Weak or bad arguments nine eleven truthers use!

American Germanic Fox

The Force is Strong With This One
Ok I am doing this because a lot of nine eleven truthers use bad or stupid argument that are easy to knock down! Holocaust revisionist and creationist also do this. I am neither but I understand why it should be done... If you are trying to promote any idea that is not accepted by the main stream you are going to run into to problems when you make bad arguments.

1. The 2001 Osama confession tape is fake because Osama has a fat nose.

Problem: The nose is fat because of an angle. This has happened in other vids and photographs of him. Please google photos of him if you don't believe me!

Better Argument: The 2001 Osama confession tape is mistranslated and does not anything which can prove guilt.

2. Jet fuel dose not burn hot enough to melt steal.

Problem: There have been partial collasps in lower tempeture fire which Alex dipstick has shown on his website unknowingly!

Better Argument: The towers fell at free fall speeds and were only partially on fire there for should only have collapsed only on the top. All debunker collapse theories are just revamped versions of the pancake theory by the way.

3. All confessions are fake because the people making them are lookies likes

Problem: These could be just doubles to protect them!

Better Argument: "Nothing serious has been provided since. There is much talk of bin Laden’s “confession,” but that is rather like my confession that I won the Boston Marathon. He boasted of what he regarded as a great achievement." as Noam Chomsky says therefor this means nothing because terrorist groups claim they did things all the time which it turns out latter they didn't.

4. The government has done things like this before and could easily get away with it!

Problem: Not on this level... This would require a lot more deception then had ever been done before! This amount to the same problems no plans theories have.... To much insanity!

Better Argument: It would be better to put the argument out there that 9/11 hoax was outsourced to other countries like Pakistan, Israel and Saudi Arabia. First Pakistan was giving lots of money to the supposed hijackers according The 5 Unanswered Questions About 9/11: What the 9/11 Commission Report Failed to Tell Us by James Rigdeway a mainstream book which does not argue for an inside job. Also Fox and ABC showed the thing on the dancing Israelis and Bush had enough connection to the bin Laden's to order it out through them himself. We should look into the idea that Bush and other Neocons used their influence to order the Al-Qaeda to do it through Saudi Arabia! Michel Moore and Michel Hoffman have both researched this idea and come with interesting results! We should also look that Al-Qaeda may be a Pakistani merc group.

5. The photos and videos show melted steal!

Problem: these appears to be some sort of photoshop hoax by Steven Jones and NIST... There is a no planes site which exposes this quite well for even if it wasn't a no planes site!

Better Argument: There were witnesses shown in David Ray Griffin's book Debunking 9/11 Debunking... This is much better evidence for melted steal then the photos!

6. The Pentagon was hit by a missile.

Problem: Why in -flick- would they do this... They would expose themselves instantly if any vids came out! To stupid for them!

Better Argument: The plane his at an angle which could only be done by a professional pilot! This is examined by David in the previously mentioned book in light detail. This would enplane every anomaly.

I won't go into myths like pods, no planes and no Jews in the tower!
 
It seems to me that your approach is based on convincing people rather than pursuing Truth. I find that problematic. Have you read everything on this site and SOTT, etc. about the evidence of the 9/11 hoax? Or Laura and Joe Quinn's book 9/11 The Ultimate Truth? I think this would be very good material, if you are interested in getting as close to the truth as possible.
 
SeekinTruth said:
It seems to me that your approach is based on convincing people rather than pursuing Truth. I find that problematic. Have you read everything on this site and SOTT, etc. about the evidence of the 9/11 hoax? Or Laura and Joe Quinn's book 9/11 The Ultimate Truth? I think this would be very good material, if you are interested in getting as close to the truth as possible.

I like Truth I just don't like looking nuts at the end of the day! I will watch the film but right now I am more interested in books on the subject!
 
American Germanic Fox said:
SeekinTruth said:
It seems to me that your approach is based on convincing people rather than pursuing Truth. I find that problematic. Have you read everything on this site and SOTT, etc. about the evidence of the 9/11 hoax? Or Laura and Joe Quinn's book 9/11 The Ultimate Truth? I think this would be very good material, if you are interested in getting as close to the truth as possible.

