What you can do for 9/11 truth?

What makes that book credible and others not? I really feel like crying or laughing sometimes at these admins and moderators. I almost feel as if the admins on this site are programmed! I mean, you guys do great most of the time, but there are some responses given out sometimes that are just soooo hypocritical.

I'm glad we're able to distinguish between a discussion of methods/philosophies and specific calls to action/recruiting/gettin' towards DHS alert territory. Timely reminder and good discussion.

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
What "activism" will work? Will dozens of black-shirted angry activists scaring/angering the tourists at Ground Zero work? Will jump up and down behind Geraldo Rivera, providing him with "comic" material work? Will shouting at a politician's entourage in the subway work?

In the history of uncovering the reality behind suspected conspiracies, "activism" has rarely played a role, until this decade.

Agreed. I sense a certain disconnect in actions like we've seen. They seem to think they've got the whole case sewn up, the whole country behind them, and all they need is to get louder and bigger fonts on their signs and the 9/11-engineering regime will topple. They get this high from the internet. Therefore it's primarily a movement of young white males and assorted misfits. This includes me BTW.

The circumstantial evidence should more than trouble any reasonable person, but unwarranted certainty over mechanical "proofs" (like no plane hitting the Pentagon) and comical claims like TV fakery eclipse the real questions, just as the black T-shirt people eclipse any any type of realistic, organic, reasonable and wise approach that may be happening.

Which brings me to what I do: Think. Sometimes I talk and share. I comfort the afflicted and afflict the comfortable. I turn new people onto 9/11 skepticism on occasion by addressing their apparent stumbling point (hint: listen more and talk less). To hard 9/11 Truthers infected with the Loose Change virus, I play devil's advocate and inject some skepticism there. I like to see people get closer, not further apart. I find real people are more reasonable than internet people (on average). I take this as some effect of "realness" that's partly lost in cyberspace where one guy with a CIA paycheck can be fifteen members of the same forum, you know...

But mostly I just do my thing with the Pentagon evidence and think about the non-9/11, subtly world-transforming lifestyle activism I should be doing. Follow the money, even back to yourself, and you'll find your answer.

Originally posted by sp00n1
Cynics will imply that a "massive conspiracy" would be impossible to cover-up.

This is one of the most ironic things about it. All the mechanistic inside job arguments claiming proof make it seem uber-complex. But really if it was just turn a blind eye here and there, drop some hints...
That's how LBJ and McNamara got it done in '64 at Gulf of Tonkin. Itching for war? Got impatient generals breathing down yur neckcause Saigon is about to fall if we don't start shooting our own guns with our own teenagers? Hint to everyone that we needed a pre-emptive strike, rile up the locals, send in a spy ship, get it attacked, try again since that was a pretty weak strike, get no strike the second time but you get some sonarman getting the clue and "misreading" some water currents as a barrage of missiles froma NV ship that wasn't there, and LBJ goes on the evening news - "let's roll." It was hardly even covered up really. Hardly could be. It was Just never all put together with Walter Cronkite explaining it to everyone.

Pearl Harbor: Ed Murrow was told all about it by FDR it seems, the planned provocation, the fleet at Pearl Harbor left helpless in the line of retaliatory fire. Others knew, like Adm. Richardson, dismissed for protesting the plan. It was obvious in many ways. And necessary, of course. So we keep it quiet.

But for some it's always necessary. 9/11 and we got missed signals, bungled and dropped investigations, FAA security deregulation, war games, cluttered radar screens, a swap-out at NMCC, messed-up chain of command, etc. All the responses, from troops around Afghanistan and Brits on the way, DHS half-formed, Patriot Act written, all set before 9/11. Again, it can hardly be covered up.

The cover up is in each American's mind. It's become almost a part of the American way of life. We're all to be like little Ollie Norths all lying geefully for King and country, lying to ourselves and to each other. It's insane but it's the historic norm and it'll be hecka hard to break this idea through in a lasting way to Joe Q subaverage out there.

Originally posted by sp00n1
Cynics will imply that a "massive conspiracy" would be impossible to cover-up.

Yes, if one believes the "government" did it, than it's a "massive conspiracy", yet if one believes 19 men (of no particular distinction, besides possibly training at an Al Queda base) did it, than it's a believable conspiracy.

This reminds me of some liberals who joked before 911 that Bush doesn't make any decisions in the white house, yet when they want to disprove that 9-11(IJ) couldn't have happened, they all of a sudden now attribute decision making to Bush, "well, he would be too stupid to pull it of", well since when is Bush making decisions all of sudden, when it suits the world view you are willing to accept?

It is as if when these things happen, the U.S post office is informed. It's just easy for some to accept that outside forces are responsible, believing the inside job theory would be too much for them to handle.

One way to inform people is showing them information on how secret ops work and tell them the real history of Al Queda. We must continue to support the first responders which is what I did by attending the 9/11 truth events in NY. Keep plugging away and be skeptical about those in power, don't let this world consume you, because it is just as dangerous as believing the company line (CNN, Faux news).

If one believes 19 men could pull of 9-11, then they are familiar with small black ops teams, and it's really a matter of convincing them who these 19 men were really working for, or convince them with that reasoning that any 19 well trained men could allegedly do the same thing.

Originally posted by Amelie


If one believes 19 men could pull of 9-11, then they are familiar with small black ops teams, and it's really a matter of convincing them who these 19 men were really working for, or convince them with that reasoning that any 19 well trained men could allegedly do the same thing.

Aggreed. Motive, means, opportunity. the attack was intended to "frighten our nation into chaos and retreat," as Bush put it. Nice reverse psychology. All it did was rile up the beast. As any idiot should have foreseen.

So if AQ did it, which I take as a distinct possibility despite the many questions (some debunked), we must be left wondering: are they collectively imbecilic? Playing a complex game of drawing us into prolonged conflict for their own genuine strategic aims? Or simply playing the part of the genie in the bottle that grants wishes and then whisps away? Who would be paying out checks for work like that? How long ago was it planned? Is Osama a conscious agent or a delusional, manipulated Caliph wannabe millionaire brat?

We do need to spread doubt deep and wide enough that when the next attack happens and we (or perhaps not we but our friends and family) stop thinking clearly due to shock and media barrages, we can instead keep our heads. Not overreact, and neither slink away. If people get SERIOUS about 9/11, and another 9/11 happens, it could get ugly. Cool heads will prevail.

Can't put that all on one placard of course, and that's the problem.