The reason for countering 9/11 conspiracy numpties

[JihadJane]

There is SOMETHING DEFINITELY wrong with accusing people [...] with complicity to mass murder, without any form of hard evidence...not even much if any soft evidence.

TAM

Caeful! You're sounding exactly like a twooooooofer.

 

[twinstead]

I don't think the opinion of family members who are 'skeptical' of the government's account weight any more heavily or are more meaningful than the opinions of anybody else.

JihadJane's odd 'politics is more important than evidence' stance aside, I could care less if the Pope himself came out in favor of 'inside job'; to any rational person, and to the satisfaction of any REAL world-wide expert consensus, the 'official story' is the one that is supported by the preponderance of evidence.

I'm a mature, world-aware, and relatively intelligent adult. I am neither a sheep, a mindless automaton, nor an evil minion. I'd be willing to change my position if presented with the proper evidence; it just ain't happening right now.

 

[eeyore1954]

@ eeyore1954 and TjW

Why does your offensive cod psychology only apply to the beliefs of people who don't believe the official account?

What was offensive about it and what is cod psychology ?

 

[johnny karate]

No, I didn't. I posted it to give names to some of the faceless people Bananaman says she/he wants to hurt and humiliate in the name of the dead, in the name of the people on the list I pasted.

Spin all you want. You made this claim more than once:

Many family members of 911 victims are skeptical of the government's account.

and have provided no evidence to substantiate it. Until you do so, your claim is a falsehood, and you are a liar.

 

[CptColumbo]

I have noticed that you try to be respectful to me and I appreciate it. I apologise for not expressing my outrage in less personalised way.

I find the word "twoofer" offensive, as it is intended to be, and disrespectful. Using such demeaning baby language is a form of crude, playground bullying, normally abandoned with emotional maturity. I find it hard to take anyone who attempts to reinforce their argument by pretending to have a speech impediment seriously.

I find the use of the word "truth" by the "twoof" movement offensive, and refuse to use it to describe that delusional group of liars.

I also find the tactic of equating 911 Truth with blaming the police, first responders and people in the military to be as offensive as the "pissing on graves" tactic employed in the OP. I found your language deceptive, as I attempted to explain. "The Military" summons an image of many people. Only a very small minority 911 skeptcs, if any at all, blame ordinary men and women in the military for the alleged actions of those in the chain of command or of covert operatives. As far as I'm aware not even "no-planers" do this.

If a person claims, for example that Larry Silverstein ordered the FDNY to destroy WTC7 and then cover it up, they are saying that the FDNY helped perpetrate and cover-up what "really happened." No-planers descriptions of the vaious ways that the Towers and the Pentagon were hit include military aircraft being used, and the Pentagon is a building used by the military, any person who saw (as some have speculated) the debris from a comercial airliner being placed on the lawn would then be part of the conspiracy.

I do not wish to get into a "many" debate like the one that was manufactured earlier to avoid answering my questions, but it is hard to match "many factions" with your list. Perhaps you are simply mistaken rather than being dishonest, in which case I apologise for misunderstanding. If not then I have to say that I do find misrepresentation by an "appeal to emotion", as I saw it, to be shameful and dishonest.

If you payed attention to the "scholars for 9/11 'twoof'" you would have seen the in fighting about two years ago, as different members had their own hypothesis and were unwilling to comprimise. Since each hypothesis cannot exist a rift occured. Since then there has been the PfT, CIT, LC:FC forumites fighting amongst themselves. If you want to see each faction, just look at some of their websites and you will see many different hypothesis being put forward.

I saw (don't always believe your eyes!) two emotionally manipulative messages today(I paraphrase):

"How could you piss on the graves of the dead?"

Then:

"How could you blame those who put their lives on the line to serve others of being complcit in murdering us?"

In essence both the questions say something like:

"You are so morally corrupt that nothing you say is even worth considering."

or, even shorter:

"Scum!"

Except for the "pissing on graves" bit, which while I failed to put quotes around I was merely quoting from your post which you had quoted from the post before yours, I didn't say any of those things.

 

[Tippit]

And it also provides you with the rather convenient position of not having to actually defend a point of view, or be consistent within that point of view.

I can defend my point of view. The government and media consist of liars with no credibility operating behind a trail of cover-up and contradiction. Therefore, their own narrative is subject to doubt.

I provided you with no dilemma, false or otherwise. I merely made a statement of fact. Truthers often contradict themselves and each other. It makes you sound like idiots and frauds. That's why, for the most part, you are not taken seriously.

If you judge me on the basis of "truthers", that's your problem. I own my own thoughts and opinions, and I'm responsible for them.

