Truther throws in the towel, admits it's all B.S.

reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar


Bravo,,,finally someone brave enough to stand up and say I was wrong...People get brain washed to, to certain degrees, everyday. I think it takes a really big man with not only humility but grace to open up his mind and see other points of view. I would give you a pat on the back if I was there, however I dont think your conversion is going to change anything, Im sure someone will pick up your torch and put their blinders on and walk the walk. Another strange think too, this is probably the first halfway decent post that has been on ATS in over a week, there has been so much trash that I have quit even checking ATS daily like I used too, before long I will probably stop all together unless management changes the way stories get pushed up to the front page... We need to revamp the flagging method, instead of just giving flags to promote, we should be given flags to demote, so 4 ppl cant push all the trash to the front page and we can get the real stories there for ppl who dont have hours to scour the forums and can start posting on things worth while. I AM NOT YELLING I CAPITALIZED THIS TO SHOW ITS IMPORTANCE -- PLEASE REVAMP THE FLAGGING, SO IF WE DONT LIKE A TOPIC WE CAN PUSH IT BACK DOWN AND GET REAL STORIES ON THE FRONT PAGE...THANK YOU

I personally haven't seen his blog , nor will I , but there have been times when I've felt like doing the same ( throwing in the towel) .
I have come to realise why people feel this way .
Its because we speculate on conspiracies and the like, we argue with each other and 'discuss' who's right and who's wrong, but the painful truth that I have thought about when calling it all BS is that there are no definitive answers which is why its so frustrating.

No one is willing to own up to any truth, Yes there are UFO's, you are being duped by the aliens and are cattle. You have been poisoned by your government, there are ghosts and unicorns and dragons.Thats all we really want , someone to say 'YES IT'S ALL TRUE', But it never happens and thats when it becomes frustrating.

That the truth is out there is 'true' but it's so damned hard to find, your constantly told by government / family/ friends (delete as applicable) 'the truth ISN'T out there but you can believe what I tell you' that finally you give up the ghost of wanting to believe and then fall back into the rut that you crawled out of when deciding to follow your own beliefs and your quest for the knowledge of fact.
The rut is comfortable to be in and you'll fit into the norm of your surroundings .

Originally posted by alienj
I have quit even checking ATS daily like I used too, before long I will probably stop all together unless management changes the way stories get pushed up to the front page... We need to revamp the flagging method, instead of just giving flags to promote, we should be given flags to demote, so 4 ppl cant push all the trash to the front page and we can get the real stories there for ppl who dont have hours to scour the forums and can start posting on things worth while.

You mean like the 3 people who flagged this thread, which somehow pushed it to the front page?

In contrast to this thread, Former Head Of Star Wars Program Says Cheney Main 9/11 Suspect which received 10 times as many flags, but still isn't at the top of the front page?

Originally posted by GoldenFleece

Originally posted by expatwhite
And to the poster who said no one had explained why the buildings collapsed, well, im betting that getting hit by big fast metal things full of jet fuel may have been a contributory factor.

Is that what you think happened to WTC7?

Even WTC 1 & 2 were designed and built to withstand the impact of a similar-sized 707.

To be honest my friend, yes thats exactly what i think happened. People forget that although things are "designed" to withstand certain things, it doesnt actually mean that they will.

A good example is the Titanic, wasnt that designed to unsinkable, yet didnt complete its maiden journey?

The space shuttle was "designed" to safely leave the atmosphere and return. Yet twice we have had tragedy.

bridges and buildings are deisgned to be earthquake proof but look what happens when one hits...i could go on, but im sure you get my point. How many people on here have had tyre blow outs when they are designed not to? Yet they dont claim its a conspiracy by the goverment, or bridgestone, or pirelli

Watching the videos, i can understand peoples concerns about WTC7, however many of them dont realise the massive fires that were raging there AND the damage caused to it when the tower collapsed

I hold my hand up and freely admit that im not as well versed in every detail of that day as the majority on here but i can see the logic in the official line. To me its occams razor, it makes more sense to me than saying a massive conspiracy was in place.

I look at the firefighters and cops that day and i see real genuine heroes that ALL americans should be proud of. I just think that Some of the allusions to conspiracy that are made would mean that they were involved and i honestly thats a real insult to people who showed their true courage in one of americas darkest hours.

