New Article Knocking Self-Proclaimed 9/11 "Truthers"

I realize that the title of the linked article may initially be offensive to some who believe in alternative 9/11 explanations. Sorry in advance to those whom it offends, but please don't let that be a reason not to read it. It is a very logical, direct, and smart look into why the conspiracy theories don't hold water.

This is a very good and fairly new article that starts out by making a superb point.

If there was any proof of conspiracy, it would be the largest news story in history. Not posted on the internet along with Chupacabra sightings. The ironically self-named "Truthers" will tell you that the story is not being reported because the media is controlled by the government. Moses smell the roses... If that is the case, then how did the Watergate, Iran-Contra, Monica Lewinsky, Grover Cleveland's illegitimate son, Whitewater, Alberto Gonzales' dismissal of U.S. attorneys, Thomas Jefferson diddling Sally Hemmings and other Presidential scandals slip through the cracks?

You're telling me that not one young, ambitious reporter doesn't want to report this "conspiracy" and win a Pulitzer Prize? When Watergate began to unspool, it did so in the pages of the Washington Post. Robert Redford and Dustin Hoffman, wait, no ... that's not right ... Bob Woodward and Carl Bernstein (there, that's better) dug up proof of slush funds, hush money, paper trails, witnesses and had a high ranking government informant - Mark "Deep Throat" Felt - come forward. There was actual evidence to go along with suspicion.

I honestly wonder how there could not even be just one reporter, whether freelancing for the AP or Reuters, that wouldn't dig as deep as they could to find legitimate proof of a government conspiracy. They would become the next Deepthroat, as this article implies. I'm sure that prospect is attractive to nearly every reporter. Government scandals and cover-ups are constantly being brought to the surface because the news is entirely about ratings, viewers, readers, and, of course, MONEY. This would be the holy grail of news reports, if of course there were any hard, substantiated proof.

It is good to question our leaders. It is good to question our government. However, there is a not-so-fine-line between questioning and crazy. A line these loons left miles behind them as they grabbed bullhorns and started yelling about conspiracies on YouTube.

From everything that I have read and heard by them, "Truthers" seem disregard the expert analysis of architects and scientists who devote their lives to their respective fields and instead cash them out for the opinions of a Film Director and Graphic Designer.

Here is an example of how the 'Claims' vs 'Reality' argument is laid out in the article.

Claim: There is no way that jet fuel can burn hot enough to melt the steel in the World Trade Centers. Therefore, the fires from the planes could not be the cause of the Tower's collapse.

Reality: Jet fuel burns at 800 degrees to 1,500 degrees Fahrenheit. Steel melts at somewhere in the ballpark of 2,750 degrees. However, the steel did not have to melt like candle wax to cause a collapse. According to the American Institute of Steel Construction, steel loses 50% of it's strength at about 1,000 degrees. In addition, the jet fuel was not the only substance burning. In extreme heat, steel can expand, then sag, then crack, then give way.

Finally it ends with a bit of humor, but a whole smack of reality,

Three people can keep a secret. If two of them are dead. If you listen to these idiots, there would be the White House staff, government officials, explosives experts, explosive manufacturers, pilots, people planting bombs, Pentagon employees, Saudi's, Jimmy Hoffa, military officials, the cast of Lost, CIA, FBI, Secret Service, salvage companies, do I really need to keep going? When we talk about hypothetical "impossibilities," here's mine; No group that large can either keep a secret or not leave a paper trial or a money trail or a trail of breadcrumbs. Dozens if not hundreds involved and nobody comes forward to cut a deal for immunity and name names? Not one guilt-ridden conspirator or patriotic staffer? Maybe Oswald didn't act alone when he killed Jack Kennedy in '63. But if you think it was more than a half dozen involved, you're out of your mind.

I'll leave you with this,

What happened on that horrible day, unfortunately, is 19 hateful, delusional, religious zealots hijacked airplanes and managed to crash three of them into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. Like the iceberg that sunk the Titanic, sometimes a seemingly innocuous enemy can take down a mighty opponent. That infamous maritime disaster started with a few holes popped into the hull from a still iceberg. Two and half hours later, the mighty Titanic was gone.

Now, before the responses start coming in, please, please, please read the entire article and try to respond to it as a whole, not at one sentence of it that seems to suggest that the person who wrote it is also in on the conspiracy too.

[edit on 9/9/2008 by InterestedObserver]

reply to post by InterestedObserver

Great article.
I cant wait to see the responses.
Are you a Bush Loyalist?

reply to post by InterestedObserver

If there was any proof of conspiracy, it would be the largest news story in history. Not posted on the internet along with Chupacabra sightings. The ironically self-named "Truthers" will tell you that the story is not being reported because the media is controlled by the government. Moses smell the roses... If that is the case, then how did the Watergate, Iran-Contra, Monica Lewinsky, Grover Cleveland's illegitimate son, Whitewater, Alberto Gonzales' dismissal of U.S. attorneys, Thomas Jefferson diddling Sally Hemmings and other Presidential scandals slip through the cracks?

Is this the first part you are referring to? If so then you have lost much of my anticpated interest in this article. I'll still read it but you must understand this. The tactic being used here is so simple and obvious that it immediately has thrown up the red flags. In essence, what this person is doing is simply using the old line government tactic of association with a 'crackpot' theory like the Chupacabra. Then they move on to 'lesser' criminal acts like Watergate, Lewinski, Whitewater and the U.S. Attorneys. How do any of these compare to what took place on 911 if it was indeed an inside job? What did ANY of these lead to as a global impact? Anything beyond creating questions about the character of our leaders and whether or not we were playing both sides in the Iran Contra affair? Something that still hasn't been clearly divulged either.

For this writer to start out like that and for you to call it pretty powerful tells me that you have bought into this means of manipulation.

Plus, the only significant events listed are the Watergate and Iran Contra Affairs and those both were reported on during times when more than 100 different owners controlled the media. Now there are only 5 major owners of ALL OF THE MEDIA. And this guy wants to try and say that it wouldn't be controlled?

Sorry, but this article has started off on the wrong foot of trying to convince the 'truthers' that the conspiracies hold no water. It only starts out by discrediting itself.

[edit on 9-9-2008 by dariousg]

Thanks for the link, OP. And your headline is certainly less-offensive than the one on the linked article.

Ouch...

reply to post by dariousg

My SIL won a Pulitzer prize for a book she cowrote on US soldiers firing on a killing several civilians during the Korean War.
The idea that 9-11 could be covered up without 1 shred of proof is a joke.
Reports are NOT AT ALL afraid to take on the US government.
It is how careers are made and things like the Pulitzer prize are won.

And as far as some ambitious reporter un-earthing the "truth"...

In Watergate, Iran-Contra, et al., there was always a strong opposition force, often along political lines, to bolster the work of the whistle-blower.

In terms of the Nine Eleven Event, the groundswell of suspicion is firmly and unequivocally ridiculed by both parties, all corporations [even though they can still profit from the "Truth" movement], which means all major media outlets as well, etc.

I don't think it's a fair analogy in this sense.

this article seems to overlook the fact that many previous conspiracy "theories" turned out to be fact, once the government declassified the information.

Doesn't that at least invoke a hint of skepticism with official reports? I mean, you don't have to buy the whole "truther" thing, hook line and sinker (although my impression was that "truthers" simply want a new independent investigation). You just need to keep a critical mindset on these things, especially since they are still discovering new evidence all the time. No one has been formally charged yet either - so to anyone fighting the "truth" movement, it's almost as pointless as debating religion with an atheist. Until all the facts are in, both sides are wise to remain humble.

These truther-debunking articles are just as mind numbing as the logic they claim to debunk.

Originally posted by TheBobert
reply to post by InterestedObserver

 

Great article.
I cant wait to see the responses.
Are you a Bush Loyalist?

I cannot stand President Bush. Judging by the winky face I think you're mocking what most people are going to think about me


To the other posters so far, what about this point?

3 people can't keep a secret, let alone the hundreds to thousands that would need to be in on this conspiracy.

[edit on 9/9/2008 by InterestedObserver]

So, who should I believe? An article written by someone that seemingly cut and pasted an article together from Popular Mechanics, or these guys?


www.patriotsquestion911.com...

And secrets can be kept by more than 3 people. You just don't know about them. That's why they call them secrets. Ever heard of "compartmentalization"

There are a myriad of secrets held in the military, research facilities, and government that no one knows about except those in "need to know" positions.

Obviously you have never worked for the feds or been in the military or you would know that secrets CAN be kept.

[edit on 9-9-2008 by whaaa]

IO, it depends on the three people. But I see your point.

Undoubtedly, if there is, in fact, a conspiracy orchestrated by some element of the American government [or their higher-ups on the global stage], the fear of god[s] would be placed squarely in the hearts of anyone who would divulge any of the alleged secrets.

Entire families could be wiped out, for instance. And if such a horrific possibility as a vast, evil 9-11 conspiracy pulled off by Americans exists, then obviously the perpetrators would stop at nothing to silence the whole story. Furthermore, they're powerful enough to go to the ends of the earth to maintain the veil.

edit to fix punctuation, and to add that the point about 'compartmentalization' is a great one...




[edit on 9.9.2008 by ItsTheQuestion]

I wasnt going to post on this but wtf.. I will..

Look there is something about 9/11 that isn't your normal typical crap.. Not only the fact a few buildings drop and no proof that a plane hit the pentagon and fell in PA really don't mean nothing.. TO suck the official story up and no question your government on anything means you are a damn sheep..

A true patriot is one who questions every damn thing the government says and does..

This game about us "truthers" being "wackjobs" is getting really old.. Most of the people aren't out starting crap with people to conform them to what we believe...

Take me for instance.. All I do is run a site with a few articles and images on what happened that day.. Nothing.. I mean nothing is biased.. It is straight in your face fact.. There is no bush sucks balls or bin laden the ass or whatever.. It is unbiased thought on what happened..

And most of the people who question that day just want to know simple things on why it happened.. If it don't sit right with them, then they have every damn right to question the official story..

I am sick of this crap people spew because someone don't agree with the official story.. Its bs and the history after 9/11 does show things went down for a reason.. and not because Bin Laden did it..

Anyway I give this article 2 big FU's and 2 middle fingers...

I have 2 quotes for this crap..

1 here is about how 1 thinks..

"Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense." Buddha (563 B.C. - 483 B.C.)

The other is how such a big lie can be told with little effect on the populous.

"In the size of the lie there is always contained a certain factor of credibility, since the mass of people will more easily fall victim to a greater lie than to a small one" Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf

It dont matter if you believe the government or not.. Its how u feel about the situation.

[edit on 9/9/2008 by ThichHeaded]

reply to post by ItsTheQuestion


yes compartmentalization is a key factor. For example, you may work in the military creating software that decrypts messages, but never get to see any decrypted messages yourself.

Just as a soldier can be asked for the specific coordinates of a town, not knowing whether they will be receiving aid, or bombs. His part in the event does not change, just because the outcome was unexpected. He was not necessarily involved in a secret bombing either, since that information was being passed along in a completely different chain of command.

By the way, this "article" is full of ad hominem attacks, among other logical fallacies. Sprinkled with words such as "stupid" and "crackpots", this deplorable-type of journalism falls far, far short of doing anything but dividing the readership.

And conquering investigation.

The author seems like a shill. He reminds me of Bill Nye whining at the ufologists on Larry King Live this summer.

I'm not convinced, by any means, that 9-11 was an "inside-job". Not convinced that it wasn't, either.

But "work" such as this hack's article only obfuscates the need for a better investigation into the many anomalies.

Originally posted by InterestedObserver

I honestly wonder how there could not even be just one reporter, whether freelancing for the AP or Reuters, that wouldn't dig as deep as they could to find legitimate proof of a government conspiracy. They would become the next Deepthroat, as this article implies. I'm sure that prospect is

No, they would become the next dead person (by ‘suicide’ of course). First, though, they would have their careers immediately destroyed. And if they didn’t get the message at that point, well, then more ‘drastic’ measures would be applied. In case you haven’t noticed, as one poster (dariousg) previously so wisely pointed out, only the most irrelevant of ‘conspiracies’ have ever been officially uncovered.

To mention an example.. For the umpteenth time, since 1963 everyone can/could/did see (but doesn't care) how JFK’s brains flew backwards — so he MUST have been shot from the front. And still, no one has ever officially investigated that either. The original version of Oswald being the lone shooter from behind and afar with a crappy WWII rife still stands. So, please don't mention things like Watergate. A) That story is a joke in comparison. And, B) the powers-that-be wanted to get rid of Nixon all along.

