• Due to ongoing issues caused by Search, it has been temporarily disabled
  • Please excuse the mess, we're moving the furniture and restructuring the forum categories

Science Denial

Keep in mind, he is in denial and/or lying. He may be lying to himself more than anyone else.

Also, the most important lesson of skepticism should be humility. You and I almost certainly believe things that are not supported by evidence, maybe eve contradicted by the evidence.
 
ahhell said:
Keep in mind, he is in denial and/or lying. He may be lying to himself more than anyone else.

Also, the most important lesson of skepticism should be humility. You and I almost certainly believe things that are not supported by evidence, maybe eve contradicted by the evidence.
Click to expand...

Lying and Misinformation was how the hole Truth movement started.
 
ahhell said:
Couple of points. Almost nobody denies science outright, mostly they deny scientific evidence that has implication or outright contradicts their pre-existing beliefs, most science deniers really just pick and choose which science they like.
Click to expand...

Just to add to this, I think it's also that they don't deny science, they deny scientists.
Conspiracy theorists often fixate on individuals- Fauci, RFK Jr, Trump, Boris Johnson- who are either idolised or demonised, depending on which 'side' they're on.
I think they approach science in much the same way. Any claim by a scientist/ expert on their side- e.g. Judy Mikovitz or Richard Gage- is held to be true, not because of the validity of the actual research or claim, but because they are 'plucky whistleblowers' or 'the voice of truth'.
On the other side of it, anything presented that contradicts their beliefs is rejected, again, not on the merits or flaws of the actual science, but because of vague claims that the individual scientists have been 'got to' or paid off in some way.
It is very rare- at least, in my own experience- to see the actual studies examined, and subjected to detailed, factual rebuttals, by the conspiracy/fundamentalist side. This is not true for the debunkers: whilst the characters and track records of the claimants are looked at, the actual research is studied as well, and in far more detail.
 
It's hard to say. Gage claims he was inspired by hearing David Griffin. I believe early on there were a bunch of independent people who produced 911 conspiracy content... which appeared online and pulled people into that mindset. Loose Change I think was key. It was slick and seemed professional to many.
The collapses shocked many people because tall buildings don't collapse every day and so the only thing the public could easily refer to was a controlled demolition.
People found it a hard pill to swallow that the USG was unable to prevent the attacks with all their intell. So... they assumed there was something wrong with the official story... So what they did was propose different scenarios...
The USG knew of the event and did nothing... to use it for a pretext for more war, patriot act, ramped up military spending. It was going to be the "new Pearl Harbor" to rally the nation.
US was literally behind the event AS a false flag to get the nation to war as the cold war had left the US with no enemy to engage. Trade wars don't inspire patriotism or keep the cash flowing to the MIC.
All manner of fantasies were built around some assumption or assumptions made from whole cloth mostly putting the US in the middle of the event and not AQ. The conspiracies all have logical consistency... easy for the public to follow. I believe the 911truth "movement" can essentially be attributed to David Griffin as this quote suggests:
"Following the September 11 attacks, David Ray Griffin shifted his focus from questions of philosophy and religion to ones of politics and history, specifically American expansionism and imperialism. He intended to write a book on the subject, presenting 9/11 in terms of "blowback" for aggressive United States foreign policies of the 20th century:

Until the spring of 2003, I had not looked at any of the evidence. I was vaguely aware there were people, at least on the internet, who were offering evidence against the official account of 9/11... I knew the US government had 'fabricated' evidence to go to war several times before. Nevertheless... I did not take this possibility seriously... I was so confident that they must be wrong.[10]

After reading the work of Paul Thompson[11] and Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed,[12] he became convinced that there was a prima facie case for the contention that there must have been complicity from individuals within the United States government. He has called for an extensive investigation from the United States media, Congress and the 9/11 Commission.[13] It was then that he set about writing his first book on the topic, which he entitled The New Pearl Harbor: Disturbing Questions About the Bush Administration and 9/11 (2004).[14][15] The book has been described by Peter Barber of the Financial Times as "a touchstone in the 9/11 Truth movement".[16] Griffin is a founder of Scholars for 9/11 Truth.[5]"
Gage heard DRG and thought he would get architects and engineers to support the contention that the towers could have only been brought down by controlled demolition. Gage believed that because he simply did not know the engineering or physics... but knew that buildings can be demolished with explosives.
The truth movement was founded on the notion of the "false flag"... what happened was not what we were told.... by the USG, creater of the false flag... and the media the messenger. So there were elements of truth in things like... false flag operations do exist... cover stories are issued everyday and we don't have transparency. Gage presented the Means, Motive and Opportunity "model" to frame the "inside job". This "reasoning" made sense and people were pulled into the fold by "slick" media savy presentations.
The USG and the "mainstream media" largely ignore the truthers. This was in fact evidence to the truthers that they were on to something. NIST took several years to produce it's technical study of the WTC collapses. It was of course too technical for the average person. AE911T framed the reports as government "cover ups"... and they enlisted "professionals" to refute it. So we witnessed a parade of misinformed professionals who did not understand the engineering and physics. Many simply said the collapses were impossible without explosives. We were also subjected to theories like directed energy weapons only achievable by the USG... or mini nukes and of course Gage's pet theory of "nano thermite"... the silent explosive.

