You know better because you know that you cannot back up your claims with facts. What controlled implosion? Where's the evidence that proves that? The actual evidence clearly indicates no explosives were present in any of the buildings. No super-secret-non-existent thermite, either. If you have evidence that WTC 7 was a controlled implosion please post it so we can all see it. This should be wildly entertaining.
Notice the part where it falls perfectly into its own footprint.
How do you explain its collapse in the first place?
Here's how wikipedia explains it
As the North Tower collapsed on September 11, 2001, debris hit 7 World Trade Center, causing heavy damage to the south face of the building.[3] The bottom portion of the building's south face was heavily damaged by debris, including damage to the southwest corner from the 8th to 18th floors, a large vertical gash on the center-bottom extending at least ten floors, and other damage as high as the 18th floor.[3]
You expect me to believe that those damages in various areas led the building to collapse in an identical fashion to a controlled demolition? I got some gov't bonds to sell you.
WTC 7 did not fall into it's own footprint. It fell to the south, across the street and damaged buildings on the other side of the street. In the video you provided this is very apparent. However, if you need further proof look at the debris pile:
What you believe is unimportant. What the facts clearly demonstrate is what matters. To date there has been precisely zero evidence to support a controlled demolition theory. The entire truther theory is based on what it looked like, not what actually happened. If you believe the stories told by the truthers then they have a whole boat load of crap to sell you.
Herkimer: The 911 Truth movement has a dust study - where is yours? You say "The actual evidence ..." - is this as opposed to the un-actual evidence?
"This should be wildly entertaining" - as opposed to what?
"no super-secret-non-existent thermite.."
If the thermite is out in the open it is no longer a secret. And if the thermite has been exposed by a nano-tech expert from four dust samples with chain of custody of evidence for those samples - the thermite is existent, not non-existent.
You say: "You know better because you know that you cannot back up your claims with facts."
How do you know what another person knows or doesn't know? Please tell us - this should be entertaining.
A dust study based on evidence that has no proper provenance and was likely contaminated. The results of that dust study are brought further into question now that Steven Jones, who helped write the "study", is now admitting that what he found may not be thermite after all.
"is this as opposed to the un-actual evidence?"
No, this is as opposed to the lies and delusions put forth by your cult.
The thermite is not out in the open because there has never been a form of thermite that was capable of all of the things that Jones claimed that this thermite did. If this thermite exists, it is still a deeply held secret because no one has ever seen anything like it before or since.
"How do you know what another person knows or doesn't know?"
Because I've been asking people like you to produce evidence to back their claims for seven years now and not once has anyone actually provided anything with any evidential value at all.
No, they're the ones who possess more than a third grade education and some critical thinking skills. The truthers are the ones who believe whatever crap is fed to them by the leaders of their cult.
Alex Jones, Steven Jones, David Ray Griffin and others of their ilk.
"911Truthers don't claim to know the truth, they claim to seek the truth."
Are you new here? They absolutely claim to know exactly what happened and who did it. The problem for them is that they're talking out of their collective asses and have no idea what they're talking about.
"You are the the one that blindly believes what you are told."
I'm the one who has read the actual, credible studies of the events of 9/11.
"You are the one with a lack of critical thinking skills."
if I had no critical thinking skills I'd be living in my parent's basement wearing a "9/11 Truth" t-shirt and masturbating to a picture of Alex Jones.
"You are the one that has drunk the Koolaide."
Actually, I like Diet Pepsi.
"There is no use even discussing 911 with you since have already made up your mind."
And it will remain this way until someone in the truther movement develops even one piece of credible, verifiable evidence that proves the dozens of investigations and studies done to date wrong. I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.
"You are programmed with the dogma of the mass media."
Says the man who believes everything that his cult leaders want him to believe. For your information, sparky, my information comes mainly from engineering and scientific studies done at universities all over the world.
"You are a follower."
You are a moron. Easily led and manipulated and willing to believe whatever you're told as long as it fits your pre-conceived notions.