Greetings,
The Wizard In The Woods

[edit on 9/9/2008 by Wizard_In_The_Woods]

reply to post by whaaa

Seriously you really need to stop paying attention to all those movies that paint a conspiracy as possible.
Anyone who has every served in any level of government knows that you cant get away with wrong doing for very long before someone reports it and yes I have worked in government.

Originally posted by TheBobert
reply to post by whaaa

 

Seriously you really need to stop paying attention to all those movies that paint a conspiracy as possible.
Anyone who has every served in any level of government knows that you cant get away with wrong doing for very long before someone reports it and yes I have worked in government.

What movies? BS, I too have worked for the Federal government both as an employee and a contractor and have seen theft, graft and corruption at all levels, never reported for fear of reprisal. Same in the Military.

Hey Toto, I don't think were in Kansas anymore!!

[edit on 9-9-2008 by whaaa]

reply to post by whaaa


YOU NOT REPORTING CRIMES say more about your moral character then anything.
BECAUSE YOU REFUSED TO REPORT CRIMES doesnt mean that a MAJORITY of other workers would turn a blind eye as well.

And based on your post on a re-read of your post it appears that you did this on more then one occasion within different levels of government employment.

[edit on 9-9-2008 by TheBobert]

Originally posted by TheBobert
reply to post by whaaa

 

YOU NOT REPORTING CRIMES say more about your moral character then anything.
BECAUSE YOU REFUSED TO REPORT CRIMES doesnt mean that a MAJORITY of other workers would turn a blind eye as well.

But they did. Because like me they had families and bills to pay and didn't need any extra hassle; especially from powerful people that could jeopardize their jobs and future employment with the feds.

Feel free to judge my moral character. "Let he without sin cast the first stone"

[edit on 9-9-2008 by whaaa]

My question to "truthers" would be, why are the videos and audios always edited leaving out very key parts? This is not a generalized question, but more specified to those who are putting this stuff out that other ppl are buying into.

More and more I am seeing editing of the evidence, splicing here, snipping there.. wha la!! conspiracy created for the herd. Why not just tell people to go and look at the evidence themselves... why draw on ppl's emotions and sensories.

I have more suspicion put into me since I quit buying into the distortion of truths, play on emotions, edited and spliced videos and audios... but my suspicions and questions are now directed at YOU. why? what is the point? Is it for the $$ or is there another reason that you are so quick to deceive others (good intentioned, just misinformed others) for? why? I have watched you blatantly ignore facts and truth when you are claiming this is what you are after.

The more looking into the unedited footage freely available on the web, listening to the unedited audio, reading the unedited investigation reports, hearing the unedited versions of testimony the more I see who the frauds really are.

Anyway, this is something I am just now coming to a realization on... you can't trust anyone that can only offer you unsupported theories and you can't trust the intent of those who claim truth, but blatantly deny it and twist it. I just want to know what you are gaining from it.


The wolves don't come to us in fancy suits, but rather they will come in sheeps clothes. All a sheep has to do is quit his endless baa'ing and look around to see how easily and quickly he was led astray from the truth. Thank you wolves, you have proved that lies come from the most unexpected places. I will be more onguard from now on.

OP: thumbs up to the article. It may not be proof of much, but I honestly am filled with so much anger at the manipulations and distortions and even blatant lies that it just felt good reading it.

(sorry for the rant..... but I really do want to know why and those I am posing the question to know in their heart that it is for them)



[edit on 9-9-2008 by justamomma]

@justamomma you are exactly correct. Why don't they let us see the raw, unedited footage and reports from that day, instead of taking snippets out of context and bending them to support their baseless conspiracy theories? Thanks for your input.

@ Everyone else: There are SO many ways that government officials can come out to the press anonymously and never be revealed. We have seen how journalists are willing to go to jail defending their right not to reveal anonymous sources. We would have heard of several "leaks" by now if there was something to cover-up this atrocious.

Other things are kept secret by the military and government because the officials actually believe they are protecting and defending America by not revealing them. I'm positive that there would be at least one government official that would not be so cold-hearted as to keep such a horrible secret from America's citizens. The guilt would crush them and make them break, no doubt.

In short, if there was such a vast conspiracy, we would know about it by now.