Can a 4 star General Talk Like a Truther? Try to Debunk Brigadier General Wesley Clark! Ummmm WOW!

reply to post by boondock-saint


Neither of those proves he's a truther. Believing that there were intelligence failures that were covered up by the 9/11 commission does not make you a member of the Truth Movement. It's just a favourite method that the TM uses to exaggerate its popularity. Show me some evidence that he thinks a missile hit the Pentagon or that the towers were brought down by CD and then he's a Truther.

And anyone can publish a picture of a general on their web page. I'll contact Gen Clark's office to see if he knows about it, but I suspect that he doesn't. And if he does, I seriously doubt he entertains any notion of CD or anything like that. I've seen no evidence of it.

Originally posted by boondock-saint
another factoid of interest leading up to 9/11.
9/11 happened after only 5 months being
in power for Benjamin Netanyahu. Which
his predecessor (Ariel Sharon) is still in
a coma (supposedly).

a 10 yr coma ???
come-on !!!

or was it a coup in Israel
with a Zionist Crusades agenda ???

edit on 3/20/2011 by boondock-saint because: (no reason given)

I was told Sharon died a few years ago.. I never saw a source, i was told by my father in a recent conversation about this ordeal.. He said between 06 and 09..?

though he's obviously wrong.. coma

reply to post by boondock-saint


You might like to look up the definition of factoid, as well. Because in this case your facts are at least correct. Although Sharon was hardly the most left wing leader Israel have ever had.

I'm not exactly sure what's at all suspicious about what you're claiming, or why it suggests a "coup". But I suppose if you can make out that Wes Clark is a Truther from that evidence then you can make anything mean anything.

Gen Clark is a West Pointer while Gen Myers (JCS) is a K-Stater.
West Pointers have a code of honor and ethics that is exemplary.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Neither of those proves he's a truther. Believing that there were intelligence failures that were covered up by the 9/11 commission does not make you a member of the Truth Movement. It's just a favourite method that the TM uses to exaggerate its popularity. Show me some evidence that he thinks a missile hit the Pentagon or that the towers were brought down by CD and then he's a Truther.

absolutely misleading on your part.
Being a truther only means one thing
that you do not believe there is truth
in the Official Story. It has nothing to do
with all those variations you mention.
And Clark has already stated he does
not believe the official story and that
alone makes him a truther. Has got nothing
to do with missile or holograms. It's just a
disbelief in the official story.

And yes by all means, contact Clark's office
if you wish.

reply to post by Myendica

thank you for that post.
I thought I had read somewhere that Sharon had his stroke
in April 2001, not 2006. I just looked it up on wiki and you
are correct. It was in 2006. My bad. I print a retraction
of that factoid due to conflicting info. Sorry

reply to post by boondock-saint

And Clark has already stated he does
not believe the official story and that
alone makes him a truther.

Where did he state that Boon??
It wasn't in any of the videos in this thread..I looked...

reply to post by boondock-saint

You dont have to be a class valedictorian to question the OS of 911. The WTC "crime scene" was not secured....with rubble (evidence) shipped off site asap. Obvious planted operatives appeared on tv shortly after the collapse of the twin towers offering their reasons for how the buildings collapsed. Firefighters on the scene reported separate explosions in the basement that coincided with the buildings collapse. WTC7 collapsed in free fall fashion (demolition) and it wasnt hit by a plane. And there are other things that dont make sense, including at the Pentagon & Shanksville.

Originally posted by backinblack
Where did he state that Boon??
It wasn't in any of the videos in this thread..I looked...

the video I posted of Clark where he asks
for a new 9/11 investigation.

Why would he want a new investigation
if he believes in the previous one ???

reply to post by boondock-saint

the video I posted of Clark where he asks
for a new 9/11 investigation.

I think you better watch that vid again..
He says he wants the investigation to continue into the misuse of information after 9/11..
More about the reasons we went to war..

Originally posted by boondock-saint


Being a truther only means one thing
that you do not believe there is truth
in the Official Story. It has nothing to do
with all those variations you mention.

In that case almost every debunker on this website is a Truther!

I'm sorry, I don't agree with you. I think a to be a Truther you have to ascribe to the idea that there was some kind of official conspiracy to at least aid in the execution of 9/11. There's no evidence that Clark thinks that.

I also think that Truther, at least how it is commonly used, generally suggests a belief in CD, missiles at the Pentagon and suspicions about the fate of United 93. There are small variations to this, but I'm unwilling to let the truth movement appropriate those who have serious concerns about intelligence misuse - like me and gen Clark and a lot of others - with a fringe movement that focuses on far-fetched conspiracy theories with little basis in fact.

ya know I should have learned my lesson from the
last 9/11 truther thread I posted on. Here we are
10 yrs after the fact and not a damn thing has
been accomplished other than heated rhetoric
on both sides. Until the culprits of 9/11 are
ousted it is an un-winnable argument for
both sides and nothing but a waste of time
to participate. With this analogy I'm out
outta here. Argue with your sign post
for all I care.

We already had heads of state/former heads of state flatout saying 911 was an inside job and for me that trumps a 4 star general, good find though.

Who knows maybe someday they find Cobra bin Laden in his hideout www.youtube.com... then I will be a believer too XD

Originally posted by boondock-saint

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade
Neither of those proves he's a truther. Believing that there were intelligence failures that were covered up by the 9/11 commission does not make you a member of the Truth Movement. It's just a favourite method that the TM uses to exaggerate its popularity. Show me some evidence that he thinks a missile hit the Pentagon or that the towers were brought down by CD and then he's a Truther.

absolutely misleading on your part.
Being a truther only means one thing
that you do not believe there is truth
in the Official Story. It has nothing to do
with all those variations you mention.
And Clark has already stated he does
not believe the official story and that
alone makes him a truther. Has got nothing
to do with missile or holograms. It's just a
disbelief in the official story.

And yes by all means, contact Clark's office
if you wish.

That's not true. The other guy is right, this is just the crazy truthers trying to bulk up their support base and give themselves credibility.

Who decided that I'm part of the 9/11 truth movement? I didn't, and I in know way want to be affiliated with them.

Originally posted by Cassius666
We already had heads of state/former heads of state flatout saying 911 was an inside job and for me that trumps a 4 star general, good find though.

Who knows maybe someday they find Cobra bin Laden in his hideout www.youtube.com... then I will be a believer too XD

The General said nothing about it being an inside job...

2nd line

General Wesley Clark's the American military General that signed the order releasing US Army ordinance over to the FBI which was used to kill the innocent women and children at Waco. They were burned ALIVE.

All over supposedly 1 guy had a machine gun he didn't pay his $250 tax on. And ATF could have picked that guy up in town while he was shopping for groceries. Instead they used it as an excuse to attack those religious nuts firing 60+ military 40mm grenades into buildings that used STRAW as insulation in the walls.

Burn'd 'em up real good General Clark. You did a nice job there.

Originally posted by TrickoftheShade

Originally posted by boondock-saint


Being a truther only means one thing
that you do not believe there is truth
in the Official Story. It has nothing to do
with all those variations you mention.

In that case almost every debunker on this website is a Truther!

I'm sorry, I don't agree with you. I think a to be a Truther you have to ascribe to the idea that there was some kind of official conspiracy to at least aid in the execution of 9/11. There's no evidence that Clark thinks that.

I also think that Truther, at least how it is commonly used, generally suggests a belief in CD, missiles at the Pentagon and suspicions about the fate of United 93. There are small variations to this, but I'm unwilling to let the truth movement appropriate those who have serious concerns about intelligence misuse - like me and gen Clark and a lot of others - with a fringe movement that focuses on far-fetched conspiracy theories with little basis in fact.

Sorry, but I have to side with saint on this one. I think to be a REAL truther, you need to ascribe to the truth. Truth. Truther. That's it. Open eyes and ears, processing information, and leaning towards what you in your own judgement deem to be the truth after seeing questionable evidence and motives, not to mention known history of the willingness to sacrifice American lives to start wars in some circles.

You can attach whatever connotation you want to the term Truther, but to me it only means one thing. The truth.
Imo, Clark is a truther in that sense, and that's it. He's been in positions where few men have been, and if he knows there's things wrong and wants a new investigation, then there must be a valid reason. Maybe the real truth means something to him. That would be kind of nice for a change.

After even a cursory examination/investigation, All who subsequently insist on adhering to the 9/11 Official Story are, at the least, a disgrace to intelligence and more likely, a disgrace to humanity.
I will make no apologisies for this statement

BTW, he is a retired full (ie four star) General not a Brigadier (1 star).
A little higher up the pay grade (O-10 vs O-7).

reply to post by TrueAmerican


But in that case there's hardly anyone who isn't a 9/11 Truther. Most people want to find the "truth" in any given scenario and most think that there was at least a cover up with regard to the intel failures. Clark thinks so, and it's the same thing that the 9/11 commissioners were talking about when they criticised the report and its methodology.

None of them were talking about CD, missiles or inside jobs, and there is no evidence that any of them give that kind of thing any credit at all. Nobody can find a quote that suggests that Clark believes anything different from "the OS", except with regard to the intel misuse, and that's something that many "debunkers" would agree with. Me, for one.

You can disagree with me, that's your prerogative, but the fact is that the Truth Movement is principally concerned with proving an inside job by providing evidence for such things as controlled demos, missiles at the Pentagon and so on. I, and many people like me, think that those things have nothing to do with the truth, and - in my case at least - actively militate against its discovery. I'd be pretty certain Clark agrees with me as well. Certainly that's what all the evidence presented suggests.