I like Truth I just don't like looking nuts at the end of the day! I will watch the film but right now I am more interested in books on the subject!
In that case, the book mentioned above by SeekinTruth won't disappoint! :D
 
American Germanic Fox said:
Ok I am doing this because a lot of nine eleven truthers use bad or stupid argument that are easy to knock down! Holocaust revisionist and creationist also do this. I am neither but I understand why it should be done... If you are trying to promote any idea that is not accepted by the main stream you are going to run into to problems when you make bad arguments.

1. The 2001 Osama confession tape is fake because Osama has a fat nose.

Problem: The nose is fat because of an angle. This has happened in other vids and photographs of him. Please google photos of him if you don't believe me!

I have, and I don't believe you, because it's clearly not him.

American Germanic Fox said:
Better Argument: The 2001 Osama confession tape is mistranslated and does not anything which can prove guilt.

Even better argument, Osama officially denied any involvement in the attacks in early 2002.

American Germanic Fox said:
3. All confessions are fake because the people making them are lookies likes

Problem: These could be just doubles to protect them!

Better Argument: "Nothing serious has been provided since. There is much talk of bin Laden’s “confession,” but that is rather like my confession that I won the Boston Marathon. He boasted of what he regarded as a great achievement." as Noam Chomsky says therefor this means nothing because terrorist groups claim they did things all the time which it turns out latter they didn't.

Take note, there is no tape, audio or video, where it can be proven that Osama bin Laden accepts responsibility for 9/11. Also take note, there are no "terrorist groups" as they have been portrayed by the US, British and Israeli (among others) governments.

American Germanic Fox said:
4. The government has done things like this before and could easily get away with it!

Problem: Not on this level... This would require a lot more deception then had ever been done before! This amount to the same problems no plans theories have.... To much insanity!

Nonsense. If you understand the compartmentalisation of government agencies and that greed is a sickness and addictive, it becomes obvious that it was possible.

American Germanic Fox said:
5. The photos and videos show melted steal!

Problem: these appears to be some sort of photoshop hoax by Steven Jones and NIST... There is a no planes site which exposes this quite well for even if it wasn't a no planes site!

NYC firefighters have testified that they saw molten metal in the rubble.

American Germanic Fox said:
6. The Pentagon was hit by a missile.

Problem: Why in -flick- would they do this... They would expose themselves instantly if any vids came out! To stupid for them!

Not too stupid, and why do you think they haven't released any of the videos? Because they can easily keep them hidden, as they have done. Which addresses the "they could get away with it easily" point.
 
Perceval said:
American Germanic Fox said:
Ok I am doing this because a lot of nine eleven truthers use bad or stupid argument that are easy to knock down! Holocaust revisionist and creationist also do this. I am neither but I understand why it should be done... If you are trying to promote any idea that is not accepted by the main stream you are going to run into to problems when you make bad arguments.

1. The 2001 Osama confession tape is fake because Osama has a fat nose.

Problem: The nose is fat because of an angle. This has happened in other vids and photographs of him. Please google photos of him if you don't believe me!

I have, and I don't believe you, because it's clearly not him.

http://emptv.com/research/loose-change-4#osamas-confession-tape This website when it ngets repaired will show you a photo not from the tape that I am talking about which reveals that when Osama's head is tilted upward that it has the ilusion of being squashed.
osamafake1.jpg

This little dimonstration I created has

Perceval said:
American Germanic Fox said:
Better Argument: The 2001 Osama confession tape is mistranslated and does not anything which can prove guilt.

Even better argument, Osama officially denied any involvement in the attacks in early 2002.

American Germanic Fox said:
3. All confessions are fake because the people making them are lookies likes

Problem: These could be just doubles to protect them!

Better Argument: "Nothing serious has been provided since. There is much talk of bin Laden’s “confession,” but that is rather like my confession that I won the Boston Marathon. He boasted of what he regarded as a great achievement." as Noam Chomsky says therefor this means nothing because terrorist groups claim they did things all the time which it turns out latter they didn't.

