The Idiocy Behind the '9/11 Truth' Movement

by **orz** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:17 pm

Uh what? Do people really not understand how security cameras work?? <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/tired.gif ALT="|I"> Sure it's a video camera, and takes pictures of course! <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"> But security video is recorded at a low frame rate... Come on, have you never seen bad reality tv crime shows? the grainy black + white guy robbing the 7-11 at one frame per second? <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/eyes.gif ALT=":rolleyes"> Naturally the authorities would take all the tapes (and you have to admit that if they weren't 'in on it' and were genuinely investigating that'd be the right thing to do, yeah?), but what level of detail do you expect a timelapse security camera is gonna capture of a plane (or missile <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/eyes.gif ALT=":rolleyes"> ) zooming past at full speed then exploding! <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/tired.gif ALT="|I"> You know those few absurdly indistinct frames of a blur and then an explosion at the pentagon that they eventually finally released? Well guess what: If you're thinking "oh why did they just show those 3 blurry still frames, they're hiding the rest of the video from us <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/mad.gif ALT=">:"> " then i'm afraid you're an idiot when it comes to video. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/tongue.gif ALT=":p"> Those few frames ARE the video. Clearly the chances of accidentally capturing a clear, distinct image of the plane, with identifying markings visible etc etc, on a gas station security camera are astronomical. So again, why muddy the waters and provide yet another distraction by demanding something that common sense indicates does not exist?

by **pugzleyca3** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:22 pm

I fully expected you to come in here a WOW me with your vast knowledge of photography. I wasn't disappointed, was I? "then i'm afraid you're an idiot when it comes to video" Fuck you. I don't give a crap if it is grainy, one frame at a time or whatever the case may be. I want to see what they've got because my tax dollars paid for it. And I think they're lying.

by **orz** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:31 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>How about releasing all the data? All photos? All security camera tapes? All the Cockpit Voice Recorder transcripts? All the ATC tapes? All the 9/11 calls? All the complete passenger manifests? All the supposed cell phone and air phone calls? All the radar returns, including the supposed phantom Flight 11 they supposedly scrambled to intercept? The WTC metal?<hr></blockquote> Oh sure, release of any/all of those things would be great... but probably not gonna happen, and probably not gonna prove a lot either way in many cases. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/frown.gif ALT=":("> All i'm reacting against here is the extremely depressing tendancy in conspiracy circles to imagine for some strange reason that security cameras capture super-crisp video at normal TV frame rates... I see a lot of the same stuff in the 7/7 investigations... implying that a single image of an alleged hijacker is part of a longer full motion video sequence that's being hidden from us wheras in fact they probably walked past the camera in one frame. Why not do a bit of research or just common sense thinking before including stuff like this that can only weaken your argument? (before anyone gets too excited, I must point out that I find the lack of CCTV images of the London 'bombers' totally ludicrous.... you can't take a step in london without being in range of a camera!!! <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/eyes.gif ALT=":rolleyes"> Oh and oooops ALL the cameras at Stockwell station happened to be broken too... <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/eyes.gif ALT=":rolleyes"> .... BUT i don't demand 25fps video of the guys walking about because i know it won't exist. What SHOULD exist and be shown to the public is at least a handful of not loads of images with the supposed bombers recognisably at the various places and times they were said to be....) (and if anyone mentions that idiotic nonsense about a railing in front of that guy's arm they'll get an e-slap! <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/tongue.gif ALT=":p"> <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/tongue.gif ALT=":p"> )

by **stickdog99** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:38 pm

So we are not supposed to care about all the suppressed evidence because you have concluded for us in advance that it "probably won't prove a lot"?

by **pugzleyca3** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:42 pm

Oh, and another thing, if what you say is the case and it may very well be, I don't want to have to hear their excuses from someone on a message board, I want it from the FBI. See, that's the problem. The truth movement may or may not deserve something in the way of being indicted by those who think they have gone too far, but some rabid debunkers become the unwitting mouth pieces for the official theory, which can be just as damaging as any whacko theory that could ever be concocted by the 9/11 "truthers". Of couse, I am saying this as someone completely convinced there was a coverup. The government doesn't need anyone to state their case for them, they have the mainstream media to do that. The 9/11 "truth movement" does not. They have all the information and a way to disseminate it to the masses. If the questions about 9/11 had been asked by the media, we wouldn't be here doing asking them ourselves. Both sides of this issue have not been covered adequately and until they are... No one will muzzle me, even by calling me an idiot.

by **orz** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:50 pm

OK, sorry, only a videot. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"> <blockquote>Quote:<hr>So we are not supposed to care about all the suppressed evidence because you have concluded for us in advance that it "probably won't prove a lot"?<hr></blockquote>No, certainly you should care; you're just not supposed to rhetorically demand probably nonexistant evidence and then take its failure to show as 'proof' of some kind. <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/tired.gif ALT="|I"> If you wanna hear it from the FBI and not random forum guys, then have you considered ASKING the FBI!? Not that I'd expect them to be forthcoming but you might at least get an indication of whether they claim to have such evidence or not?... (and a nice new file with your name on it maybe!? <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/smile.gif ALT=":)"> )

by **orz** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 9:54 pm

HUGH: Go into your kitchen take a piece of dry spagetti push both ends until it snaps Let me know what happens. For bonus points research what the bows of crossbows are made of.