There is plenty of contradiction in the government and media with regard to 9/11, it makes them sound like idiots and frauds. That's why, for the most part, I don't take them seriously.

Opinions aren't diverse. The overwhelming majority of people seem quite content with the version of events corroborated by the evidence you deny exists. The Truth Movements inability to rally any kind of significant support in the public or the media bears this out.

Argument ad populum is a fallacy, you should know this. I don't care what the "overwhelming majority" of people think about anything. The media is very powerful and pervasive, to the degree where it is quite possible to fool most of the people all of the time as well as forming a consensus reality. The TM's shortcomings have more to do with the power of the media and current political conditions than anything else.

And exactly where are all these angry people? If the official version is such an obvious media-concocted sham, why can't Truthers ever seem to get a group larger than 100 or so together to protest? Why is there such a struggle to launch a new investigation? Why isn't there a single professional investigator or law enforcement official anywhere on the planet that has been able to discern and/or reveal the shocking truth behind 9/11 Truthers like yourself pretend is so blatantly obvious?

There are plenty of credible, reasonable people with serious questions about 9/11 who make up the truth movement. Despite this, they don't have the necessary power, or the capability to turn back time and do a thorough investigation of what happened.

You use a vague term like "a lot of people" to make it seem as if somehow you have a consensus (that's your cue to whip out that tired, old Scripps poll), and yet Truthers fail again and again to have any significant real world impact.

Why do you suppose that is?

I don't place much significance on the Scripps poll, I haven't met too many people who question the official version of events. However, as I pointed out above, that doesn't mean anything. According to a survey in 2002, 80% of high school students couldn't find Iraq on a map, but so what? The fact that many people are ignorant of truth doesn't change the truth itself - or at least, the untruth.

 

[johnny karate]

I can defend my point of view. The government and media consist of liars with no credibility operating behind a trail of cover-up and contradiction. Therefore, their own narrative is subject to doubt.

First, you act like there is some kind of Official Version that was released by the Monolithic Evil Government through the Monolithic Evil Media and spoon-fed to an easily duped public that was completely in the dark about what happened. Are you forgetting that these attacks happened in broad daylight in front of hundreds of witnesses, with the immediate aftermath being broadcast live on television all over the planet?

Then, you conveniently leave out all the non-government, non-media people that corroborate this supposed official version of events. Witnesses, first responders, private sector investigators, etc. Are they all liars with no credibility as well?

Argument ad populum is a fallacy, you should know this. I don't care what the "overwhelming majority" of people think about anything.

You should really learn what that particular fallacy is, and how to properly apply it. You stated that there are many diverse opinions regarding what really happened on 9/11. I pointed out that since most people seem to have accepted the official version, your claim is erroneous. I never invoked the argument ad populum.

The media is very powerful and pervasive, to the degree where it is quite possible to fool most of the people all of the time as well as forming a consensus reality. The TM's shortcomings have more to do with the power of the media and current political conditions than anything else.

Ah, yes. The Monolithic Evil Media canard again. So let me see if I've got this straight, the worldwide media conspired to lie to the entire planet about really happened, and for the most part we all bought it. Except, of course, for cunning geniuses like yourself that were able to see through charade. That sound about right?

There are plenty of credible, reasonable people with serious questions about 9/11 who make up the truth movement.

If you say so. Just nudge me when any of these "credible, reasonable" *snicker* people ever decide to do something constructive or have any real world impact whatsoever regarding the heinous crime they believe took place.

I don't place much significance on the Scripps poll, I haven't met too many people who question the official version of events. However, as I pointed out above, that doesn't mean anything. According to a survey in 2002, 80% of high school students couldn't find Iraq on a map, but so what? The fact that many people are ignorant of truth doesn't change the truth itself - or at least, the untruth.

Yeah, I think I've got it. We're all ignorant, blind sheeple because we buy into the "official version" while only you and a handful of others are awesome super geniuses because you figured out The Truth.

It must be difficult being you, surrounded by all the brain-washed masses that will never have your mental clarity or be able to comprehend the horrible reality that only you can see. I guess being an awesome super genius is more of a curse than a blessing. You'd have my pity, if only I had the intellectual capacity to grasp all these difficult concepts.

 

[Architect]

There are plenty of credible, reasonable people with serious questions about 9/11 who make up the truth movement. Despite this, they don't have the necessary power, or the capability to turn back time and do a thorough investigation of what happened.

None of whom are in the architectural, structural or fire engineering communities* across the World who have actually studied the report. How very peculiar. Perhaps we've all been "silenced"?





* Gage doesn't count, his "theory" is full of glaring technical errors.

