A worrying trend in the "Truther" movement

[MaGZ]

Has anyone noticed a worrying trend among 9/11 conspiracy theorists in the past couple of years? Previously it was believed that 9/11 was an "inside job", perpetrated by elements in the US establishment; or at the least, that they knew of the plot, but did nothing about it.

Now there is an increasing belief that either Israel was partly involved,or the whole thing was a Zionist "false flag" operation. Some of the websites plugging this line are virulently anti-Zionist and there is some thinly disguised anti-semitism.

A major plank in the "evidence" for this, is the case of the so-called "dancing Israelis". A woman called "Maria" looked out of her New Jersey apartment on 9/11 and allegedly saw five men of Middle Eastern appearance in the parking lot. They seemed to be making a film of the attacks. They appeared "happy" and were not at all shocked by events.

She took down the number plate, and reported this to the police. The men were later arrested and turned out to be Israelis. They were held for questioning, but the FBI could find no evidence of any involvement in the attacks. They were released but deported due to immigration violations.

This is what is known or can reasonably be believed from the available evidence. However, the story has become embellished so much that it is now written in tablets of stone that the men had their camera set up before the attacks, indicating foreknowledge; also that they were dancing and high-fiving.

There is, of course, no evidence for any of this; moreover, nobody has seen the film they are alleged to have made of the attacks. However, on this flimsy basis a whole new subset of the Truther movement has arisen, holding that Israel was behind the attacks, and that these men were Mossad agents intending to film it.

In another forum I was involved in a discussion with a "Truther" on this topic; despite my asking him repeatedly for the evidence of foreknowledge, he was unable to do so, but neither was he willing to concede that these allegations were anything less than "fact". It was like dealing with a religious believer.

What are people's views on the growth of this Zionist "false flag" theory? Is it a cause for concern, and does it stem, or will it lead to, a revival of anti-semitism?

The evidence of foreknowledge is the Israeli Art Students
http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Art_Students

and the Dancing Israelis.
http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Dancing_Israelis_on_9/11

 

[uke2se]

...evidence...

...metapedia...

Lol, no.

 

[Cl1mh4224rd]

One of the first conspiracies was days (if not a day) after 9/11 about some 500 Jews not showing up for work at the World Trade Center.

Wasn't it 10,000?

4,000.

 

[Oystein]

Wasn't it 10,000? Based on the rather illogical position that there were estimated to be about 10,000 Jews who worked in the area, and there was no evidence that any Jews had been killed, ergo clearly no Jews were actually in the area. Never mind that the State Department or whoever issued the victim lists didn't actually release religious or ethnic information for the victims.

A while ago I posted a statistic of number of foreign nationals killed at the WTC by country vs. population of those countries. Turns out that Israel, along with the UK, lost most of nationals, per million citizens.

I think the Truther sleuth just took the victim list and did a search for all instances of "stein".

By the same logic, I am frequently called a "zionist" or "Jew-Boy" in YT comments. Apparently, people see "-stein" and think "Jew". Quite the opposite is true: My screen-name "Oystein" is an old-fashioned Nordic (Norwegian) male first name - pre-Christian.

 

[twinstead]

The evidence of foreknowledge is the Israeli Art Students
http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Art_Students

and the Dancing Israelis.
http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Dancing_Israelis_on_9/11

Ah, so we have a different opinion on what constitutes evidence. It appears your definition of evidence is "anything that I agree with". That's too broad a definition for most rational people. Rational people apply the same skepticism to things that appear to support their position as they do to things that don't.

But, carry on. I suppose there's a place in the universe for ideologues.

 

[beachnut]

"Worrying trend". What evidence do you have of this new "trend"?

More like a concern troll trying to resurrect the "truthers are anti-semites!" meme.

The evidence of foreknowledge is the Israeli Art Students
http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Art_Students

and the Dancing Israelis.
[URL]http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Dancing_Israelis_on_9/11[/URL]

I would not be 911 truth if they got more than the date right.

