Wake Up Call To All Truthers

Clayton Moore said:
You need to understand that the truther vs. duhbunker issue isn't about who's going to win the Super Bowl. It's about whether the duhbunkers are protecting those who instigated a false flag operation against the USA. There is no middle ground.

When someone says truther in a disparaging manner they are protecting those who instigated a false flag operation against the USA.

If you think any aspect of what the American public has been fed about 9/11 doesn't ring true, research it. Remember, anything that you determine to be a significant fact that disagrees with the why/when/who/what of 9/11 as per the government's explanation means that 9/11 was a false flag operation.
Click to expand...

Anything I determine to be a significant fact? What happened to objectivity?
 
Clayton Moore said:
Remember, anything that you determine to be a significant fact that disagrees with the why/when/who/what of 9/11 as per the government's explanation means that 9/11 was a false flag operation.
Click to expand...

does this also mean... anything that you determine to be a significant fact that disagrees with the why/when/who/what of 9/11 as per the twoofers explanation means that 9/11 was a true flag operation?

this reminds of the creationist bs. how does false flag become the default? i find it just as likely to be the Pentaverate... ohhh, i hated the colonel.. with his wee beady eyes!

pentaverate.jpg
 
Mark F said:
Hold on now. I think it is only fair we give this a fair shake. So with that in mind, and seeing as we are headed towards the 11th anniversary of 9/11 I am just curious as to what "significant fact that disagrees with the why/when/who/what of 9/11 as per the government's explanation" has been uncovered and how does that prove a "false flag" attack?

Has this significant fact been turned over to a prosecutor to present before a grand jury?

Has it even been turned over to the media for a proper investigative expose?

If, in the past nearly 11 years no such significant fact has presented itself, what are the odds that one will?
Click to expand...

Isn't it strange that 9/11 Truthers believe they've uncovered these obvious crimes, yet they can't summon the energy to do anything but sputter and bluster on obscure internet forums?

btw this phenomenon (outlined in the OP) has been described very well by Ryan Mackey's Inflationary Model and his whitepaper on the Irreducible Delusion

You may enjoy looking at those. Cheers and welcome to the forum.
 
Clayton Moore said:
Remember, anything that you determine to be a significant fact that disagrees with the why/when/who/what of 9/11 as per the government's explanation means that 9/11 was a false flag operation.
Click to expand...

LMAO, Clayton in that one phrase you captured the lunacy of 9/11 Truth perfectly! It's ironically just this inner maxim that at once makes 9/11 Truth so appealing to confused persons as it renders the movement impotent.

Kind of like self-made death trap for conspiracy theorists. :)
 
Clayton Moore said:
...If you think any aspect of what the American public has been fed about 9/11 doesn't ring true, research it. Remember, anything that you determine to be a significant fact that disagrees with the why/when/who/what of 9/11 as per the government's explanation means that 9/11 was a false flag operation.
Click to expand...

I see the problem with your argument, and it's as obvious to the experienced eye as the ping of an engine would be to a mechanic, or a shadow on an X-ray would be to a doctor. In the quoted paragraph, you have backed yourself into a corner that's both indefensible and inescapable. For if you really believe the above is true, there is absolutely no way -- no way -- your arguments will ever accomplish anything.

Here's the reason why: you have framed this as an either/or proposition. Either the government's explanation of what happened on 9/11 is completely, 100% true in all particulars, or it was false flag. Thus in your scenario, if one single significant fact is found to be in disagreement with the "offical" explanation, then one has no choice but to conclude that the U.S. government did it.

This, of course, is nonsense so complete, so utterly misguided and intellectually sterile and self-destructive, that I in good conscious cannot let it pass without making some attempt, however quixotic, to dissuade others from believing it. There are so many things wrong with this approach that I would need vastly more time than I have at present to list them all. So I'll just go with the most obvious, namely that determining the truth behind 9/11 is simply not an either/or binary proposition. Few things in life are. There are so many different possibilities as to why things happen the way they do, especially events as complicated as 9/11, that only the most obsessed and narrow minded would ever really believe your preceding statement.

I'll provide an example: Suppose, after over a decade of trying, someone actually does find some significant relevant fact that disagrees with the generally accepted explanation of 9/11. Even if we leave aside the enormous subjectivity behind terms such as "significant," "relevant," or even "fact," you would not have advanced the false-flag theory a single angstrom forward. Please reread the bolded part again, because it's crucial here. Because if you did find such contrary evidence, you'd be able to say "this part of the government explanation appears incorrect, or at least incomplete." What you couldn't say is "this means it's false flag," because to do that you can't just prove a competing theory wrong; you must prove your theory right.

Sorry about all the bolding, but it's really critical to what I'm trying to explain. Because unless you bear these words in mind, you will never get anywhere in learning the truth behind 9/11 -- or anything else you approach with such fruitlessly limited and faulty initial assumptions. And that, I believe, would be truly unfortunate.
 
Last edited:
Thanks. Those who appear on this site and post in favor of the 'official' lie, at this late date, can be considered to be complicit. Even a cursory examination of that day will show that an inordinate amount of Jews were involved, and that Israel stood to gain the most from the aftermath.
We've been saddled with unending wars and the Patriot act, so in other words, we're screwed. Those that think you're wrong, are either incredibly stupid, or part of the coverup.
 
lugnutz said:
Thanks. Those who appear on this site and post in favor of the 'official' lie, at this late date, can be considered to be complicit. Even a cursory examination of that day will show that an inordinate amount of Jews were involved, and that Israel stood to gain the most from the aftermath.
We've been saddled with unending wars and the Patriot act, so in other words, we're screwed. Those that think you're wrong, are either incredibly stupid, or part of the coverup.
Click to expand...