All of the truthers believe the rubbish they espouse about 9/11. So it hard to call them liars. The engineer/science types SHOULD have done some due diligence and they would have found all the supporting engineering and science to show the towers came down without explosives. This material was not only published by NIST, but appeared on the web on websites of independent researchers. There were other professional studies such as ARUP which reached the same no CD conclusion.

So.... if the correct information/explanations are out there... why does the truth "community" refuse to accept it? Can there be valid alternate science? It appears to me that the same dynamics are manifesting with the pandemic. Underlying both movements is strong distrust of the government and the media. But to support this distrust... science deniers produce "junk scientists" to support their case. Look people... listen to our scientists... they have no hidden agenda and their agenda is the "truth". Who doesn't want the truth?
Once down the rabbit hole... conspiracy followers cannot escape... and they seem to lose the ability to think critically and rationally. And this makes it almost impossible to help them out of the false narratives they believe to be the "truth".

Now since the smart ones are "marketing" something... one would expect them to have done their due diligence which would have brought them in contact with the "real science". And that would mean they would have to renounce the junk science they had been espousing. They can't do it. Too committed and too much self esteem invested in their beliefs. So no... Gage, Griffin, Ryan, Hopper... the whole lot of vocal 911truth "presenters".. will never "recant" and reverse ... they believe what they say and believe that they are speaking truth (to power) and are not liars. But effectively... they deceive.

At best they might simple go silent and leave the movement. Don't bet on it.
 
Some of you may notice that within the Truther community a rift has occurred between those who now admit that a passenger plane hit the pentagon and the others, called no planers or plane flyovers (there was a passenger plane but it flew over and went somewhere else). This pentagon study group met in colorado a couple years ago and conclusively proved to themselves what everyone else already knew, including the hundreds of witnesses.. .that a plane crashed into the pentagon. And that the truth movement should admit this to avoid being discredited and focus on WTC controlled demolition. This development is interesting because the the flyover group Citizens Investigation Team I think its called, are the ones accused of having taken over AE911 truth, at least according to Adam Fitzgeralds recent youtube video. Now we know that cults like this often fragment, as anyone who has studied leftwing fractions or seen Monty Pythons film with the Front for liberation of Judea and Judean Liberation Front, so this rift could be a first sign. Jim hoffman, chandler and others are in the 'yes there was a plane' group, so it's a factional struggle.... It's all about belief.... 'research' , 'evidence' 'argument' is just the facade.
 
steveDK said:
Some of you may notice that within the Truther community a rift has occurred between those who now admit that a passenger plane hit the pentagon and the others, called no planers or plane flyovers (there was a passenger plane but it flew over and went somewhere else). This pentagon study group met in colorado a couple years ago and conclusively proved to themselves what everyone else already knew, including the hundreds of witnesses.. .that a plane crashed into the pentagon. And that the truth movement should admit this to avoid being discredited and focus on WTC controlled demolition. This development is interesting because the the flyover group Citizens Investigation Team I think its called, are the ones accused of having taken over AE911 truth, at least according to Adam Fitzgeralds recent youtube video. Now we know that cults like this often fragment, as anyone who has studied leftwing fractions or seen Monty Pythons film with the Front for liberation of Judea and Judean Liberation Front, so this rift could be a first sign. Jim hoffman, chandler and others are in the 'yes there was a plane' group, so it's a factional struggle.... It's all about belief.... 'research' , 'evidence' 'argument' is just the facade.
Click to expand...

Tell rubygray and (s)he will deny , deny maybe a lot more denials.
 
The Shocking Truth About WTC 7 and The Twin Towers

Kim Iversen, formerly a reporter for The Hill on their popular web show, The Rising, interviewed Ted Walter on the collapse of World Trade Towers 1,2 and 7 on 9/11. Ted Walter had been with AE911Truth for quite a few years. He left to start his own organization, the International Center for 9/11 Justice.

