Why truthers are dangerouse!

[tsig]

grow up, it's not so black and white.

Yes it is.

 

[tsig]

I´ll be honest and say that with research like this, you need patience. I have none.
Every paragraph of information down this road requires looking in to more links, which lead to more links which...
All I´m saying is that I would love to know EXACTLY what she is being gagged about. Details, dates, numbers , quotes. Especially when she describes intricate links between the US and Al Qaeda up until 9/11.
Cut the crap and lay it on the table.
Would YOU not like to know??

Out of curiosity did Obama renew the gagging order or is it indeterminate?

You want to know but you won't look?

 

[tsig]

As I said ´I would love to know´. How can I prove you wrong on a subject that has never come to light, been verified and there for all to see in black and white?



I would hardly call the State Secrets Privilege a ´normal´ confidentiality agreement.

Quick finish.

 

[JihadJane]

Seconded.

Can we not act like twoofers JAQing off on the dead for a while, please?

Why the sudden change of heart, Sword_Of_Truth?

 

[beachnut]

I´ll be honest and say that with research like this, you need patience.

8 years of failed research to be honest. Failed research from an ironically name (1984ish if not pure NAZI like) "truth movement". A more apt name is the "zero research, botched logic, spewing delusions movement". or the "liars lair". Zero evidence, just talk of fantasy and delusions made up by frauds, regurgitated by those who lack knowledge and prefer nutty conspiracy theories and a few who can't grasp the complex terrorist plot.
kill pilots'
fly planes into large buildings

Truthers are dangerous to the truth, but serve a purpose teaching people about what fraud can look like; it is personified by the truth movement.

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Why the sudden change of heart, Sword_Of_Truth?

What change of heart, JihadJane?

Making assumptions about a major event like this and heading straight into using it to push your agendas before all the facts are known is what twoofers do. It's part of what makes you people dangerous.

It's still less than 48 hours since this tragedy in Fort Hood, I'm waiting till I know more before attempting to apply meaning to it.

You people should try it, you might end up killing less police officers that way.

 

[JihadJane]

What change of heart, JihadJane?

Making assumptions about a major event like this and heading straight into using it to push your agendas before all the facts are known is what twoofers do. It's part of what makes you people dangerous.

It's still less than 48 hours since this tragedy in Fort Hood, I'm waiting till I know more before attempting to apply meaning to it.

You people should try it, you might end up killing less police officers that way.

I was thinking about your own "JAQing off on the dead".


Have you ever wondered how people, such as the families of those police officers, might feel about you appropriating their tragedies to fuel your cheap hate and sensationalist distortions?

 

[Sword_Of_Truth]

Have you ever wondered how people, such as the families of those who fell on 9/11, might feel about you and your fellow twoofers appropriating their tragedies to fuel your cheap hate and sensationalist distortions?

 

[JihadJane]

Have you ever wondered how people, such as the families of those who fell on 9/11, might feel about you and your fellow twoofers appropriating their tragedies to fuel your cheap hate and sensationalist distortions?

Is that your excuse? I'd ask you the same question about your use of those families to feed your agenda of hate.

Aren't you generally contemptuous of people who dodge perfectly straightforward questions?

 

[stilicho]

.... your agenda of hate.

Is there a contrary agenda of love? Could it be enticed into hating the agenda of hate?

Or (more likely) is "agenda of hate" just a throwaway term you use to slander those with whom you disagree mildly?

 

[A W Smith]

Is that your excuse? I'd ask you the same question about your use of those families to feed your agenda of hate.

Aren't you generally contemptuous of people who dodge perfectly straightforward questions?

Its not an "Agenda of hate" Plane Jane, Its an agenda of intolerance for jackass armchair revolutionary's who lie while hiding behind what they think are cute sounding nicknames. If anyone has an agenda of hate it is you Plane.

 

[Justin39640]

What has that got to do with assessing the real terrorist threat level?

It happened once. Why can't it happen again. Not that they haven't tried. I guess you'd have to live here to remember those stories.

You think attacking Iraq was an attack on terrorists, do you? Dreamer!

How is bombing Pakistan effective? What does it achieve?

What did I say about attacking Iraq? I personally don't agree with going to war with Iraq in the first place. But it did draw extremists in from other areas. Other than that I guess you don't consider Afghanistan a problem with extremism? Or are you gonna spew some imaginary pipeline crap?

It brings the fight to their door.

You are able to read fear through the ether?

Welcome to the funk de fino psychics’ club!

It doesn't take much reading to realize you have some agendas and hate.

Debatable and depends what you mean by "most" and "Jihad" but what is your point?