Which official lie? The one from AE911Truth that says small microspheres can ONLY have come from a thermitic reaction?

The lie that alleges Larry Silverstein ordered FDNY to demolish a building while it was on fire?

The lie that no plane hit the Pentagon?

The lie that there was a 'stand-down' order on 9/11?

There are so many official lies of 9/11 Truth, and yes, they are complicit in support of Al Qaeda and the hijackers who killed thousands of innocent Americans and others. They are complicit in accusing innocent people of committing those crimes, of thoughtless disregard for the truth.

Why do 9/11 Truthers lie so much? It's official, after all.
 
lugnutz said:
Thanks. Those who appear on this site and post in favor of the 'official' lie, at this late date, can be considered to be complicit. Even a cursory examination of that day will show that an inordinate amount of Jews were involved, and that Israel stood to gain the most from the aftermath.
We've been saddled with unending wars and the Patriot act, so in other words, we're screwed. Those that think you're wrong, are either incredibly stupid, or part of the coverup.
Click to expand...

I'll drink to that!! :alc:

Well, this is fun!
 
lugnutz said:
Thanks. Those who appear on this site and post in favor of the 'official' lie, at this late date, can be considered to be complicit. Even a cursory examination of that day will show that an inordinate amount of Jews were involved, and that Israel stood to gain the most from the aftermath.
We've been saddled with unending wars and the Patriot act, so in other words, we're screwed. Those that think you're wrong, are either incredibly stupid, or part of the coverup.
Click to expand...



Thanks. Those who appear on this site and post about "Zionists", but deny that they're really just talking about Jews, at this late date, can be considered to be complicit in antisemitism. It's nice refreshing unexpected to see one of you being so honest and upfront about it.
 
lugnutz said:
Thanks. Those who appear on this site and post in favor of the 'official' lie, at this late date, can be considered to be complicit. Even a cursory examination of that day will show that an inordinate amount of Jews were involved, and that Israel stood to gain the most from the aftermath.
We've been saddled with unending wars and the Patriot act, so in other words, we're screwed. Those that think you're wrong, are either incredibly stupid, or part of the coverup.
Click to expand...

Poe? Is that you?
 
Stellafane said:
I see the problem with your argument, and it's as obvious to the experienced eye as the ping of an engine would be to a mechanic, or a shadow on an X-ray would be to a doctor. In the quoted paragraph, you have backed yourself into a corner that's both indefensible and inescapable. For if you really believe the above is true, there is absolutely no way -- no way -- your arguments will ever accomplish anything.

Here's the reason why: you have framed this as an either/or proposition. Either the government's explanation of what happened on 9/11 is completely, 100% true in all particulars, or it was false flag. Thus in your scenario, if one single significant fact is found to be in disagreement with the "offical" explanation, then one has no choice but to conclude that the U.S. government did it.

This, of course, is nonsense so complete, so utterly misguided and intellectually sterile and self-destructive, that I in good conscious cannot let it pass without making some attempt, however quixotic, to dissuade others from believing it. There are so many things wrong with this approach that I would need vastly more time than I have at present to list them all. So I'll just go with the most obvious, namely that determining the truth behind 9/11 is simply not an either/or binary proposition. Few things in life are. There are so many different possibilities as to why things happen the way they do, especially events as complicated as 9/11, that only the most obsessed and narrow minded would ever really believe your preceding statement.

I'll provide an example: Suppose, after over a decade of trying, someone actually does find some significant relevant fact that disagrees with the generally accepted explanation of 9/11. Even if we leave aside the enormous subjectivity behind terms such as "significant," "relevant," or even "fact," you would not have advanced the false-flag theory a single angstrom forward. Please reread the bolded part again, because it's crucial here. Because if you did find such contrary evidence, you'd be able to say "this part of the government explanation appears incorrect, or at least incomplete." What you couldn't say is "this means it's false flag," because to do that you can't just prove a competing theory wrong; you must prove your theory right.

Sorry about all the bolding, but it's really critical to what I'm trying to explain. Because unless you bear these words in mind, you will never get anywhere in learning the truth behind 9/11 -- or anything else you approach with such fruitlessly limited and faulty initial assumptions. And that, I believe, would be truly unfortunate.
Click to expand...

For instance, if the confiscated Pentagon videos were released and showed a missile hit the Pentagon, badda bing.
 
Metullus said:
Evidently not any fool...
Click to expand...

We are dealing with a kid who believes that anything injected in the arm ends up in the intestinal tract so I don't really trust his judgements about missiles and planes.
 
lugnutz said:
Thanks. Those who appear on this site and post in favor of the 'official' lie, at this late date, can be considered to be complicit. Even a cursory examination of that day will show that an inordinate amount of Jews were involved, and that Israel stood to gain the most from the aftermath.
We've been saddled with unending wars and the Patriot act, so in other words, we're screwed. Those that think you're wrong, are either incredibly stupid, or part of the coverup.
Click to expand...

Not off to a good start, is he?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom