides and generally go for whomever has the best rhetorical skill.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
I am not, nor do I have to, cherry pick(ing) any evidence. I am suggesting that people look at the information available and decide if they are in favor of an open and transparent investigation into the murder of 3000 people. The government can be as reluctant as it wants. An increasing majority of people agree that this is the right and necessary thing to do.
23456D 4 years ago
But anyway, these are the reasons no one will talk to 9/11 Truthers. Old, debunked, and often obscure arguments are pulled up and the track record for CTs is so overwhelmingly false-positive that that is the reputation now. If CTs want to be taken seriously, stop making YouTube videos and start a peer-reviewed publication where ideas can be scrutinized before being lobbed up as proof of government involvement.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
After five minutes of Googling I have found the answer as to why bin Laden's list of crimes do not include the WTC attack.
It's a long link so I'll mail it to you. Other members just type in a google for "debunk911myths Osama bin Laden", take the first link, and do a term search for FBI. It's towards the bottom in a box.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
Bush and Rice WERE speaking in general terms. Just like how Silverstein was using a common use of the phrase "pull it", but then CTs went batshit crazy saying "OMG! He admitted he said pull the building!" No... that's not it at all. All of these arguments are taking a very cherry picked version of events that is then spun heavily.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
And when you're telling someone to prove a negative, then you use purely hypotheticals as ammunition, you can't lose. The scientific method is illegitimized by CTs because they cherry pick evidence. If you only include certain dots, of course you can say it's an obvious line to somewhere.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
Where is your evidence. As for Bush and Rice's statements, I believe they were speaking in a general sense of disbelief at what had happened. Not making an "oopsa daisey" blatant lie. That's just occam's razor and the simplest of those explanations makes more sense to me.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
Again, you try to turn the responsibility to people OTHER THAN our government to explain how 4 planes flew around and hit their targets without interference. You say it's obvious how the towers fell, so why try and explain it. As for your "massive preponderance" of Islamic involvement, why does the FBI NOT list 9/11 among bin Laden's crimes? Why is there NO evidence linking ANY of the susected hijackers to Al Quaeda? Where's your proof that it was just them?
23456D 4 years ago
Also on Bin Laden, do you maintain that the man in the videotape "found" in Afghanistan is Osama Bin Laden? Say you do. Please say you do.
23456D 4 years ago
Which video tape? As far as I know they are all authentic. Please don't give me the "OMG!!! HIS NOSE IS SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT!" argument. It's paradolia.
For better pics of WTC7 go to debunking9/11 dot com / wtc7 dot html I'm not the one asserting. Your arguments are so flimsy. You're telling me to prove the government DIDN'T do it.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
Wow. You do. That's super. You believe that the "confession" video "found" in Afghanistan is the same man in all other photography of Osama Bin Laden. I'm not telling you to prove anything. I'm saying it's the government's job to explain why they didn't protect us. And they haven't, and anyone who examines the BALANCE of information available comes inevitably to the same conclusion: we are being lied to.
23456D 4 years ago
How, specifically, are we being lied to beyond the pail of ordinary political bullshittery? I am no fan of the Bush administration or Cheney in particular, but there is NO solid evidence that they orchestrated 9/11.
Incidentally, I just watched a great Frontline documentary called "The Dark Side" about Dick Cheney's power brokering. Highly recommended.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
"9/11 was an inside job" is too broad of a statement, and I'll grant you that it's a slogan adopted by the "organized" (which is to say "most visible") portion of the truth movement, but the majority of people who take issue here are not claiming the whole government was involved, only that we insist on seeing the proof that we've been told the whole story, that these 19 men didn't just "luck out" for 2 hours of a military standdown simultaneous with their plot.
23456D 4 years ago
Whether you insist or not, you will continue to be ignored as long as the "most visible" among you continue to make claims based more on their pre-existing hatreds (for Bush, Clinton, Jews, corporations etc.) than on the evidence.
ndbrandt 4 years ago
I love how debunkers say all the direct quotes from our leaders contradicting demonstrated facts (like Bush, Rice on failure of imagination), and direct quotes from witnesses contradicting the official story are "metaphors", "similes", "SPEAKING IN A GENERAL SENSE". It's obvious you want the simplest answer. Your commitment to simplicity is similar to other Americans who want to disregard inconvenient realities.