Take note, there is no tape, audio or video, where it can be proven that Osama bin Laden accepts responsibility for 9/11. Also take note, there are no "terrorist groups" as they have been portrayed by the US, British and Israeli (among others) governments.
I will say that including that Bush and the Bin Ladens are tight enough to have ordered Bin Laden to do it himself!
You did not disprove anything I said.... You've edited me by the way so I have to repeat myself... Something I unlike Chomsky have no problem doing. The people in Bin Laden's organization have said things which do confess that this happened.

American Germanic Fox said:
4. The government has done things like this before and could easily get away with it!

Problem: Not on this level... This would require a lot more deception then had ever been done before! This amount to the same problems no plans theories have.... To much insanity!

Nonsense. If you understand the compartmentalisation of government agencies and that greed is a sickness and addictive, it becomes obvious that it was possible.
Nope not understanding why they would do something incriminate themselves. Evil does not mean stupid! I said they out sourced it not that they did not do it. Bush made deals with other powers is what am arguing.
American Germanic Fox said:
5. The photos and videos show melted steal!

Problem: these appears to be some sort of photoshop hoax by Steven Jones and NIST... There is a no planes site which exposes this quite well for even if it wasn't a no planes site!

NYC firefighters have testified that they saw molten metal in the rubble.[/quote]
Never said they did not just said the Steven John photos are shoped.

American Germanic Fox said:
6. The Pentagon was hit by a missile.

Problem: Why in -flick- would they do this... They would expose themselves instantly if any vids came out! To stupid for them!

Not too stupid, and why do you think they haven't released any of the videos? Because they can easily keep them hidden, as they have done. Which addresses the "they could get away with it easily" point.
[/quote]
They are keeping it secret because they wanna shoot you down when the moment is good!
The plane just hit at a different angle that is all.
You are editing me to look like a debunker by editing out my better argument as well as my analyse on the flaws in the truth movement story, when I am simply trying to tell you some fact to help in the 911 debate to prove our points.

Oh by the way guys I will get the book 9/11 ultimate truth as soon as I can. I will tell if I think it was better then others I have read. I am having a rough Christmas vacation with my parents so I need to convince them to get me that book tomorrow or maybe the next day. I can not get Kindle books on my own right now.
 
Dang it the photo I created did not show up! Just stretch the Fatty Bin Laden on your computer and you'll see what I am getting at. It is him from a weird angle;. I would like to say that another thing about angles is that Michel Hoffman a lesser known researcher has shown that the Bush family could have ordered it out with the Neo-cons and the Saudis with there little known connections... Also there is a good possibility that Al-Qaeda is a Pakistani front organization. Israel could have easily had the dudes on the van making shure it all went down properly so their shared oppium industry would be protected from their enemy the Taliban which was also an enemy of Al-Qaeda! Little know fact there. I am looking at all possibilities... And I can name a hundred it could have been pulled off and several suspects all allied with Israel which benefited greatly from 911. I look at all ways something could have happened. I think once I read 911 TUT I will write my own book if I am not satisfied.
 
American Germanic Fox, I'd like to bring your attention, once again, to searching and reading everything you can on THESE sites, because an exhaustive amount of research and discussion already exists, including what red herrings and disinfo / disinfo agents are out there. It is a HUGE amount of reading and will take quite some time, but if you really want to get to the nitty gritty, it's worth it.

In addition to the overall tenor of this thread, the examples and sources, such as Noam Chomsky and Michael Moore, that you've brought up are part of the controlled opposition -- they set the "acceptable" boundaries of what can be discussed. So it seems like you have a lot of getting up to speed to do on this subject.
 
SeekinTruth said:
American Germanic Fox, I'd like to bring your attention, once again, to searching and reading everything you can on THESE sites, because an exhaustive amount of research and discussion already exists, including what red herrings and disinfo / disinfo agents are out there. It is a HUGE amount of reading and will take quite some time, but if you really want to get to the nitty gritty, it's worth it.

In addition to the overall tenor of this thread, the examples and sources, such as Noam Chomsky and Michael Moore, that you've brought up are part of the controlled opposition -- they set the "acceptable" boundaries of what can be discussed. So it seems like you have a lot of getting up to speed to do on this subject.
In order to be controlled opposition, you don't actually need a handler, you just need to be a little unaccepting of facts which scare the Jesus. David Ray Griffin enplanes that in his most recent very well! Disinfo is sometimes just self inflected in order to protect one's self from harsh realities!
 
