9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom :: View topic - is David Ray Griffin a fraud?

FAQ

Memberlist

Chat

Usergroups

Calendar

Profile

is David Ray Griffin a fraud?
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> 9/11 & 7/7 Truth Controversies

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic

Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:23 pm Post subject:

DDD911 wrote:

I’m sorry but this is all sounds silly to me, SEJ & DRG + Loose Change 2 + Dan Rather & WTC7 all provided me with enough visual & scientific evidence to clearly convince me of deception with the official story, thanks to these people & videos my eyes have been opened to the gritty reality of politics, those men opened my eyes to it all and before I was very asleep.

I always though Steven E Jones had strong Christian views (coming from BYU) and so does DRG, I believe what allows them to continue their 9/11 work is simply they believe in right & wrong,

Look if they hadn’t illuminated me I would still be in la la land. Loose Change 2 was never my doorway to enlightenment, in fact I don’t think it should be used as a gateway video, just show any sensible American that Dan Rather CBS clip of WTC 7 and with his voice and that building falling often wakes many up.

Anyway what I’m getting at is that both SEJ & DRG made the case for conspiracy with regards to the attacks of 9/11, to say otherwise is not only dangerous to 9/11 truth its just wrong in the first place, who’s side are you on THETRUTHWILLSETU3? Because looking through your past posts and I can see is a person who attacks very credible people & just stirs up a wild fire of confusion, do your views carry much weight on here because if they do I’ll consider going elsewhere because this isn’t constructive it’s destructive!

I can certainly understand peoples worries about this place, I’ve only just joined and this place is full of in-fighting & arguments, its about time you all got serious about this isn’t it?

You may not realize that just because someone wears a 911 Truth Movement hat and may want the 911 truth exposed, it doesn't mean they want it exposed for "good" reasons.

It's possible they could want it exposed because they want to pin the blame on the wrong people, and have an end game agenda you are not aware of.

Do you have a problem discussing points of evidence DDD911?

Last edited by THETRUTHWILLSETU3 on Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:31 pm; edited 1 time in total

marky 54
Mega Poster

Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:28 pm Post subject:

so your saying we should just all keep accusing each other of being shills on the basis somebody might be? the above statement also raises suspion of yourself who could be doing the same. however your thinking is wrong and we need to move away from it.

DDD911
Minor Poster

Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Posts: 72
Location: UK, Essex

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:37 pm Post subject:

Patrick Brown wrote:

DDD911 wrote:

Anyway what I’m getting at is that both SEJ & DRG made the case for conspiracy with regards to the attacks of 9/11, to say otherwise is not only dangerous to 9/11 truth its just wrong in the first place, who’s side are you on THETRUTHWILLSETU3? Because looking through your past posts and I can see is a person who attacks very credible people & just stirs up a wild fire of confusion, do your views carry much weight on here because if they do I’ll consider going elsewhere because this isn’t constructive it’s destructive!

The only reason he hasn't been banned is because he's a friend of the forum Administrator Andrew Johnson.

Andrew's been pushing the Beam Weapon Theory while supporting Wood's, Reynolds and Fetzer. Andrew has also suggested Steven Jones is a shill. These are facts so let's hope I don't get banned! Rolling Eyes

It's all here: http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=7006

Well if you get banned I’m gone.

Dangerous game everyone is playing, if it doesn’t stop 9/11 will be worth nothing! It’s amazing the infighting going on within this place, I never noticed it before joining, really is a shame there isn’t more cohesion.

Beam Weapons, No-Planes, Shills! You will never persuade the masses they never saw planes because the USA media & government played it like a fiddle, those images are burnt into the memory of everyone that watched it all unfold that day, and you will never win this no-plane/beam weapon theory, ditch it now and put all your efforts into showing people aviation fuel doesn’t blow-up buildings, and that this sort of thing never happens with concrete & steel framed buildings.
_________________
In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act: George Orwell

thought criminal
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 574
Location: London

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:44 pm Post subject:

DDD911 wrote:

Patrick Brown wrote:

DDD911 wrote:

It's all here: http://www.nineeleven.co.uk/board/viewtopic.php?t=7006

So what are you suggesting we do? Lie our asses off instead??

DDD911
Minor Poster

Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Posts: 72
Location: UK, Essex

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:53 pm Post subject:

THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote:

I have absolutely no problem discussing evidence worthy of discussion in the first place.

