A Question to Truthers

Here's a video I came across that poses a serious question to 9/11 Truthers. Why focus on the crime of 9/11 when prosecuting the government when there are many more proven instances of the corruptness and immorality of government.

Originally posted by wingman77
Why focus on the crime of 9/11 when prosecuting the government when there are many more proven instances of the corruptness and immorality of government.

It wasn't the "government" that carried out 9/11. Just a select few within the military industrial complex that planned and carried out 9/11. Yes, there are many corrupt politicians, but 9/11 goes deeper than that, into the military industrial complex and are therefore two separate facets of the government.

Originally posted by wingman77
Here's a video I came across that poses a serious question to 9/11 Truthers. Why focus on the crime of 9/11 when prosecuting the government when there are many more proven instances of the corruptness and immorality of government.

what if its like spam in the trash can

Originally posted by wingman77
..Why focus on the crime of 9/11 when prosecuting the government when there are many more proven instances of the corruptness and immorality of government.

How do you know we're not focusing on other stuff?

You have no idea what any of us do outside of ATS, or maybe even in other forums on ATS.

ATS, and 9/11, is but a fraction of my existence, my focus, and my interests.

But people like to stereotype and label to make it easier to control you, or dismiss you. Your vid is a classic example of such. Some people do focus on 9/11 a lot, some only sometimes when not focusing on other stuff. There are many degrees of focus...

A better question would be, why do the 'de-bunkers' on the internet only focus on straw-man arguments that nobody can prove either way, and ignore the real physical issues that contradict the official story, and thus your argument? And why do you bother?

How do you know we're not focusing on other stuff?

You have no idea what any of us do outside of ATS, or maybe even in other forums on ATS.

ATS, and 9/11, is but a fraction of my existence, my focus, and my interests.

But people like to stereotype and label to make it easier to control you, or dismiss you. Your vid is a classic example of such. Some people do focus on 9/11 a lot, some only sometimes when not focusing on other stuff. There are many degrees of focus...

A better question would be, why do the 'de-bunkers' on the internet only focus on straw-man arguments that nobody can prove either way, and ignore the real physical issues that contradict the official story, and thus your argument? And why do you bother?

I am not the author of this video. I am neither bald nor over thirty.

I'm not claiming that all people who research 9/11 don't focus on other things as well, I just thought that this video brought up an interesting point. I'm not a de-bunker, I lean towards the government was involved side. The problem I see with the 9/11 movement is the scarcity of physical evidence, which makes it difficult to prove the case to a lot of people. Even if 9/11 turned out to be as the official story states (which at this point is impossible) I would still know that government is a corrupt institution based on everything else that is proven and admitted.

Originally posted by wingman77
I am not the author of this video. I am neither bald nor over thirty.

I didn't say you were, but you didn't explain your position. De-bunkers posts this sort of stuff all the time because they have no real points to argue.

I'm not claiming that all people who research 9/11 don't focus on other things as well, I just thought that this video brought up an interesting point. I'm not a de-bunker, I lean towards the government was involved side....

OK fair enough, but as I said you didn't really explain your position in your OP, so it does look like that's what you're saying by posting this vid.

You say you disagree with the vid ['I'm not claiming that all people who research 9/11 don't focus on other things'], but then again you say it has a point ['I just thought that this video brought up an interesting point']? It's all just a bit confusing is all mate...

You say you disagree with the vid ['I'm not claiming that all people who research 9/11 don't focus on other things'], but then again you say it has a point ['I just thought that this video brought up an interesting point']? It's all just a bit confusing is all mate...

I think the confusion lies in whether we see 9/11 as a means to an end or as an end in itself.

reply to post by wingman77


I think the guy brings up a good point but I think the "truther" that he speaks about only represents a small percentage of the people that have questions or just want to learn more about what actually happened that day(even if you might believe in the OS we were still just told the very basics of what happened or lead up to that day).

I think he also makes a point that he doesn't intend to make. Which is that if he thinks are government is capable of all those things he says and as he puts it "these things are uncontested" how could anyone who believes that not believe that they couldn't be responsible for 9/11. The fact is they could be.

Not everyone thats interested in 9/11 is a "truther", not everyone is worried about prosecutions and convincing others "9/11 is a inside job" some are just looking for all the information out there and studying the event.