 

[1337m4n]

Lol, no.

"As a website, Metapedia is strongly opposed to Jewish supremacism and its slave army of beast-men of the demiurge. In the battle between good and evil, Metapedia is strongly in favour of the Aryan race - descendants of the god-men of Hyperborea and Ultima Thule"

What.

 

[Mobertermy]

Has anyone noticed a worrying trend among 9/11 truth deniers in the past couple of years? Previously it was believed that 9/11 was a "terrorist attack", perpetrated by al-qaeda.

Now there is an increasing belief that either Iraq was partly involved,or the whole thing was a Saddam backed operation. Some of the websites plugging this line are virulently anti-muslim and there is some outright hatred of all muslims.

A major plank in the "evidence" for this, is the case of the so-called "WMD". A informant called "curveball" provided what was obvioulsy bad information, yet the neo-cons used this to sell the war with Iraq to the American public.

This is what is known or can reasonably be believed from the available evidence. However, the story has become embellished so much that it is now written in tablets of stone that evidence provided by "curveball" was completely accurate.

There is, of course, no evidence for any WMD. However, on this flimsy basis a whole new subset of the Neo-con movement has arisen, holding that Iraq was behind the attacks.

In another forum I was involved in a discussion with a "debunker" on this topic; despite my asking him repeatedly for the evidence of Iraqi complicity, he was unable to do so, but neither was he willing to concede that these allegations were anything less than "fact". It was like dealing with a religious believer.

What are people's views on the growth of this Iraqi involvement theory that has led to the death of thousands of Americans and Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis? Is it a cause for concern, and does it stem, or will it lead to, a revival of the crusades?

 

[ProBonoShill]

Has anyone noticed a worrying trend among 9/11 truth deniers in the past couple of years?

No

Previously it was believed that 9/11 was a "terrorist attack", perpetrated by al-qaeda.

Now there is an increasing belief that either Iraq was partly involved,or the whole thing was a Saddam backed operation. Some of the websites plugging this line are virulently anti-muslim and there is some outright hatred of all muslims.

Proof?

A major plank in the "evidence" for this, is the case of the so-called "WMD". A informant called "curveball" provided what was obvioulsy bad information, yet the neo-cons used this to sell the war with Iraq to the American public.

Can you explain to me how these "neo-cons" managed to crash four planes into three buildings, kill thousands of people, keep it a big secret and have the blame placed elsewhere, yet weren't capable of planting a few WMD's in Iraq?

Also why did this same nefarious group decide that instead of framing some Iraqi's for these murders (you know to help give them a reason to invade Iraq) they'd choose persons from othe Middle Eastern countries?

This is what is known or can reasonably be believed from the available evidence. However, the story has become embellished so much that it is now written in tablets of stone that evidence provided by "curveball" was completely accurate.

Evidence?

Where?

There is, of course, no evidence for any WMD. However, on this flimsy basis a whole new subset of the Neo-con movement has arisen, holding that Iraq was behind the attacks.

Really? What movement is this?

In another forum I was involved in a discussion with a "debunker" on this topic; despite my asking him repeatedly for the evidence of Iraqi complicity, he was unable to do so, but neither was he willing to concede that these allegations were anything less than "fact". It was like dealing with a religious believer.

So you've speaking to a delusional idiot, welcome to our world.

What are people's views on the growth of this Iraqi involvement theory that has led to the death of thousands of Americans and Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis? Is it a cause for concern, and does it stem, or will it lead to, a revival of the crusades?

This is nonsense and off topic.

 

[Brainster]

I agree with those who've stated that the anti-Zionist faction in the Troof Movement has always been there; it's just more obvious now that the anti-Bush faction (which was much larger) has mostly disappeared. This is also the reason that the Troofers seem more right-wing these days.

 

[A W Smith]

Has anyone noticed a worrying trend among 9/11 truth deniers in the past couple of years? Previously it was believed that 9/11 was a "terrorist attack", perpetrated by al-qaeda.