 

[Architect]

What was offensive about it and what is cod psychology ?

Probably related to the "cod structures" which we see touted by members of the Truth Movement with no formal training or, for that matter, grasp or the basic issues beyone "clunkety clunk".

 

[JihadJane]

I don't think the opinion of family members who are 'skeptical' of the government's account weight any more heavily or are more meaningful than the opinions of anybody else.

I didn't reproduce the list of signatories to give weight to anyone's account. I posted it because, if bananaman was going to justify her/his carefully described violent urges (mostly involving blows to the head) against his/her favourite "nincompoops" then he was going to have to do the same for the people on the list. I did this to highlight the moral bankruptcy of his disgustingly exploitative argument.

JihadJane's odd 'politics is more important than evidence' stance aside, I could care less if the Pope himself came out in favor of 'inside job'; to any rational person, and to the satisfaction of any REAL world-wide expert consensus, the 'official story' is the one that is supported by the preponderance of evidence.

What is it about my infamous statement (see my signature) that compels its readers to make up their own fantasy fictional version before addressing it? My statement does not say 'politics is more important than evidence', nor does it imply it.

What is so difficult to understand about the word "literacy" that it must be substituted with another word with a completely different meaning?

I am intending to explore this phenomenon further either here:

http://www.randi.org/forumlive/showthread.php?t=122763

or on a seperate dedicated thread.

I'm a mature, world-aware, and relatively intelligent adult. I am neither a sheep, a mindless automaton, nor an evil minion. I'd be willing to change my position if presented with the proper evidence; it just ain't happening right now.

Many intelligent people are to be found in various cults around the world because cult manipulation works on emotions rather than intellect.

As an intelligent person has it ever occurred to you that, if 911 were a covert, criminal, Intelligence-orchestrated operation, then there would no be a trail of hard evidence other than the "evidence" that the perpetrators wanted to be found? The evidence pointing at such an operation is to be found in orchestrated lies and obstructions, surreal "evidence", the changing and inconsistent stories and in the removal and destruction of evidence that is necessary to maintain the ensuing cover-up. Of this there is a plentiful supply, all of it in the public domain.

 

[Brainache]

...
As an intelligent person has it ever occurred to you that, if 911 were a covert, criminal, Intelligence-orchestrated operation, then there would no be a trail of hard evidence other than the "evidence" that the perpetrators wanted to be found? The evidence pointing at such an operation is to be found in orchestrated lies and obstructions, surreal "evidence", the changing and inconsistent stories and in the removal and destruction of evidence that is necessary to maintain the ensuing cover-up. Of this there is a plentiful supply, all of it in the public domain.

So Jane, has it occurred to you that Intelligence operatives are human beings, not psychopathic robots? Has it occurred to you that covering up something like 9/11 forever is physically impossible? Has it occurred to you that human beings are just not that good at keeping secrets? Has it occurred to you that maybe you watch too many spy movies?

 

[JihadJane]

I find the use of the word "truth" by the "twoof" movement offensive, and refuse to use it to describe that delusional group of liars

Then you have no right to complain when someone insults you.

If a person claims, for example that Larry Silverstein ordered the FDNY to destroy WTC7 and then cover it up, they are saying that the FDNY helped perpetrate and cover-up what "really happened." No-planers descriptions of the vaious ways that the Towers and the Pentagon were hit include military aircraft being used, and the Pentagon is a building used by the military, any person who saw (as some have speculated) the debris from a comercial airliner being placed on the lawn would then be part of the conspiracy.

Your use of collective nouns such as FDNY and "the military" fails to disguinguish who has power in heirarchical organisations.

If you payed attention to the "scholars for 9/11 'twoof'" you would have seen the in fighting about two years ago, as different members had their own hypothesis and were unwilling to comprimise. Since each hypothesis cannot exist a rift occured. Since then there has been the PfT, CIT, LC:FC forumites fighting amongst themselves. If you want to see each faction, just look at some of their websites and you will see many different hypothesis being put forward.

If you unable to put your point across without using insulting baby language then I will not address it.

Except for the "pissing on graves" bit, which while I failed to put quotes around I was merely quoting from your post which you had quoted from the post before yours, I didn't say any of those things.

As I said, those were arguments I'd seen "today" (yesterday now!). I wasn't putting them in your mouth. My paraphrase "How could you blame those who put their lives on the line to serve others of being complcit in murdering us?" was summing up what I see as the political/emotional intent of your firefighter/police/military shot, which I regard as propagandistic and, therefore, not honest.

