How long Have you been a 911 Truther?

Question

I am a christian and have been a truther for a lil over a year

Answer 1

Since 9/12.

Oh, wait, you mean one of those crackpots who believe in all that conspiracy crap? Nevermind. I guess I must be a 9/11 Falser then (in your world, anyway).

Answer 2

The only thing 9/11 truthers seem to prove is that our government is only a collection of corrupt, inept, incompetent, crony, political figures that will do anything to avoid responsibility.

Of course the 9/11 commission was a political farce. You don’t have to look too hard to notice it occurred during an election, and those running for election had the most to lose from the 9/11 report. This does not prove or even suggest a conspiracy. It proves that there are a bunch of jack-asses running the country, but we already knew that.

Of course Bush obstructed the commission. Why wouldn’t he? He had absolutely nothing to gain from the report and everything to lose. It was just good politics (however slimy). He’d prefer public perception be that he was a great war time leader coming to the rescue, that’s what his entire campaign was based on.

9/11 Truthers need to read the independent investigations. MIT, Purdue University, NFPA, and on and on all did studies and concluded that the WTC certainly did collapse because of the planes hitting them and the resulting fires. The reports are online just like all the other garbage you read.

Which is another point. 9/11 Truthers get all their info off the internet. They never do hard research. They simply pretend to analyze crummy photographs and interviews that were online anyway and hey leave things out that don’t support their claims. They’re making a lot of money off of people who would rather believe an X-Files type conspiracy.

Don’t look at the 9/11 report, look at the dozens of other independent investigations.

Answer 3

How long? Since that day when I saw both towers and Building 7 collapse into their footprints at near the free fall rate of gravity. I was there that terrible day, along with my brother. I remember looking at the plane's impacts and wondering that the tragedy was quite surreal. Right there and then we both knew that we were witnessing an event that would change the world forever. When I saw the North Tower collapse I immediately knew that this was not the result of an airplane or fire. The debris from the North Tower was completely emulsified as it fell to the ground. I also knew that when the major news media started touting that Osama Bin Laden was the culprit, I immediately thought of the press reports implicating Lee Harvey Oswald as the assassin of JFK. It was at that moment my suspicions were confirmed. My brother had just finished Stinnet's book "Day of Deceit," it was lying on the floor of his apartment. This book outlined in great detail the foreknowledge that the Japanese were going to attack Pearl Harbour and that FDR and his administration had let it happen. I guess there is something to the phenomona of synchronicity. However, the difference between the Pearl Harbour attack and 9/11 is one of perception. We as Americans knew for certain that we were attacked by the Japanese at Pearl, whereas, 9/11 would question the very tenents of 19 hijackers who overcame a 370 billion defense budget and a 30 billion intelligence budget using box-cutters and knives. The American people, nor I and my brother are that gullible. Intuitively all Americans know that this event regarding 9/11 just doesn't add up. It is this lack of accountability and consistency that drives me forward for the truth on that tragic day. I only wish that all Americans would drive for this truth too.

Answer 4

What the heck is a truther? I am not a christian and I tell the truth, I have never been a liar. You have been telling the truth for only a little over a year? I'm sorry.

Answer 5

Since 9/12/01

Answer 6

Its really becoming a cult now. They're getting tenure, its disgusting! The whole thing is fake dude, popular mechanics proved it. All that loose change dork did is find some tiny discrepancies and exploit them with no logic whatsoever. I predict he will have some lucrative book deals in the future :(

For the posters below, when someone says they are a 9/11 truther, it means they have been "enlightened" by putting on a tinfoil hat and believing some utter garbage that the goverment carried out 9/11.

Answer 7

Ever because I examine Joe Smoes e book "They Blew the Towers" you be attentive to, the story the place Joe Smoe had seen for weeks workers working around drilling holes in help columns and how he observed Bush/Chaney stickers on between the employees lunch bins on the evening of 9/10. it is poor yet must be genuine.

Answer 8

You can tell schools out for summer, the 9/11 posts have doubled..... ("Truther" that's a new one....ah and we wonder what goes on in public school... for proof see the post below)

Answer 9

BUT THE 9/11 COMMISSION SHOWED
THAT SEPTEMBER 11TH WAS A REAL
TERRORIST ATTACK, RIGHT?

Whether or not you believe that governments carry out "false flag" terror, you might reasonably assume that the 9/11 Commission investigated September 11th, and concluded that Osama Bin Laden and his group of terrorists were solely responsible.