It is good to see 9/11 Truth receiving some mainstream coverage.

Watch the interview here.

https://rumble.com/v2xyjcg-july-3-2023.html
 
tanabear said:
Kim Iversen, formerly a reporter for The Hill on their popular web show, The Rising, interviewed Ted Walter on the collapse of World Trade Towers 1,2 and 7 on 9/11. Ted Walter had been with AE911Truth for quite a few years. He left to start his own organization, the International Center for 9/11 Justice.

It is good to see 9/11 Truth receiving some mainstream coverage.

Watch the interview here.

https://rumble.com/v2xyjcg-july-3-2023.html
Click to expand...

Neither Kim Iverson nor rumble even begin to remotely approach mainstream. If you want to push lies in a way attractive to the gullible, however, they're good places to start.
 
ahhell said:
Keep in mind, he is in denial and/or lying. He may be lying to himself more than anyone else.

Also, the most important lesson of skepticism should be humility. You and I almost certainly believe things that are not supported by evidence, maybe eve contradicted by the evidence.
Click to expand...

Cosmic Yak said:
Just to add to this, I think it's also that they don't deny science, they deny scientists.
Conspiracy theorists often fixate on individuals- Fauci, RFK Jr, Trump, Boris Johnson- who are either idolised or demonised, depending on which 'side' they're on.
I think they approach science in much the same way. Any claim by a scientist/ expert on their side- e.g. Judy Mikovitz or Richard Gage- is held to be true, not because of the validity of the actual research or claim, but because they are 'plucky whistleblowers' or 'the voice of truth'.
On the other side of it, anything presented that contradicts their beliefs is rejected, again, not on the merits or flaws of the actual science, but because of vague claims that the individual scientists have been 'got to' or paid off in some way.
It is very rare- at least, in my own experience- to see the actual studies examined, and subjected to detailed, factual rebuttals, by the conspiracy/fundamentalist side. This is not true for the debunkers: whilst the characters and track records of the claimants are looked at, the actual research is studied as well, and in far more detail.
Click to expand...

Recently heard an interview with RFK junior, totally confirmed by pre-exsitng belief. He's previously called for severe penalties for science deniers when it comes to climate change, not so much when it comes to vaccines.
 
tanabear said:
Kim Iversen, formerly a reporter for The Hill on their popular web show, The Rising, interviewed Ted Walter on the collapse of World Trade Towers 1,2 and 7 on 9/11. Ted Walter had been with AE911Truth for quite a few years. He left to start his own organization, the International Center for 9/11 Justice.

It is good to see 9/11 Truth receiving some mainstream coverage.

Watch the interview here.

https://rumble.com/v2xyjcg-july-3-2023.html
Click to expand...

Rumble eh?

Let's have a little look see...

extremeright031.png


MBFCLow.png
 
So, I looked up rumble, seems much like any other hosting platform, you should probably judge the individual contributors on their own merit rather than the site as a whole.

More importantly, I found this line on the wiki article.
They include Del Bigtree, Sherri Tenpenny, and Simone Gold
Click to expand...
They also sound like characters from some bad 80s tv show for kids.
 
tanabear said:
Kim Iversen, formerly a reporter for The Hill on their popular web show, The Rising, interviewed Ted Walter on the collapse of World Trade Towers 1,2 and 7 on 9/11. Ted Walter had been with AE911Truth for quite a few years. He left to start his own organization, the International Center for 9/11 Justice.

It is good to see 9/11 Truth receiving some mainstream coverage.

Watch the interview here.

https://rumble.com/v2xyjcg-july-3-2023.html
Click to expand...

Either Kim Iversen is an idiot, or she just knows that the best way to make money is to shovel idiotic conspiracy theories at a large crowd of morons. Perhaps there is a bit of both involved.

Anyway, I remember her from the pandemic when the idiot jumped on the ivermectin train.

People like this are just contributing to cluttering up the world with garbage information.

It’s quite sickening actually.
 
ahhell said:
So, I looked up rumble, seems much like any other hosting platform, you should probably judge the individual contributors on their own merit rather than the site as a whole.

More importantly, I found this line on the wiki article. They also sound like characters from some bad 80s tv show for kids.
Click to expand...

They are all anti-vaxxers. Iversen is too. Not worth a second of your time.
 
MarkCorrigan said:
Rumble eh?