23456D 4 years ago
As for my "coyness" or my seeming assertion that "The Government did it", my opinion shouldn't matter to you in the slightest anyway. The information I'm offering should interest you, and you should be reponsibly sorting through it. Like others seeking to reach a pre-determined conclusion, you are looking for ways to weed out information based on your evaluation of the credibility of those relating the information to you, rather than the truth or falseness of the statements.
23456D 4 years ago
I believe you are just being coy when you say you haven't reached a conclusion. My evidence is that you have another video on YouTube where you "formally" accuse Dick Cheney of orchestrating 9/11. You have gone from saying "I just want the truth" to "Dick Cheney is a murderer and he is behind all of this."...
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
... it is very obvious how it collapsed if you look at the pictures taken of the front of it. Contrary to conspiracy theorists' ideas the building was almost engulfed in flame on the forward portion, was missing massive chunks of support structure, and did not fall in on its own footprint when it came down.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
"building (7) was almost engulfed in flame" - show me ONE picture proving this
"was missing massive chunks of its support structure" - show me ONE picture proving this
AND FINALLY - EVEN IF YOU'RE RIGHT, show me ONE model of how this exact damage caused the exact collapse we observed. That's how the scientific method works. You don't just get to assert and walk away.
23456D 4 years ago
...it is very obvious how it collapsed if you look at the pictures taken of the front of it. Contrary to conspiracy theorists' ideas the building was almost engulfed in flame on the forward portion, was missing massive chunks of support structure, and did not fall in on its own footprint when it came down.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
I am unaware of any major changes to NIST's explanations. The last I read actually they had released a 10,000 page compilation of the various working theories they have as to HOW the towers (including WTC7) could collapse. WTC 7 appears to me to be a red herring...
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
... the massive preponderance of evidence, both material and circumstantial, says it was a terror attack by Islamic fundamentalists who we are STILL fighting. They EXIST and they have done things like this before and most damningly they take credit for it.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
This will be a long one. I was going to send it via mail, but what the hell.
I am characterizing 9/11 conspiracy theorists who propose that the U.S. Gov't was behind 9/11. In order to believe that you have to have a valid testable reason. While no doubt there was gross incompetence that led to the Sept 11 attacks, there is no evidence it was insidious. THAT is where I would like to get answers. However...
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
And I don't mean this as an ad hominem, but it seems that most of the conspiracy theorists are just ravenous adolescents. I think the "lots of people" that are claimed to believe 9/11 was an inside job are mostly just dolts like our friend down there looking to rebel against something by leaping without looking at what they've been conditioned to see as plausible: ie: big evil omniscient government.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
Spot on, Semper. Something has happened to millions of brains where reality is distorted and truth is infact anti-truth, it's truly a phenomenon. And frighteningly, what will eventually happen is revolts against our own government, nhilism, chaos, anarchy. Eventually Al-Quaeda will not be our biggest threat. The fact that we must debate these CT's is offensive to any sane mind.
DelGriffith10 4 years ago
mmmm, more concise and intelligent commentary from conspiracy theorists... Thank you for that wonderful display of mental acuity.
I'm sure it "shall"...
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
Obviously the kind of comments made here by albertstenton are worse than useless, but they do not represent the majority of people asking questions. Many of us are making concise and intelligent commentary, granting the (again obvious) observation that LC kids do not have the whole thing figured out, and that debunkers make some very good points. The balance of information remains insufficient to dismiss a skeptical look at what we've been told happened.
23456D 4 years ago
The official story declares that Bin Laden "conspired" with 19 young men to do everything that happened on 9/11, including the total thwarting of the most advanced and expensive defense system in history. And it ignores the fact that simulations of exactly what occured were going on as the attacks happened. Do you have ANY explaination for why you would disregard the wargame exercises (which provided the opportunity)...
23456D 4 years ago
...especially in conjunction with Bush's and Rice's assertion that "No one in our government...could envision flying airplanes into buildings"? They were simulating THAT EXACT SCENARIO THAT MORNING, and had set up anti aircraft weapons at the G8 summit the year prior to defend against THAT EXACT SCENARIO... these are FAIR questions.
