I hate introductions (This thread contains sharing of ideas)

[NorthernSoul]

...but here it goes.

Hi, hope everyone reading this is doing well.

I'm a student in Lincolnshire and have followed the 9/11 truth movement since watching Loose Change 2nd Edition back in 2006. I was very much taken in by it without giving it much thought and spent perhaps a week quoting from it. When I was introduced to the debunkers retorts however I realised that the arguments against the truth movements claims was were and are very strong.

I have no political affiliations and recognise the arguments for and against the War in Iraq and Afghanistan and havn't, even now, formed a definative opinion. I am open minded to ideas but not so open minded that my brain falls out.

I'm basically here in hopes of introducing people who may not know the debunker retorts (I'm sure a fair number here have but I also know that no "Truther" I have spoken to knew the arguments against their claims) and to just generally stick my opinion in whenever I can.

Thanks for allowing me to bore you with that introduction.

[A.L.EX-N.E.TA]

Hello - I myself only started posting here 30-mins ago so should probably intro myself too!

I'm Matt (don't let the name fool ya) from Heanor in Derbyshire. Truth since April 2007 after I stumbled upon Alex Jonese Road To Tyranny on google video whilst looking for a Ted Bundy confessions tape. Angry as hell ever since (and I was pretty angry before).

I'm almost done with writing my 9/11 Truth Rap Anthem (you'll like it even if you don't like rap) - I wanted to write one as soon as my eyes were opened but it wasn't until I head Reemo Conscious'es "We Know" at the end of Loose Change 2nd Edition that I knew I could (and I dare say mine is even better - but I'm not big headed).

Would love to write a 9/11 Truth dtrama for a feature film - if anyone has any ideas - important notes of 9/11 that CAN NOT be left out (like Daniel Pearl, why he was in Pakistan and the guy that killed him) - please let me know.

[blackcat]

[NorthernSoul]

My intention is to give people the oppotunity to see both sides of a particular argument, something that cannot be done from a small section hidden at the bottom of these forums. I am sorry if you are uncomfortable with that.

You clearly have a great deal of confidence in your beliefs, as such I am sure you will have no problem proving my retorts to be...wrong.

(That wink smiley is going to become so very useful)

[Edit: Of course if you wish to skip my posts that is your decision, and I am not a doubter, I'm a...skeptic is probably the best word]

[blackcat]

[NorthernSoul]

It is nice to know that the UK branch of the truth movement is so very welcoming. I have been, in my opinion, more than polite.

It troubles me that you are so set up on quashing my ability to state an opinion.

I have no intentions to mislead, if you ever believe I am doing so then please pick me up on it and present evidence to the contrary.

I am trying to be polite and fair. As mentioned I am very open minded to new ideas. I very much look forward to hearing yours.

[Leiff]

This is a forum for supporters for the call for a new enquiry into 9/11.

If you use the search facility you will find that most if not all of your questions will have been answered already. If you have further unanswered questions, post them in Critics Corner, where I'm sure they will be efficiently debunked by posters there.

[NorthernSoul]

I don't have any questions [Edit: I take that back]. I am here to offer an alternative point of view and it is my sincere hope that you will not prevent me from doing so. Unfortunately the oppression of alternative views is something that is common in Truther forums, I hoped this forum would be different. I am slowly learning however that it is not.

You will find that Truther opinions are not blocked on sites such as Screw Loose Change, it is a sorry fact that the 9/11 Truth movement does not show the same courtesy.

I have every intention of using the search function.

[kbo234]

[NorthernSoul]

[Stefan]

Northern Soul,
You are very much welcome - and will be treated with the respect you earn according to your own M.O. (note that critics like Alex who are generally polite are treated far better than those like Pepik who are generally rude and sarcastic) - however you are only welcome in critics corner.

This is not censorship or an attack on you - it is because we order debate into different areas here - it is generally a site for "Truthers" as you call them come to discuss different issues and a lot of people here don't want to spend their time debating people whoes minds are clearly closed to alternate possibilties, so we have a set area where those who do wish to do so can.

Unlike many forums which include 9/11 as a subject area we welcome critics of 9/11 Truth as well as people propounding the more zany theories out there - most forums ban both - all we ask is you respect the set up we have kindly provided for you.

[NorthernSoul]

I wonder whether the same line was fed to black people in South Africa?

So basically it's E-Segregation, oh I think I just coined a new phrase. E-Segregation, must look that up.

Of course I don't consider this remotely similar in scale to the suffering of black South Africans but this is an interesting phenomena .

You have come out, and accused me of being closed minded despite the fact that you openly admit people here are unwilling to discuss and listen to other points of view?

Open mindedness revolves around the concept of being able to change ones mind, and as I have said this is something I have done based on evidence rather than faith in some great movement.

