Questions for 9/11 Truthers

[athon]

Why do 9/11 Truthers never actually answer questions posed to them about 9/11?

You know, I tend to wonder the same thing myself.

The reason I guess I read these threads without engaging in them is because you have one proponent of a theory offer some link, followed by a score of critical replies, many of which have some damn good questions. The proponent then replies to the poster who had little of value to offer, hence looking like they've said something, while ignoring the good questions.

Orphia Nay summarised things neatly. Good questions with Uruk's concise description.

No chance we'll have responses to the list of questions on PET, though.

Athon

 

[HyJinX]

Why do 9/11 Truthers never actually answer questions posed to them about 9/11?

Because they're to busy trying to bait-N-switch and headlock the thinkers.

Example:

Truther - "Thermite was a key factor in bringing down both towers"

Logical thinker - "Can you prove it?"

Truther - "Ah hah! Prove to me it wasn't thermite! You can't. Why? See...NIST sucks. You're covering for a mass murder that was perpetrated by PNAC and the NWO"

Logical thinker - "Can you prove that?"

Truther - "Not until you prove that thermite didn't cause the buildings to collapse"

Logical thinker - "I just threw up because of your idiocy"

 

[A W Smith]

http://www.acebaker.com/9-11/HTR/web-content/Pages/OCTFAQ.html

With answers like

False premise. Have you stopped beating your wife yet?

or

Have you stopped beating your wife yet?

again

Why are you still beating your wife?

also

Still beating your wife?

and finaly

Please stop beating your wife, I’m asking you nicely.

With answers like that no one is going to take Anus Baker seriously. But Judy Would!

 

[DarkMagician]

Awesome Thread

You should mail this one to Alex Jones and count the contradictions in his answers. Only issue is we can't use a clicker wheel because it only goes up to 999.

I thought they had 4-digit ones available.

Yeah, still not enough.

 

[Arus808]

If you need it in more simply terms:
Plane crash make building go boom.

correction: Plane crash, make building fall down.

 

[Bubbers]

http://www.acebaker.com/9-11/HTR/web-content/Pages/OCTFAQ.html

Yet another gem from TS. You can dodge all of the questions you don't like and answer the ones that you do like with "we have proof", but it's obvious at this point you have no real evidence of anything as the truthers have yet to put their evidence together to be taken to the DA(and this challenge was posed to them a month or two ago). And I love all of the wife beating questions. That sure has a lot to do with accusing the government of mass murder with no proof and calling us all shills with no proof. And it looks so mature. Anyone that grown up must know everything about everything.

 

[PerryLogan]

In answer to that wife-beating query:
I beat her; she beats me. It's our life style, OK?

Which part of "plane crash make building fall down" don't you understand?
Why are Ace's "answers" to these questions a combination of evasive jokes and false claims?
And why the snarky tone? (Prof. Stephen Hawkings doesn't think he's as smart as these guys do!)

How does "honest disagreement" amongst Truthers justify calling one another CIA agents and government shills? Seems extreme.
Why can't Alex Jones prove the existence of a single "globalist"?
Why do CTs believe the phrase "new world order" refers to world government (when it seems to mean simply "a change in the world order")?
Why do Truthers say government reports are wrong...without proving that they're wrong (the logical fallacy of using their premise to prove their premise)?
Why do the Truthers blame the government first and then go get the "proof"?
Why do Truthers constantly pose as engineers, seismologists, historians, and journalists, when they are mostly angry white guys with high-school education?
Why do Truthers cite fictional movies and stories as "proof" of their theories?
Why haven't any Truthers in the world asked any of these questions first?
Why is making up these questions so much fun?

Here's a good one to put last:
Would any two Truthers answer any of these questions the same way?

 

[Foolmewunz]

http://www.acebaker.com/9-11/HTR/web-content/Pages/OCTFAQ.html

1. Did I miss LL's apology? Can someone post it for me?
2. Taking a page from Chris Brown's book - trolling for hits?

 

[Orphia Nay]

Maybe, the joke is on you now:

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=2171782#post2171782

Tee hee...da da da hee hee.

Well at least you got the 'Maybe' part right.

Arguments from incredulity add less than nothing to your argument from ignorance.

When are you going to answer those questions, troll?

You can answer just the ones I posted, instead of answering all the questions addressed to twoofers - I'll cut you some slack since you seem to be daunted by the task.


