Are you a "Debunker" that denies the existence of an Official Story? Here's your sign

reply to post by Judge_Holden


Hello Judge,
you say that you don't think the people behind the public face of government are capable of cover ups and provide a few well known examples but imo all the events listed, maybe with the exception of the Monica Lewinsky BJ, happened as planned. For example Nixon definately didn't want anyone knowing about the watergate scandle, but the people actually in control of the goverment and the country did aand thats why it came out.
Secondly, when the government/Feds/CIA want to cover something up they can and do, J.F.K being the prime example. While I agree with you that alot of the info out there is dis-information, there is too much hard evidence provided by from expert scientists, expert pilots and explosives experts with regard to 9/11, not to mention all the recordings of fire fighters and police officers in the towers where you can HEAR the bombs going off, HEAR firefighters and police saying that they can SEE explosions etc backing up the 'inside job' hypothesis. Jet fuel not burning nearly hot enough to melt the steel supports to bring the towers down just one easily researched truth that makes a mockery of the 'official report'.

Scientific Poll: 84% Reject Official 9/11 Story
Only 16% now believe official fable according to New York Times/CBS News poll
Truth Movement has the huge majority of opinion

www.infowars.com...

The [CIA] actually did make a video purporting to show Osama bin Laden and his cronies sitting around a campfire swigging bottles of liquor and savoring their conquests with boys, one of the former CIA officers recalled, chuckling at the memory. The actors were drawn from “some of us darker-skinned employees,” he said. [Washington Post 5/25/10]

whatreallyhappened.com...

*sigh*
Well that disproves most of the Comments "pro OS" on this thread.
The rest of the comments claiming there is no official story kind of disprove them selves...

There isn't even enough evidence to Charge OBL for Jay walking let alone 911, and since America is about truth and justice any one who supports the death penalty that has been applied could only be a heathen...or worse...A dirty commie!


PS what happens in court when you get caught perjuring your self again...?
Oh Yeah...
"YOU GOT JAIL!"

[edit on 26-8-2010 by Danbones]

[edit on 26-8-2010 by Danbones]

reply to post by Prove_It_NOW


if you red my post i said i don't believe the official story so i believe it was an inside job, probably even those who "believe" the official story know this but are just disinterested in talking about it.
The fact that you were pretty harsh on your reply proves that the 9/11 debate has gone out of control with both parts offending each other.

The problem with 9/11 and other conspiracies as well is not a question of it being true or false,
it is "what are we going to do about it?"

Originally posted by ProdigalSon
reply to post by Prove_It_NOW

 

it is "what are we going to do about it?"

In support to the original posting, wheres the damn Feds report ?

Should I make my own 911 report and claim its the Official 911 Report ?
Is there NTSB report ? Is it the official ? How about NORAD report ? Semi official ? DoD report ?
Which one is the official report that sum it all actually ? wheres the Feds report ?

Lets start building banners people! Memorial day is near.

Originally posted by okbmd
reply to post by VirginiaRisesYetAgain

 

Is it the fact that you really just don't get it or are you pretending to not understand ???

NIST issued their report . You disagree with it and call it a conspiracy and/or cover-up .

FEMA issued their report . You disagree with it and call it a conspiracy and/or cover-up .

The Kean Commission issued their report . You disagree with it and call it a conspiracy and/or cover-up .

WHOSE burden is it to PROVE these reports are a conspiracy and/or cover-up ???

SEE WHAT I MEAN PEOPLE ???

And the post I mentioned , that you have so conveniently ignored for days now , proves you are wrong in one of your assumptions/theories . Please note that I said PROVES you are wrong .

" ...I don't really think anyone in their right mind would have a problem seeing the total ignorance of " you not realizing that the burden of proof is on the accuser , not the accused .

The accused does not have to prove his innocence .

The ACCUSER has to PROVE his guilt .

FACT .

I believe you actually have this backwards....

the federal govenment is the accuser... saying 19 hijackers flew 4 planes into 3 buildings.

the federal government said that 3 WTC buildings fell from the plane strikes and ensuing fires...

the fed said that a plane hit the pentagon

it is now on the accusers to show evidence..

they have failed at that.

there is resonable doubt that their story is true

that is enough to question the OS.

now what?!?

Well it's obvious that if they admit there is no ''official story" The invasion of Iraq is illegal. Very incriminating status.
Debunkers trolls and shills, I have noticed, have only multiplied. They have not succeeded in outshining "the proof and evidence seekers, the researchers, victims and sharp scientific whistle blowers." They are similarly programmed to propagate confusion intimidation information that is memorized(they freak when you ask them what it means though)and violence. Real intelligent people do not really bother with them anymore, we have come to realize the loss of energy is the ultimate gain for cyber shills. But we keep em around just to gather more evidence cause they love to exhibit their evilness.
I am posting this on my facebook, I'll be keeping an eye;-)

reply to post by VirginiaRisesYetAgain


You forgot the Pentagon building performance report.

Just sayin'.

It's been nearly 10 years... Geez what happened was awful and i feel bad for the families that was directly suffered and I'll support their pursuit of justice, but by now what "they" say doesn't matter anymore, stop looking back and look ahead. We can't change that business men from america have blocked access to free energy, hemp or the truth! we just have to wait for the next big thing and protect it with all our hearts, such as first world countries blocking development of third world countries via "green tax" and "greenhouse gasses"

Originally posted by WENEEDAREVOLUTION

when the government/Feds/CIA want to cover something up they can and do, J.F.K being the prime example.

Oklahoma City Bombing comes to mind when you talk about them succeeding in a cover-up...

1st 24 hours of news footage "its been confirmed that there are multiple explosive devices in the Murrah Building.'

the OS "a truck bomb was the cause"

kinda fishy...

I cannot help but laugh to myself every time I hear someone believe the official story of 9/11. I,myself use to be in that camp but then I eventually found something that never existed when I was younger, LOGIC AND A BRAIN. The only points I usually make on this subject are, what happened to building 7? Why did they report 20 minutes ahead of time if collapsed when you could clearly see it in the background? How did they know it was going to fall? Why did Larry Silverstein say "Pull it" when he could have just as easily said "Pull the firefighters out of the building" So many questions that you will probably avoid there debummer.

[edit on 26-8-2010 by hawaiinguy12]

The problem is that there is not a consensus on what parts of the OS get accepted and which don't. There was always going to be a bigger burden of proof on the shoulders of Conspiracy Theorists because they were going up against the Official/Authoritative report.

But the thing is that many have gone beyond what was needed to establish that parts of the OS are inaccurate or inconsistent. It is therefore now the burden of those believing in the OS (9/11 Commission Report) to rise to the challenge and prove that the OS is accurate.

Debunkers are, naturally, good at dismissing Conspiracy Theorists' views as invalid, but they are naturally weak at supporting their own positions.

ETA: There is an Official Version and this cannot be denied (9-11 Commission Report). This document has been the basis for the "validity" of the Official Story (OS).

[edit on 26/8/2010 by Dark Ghost]

reply to post by VirginiaRisesYetAgain


I just got done reading page one of this thread.

I believe one of the problems is the blatent conspiracy on the part of the "Main Stream News" to subliminally influence people to disregard the evidence concerning the events of 9/11/2001.

Here is examples of how FOX "News" utilizes neuro-linguistic programming psyops' techniques to influence and control their viewers' logical reasoning and disrupt the flow of truthful information:
i do not believe that the msm goes to this level of psyops for no reason:

originally posted by NoRegretsEver
1 Interpreting Media NLP Neuro-linguistic programming

2 Interpreting Media Neuro-linguistic programming or NLP

more about how they subliminially influence (brain rape) their audience:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
(also in my signature)

I believe if the "Main Stream News" is obviously efforting at this level to subliminally influence the opinions of millions at this level, they may be a tool or the extension of someones' wills to cover up the truth.

hope this helps readers of this thread to realize, your news may not be news, therefore audiences are not informed, rather dis-informed.

hope this offers some insight into the conversation here, entered for your consumption and consideration.

