The greatest single reason why I reject the hypothesis put forth by the 9/11 truth movement is that after more than 10 years no mainstream academic, scientific or news/ investigative publication has published written discourse that supports anything that might implicate our gov't in the 9/11 attacks. In many respects, the Jones/Thermite paper is the only publication related to the 9/11 movement that has been published in a scientific/academic periodical- though the reputation of this periodical is in question http://www.nature.com/news/2009/090615/full/news.2009.571.html. To date, the 9/11 truth movement is supported by information that is disseminated through websites and/or internet videos. Credible information that would implicate our government in the 9/11 attacks would be the greatest news story in the history of journalism yet no mainstream investigative journalists have touched the story. Additionally, while many on this forum claim the physics related to the collapse of the wtc buildings unequivovally prove that controlled demolition brought the buildings down yet no academic/scientific peer reviewed articles support these claims. Ultimately, websites and videos are not considered academic discourse and until the 9/11 truth movement can produce academic discourse it will be viewed with contempt. To me, the inability of the 9/11 truth movement to publish academic discourse suggests that the evidence supporting it is marginal at best. Admittedly, I am no expert on 9/11. While I have many reservations about the official story, I have not seen any convincing evidence that our gov't was a party to the attacks. Additionally, as I have not come across any academic discourse to support tenets of the 9/11 truth movement I find their narrative even more unplausible than the gov'ts. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and the above is nothing more than my opinion. Perhaps someone could explain to me why I am wrong or show me credible and convincing evidence to the contrary.
The press is controlled. If someone were to try to come forward, the story would never make it past the editor of a mainstream newspaper or news channel. The only place I know of where objective info on 9/11 can be found is on the internet. Here's some of the info on 9/11 I've found. http://able2know.org/topic/177268-1#post-4782975 Here's some info about the media I've already posted several times in this section. At about the 30 minute mark of this video a scientist says that science fraud is common. http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-3626298989248030643# Scientists at the Rand Corporation say that depleted uranium is safe. http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/land/docs/b04151999_bt170-99.htm There are other scientists who say the opposite. http://www.google.es/search?q=depleted uranium&tbs=vid:1 It's clear that the government can find scientists willing to sell out and lie. Here's a scientists who say that it's impossible to get something published in a science journal if it goes against the official version. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bAE7FGdNmA (00:16 time mark) Here are some analyses of the media. http://www.thismodernworld.org/arc/1993/93short-attention-span.gif http://www.youtube.com/results?search_type=&search_query=chomsky+media&aq=f http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=ES&hl=es&v=Wi5h3vZl6uo http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=William+Schaap++-+The+Media,+CIA,+FBI+&+Disinfo.+&aq=f http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media/MediaControl_Chomsky.html http://www.chomsky.info/articles/199710--.htm http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media/media_watch.html http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Propaganda/Propaganda_page.html http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Media_control_propaganda/Media_Control.html http://www.cassiopaea.org/cass/official_culture.htm http://www.youtube.com/watch?gl=ES&hl=es&v=trWcqxrQgcc http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Herman /Propaganda_System_One.html http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXg70qJQ6O0 Here's some evidence that it might even be downright dangerous to try to come forward with the truth. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvay28lZiHU http://es.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfYBJFPuiwE http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ipKyUVuQ2Uk We are lied to about history. http://www.politicalforum.com/history-past-politicians/149071-american-imperialism.html It's ridiculous to even consider the mainstream media to be a reliable source of information.
I looked around for some videos on this topic. I just found this one. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ck3VBAKxznw I'm going to look for some more.
This is a convenient excuse for the glaring problem with 9/11. There has been no problem at all with nutjobs coming forward and pretending they had information on 9/11. Pretending someone who actually had information would be ignored is in and of itself, ignorant. It has been over a decade now. Not one piece of real evidence has been found that lends credibility to the truthtard bowel movement.
This one is interesting. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CHwX4ubbeRU She wonders about who actually controls the US government toward the end of the video. Here's a possible explanation. http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Ruling_Elites/BilderbergClub.html Do a YouTube search on "Bilderberg club" to see more.
Here's another good one. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ikTLt-y7-dE Do a YouTube search on "9/11 media censorship". There seems to be a lot of good stuff on this.
The cult leaders are good capitalists, though. Gage's sect alone milked hundreds of thousands of dollars from the gullible 'truther' flock in 2010. All while producing ... Nothing.
What media is controlled by whom? You do realize that all media does not come from a singular source, right? Are you really trying to claim that all media is somehow made to be compliant to the 9/11 conspiracy? You think that every credible scientific journal is in on it? Every newspaper, every television broadcaster, every radio host is part of the plan? In every nation? Everywhere? wow. That's just... It's not believable is what it is. This is why no one believes your theory. First, it's founded on far too much wild speculation, and second it constantly involved a wider and wider spectrum of people who have to be willing to participate.
Who controls the press? The government? Is this the same government that couldn't stop the press from reporting on Watergate or Monica Lewinsky? The same government that whose members are embarrassed time and time again by journalists' reports on their various indiscretions? I notice a common theme among conspiracists. They believe that the government is run by evil geniuses bent on world domination and the conspiracist is the only one who knows the truth. The actual truth is that the government is run by inept moron's who are just trying to get reelected because this is the only job that they are qualified for.