[qimg]https://i0.wp.com/mediabiasfactcheck.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/extremeright031.png?w=600&ssl=1[/qimg]

[qimg]https://i1.wp.com/mediabiasfactcheck.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/MBFCLow.png?w=357&ssl=1[/qimg]
Click to expand...

I apologise for the broken link, not sure how I did that.

[URL="https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/rumble/]Let's have a little look see...[/URL]
 
tanabear said:
Kim Iversen, formerly a reporter for The Hill on their popular web show, The Rising, interviewed Ted Walter on the collapse of World Trade Towers 1,2 and 7 on 9/11. Ted Walter had been with AE911Truth for quite a few years. He left to start his own organization, the International Center for 9/11 Justice.

It is good to see 9/11 Truth receiving some mainstream coverage.

Watch the interview here.

https://rumble.com/v2xyjcg-july-3-2023.html
Click to expand...

Same garbage different bag, the lack of Knowledge in the 9/11Truth Movement has never shocked me, kinda like Birthers not being able to understand the Science of IBM Paper punch cards.
Holes though paper!
 
tanabear said:
Kim Iversen, formerly a reporter for The Hill on their popular web show, The Rising, interviewed Ted Walter on the collapse of World Trade Towers 1,2 and 7 on 9/11. Ted Walter had been with AE911Truth for quite a few years. He left to start his own organization, the International Center for 9/11 Justice.

It is good to see 9/11 Truth receiving some mainstream coverage.

Watch the interview here.

https://rumble.com/v2xyjcg-july-3-2023.html
Click to expand...

Only if there are other panel members that are not truthers, to refute bogus claims.
 
Gullible 9/11 truth believers try again, and fail

tanabear said:
Kim Iversen, formerly a reporter for The Hill on their popular web show, The Rising, interviewed Ted Walter on the collapse of World Trade Towers 1,2 and 7 on 9/11. Ted Walter had been with AE911Truth for quite a few years. He left to start his own organization, the International Center for 9/11 Justice.

It is good to see 9/11 Truth receiving some mainstream coverage.

Watch the interview here.

https://rumble.com/v2xyjcg-july-3-2023.html
Click to expand...
Do you believe this claptrap, or what?
Did you hit the "Donate" button for the "International Center for 9/11 Justice"? How much does Ted make for spreading delusional claims about 9/11? Have you figured out 9/11 yet? No? When will you figure out there is no "Stunning Evidence"?

Did she get fired for being a conspiracy theorist from The Hill? She is fooled by Ted Walter. Why is Ted Walter unable to figure out 9/11 after all these years? Oh, Is it because he can't comprehend fire science, physics, structural engineering? Why is he so wrong?

Here is your chance... You can take the Stunning Evidence from The Shocking Truth About WTC 7 and The Twin Towers: Stunning Evidence Of Controlled Demolition Interview and earn the biggest Pulitzer Prize since Watergate exposed.

Where is the Stunning Evidence? People who believe Ted, have to have great skills at being gullible.

Darn, no Pulitzer Prize for you, there is no "Stunning Evidence", Just talk of stunning evidence.

What was the "Stunning Evidence"? :rolleyes:

This video is not "mainstream coverage", it is woo covering woo.

#lotsofwoo
 
In defence of Rumble..

I find it preferable to the censorship and bias algorithm of Youtube these days.. even my debunking videos on Youtube are shadow-banned now because they relate to '9/11 conspiracy theories'... It's hard to find anything 9/11 related on google/youtube these days because all the top results are 'reputable' sources like CNN, MSNBC, ABC etc etc etc.. frustrates the living hell out of me trying to find material.

Rumble, on the other-hand has no such bollocks.. so whilst it has become attritive to conspiratoid believers and far-right, I honestly prefer that to outright censorship and manipulation. Let the truth stand on it's own merit.
 
cjnewson88 said:
In defence of Rumble..

I find it preferable to the censorship and bias algorithm of Youtube these days.. even my debunking videos on Youtube are shadow-banned now because they relate to '9/11 conspiracy theories'... It's hard to find anything 9/11 related on google/youtube these days because all the top results are 'reputable' sources like CNN, MSNBC, ABC etc etc etc.. frustrates the living hell out of me trying to find material.

Rumble, on the other-hand has no such bollocks.. so whilst it has become attritive to conspiratoid believers and far-right, I honestly prefer that to outright censorship and manipulation. Let the truth stand on it's own merit.
Click to expand...

That's because if rumble installed any sort of moderation process, it would have to ban its far-right userbase, leaving it to show videos to two men and a dog.
 
cjnewson88 said:
In defence of Rumble..

