9/11 Debunkers debunk themselves

It's interesting how now every time someone mentions objections to the official story of 9/11, the so called conspiracy debunkers come out (or at least get mention ala linking to their blogs). Oh yes, we already know that I've dealt with and exposed Perry Logan for the fraud that he is, but there are plenty of others that are a little less retarded on the surface than Mr. Logan. A popular one I see is 9/11 Conspiracy Smasher. Many of these so-called debunkings have been as of late tied in part to the critique of Loose Change that has been flying around like wild. Oh no, I'm not saying they're wrong about the film per se, as it certainly had a number of problems with accuracy as WTC7.net pointed out so truthfully. The problem lays in how things are tackled when there is nothing to debunk it. Screw Loose Change talked about the claims of former pilot Russ Wittenberg and specifically when he mentioned how a 767 could not of performed the aeronautical movements it supposedly did to hit the Pentagon due to the fact that it would of encountered a high-speed buffet and fallen out of the sky, well, it was counted with calling him a "conspiracy theorist". This is - apparently - an acceptable means of proving someone wrong and debunking their claims: petty, ignorant, and furthermore unsupported name calling.


Now tell me, are not the "conspiracy theorists" supposed to be the ones that are so petty, and that must rely upon such horribly poor arguments? It's interesting also how little of the official story supporters of the government's conspiracy theory know. When explaining trying to explain the manoeuvres that the plane supposedly took to hit the Pentagon, I am responded to with an answer that is little short of "duh". My personal debates aside though, we constantly see disinfo being promoted by these supposed debunker blogs. Loose Change is the most common strawman. The ignorant and intellectually lazy (or those fearful of the truth) simply point to this each time as if that somehow contained all the issues covered with 9/11. Then we see the wonderful conclusions of innocence because a certain person says they are. Larry Silverstein says he didn't mean demolish when he said "pull it", so therefore it's so! Never mind the fact that everyone who believes he was talking about demolition thinks that he slipped up (this is ignored), and that if he did come forward and admitted to being in on the demolition, he would be under arrest for insurance fraud as well as possible prior knowledge of 9/11. These little facts escape the reality of such debunkers because for some odd reason their brains turn to garbage the minute they are faced to even think about how a respected nation would pull off a false flag operation on its people.

Constantly from the supposed debunkers we see theories instead of facts. I haven't been able to have 1 discussion concerning 9/11 without a "debunker" using a strawman disinfo tactic to try to squelch that which they can not disprove. Why is this? Why is it that if I and others that agree with me are such crack pot loonies that are duped so easily and are so paranoid and have nothing but baseless theories, why is it that our arguments are met with such transparent idiocy and disinformation? Many people fear the truth, I believe. People cling to what they want to believe and refuse to give thought to anything else.

I try to look for the truth. Whether it is something I agree with or do not agree with, to me truth is the most important thing of all. I have on many occasions spent time reading these “debunker” blogs and have spent time trying to find something incriminating on men like Alex Jones and the words they say. I’ve spent time on both sides of this fence, as have many, and so therefore I have seen both sides of this coin and I do not have to fear one side or another being wrong because I do not cling to these beliefs like many do a personal bible. I suggest that everyone should read these blogs, and listen to these supposed debunkers. It’s quite amusing as you study more about 9/11, but irregardless, listen to them and check their info and see if it indeed holds up. If you feel it does, then dig deeper and deeper until you find what the truth really is.

Perhaps another day I will take the time to show these poor arguments made by the supposed debunkers in detail.