23456D 4 years ago
The biggest whopper I've seen is the molten steel argument. Yes, there was GLOWING hot steel in the WTC. It was glowing for DAYS after the towers collapsed and it was entire beams. Thermate does not do that, it burns hot quickly to cut, not long. Something was burning hot enough for quite a while to cause the metal to glow... jet fuel and plastics.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
And how do you explain the fact that you (and other debunkers) refer to people asking these and other questions as "conspiracy theorists" without acknowledging that the official story is a conspiracy theory? Your selective use of the term? What kind of mental acuity does that demonstrate?
23456D 4 years ago
For example on the last part. People often cite things like the government doing an exercise somewhere of a situation similar to this as some kind of evidence, along with FEMA doing a bioterror exercise. The federal government has literally HUNDREDS of exercises going per week about anything you can imagine.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
As far as "shall prevail", people are not un-seeing these discrepancies, and the protracted refusal to acknowledge even the simplest of questions, the plainest inconsistancies, feeds people's desire to know what and why. What revision is the NIST on now?
23456D 4 years ago
To be short, "conspiracy theorist" has become more than just the sum of its words. It is a derogatory term for people who have a conclusion generally based on paranoia, searching for a way to connect dots to validate that conclusion. Anomalies become "hard evidence", quotes are taken out of context, and understanding of the animal which they are studying becomes extremely subjective.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
Weak response Semper.
23456D 4 years ago
Of course it is, I probably should have quoted someone out of context or made a wild accusation based on correlation with no evidence of causation. That probably would have made it stronger in the conspiracy theory rulebook for arguments. Please elaborate.
SemperLieSuckah 4 years ago
You're accusing people of having reached "a conclusion". The only conclusion I've reached, and I share this characteristic with a majority of Americans, is that it is MORE responsible to investigate what we've been told happened on 9/11 than NOT to investigate. more than half your last response was to issues I had not raised. You bundle people pointing out the inconsistancies in what we've been told...
23456D 4 years ago
But see, we HAVE investigated it. We have. We have. We have. What else is there to say to individuals like yourself. I'm not trying to attack you, all I'm saying is your so confused, that you literally cannot understand truth. B/c truth to you is different from reality... Why am I even wasting my time here? This is unreal. What the hell happened to so many minds?
DelGriffith10 4 years ago
I don't spend as much time debating on youtube these days, I prefer to work on the streets one on one with people. All I can tell you is that you have to be empirical, and if you do so, you'll learn a lot. About religion, politics, and, with any luck, the world around you. Good luck.
23456D 4 years ago
What does your streetwork look like?
I'm sure you've seen Mike Gravel or maybe even Kucinich. Now, why wouldn't at least Gravel ask any questions towards 9/11, who was very direct in the debates and TV coverage I've seen so far?
If he agrees with the research like DelGriffith mentions there is, will you also convict them of being liars, like the LooseChange guys did with the PM people?
mrcuda 4 years ago
Also, you demand clarity. Is a NIST report and thus a lot more scholars than the handful 9/11 "truthers" not enough for you?
Also: Would you accept 9/11 as a successful terrorist attack, if it were indeed the case, or would you rather stick your head in the sand because you dislike confrontations that can lead to a war?
mrcuda 4 years ago
...Would ANYONE disagree that we deserve an explaination as to why a KNOWN CASH transmission from Pakistani ISI to Mohammad Atta has not been investigated and resolved? Pakistan is ostensibly a US ally, but their version of the CIA funded 9/11...
23456D 4 years ago
What part about it has not been resolved? So ISI supposedly wired 100k to Atta, but the ISI says it was the CSI. So which side of the story do you prefer?
Sorry, but I don't know anything about this other than the stuff I've seen in the latest Loose Change (which I shut down after about half an hour in, because it's even worse than the first two versions) and I don't dare to judge the situation on just a tiny video clip.
mrcuda 4 years ago
What structural engineer onsite saw "liquified steel"?
GhenisCanne 4 years ago
...mrcuda, are you aware that ~5 months ago the NIST completely restructured their explaination for the initiation of the collapse of the towers? They now say the exterior columns failed first. This is the 2nd time they've thrown out their old assertions and given a new explaination. Without broad implication, I think it's fair for me to say "That's strange and should be explained".
