There is no such thing as 911 truth

[iro]

Why?

because there is no such thing as 'one truth'.

Truth is contingent to the person, the place and the time they inhabit. Truth therefore changes over time and is perceived completely differently from one person to the next. In this context, we all agree (mostly) that 9/11 was not as we were told on tv and by our politicians.. but that is all we agree on. That is the only accepted 'norm' of this loose banding of individuals

Therefore the mess that this forum and ALL other 9/11 forums has descended is entirely predictable.

This is not reason to despair or to fathom 'defeat' - for this is the realisation of freedom itself.


The evolution of humanity towards being truly free begins with the realisation that we are all unique and completely individual. We create our own truths and they resonate and work for us (or against us if we apply our power wrongly..depression, 'bad luck' etc..). Therefore in that sense the total mess of 9/11 truth was inevitable as a consequence of our evolution.

The internet threw people on the fringes of society together for the first time on any real scale - it was only then that I as a person realised the extent of the diversity of individuals in this World - and i truly think that is amazing as much as it is frustrating.

Being free and truly understanding freedom means that sometimes you cannot take you own side in an argument, we cannot crusade truth - because it is only 'our truth' - that is intellectual fascism. Others have created their own truth and will therefore reject yours. No planers are currently trying to crusade their truth as they see it onto mainstream 9/11 theory (whatever that is) and it is failing as those who cling to that 'truth' reject it.

There is nothing wrong with believing in whatever is your own truth, but i guess ill finish by saying that if any progress is to be made in this whole mess we all need to understand that to go forward in a solution oriented sense we need to accept a little irony in our beliefs. Our truths may be wrong, sometimes we cannot take our own sides in an argument. The close proximity the internet has created with the extremes of individuality is the friction for change. Right now we're riding the height of that friction and personally as an optimist and a pragmatist im ready for wherever the penny drops.

[MadgeB]

Very philosophical, but not very helpful in terms of bringing the 9/11 perpetrators to justice. Suppose ‘your truth’ is that the towers were brought down by explosives and let’s-not-look-any-further, and ‘my truth’ is that TV-fakery is already proven.

Then if successful as the dominant view of 9/11 ‘truthers’, your truth would finger a smaller set of criminals than my truth. If the pressure gets too much a few of the patsies can be put in the firing line - they helped Al-Qaeda plant the explosives, say. So limited truth leads to ‘limited hangout’, and the real criminals remain unexposed. That’s why the debate is so bitter.

[scubadiver]

So are we our own worst enemy?

[iro]

[John White]

[Wokeman]

Iro,
You aren't seriously proposing that had I switched on TV in the early evening of 9/11/2001 and watched the Twin Towers collapsing and a friend of mine (who thought that the whole notion of a controlled demoltion was a sheer nonsensical conspiracy theory) subsequently travelled to New York for a holiday, and arrived back in the UK yesterday, would be able to inform me that "Oh, yes, the Twin Towers are still standing!" We are not talking separate truths here, but separate realities. That is quite different, and incidentally treatable.

[Emmanuel]

Agreed

"Truth is contingent to the person, the place and the time they inhabit. Truth therefore changes over time and is perceived completely differently from one person to the next. In this context, we all agree (mostly) that 9/11 was not as we were told on tv and by our politicians.. but that is all we agree on. That is the only accepted 'norm' of this loose banding of individuals "

This event was witnessed by secondary source, by millions of people in all nations, the messages that accompanied it were either consumed and believed or examined and rejected. we must be here because we think there is something more to this.
All these other minor details, theories can be debated til the cows come home but what solutions are we offering?

Every day is a marking of september 11th. Every false flag terror news report or islamaphobic remark or glance that is happening on a daily basis. We have to stand up to this before we turn into zombies.
love Jacob x

[Rabbie McM]

[iro]

ah - forget it. If the last 3 posters are not capable of understanding the idea laid out for them then its really not worth elaborating

[marky 54]

most people who look into 9/11 conclude that there are grounds for a new independant investigastion to answer the questions that so far have been ignored.

therefore that must be the truth as a lot of people would not disagree.

only when you try to come up with the reasons or how it was done do people think the truth is differant, to me that suggests belief which isnt truth.

so i think when saying that people have differant truths what you really meant was beliefs.

know facts of 9/11 is the only reason we all agree there is something wrong with 9/11 which is the truth, unknown parts of 9/11 that are not explained led people to find the reasons which without known fact will lead to a belief.

they are both seperate and not the same. sorry if i dont make sense i am really struggling to word this in a way i feel explains it.

[ian neal]

[GodSaveTheTeam]

The truth is...

I've been away for awhile and return to see nothing has changed. The same old arguments within the movement. The War marches on, everyday we get closer to the surveillance state.

The Truth is it's real tough to enlighten the sheeple. Especially the track-suited shaven headed disease like mass who worship at the altar of the air-filled spheroid on 'match-nite'.

The truth is these are the true army of the NWO.

[Anthony Lawson]

There is One Truth — What is Needed is a Strategy to Get at It

Of course there is such a thing as ‘one truth.’ We may not know what that truth is, but it still exists. The fact that it was once believed that the Sun was in orbit around the Earth did not make it true; people believed that is was true, and they were wrong.

There will always be people who choose to believe in what has yet to be proved, or in something that someone else has convinced them is true. For them, belief is a substitute for the truth. But a substitute for something does not mean that the original cannot exist.

Instant Coffee isn’t coffee, it’s a coffee-flavoured beverage. But many people give it to you, after they’ve asked “Would you like a coffee?”

Belief isn’t truth, although it can be a comforting conviction which is mistaken for the truth.

Of course there is such a thing as the truth about 9/11 truth, but no one knows what that truth is. To further complicate the issue, there are people out there who insist that the official story is the truth, which most of those who contribute to this website believe it is not. We believe that the truth has not been revealed, because so much has, apparently, been distorted or misrepresented.

When I worked in advertising, one of the buzz phrases was: Unique Selling Proposition, or U.S.P. Which is what campaigns still need, in order to focus on what we are driving at (although they may come under a different name or acronym, these days).

In the case of the 9/11 Truth Campaign, the U.S.P. should consist of the most compelling anomalies between the official explanations of what happened that day, and what was and still is observable, on video footage, in photographs or in documents, for example. Evidence which was excluded from the subsequent investigation may also be important.

One way to go about finding this compelling group of anomalies, which will form the Unique Selling Proposition of our campaign, is to have submissions from the membership, followed by polls, the aims of which will be to shed all of the dross of speculation, in order to wind up with solid questions which can then be circulated to our friends, neighbours and others, to help drive a campaign for putting pressure on MPs, other officials, media outlets and journalists to start answering some questions.

Step 1: Anyone who is interested, puts forward his or her favourite anomalies, between, say five to 10. (Not in the form of links to other website, but carefully and succinctly argued submissions.)

Step 2: These are edited, to form a full list (without duplicates) which can then be voted on.

Step 3: The full list is published, and a poll taken to select the most popular anomalies, again between 5 and 10. (Personally, I believe that the fewer questions we end up with the better, although an A and B list might work.)

Step 4: Each of the anomalies is carefully researched, to ensure that we have our facts right, and reference material is prepared to back up the proposition as to why we believe that the official version appears to have no sustainable basis, or fails to adequately explain what happened.

Step 5: A final document is prepared which enlarges on the ‘Mission’ statement on the home page of this site, and which can then be sent to MPs, etc., and circulated by e-mail, for others to help back us up.

It will not be easy, because bucking City Hall never has been, but unless we get some concerted and well-directed effort going, we’ll all look back on our posts on this site as being a complete waste of time.

Hopefully, the organizers and moderators will make some positive suggestions or amendments to this idea, maybe they should be the ones to do the editing, or pruning in order to avoid doubling up, or select members whom they feel would take an unbiased approach. (A list of ‘We-don’t-knows’ might also be useful, to prevent stupid remarks like: “Well what happened to the passengers?” from clouding the issues.)

Remember the U.S.P. is to get the idea across—that 9/11 needs further investigation in order to reveal the truth about what happened that day—to MPs, the mainstream media and the British public.

Take care,

Anthony

[iro]

truths are beliefs - that was the point

now im not taking that to the ideological absurd extreme to say the sky is not blue and the earth does not orbit the sun - ot that the twin towers did not fall etc...

what i am saying, and i will only clarify this once, is that each individual person develops and nurtures a completely unique set of values with which they interpret the world around them. It is shaped by their own personality/features, and the situations and surroundings they have found themselves in through their life.

Therefore there can be no one agreed 'truth' or 'belief' - this is just a throwback to religion -the belief in 'the one god' - it is a fallacy of philosophy.

Now - wait, because i am only addressing this reality we all co-inhabit. I am not dismissing that there is a larger scheme of things operating, and i keep my personal beliefs to myself.... but we live in a material world, and within it there is no evidence, no sign and no hope of 'one truth' on anything abstract or anything interpretative. Even most science is conflicted.

i hope that clears up my think piece and i would hope the general poster here would sit back and read the words of my last 3 posts with care instead of making rash comments and missing the point.

