Disrespectful to the Victims
A common tactic that 9/11 apologists use for changing the subject away from 9/11 truth is to claim that questioning the official version is "disrepectful to the victims and their families".
In fact, half of the victim's families believe that 9/11 was an inside job. Many family and friends of victims not only support the search for 9/11 truth, but they demand it (please ignore the partisan tone). Indeed, it has now become so clear that the 9/11 Commission was a whitewash that the same 9/11 widows who called for the creation of the 9/11 Commission are now demanding a NEW investigation.
So next time someone tells you that questioning 9/11 is disrepectful to the victims, show him or her the facts contained in this story, and educate them to the fact that NOT questioning the heinous lie passing for the official story is what is truly disrepectful to the victims and their families. For failing to uncover the truth of 9/11 will mean that the victims died in vain: just 3,000 of countless victims of false flag terror committed by Western (and other) governments from Rome to the present.
If, instead, the truth of 9/11 is revealed and the perpetrators are brought to justice, the victims of this horrible tragedy will have helped educate America and the world as to the secret history of false flag terror, and their deaths will have been heroic and honorable.
- Login to post comments
here is a victim.
Bob, a former school teacher, recognises he has anger problems and also knows where they come from. On 9/11, he lost his son, 26-year-old Bobby, who had just begun working for the media department of Merrill Lynch and who was heading to a seminar on the 103rd floor of the south tower when the planes struck. And he is certain that criminals within the US government were responsible, not Osama bin Laden.
For the first few years, after the terror attack, Bob, 61, dedicated himself to anti-war groups that sprung up in its wake. He joined protesters pushing a massive stone dedicated to world peace down the highways of New England to New York and, last year, from Nagasaki to Hiroshima.
Today, he has withdrawn from those groups, however, to concentrate on a project he expects to take up the rest of his life: documenting and writing about the conspiracy that he believes was really responsible for the felling of the twin towers.
"I spend all my time researching 9/11," he admits. "Today, there are no ifs or buts in my mind that this was an inside job. The US government orchestrated it with the help of MI6 and Pakistan and Mossad. What they are telling us is bullshit. The hijackers were patsies and Osama bin Laden was set up."
http://www.prisonplanet.com/articles/September2006/030906five.htm
This Is How Disrespectful We Are...
Dear Mrs. Van Auken
"An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it." - Gandhi
The 9/11 Families
Click Here
"An error does not become truth by reason of multiplied propagation, nor does truth become error because nobody sees it." - Gandhi
Yes! We must be suspicious when ANYBODY uses this tactic!
Thanks, GW, for discussing this classic PSYOPS tactic of arguing that to question the OGCT (Official Government Conspiracy Theory) is "disrepectful to the victims and their families". I was going to write an article about this bogus argument because people need to see all the fallacies and false assumptions contained within it.
This is also a favorite argument, by the way, of disinfo agents within the 9/11 truth movement who go about debunking other 9/11 activists/researchers in this way. "Don't question this part of the OGCT because it will offend the victims' families."
This BS is constantly trotted out by the likes of Jim Hoffman (911research.com) and Mark Rabinowitz (oilempire.us) in attacking those researchers who dispute the OGCT regarding the Pentagon attack and cell phone calls. This argument is a red flag that should immediately alert people to what is going on. When anybody uses this bogus argument, we should all ask ourselves, "why is this person resorting to non-sequiturs and ad hominem attacks rather than discussing the actual evidence?" If they want to uphold those parts of the OGCT, they should back it up with research and evidence, otherwise they are just trying to divide and damage the truth movement, exactly the same way the official 9/11 apologists are operating.
Yes! We must be suspicious when ANYBODY uses this tactic!
Thanks, GW, for discussing this classic PSYOPS tactic of arguing that to question the OGCT (Official Government Conspiracy Theory) is "disrepectful to the victims and their families". I was going to write an article about this bogus argument because people need to see all the fallacies and false assumptions contained within it.
This is also a favorite argument, by the way, of disinfo agents within the 9/11 truth movement who go about debunking other 9/11 activists/researchers in this way. "Don't question this part of the OGCT because it will offend the victims' families."
This BS is constantly trotted out by the likes of Jim Hoffman (911research.com) and Mark Rabinowitz (oilempire.us) in attacking those researchers who dispute the OGCT regarding the Pentagon attack and cell phone calls. This argument is a red flag that should immediately alert people to what is going on. When anybody uses this bogus argument, we should all ask ourselves, "why is this person resorting to non-sequiturs and ad hominem attacks rather than discussing the actual evidence?" If they want to uphold those parts of the OGCT, they should back it up with research and evidence, otherwise they are just trying to divide and damage the truth movement, exactly the same way the official 9/11 apologists are operating.
---
This is like Sherlock Holmes telling Watson, we should trust a suspicious story of a butler because we would be disrespectful to his employers who were murdered.
This is like saying we are being disrespectful to the dead hens because we don't trust the story of the overweight/fat fox.
This is like saying that believing the perpetrators is good for the victims.