23456D 4 years ago
Well that's how science works, isn't it? You revise things based on newly gained knowledge that you didn't have previously.
I'm sure people believed that the world's flat, then that it's round and even that was more defined to something like "slightly egg shaped". Do you see a conspiracy in that, too?
mrcuda 4 years ago
I would say that the reason no one in the mainstream media touches 9/11 (except to sy "it changed everything", a vague comment, not commensurate with the magnitude of the event) is that our conversation about 9/11 has been directed to the most extreme alternative theories (and LC/many truthers are responsible in part for this) rather than the discrepancies that resulted in the alternative theories...
23456D 4 years ago
It has changed at least your domestic and foreign policies, hasn't it, so how is "it changed everything" a vague statement?
As for the direction towards the most extreme alternative theories: How will you for example answer a person, who seriously believes that no plane crashed somewhere, based on "evidence" like news reporters on scene, seeing nothing much in 2001, although you found evidence that suggests indeed that plane crashed there?
mrcuda 4 years ago
I encourage them to be skeptical of ALL the information they find and to pay careful attention to separate what they have observed conclusively and what they have inferred. I tell them that I am skeptical of that claim, but that I DO support the release of the evidence that PROVES what happened (such as other videos, VA highway, interior/exterior cameras from Pentagon).
23456D 4 years ago
I understand everyone's frustration with the way Bermas talks shit in this "debate". I understand everyone's frustration with a lot of the alternative theories proposed about 9/11. I do NOT understand how people who are SO certain that we've been given the truth abjectly refuse to support any new investigation that would SETTLE some of these issues...
23456D 4 years ago
Do you admit though, that you can't take those two guys seriously? What serious ground do they have for their assertions, when all they do is stick to old "evidence" and try to ridicule their opponents the way they did *throughout* the entire "debate" like some highschool morons?
Also, how do you explain that the NIST report has been revised so much? Maybe because there were unanswered questions that they tried to settle in a new research process?
mrcuda 4 years ago
See if this makes sense: an idea is not responsible for who believes in it. It doesn't enter into my mind to tether the validity of a claim to the manners of its claimant. So even whether someone is AN HONEST PERSON or not doesn't change whether a statement they make is true or not. Do I find them convincing advocates of the questions they're raising? Honestly, I think Avery comes across as pretty measured, Bermas as pretty crazy...
23456D 4 years ago
See if this makes sense: If you claim to have evidence, you produce the evidence, not some theories, nor outright ridicule your opponent and behave the way they did, which can be called either being insecure, an arrogant ass or just crazy in the head.
mrcuda 4 years ago
...It's just deeply disingenuous for you and others (on this issue and others) to turn the conversation to whether some 20 year old kids are calm and collected in a debate rather than toward the issues being debated. Also, if you didn't hear, Miegs compares these young men to holocaust deniers. You're right, he's not singing "liar liar pants on fire", but c'mon? Holocaust denial? Is that not a CHARGED DISTRACTION intentionally slipped into the room?...last point...:
23456D 4 years ago
Why not the holocaust? What other event comes to your mind, where a large number of people died, yet people try to blame a government or group (Zionists) for what happened and openly distort events to their benefit (they took part in it, gained Israel from it), although there is a lot of evidence that makes sense and proves it happened the way it did?
mrcuda 4 years ago
...It was NEVER about whether these kids have figured the whole thing out. It was ALWAYS about whether OUR government has demonstrated conclusively and transparently to OUR satisfaction that their explaination of and blame for the murder of 3000 people was 100% accurate. There has, to this day NEVER been a criminal investigation...
23456D 4 years ago
Yet they claim to have figured it out or not? Why else would they _yell_ into the PM-Guy's face he's a liar instead of producing hard evidence?
And there you have it: To YOUR satisfaction. What does that mean to you? To me it seem that it has to fit YOUR idea of how things went down. Do you really expect to get an answer to every little detail, when experts might not even be able to explain some anomalies?
mrcuda 4 years ago
...That's absurd, and the majority of people in the US and the rest of the world PERCEIVE the marketing tactic debunkers use to redirect the issue to the character of 2 young men to the exclusion of conversation of ANY of the 100's of legitimate questions and OUR RIGHT TO DEMAND ANSWERS.
23456D 4 years ago