Now there is an increasing belief that either Iraq was partly involved,or the whole thing was a Saddam backed operation. Some of the websites plugging this line are virulently anti-muslim and there is some outright hatred of all muslims.

A major plank in the "evidence" for this, is the case of the so-called "WMD". A informant called "curveball" provided what was obvioulsy bad information, yet the neo-cons used this to sell the war with Iraq to the American public.

This is what is known or can reasonably be believed from the available evidence. However, the story has become embellished so much that it is now written in tablets of stone that evidence provided by "curveball" was completely accurate.

There is, of course, no evidence for any WMD. However, on this flimsy basis a whole new subset of the Neo-con movement has arisen, holding that Iraq was behind the attacks.

In another forum I was involved in a discussion with a "debunker" on this topic; despite my asking him repeatedly for the evidence of Iraqi complicity, he was unable to do so, but neither was he willing to concede that these allegations were anything less than "fact". It was like dealing with a religious believer.

What are people's views on the growth of this Iraqi involvement theory that has led to the death of thousands of Americans and Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis? Is it a cause for concern, and does it stem, or will it lead to, a revival of the crusades?

you are funny
I don't even believe Bush and Cheney believe that.

 

[ergo]

Has anyone noticed a worrying trend among 9/11 truth deniers in the past couple of years? Previously it was believed that 9/11 was a "terrorist attack", perpetrated by al-qaeda.

Now there is an increasing belief that either Iraq was partly involved,or the whole thing was a Saddam backed operation. Some of the websites plugging this line are virulently anti-muslim and there is some outright hatred of all muslims.

.....

What are people's views on the growth of this Iraqi involvement theory that has led to the death of thousands of Americans and Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis? Is it a cause for concern, and does it stem, or will it lead to, a revival of the crusades?

Actually, Mobertermy, I have noticed this. This is indeed a worrying trend, this propensity of Coincidence Theorists to support notions of retaliation, to support fabricated military justifications for violence and aggression against nation states that had nothing to do with the fabricated attacks. It does seem that the overwhelming majority of 9/11 "debunker"/Coincidence Theorists support wanton aggression and violence against any persons or states who might voice criticism of U.S. domestic and foreign policy.

In fact, I think all Americans should be concerned about the increased pronouncements of violence and aggression uttered by obvious supporters of the official government explanations of 9/11.

 

[uke2se]

Has anyone noticed a worrying trend among 9/11 truth deniers in the past couple of years? Previously it was believed that 9/11 was a "terrorist attack", perpetrated by al-qaeda.

Now there is an increasing belief that either Iraq was partly involved,or the whole thing was a Saddam backed operation. Some of the websites plugging this line are virulently anti-muslim and there is some outright hatred of all muslims.

A major plank in the "evidence" for this, is the case of the so-called "WMD". A informant called "curveball" provided what was obvioulsy bad information, yet the neo-cons used this to sell the war with Iraq to the American public.

This is what is known or can reasonably be believed from the available evidence. However, the story has become embellished so much that it is now written in tablets of stone that evidence provided by "curveball" was completely accurate.

There is, of course, no evidence for any WMD. However, on this flimsy basis a whole new subset of the Neo-con movement has arisen, holding that Iraq was behind the attacks.

In another forum I was involved in a discussion with a "debunker" on this topic; despite my asking him repeatedly for the evidence of Iraqi complicity, he was unable to do so, but neither was he willing to concede that these allegations were anything less than "fact". It was like dealing with a religious believer.

What are people's views on the growth of this Iraqi involvement theory that has led to the death of thousands of Americans and Hundreds of thousands of Iraqis? Is it a cause for concern, and does it stem, or will it lead to, a revival of the crusades?

I know this is a troll, as even you aren't stupid enough to believe what you just posted, but on the off-chance that you are, I have a challenge for you. Find any "debunker" on this forum spouting off that Iraq was complicit in the 9/11 attacks. For each one you find, I will find you 10 twoofers who spout off anti-semitic rhetoric.

