Has 9/11 truth had its day ?

Here is another typical debunker style post, but posted from the truther perspective.

There isn't a shred of evidence to support the government's ridiculous claims to be innocent of a false flag attack on their own country and of murdering some 3000 of their own citizens before going on to murder hundreds of thousands more in Iraq.

But then what would you expect of an elite that tried to ethnic cleanse New Orleans during the Katrina Kleenup, and who run around naked in the woods at Bohemian Grove when they aren't "cremating care" in front of a statue symbol of the Babylonian god Moloch.

Who knew Reptilians could be so mean?

[edit on 7-7-2010 by ipsedixit]

reply to post by ipsedixit


I'm not getting the parody. That looks like about fifty per cent of Truthers' posts.

reply to post by TrickoftheShade

I will grant you that there have been some flamboyant truther posts. I'll try again. Here's a typical debunker style exhortation to vast overreaction, from the truther perspective.

Any academic institution whose digital simulation does not prove that the WTC towers came down in a controlled demolition should have it's accreditation removed.

Originally posted by ipsedixit


Any academic institution whose digital simulation does not prove that the WTC towers came down in a controlled demolition should have it's accreditation removed.

So what you're saying is that you're reversing the type of statements made by debunkers? Is that the idea?

In which case the opposite statement

Any academic institution whose digital simulation proves that the WTC towers came down in a controlled demolition should have it's accreditation removed

should be extant somewhere in a post by a debunker, at least in spirit if not verbatim.

And yet I've never seen anyone write anything like that.

reply to post by TrickoftheShade

Substitute Richard Gage and any number of experts in various fields who have come out for 9/11 truth, for "academic institution".

The ad hominem attack is a debunker standby. Maybe that comes with being on the "righteous right".

reply to post by ipsedixit


Leaving aside the fact that Richard Gage isn't an academic institution, I was asking for a specific quote, not a blanket assertion. Can you give me one?

Their Day Has Come.... and Gone

The Real Truth in numbers.

As I have mentioned previously, outside the internet, the 9/11 Truth Movement is practically non existent. As they say, the numbers don't lie.

The following is a list of several city's that have a 9/11 Truth organization and get together outside the internet. Some here claim better organization, and that there is drastic growth. Please see for yourself where the truth movement is in the real world. (outside conspiracy theory websites)

Boston 9/11 Truth

Massachusetts Population: 6,593,587
Boston Population: 590,763
source

Boston 9/11 Truth statistics:

196 Members= 0.033% of the population of the City of Boston

or 0.002% of the population of Massachusetts.

Boston 9/11 Truth have held 23 Meetings in 2009. The average attendance to their meetings is 3.2 members.

So, they get a 1.6% average of their member to their meetings.

Atlanta 9/11 Truth

Sorry, 'www.atlanta911truth.org' does not exist or is not available.

Grand Junction Colorado

28 Members strong. Have not held a meeting since last August. The average attendance at their meetings? A solid (1)

source


Cleveland Campaign for 9/11 Truth

we keep losing members and we haven't had a meet up in over a year it will soon be May just looking for input are their and dedicated members out there willing to participate in a meet up please respond thank you no location no set time no input no meet up

2 people attended out of 79 members.

www.meetup.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow">source


What about New York City???

Population of NYC: 8,214,426
source


911 Truth Activists (members) 1,454

So, there is 0.01% of the population involved in NYC We Are Change.

They seem to have a larger turn out at their meetings.

Their past 10 meetings average about 6 members per meeting. Or, 0.4% of their members.
source



Any questions?

Originally posted by SphinxMontreal

While we're at it, how about some more attention to detail? Is there any particular reason why you do not bother to capitalize the first letter of the first word of a sentence? Unless, of course, you do not consider a group of words which asks a question a sentence. Again, these are "details" which most people learn in the first grade to advance their credibility.

Ouch. You cut me to the bone with that, you did. Am I to be concerned about what you think of my credibility? Absolutely not. My point was made - the inherent lack of attention to detail or specifics when you and your fellow Truthers defend your unsubstantiated claims of official government malfeasance in this issue, combined with your absolutely ludicrous claims of controlled demolition and remote controlled aircraft or laser super-destructo beams from space is sufficient evidence that something less than a crisp mind and a sharp wit is at work here.

When all you can come up with as a rebuttal is a handful of typos? I'm quaking in my boots, I am. It *must* have been an inside jobby-job!

reply to post by Six Sigma


Interesting post.

I'm often told that I'll end my days swinging from a rope when the glorious Truther revolution finally rights all wrongs. I'm not quite so worried now.

Mind you, I wasn't that worried in the first place.

weedy...

Remember...

The rules say you cant keep blaming "truther websites", yet you did it again....!!

Because it's as plain as day that the whole OS is soooo full of holes,demonstrated quite admirably by yourself in your previous post were you attempted to explain but 4 points i raised, and was found wanting....resorting, as always, to put-downs instead of sincerity...

This has nothing to do with websites, and everything to do with the two photos I attached...

Your video of a small 200 year old block of flats in Lisboa, which is a laughable comparison I might add, shows the dust effect I presume you are trying to fob off as similar to 9/11's dust effect( or what did you call it..."dustification")....
interesting weedy...

As you may have clearly misunderstood, lets try one more time....
Where/what is this source you referred to that is causing ALL that dust and steel to explode at the TOP of the buildings..your video's dust is from your 200 year old clay bricks hitting the ground...whereas WTC1 and 2 has "dustification" as soon as the explosions occur....HOW??


AND..NO blaming the "unprecedented, first time in history blah blah"

Youve dragged laser beams in to discredit, then you tried thermite/ate....but you are skirting away from my Q.....

Have a good flight today??

Originally posted by benoni
weedy...
Where/what is this source you referred to that is causing ALL that dust and steel to explode

It's not exploding.

AND..NO blaming the "unprecedented, first time in history blah blah"

Even though 9/11 was unprecedented? Odd way you have of looking at things.

Originally posted by benoni


Where/what is this source you referred to that is causing ALL that dust and steel to explode at the TOP of the buildings..your video's dust is from your 200 year old clay bricks hitting the ground...whereas WTC1 and 2 has "dustification" as soon as the explosions occur....HOW??

Gravity. (nothing is exploding)


Dustification is a word made up by that Loon Judy Woods. This is probably why Weedy brought up the Space Beams.


[edit on 7-7-2010 by Six Sigma]

reply to post by benoni


Huh?

The rules say you cant keep blaming "truther websites", yet you did it again....!!

"rules"??

"blaming"??

The title of the thread is: Has 9/11 truth had its day ?

"9/11"

"truth"

So, how is mentioning "9/11 truth websites" (or "truther websites, same thing) against these so-called "rules"?? It is a most puzzling comment to make...

...however, discussing the details (yet again, ad infinitum) of perfectly understandable videos and scenes from that tragic day... of buildings collapsing... isn't really in the spirit of the topic on hand; and convincing a few stalwart "believers" who can't see the reality that is presented, nor draw the obvious parallels, isn't my task here. The material refuting what many "truthers" believe has been offered countless times, which many causual readers will no doubt notice, on other threads.


As to the thread topic: I believe it's been addressed sufficiently.

The answer to the question appears to be, on the whole..."Yes".

reply to post by benoni



Benoni,

I am quite certain you have watched these videos in the past. Let's, for memory sake look... and listen again.

Here is the collapse of the South Tower. Start the video at about 1:00.




Now, the following are controlled demolitions:

Please turn your speakers (and brains) on.

I believe the governments explanation of 9/11 kind of fits in with the JFK assasination and the "magic" bullet,i'm sure same ones believe both storys,And I bet they did reasearch too not! what a joke

So if the top of WTC1 didn't turn to dust then how do you explain this...



The top is gone before the bottom starts to collapse, watch very closely OSers...

www.youtube.com...

Watch this, see the right facade of the building still standing as the center drops?

www.youtube.com...

Update to the poll from this pg.

No 409 voted, the government lied about 911.
Yes 20 voted, the government told the truth about 911.

I will continue counting as more votes come in.

This proves on ATS, that the truth has not been told about 911.

www.abovetopsecret.com...


It really does not matter how big or how small the Truth movement is.
The fact is most people know the government lied about the events of 911.
An ATS poll speaks for its self.
The OS believers can deny everything all they want but they cannot get rid of the Truth.
Most people are not as stupid as some of you OS believers believe.

Most people do not have to be in any Truth movement to know they have been lied to, something some of you OS believers keep forgetting.

[edit on 7-7-2010 by impressme]

Originally posted by ANOK
So if the top of WTC1 didn't turn to dust then how do you explain this...

Trivial and easy.

The yellow line is in the wrong place.

But, as usual, you fell for the woo cuz you aren't able to figure that out for yourself.

Originally posted by ANOK
So if the top of WTC1 didn't turn to dust then how do you explain this...

Well, it could have been:

Richard Gage's patented "Hush-A-Bombs."

Steven Jones amazing "Paint-it-on/ Na-Nu-Na-Nu Super Dooper Thermite"

OR

Judy Woods new and improved "Dustification" Star Wars Beam from Space!

Take your pick Anok!




[edit on 7-7-2010 by Six Sigma]

reply to post by Six Sigma


That doesn't answer the question now does it?

You think by being sarcastic it makes the evidence that contradicts the OS go away?