I am not telling you there is no truth, after all that is only my truth, and if i did i would be a hypocrite - im throwing a thought out there and relating it to the problems of the 9/11 truth movement.

[Dogsmilk]

[Anthony Lawson]

Using Words Correctly

Iro wrote:

[ashgarth]

BELIEF IS THE ENEMY OF TRUTH.

[Anthony Lawson]

Research

Right on! You could add:

BUT RESEARCH IS IT'S FRIEND.

[Dogsmilk]

Quoting the dictionary definition of truth is as useless for understanding what truth 'is' as quoting the dictionary defintion for 'right' and 'wrong' is for considering how we formulate ethical systems and the meta-ethical systems that underlie them. In common language we use words like 'true' without analysing them too far to avoid every conversation turning into a big philosophical debate, but the very notion of 'truth' implies universality, objectivity. We are all, however, subjective entities and are not privy to an objective standpoint (arguably, only 'God' could achieve this).

Furthermore, what exactly is a 'fact'? What, exactly, is 'reality'? A fact needs to be true in order for it to be a fact. Reality? - no-one, however much Descartes and chums may have tried, has ever given a cast-iron argument to irrefutably prove it's, er, real.

You can't solve questions of epistemology by looking in a dictionary.


Words are not reality - they are a tool that help us try to make sense of it. They are as limited as we are. What words like 'true', 'good', 'evil' etc really mean has preoccupied people for as long as language has existed. No philosopher in history has ever come up with a flawless definition of how truth is determined or what it actually 'is'. No-one thought the issue had advanced when Samuel Johnson did his thing.

Words only work in terms of a group applying certain rules. They are essentially a game - the map is not the territory.

Check this out.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Philosophical-Investigations-Ludwig-Wittgenste in/dp/0631146709/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1/026-6619769-3909261?ie=UTF8&s=books&q id=1178194444&sr=8-1

I wouldn't say it's the truth. But it is pretty interesting.

I thought what Iro was saying about truth was pretty much a given. It certainly wouldn't be seen as unusual or inherently flawed in any University philosophy department.

'Belief is the enemy of truth' is a slogan that makes a lot of sense insofar as it is useful to recognise one's own belief system may prejudice one's interpretation of information. We strive for the truth - it's just no-one knows exactly what it 'is' (or truly 'knows' what it is to 'know' etc)

[iro]

[peloloco]

Iro, I can see where you are coming from and I am glad you brought this up. One thing I do wonder is that should the headline for your post be a statement or a question? Maybe you are proved right by the diverse reactions posted but what are we to aim for but the truth even if it will always remain ahead of us?

We are becoming more aware of our status as the peak of evolution and the responsibilities that come with it and that threw me sideways for a while. It strikes me that the more people want the truth the more it wants to hide. We know we are onto something and there needs to be reasoned and calm debate and above all educate eachother in a nice way if that is possible.
My truth is that I have many questions and I want to keep the right to ask them and if we cant get near the truth about 911 we are in trouble.

So 911 truth does exist and we are closer now than 4-5 years ago imho.

Pelo

[iro]

[TimmyG]

hmmm . interesting discussion
not sure wot you mean exactly tho

i'm a believer that in the reality i'm experiencing, the only thing i can prove 100% is the existance of my own conscienceness. everything else is probabilties. some people i've said this to think i'm mad, but i just see it as matter of fact.

i find it most probable that all you lot exist and society in general exists. i also find it most probable that there is 1 universal truth for the events of 9/11 in this reality. which is a consciencess i most probably share with the other people here.

[Anthony Lawson]

Word Definitions

Dogsmilk wrote:

[utopiated]

Best topic/thread title since this board was PHP'd into the digital explicit order.

[iro]

[Anthony Lawson]

There's this little line, underneath the last post:

Stop watching this topic

I'm about to press it: Have fun.

[iro]

[Emmanuel]

Iro: I think its great that you have raised this debate.

There is not only one path to the truth either.
Some people have only just realised there is a blue pill and a red pill on offer. Some are so far down the rabbit hole they have forgotten there are others still blindly slaving away in the matrix. And therefore become agressive and frustrated when others don't get the information which is obvious to them,

I am a fascinated by religions of the world but due to the amount of corruption that goes on there I am more interested in God.
If everyone is looking in the same direction ie God (something bigger than all of us , The cause of all causes) then we would all be more focussed and this would give us strengh to move on.
We have to ask ourselves to : why are we here? What was the question that brought us here in the first place?

[utopiated]