Either way one does not swallow anything. In some way, they are just two faces of the same coin. So, that's not the point, it's just to argument for the sake of argumentation.
 
What matters in the "9/11 Truth Movement" -- like in everything else -- is the Truth. It is obvious that those who pulled it off would also get their agents into the "movement" early on to vector and muddy the waters, inevitably causing all the infighting and confusion that has existed for so many years. Not to mention all the unconscious agents of disinfo/misinfo each with their favorite theories and lack of enough critical thinking, etc. who have not looked at all the evidence and made a careful analysis.
 
American Germanic Fox said:
They are keeping it secret because they wanna shoot you down when the moment is good!
They already released a new "video" of some object impacting the Pentagon about a year or 2 ago (I say "video" because it was just a few frames). It only further solidified the fact that it wasn't a 757 at all. If they had something better, why release something that only adds weight to the conspiracy theory? Currently all the evidence points to a complete lack of plane, and it is very damning evidence, so it makes sense to go with where the data leads, rather than be afraid of being "too crazy" and actually ignoring the data in favor of a less "radical" conclusion.
 
SAO said:
American Germanic Fox said:
They are keeping it secret because they wanna shoot you down when the moment is good!
They already released a new "video" of some object impacting the Pentagon about a year or 2 ago (I say "video" because it was just a few frames). It only further solidified the fact that it wasn't a 757 at all. If they had something better, why release something that only adds weight to the conspiracy theory? Currently all the evidence points to a complete lack of plane, and it is very damning evidence, so it makes sense to go with where the data leads, rather than be afraid of being "too crazy" and actually ignoring the data in favor of a less "radical" conclusion.

Show me this so I can examine it and come to my own conclusions about it! I more think this because I don't understand why use a missile rather then a plane! Do you have a motivation for something like that!
_http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/9-11PentagonExplosions.php
_http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/ppfinal.html

Some links to show flaws in the missile theory!
 
SAO said:
American Germanic Fox said:
They are keeping it secret because they wanna shoot you down when the moment is good!
They already released a new "video" of some object impacting the Pentagon about a year or 2 ago (I say "video" because it was just a few frames). It only further solidified the fact that it wasn't a 757 at all. If they had something better, why release something that only adds weight to the conspiracy theory? Currently all the evidence points to a complete lack of plane, and it is very damning evidence, so it makes sense to go with where the data leads, rather than be afraid of being "too crazy" and actually ignoring the data in favor of a less "radical" conclusion.

Exactly. One of the clearest things about 9/11 and the weakest link in the whole cover up is that no 757 hit the Pentagon. Whatever it was -- a missile or small drone or whatever -- it definitely was NOT a 757.
 
SeekinTruth said:
SAO said:
American Germanic Fox said:
They are keeping it secret because they wanna shoot you down when the moment is good!
They already released a new "video" of some object impacting the Pentagon about a year or 2 ago (I say "video" because it was just a few frames). It only further solidified the fact that it wasn't a 757 at all. If they had something better, why release something that only adds weight to the conspiracy theory? Currently all the evidence points to a complete lack of plane, and it is very damning evidence, so it makes sense to go with where the data leads, rather than be afraid of being "too crazy" and actually ignoring the data in favor of a less "radical" conclusion.

Exactly. One of the clearest things about 9/11 and the weakest link in the whole cover up is that no 757 hit the Pentagon. Whatever it was -- a missile or small drone or whatever -- it definitely was NOT a 757.
Or one of the best pieces of disinfo ever planted on the movement. There is a lot of strong evidence like the presence of MOSSAD bomb filled trucks all around the NYC area and the links between Osama and the American government... And the fact that the MI6 unofficially admits that Al-Qaeda mean the database. There is lots of evidence that this is fishy!

Please look here I can deconstruct or counter any argument you make! http://cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php/topic,25187.0.html Watch me deconstruct the arguments made by Shermer in this thread!
 
Back
Top Bottom