You’re really missing the point with this, why in any rational means would you inject this whirlwind of a story with two credible people who are a damn sight smarter than you and me, their views have done nothing more than strengthen 9/11 truth, DRG explanations are fantastic, have who actually watched any of his seminars? Ask everyone in any 9/11 truth movement is SEJ & DRG & good thing and the majority will say YES, you are in the minority with these views.

Sorry i dont know you at all, but from what I’m seeing/reading your contribution has been more disinformation than help.
_________________
In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act: George Orwell

DDD911
Minor Poster

Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Posts: 72
Location: UK, Essex

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 4:55 pm Post subject:

thought criminal wrote:

So what are you suggesting we do? Lie our asses off instead??

Lie your asses off about what?
_________________
In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act: George Orwell

thought criminal
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 574
Location: London

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:11 pm Post subject:

DDD911 wrote:

thought criminal wrote:

So what are you suggesting we do? Lie our asses off instead??

Lie your asses off about what?

Planes hitting the towers. You are suggesting we lie about that?

THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic

Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:15 pm Post subject:

DDD911 wrote:

THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote:

Do your homework DDD911 your not up to speed and incredibly naive.

The truth goes through 3 stages

First it is ridiculed

Second it is violently opposed

Third it is accepted as being self evident.

Yes I am in the minority with these views (within the truth movement)

But your views which may be the majority in the truth movement are in the minority within the population as a whole.

The fact is before this can move on we need to establish what did happen before we can establish who did it.

Only then will it be clear as to why they did it and what the end game is

rodin
Validated Poster

Joined: 09 Dec 2006
Posts: 2224
Location: UK

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:21 pm Post subject:

I think we should get off the 'whose a shill and who isn't' tip and get on a 'what is evidence and what isn't' tip. We really should have built a case already. We do not NEED exploding cars, no plane theories, or even an explanation of what explosives were used to present a case based on public-domain evidence. I have posted on a few threads about the G911 idea and still the infighting goes on. It must be an ego thing... _________________ Belief is the Enemy of Truth www.dissential.com

uselesseater
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter

Joined: 21 Sep 2005
Posts: 629
Location: Leeds

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:27 pm Post subject:

I can't see why TTWSU3 hasn't been banned. He is so obviousley intentionaly and constantly disruptive to put it politely. The only thing I have seen posted in his defence is that 1.Andrew knows him and 2.he paid for some leaflets. 1. Does Andrew poses some special power of intuition which allows him to deduce that TTWSU3 is genuine? No. I think intuative deduction is a bit of an oxymoron. Clearly Andrew can only theorise on TTWSU3s intentions. 2. Exactly what and government employee would do to curry favour with the real campaigners. So that's no defence in reality. Anyone who constantly pushes rubbish like the NPT and the BWT while constantly calling into question other researchers is IMHO very suspect. TTWSU3 fits this profile perfectly. How he remains unbanned is a miracle to me.

thought criminal
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 574
Location: London

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:27 pm Post subject:

rodin wrote:

I think we should get off the 'whose a shill and who isn't' tip and get on a 'what is evidence and what isn't' tip. We really should have built a case already.

We do not NEED exploding cars, no plane theories, or even an explanation of what explosives were used to present a case based on public-domain evidence.

I have posted on a few threads about the G911 idea and still the infighting goes on. It must be an ego thing... Confused

The case you are trying to present as 101 holes in it. You are living in a fantasy land if you seriously believe that the 'planes hitting the towers scenario' is going to get anywhere. Apart from it being bs, it is a circuitous argument that goes round and round and round. It would become a 100 year court case. You are delusional if you think you are going to win this with half assed semi-truths!

uselesseater
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter

Joined: 21 Sep 2005
Posts: 629
Location: Leeds

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:32 pm Post subject:

rodin wrote:

We do not NEED exploding cars, no plane theories, or even an explanation of what explosives were used to present a case based on public-domain evidence.

Exactly. You can prove someone was shot without knowing the calibre of the weapon.

Anyone can see that the towers were demolished. Finding the exact method is extremely difficult on the information we have available.

thought criminal
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 574
Location: London

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:33 pm Post subject:

uselesseater wrote:

I can't see why TTWSU3 hasn't been banned.

He is so obviousley intentionaly and constantly disruptive to put it politely.

The only thing I have seen posted in his defence is that 1.Andrew knows him and 2.he paid for some leaflets.

