Sincere help for 9/11 debunkers

page: 5
34
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 11:44 PM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 

If you really want to know what happened then educate yourself. Don't ask others to teach you what you are unwilling to learn.




posted on Jun, 23 2012 @ 11:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by 10thExponential
reply to post by soulwaxer
 


Kind of ironic that you would write such a post, and then refuse to reply to the members who provided the best responses to your little rant about these people.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

That post in particular. It's very telling when you choose to respond, it's even more telling when you choose not to.



I spent the rest of yesterday with my wife and kids because it was there last day here before a trip to Spain. I just returned from the airport to drop them off, and have replied to the post you mentioned. I am replying to as many posts as I can, except for the silly ones. Are there any other posts in particular you would like me to react to?



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 12:06 AM
link   

Originally posted by exponent
reply to post by soulwaxer
 


Just a thought, I lead a happy full life and am respected by my peers and in a position of power due to my hard work.

If that's emotionally damaged, I'd love to hear about your life because it must be truly amazing!


You didn't provide me enough information for me to know if you are emotionally damaged (I wouldn't use that term myself though). But we all have emotional issues that could be worked through, whether they are conscious or not.

But let me add that I don't regard a position of power as a requisite for a peaceful mind and heart.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 12:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by BBobb

Originally posted by soulwaxer

Originally posted by BBobb

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by soulwaxer
 

So why does the 911 conspiracy only exist in cyberspace?



That, sir, is a veeeery good question, one that deserves an answer. Why aren't these issues raised elsewhere with veracity and seriousness? Are they not serious questions raised by serious people?


No, that is an uninformed question. I have seen both David Ray Griffin and Richard Gage (Do you know who they are?) speak to an audience of a few hundred here in Brussels several years ago. Many people attending resolved their conflict right there.

No need to answer dumb questions is there?


Hmmm...you seem very angry. Firstly, I completely agree, I think that the inability to see the obviousness of a 9/11 cover-up is to me, a great mystery, so where coming from the same page here. Yes, I know quite well who both those gentleman are by the way. Don't get so defensive that you end up attacking those agreeing with you. All I was saying was that it's a mystery that it only seems to exist in cyberspace, that it's in no way being covered in any mainstream outlets.


I have anger in me at times, just like everyone else, but not in my reply to you.

But you are right about the defensiveness, and I thank you for the advice.

Thank you also for clarifying your point.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 12:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by DerepentLEstranger
reply to post by soulwaxer
 


S&F
indeed the psychological circle-jerk involved often leads the
cognitively dissonant to make all sorts of projections and Freudian slips

take the "pejorative" label/insult "Truther"
you just know that gov-shills didn't come up with that term

as that would imply that the person applying the term is a "Falsifier" or a "Liar"


About the 'truther' term, that is a very good observation. The psychological implications of that are immense.

Thanks.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 12:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by Classified Info

Originally posted by JustAHuman
reply to post by samkent
 


Because the MSM is afraid to reveal the truth and those that own the MSM won't allow it to be revealed.



I'' ll have to remember to add the above to the long and ever growing list of those who are part of this "inside job."

Thanks!


It's a small world at the top .... regardless of demolished or not ... the whole thing seems a little convenient considering the laws and wars that have come to pass.

The "six corporations" (actually 5 - see below) that collectively control U.S. media today are Time Warner, Walt Disney, Viacom, Rupert Murdoch's News Corp., CBS Corporation and NBC Universal. Together, the "big six" absolutely dominate news and entertainment in the United States. But even those areas of the media that the "big six" do not completely control are becoming increasingly concentrated. For example, Clear Channel now owns over 1000 radio stations across the United States. Companies like Google, Yahoo and Microsoft are increasingly dominating the Internet.
But it is the "big six" that are the biggest concerns. When you control what Americans watch, hear and read you gain a great deal of control over what they think. They don't call it "programming" for nothing.


Back in 1983 it was bad enough that about 50 corporations dominated U.S. media. But since that time, power over the media has rapidly become concentrated in the hands of fewer and fewer people....

NBC is owned by General Electric.
CBS & VIACOM are owned by a private company called National Amusements (Redstones - heavily invoved in Politics)
GENERAL ELECTRIC --(donated 1.1 million to GW Bush for his 2000 election campaign)
DISNEY / ABC / CAP (donated 640 thousand to GW's 2000 campaign)
TIME-WARNER TBS - AOL (donated 1.6 million to GW's 2000 campaign)
Rupert Murdoch: Board of Directors, Philip Morris (USA)
*(Phillip Morris donated 2.9 million to George W Bush in 2000)*



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 01:21 AM
link   
The government is known for not being able to keep the smallest thing goddamn secret for very long. Truthers would have me believe that the government could keep an event so huge like 911 shrouded in secrecy for more than a decade?