by **pugzleyca3** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 10:01 pm

Ok, I'll settle for being a videot. Others have requested the information through the FOIA and were denied. I see no need to request it again and as you say get a nice new file with my name on it. These were individuals and I saw the copy of the request and the denial from the FBI, this was a long time ago, it may have even been posted on this board when I saw that. When (judicial watch?) asked for it, they got the same old thing we all saw before, that was widely talked about online and happened just recently, in the past few month. Point being, if they don't like the conspiracy theories, then why don't they just come out with it, show me those grainy pics and then I will shut up and quit asking. It's the WAY they handle the evidence and information that has caused this ground swell of questions. It's the subsequent events and the invocation of 9/11 to their advantage at every turn which has made people question every single thing they say and do. And as far as I am concerned, everything they say and do deserved to be questioned in the loudest and most shrill of voices in order to preserve any republic with democratic tendencies such as the U.S.. (What am I saying, regarding the republic? Arguing that I am fighting for freedom becomes a moot point if a person believes we've already been taken over, so my posts are made under the assumption that there is still hope to take it back.)

by **orz** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 10:10 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Point being, if they don't like the conspiracy theories, then why don't they just come out with it, show me those grainy pics and then I will shut up and quit asking.<hr></blockquote> Two possible reasons i can think of: (not mutually exclusive) 1. Many (not all!) of those with a conspiracy theorist mindset will NEVER shut up once an idea is fixed. Come on, you can't tell me that if they showed pictures clearly detailing a passenger plane at the pentagon etc, noone would claim they were fake?! 2. They DO like the conspiracy theories.

by **medicis** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 10:10 pm

I have always thought that those who would ridicule, and in so doing, commit multiples of fallacies of argumentation, and attempt to quash sincere and honest questioning are in league with the guilty. If anybody ever sincerely wishes to argue the science I would be only too happy to oblige.... if they will stick to clear and honest logical and empirical argumentation. But none of the 'debunkers' I have ever heard or ever read actually do so. Thus, they lose credibility even further in my eyes. One has to ask why they would attempt to be 'debunking' 9/11 truth efforts with such fervor in the first place. Cui bono. That is why I have very little use for such as the author of the Rollingstone article. They just become so many mockingbirds cackling and mewing. But, of course, all of this will become moot as the Military Commissions Act is implemented. Then, they really can get rid of the 'truth seekers'.

by **orz** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 10:15 pm

3. Control is controlled by the need to control. Once you get into the mindset of military/police 'need to know' secrecy why give ANYTHING away regardless of whether it really needs to be secret or not? Part of being in power is not having to do stuff if you don't feel like it however moral, logical or sensible it might be! <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/indifferent.gif ALT=":|">

by **orz** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 10:26 pm

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>Cui bono.<hr></blockquote> I hear that a lot... yes, a good thing to think about but never lose site of the fact that benefiting from something does not in itself prove you did it. Also how about this: Who benefits from stagnant circular arguments... good and important info diluted and discredited with insane gibberish... increasing alienation from the mainstream media and the more moderate anti-war crowd... brainpower expended on unprovable and irrelevent details... infighting over differing dogma... Divide and conquer and all that <img src=http://www.ezboard.com/images/emoticons/tired.gif ALT="|I">

by **medicis** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 10:46 pm

[Also how about this: Who benefits from stagnant circular arguments... good and important info diluted and discredited with insane gibberish... increasing alienation from the mainstream media and the more moderate anti-war crowd... brainpower expended on unprovable and irrelevent details... infighting over differing dogma...] You laud the main stream media? (your statement and apparent naivete about the MSM really sends up red flags to me). You dismiss with derisive comments like "stagnant circular arguments" and you assume alienation from the so-called "more moderate anti-war crowd" and minimize and deride with "unprovable and irrelevant (correction) details". These are covert efforts at ridicule - not logical and empirically-based arguments. When and if you do, you may gain credibility.

by **medicis** » Thu Oct 26, 2006 10:50 pm

Oh, and good night. Sleep is more important than responding to ridicule.

by **Mel** » Fri Oct 27, 2006 1:36 am

<blockquote>Quote:<hr>HUGH: Go into your kitchen take a piece of dry spagetti push both ends until it snaps Let me know what happens. For bonus points research what the bows of crossbows are made of.<hr></blockquote> HUGH: Go into your kitchen take a piece of dry spagetti drop another, shorter piece of spagetti on top of the first one, end to end. Let me know what happens. For bonus points research what the core and perimeter columns of the twin towers were made of. Edited by: <A HREF=http://p216.ezboard.com/brigorousintuition.showUserPublicProfile?gid=mel@rigorousintuition>Mel</A> at: 10/26/06 11:39 pm

The Idiocy Behind the '9/11 Truth' Movement

oh right

Re: oh right

yea

Re: yea

Re: oh right

:)

BOING!

Re: :)

z

Re: The Idiocy Behind the '9/11 Truth' Movement

also

hmm

Re: hmm

Re: hmm

Re: Spagetti

Who is online