• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Questions for 9/11 Truthers

PerryLogan

Banned
P
Joined
Oct 8, 2006
Messages
980
As we know, Truthers like to make up lists of probing questions about 9/11:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=70136

I guess every Truther has a different version of this list, just as they each have a different version of the story. And in any case, the questions they put have all been answered many times at this forum.

But the idea of listing questions strikes me as a good one, so I've created this thread, where we can pose our questions to the 9/11 Truth Movement folks.

If you can think of questions designed to deconstruct the fantasy theories of the 9/11 Truthers, please add them here.

Questions for Truthers:

How could such an elaborately planned subterfuge have THAT many smoking guns?
How could such a Keystone Kops Kaper have fooled everyone in the world--except a few white guys who got on the web?
Why would international bankers fund a plan to close down Wall Street?
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 disagreed?
Why are so many 9/11 Truth organizations overtly anti-Semitic?
Why have the Scholars for 9/11 Truth split up?
Why have all of Alex Jones's predictions been bummers, and why doesn't Alex notice this?
Why do the 9/11 Truth organizations attack and criticize one another, accuse one another of being CIA agents, etc.?
Why can't the 9/11 Truth Movement agree on the specifics of the scenario? If there were real evidence, it seems they could agree.
If the Bush Administration planned 9/11, why did the President go into brainlock on 9/11? Wouldn't they have planned something to make him look good?
Why would the cover story be lame (a few guys with box cutters, kidney patient in a cave, etc.), when they could just as well have made up something good (ten men with Uzis take over the plane, etc.)?
How could they have forgotten to leave wreckage around the Pentagon? And how did this fool everyone in the world except you-know-who?
How could they get the planes to fly into the buildings at the exact spot where the charges were planted?
Why didn't they just put a few drops of dioxin in a city's water supply, blame it on terrorists, then declare martial law?
Why didn't they blame Saddam, since they evidently wanted to invade Iraq?
Why have none of the Truthers been killed or discredited or framed for a crime--or otherwise neutralized?
Why do Truthers immediately throw people out of their forums when they disagree with the party line?
Why do Truthers attack one another so much?
Why are almost all Truthers angry white males of subnormal intelligence who think they're geniuses?
Do Truthers even realize they are making false accusations of mass murder?
Why does the Truth Movement repeat right-wing disinformation about Democrats? If they have to use disinformation to back up their theory, their theory must be wrong...right?
If everyone is waking up, why did the Republicans get their butts kicked in the 2006 midterm elections? If people were waking up in great numbers, they would be abandoning both major parties.
Why was there so much "prior knowledge"? If you're planning a hoax, you don't want your own people warning you of the job you are in fact committing.

Kiwiwriter adds these:

Why did the conspirators find it necessary to kill big shots like Neil Levin, the Executive Director of the Port Authority?
Why did they let him die but his secretary (who had to go to the basement of the WTC to get his briefcase) live?
Why did the presumably Jewish conspirators allow the myth that 4,000 Jews get advance warning get publicized, knowing it would only fuel further anti-Semitism?
Why didn't they let the fourth plane hit its target, to really infuriate Americans?
How come the conspirators haven't pulled similar stunts with airplanes since then, so as to keep up fear and terror?
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 where light poles at the Pentagon spring loaded and wired to fall down on cue, when the conspiracy works just as well if the plane simply few at 31 feet, and hence missed them?

MG1962 adds another:
Why where light poles at the Pentagon spring loaded and wired to fall down on cue, when the conspiracy works just as well if the plane simply few at 31 feet, and hence missed them?

