It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Somebody called me a "Truther" for the first time.

page: 1
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 06:21 PM
link   
This happened to me yesterday in another forum, because I asserted that 9/11 was an inside job.

I've certainly seen the word used before, but it felt odd to have somebody hurl it at me as a pejorative. Obviously it's a derivative of the term "birther," and is often used in the same breath as that word.

I find it odd that I should be lumped in with the "birthers," since I do not share their concerns about Obama's place of birth, nor their hatred for Obama.

The frustrating thing is that merely mentioning my beliefs about 9/11 in a mainstream forum is enough to cause people to make "tin foil hat" comments and joke about the faked Moon landing and the Bermuda Triangle and what-not.

There is a lot of denial out there, and "truther" is just one more term that the deniers are using in order to marginalize us.

Sad, and very frustrating.

There's no talking to these people once they've made up their mind that you're in the tin-foil hat crowd.

Heck, there's no talking to people when they're in denial. They haven't seen any of the research we've seen, they're not privy to the facts we're aware of, but they've already made up their mind that "there's nothing to see here."

Do we have the Popular Mechanics hit-piece to thank? Or just a general lack of critical thinking skills on the part of the American people?

Sigh.




posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 06:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by flightsuit
This happened to me yesterday in another forum, because I asserted that 9/11 was an inside job.

I've certainly seen the word used before, but it felt odd to have somebody hurl it at me as a pejorative. Obviously it's a derivative of the term "birther," and is often used in the same breath as that word.


"Truther" as a term predates "birther" by years. "Birther" only surfaced in relation to Obama.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 06:39 PM
link   
reply to post by flightsuit
 




Sad, and very frustrating.


Why?

Amongst all possible epithets, how is one that associates you with truth a bad thing?

Them: "You're a truther!"
You: "Why, yes. Truth is very important to me. Isn't it important to you?"

How can they respond to that?



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 06:49 PM
link   
Thanks for the info, jthomas, and yes, you make a good point, Lord Bucket.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 06:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by LordBucket
reply to post by flightsuit
 




Sad, and very frustrating.


Why?

Amongst all possible epithets, how is one that associates you with truth a bad thing?

Them: "You're a truther!"
You: "Why, yes. Truth is very important to me. Isn't it important to you?"

How can they respond to that?





Thats what I always say too.

"Better a Truther than a Liar right??"



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 07:15 PM
link   
reply to post by flightsuit
 


I was called a Truther by someone here though I stay away from the subject.

If you aren't curious how 2 planes can bring down 3 buildings...well I think there is something unhealthy and wrong with that lack of scrutiny.

Truther.

I suppose that is what searching for answers is being called these days.

Sort of brings the old conspiracy theory up a notch when opposition already in position with counter attacks ready.

Opposition which should be simply concerned citizens, curious Americans looking for answers. It IS hard to believe. They should not be met with "guerrilla soldier bloggers" armed with attack ads out to discredit further investigation.
The average Joe would not take this much interest in debunking the Truther claim. They would be either fighting for truth, or watching. Not launching counter attacks to discredit people who want to know.
We would not see the vehemence and blind allegiance to government, or hardly the enthusiasm in defense of "government" from the general populace. Yet this loyalty and fidelity to our sacred and presumably uncorruptable "government" is present in almost all writers I see assailing "Truthers"

What is wrong with this picture?
Anti-Truthers are the same Tea Partiers who hate government and want to shrink it to the size of a potato farm in Ireland.

I am guessing...
There would not be this much return fire were there not someone standing where Truthers are aiming their inquiry.

Why would regular folk care so much what some so called Truthers think or who they interrogate or investigate with regard to this "terror attack"
We Americans generally accept and relish curiosity and mystery...So who is bent on the hush hush?.....I wonder.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 07:59 PM
link   
Better a truther than a liar any day.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee
Better a truther than a liar any day.


Truthers have never been able to show anyone "lied" about 9/11.

But Truthers have a nasty habit of never admitting they have been never been able to demonstrate any validity to any of their claims. Truthers continue to repeat their claims regardless.

And why Truthers have never made one step forward with their unsupported claims.

So no one should be surprised that Truthers get the derision they do.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 08:21 PM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 


Its clear from looking at your account that you obviously have an issue with seeking the truth regarding 911. Something that you do not seemed to be too concerned about doing despite that 85% of Americans believe that the US Gov was complicit in some manner regarding the events of 911.


