Total Posts:7|Showing Posts:1-7
Jump to topic:

Anti-Truther Arguments

Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2012 2:39:38 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
I've noticed that what tends to drive most people towards Truthers is largely that they have questions that the official reports either lie about or do not address. And yes, the official story is bursting with lies. However, the lies along with the truth all point towards independent actors with divested interests, not some singular agent, either in terms of government or secret group.

Truther ideology is, at its most basic, the claim that whatever agency was a proximate cause of 9/11 , it was not Al Qaeda (I include proximate to pre-empt historical claims like "9/11 was due to the Crusades"). Al Qaeda either does not exist or is only a front group for the agent's personal interests. Variations claim that this agent is the American Government, Freemasons, Illuminati, the French, etc.

This is dangerous thinking. It simplifies the world into "Evil Agent vs. all" and ignores the actual geo-political and religious conflicts. Sometimes, interest groups align in which case you can get a viable "conspiracy" (see: Iran-Contra and Bay of Pigs).
imabench
Posts: 21,206
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2012 2:54:36 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/14/2012 2:39:38 AM, Wnope wrote:
I've noticed that what tends to drive most people towards Truthers is largely that they have questions that the official reports either lie about or do not address. And yes, the official story is bursting with lies. However, the lies along with the truth all point towards independent actors with divested interests, not some singular agent, either in terms of government or secret group.

^ This.

Also I realize some of them were lies, but quite a number of them were simply inconsistencies with what was later revealed as false, not blatantly ignoring the truth.
Kevin24018 : "He's just so mean it makes me want to ball up my fists and stamp on the ground"

7/14/16 = The Presidency Dies

DDO: THE MOVIE = http://www.debate.org...
http://www.debate.org...

VP of DDO from Dec 14th 2014 to Jan 1st 2015
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2012 4:19:18 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/14/2012 2:39:38 AM, Wnope wrote:
the lies along with the truth all point towards independent actors with divested interests, not some singular agent, either in terms of government or secret group.

This is admitted. Conspiracists acknowledge the fact that the media and politicians don't have to be in on the conspiracy. That's why it works. The left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.

Truther ideology is, at its most basic, the claim that whatever agency was a proximate cause of 9/11 , it was not Al Qaeda (I include proximate to pre-empt historical claims like "9/11 was due to the Crusades"). Al Qaeda either does not exist or is only a front group for the agent's personal interests. Variations claim that this agent is the American Government, Freemasons, Illuminati, the French, etc.

"[Zbigniew Brzezinski] was a major force in creating both the Taliban and al Qaeda."
-- http://www.redstate.com...

This is dangerous thinking. It simplifies the world into "Evil Agent vs. all" and ignores the actual geo-political and religious conflicts. Sometimes, interest groups align in which case you can get a viable "conspiracy" (see: Iran-Contra and Bay of Pigs).

Strawman. You assume that conspiracists ignore geo-politics and religious conflicts. Alex Jones would destroy you in geo-politics and these religious conflicts.

Everyone has an agenda, we don't dismiss that fact. The fact that multiple interests exist doesn't negate anything.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
MouthWash
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2012 6:53:04 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
Geo, what do you think of George Friedman? An honest supporter of freedom and truth, or a snake-worshiping cultist?
"Well, that gives whole new meaning to my assassination. If I was going to die anyway, perhaps I should leave the Bolsheviks' descendants some Christmas cookies instead of breaking their dishes and vodka bottles in their sleep." -Tsar Nicholas II (YYW)
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2012 7:01:29 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/14/2012 4:19:18 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 9/14/2012 2:39:38 AM, Wnope wrote:
the lies along with the truth all point towards independent actors with divested interests, not some singular agent, either in terms of government or secret group.

This is admitted. Conspiracists acknowledge the fact that the media and politicians don't have to be in on the conspiracy. That's why it works. The left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.


His point was it doesn't point towards anyone person in the US government, but, more so towards things like, *gasp* Al-Qeada. Also, do you honestly believe Al-Qeada is unde US control?

Truther ideology is, at its most basic, the claim that whatever agency was a proximate cause of 9/11 , it was not Al Qaeda (I include proximate to pre-empt historical claims like "9/11 was due to the Crusades"). Al Qaeda either does not exist or is only a front group for the agent's personal interests. Variations claim that this agent is the American Government, Freemasons, Illuminati, the French, etc.

"[Zbigniew Brzezinski] was a major force in creating both the Taliban and al Qaeda."
-- http://www.redstate.com...


Yeah, when it was fighting friggen Soviet Russia. Al-Qaeda and the Taliban used to be the "good guys".