If you watch that video of GW at the school, look at his face. There is NO WAY he can act that well, he was genuinely stunned and didnt have the first clue what was happening or what to do.

When we had the 7/7 bombings here i didnt here anyone saying it was british government conspiracy...maybe its just a Brit thing Its only my very humble opinion but i honestly believe that the government line is far more likely than anything else. And its a shame that an issue so tragic has caused so much division and arguement.

Just my twopennyworth

Originally posted by expatwhite
[When we had the 7/7 bombings here i didnt here anyone saying it was british government conspiracy...maybe its just a Brit thing

Its only my very humble opinion but i honestly believe that the government line is far more likely than anything else.

You really think the government line is most likely? Well, not to get too far off-topic, but just like 9/11, 7/7 was most likely an inside job:

The 7/7 London Bombings:
How to Set Up a Patsy

The first surveillance footage of the leaders of the July 7 bomb plot has been shown to a jury, showing them meeting with a �committed terrorist� outside an East London kebab shop. The video ... shows Mohammed Sidique Khan, with a beard and short hair, and Shezhad Tanweer, wearing a woolly hat, as they walk down a street in Upton Park, East London with four other men. [Telegraph]

Note the date of the surveillance video.

Mohammad Sidique Khan, the teacher who killed himself and six others in the Edgware Road bombing, attended Parliament as the guest of a Labour MP. He was invited in July 2004 by Jon Trickett MP in his capacity as a learning mentor at Hillside Primary School in Beeston, Leeds where Mr Tickett's wife Sarah is headteacher. [Telegraph]

Is it standard protocol for terrorist suspects to be allowed into the Houses of Parliament?

A consultancy agency with government and police connections was running an exercise for an unnamed company that revolved around the London Underground being bombed at the exact same times and locations as happened in real life on the morning of July 7th...

www.whatreallyhappened.com...

.


[edit on 15-7-2008 by GoldenFleece]

Originally posted by GoldenFleece

Originally posted by expatwhite
[When we had the 7/7 bombings here i didnt here anyone saying it was british government conspiracy...maybe its just a Brit thing

Its only my very humble opinion but i honestly believe that the government line is far more likely than anything else.

You really think the government line is most likely? Well, not to get too far off-topic, but just like 9/11, 7/7 was most likely an inside job:

The 7/7 London Bombings:
How to Set Up a Patsy

The first surveillance footage of the leaders of the July 7 bomb plot has been shown to a jury, showing them meeting with a ?committed terrorist? outside an East London kebab shop. The video ... shows Mohammed Sidique Khan, with a beard and short hair, and Shezhad Tanweer, wearing a woolly hat, as they walk down a street in Upton Park, East London with four other men. [Telegraph]

Note the date of the surveillance video.

Mohammad Sidique Khan, the teacher who killed himself and six others in the Edgware Road bombing, attended Parliament as the guest of a Labour MP. He was invited in July 2004 by Jon Trickett MP in his capacity as a learning mentor at Hillside Primary School in Beeston, Leeds where Mr Tickett's wife Sarah is headteacher. [Telegraph]

Is it standard protocol for terrorist suspects to be allowed into the Houses of Parliament?

A consultancy agency with government and police connections was running an exercise for an unnamed company that revolved around the London Underground being bombed at the exact same times and locations as happened in real life on the morning of July 7th...

www.whatreallyhappened.com...

. [edit on 15-7-2008 by GoldenFleece]

I bet there has been 2 excerises run this week with different firms already...i bet there were 5 last week, 5 the week before, 5 the week before... Pure coincidence and nothing else on that one. There are only so many targets here and i bet execises and simulations are done for what if scenarios every day of the week.

As for the terror suspect allowed into houses of parliament
I bet that happens EVERY day. Seriously. The man was invited in due to work at his school with the MPs wife. You think he wasnt watched?

More to the point, do you REALLY think that the British security services would brief a bog standard MP's wife that she couldnt invite this man as he was a terrorist suspect????? Like chuff they would, shes a bloody headmistress, not stella rimmington. They would keep quiet and keep an eye on him nothing more, after all, he was only a suspect! Our MPs are nothing like senators in the USA, not usually rich, not usually powerful. An MP used to live 5 doors down from me and drink in my local.

