Saturday, October 6, 2012

The False Thinking and Assumptions of 'Informed' 911 Truth Doubters: A Message to the Honest Critics that have Been Fooled by the Propagandists.

Many aggressive non-truthers - the honest doubters of the 'conspiracy theorist position', as opposed to the leading 'professional' Debunkers - have serious issues to consider when it comes to fully understanding and confronting their own 911 beliefs.

They have three main problems to reflect upon which arise from the propaganda put out by the 911 truth 'Debunkers':

1. The doubters have been taught, via Debunking websites, to cynically equate straw man arguments and fringe ideas with valid criticism of the official story and thereby tend to miss the real arguments under examination.

Positions like the 'no-planes' theories, something that serious researchers have long rejected, are seen as part and parcel of the 911 truth claims. Truthers are commonly seen as naive or uncritical thinkers and are intellectually looked down upon because of these wrongly held assumptions.

In the minds of the 911 truth doubters they see the overall truther case, that goes against the official narrative, as being almost entirely irrational when, in fact, the conspiracy argument is based upon proven observation, science and (when pointing out the flaws of the Government's position) official documentation.

2. Furthermore, beyond falling for the straw man arguments that don't address real issues, the doubters are also fooled by the outright false official explanations, plus the plethora of false arguments put up by the 911 truth 'Debunking' (disinformation) fraternity, that do 'address' the real issues.

In this instance the key 911 truth 'Debunker' rebuttals rely upon many unsubstantiated explanations and false analogies. They pretend to adequately cover the highly relevant issues at hand, like freefall collapse rates and molten steel, but don't. Unfortunately the honest 911 truth doubters fall for these deceptions rather than thinking twice about what is being put to them - even after it is has been pointed out by the 911 truthers.

For instance, we find debunker 'explanations' have been made against the mountain of material that documents the melting of steel at the World Trade Centre ruins -something that could only occur if high temperature incendiaries were used. The melted steel, strong evidence of an inside job, is 'dismissed' via a number of completely inadequate explanations - that there was no melted steel, only red hot steel; that other metals had melted and that it was not steel; that the rubble pile fires could have done the job anyway, that what was witnessed was melted aluminium or lead etc.

These explanations are trotted out to trick those who are both unfamiliar with fire and materials science and unfamiliar with what was actually observed and recorded. Indeed none of the 'truth debunking' answers, no matter how elaborately padded, actually accounts for the data we find in the FEMA report, from the USGS, in the RJ Lee Report, from numerous eyewitnesses, the photographs, or the independent research by scientists not part of the US Government. From the accumulated evidence we know that steel was definitely melted like 'Swiss cheese', that pools of molten metal were seen, that hot dripping structural steel was observed, and that iron rich spheres of metal (previously molten) were found all throughout the dust, and that this evidence cannot be reconciled with welding or post disaster clean up activity.

The question to those who believe the debunking explanations is very simple - do the debunker claims and analogies actually account for what was observed? If not, then these represent NO explanation for what was seen. Those familiar with the science, and are able to do further research, will find that the debunker explanations are bogus.

3. The last key point to make in addressing the views of those who aggressively reject 911 truth claims is the fact that many of them are acting, or rather parroting the view, that asking questions, in the face of official assurances, is a bad thing. Truth should never fear inspection and interrogation! We should  be asking questions and we should be debating the issues - using logic and science.

So, when  the question arises over which side is fielding propaganda, especially if the material deals with 'difficult' issues, we can actually discern who has the better argument (ie telling the truth) via methods of reasoning and properly applied scientific knowledge juxtaposed with the recorded observations.

No claim, regardless of whose side it comes from should be taken at face value. In this information war data must be interrogated. And be mindful. The Debunkers/Disinformation fraternity will falsely claim that this is exactly what they have been doing and not what truthers are doing. Such wholesale accusations are just rhetoric. If one CHECKS the evidence and arguments, the truth behind such claims becomes apparent. Check the evidence - it's not that difficult.

Therefore, if the 911 truth doubters are honest with themselves (as opposed to the likely disingenuous government-connected 'Debunkers') they will reassess what they think they know and engage in further research. It's time to understand that 911 was indeed an inside job - and that being an unwitting part of the 911 lie only helps to maintain the never ending War on Terror.

As long as there is the threat of false flags we will never find peace. The enemy is within our own ranks and we must recognise this sad fact. Responsible individuals MUST inform the public - to explain that we are all  subjects of a heinous staged terror event, and that justice needs to be served so that peace can be attained.