And, what does this have to do with disproving Al-Qeada did it?

All it proves is some dude had something to do with helping to make it. They turned on us. Basic history 101.

This is dangerous thinking. It simplifies the world into "Evil Agent vs. all" and ignores the actual geo-political and religious conflicts. Sometimes, interest groups align in which case you can get a viable "conspiracy" (see: Iran-Contra and Bay of Pigs).

Strawman. You assume that conspiracists ignore geo-politics and religious conflicts. Alex Jones would destroy you in geo-politics and these religious conflicts.


Only after he says where in the treaty it says SPECIFICALLY that the UN can disarm US citizens forcefully.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2012 3:51:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 9/14/2012 4:19:18 AM, GeoLaureate8 wrote:
At 9/14/2012 2:39:38 AM, Wnope wrote:
the lies along with the truth all point towards independent actors with divested interests, not some singular agent, either in terms of government or secret group.

This is admitted. Conspiracists acknowledge the fact that the media and politicians don't have to be in on the conspiracy. That's why it works. The left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing.

Truther ideology is, at its most basic, the claim that whatever agency was a proximate cause of 9/11 , it was not Al Qaeda (I include proximate to pre-empt historical claims like "9/11 was due to the Crusades"). Al Qaeda either does not exist or is only a front group for the agent's personal interests. Variations claim that this agent is the American Government, Freemasons, Illuminati, the French, etc.

"[Zbigniew Brzezinski] was a major force in creating both the Taliban and al Qaeda."
-- http://www.redstate.com...

This is dangerous thinking. It simplifies the world into "Evil Agent vs. all" and ignores the actual geo-political and religious conflicts. Sometimes, interest groups align in which case you can get a viable "conspiracy" (see: Iran-Contra and Bay of Pigs).

Strawman. You assume that conspiracists ignore geo-politics and religious conflicts. Alex Jones would destroy you in geo-politics and these religious conflicts.

Everyone has an agenda, we don't dismiss that fact. The fact that multiple interests exist doesn't negate anything.

This is exactly the kind of simplicity of thought I'm talking about. It's well known that America used the CIA to fund the Northern Alliance with Pakistan as an intermediary The CIA funded movements all over the world with the sole goal of countering Soviet movements while gobbling as much strategically important land as they could.

If things were half as simplistic as you make them out to be, it wouldn't explain how just after the soviets left, there was a series of in fighting which lead to Pakistan helping to form the original Taliban. Pakistans ISI helped Al Qaeda set up camp until they were all but evicted to Sudan.

If Alex Jones would destroy me in geo-politics, perhaps he can explain why Osama asked the Saudi Royalty if he could attack Saddam, America and the Saudis refused and exiled Osama, and then America set up bases in Saudi Arabia setting off 180 degree turn in jihadist activity (at least since Lebanon in the 80s).

Perhaps he could explain how Salaafist islam, which has historical roots going back decades, could simultaneously be at the root of mujahedeen's beliefs (we have records of Bin Laden studying under Salaafist figures) while these same men helped establish a non-theocratic one-world-government.

Or he could explain how it is that the EIJ and Hamas decided to ally with Al Qaeda if this group is supposedly run by western interests.

If he's really got some guts, he could explain why Illuminati wanted Al Qaeda to bomb all of our allies to drive them out of the Iraq war. He could explain how Bush or Illuminati was in full control of Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI) when even AL QAEDA ITSELF didn't have full control over AQI (we know this through declassified communiques between Zarqawi and AQI commanders).

Why does Osama's messages consistently emphasize drawing US troops out of Saudi Arabia? He's said he'll make a truce with the west if they leave the Holy Land. That makes NO F*CKING SENSE if Osama is a smoke-screen to keep Americans from thinking too much about our foreign policy.

If Jones had the slightest bit of academic integrity, he'd explain what drove a dozen or so individuals with good jobs, college education, and life prospects to crash into buildings JUST to help some one world government.

And last but not least, Jones might explain why when the mujahedeen gathered to destroy the Soviets, yet when America invades the mujahedeen are supposed to be fine with this because they might get a non-theocratic one-world government.

Inane, to say the least.
Wnope
Posts: 6,924
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/14/2012 4:18:15 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I also pretty highly doubt Jones has read half as much correspondence between Islamic terrorists/terrorists and civilians as I have. For instance, he might have known that a vast majority of Al Qaeda's videos do NOT go to the west but are instead geared towards middle-easterners to define Islam in a "clash of the civilizations" context. The utilize Islamic clerics and entire madrassas, which I guess must also be working for Illuminati.