I have heard of Alex Jones, but I have not heard of Steven Jones or David Ray Griffin.
Maybe those that doubt the reported "facts" should be called 911Doubters.
I'm the one who has read the actual, credible studies of the events of 9/11.
Congratulations you read the reports and believe what you are told to believe.
if I had no critical thinking skills I'd be living in my parent's basement wearing a "9/11 Truth" t-shirt and masturbating to a picture of Alex Jones.
By your definition, at least we have critical thinking skills in common.
Actually, I like Diet Pepsi
I like water. Diet Pepsi is for followers.
You are a moron. Easily led and manipulated and willing to believe whatever you're told as long as it fits your pre-conceived notions.
I have not read all of "the actual, credible studies of the events of 911". And I do admit that I am attracted to the possibility of inside culpability. The fact that Bldg 7 collapsed that way it did is my major initiator of doubt.
Just to sum this up, let me write out what I expect the next few replies to be:
Well, I had to Google Steven Jones and David Ray Griffin.
Steven Jones is a University physics professor. I would think that he carries a little bit of respectability. I would not claim that he lacks critical thinking skills. Do you think he has an agenda to deceive people? I took a few physics classes in University, (a bunch of lower division stuff and one upper division Quantum physics course), so he has credibility in my eyes. The thermite argument has some merit.
David Ray Griffin is a different case, as soon as he started talking about being a theology professor, I lost interest. For me he does not have any credibility.
"I would think that he carries a little bit of respectability."
One would think so but he's been caught lying far too many times to still be considered respectable. In fact, he was relieved of his teaching duties at BYU and forced into retirement for lying about having his work peer reviewed and published.
That's not new information. That's an old story from a guy that's on the dodge from a murder charge.
You know what Herkimer, I think of this whole thing as one giant soap opera. It's a TV / internet reality show. That's why I didn't know who Steven & David were. I really don't care enough about the subject.
I am convinced that we will never know the real truth.
I read things that the media says are true and others debunk it with apparently credible claims.
I read things that the debunkers say are true and others claim evidence of its falsehood.
This is why I support the 911Truthers to a certain degree. If nothing else, they question convention. They may be crazy and they may be followers, but they believe in a story just like you believe in a story.
I mean you weren't involved in the plot to destroy the twin towers so, how can you know the truth of what happened. You were told a story and you believed it. Others just could not believe the story you were told and so another story was made up, (the conspiracy), that they could believe.
The only story I truly believe is that the event did happen. How or why it happened,.... Unless you were there and were part of the plot, (and could prove it), I don't believe you.
Fuckin' Newspapers can't even report a city council meeting accuratly, let alone a major event like 911.
Politicians will use an event like 911 to push whatever agenda they have. Every side will distort and manipulate the event to their own purpose.
I will sit on the side lines and troll for angry responses.
The fact that you are even entertaining the notion that Herkimer was part of some grand conspiracy theory, one that you have no evidence to support the existence of, is ludicrous enough.
You guys sure do turn things around. I did not make an assertion. I did not make an accusation. I simply asked another poster if he was sure of an assertion that he made. It was a short three word question in plain, simple English. ¿Comprende?
You really do remind me of the lowest trolls I've ever met, such as Brappie from digg. You play these stupid games where you strongly imply/associate someone with something and then back off like this by trying to do this little semantic dance. Or at least that's what you try to do.
Look at what you posted here. You clearly took ownership of the position that Herkimer is somehow part of a 9/11 conspiracy which you have no evidence to support the existence of.
"I think of this whole thing as one giant soap opera."
Really? Nearly 3000 innocent people were murdered, the members of the 9/11 truther movement are using those deaths as a sick kind of entertainment and you think it's all just a soap opera? Your lack of humanity is stunning.
The event was tragic, agreed. I didn't personally know anyone that died in that event. The circus created around the "How" and the "Why" is what has hardened my heart to the suffering of those people.
Just like my heart is hardened to the suffering of the Palestinians at the hands of their persecutors. Or as my heart is hardened to the deaths of Israeli children at the hands of Hamas rockets. My heart is hardened to the deaths of the Cambodians at the hands of Pol Pot. The Tutsi's at the hands of the Hutu's. The Jews at the hands of the Nazi's. The list goes on. There is too much to care about. At some point one has to stop caring. I just don't have any care left for your cause.
I am surprised that my lack of humanity is so stunning to you, given that we live with a constant media influx of death and destruction. But I am not disappointed that you made that your focus of rebuttal.
Well played sir. When nothing else works go for the personal attack. Do they teach that in school?
So, what is your purpose in responding to the 911Truthers? Are you trying to convert them? Or, are just entertaining yourself by bashing them?
"So, what is your purpose in responding to the 911Truthers?"
They are liars who are exploiting the deaths of innocent people to play some sick LARP where they are all trying to be the next Agent Mulder or Alex Jones. They spread misinformation, slander innocent people and dsiplay nothing but disrespect for the dead and their survivors. They are an insult to reason, logic, intellect and to humanity. Other than that, I'm fine with them.
I don't think that the majority of 911Truthers are liars. They truly believe in what they are proposing.
Many qualified architects and engineers have reviewed the same documents that you claim to have reviewed, and many of those architects and engineers have determined that the report provided by the 911 commission is inaccurate and misleading.
Are you qualified to judge the accuracy of the documents that you have reviewed, or are you really just relying on the opinion of "experts" that support your own "story"?
If you already have your mind made-up as to what happened on September 11, 2001 then you are the fool and the liar, for you claim to have have humanity for those that suffered in the collapse, but you blind youself to any new information that may inlighten you as to the true cause.
I could be forgiven for my ignorance, (for I am a self acknowledged bystander without an investment in the outcome), but you, (as one that claims to passionately care), should be ashamed of your bashing of those that seek the truth.
You have to understand that the term "truthers" is used in an ironic sense. In reality, the 9/11 truth movement wants absolutely nothing to do with the truth. The truth disproves the dogma of their cult and much like the religious fundamentalists who deny evolution, they refuse to listen to any evidence that is contrary to what they believe. However, they are not liars. They are misguided fools who lack the cognitive ability to understand hard science and mathematics so they've resorted to a hate campaign that makes the Westboro Baptist Church members green with envy. There are liars involved in the truth movement and most of them are in leadership positions. Alex Jones, Steven Jones, Richard Gage, David Ray Griffin and the others who know that what they're saying isn't true but they keep repeating it anyway because they're making a pretty good living telling lies. So if you're so concerned with looking for liars I would strongly suggest that you start with them.
Herkimer says: "In reality, the 9/11 truth movement wants absolutely nothing to do with the truth."
JR says - Any gratuitous assertion can be equally gratuitously denied. This also applies to Herkimer's gratuitous assertion that "the 9/11 truth movement wants absolutely nothing to do with the truth."
Shooting the messenger - an ad hominem logical fallacy employed by truthers to detract from their complete lack of factual material to back their claims.
Name-calling is a propaganda tool -
Notice Herkimer has to call names like "liar" "fools" "hate"
Also poor Herkimer can't seem to stop using illogical universal statements like "nothing to do with the truth", "they refuse to listen to ANY evidence"
Everything I posted is the direct result of close observations of the creatures that we laughingly refer to as "truthers". Denying your own nature is also a propaganda tool used by those not wishing to allow society to see them for what they actually are. Thank you for making my point.
Alex Jones and his fans disrupt honest people from doing anything in public by lashing out at them with baseless insults. Haven't you seen them in action? Google these people. Look at Alex Jones screaming at and hitting Michelle Malkin, making even huge liberals side with Malkin for once, or Jones minions such as the We Are Idiots kids making fools out of themselves everywhere.
44 comments
5 [deleted] 2009-06-23
It's tempting to respond directly to Herkimer, but I know better.
How can anyone explain away Building 7's controlled implosion? That alone points to the other collapses also being staged.
-2 Herkimer 2009-06-23
You know better because you know that you cannot back up your claims with facts. What controlled implosion? Where's the evidence that proves that? The actual evidence clearly indicates no explosives were present in any of the buildings. No super-secret-non-existent thermite, either. If you have evidence that WTC 7 was a controlled implosion please post it so we can all see it. This should be wildly entertaining.
3 [deleted] 2009-06-23
http://www.disclose.tv/action/viewvideo/11576/New_911_Building_7_Collapse_Clearly_Shows_Demoliti
Notice the part where it falls perfectly into its own footprint.
How do you explain its collapse in the first place?
Here's how wikipedia explains it
You expect me to believe that those damages in various areas led the building to collapse in an identical fashion to a controlled demolition? I got some gov't bonds to sell you.
-1 Herkimer 2009-06-23
WTC 7 did not fall into it's own footprint. It fell to the south, across the street and damaged buildings on the other side of the street. In the video you provided this is very apparent. However, if you need further proof look at the debris pile:
http://www.debunking911.com/wtc7pile.jpg
http://www.debunking911.com/b7debris.jpg
http://www.debunking911.com/barclay.jpg
What you believe is unimportant. What the facts clearly demonstrate is what matters. To date there has been precisely zero evidence to support a controlled demolition theory. The entire truther theory is based on what it looked like, not what actually happened. If you believe the stories told by the truthers then they have a whole boat load of crap to sell you.
6 [deleted] 2009-06-23
and what the facts clearly demonstrate is that the official report must be among the greatest falsehoods of our lifetimes.
-3 Herkimer 2009-06-23
Proof?
1 21jack21 2009-06-23
Herkimer: The 911 Truth movement has a dust study - where is yours? You say "The actual evidence ..." - is this as opposed to the un-actual evidence?
"This should be wildly entertaining" - as opposed to what?
"no super-secret-non-existent thermite.."
If the thermite is out in the open it is no longer a secret. And if the thermite has been exposed by a nano-tech expert from four dust samples with chain of custody of evidence for those samples - the thermite is existent, not non-existent.
You say: "You know better because you know that you cannot back up your claims with facts."
How do you know what another person knows or doesn't know? Please tell us - this should be entertaining.
-1 Herkimer 2009-06-23
A dust study based on evidence that has no proper provenance and was likely contaminated. The results of that dust study are brought further into question now that Steven Jones, who helped write the "study", is now admitting that what he found may not be thermite after all.
"is this as opposed to the un-actual evidence?"
No, this is as opposed to the lies and delusions put forth by your cult.
The thermite is not out in the open because there has never been a form of thermite that was capable of all of the things that Jones claimed that this thermite did. If this thermite exists, it is still a deeply held secret because no one has ever seen anything like it before or since.
"How do you know what another person knows or doesn't know?"
Because I've been asking people like you to produce evidence to back their claims for seven years now and not once has anyone actually provided anything with any evidential value at all.
1 troller10 2009-06-23
Not lairs, just ignorant of the truth.
-1 21jack21 2009-06-23
I'm relieved that troller didn't call us 911Truthers "lairs" - that would have been quite an insult.
1 troller10 2009-06-23
You got it backwards. The ones that don't believe what the 911truthers believe, (911Deniers), are the ignorant ones.
-3 Herkimer 2009-06-23
No, they're the ones who possess more than a third grade education and some critical thinking skills. The truthers are the ones who believe whatever crap is fed to them by the leaders of their cult.
1 troller10 2009-06-23
Who are the leaders of the 911truth cult?
911Truthers don't claim to know the truth, they claim to seek the truth.
You are the the one that blindly believes what you are told. You are the one with a lack of critical thinking skills.
You are the one that has drunk the Koolaide.
There is no use even discussing 911 with you since have already made up your mind. You are programmed with the dogma of the mass media.
You are a follower.
-4 Herkimer 2009-06-23
"Who are the leaders of the 911truth cult?"
Alex Jones, Steven Jones, David Ray Griffin and others of their ilk.
"911Truthers don't claim to know the truth, they claim to seek the truth."
Are you new here? They absolutely claim to know exactly what happened and who did it. The problem for them is that they're talking out of their collective asses and have no idea what they're talking about.
"You are the the one that blindly believes what you are told."
I'm the one who has read the actual, credible studies of the events of 9/11.
"You are the one with a lack of critical thinking skills."
if I had no critical thinking skills I'd be living in my parent's basement wearing a "9/11 Truth" t-shirt and masturbating to a picture of Alex Jones.
"You are the one that has drunk the Koolaide."
Actually, I like Diet Pepsi.
"There is no use even discussing 911 with you since have already made up your mind."
And it will remain this way until someone in the truther movement develops even one piece of credible, verifiable evidence that proves the dozens of investigations and studies done to date wrong. I wouldn't hold my breath if I were you.
"You are programmed with the dogma of the mass media."
Says the man who believes everything that his cult leaders want him to believe. For your information, sparky, my information comes mainly from engineering and scientific studies done at universities all over the world.
"You are a follower."
You are a moron. Easily led and manipulated and willing to believe whatever you're told as long as it fits your pre-conceived notions.
1 troller10 2009-06-23
I have heard of Alex Jones, but I have not heard of Steven Jones or David Ray Griffin.
Maybe those that doubt the reported "facts" should be called 911Doubters.
I'm the one who has read the actual, credible studies of the events of 9/11.
Congratulations you read the reports and believe what you are told to believe.
if I had no critical thinking skills I'd be living in my parent's basement wearing a "9/11 Truth" t-shirt and masturbating to a picture of Alex Jones.
By your definition, at least we have critical thinking skills in common.
Actually, I like Diet Pepsi
I like water. Diet Pepsi is for followers.
You are a moron. Easily led and manipulated and willing to believe whatever you're told as long as it fits your pre-conceived notions.
I have not read all of "the actual, credible studies of the events of 911". And I do admit that I am attracted to the possibility of inside culpability. The fact that Bldg 7 collapsed that way it did is my major initiator of doubt.
Just to sum this up, let me write out what I expect the next few replies to be:
You, (to me): You're an idiot.
Me, (to you): No, you're and idiot.
You, (back to me): No I'm not, you're the idiot.
Me, (back to you): No I'm not, you're ......
Repeat as necessary to get my drift.
-2 Herkimer 2009-06-23
"I have heard of Alex Jones, but I have not heard of Steven Jones or David Ray Griffin."
Then you don't know anything about the subject. Bye!
1 troller10 2009-06-23
Well, I had to Google Steven Jones and David Ray Griffin.
Steven Jones is a University physics professor. I would think that he carries a little bit of respectability. I would not claim that he lacks critical thinking skills. Do you think he has an agenda to deceive people? I took a few physics classes in University, (a bunch of lower division stuff and one upper division Quantum physics course), so he has credibility in my eyes. The thermite argument has some merit.
David Ray Griffin is a different case, as soon as he started talking about being a theology professor, I lost interest. For me he does not have any credibility.
But, here is some new information.
http://www.voltairenet.org/article160636.html
I wish this guy would release the video he claims he has.
Cheers
-3 Herkimer 2009-06-23
"I would think that he carries a little bit of respectability."
One would think so but he's been caught lying far too many times to still be considered respectable. In fact, he was relieved of his teaching duties at BYU and forced into retirement for lying about having his work peer reviewed and published.
That's not new information. That's an old story from a guy that's on the dodge from a murder charge.
2 troller10 2009-06-23
You know what Herkimer, I think of this whole thing as one giant soap opera. It's a TV / internet reality show. That's why I didn't know who Steven & David were. I really don't care enough about the subject.
I am convinced that we will never know the real truth.
I read things that the media says are true and others debunk it with apparently credible claims.
I read things that the debunkers say are true and others claim evidence of its falsehood.
This is why I support the 911Truthers to a certain degree. If nothing else, they question convention. They may be crazy and they may be followers, but they believe in a story just like you believe in a story.
I mean you weren't involved in the plot to destroy the twin towers so, how can you know the truth of what happened. You were told a story and you believed it. Others just could not believe the story you were told and so another story was made up, (the conspiracy), that they could believe.
The only story I truly believe is that the event did happen. How or why it happened,.... Unless you were there and were part of the plot, (and could prove it), I don't believe you.
Fuckin' Newspapers can't even report a city council meeting accuratly, let alone a major event like 911.
Politicians will use an event like 911 to push whatever agenda they have. Every side will distort and manipulate the event to their own purpose.
I will sit on the side lines and troll for angry responses.
Now, can we get back to the name calling.
1 SovereignMan 2009-06-23
You sure about that?
0 [deleted] 2009-06-23
maybe that's why he takes it all so personally for so many years.
personal involvement.
he knows if he's caught that a short drop from a long rope is the best of what will occur if he's caught.
-3 jcm267 2009-06-23
Or maybe he just likes to come in here and laugh at the inane postings of the morons in the 9/11 Truth Movement.
-4 Herkimer 2009-06-23
So I'm on the list now of people you people are accusing of being in on the plot? Just how far does your idiocy extend?
0 SovereignMan 2009-06-23
ques⋅tion – noun
ac⋅cuse – verb
-1 jcm267 2009-06-23
The fact that you are even entertaining the notion that Herkimer was part of some grand conspiracy theory, one that you have no evidence to support the existence of, is ludicrous enough.
edit small grammatical change.
0 SovereignMan 2009-06-23
It was actually intended as more of a joke than anything but now I'll take a page from you guys' book and say: Prove that he wasn't!
-1 jcm267 2009-06-23
The burden of proof isn't on me, it's on the one who is making the outrageous assertion. The person making the outrageous assertions is you.
0 SovereignMan 2009-06-23
You guys sure do turn things around. I did not make an assertion. I did not make an accusation. I simply asked another poster if he was sure of an assertion that he made. It was a short three word question in plain, simple English. ¿Comprende?
-2 Herkimer 2009-06-23
You didn't make the assertion, you just agreed with it. Either way your behavior was despicable.
-2 jcm267 2009-06-23
You really do remind me of the lowest trolls I've ever met, such as Brappie from digg. You play these stupid games where you strongly imply/associate someone with something and then back off like this by trying to do this little semantic dance. Or at least that's what you try to do.
Look at what you posted here. You clearly took ownership of the position that Herkimer is somehow part of a 9/11 conspiracy which you have no evidence to support the existence of.
-4 Herkimer 2009-06-23
"I think of this whole thing as one giant soap opera."
Really? Nearly 3000 innocent people were murdered, the members of the 9/11 truther movement are using those deaths as a sick kind of entertainment and you think it's all just a soap opera? Your lack of humanity is stunning.
1 troller10 2009-06-23
The event was tragic, agreed. I didn't personally know anyone that died in that event. The circus created around the "How" and the "Why" is what has hardened my heart to the suffering of those people.
Just like my heart is hardened to the suffering of the Palestinians at the hands of their persecutors. Or as my heart is hardened to the deaths of Israeli children at the hands of Hamas rockets. My heart is hardened to the deaths of the Cambodians at the hands of Pol Pot. The Tutsi's at the hands of the Hutu's. The Jews at the hands of the Nazi's. The list goes on. There is too much to care about. At some point one has to stop caring. I just don't have any care left for your cause.
I am surprised that my lack of humanity is so stunning to you, given that we live with a constant media influx of death and destruction. But I am not disappointed that you made that your focus of rebuttal.
Well played sir. When nothing else works go for the personal attack. Do they teach that in school?
So, what is your purpose in responding to the 911Truthers? Are you trying to convert them? Or, are just entertaining yourself by bashing them?
-2 Herkimer 2009-06-23
"So, what is your purpose in responding to the 911Truthers?"
They are liars who are exploiting the deaths of innocent people to play some sick LARP where they are all trying to be the next Agent Mulder or Alex Jones. They spread misinformation, slander innocent people and dsiplay nothing but disrespect for the dead and their survivors. They are an insult to reason, logic, intellect and to humanity. Other than that, I'm fine with them.
