Wednesday, December 31, 7000

Permanent Top Post by JM Talboo and Steve W.



By JM Talboo and Steve W.

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2008/10/debunking-myths-on-conspiracy-theories.htmlMany people subconsciously make the mistake of only seeing the issues concerning 9/11 in black and white, as opposed to shades of gray. This is known as the black-or-white fallacy. In this case, the false dilemma is: 9/11 was either carried out by Al-Qaeda or it was "an inside job."

Just because the evidence suggests that rogue elements of the US government and intelligence apparatus, as well as other international intelligence agencies, were involved, doesn't mean bin Laden and Al-Qaeda hijackers weren't involved.

In the fight to uncover the truth about 9/11 we must contend with individuals and groups that distort, omit and lie about important details in order to defend the official narrative - the 911 truth debunkers.

 

The NORAD-stand-down, various whistleblowers ("debunkers" just assert they are all confused lying with no basis), and peer-reviewed studies of the physical evidence centered around the destruction of the 3 World Trade Center Buildings in New York, make a strong case that the attacks involved substantial inside help.

“I think it’s implausible to believe that 19 people, most of whom didn’t speak English, most of whom had never been in the United States before, many didn’t have a high school education, could have carried out such a complicated task without some support from within the United States”
Former Sen. Bob Graham on 60-Minutes 



We might be wrong about where we suspect this all leads, but the "debunkers" are wrong when many essentially argue that it's acceptable for 70% of 9/11 family members questions to have never been answered by the 9/11 Commission. So of course, most have no qualms about promises made to 9/11 family members being broken by the Commission to investigate all whistleblower claims, which a substantial amount of the public find highly-suspicious at minimum, with many regarding the evidence as suggestive of complicity to varied degrees.

The below link proves that many thousands of family members want a new investigation. Likely the amount of people killed that day is outnumbered by these 9/11 victim's family members.






Truth Teller's Radio Episode 16 - 9/11/2018 JM Talboo Interviews Richard Gage about the 3000+ Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth:

http://truthtellersradio.blogspot.com/2018/09/truth-tellers-radio-episode-16-9112018.html


Are there more problems with the UAF/Hulsey/AE911Truth WTC7 Draft Report or the NIST WTC 7 Report? You Decide...

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2019/09/are-there-more-problems-with.html

Firefighters for 9/11 Truth Tribute Page:

http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2014/03/firefighters-for-911-truth-tribute-page.html

 


         

Unsurprisingly, the duh-bunk-turds hate even the best of the "Loose Change" films, but loose ends are no biggie.

The Washington Post reported on August 2, 2006 that:
Suspicion of wrongdoing ran so deep that the 10-member commission, in a secret meeting at the end of its tenure in summer 2004, debated referring the matter to the Justice Department for criminal investigation, according to several commission sources... "We to this day don't know why NORAD [the North American Aerospace Command] told us what they told us," said Thomas H. Kean, the former New Jersey Republican governor who led the commission. 'It was just so far from the truth. . . . It's one of those loose ends that never got tied."
So, if 9/11 didn't have an inside element, what's to stop such a scenario from taking place in the future when we get investigations that have attributes like these? 

It is therefore the purpose of this website to rebut the hollow claims of the so-called 911 truth "debunkers" and clarify what is known about the attacks for the benefit of those following the debate and also for the largely uninformed public. This site now features 9/11 truth related and not-so-related content. So please utilize our search feature (found also on the sidebar) to find a massive treasure trove of well-researched info on nearly every issue in the realm of 9/11 truth debate. 

Sorry that we don't allow any comments, but if you wish to communicate any thoughts you have about the published material please contact us here. Ad hominems will be ignored, but well-formed rebuttals may be addressed (and that is a subjective matter) provided we have not refuted the points therein numerous times on this blog already.

FAIR USE NOTICE

National Security Notice 

We are NOT calling for the overthrow of the government. In fact, we are calling for the reinstatement of our government. We are not calling for lawlessness. We are calling for an end to lawlessness and lack of accountability and a return to the rule of law. Rather than trying to subvert the constitution, we are calling for its enforcement. We are patriotic Americans born and raised in this country. [Four foreign countries also represented here at DTD]. We love the U.S. We don't seek to destroy or attack America ... we seek to restore her to strength, prosperity, liberty and respect. We don't support or like Al Qaeda, the Taliban or any supporting groups. We think they are all disgusting. The nation's top legal scholars say that draconian security laws which violate the Constitution should not apply to Americans. Should you attempt to shut down this site or harass its authors, you are anti-liberty, anti-justice, anti-American ... and undermining America's national security.