And here are some more from me:
Why do Truthers say the news is controlled...then turn around and repeat news stories?
Why do Truthers constantly call everyone agents and government shills, without a shred of proof?
Why do Truthers rely so heavily on bogus, right-wing news sources (Fox News, NewsMax, WorldNetDaily)?
Why are the documentaries made by Truthers so totally riddled with errors?
Why are so many Truthers xenophobes, homophobes, and vaccinophobes?
Why do seismology readings show no explosions on 9/11?
Why do so many Truthers say so many weird things (the secret ruling elite of the world can live forever; the world is governed by shape-changing inter-dimensional lizards)?
Why were there no major domestic terror attacks in the U.S. after 9/11 (which many Truthers predicted)?
Why are the Truthers so insulting to everyone—calling them sheeple, scum, government shills, Nazis, etc.?
Why does most Truther writing look like E.E. Cummings on acid?
Why do Truthers ignore the many accomplishments of government (Social Security, Medicare, workplace safety laws, food safety laws, anti-pollution laws, flood relief)?
Why does Alex Jones pull facts out of his butt (i.e., the secret ruling elite of the world can live forever)?
Why does every Truther think every other Truther is for the birds?
Why do Truthers say everyone is waking up, when this is obviously not true?
Why can't the Truthers organize to do anything? Why don't they have a plan?
If everyone is waking up, why are Alex Jones's fans watching "Terror Storm" over and over again, to boost the numbers?
Why do Truthers engage in so much character assassination, personal attack, slander, and libel (Alex Jones has an entire web page devoted to smearing Arnold Schwartzeneggar)?
Is the 9/11 Truth Movement a cult of alienated, low-IQ white males who think they're the Enlightened Ones?
Is "Patriot" a euphemism for "cop-hater"?
Why is Alex Jones afraid to have Perry Logan's name mentioned on his show?
Why does every Truther have a different version of the #$&@ story?
Why does the scenario devised by the Truth Movement sound like the plot of a bad comic book?
Why do Truthers think the bad guys like to leave clues (that no one but they can see)?
Why do no historians in the world believe in a secret ruling elite?
Why do Truthers rely so heavily on blurry, unverified videos they got off the web?
Why are the so paranoid?
Do Truthers know how funny they are to normal people?
How can we get the Truthers to pay their traffic fines?
Why do so many Truthers think the phrase "new world order" means world government?
Why do Truthers think they can predict the future?
Why do Truthers think they see clues nobody else can see?
Why do Truthers keep using long-debunked factoids and false claims (molten steel, Silverstein said to demolish WTC7, etc.)?

P.S.: Oliver has answered some of these questions. Please disregard:
http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showpost.php?p=2158119&postcount=21
 
"Have you read the rebuttals written by Mark Roberts, MarkyX and so on?"
"Why are there no scientific journals regarding 9/11 'truth'?" (These journals are written by academics, then submitted to many other professors, academics and so on and if they all agree with its findings, it becomes an official scientific journal - one you could cite in say, an essay. Where are these journals? Oh yeah, hidden by the government, thats true, how could I forget.)
 
Last edited:
Why do truthers never say what happened to the passengers and crew of Flight 77?
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 mock the final desperate calls of the victims from the doomed flights?
Why do truthers try to prove that the black boxes from Flight 77, which hit the Pentagon in fact proves the Flight did not hit the Pentagon?
Why do truthers insist that because there is no video of Flight 77 hitting the Pentagon, it did not?
Why do truthers insist that NORAD stood down when they did not?
Why do thruthers 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 go to GZ and desecrate this sacred ground?
Why do the insist the final report into the Towers from NIST is wrong when they have not read it?
Why do they insist the report form The 911 commission is wrong when they have not read it ?
Why do they insist the final report from NIST into the collapse of WTC 7 is wrong when it is not even published yet ?
 
Last edited:
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?
 
Good list of questions folks....of course the conspiracy liars can't/won't answer them. I predict that by the sixth anniversary of 9/11 the "truth" movement will be totally dominated by the "star wars beam" people and "no planers". Since they are the wackest, they tend to be the loudest and most hard-core.

The more "reasonable" people who are wondering about MAYBE a controlled demolition will eventually be frustrated away by the total lack of any sort of unifed theory.
 
Last edited:
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.

:)
 
Why are 9/11 Truthers and conspiracy people immune to the brainwashing which afflicts everyone else in the world?
 
Because they aren't immune to the REAL brainwashing which afflicts their "truth" group.

;)
 
Why would the Administration use family friends to bring off 9/11? Wouldn't this tend to give the game away?

Why do Truthers hate the government and everyone who works for it? Isn't this bigotry?
 
Last edited:
Here's a question for 9/11 Deniers: Why do all of you claim to have debunked the Planted Explosive Theory (PET) when you have done no such thing?

I'm not talking about Star Wars beams or holographic wings...Payne Stewart and NORAD dinner dates...I'm talking about the only issue that we should be discussing and that's the cause of the collapses. Why do you all want to water down the topic by introducing a million side topics and discussions? Is it to draw attention away from the real hard and overwhelming physical evidence that planted explosives were used?

There are two main theory camps that have been set up. The PET camp and the NIST camp. Now, the main debate is what exactly caused those three buildings to collapse. Apparently, the NISTer can't even articulate exactly what NIST's theory is. One person tried to, but I'm not even sure if all of you agree with what he/she said. You can't seem to even give a hint at what they're (NIST) really saying happened...but yet you buy it lock, stock and barrel. Is that what critical thinking is all about? Because, YOU claim that NIST is the ultimate authority on this subject...you just blindly swallow THEIR theory...without questioning anything or investigating all of the physical evidence that contradicts what they're saying happened?