1 troller10 2009-06-23
I don't think that the majority of 911Truthers are liars. They truly believe in what they are proposing.
Many qualified architects and engineers have reviewed the same documents that you claim to have reviewed, and many of those architects and engineers have determined that the report provided by the 911 commission is inaccurate and misleading.
Are you qualified to judge the accuracy of the documents that you have reviewed, or are you really just relying on the opinion of "experts" that support your own "story"?
If you already have your mind made-up as to what happened on September 11, 2001 then you are the fool and the liar, for you claim to have have humanity for those that suffered in the collapse, but you blind youself to any new information that may inlighten you as to the true cause.
I could be forgiven for my ignorance, (for I am a self acknowledged bystander without an investment in the outcome), but you, (as one that claims to passionately care), should be ashamed of your bashing of those that seek the truth.
0 [deleted] 2009-06-23
You are hereby notified that you are in the very act of committing treason.
-2 jcm267 2009-06-23
You are hereby notified that you are in the very act of committing treason.
That's a very serious accusation. Care to back it up with some factual evidence?
-3 Herkimer 2009-06-23
Do you have even the faintest concept of what treason is? It sure doesn't appear so from your ridiculous accusation.
1 21jack21 2009-06-23
"as if Truthers always told the truth" is a universal statement - illogical
-2 Herkimer 2009-06-23
You have to understand that the term "truthers" is used in an ironic sense. In reality, the 9/11 truth movement wants absolutely nothing to do with the truth. The truth disproves the dogma of their cult and much like the religious fundamentalists who deny evolution, they refuse to listen to any evidence that is contrary to what they believe. However, they are not liars. They are misguided fools who lack the cognitive ability to understand hard science and mathematics so they've resorted to a hate campaign that makes the Westboro Baptist Church members green with envy. There are liars involved in the truth movement and most of them are in leadership positions. Alex Jones, Steven Jones, Richard Gage, David Ray Griffin and the others who know that what they're saying isn't true but they keep repeating it anyway because they're making a pretty good living telling lies. So if you're so concerned with looking for liars I would strongly suggest that you start with them.
3 21jack21 2009-06-23
Herkimer says: "In reality, the 9/11 truth movement wants absolutely nothing to do with the truth."
JR says - Any gratuitous assertion can be equally gratuitously denied. This also applies to Herkimer's gratuitous assertion that "the 9/11 truth movement wants absolutely nothing to do with the truth."
Logical fallacy - grade=F
-1 Herkimer 2009-06-23
Shooting the messenger - an ad hominem logical fallacy employed by truthers to detract from their complete lack of factual material to back their claims.
Logical fallacy - grade=F
2 21jack21 2009-06-23
Name-calling is a propaganda tool - Notice Herkimer has to call names like "liar" "fools" "hate"
Also poor Herkimer can't seem to stop using illogical universal statements like "nothing to do with the truth", "they refuse to listen to ANY evidence"
Logic grade=F
-1 Herkimer 2009-06-23
Everything I posted is the direct result of close observations of the creatures that we laughingly refer to as "truthers". Denying your own nature is also a propaganda tool used by those not wishing to allow society to see them for what they actually are. Thank you for making my point.
-2 jcm267 2009-06-23
Alex Jones and his fans disrupt honest people from doing anything in public by lashing out at them with baseless insults. Haven't you seen them in action? Google these people. Look at Alex Jones screaming at and hitting Michelle Malkin, making even huge liberals side with Malkin for once, or Jones minions such as the We Are Idiots kids making fools out of themselves everywhere.
0 [deleted] 2009-06-23
maybe that's why he takes it all so personally for so many years.
personal involvement.
he knows if he's caught that a short drop from a long rope is the best of what will occur if he's caught.
-4 Herkimer 2009-06-23
So I'm on the list now of people you people are accusing of being in on the plot? Just how far does your idiocy extend?