Of course in war there is collateral damage. That number is extremely low compared to any other conflict in history. On the other hand groups like Al Queda prefer soft targets for maximum psychological damage. They bomb schools, hospitals, pet markets, etc, etc. They use mental patients as human bombs. This stuff is well documented. Check out Iraq body count (I think you've linked it before) but this time check out the deaths and body counts of suicide bombings vs deaths resulting from actions by US forces. It's quite lopsided.

These 'people' are animals and cowards. They should be found and eradicated.

 

[twinstead]

Or (more likely) is "agenda of hate" just a throwaway term you use to slander those with whom you disagree mildly?

JJ would NEVER do that. You should bite your tongue!

 

[mudlark]

8 years of failed research to be honest. Failed research from an ironically name (1984ish if not pure NAZI like) "truth movement". A more apt name is the "zero research, botched logic, spewing delusions movement". or the "liars lair". Zero evidence, just talk of fantasy and delusions made up by frauds, regurgitated by those who lack knowledge and prefer nutty conspiracy theories and a few who can't grasp the complex terrorist plot.
kill pilots'
fly planes into large buildings

Truthers are dangerous to the truth, but serve a purpose teaching people about what fraud can look like; it is personified by the truth movement.

A recent thread here joked about the possible death of a ´9/11 twoofer´
politician. This dehumanisation of another human being epitomises ´Nazi´ ideology.
You have accepted this ´complex terrorist plot´ on the basis of what?
The 9/11 Commission? The authors of which have distanced themselves because of ´obstacles´?
Testimony from witnesses ignored or sidestepped.
Run and treated with contempt and/or secrecy by the very people that have in effect become suspects AT LEAST insofar as prior knowledge is concerned.
Even if you refuse to believe that 9/11 was anything other than a ´terrorist plot´ why let people investigate an incident where they were going to cover their asses at all costs from any negligence and ineptitude exposed that morning in September.
Sorry, you can put your faith in an investigation which ran backwards from an already decided upon conclusion , I´ll wait another 8 years if I have to.
I don´t know about you but I want to hear the full truth, warts and all.

delusions made up by frauds, regurgitated by those who lack knowledge

Ditto

 

[mudlark]

Have you ever wondered how people, such as the families of those who fell on 9/11, might feel about you and your fellow twoofers appropriating their tragedies to fuel your cheap hate and sensationalist distortions?

A number of those family members ARE ´fellow twoofers´.
Ask the first responders choking up their own lung tissue about ´sensationalist distortions´
Everybody is entitled to their own opinion of what happened on 9/11 whether they believe the official story or that they have serious concerns. Tell me, do you not have ONE lingering doubt? Given that these people have actually been caught lying, say with the example of the first responders and the air being ´safe´. They lied. They got caught.
How can you accept ANYTHING these people claim to be true given this fact?

 

[A W Smith]

A recent thread here joked about the possible death of a ´9/11 twoofer´
politician. This dehumanisation of another human being epitomises ´Nazi´ ideology.

Oh it does? does it? how so? Or are you just a child using that word for shock value because you don't know what it means and have nothing else to attach your feigned outrage to?

Key elements of the Nazi ideology

• National Socialist Program
• Racism
  • Especially anti-Semitism, which eventually culminated in the Holocaust.
  • The creation of a Herrenrasse (Master Race= by the Lebensborn (Fountain of Life; A department in the Third Reich)
  • Anti-Slavism
  • Belief in the superiority of the White, Germanic, Aryan or Nordic races.
• Euthanasia and Eugenics with respect to "Racial Hygiene"
• Anti-Marxism, Anti-Communism, Anti-Bolshevism
• The rejection of democracy, with as a consequence the ending the existence of political parties, labor unions, and free press.
• Führerprinzip (Leader Principle) /belief in the leader (Responsibility up the ranks, and authority down the ranks.)
• Strong show of local culture.
• Social Darwinism
• Defense of Blood and Soil (German: "Blut und Boden" - represented by the red and black colors in theNaziflag)
• "Lebensraumpolitik", "Lebensraum im Osten" (The creation of more living space for Germans)
• Related to Fascism

 

[TruthersLie]

A recent thread here joked about the possible death of a ´9/11 twoofer´
politician. This dehumanisation of another human being epitomises ´Nazi´ ideology.

I have stayed out of that thread, and when involved called for waiting to see what the facts state...

Though it is extremely amusing watching someone who randomly accuses up to 10,000 american citizens of being part of the consipracy to murder 3,000 other citizens.