I am not religious but I think I hear the blood of 3000 Abel's crying out for revenge.
I know that is what I would want if it were me. Revenge. An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth, a life for a life.
The only way to respect the victims is to question everything that is questionable in the "official" 911 story. And nearly everything from this "official" story is questionable. Voila. AMEN.
Sorry, you goofed
We've all seen how GW makes claims that don't ever hold water. The claim that you guys are "just asking questions" has already been shown by your own admission to be false.
There is a distict difference form "asking questions" and making the assertions that are made here daily.
So I would like to ask GW to refain from making such claims that you "are just asking questions."
I'd also like you all to understand that many legitimate questions that you have asked over the years HAVE been answered fully and irrefutably and that you acknowledge that fact.
Some are right here:
Good Science and 9-11 Demolition Theories
WTC Pre-Collapse Bowing Debunks 9/11 "Controlled Demolition" Theory
The End of The "Controlled Demolition" Theory
If you can refute them, by all means do so. If you can't, admit it.
NOTHING outrages me more as
NOTHING outrages me more as far as what people say than we are "disrespecting the 9/11 family members". I've MET people directly affected by 9/11, and trust me they are PISSED at the coverup, and do not support this white wash "incompetence" theory. What about Bush, exploiting 9/11 so the US can bomb tens of thousands of innocents and get thousands of young US soldiers killed?
Victims feelings
We in the truth movement are the ones trying to bring the perpatrators of these evil events to justice. Catching the criminals is the ultimate form of respect for the victims.
It is interesting to read
It is interesting to read the statements from the meeting of October 26, 2005 - Full Committee on Science - Hearing - The Investigation of the World Trade Center Collapse: Findings, Recommendations and Next Steps (see www.house.gov/science/hearings/full05/oct%2026/index.htm )
Specifically with respect to the families, below is criticism against NIST raised at the meeting by Sally Regenhard, Chairperson, Skyscraper Safety Campaign: (The SSC represents families and survivors of the WTC disaster)
Quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In totality however, while some very valuable results were achieved, the overall mode and findings of the investigation was not what I had hoped for. I had certain hopes regarding NIST & the investigation, but I and others were disillusioned regarding what NIST was willing and able to do. I had hoped for more specific and comprehensive recommendations that could easily be translated into code reform and change, but this is not the case. The recommendations are very general and lack specifics. I feel that the vagueness of the language was influenced by political correctness and a general reluctance or inability to "investigate", use subpoena power, "lay blame", or even point out the deadly mistakes of 9/11 in the WTC. The following are five areas of concern for the Skyscraper Safety Campaign.
1) The role of the Port Authority of NYNJ & its’ exemptions from immunities & codes. The failure of the NIST Investigation to comprehensively examine what role these immunities had in the design, construction, maintenance and ultimate collapse of the WTC is of great concern to me.
2) The lack of more intense emphasis on fireproofing issues, premature disposal of steel evidence, the heavy reliance on computer modeling for fire testing, & the reluctance to focus on cause, blame, and resultant implications are troubling.
3) The reliance on the voluntary cooperation of key figures in the investigation to provide needed information; placing the former WTC chief structural engineer on the payroll to facilitate his involvement in the investigation, utilizing researchers to the exclusion of true investigators going into the field to obtain evidence is problematic to me. On this last point, I have been married to a NYPD detective sergeant for over 30 years, and I can recognize an Investigation when I see one. I feel the inherent character of NIST as a research rather than investigative agency was a factor in this situation.
4) The lack of focus on evacuation issues of the WTC such as remoteness of exits, behavior of fleeing persons in the stairwells, & the avoidance of first person accounts of stairwell evacuation, and length of time it took to evacuate the building was a shortcoming.
5) The relative secrecy of the investigation, and the withholding of all materials and documents used by NIST to arrive at the study's conclusions is very disturbing. These materials should be made available to professionals for further study and analysis, to question and/or duplicate the findings, according to the scientific method, and should not be locked away in the National Archives or anywhere else. I hope I can call on the Science Committee to unlock this information for the American public
Also read the concerns of Professor Glenn Corbett, from the link above.
1. THe premature disposal of
1. THe premature disposal of the steel is a smoking gun.
Guliani gave his OK to do this. When do we investigate Guliani ? He also knew the WTC 2 tower was going to fall
before it fell. How did he know this ? How was he smarter than the 300+ firemen who did this for a living but died in the collapses? Amazing, we have the crime of removing evidence happening right before the eyes of 300 million people.
3. Its clear they did not want an investigation. This further blows to smitherenes the 19 hijackers conspiracy theory. Why are they covering everything up if the 19 hijackers really did it.
5. Oh, the secrecy, the secrecy.
I have read thru large sections of Paul Thompson's timeline and again and again you see the FBI, CIA, Bush, the pentagon etc. blocking the investigation.
This alone shows GUILT.
And add this to all the things that we know about 911 and its beyond a reasonable doubt that 911 was an inside job.
Now, how to go from here to an independent investigation with subpeona power.