I think not, sir. They are not that competent.
edit on 24-6-2012 by TsukiLunar because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 01:28 AM
link   

Originally posted by plube
this vid shows what the OP is talking about...the sell...then the emotional betrayal...



Thanks. I've seen that video, and the comments in it are indeed very suspicious, especially the ones of the witness being interviewed in the street. But even so, I can't be sure that they aren't authentic, not 100 percent. However, if they are authentic, it would be very logical that this would be part of the plan to mislead the public. It wouldn't surprise me at all.

There are huge amounts of verifiable facts out there that perfectly fit (but not prove) an inside job scenario. There are very few verifiable facts that fit into the 19 Arabs carrying out a mission for Bin Laden scenario.

The inside job scenario is also much more logical. Who gained through 9/11? Who has repeatedly used false flags in the past?

Does anybody really think that 'Al Qaida' hates us for our freedom and so spent years planning and then attacking us big time because it would give them the pleasure of revenge? Or that it would scare us away? It might work that way on a school playground between kids, but I just can't see that happening in this case. And what did they gain? They (I won't go into who they really might be.) are being hunted down by 'predator drones'. Their societies are being taken over. Do you think it is possible that they thought, "Let's attack the US, haha yeah we'll get 'em! We don't care if they come after us and bomb the crap out of us. It's worth it! Or maybe they won't find out that it was us. Maybe we'll get away with it."...


The strongest emotional betrayal is our instilled fear of, and disrespect for Arabs. We fear the unknown, and that weakness is definitely being used against us. This doesn't appear to be a huge challenge. We (in general) don't seem to have a problem believing that the Arabs (who's culture most Americans are not very familiar with) did it. We do have a problem believing that people like Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld are behind this, while we know many things about them that fit the kind of actions that were planned for 9/11 to succeed, in their favor... Their whole administration took every opportunity to use 9/11 for their agenda and increasing their power on all fronts.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 01:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno
You want facts? Read my factual signature.


except that is NOT factual.... just your opinion



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 01:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Raivan31
Would'nt the OP be basically saying that your mind either covers up the trauma or your mind is already so messed up that to see the truth doesn't actually harm you so you have no need to ignore it?

Sort of.

You're right in that I'm saying not everyone was traumatized by 9/11. And some were only traumatized long after the event, when they let the reality seep in (meaning the reality of an inside job). The ones who were not traumatized in any way may be the type that has been through (and worked through) some very tough, existential issues. That doesn't necessarily make them 'messed up' though. Sometimes, if it doesn't kill you, it makes you stronger.

And then there is the fact that our society was traumatized as a whole...



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 01:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by TsukiLunar
The government is known for not being able to keep the smallest thing goddamn secret for very long.


How do know that? How do you know that the secrets that have been revealed are not like only 0.000000001% of the actual goddamn secrets the government holds? You don't know that, do you?

The claim has no logic.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 02:16 AM
link   
reply to post by neformore
 


You have pointed out quite rightly that WTC's 1 & 2 were of a fairly UNIQUE CONSTRUCTION, I don't think many people take this into account, when discussing this topic....

Or choose to overlook it, for their own purposes ?

The whole event was unique in nature, and therefore comparisons cannot be made with other similar events.

If people understood the construction method of the twin towers, they would see WHY the burning aviation fuel did not have to actually melt any of the steel work, only buckle it, through heat distortion, to do the damage which led to the collapse of the towers.

I took the time to look into how the twin towers were built, and although I'm no engineer, I can see why they collapsed, under the circumstances..



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 02:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by southtower
I think this scene from Men in Black explains our situation well:



As a country united, under 1 political leader....we will NEVER come to terms with 9/11 being a conspiracy. It will always be a legacy of fear, just like the JFK assassination. (Yup we all still believe that one too)

Until conspiracy theorists start acting as revolutionaries & do their job, we will sit here and do nothing except whine, complain and argue with FBI informants on sites like this.

We all must do our part if we want change and love this country. If not, GTFO and stop pretending to care.


Yup, that explains at least some of it quite well. Thanks. I never saw MIB.

I have wondered about the revolution attitude as well. I think that every honest 'truther' is a bit of a revolutionary, no matter how he goes about it, or how little impact he has. At least he is projecting the right attitude in accepting reality. That is the first step towards positive change. You can't change reality if you don't know what it is. More people are reaching that point every day, and I don't see that ever going in the opposite direction. Maybe, in time, that will diminish the taboo on it enough for others to actually take the chance to look into it with an open mind.

Or maybe that's just wishful thinking. I don't know. I have a tendency of trusting that what needs to happen will eventually happen. And that light penetrates darkness. (I used to convert my bathroom to a darkroom, and keeping the light out could be a real mission.)