I find it preferable to the censorship and bias algorithm of Youtube these days.. even my debunking videos on Youtube are shadow-banned now because they relate to '9/11 conspiracy theories'... It's hard to find anything 9/11 related on google/youtube these days because all the top results are 'reputable' sources like CNN, MSNBC, ABC etc etc etc.. frustrates the living hell out of me trying to find material.

Rumble, on the other-hand has no such bollocks.. so whilst it has become attritive to conspiratoid believers and far-right, I honestly prefer that to outright censorship and manipulation. Let the truth stand on it's own merit.
Click to expand...

Funny I can find anything 9/11 Related on YouTube might be your search engine.
 
Vivek Ramaswamy on the 9/11 Commission report

Vivek Ramaswamy, a Republican Presidential Candidate, said in an interview with BlazeTV that he does not believe the 9/11 Commission report. He is now running third in the polling only behind Trump and Desantis and his campaign shows no signs of slowing down.

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/9LzhAlkm8lk

Transcript: I don't believe the government has told us the truth. Again, I'm driven by evidence and data. What I've seen in the last several years is we have to be skeptical of what the government does tell us. I haven't seen evidence to the contrary, but do I believe everything the government told us about it? Absolutely not. Do I believe the 9/11 Commission? Absolutely not.
 
kookbreaker said:
And he promptly said this about what he said.

https://twitter.com/vivekgramaswamy/status/1686815204045111311?s=61&t=sE9SVLq0FjCjlM4Fk2Ajcw

Dylan Avery didn’t even backtrack this much.
Click to expand...

Considering that the lame bird may die soon or disappear behind paywalls or otherwise be blown some stupid peril at the childish hands of its petulant new master, allow me to quote the Tweet:

@VivekGRamaswamy said:
Do I believe our government has been completely forthright about 9/11? No. Al-Qaeda clearly planned and executed the attacks, but we have never fully addressed who knew what in the Saudi government about it. We *can* handle the TRUTH.

@BlazeTV - Aug 2 said:
Replying to @BlazeTV
.@alexstein99: "Was 9/11 an inside job or exactly how the government tells us?"

@VivekGRamaswamy: "I don't believe the government has told us the truth. We have to be skeptical. Do I believe everything the government told us about it? Absolutely not."
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Crazy Chainsaw said:
Funny I can find anything 9/11 Related on YouTube might be your search engine.
Click to expand...

Oh, don't get me wrong, it can be 'found', but only after digging through the first 5 pages of material 'related to 9/11 from reputable sources' that have nothing to do with the specifics of what you're searching looking for.

But if you're trying to say searching for specific 9/11 videos or images through google/youtube is as easy now as it was 10 years ago, you either haven't tried recently, or you're not being truthful.


Go ahead and try these;

Search youtube for "9/11 Debunked: World Trade Center" and see how many pages you have to dig through before a video by Ryan Owens to appears?

Here's one I did recently; I wanted a specific, original quality, recording of United 175 hitting the South Tower. The footage I was after was by a guy named Scott Myers. At the time, I didn't know his name. So all I had to go on was "united 175 impact". Go ahead and see how long it takes you to find his specific, original quality video, using just "united 175 impact" on youtube... literally hundreds of videos of '9/11 related' stuff most of it totally unrelated to what I was searching for.

It never used to be this hard.

There is a group of people, who I have recently begun assisting, who are so fed up with how difficult it has become to find specific video footage and photos on google/youtube they've dedicated hours finding and archiving videos/pictures to make it easier.
 
cjnewson88 said:
Oh, don't get me wrong, it can be 'found', but only after digging through the first 5 pages of material 'related to 9/11 from reputable sources' that have nothing to do with the specifics of what you're searching looking for.

But if you're trying to say searching for specific 9/11 videos or images through google/youtube is as easy now as it was 10 years ago, you either haven't tried recently, or you're not being truthful.


Go ahead and try these;

Search youtube for "9/11 Debunked: World Trade Center" and see how many pages you have to dig through before a video by Ryan Owens to appears?

Here's one I did recently; I wanted a specific, original quality, recording of United 175 hitting the South Tower. The footage I was after was by a guy named Scott Myers. At the time, I didn't know his name. So all I had to go on was "united 175 impact". Go ahead and see how long it takes you to find his specific, original quality video, using just "united 175 impact" on youtube... literally hundreds of videos of '9/11 related' stuff most of it totally unrelated to what I was searching for.

It never used to be this hard.