 

[leftysergeant]

What are people's views on the growth of this Zionist "false flag" theory? Is it a cause for concern, and does it stem, or will it lead to, a revival of anti-semitism?

Da Twoof has always been a Nazi and/or anarchocapitalist operation. Two Nazis (that I know of) are posting to this thread. Twoofer leadership is almost all Nazi or guanophrenic.

 

[Dave Rogers]

Has anyone noticed a worrying trend among 9/11 truth deniers in the past couple of years?

There are lots of trends among those who, under cover of the misleading title "truth movement", deny the truth about 9/11. Since you're discussing a different subset of this movement, I suppose your post is on-topic.

Previously it was believed that 9/11 was a "terrorist attack", perpetrated by al-qaeda.

Now there is an increasing belief that either Iraq was partly involved,or the whole thing was a Saddam backed operation. Some of the websites plugging this line are virulently anti-muslim and there is some outright hatred of all muslims.

What a bizarre fantasy. You're equating a different branch of your religion with the people who don't share your unfounded beliefs. It's well-known that Iraq was in no way associated with the 9/11 attacks. It's also frequently disputed, amongst those who base their understanding on reality, whether or not the Bush administration deliberately manipulated media to give the impression of such a link in order to gain psychological support for an attack on Iraq which had been Bush's intention ever since gaining power; personally, I suspect the Bush administration did so, but we all understand that there was never any evidence for any such link.

The world is not black and white; the possibility of deception by the government is not to be rejected without investigation and consideration of the evidence. We reject your conspiracy theory, and the conspiracy theories that suggest the involvement of Iraq, not because they are conspiracy theories but because the evidence is against them.

Dave

 

[tempesta29]

Got any charts or data on this new trend you've discovered? We know that Mossad was at least tracking some of the hijackers just prior to 9/11, but I'm not aware of any increasing trend in accepting this fact.

 

[Mobertermy]

I know this is a troll, as even you aren't stupid enough to believe what you just posted, but on the off-chance that you are,

It's satire of the OP. Which isn't to say that it also doesn't reflect reality.

I have a challenge for you. Find any "debunker" on this forum spouting off that Iraq was complicit in the 9/11 attacks. For each one you find, I will find you 10 twoofers who spout off anti-semitic rhetoric.

Well, isn't just too bad that you all weren't piping up back in 2002 then.

 

[ergo]

The world is not black and white; the possibility of deception by the government is not to be rejected without investigation and consideration of the evidence. We reject your conspiracy theory, and the conspiracy theories that suggest the involvement of Iraq, not because they are conspiracy theories but because the evidence is against them.

No, you're wrong. The world is black and white. And, as we have seen here on JREF, any discussion on 9/11 is necessarily black and white. Extreme black or white. There is no grey area. Understand? You're either with us or against us. Okay? And it is clear you're against us. It is clear you are against the common good. It is clear that anyone who supports the official government conspiracy theory also supports the illegal wars that followed, supports aggression and violence against civilians, supports torture. That is what you are. You can't have one without the other. And the leaders of your so-called 9/11 OCT/"debunker" movement are overwhelmingly sociopathic. We have the proof.

 

[ergo]

Might be easier just to call you the warmongers.

 

[The Platypus]

No, you're wrong. The world is black and white. And, as we have seen here on JREF, any discussion on 9/11 is necessarily black and white. Extreme black or white. There is no grey area. Understand? You're either with us or against us. Okay? And it is clear you're against us. It is clear you are against the common good. It is clear that anyone who supports the official government conspiracy theory also supports the illegal wars that followed, supports aggression and violence against civilians, supports torture. That is what you are. You can't have one without the other. And the leaders of your so-called 9/11 OCT/"debunker" movement are overwhelmingly sociopathic. We have the proof.

Typical cult type rhetoric...