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 02:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by MrJohnSmith
reply to post by neformore
 


You have pointed out quite rightly that WTC's 1 & 2 were of a fairly UNIQUE CONSTRUCTION, I don't think many people take this into account, when discussing this topic....

Or choose to overlook it, for their own purposes ?

The whole event was unique in nature, and therefore comparisons cannot be made with other similar events.

If people understood the construction method of the twin towers, they would see WHY the burning aviation fuel did not have to actually melt any of the steel work, only buckle it, through heat distortion, to do the damage which led to the collapse of the towers.

I took the time to look into how the twin towers were built, and although I'm no engineer, I can see why they collapsed, under the circumstances..


There also seems to be the mindset that since they do not like the action taken post 9/11, someone must of made the 9/11 actions happen. There seems to be this naive belief that politicians will not take advantage of a highly traumatic/emotional event to advance their agenda. It is difficult to analyze technical issues with political glasses on. The events need to be analyzed separately. Conduct a technical analysis of the technical issues and conduct a political analysis of the political issues. How the building fell down is a technical issue. Who flew the planes into the building is political. These issues are linked and related but to reach a rational conclusion one has to understand where each analysis starts and ends. Where it goes from political to technical and vice versa. Things do not happen in a vacuum but it may be helpful to isolate events to simplify analysis. Build out from a solid small core to a more complete picture. First analyze events A and B, then develop the links between them.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 02:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by randomname
how are you suppose to get facts regarding 9/11.

you can't get near cheney, bush and rumsfeld without running into a wall of armed secret service body guards.

then you're left with option "b". schedule an interview with them.

which would leave you at square one. they can say no. or if they do say yes, it's with a mainstream media outlet of their choosing.

which involves cash, final production approval, pre-screened questions and final say if it makes it on to the air.

that leaves the only reasonable option left; a whistle blower. finding a whistle blower is near impossible.

first any conspirators with hard knowledge were chosen with 1000% loyalty and trust in mind.

if by some act of God they were freed from this grip, then they would have to be dodging hit squads. because if its a choice between cheney, bush and rumsfeld going to jail, or a minion, the choice is a no brainer in their view.

basically, someone with knowledge has to go to God, ask His protection and clean his soul.


Ooooh maaaan... that was funny!


Thanks.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 02:41 AM
link   

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno

Originally posted by samkent
reply to post by soulwaxer
 

So why does the 911 conspiracy only exist in cyberspace?




With cyberspace one can only express one's true interpretations without having there lives ruined. I could never express my signature within my industry. Get it?



Yup! That's a no-brainer.



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 02:44 AM
link   
reply to post by huh2142
 


Good points, huh2142, I hadn't considered separating the political from the technical, and the issues this would raise. Thank you....



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 02:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by soulwaxer


About the 'truther' term, that is a very good observation. The psychological implications of that are immense.

Thanks.


Not. Is psychology going to be the next subject you pretend you are an expert in?

You guys call yourselves truthers. It IS the "9/11 truth movement," right?



"Anyone who does not see my deluded version of reality must have psychological issues. Because I am incapable of using a logical thought process and the 'debunkers' are, it just has to be a psychological issue with them, because there is no way that I am wrong. I am an armchair expert in all things physics, engineering, politics, and even the psychological profiles of strangers on the internet."

Now, you should start by searching up studies done by Dr. Irving Biederman on the neurophysical payoffs of believing that you have "secret knowledge" or that you have uncovered a super evil plot, and the neurochemical reactions associated with these delusional beliefs. It would very much explain the "truth movements" incessant ramblings and complete ignorance regarding all things scientific/factually based.
edit on 6-24-12 by paradox because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 03:07 AM
link   
I think 9/11 truthers should stop acting like they know 100% without a doubt their version of events are reality when they have no clue whether or not it is. It is silly to get so emotional on a topic when it is based on pure speculation.

The OP is very illogical. If someone doesn't agree with you on a topic it means they're traumatized? That makes absolutely NO sense. What's the explanation for non- American 9/11 "debunkers"? The OP alone shows that you are not very good at processing information or theories along with any of the people that agreed with you.

edit on 24-6-2012 by RealSpoke because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 24 2012 @ 03:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by GiodanoBruno
So instead of becoming your own expert you blindly believe some certified-professional-government-employee? Says a lot about your self esteem.


Becoming my own expert is just silly. It requires years of study. Study is not the same as watching Youtube videos or reading conspiracy websites. No, you are not an expert either. Why would I invest years of study in to find prove for something when I don't even believe it to be true to begin with?

I do not blindly believe the experts and scientists. Their work is checked by other scientists. I also checked their work myself, and as far as I can understand, it checks out, even though I am not qualified in that area. But neither are you. You just assert without any basis that all the experts are wrong and you are right. That is what is called blindly believing something.
edit on 24-6-2012 by -PLB- because: (no reason given)





new topics
top topics
 
34
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join