I am prepared to limit new topics to the Critics Corner as applicable however I hope you will not prevent me from replying to topics of interest in other sections.

[NorthernSoul]

May I add that your unfamilliarity, as it seems to me though I could be wrong, with the term truther suggests that you may not have visited debunking sites such as Screw Loose Change, 9/11Myths and so on, of course you may have done and just missed the word truther but that is my current perception.

If you have not visited the sites which try to demonstrate that the arguments the 9/11 truth movement uses are often based on lies, distortions or rumours then I beg of you to take a look at these sites as soon as possible and do not allow your current beliefs to cloud your judgement of the evidence proposed on those sites. I add that these websites are likely far better informed than I or any other debunker or truther on these forums.

[WyldeChylde]

Hey dude, can't imagine you've received the warm welcome you may have anticipated so far, but welcome aboard

First off, whenever I hear the word 'truther' I cringe - in my opinion it has become the new 'conspiracy theorist' i.e. simply to label an individual as part of a nut-case group who no-one of sound mind should be listening to...as this is a load of hogwash I myself would also use " " when referring to it.

I'm not sure where I stand on you essentially being relegated to 'Critics Corner' though...the amount of true research needed to sift through the rubbish from either side of the debate is phenomenal, and is obviously a lot of hard work. At the end of the day, certain things happened in a particular order on Sept. 11th. It is our job as citizens to dig like we've never dug before and find out the truth - if you have any information that can be well-sourced, documented and has been thoroughly researched by yourself that perhaps shows that a certain area of the Truth Movement's investigation to be inaccurate or just plain wrong, then I fail to see why it can't be debated openly in this forum. If it's right, then it's right, and vice versa - simple as.

Some people might be tired of debating on here, but what harm can be done in proving a particular aspect of the story wrong or right?? In fact I'd say it's invaluable.

[WyldeChylde]

[NorthernSoul]

Thank you, I couldn't agree with you more, in terms of debate, though I think we must continually keep in mind that the burden of proof is very much on the Truthers. They, in my experience, have failed, in 6 and a half years, to come up with a single criminal case or even a working theory as to what happened on 9/11.

I use the word truthers, as many do, primarily because calling them the 9/11 Truth Movement is very misleading of course from my perspective. I would happily refer to them as the 9/11 Denial Movement if it would be preferable.

Obviously I don't know where you stand on this issue at the minute.

As for bringing up alternative sites, it was these sites that opened my eyes to the lies and distortions of 9/11 denial videos and I feel a lot of people may not know that these retorts to the movements claims even exist, introducing people to this material is vital for them to make an informed decision.

So far what I have seen, and I dearly hope I am wrong, is a blatent attempt to avoid any form of intelligent conversation and prevent visitors seeing alternate theories and retorts to the claims made by conspiracy theorists.

Thank you for the first polite reply I have yet had.

[NorthernSoul]

I have no definitive position, however I heavily lean towards the official theory, that is, that Al Queada carried out the attacks on 9/11. I simply believe that the evidence against the official theory is at best, flimsy.

I am inclined to agree with the vast vast vast number of engineers, architects, scientists and other professionals who agree that 9/11 was NOT an inside job.

[Edit: Well that sounds quite definative actually]

And your position my friend?

[WyldeChylde]

I must say that my opinion differs largely to say the least!!

I believe that at best, the US government knew of the attacks and allowed them to happen as a way to mobilise public opinion in support of the War on Terror and the consequent 'wars' in Afghanistan and Iraq.

At worst, I believe members of the US government, theirs and other countries' intelligence agencies orchestrated the event for the same purpose as above.

Either way, I believe the Official Conspiracy Theory to be false.

[NorthernSoul]

My initial problem with your worst case scenario is, can you imagine how many people would have to be keeping quiet in order for it to remain a secret? We are talking 1000's of people, without a single whistleblower?

[Sixy]

Hi Northern Soul

I do not usually post on here, but since I read your "welcome" to the forum, I felt compelled to reply and add my bit!

First of all, welcome to the forum! And secondly, (not that I feel that I should be doing this) I'd like to apologise for the initial reception that you got here. I found some comments left in response to your polite and honest post disgusting. How some of the posters have the title of a 'validated poster' after leaving those comments is beyond me. I can assure you that their reaction isn't a true reflection of all the people within the movement. I hope that they do not have a long-lasting impression on you here. You will soon find those here who you can hold a decent conversation with treating each other with mutal respect. (Maybe it's the fact that they are 'hiding' behind a computer screen that they do not feel that the word 'respect' is needed, I beg to differ).

