CIA threatens "Press for Truth" producers over release of new documentary

http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=8296935#post8296935
JihadJane said:
Be prepared: If you're going to protest NATO and are worried about uncover cops, carry a crispy creme donut and drop it on the ground...if you see a tear then you know they are cops.
Click to expand...
000063 said:
Mocking cops: #winning
Click to expand...

JihadJane said:
A twooferologist.



Mocking twoofers: #winning
Click to expand...

You don't get the irony? Truthers are trying to use the term "government truther" as a pejorative. You have to try and use my own mocking of protesters against me, thereby proving my point.

You were proved wrong in that thread, by the way. A warrant was issued.
 
Last edited:
chrismohr said:
I see two possibilities: someone in the government wanted 9/11 to happen and they let it happen. Or, two agencies were involved in petty intraoffice squabbles that allowed thousands of Americans to die. In my mind, either possibility is horrible and merits a serious look.

At least CE's investigations merit a look, if only to be sure our security apparatus is tighter next time.
Click to expand...

This seems like a reasonable proposition. But there's a problem with trying to use the research of people like CE, and the makers of this documentary: they're emotionally invested in a belief that 9-11 was an orchestrated conspiracy. Any information they find is going to be presented to try and support that belief.

This thread reminds me of an experience I had in fundamentalist Christian school around 3rd or 4th grade. One day, during recess, we had a sundog: a perfect rainbow ring around the sun, and it seemed to be getting larger. We asked our teachers what it was. Not one of them could answer the question, not even the science teachers. All the answers we got had to with signs from God and other spiritual nonsense. Some of the adults thought this could be the second coming of Jesus. Seriously.

The next day, our teacher read to the class a local newspaper article that explained the atmospheric conditions that cause sundogs. And I'll never forget how angrily she did it. She talked about cirrus clouds like she was forced to at gunpoint. She was very offended that a bunch of 8-year-olds would be curious about a strange event. Clearly, she wanted to hide the boring truth and use the phenomena as an object lesson about belief. I got a lesson about belief, allright, but it wasn't the one she meant to teach.

And so it is with the Press-For-Truth crowd when they occasionally stumble on a real fact. An explanation like "petty intraoffice FBI/CIA turf fights" isn't good enough for them. It's too mundane, too non-conspiratorial, and doesn't fulfill their fantasy of marching high-level Bush officials to the gallows. The material doesn't fit what they want to believe.

So when asked about it, they get coy. They can't give basic answers to basic questions. They obfuscate at every turn to keep alive the possibility their information supports their belief, i.e., an intentional high-level conspiracy. They further undermine themselves by using non-credible people like Sibel Edmonds to support that belief.

Yes, this film could contain insight into how interoffice squabbling helped the 9-11 attacks succeed. But after a few rounds of Q&A with these people, you realize you're not going to get any information out of them. They're too emotionally invested in the belief to just present the material and let it support what it supports.
 
No you're not.
newton3376 said:
Wrong Childlike Empress.....

Wrong wrong wrong. You do not know what you are talking about.

Unlike Sabrina, who does know what she is taking about and tried to explain things in the real world to you:

She tried to explain things here, here, here, here, here , and here. That is just a sample of her trying to talk some *********** sense into you.

Then I also tried to talk some *********** sense into you here , here , here , and here .

At least try to listen to people who know what the **** they are talking about.
Click to expand...

Childlike Empress said:
There's a reason why you link to single posts out of context. You and Sabrina went on numerous general rants based on you being some small lights in some agency, and avoided the very specific information about very specific events sourced with official documents like the plague. You were set straight every time, and not by me. I don't remember having made more that a handful of posts adding context in that thread. But I remember that the thread is a very sad and embarrassing display of the degree of denial that's common here.
Click to expand...

So none of those ten posts linked were substantial? In fact, your response looks a lot like the sort of "meta" post you just dismissed as "fact-free pantomime debunking". Or, if you think that was all bunk;

dafydd said:
This lurker would like to know what CE's claim actually is.
Click to expand...
 
Childlike Empress said:
Folks ... this:




The interview with the producers in the OP will clue you in about the role of those analysts, but if you don't know what's meant by the "Tenet-Black-Blee" cover-up and don't know the story of Hazmi and Midhar, you should start with the Thompson interviews or read this thread.
Click to expand...

A conspiracy kook wants us to drop all our scepticism of the world of 911 kookdom because of her interpretations ????
Ain't going to happen
 
A detailed debunking probably isn't going to happen.

No other action is going to happen either, so it doesn't matter.

I said for years that the effect, if not the intended purpose, of the entire Truth Movement was to provide cover for any wrongdoing or errors that might actually have occurred in the relevant arms of government. By ranting for years about thermite, holograms, dancing Israelis, controlled demolition, surviving hijackers, Pentagon fly-overs (remember those?), four missing seconds of flight recorder data, they were dooming any serious attempt to investigate, publicize, or seek punitive or remedial action for anything anyone in the U.S. government had actually done or failed to do that exacerbated the 9/11 attacks.

Since that's exactly what happened, those who worked so hard to make it happen are the last ones who should be complaining about it now.

Actions have consequences. Now you know.

Respectfully,
Myriad
 
Last edited:
Myriad said:
A detailed debunking probably isn't going to happen.

No other action is going to happen either, so it doesn't matter.

I said for years that the effect, if not the intended purpose, of the entire Truth Movement was to provide cover for any wrongdoing or errors that might actually have occurred in the relevant arms of government. By ranting for years about thermite, holograms, dancing Israelis, controlled demolition, surviving hijackers, Pentagon fly-overs (remember those?), four missing seconds of flight recorder data, they were dooming any serious attempt to investigate, publicize, or seek punitive or remedial action for anything anyone in the U.S. government had actually done or failed to do that exacerbated the 9/11 attacks.

Since that's exactly what happened, those who worked so hard to make it happen are the last ones who should be complaining about it now.

Actions have consequences. Now you know.

Respectfully,
Myriad
Click to expand...


99074c811c3689e47.png


Yours truely, ~2007. :rolleyes:
 
Triterope said:
And so it is with the Press-For-Truth crowd when they occasionally stumble on a real fact. An explanation like "petty intraoffice FBI/CIA turf fights" isn't good enough for them. It's too mundane, too non-conspiratorial, and doesn't fulfill their fantasy of marching high-level Bush officials to the gallows. The material doesn't fit what they want to believe.
Click to expand...

So, the 9/11 attacks were the result of "petty intraoffice FBI/CIA turf fights"?

Where's your evidence for this claim?
 
Whatever point you're trying to make in that Ignored post, it's wrong.
 
Childlike Empress said:
I'm waiting for someone to address a specific something.
Click to expand...

And I asked you for something specific to address. Many times. You gave a bunch of evasive non-answers and semantic games. I eventually concluded that you were just wasting my time. Which is exactly what any journalist, political figure, or other official would conclude if you presented this information to them as you have in this thread.

CE, I'm actually trying to help you here. I'm trying to tell you that no matter how solid your information is, nobody is going to take you seriously if you present it like this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom