The State Of This Website (And 9/11 Truth) IMO...

Alex_V

I'm trying to ween myself off the endless debates here in critics' corner - hopefully a longer rant will do the trick for me.

It seems that this site is dying, at least in its current form - this may be a good or bad thing, but I sense that those 'in charge' of the UK truth movement merely hope that in killing this website off they can present a cleaner public face to the public. I don't see how this is possible - clearly, in this country, many 9/11 truthers are also Icke followers, UFO seekers, believers in magic and mysticism, and other very obscure interests. This cannot be hidden by website facelifts or restructuring. Holocaust denial or revisionism, for example, may be abhorrent to many involved in 9/11 truth, but to pretend that there isn't a significant overlap between the two movements is self-deception.

The trouble, the bottom line, is that if the truth movement cannot begin to persuade 'moderates', as I consider myself, then it cannot succeed - I suspect that those at the heart of the movement are starting to understand this, and are now trying to play down the rather embarassing collection of disparate allegations that exist under the 9/11 truth umbrella.

The truth is that, like it or not, there is no aspect of 9/11 truth which isn't hotly debated - whichever side of the fence you sit, I hope even a cursory glance through critics corner proves at least that fact. Despite the infinite announcements to the contrary, there has been no absolute 'smoking gun' - no absolutely definite piece of evidence that proves an inside job. If you haven't read the 'debunking' to your favourite 9/11 smoking gun, then you just haven't been following the debate clearly enough. The problem being that on the huge majority of 9/11 truth websites, there apparently IS no debate - an approach which not only polarises the debate, but allows truthers to exist in a sort of bubble, unaware of the very debates in which they should be engaging. Whenever a truther tells you the case is proven, they are either lying or totally naive - unfortunately it is usually the former.

I do not mind in the slightest people having an opinion, or investigating issues they are interested in, but to hide from real debate is cowardly and corrupt - unfortunately I think this approach is endemic in the movement. The sense I get is that many truthers are 'tired' of being disagreed with, rather than relishing the chance to test their theories, or the state of their case against the OT. Most on this site would rather critics were kept off it, let alone ghettoised into a carefully hidden section - what a triumph for supposed champions of free speech!

As for the bigger picture, in my time on this forum I have learned what a straitjacket being a truther can be - once you start espousing 9/11 truth, you cannot almost on principle believe any facet of the establishment. If you believe that the media is hiding the truth, almost no aspect of news reporting can any longer be trusted. Any hint of corruption is then a tangible trace of NWO operation - each crime or even mistake in the past a feature of a growing web of corruption. It all starts to transmogrify into an alternate universe, a fairy tale of good versus evil.

My own personal experience, limited in terms of politics as it is, utterly blows out of the water these strange fantasies about politics and the media. Truthers often wonder why the likes of Galloway or Monbiot don't share their view of the political World - that's because they KNOW something of it, and realise how the truther concoction simply doesn't occur in reality. I feel the same - I have/had friends in the media at ITN, the BBC and Sky, and on newspapers, and simply from their experiences I know how that system works, and it is nothing like the grotesque parody that many truthers believe. My father, once part of a Labour council with Jack Straw and Patricia Hodge, KNOWS those people and knows something of how they tick - there is no NWO plot at the heart of British government, corrupt as it may be.

So much of what I read is utterly inconsistent with this strange truther/NWO view of the world - it gives me such an insight into what a lonely place it is to be a truther, simply because so much cannot be believed. I read Piers Morgan's diaries recently - pure tittle-tattle, and nothing to do with 9/11 truth, but I put the book down realising that many truthers simply could not believe much of what was contained within them on principle. An impotent royal family? A dithering incompetent government machine? A slimy out-of-control oik in sole charge of the output of a national daily newspaper? This culture of incompetence is simply not in keeping with evil plans to annexe the middle east and hide a 9/11 inside job. I felt the same after reading 'Black Swans' recently (one of the best books I have ever read) - a history of the World dictated by irrational, extreme one-off events that cannot be predicted? A human race dominated by incompetence and randomness? Truthers simply cannot accept that '* happens'.

It seems to me that on principle, as a truther, you simply have to reject the meanderings of the rest of the human race as either fabrication or desperate naivety. To a truther, the rest of the world must be asleep, because everything that they say and do seems so incongruent to the World you have to believe in to support 9/11 truth. Mainstream science is corrupt, because they support the OT, and therefore man-made warming is a hoax and flouride is poisoning us. Every time the media lead on a story that isn't uncovering the NWO machine at work, they are a corrupting evil influence on the human race.

And as the world keeps on turning, the truther mind slips further and further into a vicious circle of thought that bears ABSOLUTELY NO RELATION TO REALITY WHATSOEVER. It is fed not by first-hand experience of the World, but by second-hand information filtered by other truthers. YouTube videos of selective and seductive slices of media reporting, the rantings of enthusiasts like Alex Jones or David Ray Griffin safely housed behind their microphones or keyboards, facts churned around from website to website until nobody knows where they come from and what they represent.

I retain a hope that 9/11 truth will affect some sort of positive change in the World, but I am more fearful that it will descend into further extremism, perhaps eventually of the violent sort. Perhaps, with such a future on the horizon, the movement is right to try and soften its approach, or even to end in its current guise.

Busker · Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 5:49 pm Post subject:

If you're looking for a place to start I would suggest the numerous videos of the collapse of WTC7 would be a good place.

Using the laws of physic, forces in structures etc. how can the collapse be explained.

If you're like me, that may involve a return to the books to brush up on my knowledge, but considering NIST are taking so long to explain the collapse, I didn't feel too bad about that.

Forget the emotive language and go back to first principles. If you can prove the HOW, the WHAT and WHY generally fall into place.

scubadiver · Posted: Thu May 01, 2008 5:52 pm Post subject:

Following on from Busker, could you explain why the Commission ignored the collapse of WTC7 in the report?

If it is claimed it was as a consequence from the collapse of WTC1, why not say so?

Even FEMA admit this explanation only has a low probability yet apologists maintain its the undeniable truth.

Rolling Eyes