1. Does Andrew poses some special power of intuition which allows him to deduce that TTWSU3 is genuine? No. I think intuative deduction is a bit of an oxymoron. Clearly Andrew can only theorise on TTWSU3s intentions.

2. Exactly what and government employee would do to curry favour with the real campaigners.

So that's no defence in reality.

Anyone who constantly pushes rubbish like the NPT and the BWT while constantly calling into question other researchers is IMHO very suspect.

TTWSU3 fits this profile perfectly. How he remains unbanned is a miracle to me.

That is your opinion. I think your opinion stinks. I personally think anybody who pushes remote controlled planes is a shill or a bit of a 'thicky'. This is my opinion.

DDD911
Minor Poster

Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Posts: 72
Location: UK, Essex

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:37 pm Post subject:

THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote:

Do your homework DDD911 your not up to speed and incredibly naive.

The truth goes through 3 stages

First it is ridiculed

Second it is violently opposed

Third it is accepted as being self evident.

Yes I am in the minority with these views (within the truth movement)

But your views which may be the majority in the truth movement are in the minority within the population as a whole. The fact is before this can move on we need to establish what did happen before we can establish who did it.Only then will it be clear as to why they did it and what the end game is

THETRUTHWILLSETU3 Have you actually watched any of DRG & SEJ discussions & seminars? And what part of there argument should I not believe in? And why does this make me naive?

Let me get this right: So your views are in the minority & mine are in the Majority, yet my views are in the minority in the population as a whole, ok I get that but what’s your point? You say your views are in the minority and then brackets (within the truth movement) so are you implying your views are in the majority elsewhere?

I’m trying to discuss with you but what makes me incredibly naive?
_________________
In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act: George Orwell

uselesseater
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter

Joined: 21 Sep 2005
Posts: 629
Location: Leeds

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:38 pm Post subject:

thought criminal wrote:

rodin wrote:

You are delusional if you think you are going to win this with half assed semi-truths!

'Every man is delusional. When told this he believes he is the exception. That is his delusion'

Your delusion among others, appears to be thinking that you can find the whole truth based on the evidence we have available.

thought criminal
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 574
Location: London

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:40 pm Post subject:

uselesseater wrote:

thought criminal wrote:

rodin wrote:

You are delusional if you think you are going to win this with half assed semi-truths!

You cannot even provide me with pictorial evidence that a 'plane' hit the North Tower. My thread in the 'General' section is getting cold and it's getting lonely.

uselesseater
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter

Joined: 21 Sep 2005
Posts: 629
Location: Leeds

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:46 pm Post subject:

thought criminal wrote:

uselesseater wrote:

That is your opinion. I think your opinion stinks. I personally think anybody who pushes remote controlled planes is a shill or a bit of a 'thicky'. This is my opinion.

I forgot about you.

All I can say is; whoever is responsible for your recruitment wants sacking.

DDD911
Minor Poster

Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Posts: 72
Location: UK, Essex

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:46 pm Post subject:

thought criminal wrote:

I understand how frustrating this all is but you must see the bigger picture: Say the 70% of the population has a TV (for augments sake) you can pretty much guarantee over the 11th/12th September 2001 allot of people would have seen planes flying into those towers, now you try and convince them not only was 9/11 a conspiracy of the nastiest nature, but also no actual planes flew into the building! Good Luck with that one.

Why not use your energy to explain to the people why aviation fuel cannot demolish a building, and that fires do not make buildings collapse into their own footprint, sell them this idea first then sell them whatever you want.

Quick question: Do you believe in the Beam theory?
_________________
In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act: George Orwell

uselesseater
Trustworthy Freedom Fighter

Joined: 21 Sep 2005
Posts: 629
Location: Leeds

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:47 pm Post subject:

thought criminal wrote:

uselesseater wrote:

thought criminal wrote:

rodin wrote:

You are delusional if you think you are going to win this with half assed semi-truths!

You cannot even provide me with pictorial evidence that a 'plane' hit the North Tower. My thread in the 'General' section is getting cold and it's getting lonely.

I don't have any intention of doing so either. I'm not interested in debating the NPT.

thought criminal
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 574
Location: London

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:51 pm Post subject:

DDD911 wrote:

thought criminal wrote:

It's very likely that some sort of exotic technology was used but I haven't looked into it enough. We have been flogging the 'planes hit towers' story for yonks and it is a dead horse. There is always some shills who will support the theory that jet fuel would have destroyed the structure etc etc. My question to you is 'Do you believe planes hit those towers?'.