All of you so-called skeptics...are breaking your own code by taking many, "leaps of faith," in your assertion that what NIST is saying is gospel and the undeniable universal truth of why the buildings collapsed. When I say leaps of faith, I am of course referring to the fact, that you are believing by virtue of faith and faith alone...that because planes flew into buildings...ANYTHING is possible. ANYTHING. The law of physics can be altered, magical floor jumping fires can be manifested, phantom explosions can be summoned - I mean all kinds of cool stuff. The invisible intangibles of the ether have now become a clear influence and factor in this material universe that we perceive with our five senses.

NISTer Logic:

Planes flying into buildings = warps the field and laws of the physical world into a realm of infinite possibilities and probabilities.

You can't see any major fires (fire NOT smoke) from the outside of the buildings...but of course, there were probably major fires in every spot of the buildings we can't see (faith leaping) I thought, skeptics like to see things with their own eyes? You know that's why they have a hard time believing in the paranormal, since you have to use senses other than your eyes and ears in order for one to experience and/or perceive such phenomena.

So we can't see any fire raging from the WTC's, even though we can see every side of these buildings...including the internal part of the structures where the planes impacted...but yet, raging fires were causing explosions (that are on record as being reported by firefighters) all throughout the buildings including floors 7 & 8 - some 70+ floors below the impact points.

...I believe in miracles...oh, you sexy thing...
 
28K you already have two threads discussing NIST's collapse theory, please stop trolling in this one.
 
28th Kingdom said:
You have just reaffirmed my points....by rendering yourself completely useless in this debate.
Click to expand...

Argumentum ad ignorantiam (argument to ignorance). This is the fallacy of assuming something is true simply because it hasn't been proven false.[bolding mine] For example, someone might argue that global warming is certainly occurring because nobody has demonstrated conclusively that it is not. But failing to prove the global warming theory false is not the same as proving it true.
Whether or not an argumentum ad ignorantiam is really fallacious depends crucially upon the burden of proof. In an American courtroom, where the burden of proof rests with the prosecution, it would be fallacious for the prosecution to argue, "The defendant has no alibi, therefore he must have committed the crime." But it would be perfectly valid for the defense to argue, "The prosecution has not proven the defendant committed the crime, therefore you should declare him not guilty." Both statements have the form of an argumentum ad ignorantiam; the difference is the burden of proof. In debate, the proposing team in a debate round is usually (but not always) assumed to have the burden of proof, which means that if the team fails to prove the proposition to the satisfaction of the judge, the opposition wins. In a sense, the opposition team's case is assumed true until proven false. But the burden of proof can sometimes be shifted; for example, in some forms of debate, the proposing team can shift the burden of proof to the opposing team by presenting a prima facie case that would, in the absence of refutation, be sufficient to affirm the proposition. Still, the higher burden generally rests with the proposing team, which means that only the opposition is in a position to make an accusation of argumentum ad ignorantiam with respect to proving the proposition.
Click to expand...
http://www.csun.edu/~dgw61315/fallacies.html#Argumentum ad ignorantiam
 
Why do those who speak Weal Twoof never explain how 3 giant skyscrapers - in the middle of the downtown section of the most populous city in the USA - could be surreptitiously rigged with explosives while thousands of people are milling about - WITHOUT ANYONE NOTICING IT?

What do these 2 phrases have in common?
"Swift Boat Veterans for Truth"
"9/11 Truth Movement"
 
28th Kingdom said:
NISTer Logic:

Planes flying into buildings = warps the field and laws of the physical world into a realm of infinite possibilities and probabilities.

So we can't see any fire raging from the WTC's, even though we can see every side of these buildings...including the internal part of the structures where the planes impacted...but yet, raging fires were causing explosions (that are on record as being reported by firefighters) all throughout the buildings including floors 7 & 8 - some 70+ floors below the impact points.

...I believe in miracles......
Click to expand...

a musical truther has hit the scene, see only smoke and forget there is fire, when he posts he has no facts, yet he continues to ask questions at that, he listens to firemen say floor 7 8, if he had been in the military or serve in the FD, he may understand FD tango alpha lima kilo.

Why are the largest building fires I have ever seen, called small fires by truthers?

I have never seen 5 to 10 to almost 20 acres of fires in a building before (there was a big fire in OKC, it was in a mile long building).

Why do truthers see the largest clouds of smoke I have ever seen as small fires? Damn, the smoke was so big it cut the light to the white smoke making it look dark.

Why do truthers say black smoke is due to oxygen starve fires, while looking at giant holes in the building feeding the fire like a huge flue, broken windows all around? When jet fuel burns with black smoke, computer plastic burn with black smoke, etc, why do truther say the smoke means no fire?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom