3 type's of people on this site

[zimboy69]

type 1
the one's who belive in the goverment story no matter what anyone says they will defend it to the end
i have no idea why these people are on this site
if what the goverment says is really all true
and they come here and just fight all that makes is a bigger noise and kinda gets more people looking at whats the noise about

type 2
the ones who belive that there is a big cover up and almost everything about 9/11 is fake
but this is quite a hard type to prove as it would involve 1000's of people involved
and i think there are certain facts that are without question
but at least these people bring new ideas and try to expand the forum and to put at least new and intresting ideas forward
and i wonder whats next NO TOWER THEORY

type 3
there are the ones who say 9/11 dosent feel true
one or more points just dont fit the jigsaw

now i belive that almost everyone who fills this type belives in parts of both stories but there are niggling doubts and somthings just dont fit

im all for free speech and i could see the point the npt was putting up but i have also seen how people have really put it down in a quite nasty way from certain people

im sure that all npt people have really tried to show somthing new (if correct or not) but the way some of them have been put down is also wrong
i mean what happens if some one really works out what happend on 9/11
they come here u all shout them down and they go away cause they cant argue as good as you it dont mean that there point is wrong it just means they cant argue as good as u

[marky 54]

poor npt poor npt.

if npt is so true why would certain researchers need to use misleading and false information inorder to prove it.

are you saying people should accept lies because it might hurt someones feelings if they don't????

if people are wrong or promoting misleading evidence expect it to be pointed out and don't presume people are saying NPT is false overall.
what they are saying is researchers are using misleading evidence and disinfo to prove it is true, which has been proven and is wrong.

how can you defend it?

i don't care what theory is being promoted in a dishonest way, it deserves to be exposed and persons made accountable for the errors if they continue to promote them without correcting them after it being pointed out over and over and over again!

is this truth or a farce movement?

or do you think it is fine to mislead the public into believing it?

there are 3 types of people:

1. those who want the truth

2. those who want to promote disinfo to hide the truth

3. and those who have not woken up or do not see anything in what is being claimed overall.

the honesty of posters and their research dictates which one they are, sadly a lot of npt'ers come under number 2 as they continue to promote false information after it being pointed out countless times.

[blackcat]

It is not the fact that some people believe in the NPT - it is the way its adherents make a point of it being the be all and end all of every discussion relating to 9/11. They dwell on it to such a degree it smacks of a deliberate attempt to smear the 9/11 Truth movement as being as outrageous as the NPT "theory" itself. If they are not disinformation agents they do a damn good job of imitating them.

[chek]

[gruts]

^^ what they said.

IMHO if we think about how different groups of people perceive the events of 9/11, there are actually four groups....

Group A - people who either believe in the OCT or can't be arsed thinking about it.

Group B - people who ask logical and rational questions about various gaps or inconsistencies in the OCT.

Group C - people who swamp the internet with illogical and irrational claims about the OCT which are repeatedly shown to be bogus, while simultaneously attacking Group B at every possible opportunity (and portraying any attempt by Group B to disagree with them as a sign that they're "working for the perps", "shills", "truthlings", "planehuggers" etc).

Group D - the gullible, sheep-like useful idiots, sockpuppets, cheerleaders and repeaters who believe all the disinfo created by Group C.

the whole NPT/tv fakery thing looks to me like a massive distraction and also an exercise in futility - because even if you could prove (as opposed to speculate) that a particular video clip was somehow "fake" - it still wouldn't prove whether or not real planes hit the towers.

all the "evidence" for tv fakery consists of speculative assertions about video footage made by self-appointed video experts who don't actually know much about video and are "analysing" their own zoomed-in, highly compressed clips. the other "evidence" for NPT consists of speculative assertions about whether the crashes actually happened, which generally reveal a high degree of ignorance, gullibility and/or reality-denial on the part of the person making/believing the assertion (eg "aluminium can't penetrate steel", "there was no wake vortex effect in the smoke after the impacts", "the fireball was delayed", "all the evidence was planted" etc etc)....

and it always seems to be a pointless detour away from the real issues....

for example, just look at indubitably's thread about building 7:

http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=11733

there are some real smoking guns here, like:

why did WTC7 collapse in the way it did?
why are NIST so "reluctant" to explain how it collapsed?
why did the BBC report the collapse before it actually happened?

but all this gets completely obscured by screeds of meaningless waffle about whether or not Jane Standley is standing in front of a chromakey image. in other words - logical and rational questions are replaced by bogus, easily debunkable nonsense.

coincidence?

and anyone who thinks that people are putting the NPT crowd down "in a nasty way" just needs to spend a couple of days on this forum to see that it's actually the other way round.

as "proving" the NPT case often involves rejecting and trying to "disprove" the logical and rational questions about various gaps or inconsistencies in the OCT, it's also the perfect excuse for the NPT crowd to attack the people asking those rational and logical questions with claims that they're "working for the perps", "shills", "truthlings", "planehuggers" etc - which they seem to do at every opportunity.

coincidence?

[marky 54]

all i know is, you never see critics to 9/11 truth debating npt'ers and you never see npt'ers debating critics to 9/11 truth, they work more like a team from what i can tell.

[zimboy69]

why not all agree on some common ground find out what everyone
thinks happend

are we all agreed that it happens on 9/11

[Indubitably]

We are all agreed that 9/11 was a great crime and that the criminals have yet to be arrested. We are all agreed they should be arrested. We are all agreed that the 'truth movement' (like anything real) consists of all sorts of people, including those who simply wish to lead us round and round in circles. We are all agreed about the power of the media and of the never ending lies that surround this matter. And we are all convinced that the laws of science were not violated on 9/11/2001.

You must judge for yourself whether media fakery has occurred and whether it is still occurring. You must judge whether, in fact, the official report provides a solution to the causes of that tragedy. And whether the Twin Towers were destroyed by two commercial planes and the effects of them colliding with the tower.

Added to this, you must decide whether truth forums are really truth forums. Whether or not they believe in public accountability for eye witnesses, for example.

But most of all, you must not expect to hide yourself from taking a stand on what you think is right, having studied these issues yourself. The truth movement is honesty, accountability and it has no member who is right all the time.

I believe the key to 9/11 research is the media. It's the media who seek to persuade the masses. Who lag behind reality on these issues. Who can and must be accountable for their output and for their attitudes.

To date we see lots of talk but very little public accountability. That is what is missing.