In the history of ATS has a truther ever changed his/her mind and decided Osama did it ???

Originally posted by SuperViking
What does the FBI not wanting OBL have to do with anything?

Well, in case you missed it, it kind of contradicts the propaganda story that the MSM were broadcasting around 20 minutes after the event!

Do you remember how often it was played ad nauseum that morning, the whole day and the following couple of days after that?

You couldn't have a war on terra, unless there was a focal point for eveyone to hate, could you? OBL was that focal point.

You work for the NSA, yet you can't see why it's significant that the FBI do not want OBL for 9/11. Hmmm... that alone tells me all I need to know. I guess that US citizens should sleep safe at night, knowing that their security agencies are always up to date with their critical thinking. Nothing's going to slip through the cracks again, right?

[edit on 3-11-2008 by tezzajw]

The FBI's jurisdiction doesn't extend overseas. Further he IS on the list and has been for almost 10 years.

Funny how now that he's on it, it's not a big deal, it's part of the conspiracy. A conspiracy so vast it took down multiple skyscrapers and attacked the Pentagon while silencing all witnesses and tricking the whole world...but not smart enough to put him on the wanted list in the first place.

How in the # does that make sense?



[edit on 3-11-2008 by SuperViking]

reply to post by Seymour Butz

Could be true, sure. But don't you find it interesting that the true crazies - hologrammers, nukers, blatant anti-semites, etc.... only inhabit the troofer community?

Really! So you find it interesting that some people might be sick, because they have a different opinion than you. That is more important to you, to point that out who dose not believe what “you” believe in and ridicule their idea. You imply your own authority and expertise but fail to provide credentials, and you also fail to address issues and cite sources.

To imply hologrammers, nukers, blatant anti-semites, etc.... only inhabit the troofer community Wow that is a strong statement to make would you do me a little tiny favor and tell these people that.

The 9/11 Family Steering Committee was an organization of twelve relatives of victims of the September 11, 2001 attacks on the World Trade Center. [1] Members of the Committee included the Jersey Girls. It was part of the 9/11 Families Movement and was set up to monitor the work of the 9/11 Commission.

en.wikipedia.org...

The Jersey Girls or Jersey Widows is an informal description of four American activist women: Kristen Breitweiser, Patty Casazza, Lorie Van Auken, and Mindy Kleinberg. Each of them, as of September 11, 2001, was a resident of New Jersey and was married to a man who died in the terrorist attacks that day, otherwise known as "9/11".

The Jersey Widows testified for hearing led by congresswoman Cynthia McKinney on July 22, 2005[8] In Lorie Auken's statement she said this of the 9/11 Commission Report:
And finally, without compromising our national security, it would have reported all of its findings, with its redactions blacked out and submitted to the American people. In essence, the Commission could have produced a final product where the resulting conclusions and recommendations could be trusted. Instead, at the end of the day, what we got were some statements that truly insulted the intelligence of the American people. Violated our loved ones’ memories, and might end up hurting us, one day soon.

It's very telling that these damaged individuals are part-and-parcel a mainstay of the troofer community, and is accepted as a normal thing in that select group.

Can you tell me who these “damaged individuals are?
Can you tell me what part, or parcel of the truth movement, you are talking about?

Can you please tell me who has accepted these damage individuals as a normal thing?

Can you tell me what selected group you are talking about?

Originally posted by Griff

1-I wasn't aware that the KKK was a part of the "troofer" community.

2-The part where you broad stroke anyone and everyone who doesn't "tow the line" as crazies.

1- Then you're woefully illinformed. MANY of the original works, that blamed Israelis, PNAC, etc....... was done by prominent anti-Semites. Troofers, in their zeal to latch onto any theory, took these ridiculous claims at face value, never recognizing the fact that their source may be extremely biased. This is absolutely the worst type of research. They took this garbage at face value and never even looked into it. Nor have they condemned these hatefuk individuals. Matter of fact, I believe your hero Richard Gage was recently in Tokyo with some of these vermin. So in fact, it looks like HE has no problems with their reprehensible views. Does that make you proud?

2- Fail. If you could actually read and comprehend, you'd see in my reply to Ivan that I said that the "borderline crazies" were in the vast minority. Or did you read it and just lie about what I said? I ask becaaaaaaause...... I also said that the vast majority have a hatred for Bush and/or the wars, that they are rational thinkers, and that they are aware of what they're doing, but have no compunction to lying about what they say. They are an immoral waste of protoplasm......

So now that your reading troubles have been explained to you, what "stung" you ?

Originally posted by cashlink

1-Really! So you find it interesting that some people might be sick, because they have a different opinion than you.

2-To imply hologrammers, nukers, blatant anti-semites, etc.... only inhabit the troofer community Wow that is a strong statement to make

3-Can you tell me who these “damaged individuals are?

4-Can you please tell me who has accepted these damage individuals as a normal thing?

5-Can you tell me what selected group you are talking about?

1- Not because they disagree. Because their ideas about nukes, holograms, cgi fakery, space beams, etc... are nuts. There are a few theories that aren't nuts. But they also have no evidence. It would be healthy for you to try and distinguish between the 2.......

2- Yep, imagine that.... there are no hologrammers, nukers, etc in the debunking community. How does that surprise you? Are you thinking rationally? Belief in this junk would by definition mean that they are troofers, since they don't believe in NIST's explanation of the collapses, etc. Also -the Jersey girls wanting a new investigation has no bearing upon my statement that anti-semites blacken the troof movement. Again, are you thinking rationally? Explain how your quotes have ANYTHING at all to do with how there are A-S in the troof movement, and none, that I'm aware of, in the debunking community. Let me help here with your logic, since you seem to need some help here - if you want to prove that I'm wrong about this, you should have provided a link to A-S that back the "OS". Please try to make the connection about how that works. Failure to do so only leads your brain into the pathways described elsewhere.

3- Yep, but I don't want to call anyone out.

4-Both sides of the fence. Troofers do nothing to denounce these dunces and run them out. I personally accept that the conspiracy minded will be attracted to garbage like the 9/11 troof movement, and accept that I just need to ignore these loonies. To give them an argument just reinforces those twisted pathways in the brain that I talked about.

5- troofers.

Originally posted by Seymour Butz
1- Then you're woefully illinformed. MANY of the original works, that blamed Israelis, PNAC, etc....... was done by prominent anti-Semites.

Please supply the names of these people. Please supply proof that they were anti-Semites.

Troofers, in their zeal to latch onto any theory, took these ridiculous claims at face value, never recognizing the fact that their source may be extremely biased.

Please supply the names of the troofers.

reply to post by tezzajw


I'd also like to know the names of these "anti-semites". Because, according to some, I'm anti-semitic for pointing out the wrong doings of Israel.

Also, I'd like Seymour to go to a KKK ralley and interview them about 9/11. I bet he'd get his ass kicked out for even mentioning "conspiracy".

Not surprisingly it seems there are very few (if any) people here that have been swayed to believe the official story. I guess thats largely because the story doesnt stand up to scrutiny. In fact it tells like the sort of story you would read to pre-schoolers..arabs & boxcutters..elves & fairies..

Originally posted by tezzajw

Can you prove that? It's not what he was reported to have said shortly after the attack.

Besides, you miss my point - the FBI are not currently seeking OBL in relation to 911. If a Federal Agency isn't after OBL, then why should anyone believe that he had any involvement with it?

Anyone believing the OBL fairytale is probably reading from the same book where Saddam had WMD and he was ready to use them...

Those last two inferences do not make sense. So suddenly because of an alleged lack of action on the part the US government, you go along with what it looks like they believe? What about advocating propaganda, disinfo, and psyops instead of saying that they are actually admitting the alleged truth.

That is, unless some people are picking and choosing when they believe the alleged government over here in the US.

Mainly, that last sentence looks like conjecture.

It loses credit due to its use of the term 'fairy tale'.

Are you basing this on the FBI website? They state he is wanted for attacking the US embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya as well as being key suspect in other terrorist attacks. This makes no specific mention of any others but it implies at least two others. He was initially wanted in 1998 and the initial call for his capture came from that alleged attack. Perhaps it is from a desire to be helpful and clear rather than propagandists that the FBI did not rewrite OBL's "wanted" web page. What I just said was conjecture, yes so disregard it if you like. More important is that there are at least two other alleged attacks that the FBI suspects him of and bother to imply on the website.

Originally posted by newagent89
They state he is wanted for attacking the US embassies in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and Nairobi, Kenya as well as being key suspect in other terrorist attacks.

Sure, whatever.

Where do they state that he is wanted for 9/11 ?

More important is that there are at least two other alleged attacks that the FBI suspects him of and bother to imply on the website.

Unless those attacks are listed by name, then how do we know that he's wanted for 9/11 ?

What? So because they didn't rewrite the file on him and didn't change what he was initially wanted for, it's a conspiracy? That leap is laughable in nature, and leaps like that are why "truthers" are a laughingstock of educated and reasonable society.