DDD911
Minor Poster

Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Posts: 72
Location: UK, Essex

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 5:53 pm Post subject:

uselesseater wrote:

TTWSU3 fits this profile perfectly. How he remains unbanned is a miracle to me.

Don’t know if my views mean anything in this early stage but I totally agree with your post.

Are these NPT & BWT views also shared by the forums owners/Moderators?
_________________
In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act: George Orwell

DDD911
Minor Poster

Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Posts: 72
Location: UK, Essex

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:04 pm Post subject:

thought criminal wrote:

You might want to read back what you just said, because if your just relying on a hunch then good luck to you.

With regards to the planes I have to go with the masses and say yes I saw planes hit WTC 1 & WTC2, unless you provide me with solid evidence and not hearsay I will continue to say I saw planes, granted I wasn’t there but surly you must have seen the bucket loads of clips with New Yorkers saying they saw planes, if they saw a hologram (and I don’t buy that either) then a plane was visible to the masses and your flogging a stupid & silly horse.

What I totally believe in 100% because I understand building construction, is that fire or aviation fuel could never do what was witnessed that day. It had to be controlled demolitions because anything else would have too many variables, controlled demolitions can control the fall of a building, I know of nothing else that can do that especially weapons!
_________________
In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act: George Orwell

THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic

Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:15 pm Post subject:

DDD911 wrote:

THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote:

Do your homework DDD911 your not up to speed and incredibly naive.

The truth goes through 3 stages

First it is ridiculed

Second it is violently opposed

Third it is accepted as being self evident.

Yes I am in the minority with these views (within the truth movement)

But your views which may be the majority in the truth movement are in the minority within the population as a whole. The fact is before this can move on we need to establish what did happen before we can establish who did it.Only then will it be clear as to why they did it and what the end game is

Hi DDD911

You should watch this for starters

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=2229511748333360205&q=cold+f usion

thought criminal
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 574
Location: London

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:16 pm Post subject:

DDD911 wrote:

thought criminal wrote:

Can you provide the evidence of the North Tower plane impact? Please supply any evidence you may muster and submit it to the relevant thread. Fanks.

THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic

Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:24 pm Post subject:

Steve Jones came into 911 to piss on the strawberries

marky 54
Mega Poster

Joined: 18 Aug 2006
Posts: 3293

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:25 pm Post subject:

thought criminal wrote:

DDD911 wrote:

thought criminal wrote:

Can you provide the evidence of the North Tower plane impact? Please supply any evidence you may muster and submit it to the relevant thread. Fanks.

the plane hole.

THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic

Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:26 pm Post subject:

The same as he did with Cold Fusion ------WISE UP

DDD911
Minor Poster

Joined: 23 Jun 2006
Posts: 72
Location: UK, Essex

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:30 pm Post subject:

THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote:

Hi DDD911

You should watch this for starters

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=2229511748333360205&q=cold+f usion

Thanks for the video link but Cold Fusion doesn’t address the questions I'm asking about SEJ & DRG.
_________________
In a time of universal deceit telling the truth is a revolutionary act: George Orwell

thought criminal
Moderate Poster

Joined: 19 Apr 2006
Posts: 574
Location: London

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:33 pm Post subject:

marky 54 wrote:

thought criminal wrote:

DDD911 wrote:

thought criminal wrote:

Can you provide the evidence of the North Tower plane impact? Please supply any evidence you may muster and submit it to the relevant thread. Fanks.

the plane hole.

It was a plane hole was it? So, where is the plane?? I was under the impression plane holes were made by planes. Pray, tell me more.

THETRUTHWILLSETU3
9/11 Truth critic

Joined: 23 Jan 2006
Posts: 1009

Posted: Tue Feb 13, 2007 6:34 pm Post subject:

DDD911 wrote:

THETRUTHWILLSETU3 wrote:

Hi DDD911

You should watch this for starters

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=2229511748333360205&q=cold+f usion

Thanks for the video link but Cold Fusion doesn’t address the questions I'm asking about SEJ & DRG.

Yes it does because Steve Jones was brought in to discredit cold fusion
he has done the same with 911

Display posts from previous:

	9/11, 7/7 & the War on Freedom Forum Index -> 9/11 & 7/7 Truth Controversies	All times are GMT Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
Page 2 of 3

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum