So, you just watched the BBC 9/11 doc?

[Mark Gobell]

[Fred Jones II]

It's probably gonna get worse for a while for us.
I can't be the only person who's heart sank when Dylan Avery couldn't even underatand a basic question.
Plus, and I'm sorry if this offends, but an alarming amount of these truth guys are deeply religious (including Dylan if you looked around his house) plus there's the otherwise seemingly credible Stephen Jones dumdumdumdumdum (for south park mormon fans).

So these guys reasoning is better than everybody else's, (they got there 1st) but there's an old man in the sky throwing bolts of lightening at them when he's angry.

I'm sorry but it's 2007

[andrewwatson]

[telecasterisation]

[Fred Jones II]

[Mark Gobell]

[andrewwatson]

Belief is not a dirty word. It's organised religion that has made it one.

Belief is what you know to be true but can't prove quantatively.

What is in each of us that cannot be measured or photographed?

[Eckyboy]

I was hoping that it would show both sides of the argument but I found that there was a blatant bias towards the official story throughout. I found the whole attitude of the narrator and the so called experts to be very patronizing and it really annoys me that they can paint us all as deluded conspiracy freaks. Some of their so called evidence was laughable. They show the impact hole at the pentagon and the intact windows on either side and seconds later they show us a computer simulation with the plane inside the building complete with burning wings! How exactly did the wings get into the building without smashing through the windows and what about the engines? It is impossible. The structural engineer at the pentagon says that he saw large parts of the plane like wheels and engines etc without showing us one bit of evidence to support that yet we are supposed to just take his word for it. People dismiss so called conspiracy theories because they offer no proof yet it is acceptable for people who agree with the official story to do it. The explanation regarding building 7 was also poor. I don't care if that building had a raging inferno in it burning for hours there is no way that makes a building collapse neatly into it's own footprint. I don't mind listening to anyone's opinion but at least be fair.

[Fred Jones II]

[kbo234]

[Fred Jones II]

KBO234 wrote "There are atheists and plenty of people of many different faiths posting on this site but this post looks like a further effort to divide us and demean the leaders of 9/11 truth we hold in high regard. "

You assume I believe something different to you?.
ORGANISED religion I said.
Which has been described as a "mental illness" by psychiatrists.
So the most prominent people in the movement could be described as mentally ill.
And I am just saying I would like an expert who doesn't carry this baggage. I don't care who.

And thanks to the respondents for proving that a tie of ANY sort to a pre-existing belief can effect your ability to be reasonable and rational (God is dead, heresy!!!, how dare you. - err, i didn't).

By the way KBO, read the forum rules regarding accusations of shilling.

I give in

[Fred Jones II]

In case you haven't noticed KBO we are already divided, thats why it's so easy to continue these pointless arguements that you enjoy so much.

I've had to look at myself and my beliefs and tried to adress how they effect my reasoning in these matters.

I suggest you do the same.

[Mark Gobell]

I'm not so sure the campaign has leaders as such.

Some folk have more resources and are therefore more prominent or, are known figures in their own disciplines or have done some unique research and as a consequence are featured in the media.

What does having a picture of Jesus on your wall got to do with your doubts about the official story of 9/11 ?

[Fred Jones II]

[Mark Gobell]

I'm not sure what that reply means Fred. Sorry.

[Fred Jones II]

Sorry Mark, my mistake.
Portraits of the white stereotypical jesus are associated with organised religion.
And the S. Jones bit was a very funny episode of south park explaining morman beliefs. It was a musical with the refrain "dum- dadum-dumdum" after every other line.

There seems to be some knee-jerk to my satements.,sorry, but it needed saying.
A lot of the experts have errors in there versions of events, but refuse to let go of there beliefs.

Just like an organised religion.

I feel I have a point, I'm not just trying to upset people and I am sorry if I have.

[Mark Gobell]

Yet you have also suggested that those with religious beliefs could be classified as mentally ill ?

[Fred Jones II]

[Mark Gobell]

So what is your point precisely so that all can understand what it is you are trying to say ?

[Fred Jones II]

[peloloco]

People asking me for vids that I offered them 2 years ago and others telling me about Loose change 2. The BBC doc has opened the door to those who will look now that it is becoming a debate in the so called mainstream media. There will be those that are always going to be spoon fed their daily bread and those that will search for answers. 6 billion truths are better than one.

This is evolution and may the process of natural selection take us forwards and not backwards.

[kbo234]

[Fred Jones II]

Thanks KBO, I've been a bit thoughtless in how I aproached this thread, but my heart was in the right place.
I believe 100% in the principals of christianity and the underlying message, just not in how they've been applied by greedy smart people in the past and to this day.
As for Dunne and co they are just a symptom of "my truth is better than yours".

I wish people could see that, though 911 is important, these guys did then start an illegal war, which is proved, and murder 100's of thousands of people, which is proved, not 3000.
Thats what Chomsky meant by "it dosn't matter"
Get them for the real crime, not the setup to it.

[alwun]

I'm with Fred on this one.

As an atheist, I can afford to relax if I'm attacked by a believer, as I am of course not obliged to defend any form of preposterous 'belief system' involving invisible, omniscient, omnipresent etc. godheads and their various representatives living or long, long dead.
However, it is somehow deemed to be a bit off for one to attack(in debate, of course) an adherent to any of the mainstream orthodoxies by virtue of pointing out some of the ridiculous tenets espoused by said believers.
As for 'mental illness'...
The connection between religiosity and mental health has been widely explored, famously by William James in his 1902 publication The Varieties of Religious Experience, based on lectures that incorporated philosophical and spiritual enquiry into 'the divine'.

"Religion can allow the expression of otherwise deviant behaviour, and conversely, it can sometimes suppress or control pathological behaviour and thought. Some mystical experiences may reflect a psychotic process that is interpreted in a religious vein, while scrupulosity, which involved agonizing about sin and the careful observance of religious law, may reflect an obsessive-compulsive disorder.

As well as providing expression for emotional pathology, intense religiosity may actually produce it. Religion itself can be a stressor, as individuals try to live up to the strict exhortations of the faith. The guilt and feelings of unworthiness discussed earlier can contribute powerfully to feelings of low self-esteem, which are maladaptive to the individual's well-being."

In short, it is difficult to reconcile fundamental religious beliefs with the world driven by scientific inquiry and progress which I like to think that I inhabit.

I shall remain a little wary of all believers, including Mr. Jones.

cheers Al..

[Mark Gobell]

Personally I do not see what someone's religious beliefs have to do with their position on 9/11.

If you are going to question the mental health or any other psychological characteristic of someone who takes position a or b on 9/11 then should we include all Arsenal fans who think that their club is the best ?

Should we treat everyone as suspect simply because they believe the government's side of the story ?

Where does this reasoning end other than we're all suspect in some way, religious or not ?

We do not need to subscribe to something or agree with someone's beliefs to respect them do we ?

[Fred Jones II]

[telecasterisation]

[Mark Gobell]

Excellent. I have no problem in principle working with you either.

I won't ask you to go on family holidays if you promise to give your pedantic alter ego a mini break.

How's that ?

[telecasterisation]

[Fred Jones II]

quote :"Where does this reasoning end other than we're all suspect in some way, religious or not ?
FJ:Are you intentionally repeating evidence that has been proved false? if so then yes, you are suspected religious or not."

Sorry Mark, that was an arrogant answer to a genuine question.
So much time is spent discussing whether so and so is a shill I believe that this is a more plausible explanaton of the errors the main media commentators on 911 make.
By and large they are into organised religion, so have experience of holding on to a belief despite the (tangible) evidence.
I am only talking about the self apointed media truthers, not regular researchers, though like everybody else they should strive to "know thyself", warts and all.
Plus this is american religion, new and improved.
Every belief, religious or not, has the potential to disrupt our reasoning, the deeper the belief, the harder to recognise it in yourself.

I'm not blaming them any more than I would blame the masses for not getting 911 yet.
It's not the victims fault.