09/11 truthers, i would like to get in your heads

There's only one paid team here boss.

 

There is? Well it isn't me ... So who's paying your team? Richard Gage?

 

Got demoted huh? Times are tough I guess.

 

Not at all. I own my own business, and we're thriving.

 

Putting out fires has its rewards I guess.

 

I don't put out fires. 'Truthers' have a hard time with reality, don't they?

- - - Updated - - -

I don't put out fires. 'Truthers' have a hard time with reality, don't they?

 

I find that hilarious too, they accuse me of being a shill. I work for a fortune 500 company and have nothing to do with the government.

 

Anyone who uniformly accepts the "official" BS story without question, MUST, by definition, be a shill.

 

No one here does that.

I follow the evidence, personally. NIST, Perdue, MIT, The French University study, the Oxford study ... and all other independent investigations.

By your definition, you are shilling for terrorists.

 

You accept all things official. PERIOD. That's a pro-active shill.

 

Wrong. I follow the evidence. Period.

 

So what part(s) of the government's explanation of the events do you not accept, believe, or not agree with then?

 

What explanation(s) has the government given?

 

I'm not interested in whatever it is that you were trying to accomplish by asking a question like that. All I want to know is: Is there anything that you disagree with that comes from the government in regards to 9/11? Yes or no. If you just want to hand-wave both of my questions away, fine. So be it. It wouldn't be the first time you couldn't answer a question straight up.

 

I disagree with the way the administration exploited the event.

For someone who whines about civility, you certainly don't practice it.

 

To clarify: if the evidence supports the narrative, I'll believe it. If new evidence comes to light that shows the narrative to be in error, I'll research it for veracity.

I follow and support the evidence.

 

Okay. Is that it? Or am I going to have to ask several redundant follow-up questions to get further information out of you?

Yes, everything is whining to you. Regarding civility... it certainly does get tiring in these forums with the likes of you(s). I am but only human. My apologies, sir.

 

My statement stands. I believe the evidence.

 

You asked a very broad unqualified question. He asked for clarification. Why is that a problem? Truthers constantly build strawmen out of what they think the "official" story is. Take the argument about how deep the wreckage was at Shanksville as an example. Some tour guide at the memorial said something 10 years later that conflicts with what was said by a police officer to a reporter a few days after the crash. Truthers take this as evidence that there's something "fishy" in the official story.

 

What evidence ? Evidence of what ?

 

Take a look at the topic of this section of the forum. Think hard.

Take aspirin for any headaches, Midol for any cramps.

 

You were asked if you had any questions or doubts or deviations in thinking pertaining to the official conclusions surrounding 9/11.

You answered you believe 'the evidence'.

I asked you

1) What is The Evidence ?

2) How does This Evidence bring you to the position of agreeing the Official conclusions are correct.

 

The evidence is everything related to the scenes of 9/11. Including, but not limited to, photographic, video, eyewitness, forensic, radar and expert testimony.

Official conclusions? There's a generally accepted narrative, which has been adopted as an official position. If there is any evidence against the generally accepted narrative, it hasn't been presented.

 

The old "generally accepted narrative" line once more. Still not much actual proof though.

 

Says who?..you?

Pardon me if I don't accept you as any kind of authority on the issue.

I mean constantly shouting 'Nuh-uh!,doesn't instill confidence that you know what you're talking about