Again, I want to point out that allegedly this is a vast and complex conspiracy, but it couldn't be bothered to EVER update bin Laden's FBI wanted page because they're too inept to ever cover these tracks. Another asinine argument . And if the FBI did immediately update their webpage on September 12th, that wouldn't stop "truthers" at all; they'd say it was just more government lies. But because they didn't and haven't? It's evidence of a conspiracy. Get real.

This is why you're laughed at.

reply to post by SuperViking


I'm sorry to say that if the "confession" tape were real, then, yes they should update their webpage.

BTW, we already have the "mastermind" of 9/11 in custody. Remember? Hence the boogey-man is already caught.

Umm...why should they update their webpage? Can you seriously tell us why?

reply to post by Seymour Butz

Can you tell me who these “damaged individuals are?
Can you tell me what part, or parcel of the truth movement, you are talking about?

Can you please tell me who has accepted these damage individuals as a normal thing?

Can you tell me what selected group you are talking about?

You still have “failed” to answer my questions

1- Not because they disagree. Because their ideas about nukes, holograms, cgi fakery, space beams, etc... are nuts. There are a few theories that aren't nuts. But they also have no evidence. It would be healthy for you to try and distinguish between the 2...

Can you tell me who these “damaged individuals are?

You have failed to answer my questions!

2- Yep, imagine that.... there are no hologrammers, nukers, etc in the debunking community. How does that surprise you? Are you thinking rationally? Belief in this junk would by definition mean that they are troofers, since they don't believe in NIST's explanation of the collapses, etc. Also -the Jersey girls wanting a new investigation has no bearing upon my statement that anti-semites blacken the troof movement. Again, are you thinking rationally? Explain how your quotes have ANYTHING at all to do with how there are A-S in the troof movement, and none, that I'm aware of, in the debunking community. Let me help here with your logic, since you seem to need some help here - if you want to prove that I'm wrong about this, you should have provided a link to A-S that back the "OS". Please try to make the connection about how that works. Failure to do so only leads your brain into the pathways described elsewhere.

the Jersey girls wanting a new investigation has no bearing upon my statement

Really! The Jersey girls don’t believe in the garbage that you spew about 911!
These girls know their Government “lied” to them some thing you can not admit.

Are you thinking rationally?

I should hope so, are you?

anti-semites blacken the troof movement.

Please explain anti-semites with proof show your sources?

your quotes have ANYTHING at all to do with how there are A-S in the troof movement, and none, I'm aware of, in the debunking community.

I am not part of the debunking community that is your thing I am looking for the truth; furthermore, you do not know what I believe in concerning 911.

You are making negative statements against people who are searching for the truth about 911. You use the word troof or troofer or troofers like you are a two year old.
You call this debating by ridiculing the messenger? Please!

if you want to prove that I'm wrong about this, you should have provided a link to A-S that back the "OS".

You are the one that is clearly off topic here!

Please try to make the connection about how that works.

Duh! I am sure “you” are going to tell us grown ups how.

Failure to do so only leads your brain into the pathways described elsewhere.

This does not even deserve an answer. I clearly see where your mindset lies.

3-Can you tell me who these “damaged individuals are?

3- Yep, but I don't want to call anyone out.

You have still failed to answer my question on #3

4-Can you please tell me who has accepted these damage individuals as a normal thing?

4-Both sides of the fence. Troofers do nothing to denounce these dunces and run them out. I personally accept that the conspiracy minded will be attracted to garbage like the 9/11 troof movement, and accept that I just need to ignore these loonies. To give them an argument just reinforces those twisted pathways in the brain that I talked about.

You still have failed to answer my question on #4

To give them an argument just reinforces those twisted pathways in the brain that I talked about.

Now you are Dr Freud and expert in psychology and you know how people searching
for the truth think.

I just need to ignore these loonies.

I do not see how you can! When you consider everyone that is looking for the truth is a (Troofers!)

5-Can you tell me what selected group you are talking about?

5- troofers.

There you go again using your two year old words
Can you say Truthers?






[edit on 11/4/2008 by cashlink]

well out of all the replys only 1 or 2 people actually gave me a decent answer...

i didn't want to get into a 9/11 debate here...right away this thread got bombarded with questions that suround 9/11:

i will answer one of those questions...

Osama admitting to 9/11:

www.youtube.com...

sorry i don't know how to post a youtube vid....I'm a newb here

[edit on 4-11-2008 by common-sense]

reply to post by SuperViking


What are you referring to?

The answer to your question of who these damaged individuals are.

Originally posted by cashlink
reply to post by SuperViking

 

What are you referring to?

me?

I am reffering to the OP that I made...

read the thread title...it really only requires posters to to give me a "YES" or "NO" answer...

instead I got a bunch of questions about Osama and the rigging of the towers with explosives...