To support this site please make a small one time donation to: 


The information on this site is not intended or implied to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. All content, including text, graphics, images and information, contained on or available through this web site is for general information purposes only. The bloggers on this site make no representation and assumes no responsibility for the accuracy of information contained on or available through this web site, and such information is subject to change without notice. You are encouraged to confirm any information obtained from or through this web site with other sources, and review all information regarding any medical condition or treatment with your physician. NEVER DISREGARD PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL ADVICE OR DELAY SEEKING MEDICAL TREATMENT BECAUSE OF SOMETHING YOU HAVE READ ON OR ACCESSED THROUGH THIS WEB SITE.

The bloggers on this site do not recommend, endorse or make any representation about the efficacy, appropriateness or suitability of any specific tests, products, procedures, treatments, services, opinions, health care providers or other information that may be contained on or available through this web site. 

Monday, March 31, 2025

Chemtrails: The Global Cover-Up Exposed – From Government Admissions to Whistleblower Revelations

DebunkerBusters.blogspot.com

Chemtrails: The Global Cover-Up Exposed – From Government Admissions to Whistleblower Revelations

Introduction For years, a controversial narrative has unfolded in plain sight—one where government statements and classified documents seem at odds with the accounts of whistleblowers and independent researchers. On one hand, official channels acknowledge the existence of geoengineering programs while, at the same time, insisting that actual “chemtrails” have never been deployed. On the other, a wealth of investigative websites and firsthand testimonies assert that these trails are very real, bolstering the claim that conspiracy theorists have been right all along. This article pulls together evidence from multiple sources—from blog posts and whistleblower interviews to government bills and documentaries—to paint a comprehensive picture of the chemtrails debate.

Section 1: Government Admissions & Contradictory Claims Some sources—often originating from within government circles—provide proof of contradictory admissions:

These pieces underscore the unsettling reality: while official sources hint at atmospheric modification, they simultaneously claim such actions have not been executed—an ambiguity that fuels debate over whether government insiders have been lying all along. The discussion is further enriched by references to government bills such as the Dennis Kucinich bill and a more recent chemtrails bill from 2024, which some interpret as implicit admissions of the program’s existence.

Section 2: Whistleblower Testimonies & Insider Revelations A wealth of whistleblower accounts adds an insider perspective to the chemtrails story. Several sources feature ex-military and governmental personnel speaking out:

These accounts not only provide firsthand evidence but also point toward a systemic cover-up that spans multiple agencies and industries.

Section 3: Evidence-Based Investigations & Dedicated Platforms Many dedicated websites compile research, data, and investigative reports on chemtrails. These platforms offer extensive resources for those looking to dig deeper:

These sites present soil sample reports, atmospheric data, and analytical breakdowns of chemtrail operations, aiming to provide a fact-based counter-narrative to mainstream denials.

Section 4: Debunking the Debunkers – When Conspiracy Theorists Were Right A recurring theme in the chemtrails discussion is the persistent effort to debunk—or “debunk the debunkers”—which ultimately reinforces the validity of the original claims. Consider these sources:


NOT Debunked - Admitting the reality of chemtrails is hardly debunking them!
http://911debunkers.blogspot.com/2018/12/the-global-cover-up-of-chemtrails-has.html

How did flat earthers respond to the 24 hour sun Antarctica experiment?

How did flat earthers respond to the 24 hour sun Antarctica experiment?

For those following the debate, I think it's important you watch these videos. It isn't just a copium response of saying it was all faked. They do indeed point out anomalies, such as a person claiming to be blowing out cold air, being caught on camera vaping and lying about it. That said, flat earth models that incorporate a 24 hour sun and other arguments are also presented. Keep in mind, that many of their staunchest and most vile opponents are simulation theorists. I have two questions. Do simulations have shapes? Would co-creative consciousness, as implied by the double slit experiment and other evidence, create contradictory evidence? Good day. 

Watch "The Final Strawman Experiment" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/mp3nih7SB98?si=16brdmggCEdCCTK2 

Watch "Final Experiment Fakery" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/R6RMwROKJOs?si=VDe7TTV4f7iY1I3A 

Watch "Faking the Sun in Antarctica - Flat Earth" on YouTube
https://youtu.be/RTWxZ0qaY3U?si=Pl-WyB-mOPUZG38T