 

[JihadJane]

Spin all you want. You made this claim more than once:

and have provided no evidence to substantiate it. Until you do so, your claim is a falsehood, and you are a liar.

Your "liar" parade is a red herring.

I mentioned that many 911 Family members are skeptical of the "They hate our freedoms" account to emphasise how much spittle bananaman was going to have to manufacture in order to humiliate them all. You can do an internet search yourself if you want to find them. I wasn't making any grand claim about percentages, as you seem to believe. I notice though, that, if, as speculated above, there are 50,000 Family Members then, if only one half of one per cent qualify for bananaman's bile then his or her little fantasy fists are still going to be very busy indeed. I'd like to know if she or he is prepared to tell them all that they are pissing on the graves of the dead.

Perhaps you'd like to tell them.

 

[JihadJane]

So Jane, has it occurred to you that Intelligence operatives are human beings, not psychopathic robots? Has it occurred to you that covering up something like 9/11 forever is physically impossible? Has it occurred to you that human beings are just not that good at keeping secrets? Has it occurred to you that maybe you watch too many spy movies?

Thanks for your questions, ache.

The Military/Intelligence complex is in the business of manitaining a monopoly of violence. Much of what they do is covert.

 

[T.A.M.]

I can defend my point of view. The government and media consist of liars with no credibility operating behind a trail of cover-up and contradiction. Therefore, their own narrative is subject to doubt.



If you judge me on the basis of "truthers", that's your problem. I own my own thoughts and opinions, and I'm responsible for them.

There is plenty of contradiction in the government and media with regard to 9/11, it makes them sound like idiots and frauds. That's why, for the most part, I don't take them seriously.



Argument ad populum is a fallacy, you should know this. I don't care what the "overwhelming majority" of people think about anything. The media is very powerful and pervasive, to the degree where it is quite possible to fool most of the people all of the time as well as forming a consensus reality. The TM's shortcomings have more to do with the power of the media and current political conditions than anything else.



There are plenty of credible, reasonable people with serious questions about 9/11 who make up the truth movement. Despite this, they don't have the necessary power, or the capability to turn back time and do a thorough investigation of what happened.



I don't place much significance on the Scripps poll, I haven't met too many people who question the official version of events. However, as I pointed out above, that doesn't mean anything. According to a survey in 2002, 80% of high school students couldn't find Iraq on a map, but so what? The fact that many people are ignorant of truth doesn't change the truth itself - or at least, the untruth.

yada, yada, yada....

The overwhelming EVIDENCE (not polls, or the media, etc...) points to 19 arab hijackers under the umbrella of AL-Qaeda, carrying out 9/11.

Not one single truther, or "independent thinker" has proven otherwise yet. Good luck.

TAM

 

[Brainache]

Thanks for your questions, ache.

The Military/Intelligence complex is in the business of manitaining a monopoly of violence. Much of what they do is covert.

That doesn't make them immune to stuff ups. You seem to be saying that it is possible for intelligence agencies to remain totally water tight even though they have supposedly been tasked with killing thousands of their own countrymen.

You really do think that people in these kinds of jobs are psychopathic robots, don't you?

 

[Disenchanted]

Thanks for your questions, ache.

The Military/Intelligence complex is in the business of manitaining a monopoly of violence. Much of what they do is covert.

Nice way of dodging the questions and points Brainache made in the post by posting general nonsense about the "Military/Intelligence complex" instead of addressing what he wrote like that people are not good at keeping secrets.

If it is so covert how do you know so much about it?

 

[JihadJane]

yada, yada, yada....

The overwhelming EVIDENCE (not polls, or the media, etc...) points to 19 arab hijackers under the umbrella of AL-Qaeda, carrying out 9/11.

Not one single truther, or "independent thinker" has proven otherwise yet. Good luck.

TAM

TAM, on all my trawls through the weird and wonderful world of debunker sites and the even weirder world of debunker forums I haven't come across a single piece of conclusive evidence proving your assertion.

 

[johnny karate]

I mentioned that many 911 Family members are skeptical of the "They hate our freedoms" account...

Appeal to emotion excised for the sake succinctness and relevancy.

I'm not too interested in your reason for telling a lie. It doesn't prevent it from being a lie.

 

[JihadJane]

Nice way of dodging the questions and points Brainache made in the post by posting general nonsense about the "Military/Intelligence complex" instead of addressing what he wrote like that people are not good at keeping secrets.

If it is so covert how do you know so much about it?

I don't know much about it.

It is a fatal error to judge the predatory individuals at the top of the food chain as if they were normal people.

The a priori "people can't keep secrets argument" is absurd. If there are things that have been successfully kept secret how would we know about them?