The national survey of 1,010 adults also found that anger against the federal government is at record levels, with 54 percent saying they "personally are more angry" at the government than they used to be. Widespread resentment and alienation toward the national government appears to be fueling a growing acceptance of conspiracy theories about the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Suspicions that the 9/11 attacks were "an inside job" _ the common phrase used by conspiracy theorists on the Internet _ quickly have become nearly as popular as decades-old conspiracy theories that the federal government was responsible for President John F. Kennedy's assassination and that it has covered up proof of space aliens.
Scripps News Service

Seems like the more the discussion goes on the more that people such as yourself try to insult rather than anything else in regards to discussing 911. Despite what you believe normal folks just move on if they think that something is "stupid" or otherwise, but people like you step into the middle of it because you know for a fact your position is full of lies when based on the official explanation of 911.


In John Farmer’s book: “The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America’s Defense on 9/11″, the author builds the inescapably convincing case that the official version... is almost entirely untrue... The 9/11 Commission now tells us that the official version of 9/11 was based on false testimony and documents and is almost entirely untrue. The details of this massive cover-up are carefully outlined in a book by John Farmer, who was the Senior Counsel for the 9/11 Commission. Farmer, Dean of Rutger Universities' School of Law and former Attorney General of New Jersey, was responsible for drafting the original flawed 9/11 report.
Salem News / Also see my thread on it also

The 911 report you people try to defend is a lie, and thats not my opinion rather its the statement by the Senior Counsel to the Commission. Sorry pal, but you can't win anything by defending a lie!



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 08:24 PM
link   
reply to post by jthomas
 





Truthers have never been able to show anyone "lied" about 9/11.


A lie by omission.
How did that building 7 go down again?
A magic bullet plane?

The fact that there are so many people who remain unconvinced has merit in and of itself. This should be a no brainer...but some how, it isn't.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 08:54 PM
link   
We all know what types resort to name-calling and personal attacks.

In fact I was under the impression that anyone making any kind of personal remark towards another at all on this forum anymore, including "truther," was terms for moderation. But we all know how that goes -- moderated one week and ignored the next.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas

Originally posted by mikelee
Better a truther than a liar any day.


Truthers have never been able to show anyone "lied" about 9/11.

But Truthers have a nasty habit of never admitting they have been never been able to demonstrate any validity to any of their claims. Truthers continue to repeat their claims regardless.

And why Truthers have never made one step forward with their unsupported claims.

So no one should be surprised that Truthers get the derision they do.



Just like the way we can categorize all Christians, Muslims, Chinese, Europeans, etc under a huge umbrella and say "they do this or that".

When reality is so not like that.

Reality Folks. Everyone is different. Everyone thinks in different ways.

No one is the same.

Blanket statements, umbrellas, and prejudices/stereotypes are NOT good when trying to deny ignorance.

En Garde!

[edit on 25-4-2010 by muzzleflash]



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 09:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by bsbray11
We all know what types resort to name-calling and personal attacks.

In fact I was under the impression that anyone making any kind of personal remark towards another at all on this forum anymore, including "truther," was terms for moderation. But we all know how that goes -- moderated one week and ignored the next.


I don't see how it could be moderated to any real extent.

Such things are problems on a vast scale that even an army of mods would struggle to get under control.

So I just try to educate people that it's wrong and not accurate at all.

That way we can prevent future instances of it by curbing the problem at it's roots. Ignorance. Education solves that just fine.



posted on Apr, 25 2010 @ 09:44 PM
link   
That just doesn't make much sense. It seems like a truther and a birther would be on opposite sides of the aisle.



posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 09:34 AM
link   

Originally posted by jthomas
Truthers have never been able to show anyone "lied" about 9/11.

That statement, in and of itself could be considered a lie. Perhaps you forgot about the thread where NIST lied about molten steel at the WTC?



posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 01:16 PM
link   

Originally posted by mikelee
reply to post by jthomas
 


Its clear from looking at your account that you obviously have an issue with seeking the truth regarding 911.


Not in the slightest. I have an issue with those who repeatedly make claims they cannot support - like claiming "9/11 was an inside job."


Something that you do not seemed to be too concerned about doing despite that 85% of Americans believe that the US Gov was complicit in some manner regarding the events of 911.


The national survey of 1,010 adults also found that anger against the federal government is at record levels, with 54 percent saying they "personally are more angry" at the government than they used to be. Widespread resentment and alienation toward the national government appears to be fueling a growing acceptance of conspiracy theories about the 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Suspicions that the 9/11 attacks were "an inside job" _ the common phrase used by conspiracy theorists on the Internet _ quickly have become nearly as popular as decades-old conspiracy theories that the federal government was responsible for President John F. Kennedy's assassination and that it has covered up proof of space aliens.
Scripps News Service


I also have an issue with Truthers who misrepresent the facts. The above survey is from July 2006 - almost 4 years ago - and states quite clearly:


"Thirty-six percent of respondents overall said it is "very likely" or "somewhat likely" that federal officials either participated in the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon or took no action to stop them "because they wanted the United States to go to war in the Middle East."