There is a group of people, who I have recently begun assisting, who are so fed up with how difficult it has become to find specific video footage and photos on google/youtube they've dedicated hours finding and archiving videos/pictures to make it easier.
Click to expand...

I always try searching one White eyes 9/11 Forum first last time I checked most of the links still worked over there.
 
cjnewson88 said:
Oh, don't get me wrong, it can be 'found', but only after digging through the first 5 pages of material 'related to 9/11 from reputable sources' that have nothing to do with the specifics of what you're searching looking for.

But if you're trying to say searching for specific 9/11 videos or images through google/youtube is as easy now as it was 10 years ago, you either haven't tried recently, or you're not being truthful.


Go ahead and try these;

Search youtube for "9/11 Debunked: World Trade Center" and see how many pages you have to dig through before a video by Ryan Owens to appears?

Here's one I did recently; I wanted a specific, original quality, recording of United 175 hitting the South Tower. The footage I was after was by a guy named Scott Myers. At the time, I didn't know his name. So all I had to go on was "united 175 impact". Go ahead and see how long it takes you to find his specific, original quality video, using just "united 175 impact" on youtube... literally hundreds of videos of '9/11 related' stuff most of it totally unrelated to what I was searching for.

It never used to be this hard.

There is a group of people, who I have recently begun assisting, who are so fed up with how difficult it has become to find specific video footage and photos on google/youtube they've dedicated hours finding and archiving videos/pictures to make it easier.
Click to expand...

I just found it in 2 minutes by Typing in Clearest view Impact flight 175, South Tower, into just Google.
 
cjnewson88 said:
Oh, don't get me wrong, it can be 'found', but only after digging through the first 5 pages of material 'related to 9/11 from reputable sources' that have nothing to do with the specifics of what you're searching looking for.

But if you're trying to say searching for specific 9/11 videos or images through google/youtube is as easy now as it was 10 years ago, you either haven't tried recently, or you're not being truthful.

Go ahead and try these;

Search youtube for "9/11 Debunked: World Trade Center" and see how many pages you have to dig through before a video by Ryan Owens to appears?
Click to expand...


I searched Google instead. Second result.



debunking911edemolitionct.png




Lot of good videos here. I scrolled down a bit and found a couple of familiar names. :D ;)

isf911.png




Looks like there are 162 publicly available videos listed here.
 
Allen773 said:
I searched Google instead. Second result.

[qimg]http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/imagehosting/thum_2558864dc016dc639c.png[/qimg]

[qimg]https://i.postimg.cc/3J0NW4nF/debunking911edemolitionct.png[/qimg]



Lot of good videos here. I scrolled down a bit and found a couple of familiar names. :D ;)

[qimg]https://i.postimg.cc/j5NKtPsD/isf911.png[/qimg]



Looks like there are 162 publicly available videos listed here.
Click to expand...

It appeared as the 2nd result because you used quotation marks around it, meaning it searched for those exact words.

very few people searching google/youtube for 9/11 material are going to be using " " marks unless they already know specially what they are looking for.
 
kookbreaker said:
Vivek Ramaswamy openly wonders where all the armed sky marshals were on 9/11.

https://www.businessinsider.com/vivek-ramaswamy-truth-federal-agents-planes-twin-towers-2023-8

It seems he forgot we added armed sky marshals as a result of 9/11.

I expect he’ll be wondering where Obama was on 9/11 and why he didn’t stop it soon enough.
Click to expand...

Gord_in_Toronto said:
Assumes a fact not in evidence. Does he actually thin?
Click to expand...


Fonebone>

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Air_Marshal_Service
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal_Air_Marshal_Service
[excerpt]Before the September 11, 2001 attacks, the Federal Air Marshal Service consisted of varying numbers of FAMs dependent on government funding. Although 50 positions were authorized by Congress, only 33 FAMs were active on September 11, 2001.[13] As a result of the 9/11 attacks, President George W. Bush ordered the rapid expansion of the Federal Air Marshal Service.[/excerpt]
 
kookbreaker said:
Vivek Ramaswamy openly wonders where all the armed sky marshals were on 9/11.

https://www.businessinsider.com/vivek-ramaswamy-truth-federal-agents-planes-twin-towers-2023-8

It seems he forgot we added armed sky marshals as a result of 9/11.

I expect he’ll be wondering where Obama was on 9/11 and why he didn’t stop it soon enough.
Click to expand...

To be fair, I would have thought we had armed air marshalls prior to 9/11. I'd probably have looked it up before saying it out loud though.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom