What do people make of this?

Post Reply New Topic

http://www.ae911truth.org/

I went to the presentation at Te Papa last year and I must say that it seemed like a pretty good case. Of course the extent to which the conspiracies take the questions it raises tend to wrap it in the same discrediting smoke but, what do other people think?

Twoofers ... can't live with them ... can't drop them all into an active volcano.

please elaborate?

Not sure what I would do with that information, if the conspiracy theories were true.

I frankly never got what the Kennedy thing was all about. This would seem to be related.

Thank you that it was not a video,

Twoofers? No idea. Somehow I do not think he has in mind tuwuffiya.

I can see no reason why the Regime would find crazy stuff useful.

I can see no reason to trust the Regime not to do crazy stuff.

The presentation I went to was full of video and comparative analysis.

As for the 'regime' doing 'crazy' stuff it wouldn't be the first time, the CIA and 'dirty tricks' go hand in hand.

The thing I find interesting is that so many heavy hitters have tied their reputation to this particular mast and that the evidence I was presented gave a pretty strong case to the 'terrorists plan attack, opportunistic rats add an extension' argument which requires only a fairly small conspiracy but an aweful lot of self interest and an almost sociopathic contempt for ones compatriots, which is not that hard to credit.

peace j

My wife has just provided the cue - twoofers is a distortion of TRUTHERS

I would never have guessed.

Thankyou Philologos, it obviously emulates the distortion a lisp would give enunciation of the word. As I thought a non constructive dismissal - fair enough, however this uncritical acceptance of [as you put it] the 'regimes' official line reminds me of the German publics swallowing of the deception vis-a-vis 'Polands agression' that preceded invasion in 1939.
Logic alone necessatates the acceptance of the principle that if other governments can act in deception of their own majority in service of a select minority then so can ones own.

peace j

On government:

I used to say there was no one I could trust with high office excerpt a very few I knew personally - and that if they started to campaign I would probably change my mind.

All power corrupts, who will guatrd the guards, and such.

I have noted:

Clinton is getting into notoriety and we fight in Bosnia.

Bush is unpopular and we have 911.

Obama is dithering and we gits Osama.

Not every possible example necessarily reflects the famous "point out the window to distract them" strategy of politics, magic, and other swindles. Real things and genuine coincidences happen. But one keeps count.

Note - Diogenes did not TRY to find an honest politician.

1. Twoofers are ignorant fear-mongers, utterly lacking any valid material evidence to back up their claims.

2. I can't stand them; they are more concerned with being believed than with actually telling the truth.

3. What they're doing is not illegal, just stupid and annoying; thus my only choices are to either endure them or ignore them.

Enough said?

You picked a fight in another thread saying this stuff and now you posted it for the same purpose on a different one for some reason. You said in the other thread that your point was to cause trouble. I see no difference here.

"Conspiracy Theories", by their very nature, can not be validated. In this way, they are like religions - the believers want to convert others to their beliefs without ever actually proving a single claim.

I've read the articles, I've watched the videos, and I've listened to the ranting.

If you ignore the innuendos, the open-ended questions, the Ad Hominem attacks, and the blatantly mis-applied physical principles, the Twoofers have less to say than any one of the multiple investigations that support the official conclusion.

Twoofers are not so much interested in revealing facts as they are in inspiring doubt. In other words, Twoofers are anarchy propagandists, spreading doubt and mistrust of the government, of scientists, and of intellectualism in general.

Their entire message seems to come down to: "Do not trust anyone who knows what they are talking about."

Nothing more to see here ... move along ...

Last edited by Fnord on 15 May 2011, 6:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Have you read the thread this far? Please provide your evidence.

If you find asking questions of the establishment and about world affecting ecents 'trouble making' then I would suggest you are someone who had best stay in their room and avoid the world because it is full of people making trouble.

The cyclopean view you have on 'freedom of speech' is astounding it seems to only apply to the likes of yourself beating your chest in front of the world at your 'all american' biggotries - why your fellow citizens are not embarrassed enough to shout you down themselves beggars belief as I know that anyone who behaved like you in this country would be resoundingly shouted down.

Now herrgrimm go outside and play with the other children the adults are talking.

@ Fnord,

Thats an aweful lot of instant dismissal friend, did you look at their evidence properly or are you making a knee jerk response? there is an aweful lot of fairly hard material evidence and highly respectable people involved here.

What exactly makes you so sure the 'official' version is spotless?

I agree there are an aweful lot of 'loonies' out there from the far left and far right spouting some outrageous claims mostly worthy of little thought but this group struck me as much more reasonable and produced material evidence from experts, analysis of evidence by credible experts and loads of interesting video from GZ during the unfolding of the days events.

peace j

As I said, If you ignore the innuendos, the open-ended questions, the Ad Hominem attacks, and the blatantly mis-applied physical principles, Twoofers have nothing much to say at all.

Thanks for your obviously enquiring and considered opinion, however you have said little more than your previous post, if you post again please elaborate, I asked a genuine question about an event that has international ramifications and some substance to work with other than a blanket rebutal would be nice.

peace j