NEVER FORGET: Jet fuel doesn't melt passport paper.

submitted by BISH from self.whatever

sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

According to infowars

Name me one mainstream news outlet which has dared to contradict the narrative.

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

The narrative makes sense. Nobody needs to dare to contradict it unless it doesn't make sense to them. People who look into it, find that it makes sense.

People who believe without checking the retarded nonsense you wrote about "nobody saw the first plane" get to believe whatever imaginary reality they want.

[–][deleted] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

There is no harm in asking questions. But to oppose asking questions that scrutinize the propagandised narrative and those who abuse their authority is dangerous. Only one major player questioned 9/11, look back at the interviews they did in the early 2000's and you can see the video footage now wiped from the internet that contradicts the media. Claiming infowars is wrong about everything without actually reviewing the footage is pure ignorance. There are interviews with those.who.were suicided saying they will spread the truth and have no intention of harming themselves.

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

Bruh. Firstly, prove anything, link to anything here, because I believe you're talking out your ass.

Secondly. It's not "asking questions". When there is a topic which has been extensively studied and reported on and witnessed and inquired into. You can't pretend that some fact hasn't been answered and "ask questions" about it.

For example. Let's say, what you ate for breakfast today, has been extensively studied and reported on. And thousands of articles have been penned about exactly how you ate your cornflakes, and everyone can watch you on YouTube eating cornflakes from a bowl.

If I then say "we don't know what he ate! They killed people for asking! Did he have bacon? Nobody knows, they won't tell us!" That's not "just asking questions", is it. Because nobody was killed, and everyone who wants to check, can watch you eating cornflakes. So if I said "we don't know what he ate because the mainstream media aren't telling us and you can't believe the government about anything" - I'm just being a flashy salesmen to rope in the paranoid conspiritards. It's not really asking questions. It's a show for dipsticks.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

For example. Let's say I ate toast for breakfast. The bread company needed to get rid of a bad batch and sold it anyway knowing I'd get the shits. I get the shits. Companies and organisations who saw me chewing and getting the shits but didn't see what I was eating do an extensive study and.find I was eating cornflakes despite the evidence that the bread company was guilty of foul play and those who witnessed the act of eating toast said it wasn't just that I didn't eat cornflakes, I didn't even eat from a bowl. The witnesses mysteriouslt all die of hanging with a gunshot wound to the back and the.bread company got away with the bad batch of bread. If you question the bread or any of the footage of the witnesses of the bread eating which has now been erased from common platforms, you are a science denier. Questioning the cornflakes? Bruh, you're a dipshit

[–]Site_rly_sux 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

Well, you weren't able to establish that anyone was "suicided" in reality, so you don't get to include that in your analogue.

Also, to round off your story, the bread company actually have a totally normal industry standard 1% batch failure rate, but conspiritards point to one particular failed batch as proof of a conspiracy.

Also, in this example, the fact that cornflakes were the only item on the breakfast menu has been established through thousands of hours of video, witness testimony and congressional enquiry - but the conspiracists still ask "well what about the bread! Don't people sometimes eat bread too! I'm just asking questions!"

Also, conspiracists get to point to the fact that nobody has bought up pancakes yet as proof that Big Pancake is involved. No other evidence needed.

Also the conspiracists make a video. Let's call it Loose Breadcrumbs. And they have to revise the video 145 times to remove false debunked claims, before giving up on the edits altogether. And none of the other conspiracists get to question why their story needed 145 revisions.

Also, fifteen or twenty years pass, and none of the original conspiracists have any better idea of what transpired that day at breakfast, even though the official narrative just gets proven more and more correct. In fact sometimes they even say "well maybe I was wrong, maybe it was just cornflakes, but you can't trust anything these days". And nobody gets to say - "hey! Fifteen years ago you said you were certain! You can't walk it back now!"

Oh and of course. The conspiracists are allowed to say "nobody witnessed the cornflakes being poured out the box!" Then I link you to a video of it happening, and you get to pretend you never claimed that and it was never part of your worldview that the pouring wasnt witnessed by anyone

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

🙄

So easy to dismiss everything in hindsight. It's like the ridiculous argument that 'they had to pull building 7 because of the structural damage from the twin towers falling'. It takes weeks to rig a building to be demolished, you can't pull a building like that in hours. You want me to link to an article, a study or video now, after Google and YouTube will only allow you to find the mainstream narratives and all evidence of the original footage has gone. Even the 9/11 archive dot org page is incomplete. Fuck off, you know full well the difficulties of doing so in this age of censorship.

[–]Insider 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Infowars is a government psyops program. Use James Corbett and Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth for your 9/11 details and facts.

There are also several detailed non-government documentaries.

The fact that known government shills are out here denying everything without even looking into the other side of the argument says it all.

[–][deleted] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The government psyop is seen when you type anything into Google about 9/11 and there are link after shitty link about 'why conspiracy theories are stoopid'.