The most recent survey, "Distrust, Discontent, Anger and Partisan Rancor: The People and Their Government, April 18, 2010" from the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press, does not even mention anything about 9/11. See: pewresearch.org... and for the full survey:people-press.org...


Seems like the more the discussion goes on the more that people such as yourself try to insult rather than anything else in regards to discussing 911.


The subject of the OP is that the poster was called a 9/11 Truther as a pejorative for asserting "that 9/11 was an inside job." I have simply made the observation why Truthers get derision.


Despite what you believe normal folks just move on if they think that something is "stupid" or otherwise, but people like you step into the middle of it because you know for a fact your position is full of lies when based on the official explanation of 911.


My position has always been clear: the burden of proof is on the shoulders of 9/11 Truthers to support their claims. In 9 years, they haven't, they won't, and they can't.


The 911 report you people try to defend is a lie, ...


Neither have I "defended" the 9/11 Commission report nor do I need to. You have to refute it and you haven't. I simply challenge you truthers to support your claims and I point out the fallacious nature of those claims and how Truthers never can demonstrate the validity of those claims.


...and thats not my opinion rather its the statement by the Senior Counsel to the Commission.


I should not have to remind anyone that the 9/11 Commission stated:


"On September 11, 2001, 19 men armed with knives, box-cutters, mace and pepper spray penetrated the defenses of the most powerful nation in the world. They inflicted unbearable trauma on our people, and turned the international order upside down."


and John Farmer agrees.



posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 01:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by rusethorcain
reply to post by jthomas
 



Truthers have never been able to show anyone "lied" about 9/11.


A lie by omission. How did that building 7 go down again?


Your refutation of the NIST investigation on WTC 7 can be found exactly where?


The fact that there are so many people who remain unconvinced has merit in and of itself. This should be a no brainer...but some how, it isn't.


It's actually fallacious reasoning. By that standard, that something is valid because a certain number of people believe it, we should give deference to creationists:


"41% believe creationism, that is, the idea that God created human beings pretty much in their present form at one time within the last 10,000 years" is true and "evolution, that is, the idea that human beings developed over millions of years from less advanced forms of life" is false, ...

www.pollster.com...


Now, yes, that is because some people believe the Bible literally, and they want to impose their religious beliefs on others, unconstitutionally, because, well, they've got 41% of Americans who say the Bible is scientific "fact."



posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash

Just like the way we can categorize all Christians, Muslims, Chinese, Europeans, etc under a huge umbrella and say "they do this or that".

When reality is so not like that.

Reality Folks. Everyone is different. Everyone thinks in different ways.

No one is the same.

Blanket statements, umbrellas, and prejudices/stereotypes are NOT good when trying to deny ignorance.


Like calling non-Truthers "government loyalists", "sheeple", "blind to the truth", and "9/11 was an inside job"?



posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 02:17 PM
link   
You guys don't get it.

I see this question asked too many times. "How can people not see the truth? How can they not understand? Why don't they get it?" Ad infinitum.

Even if the government came out and said openly that 9/11 was an inside job, people would still laugh at you for believing it before the government told you.

If the government said, we crashed those planes into the WTC and took it down, people will just shrug and look away. There won't be some giant revolt or anything that you think will happen. People will still convince themselves they live in a free nation and that even though the government admitted it, it still didn't happen. People feel hopeless. They don't care whether you're telling the truth or not. They don't care if 9/11 was an inside job. They just want to believe it wasn't and move on.
This is the world you live in. Lots of people out there need a lot of help to make them feel more hopeful. No one feels they can effect any change in their surroundings. They are all pawns in the game.

"Truther" is meant to do exactly what you said its doing. Taking someone who is telling the truth and turning them into a bad person. Essentially it is installing the idea in people that telling the truth is bad. So lying is okay. This is why so many people readily accept that the government is lying to them.

But you guys are just as stubborn. You think people should rise up! Revolt! Tell the world 9/11 was an inside job! Well try telling all the unemployed people that need welfare to feed their families that the government is bad. Try telling them to bite the hand that feeds them. You're 70 years too late. Too many people rely on the government for sustenance. They will not want to revolt. Bread and circus.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Apr, 26 2010 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by _BoneZ_

Originally posted by jthomas
Truthers have never been able to show anyone "lied" about 9/11.

That statement, in and of itself could be considered a lie. Perhaps you forgot about the thread where NIST lied about molten steel at the WTC?


There is nothing there at all about "NIST lying about molten steel." Not one single thing. But then there never has been. There were fires burning for weeks, there was steel that was "red hot", there was aluminum things that melted, but never any evidence of "pools of molten steel."

And the claim that the two pieces of steel melted into each other to form the famous steel cross in that video is bogus. It is simply a column-tree like this:



See: www.fema.gov...




top topics



 
4
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join