In todays wired age, government control of information is impossible. Just ask the former governments of Lybia and Egypt. Even with control over the internet they could not contain the news. You have youtube and other video sites. You have twitter. You have facebook. You have blogs. You have internet forums such as this. Yet not one person who was in on the conspiracy has come forward, much less come forward with evidence that proves their claim. Pretending they have no outlet for their news is naive to the point of childish.
Scott, this post really exemplifies the premise of the OP. In my opinion you are mining quotes and information from marginal sources to substantiate your preconceived conclusions. Youtube and websites are very marginal sources of information. I find it almost comical that you cited a creationists complaints about his inability to be taken seriousdly in the context of the scientific method as proof that science is corrupt. Additionally, its not uncommon for their to be credible academic debate on certain topics- ie DU. I find your supposition that all the news AND scientific publications are controlled bythe gov't to be almost delusion given the long history of investigative journalism and scientific research that has been published which has exposed and embarassed the govt. Ultimately, your post exemplifies my point that the truth movement wont be taken seriousdly until it can support its tenets w more than youtube clips.
Where did you get the idea that Dr Virginia Steen-Mcintyre was a creationist? http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&...av=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&biw=1600&bih=799 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bAE7FGdNmA (00:16 time mark)
Whatever.... The dude is saying he found human and dinosaur fossils in the same strata. The important lesson from the video is that if you are going to make conclusions that contradict the current paradigm you better have all your ducks in a row and a (*)(*)(*)(*) gooddataset or no one is gonna take you seriously. Whats more no one is going to take you seriously if your whole argument is based on videos from the internet.
What about WikiLeaks? What about blogs? There are plenty of alternative sources one could use that do not rely on the traditional mainstream media.
So now you are pretending your bull(*)(*)(*)(*) whining about 93 being buried is evidence of a government conspiracy?!? That's FUNNY! All you have is your opinion that 93 wasn't buried. That's not evidence of anything but paranoia and delusions of grandeur.
Is your belief that flight 93 did not crash in Skanksville based solely on the inability of forum members to quantify the amount of wreckage recovered from the alleged crash site? Additionally, I do not see how the amount of wreckage recovered from the scene can serve as direct evidence concerning the gov't involvementin the attacks. In the context of the OP, if this is infact evidence for a conspiracy why has it been completely ignored by all of the respected journalists in the US? In my opinion people like seymore hersh or bob woodward or any other aspiring investigative journalist writing for any of a number of mainstream news/literature periodicals would be all over it. Admittedly, I cant give you the exact mass of wreckage recovered. However, I dont doubt that 93crashed at that location due to the perponderance of circumstantial evidence that supports that conclusion ie radar data, seismic data, states evidence entered at trial, sworn testimony, cell phone records etc etc etc. In my opinion, the absence of one line of evidence is not proof of your assertions. Considering how elaborate and complex it would be to fake a crash site I find your position very dubious if the absence of a mass measurement is the sole basis of your position. Again, being that your position is supported by nothing more than posts on an internet forum and dubious 9/11 conspiracy centric websites do you really think it deserves mainstream credibility?
You're grossly misrepresenting what's happening in the video in order to sway those who don't take the time to watch it and do some research into the subject. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7bAE7FGdNmA (00:16 time mark) Dr Virginia Steen-Mcintyre is not a dude. I'm only using her testimony to bolster my argument. I'm not using the rest of the video to which you mistakenly referred. The people who made that video used Dr Virginia Steen-Mcintyre's work to support their theory. She's not part of their team. Do a page search on "McIntyre" in this article to see what happened to her when she tried to publish her findings. http://www.earlyworld.de/forbidden_archeology.htm Dr Virginia Steen-Mcintyre is a scientist and what she says is not to simply be sneezed at. What she says needs to be looked at objectively by competent people and it may fall by its own lack of merit but none of us are in a position to speak authoritatively. I have watched a few of these videos. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UhPMzsrZbw I'm not going to come to any conclusions though as I'm not in a position to verify whether those fossils, ancient tools, and animal bones with cut marks on them are really as old as they say they are. An article saying this is bogus info isn't going to debunk it as it might be a damage-control article written by a government sophist. Only an archeologist who actually examines and tests the stuff could be sure. I sure see a lot of dogmatism on the part of the pro-official version people here.
Go back and look at posts numbers 3, 4, 5, 7, and 8. It will take a few hours for you to get up to speed. A lot of people experience cognitive dissonance when they find out they've been basing their opinions on lies all of their lives so I don't expect an objective response from you. http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/dissonance.htm This might be another possible explanation for an unobjective response too. http://www.opposingdigits.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1222
Well the FBI said they recovered 95% of the plane and most of that was said to have been recovered underground (one quote was 80%, which seems logical since it looks like at most 15% of a 757 remained above ground), so I can't see how that wouldn't prove the govt lied if nothing was really buried. Can you help me out on that one?