Most CTers want it both ways and it just doesnt work, im sorry. Either the government is smart enough to carry something like this off or its dumb enough to schedule exercises on the same day and invite nutters into the House of Commons.Pick one or the other im afraid, you cant bend both to suit your arguements.

reply to post by whiteraven


How can you say "in the works?"
You may have an awareness of some of the principles by name, but not understand their nature.
1983 was TWENTY-FIVE years ago. No internet. No one had heard of a cell phone. Today these weapons are deployed and in use. As you yourself pointed out, the technology has been in the works for nearly 100 years.

I wasn't suggesting 9-11 was an EM event.
Scalars cannot and will not replace soldiers for certain operations. That's the thing with Quantum offensives; they don't work when there isn't any potential!

But drones might reduce the number of actual troops required in the field. Isn't that one of the actual reasons for Gen. Moseley's early retirement? That he complained about having enough remotes and drones that we could pull a bunch of people off the ground and be as effective with drone patrols and remote security?

I remember this old blog entry. And I have always refrained from commenting on my personal beliefs regarding 9/11. Either publically or privately. Mostly out of respect to all parties who were injured.

I respect the guy for publically denouncing something he so passionately persued. It takes chutzpah to stand up and say "I was wrong" to the world. Whether or not I agree with him. And, I tend to think that persuing truth so passionately can become like a dead weight around your neck after some time. You either let yourself become so consumed by it, or you look for the light at the end of the proverbial tunnel. It's hard to get up some days and think..."You know, there really IS evil in the world. The same evil that killed thousands that day. Someone had a hand in this. Who really did this?" I couldn't think of it every ....single....day....or I'd lose my mind, to be quite honest. If giving up the very movement he started puts an end to that pain, so be it. Whatever works for him. We all have a right to believe what we want. Apparently he found *his* truth.

I do know one thing, regardless of every theory I have read, listened to, etc. I know that the 9/11 story is full of more holes than swiss cheese. I know that our president lied to us. And I know that this tragedy could have been avoided. I also know from relatives who had been military for many years of their lives, one making it a career, when they tell me themselves that our president lied to us, well, I tend to believe them.

As far as "Loose Change" goes, I never paid a red cent for it, to be fair. I downloaded it free. But it too had quite alot of b/s packed into it too. And I have zero respect for anyone who would have the audacity to make money off of 9/11. The only way I could agree with it, would be if all monies were being given to the victims or the families who lost someone. Period.

If you watch that video of GW at the school, look at his face. There is NO WAY he can act that well, he was genuinely stunned and didnt have the first clue what was happening or what to do.

Well, the first thing you do is get up from your chair and excuse yourself. Because you're the leader of a country. Little children can understand alot more than what we give them credit for. The look on his face was very damning, in my opinion. He looked as if he already knew. And he was caught in a lie right off the bat by claiming to have seen the first plane hit the first tower on tv when no one had that footage yet to air. Like I said, swiss cheese.


[edit on 15-7-2008 by Asherah]

reply to post by expatwhite

In the U.S., in reality, the line between industry and Government is a lot blurrier than in most other Western nations. Our government is also larger and more nebulous with redundant tendrils and branches. We have tons of contradictory policies, concessions and exceptions. Ou Postal system and Census Bureau are both Federal, but neither can ever under any circumstances share information.
Money is the only factor here. We are big fat liars. No one trusts politicians. They don't live down the street.

Again, to say that an inluential U.S. party couldn't have been complicit in the 9-11 event is silly. We don't believe the Government line on anything. We're not expected to. It's our duty as Americans to not trust the government. We wouldn't be good Americans if we didn't suspect ulterior motives and feel we were being exploited all the time. It's our patriotic duty to procede in this way.

reply to post by SantaClaus


Hi and thanks for your post.

I appreciate your point of view, see where you're coming from and can relate to your points.

Where I would differ, however, is in the characterization of my responses. I don't think my responses have been biting. Anyone who has said anything that can be - at all - linked to the subject matter focus of this post has been responded to with honesty and kindness. In short, if you (the royal you) can't hang with me, then don't play. I argue my posts are hard to respond to with the usual, IMO weak sauce, arguments the "truth movement" falls back on - not "harsh" for harshness sake.