Or the same twoofs who dont' call out the blatant dehumanization of Bernard whos son died on flight 77 (like Dylan avery did repeatedly) of stating that he put his son on a jet to die and went to play golf. Yup...
if you really want to compare pissing on and ******** on the dead, da twoof have much more blood on their hands.

You have accepted this ´complex terrorist plot´ on the basis of what?

Complex? Says who? The plot is VERY simple. Get 5 men on each jet, kill the pilots, fly into targets. That is freaking simple.

The "complex plot" is the what you twoofs need some massive governmetn conspiracy to plant thermite/thermate/silent explosives with other government agencies to cover it up... you obviously have never heard of the KISS rule. Look it up.

The 9/11 Commission? The authors of which have distanced themselves because of ´obstacles´?

You might just want to go and LOOK UP WHY they have distanced themselves...and what for. NOt the datamined quotes, but actually go and READ what they are talking about. They all agree it was 19 fanatics...

Testimony from witnesses ignored or sidestepped.

Whose? are you going to try to pass in sibel edwards? (snicker).
Or are you going to try to pass off the datamined "explosion" quotes from the oral histories?
you really should try to do RESEARCH

Run and treated with contempt and/or secrecy by the very people that have in effect become suspects AT LEAST insofar as prior knowledge is concerned.

GREAT. Which agencies knew that 19 hijackers would take over 4 jets and fly them into 3 buildings on 9/11. Please provide the citations and memos showing that they had foreknoweledge which was specific and actionable. It should be easy.

No it was FUBAR. Lots of different warnings were pointing to something happening. Unfortunately it happened too fast for there to be anythign done about it. Actually try to READ something. The looming tower is a good place to start.

Even if you refuse to believe that 9/11 was anything other than a ´terrorist plot´ why let people investigate an incident where they were going to cover their asses at all costs from any negligence and ineptitude exposed that morning in September.

Even if? No twoof. Not even if. That is horrible debate technique.

Who would you have investigate the accident? The french? As the 9/11 commission report stated it was a systematic failure at many levels of the US government. So there would be no "Independent" investigation from any part of the US government.

So the agencies which screwed up, tried to dodge and weave... gee I wonder why? Oh so they wouldn't be specificially blamed for screwing up and letting 3,000 citizens be murdered. Absolutely amazing.

Too bad the physical evidence is sooooooo overwhelming.

Sorry, you can put your faith in an investigation which ran backwards from an already decided upon conclusion ,

Which investigation? Penttbottom? The NTSB investigations? The NIST investigation? Which one are you talking about? There are about a dozens different investigations, many of which started on 9/11, or 9/12 using thousands of agents and investigators... So which investigation are you talking about?

Please prove that they started from "an already decided upon conclusion." Provide citations and proof to support that claim.

 

[TruthersLie]

A number of those family members ARE ´fellow twoofers´.

PRovide proof. Many family members signed petitions to get better investigations, not that the US government murdered their fellow citizens.

Ask the first responders choking up their own lung tissue about ´sensationalist distortions´

appeal to emotion noted. And conflating different issues noted.

Everybody is entitled to their own opinion of what happened on 9/11 whether they believe the official story or that they have serious concerns.

What is this official story that you speak of? Where does this come from? Which government agency is in charge of this? Which government agency has propogated this "official" story? There isn't an "official story" but there is a common narrative which has been put together by millions of individauls who witnessed the events, and the investigations conducted and released to the public.

Tell me, do you not have ONE lingering doubt?

Yup, I seriously doubt that the NY Yankees are the best team in baseball. Oh you mean about 9/11. Not really. I do have some lingering questions about some of the specifics, but not of the evidence points to individuals in the US government murdering 3,000 fellow citizens. Not one thing.

Given that these people have actually been caught lying, say with the example of the first responders and the air being ´safe´. They lied. They got caught.

Truther LIE. The government NEVER said that the air at Ground Zero was "safe." You might want to look up the OSHA and air quality papers. They advocated that any individuals working at ground zero wear respirators and take safety precautions.

The New YOrk City government hired independent contractors who may or may not have passed that infromation along to their contractors.

You really should LOOK UP the ******** you are trying to pass off.

How can you accept ANYTHING these people claim to be true given this fact?

Oopsie... who is lying here now? You should look up the information you are trying to pass off.

Now you should use the SAME standard you are trying to use on the government. Why would ANY ONE believe ANYTHING from any truther source given that they LIE out of their ASSES to you? Why is that?

 

[BigAl]

A number of those family members ARE ´fellow twoofers´.

Families of the victims have said all sorts of things over 8 years in the process of trying to get health care for the living and death benefits for the rest. The original "Jersey Gitrls" also fought for what be came the 9/11 Commission report and all but a couple appear to be satisfied with the results.

None of these peopel can be called Twoofers.

 

[Darth Rotor]

Why truthers are dangerouse!

Are twoofers dangerous?

If the answer is yes, then it might be smarter to ask: how are twoofers dangerous?

Where that is a valid characterization is mostly a second and third order influence, the dangers of spreading a lie. This habit toxifies the general public discourse. In that regard, they are as toxic as dishonest pundits in the various news media organs.

Let's look at a different sort of harm, if not danger.

In the case of Morgan Reynolds, he is an embarassment to his institution of higher learning, Texas A & M. As an econ professor there, his spouting of falsehood, and quite simply wrong assertions in re WTC, harms his university by establishing that they keep on faculty intellectually dishonest persons as professors.

But back to the toxicity issue. Two decent examples are Rosie O'Donnel and Charlie Sheen. They uncritically accepted the non-fact based assertions of the WTC events and WTC 7, and due to their distrust or hatred for the Bush administration, spread the false assertions via their positions in the entertainment industry, media. The problem with doing that is to risk discrediting legitimate and valid criticism of the Bush administration by adding to the noise level, if nothing else.

This is a somewhat different than, for example, Sean Penn. He was opposed to the Iraq War, did not care for Pres bush, and took a trip to Iraq before the war. I don't think he was very wary of who handled him. He took in what it was he saw and was shown, and made a number of public statements on the topic. A different use of being a celebrity to forward a position.

Two different anti-Bush positions undertaken with different amounts of thought and effort. I think Penn put more thought into his effort. He also was timely. I don't think he was credible, mostly due to that part of the world being filled with nuance and complexity that he didn't take the time to absorb, and that he had a pre-established motive, anti war, before taking the trip.

O'Donnel and Sheen actually are part of the problem, by spreading gross misinformation. Penn was sharing a differing political attitude for the situation and war with Iraq. He wasn't any more badly fooled than years of efforts by international inspectors, in re conditions of Saddams programs.

If Penn was mostly anti war, which I took his position as being, go a step further and look at retired Marine General Anthony Zinni, who had been Central Command commander for the years before Franks took over. He very publicly objected to the looming war from the basis of expert, insider knowledge and a differing strategic mindset than the Pentagon leadership under Rumsfeld.

From him, go to another former officer, Daniel Ellsberg, whose Pentagon Papers experience raised in him a profound distrust in the government, at any and all times. He too was anti war, for reasons of his own. His protest was again more credible, thanks to his expert/insider experience within the Pentagon and a government reaction to his whistle blowing.

Three different anti war positions in re Iraq, with only Ellsberg anti War in general. Which of the last three spouted troofer nonsense about the WTC, Pentagon, or flt 93?

None of them. None of them (unless I issed some stupid from Penn later) espoused a LIHOP or MIHOP line of thinking.

Of the three, I found Zinni's position more practical and grounded, and Penn's least informed, and ideologically motivated. I understoond Ellsberg, and his anti establishment position, with which he's been consistent over the years.

What does the twoofer approach do? Since it is based on hot air and lies, not to mention wilfull ignorance, it adds noise that interferes with more thoughtful criticism that Penn's, Zinni's, or Ellsberg's.

The other harm is the slander against perfectly decent people, like the captain of AA 77 and his crew, or the crew of flt 93, who Avery and others have slandered for being in on an inside job.

If you consider that "harmful" rather than "dangerous" then OK, we have a wordsmithing issue.

But here's the insiduous harm, and danger. With that lie begun, and taking root, you get dishonesty piled on top of dishonesty, occasionally seasoned with a fact or criticism, as we see in the case of JihadJane. The assertion of Afghanistan as a war for resources is laughable, but the criticism of Bush going to war in Iraq being rubbish/enabled by falsehood/propaganda is at least an arguable point. It is the interweaving of rubbish with the valid that makes the whole mess tainted, and fraudulent.

Mostly harmful to the credibility of the criticism, if harm there is.

Full disclosure: I have not completely ruled out LIHOP, though it is a very low odds possibility. There is so little evidence for it that I don't think a strong case can be made. I don't have the contemptuous attitude toward the enemies of America to presume incompetence, nor stupidity, as a general characteristic.

With the possibility of LIHOP, whoever (I think less than fifty, maybe less than Dr A's 20) might have been in on such a selective blinding of counter terrorist measures between 1998 and Sept 11 2001, either does not exist, or isn't talking.

Who would, being involved in such a sabotage effort?

Jack Ruby shot Oswald. Ruby died. Somebody probably knew why at one point, but took that info to the grave. All that was left behind were questions, not answers.

DR