I think WyldeChylde has put it quite well though. I'm sure you have found this out for yourself now, but the section "critics corner" is usually where people debate the issues surrounding the events of 9/11. However, I feel that anywhere is a good start and I'm glad that you have felt compelled enough to come to this forum in the first place.

Anyway, I am sure that many people here will listen and debate with you the finer points of the issues of 9/11. I for one like to look at the facts that surround the events, rather than more vague theories. For example, we know that the Bush adminstration had received advance intelligence warnings of the strike happening. Other things that intrigue me is the way WTC7 fell and how this was reported on the BBC before the building went down. Personally, I don't believe the official story of what happened and to be honest, I do not know what happened. I do know that there are things which make the official story sound a bit fishy and that spurs me on to dig through the information that we have to try to make sense of it.

[NorthernSoul]

I agree that aspects of the official theory...lack clarity perhaps. I don't doubt that the CIA wnat to hide their failures and we are unlikely ever to know what happened in the Twin Towers and Pentagon and in the air. I think my major concern is about audacious claims like controlled demolition and that kind of thing.

I would mention that while I believe the CIA may have had some of the hijackers under surveillence and on the terror watch this (The 9/11 commission report states which of the 19 were being watch in the very first chapter "We Have Some Planes" I do not believe President Bush, Cheney, Powell, Rice or any other high ranking government figures had any prior knowledge nor do I find the BBC's report of WTC 7 falling at all suspicious, my understand is now that a BBC reporter misheard a fireman (or other) saying they were expecting the building to collapse. This in it self does seem quite fishy but given the environment I can see how this might happen. (I agree it is not a compelling defence of your point but nor can we base a criminal case up on that one point so...)

Anyway, I look forward to discussing things with you in the future, thank you for the welcome.

[WyldeChylde]

That's a fair point, but is not definitive proof that a conspiracy didn't take place. If you were over-seeing an operation of this magnitude, trust would be utmost importance.

Let's not forget that people have come forward - Sibel Edmonds who was an FBI translator who got fired for being a pain in the arse when she discovered shoddy translatory works prior to 9/11 which could have prevented the attacks. She also disclosed employees questionable qualifications and a large back-log of un-translated documents. She now has a gag order placed on her.

Let's also not over-look John O'Neill, who also worked for the FBI and got a little too close to the supposed hijackers in his investigations, and was stone-walled by superiors. Think about that. After being frustrated, he then quit his job and was later given a job as head of security by Jerome Hauer of Kroll Industries, who profited from 9/11, had offices in the WTC. John O'Neill died in the attacks, a few days after he started his job.

[blackcat]

Well, on reflection I feel compelled to apologise to Northern Soul, who I can see is a decent and honest person who has come here not to spread lies and obfuscate but is intelligent and thoughtful. In fact I now realise that everything I once thought was wrong and s/he, like all the mainstream media, are correct. Forgive me and welcome. I am so happy you corrected my insane conclusions. I am now a firm believer in the official conspiracy theory and only hope that Northern Soul can add his/her "views" to the 99.9% of what we are fed by the mainstream media to this site. A million thanks Northern Soul for being so kind as to make so many posts today. Without your brilliant deductions and selfless devotion to spreading the truth of whst happened on 9/11 I would have remained in "9/11 Denial". Thanks a million. Now p!ss off jerk.

[NorthernSoul]

I am aware of Sibel Edmonds, to my knowledge she was a translator for the FBI after 9/11 and has come forward with very little of anything. In my opinion at least

O'Neill is a story I am unfamiliar with however and will be sure to look up.

People will always profit from disaster. You have to put it in to context and consider who lost money as well, contrary to popular belief Larry Silverstein was far worse off after 9/11. As was the US government it self. Billions of dollars in vital infastructure had crumbled to the ground.

[NorthernSoul]

For the record I look at a a lot of alternative media. I'm just not naive enough to believe it over what the BBC tells me. I make informed conclusions based on all the information available, rather than blindly believeing one or the other.

[Sixy]

Just wanted to add the BBC documentary "Power of Nightmares" where they explore the links between the CIA and Al Qaeda. Don't know if you have seen it Northern Soul? If not, can be found at these links....

Part1
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-1320822957676559056&q=the+pow er+of+nightmares&total=605&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=4

Part 2
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=4602171665328041876&q=the+powe r+of+nightmares&total=605&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=0

Part 3
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=2081592330319789254&q=the+powe r+of+nightmares&total=605&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=search&plindex=6

[kbo234]

Does anyone think that Lego Central are, on this thread, test-driving their latest strategy for rendering this forum dysfunctional.......i.e. by drowning us in mind-numbing, but ever-so-polite, witless *ollox??

It's a very fair question.

(Hey, 'Sixy', how do you know that Northern Soul is 'honest'?)

[kbo234]

[Sixy]

[kbo234]