Unfortunately, a quick look at the government's investigations reveals that -- not only has there never been a real investigation -- but the behaviour of government representatives in wilfully obstructing all attempts at investigation comprises evidence of guilt. Specifically, in all criminal trials, evasiveness, obstruction, and destruction of evidence all constitute strong circumstantial evidence that the accused is guilty or, at the very least, not to be believed. 9/11 is no different.
For example, the former director of the FBI says there was a cover up by the 9/11 Commission.
And the 9/11 Commissioners knew that military officials lied to the Commission, and considered recommending criminal charges for such false statements, yet didn't bother to tell the American people (free subscription required).
Indeed, the co-chairs of the Commission now admit that the Commission largely operated based upon political considerations.
9/11 Commission co-chair Lee Hamilton says "I don't believe for a minute we got everything right", that the Commission was set up to fail, that people should keep asking questions about 9/11, that the 9/11 debate should continue, and that the 9/11 Commission report was only "the first draft" of history.
9/11 Commissioner Bob Kerrey said that "There are ample reasons to suspect that there may be some alternative to what we outlined in our version . . . We didn't have access . . . ."
And former 9/11 Commissioner Max Cleland resigned from the Commission, stating: "It is a national scandal"; "This investigation is now compromised"; and "One of these days we will have to get the full story because the 9-11 issue is so important to America. But this White House wants to cover it up".
But let's back up and look at the 9/11 Commission in more detail. Preliminarily, President Bush and Vice-President Cheney took the rare step of personally requesting that congress limit all 9/11 investigation solely to "intelligence failures", so there has never been a congressional probe into any of the real issues involved.

The administration also opposed the creation of a 9/11 commission. Once it was forced, by pressure from widows of 9-11 victims, to allow a commission to be formed, the administration appointed as executive director an administration insider, whose area of expertise is the creation and maintenance of "public myths" thought to be true, even if not actually true, who was involved in pre-9/11 intelligence briefings, and who was one of the key architects of the "pre-emptive war" doctrine.
This executive director, who controlled what the Commission did and did not analyse, then limited the scope of the Commission's inquiry so that the overwhelming majority of questions about 9/11 remained unasked (see this article and this article).
The administration then starved the commission of funds, providing a fraction of the funds used to investigate Monica Lewinsky, failed to provide crucial documents (and see this article also), refused to share much information with the Commission, refused to require high-level officials to testify under oath, and allowed Bush and Cheney to be questioned jointly.

More importantly, the 9-11 Commission refused to examine virtually any evidence which contradicted the administration's official version of events. As stated by the State Department's Coordinator for Counterterrorism, who was the point man for the U.S. government's international counterterrorism policy in the first term of the Bush administration, "there were things the [9/11] commission[s] wanted to know about and things they didn't want to know about."


For example, the 9-11 Commission report fails to mention the CIA director's urgent warnings to top administration officials in July 2001 of an impending attack (indeed, the 9-11 Commission was briefed on these warnings, but denied they knew about them until confronted with contrary evidence). Moreover, numerous veteran national security experts were turned away, ignored, or censored by the 9/11 commission, even though they had information directly relevant to the commission's investigation.

And the 9/11 Commission Report does not even mention the collapse of World Trade Centre building 7 or any explosions in the buildings (the word "explosion" does not appear in the report). There are literally hundreds of other examples of entire lines of evidence which contradict the government's account which were ignored by the Commission.

A very well-documented book by a distinguished professor shows that the 9-11 Commission was a whitewash. According to law professor Richard Falk of Princeton, the author of this book "establishes himself, alongside Seymour Hersh, as America's number one bearer of unpleasant, yet necessary, public truths" (Seymour Hersh, as you might know, is the Pulitzer prize-winning reporter who uncovered the Iraq prison torture scandal). See a synopsis of the book here; and a summary of a portion of the book here.

Indeed, the very 9-11 widows who had pressured the administration to create the 9/11 Commission now "question the veracity of the entire Commission’s report", and have previously declared it a failure which ignored 70% of their detailed questions and "suppressed important evidence and whistleblower testimony that challenged the official story on many fronts".

Answer 10

I wondered where the proof was when went for bin laden in 4 days.
4 days? that means you know you have positive proop NOW.

SO....6 years? Wheres f'en proof!!

Fact--ladens a Patsy.
1 hour 45 mins---no fighter jet in DC?
100 OTHER THINGS!
= Americans murdering Americans THAT DAY!

I know....facts hurt.