I would contend a more accurate description is some people have gotten their feelings hurt because their usual bag of tricks isn't working. I would suggest it is not me who needs to tone down my positions, it is "they" who need to get better at articulating theirs.

Bad actors have been treated as such.

What I have been asking for are ideas/thoughts around this one guys experience. Some have said they think he was never really a believer. Some have said they think he's purely fictitious, some have said any number of things about the subject matter. In each case I have responded to their comments and encouraged more of the same (even if I didn't/don't agree with them).

I appreciate your constructive criticism and like all criticism offered in honesty and good will, I will reflect on it and learn what I can from your points.

reply to post by jprophet420


To you're larger point - absolutely agree. Any person who believes in the truth must not allow the application of theories (models in this case) selectively.

The trap is to which degree can each model be demonstrated in each particular case and recognizing that each example is, by it's nature, different.

reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar


Wow, you seem to have a very righteous attitude, asking others to stay on topic, but then asking questions yourself that aren't on topic. Hypocritical if you ask me.

And whilst we're on the subject of being hypocritical. Why is it anyone who watches Loose Change and believes it is an idiot. If someone came on here and said, "Hey, I didn't believe 9/11 was an inside job but then I watched Loose Change and now I think it's true" you'd spend an entire thread berating them for believing a movie. Yet a guy who watches Screw Loose Change has seen the light? They're both just movies that have differing opinions, both made with a bias towards their conclusion, so you can't shoot people down for watching one and believing it but praise them for watching another and believing it. That's hypocritical.

Also, your profile itself states that you like many many different points of view. Yet anyone who has a differing point of view to you on 9/11 soon gets a smack down from you for having a different point of view. I thought you liked different points of view????

reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar





Covering up for 911 will land you in prison or worse. 100,000 + people haved died since 911 and the lies there after. Do you think this is a joke Slightlybovepar? Do you actually believe you are making any progress?You should be ashamed of yourself for what you do but make no mistake about it. Justice will be served.


Lie all you want on ATS and other forums. Its is not convincing anyone. What your doing is making people realize that the shill-disinformationalists have infiltrated ever dark ,dank crack on the internet, trolling forums and derailing threads making sure people dont learn the truth.


This is only the begining. You will see. You will remember the words I speak when I say. THe JiG is Up. Just a matter of time.

Would be nice if debunkers can put there names where their mouths are so just incase justice is served and the official story get debunked in court, then they can be held accountable as war criminals.

Due time, due time. God Bless.

Originally posted by SlightlyAbovePar
What I have been asking for are ideas/thoughts around this one guys experience.

Well, to me (without knowing him) he seems like a flip-flopper. And an extremist one at that.

First he believes the CTs and joins/starts a "truth movement". Then he turns full circle and is now blogging about how it's all BS.

It might be just me, but he seems like he doesn't have the capacity to think for himself.

What I mean is: Even most of the hardcore "debunkers" around here will admit there's something about the OS that doesn't sit well with them. To me, these are the true people who are searching for truth.

If you (universal you) claim to know everything, I consider you the most ignorant man/woman in the universe. See my sig.

Originally posted by expatwhite
Watching the videos, i can understand peoples concerns about WTC7, however many of them dont realise the massive fires that were raging there AND the damage caused to it when the tower collapsed

Okay, I understand your points. But to this very point, please, and I'm being serious because this is one of the HUGE sticking points to this debate, explain to me WHY the building came straight down. Why didn't it collapse to one side first? Why didn't it just collapse down to the intact floors and then tumble? Why?

The fires weren't spread equally among all of the support features of the building and burning equally hot and equally as long in order to institute an EQUAL collapse.

The same goes for the two towers. Sorry my friend, but that has NEVER been presented in a truly convincing manner. It makes no sense at all.

Originally posted by illuminist
Hey, mister OP!

How do you know he wasn't paid to quit the movement and say it's bunk?

It could go both ways... I hope you understand that...

i think it's more likely someone would be paid by the government to say the truthers are false than the other way around...

[edit on 14-7-2008 by illuminist]

To you're point: you're completely correct. However, I have absolutely no evidence to support that suggestion. I don't have any evidence that he was paid off, or wasn't. In the absence of any other credible information, it's as likely he was as he wasn't. Meaning the point is moot. My comments are not a critique of you (truly). It is a critique of the logic you're using.