I'm all for people forming their own opinions. I just think said opinions should be informed opinions, not misinformed opinions one has because main stream news organizations are using psychological warfare tactics to subversively usurp peoples' own thought processes.

hope this helps,
ET


[edit on 26-8-2010 by Esoteric Teacher]

The existence of an Official Story has been told many times by the "officials" of the Bush administration. How can anyone deny that an Official Story exists? Right or wrong, the Official Story certainly exists. Anyone debunking its existence need only review the administration's statements over the period after the 9-11 travesties.

Earlier a poster implied that the BigGov story should be accepted as is, or proof should be presented to the contrary. What we have here are two thoughts, not one, and should be considered separately. First: what BigGov says must be backed by factual evidence when presented. Second: those doubting the BigGov story need to present reasons why the evidence provided by BigGov is in error.

The problem is this...BigGov presented a 9-11 story with almost no evidence. BigGov said, “we are BigGov, trust us." NOT SO. Anyone seriously evaluating this subject must realize that the error in presenting evidence is with BigGov. With a lack of evidence on the part of BigGov, the 9-11 truthers and others have accumulated mountains of evidence that the BigGov story is bunk.

Debunking is a valid pursuit if it is based on a proper presentation of facts. Fact is, BigGov is the one lacking a presentation of evidence backing up their Official Story.

Can I bring a little conspiracy type question that is just speculation into this? Why did Bush senior give his New World Order speech EXACTLY 10 YEARS to the day before 9/11? Something smells like fish

are you a paranoid, delusional, fact-ignoring sociopath who thinks everything in existence is a plot by the United States government to steal your RV camper and radio transmission equipment?

Here's your tinfoil hat.


See? It goes both ways.

[edit on 26-8-2010 by Snarf]

Originally posted by Snarf
are you a paranoid, delusional, fact-ignoring sociopath who thinks everything in existence is a plot by the United States government to steal your RV camper and radio transmission equipment?

Here's your tinfoil hat.


See? It goes both ways.

[edit on 26-8-2010 by Snarf]

So what you did here was basically avoid the legitimate questions I had and just jump to your preconceived notions that anyone who believes 9/11 was fishy is crazy. Good job! You are proven yourself to be another idiot on this tread!

reply to post by hawaiinguy12


I've done the same thing to you that you've done to everyone who DOESNT believe that the Airplanes were holograms created by Klingon technology.

You jumped to conclusions and insults against anyone who's willing to believe the common sense story hat a bunch of whackos in a cave somewhere hate this country enough to fly a few airplanes into a building.

I'll start answering your questions, when all of you go back and start answering mine (Which have all, every single one, so far, been ignored)

P.S. you might want to look in the mirror before you go around calling other people names. Does it make you feel tough? Big Boy?

[edit on 26-8-2010 by Snarf]

Kudos to you,
2nd line

reply to post by hawaiinguy12

The only points I usually make on this subject are, what happened to building 7?

Because thats what can happen to any structure that burns for hours.

Why did they report 20 minutes ahead of time if collapsed when you could clearly see it in the background?

They= BBC. Reporters and anchors that may not have been familiar with the particular building nomenclature that morning, a number of WTC complex had either collapsed or were in danger of collapsing. Its called a mistake. They happen. Often.

How did they know it was going to fall?

It was completely on fire and leaning. Generally good indicators.

Why did Larry Silverstein say "Pull it" when he could have just as easily said "Pull the firefighters out of the building"

Well, the obvious response based on your presentation - "it" is easier to say then "the firefighters out of the building". Also, Larry was responding to a statment wherein they were refering to a team of firefighters in the building. So he responded with "it".

And now the BIG question - how many more times will you ask the same questions and pretend you never got an answer?

completely on fire?
WTF?
there was two small fires that the fireman expected to have out shortley