Why do seismology readings show no explosions on 9/11?
How could they get the planes to fly into the buildings at the exact spot where the charges were planted?
Why do the world's structural engineers, architects, and demolitions experts side with the government's story? Why do no historians, journalists, sociologists, or political science experts disagree?
If George Bush and the military are big parts of this conspiracy, why would they attack their own headquarters, thus potentially crippling their own leadership?
Why weren't the Helen Keller archives and the Port Authority's records removed from the World Trade Center in advance of the attacks, given the fact that they're irreplaceable?
Why was it necessary to kill the New York Fire Department's Chief?
Why do truthers always ignore the damage the planes caused to the Towers and insist that fires have never brought down steel framed building before?
Why do truthers never tell us who planted the explosives in WTC 1, 2 and 7?
Why do truthers never tell us exactly what happened on 911?
Why do truthers never tell us exactly who was behind 911?
Why do truthers who espouse "controlled demolition" claims never have an explanation of how the difficult, time-consuming and messy preparation work was accomplished undetected in three occupied, working office buildings?

Careful not to use Ace Baker's style of response. He attended the Dodgy Brothers' School of Dodgic, Elevator Music (De-)Composition and Used Car Sales.

 

[Poetry Hound]

Why do the Truthers always jump around from topic to topic - "What about this? What about that?" Do they all have ADD?

 

[Kage]

Why didn't the military plant WMDs in Iraq if they had already gone through so much trouble for the "false flag operation?"

BTW - I have found this question to be very useful, in fact, I got a friend to give up the CT beliefs using this one.

 

[Alt+F4]

Why didn't the military plant WMDs in Iraq if they had already gone through so much trouble for the "false flag operation?"

The answer I get most often is that WMD wouldn't be enough. Someone recently told me, "Look, we know now (2006) that North Korea has a nuclear weapon and Iran might be close. What have we done about it? Nothing. A nation having WMDs isn't enough."

 

[Unfit4Command]

Why is Alex Jones so terrifying?

 

[uk_dave]

The answer I get most often is that WMD wouldn't be enough. Someone recently told me, "Look, we know now (2006) that North Korea has a nuclear weapon and Iran might be close. What have we done about it? Nothing. A nation having WMDs isn't enough."

Well it sure as **** made blair's premiership rocky and certainly gave kudos to the french and germans (dammit) for opposing the war in the first place.

And if anyone wants evidence of just how desperately the american right wing wanted wmd in iraq to be a reality, just consider santorums theatrics when 'he found' mustard gas shells. As far as I am aware only fox news and a handful of right wing 'news' websites carried the story with any prominence and to this day it is used by the likes of hannity to counter the whole 'there was no wmd in iraq' complaint.

Planting wmd in iraq would have been infinitely easier and more productive to the supposed neocon agenda than the whole convoluted 9/11 plot could ever have been. And yet, despite suspicions from some people that any wmd found after the invasion of iraq would have been planted, it never happened.

Think of the support the coalition would have had from all over the world if their claims about bio and chemical weapons had been proved correct.

Instead we have a mess and more hatred stirred up in the mid-east.

So, either -

1. someone in the NWO/Illuminati/Bilderberg/Reptoid conspiracy cabal dropped the ball on this one

or

2. governments actually find it extremely difficult to construct a false flag operation (should they be inclined to do so) because the logistics involved make exposure of the fiction a certainty.

 

[Wizard]

2. governments actually find it extremely difficult to construct a false flag operation (should they be inclined to do so) because the logistics involved make exposure of the fiction a certainty.

Precisely. The 9/11 fiction is now being exposed.

 

[uk_dave]

Precisely. The 9/11 fiction is now being exposed.

Well five years later, with the same people still in power (with the exception of rumsfeld because of (ironically) Iraq and the lack of wmd) you're doing a bang up job.

I'll switch on CNN International and watch the people taking to the streets to reclaim their nation from the hands of the murderers shall I?

 

[beachnut]

Precisely. The 9/11 fiction is now being exposed.

OH, a claim? Exactly what fiction are you talking about?

And when will you have a fact when the truth movement so far is made up of liars!

Facts or are you full of hot air? Thermite air?

 

[PerryLogan]

Questions from Karl Johannes

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/member.php?u=13345Karl Johannes posted these questions in another thread:

did they send the men to afghanistan to appear in training videos and martyrdom videos?
why would they have to mislead people who time and time again have commited their devotion to jihad and suicide?
are bin laden ksm, binalshibh, zawahiri, atef etc also paid off men?
if not how do you explain how bin laden refers to each one by name and repeatedly extols their task?
is a 767 (a plane that is not fly by wire) able to be remotley flown over the mechanical input of the pilots?
if not then who was on that plane when they were electronically hijacked?
if no one then where were all the alleged passengers? crew?
who made the phone calls?
what happened to the hijackers if they were not on the plane?
what happened to the passengers?
how do you account for the extensive delay in the remote flight system (image to plane, plane to controller, controllers reaction, controllers input, input to plane, signal to control surfaces) when taking into account the incredible speed and precision of flight 175's left bank at the last moment?
what elements within the govt are you referring to?
do you have any evidence besides a connection to a dubious claim to earlier govt involvment in a terrorist attack? even if that were true it does not prove anything about september 11
what does the pakistani ISI (which is stock full of radical islamists who do not exactly always listen to the dictates of military coup leader in cheif pervez musharraf) have to do with the USA CIA?