Some people might argue since we can't prove he wasn't paid off, then we need to assume he was. This asking me to prove a negative. It's one of the oldest logical fallacies and, IMO, the most common. You're also falling prey to a Call to Perfection. It doesn't mean you're stupid or anyone who has fallen victim to it's seemingly sound logic is stupid.

What it does represent is a common trap that we all fall into and by recognizing it as a logical fallacy, we can avoid it and get closer to the truth.

Basically a Call to Perfection means that no evidence is ever good enough. Of course, flaws or inconsistencies can be found in anything, anywhere and at any time. If you look hard enough.

The mistake is made when the call to perfection overrides what's right in front of us. An example might be the FLT 93 crash site. There were (literally) tons of aircraft debris recovered. However, CT'ers will claim there wasn't "enough wreckage". Or, some CTers will say there wasn't enough wreckage but the fact that the flight data recorders were found is utterly implausible. Can you see how a Call to Perfection can be a trap?

[edit on 15-7-2008 by SlightlyAbovePar]

reply to post by SlightlyAbovePar



So the people who wrote the Project for A New American Century weren't involved - Thank god. I must have been mistaken.

I always thought those Bohemian Grove, Molek Worshipers who called "For a Catalyzing Event, Similiar to Pearl Harbor" were innocent....

Forget PNAC, forget Bilderberg, Forget the Trilateral Commission, these are good-hearted folks. They don't want global government. They just want free trade, they just want to love you.

I guess I was deluded into thinking a bunch of pedophilic Pagans could be responsible for 9/11. Sure they just invaded two countries and killed a couple million people, but you can't expect them to kill Americans?!
That would be....Unamerican.

The Israeli Agents detained in the area with a mural of planes crashing into the twin towers - a coincidence. Their truck exploded immediately after they jumped out, guess that was a Lucky coincidence also.

Project Northwoods - Forget it, totally irrelevant

Just because the area of the pentagon containing evidence into the 2.7 TRILLION dollars going missing was hit by the Plane doesn't mean it was a conspiracy. It was a coincidence. Just because the documents ere destroyed and no one went to jail doesn't mean they had anything to do with it (Rumsfeld)

Bush signed the order to invade Afghanistan before sept. 11
-Just a coincidence, nothing to see here. Move Along.

Marvin Bush takes over Security of the twin towers six months before 9/11.
-Just another coincidence, shut up and move along.

ODIGO sends an instant message to it's Israeli employees telling them to get out!
-Coincidence, Don't be an anti-semite!

WOW! I was wrong about 9/11. Turns I was being a stupid conspiracy nut. I'm glad I started leaving Fox News on as I doze off every night....



[edit on 15-7-2008 by TruthTellist]

reply to post by Alethia


Righteous attitude so says the poster who spends two paragraphs scolding me.

You're questions and misconceptions have been answered multiple times, if you care to look. I don't remember saying anything of the things you attribute to me.

I know it may be confusing for you with the signal to noise ratio but this discussion is not about 9-11 in general. You might want it to be, but it isn't. If you want that kind of thread, go start one!

Do you have anything of substance to add to the discussion around the OP, or would you prefer to continue to discuss me? If it's the latter, start a thread and bash away. If it's the former, I would love to hear your thoughts.

EDIT: I'll try, again, to explain why I am so tough on the ranting. It's simple. What is happening is a few very emotionally charged people are reading a whole lot more into what I am saying, than what I am actually saying. In fact, a lot of the really heated responses have absolutely nothing to do with this post, other than the phrase 9-11.

This thread wasn't designed to serve as a spring-board for every pet conspiracy that some random poster wants to talk about. Why do you think I am anti-opinion if I ask people to talk about the subject matter that was the impetus for the original post in the first place?

Honestly now - you can see the need to filter the unrelated stuff and focus on what the topic was about, can't you? Step back and look at the shear volume of posts from posters who haven't even bothered to read what was offered and have gone off on wild-a** tangents.

[edit on 15-7-2008 by SlightlyAbovePar]

reply to post by TruthTellist


I haven't made any of the assertions your defending in this thread. Not a one. If you want to discuss those myths, start a thread and I will be happy to respond to you there.