as i am no gravy i cant roll off a list of debunkification at you, but these are questions you must have asked yourself before you posted such an astonishing claim and therefore i would be interested in how you would account for these minor discrepancies

but most importantly...

do you honestly believe america, global hegemon, imperial leader, sole superpower, colonial collossus, is so bereft of enemies who want to kill us that we have to invent them?
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2180146&postcount=2002

 

[ref]

Something here

I just recently found out about this forum, so here goes the first post.

This clearly seems to be a forum mainly for non-questioners of the official account of 9/11. Which seemed quite odd to me, since I always thought sceptics actually question all things. But it seems that here people only are sceptic about people, who are sceptical about 9/11 official account. Which amazed me at first, since it seems that many of you question nothing about that days events. You call that sceptical thinking?

Being from Europe, I may not share the same viewpoint that some of you guys do. But I'll give my view anyway from this viewpoint.

First, it seems very odd that many people speaking for the official account question nothing about it. You see nothing strange there? Or call it sceptical to question nothing? I give a couple of examples.

The red bandana, recovered from the flight 93 crash site, part of evidence of the Moussaoui trial. This is the clearest example of false evidence. Supposed to be a hijackers head bandana, gone through the enourmous plane crash, and what do you see in the picture? Not a single drop of blood. Not a single tiny bit of dust. Not a single tear. Not a single hole, dirt, nothing. And still they claim that this bandana went through a maximum speed plane crash and survived fresh and clean. Does this not ring any bells to you?

Second clear false evidence is the will. Supposedly Mohammed Atta had written his will and put it in his bag. Then his bag by 'mistake' did not make the flight, and was to be found by the feds. This means that we are supposed to believe, that Atta intended to take his will with him to the flight. Why on earth would any single person take time to write his will, only to take it with him to the suicide mission to be destroyed. Make no sense at all.

Doesn't this make you at all suspicious? If we have such clear false evidence, who should we trust any of the rest?

What about the famous Osama confession tape. Isn't it strange it was found in a house in Afganistan, released by Pentagon. Imagine if it hadn't been found? What a miserable way to confess the most terrible attack on earth. Why he first denied it. Osama planned that way? I doubt.

If that doesn't make you a little bit suspicious, what will? Or is your only purpose to bash all those, who question anything? I don't agree with all the CT points. I don't agree with all the offial point. What i do, is I find something strange about that days events, and that raises questions. And should raise with everybody.

I won't go into debate with all of the points discussed here, but I answer few questions.

"Why do truthers never tell us who planted the explosives in WTC 1, 2 and 7?
Why do truthers never tell us exactly what happened on 911?
Why do truthers never tell us exactly who was behind 911?"

Why should we? Does it mean, that when you see something strange and start asking questions, you immediately should know perfectly the whole string of events. How stupid is that? If you are suspicious of something, does not mean that you should know exactly what happened. For example. I know that Litvinenko was poisoned. I don't know who did it. Does that make me a crazy truther, because I don't know exactly how that was done?

"Why haven't any Truthers in the world asked any of these questions first?"

Why don't you ask any questions?

"Why do truthers always ignore the damage the planes caused to the Towers and insist that fires have never brought down steel framed building before?"

Why do you believe, that a maximum steel temperature of 250 celsius in the south tower was enough to weaken steel and cause collapse in 50+ minutes? We are accustomed to celcius here, and my own oven heats up to 300 celcius. Do I have any problems with steel components? No. NIST itself reports, that not a single steel beam was hotter that that. Ask questions. Do not read it as a bible.

I'll ask you a few questions.

What proof do you have, that fireproof was removed by the impact?
What proof do you have of Osama's quilt? Since FBI does not have enough hard evidence.
What proof do you have of your presidents honesty in this case? Since there is massive amounts of proven dishonesty in any other case.
What proof do you have of anyones honesty in this case?
Do you see any suspicious evidence, and if do, why not suspect anything else?
Why did the planes take so long detours? Just to consume fuel and risk the whole event.
Why don't you ask any questions, and ridicule anyone who does?

That for starters. Viewpoint from here. Give your replys.

 

[Pardalis]

Being from Europe, I may not share the same viewpoint that some of you guys do.

snip

First, it seems very odd that many people speaking for the official account question nothing about it. You see nothing strange there?

Yes, we are all paid US government shills.