Take me to your leader.

[BeFree]

Who here is the leading proponent of accepting the OCT?

Who here is leading the "We don't need any investigation" team?

[LARED]

1. There is no leader

And if there was one you would be a mere snack.

[BeFree]

3. Hi, LARED. Long time no see.

Have you been here all this time? So, what have we learned?

[AZCat]

2. I don't know if any of us "accept" the OCT.

There might be parts of it that individuals find acceptable but if by OCT you mean the version told by our glorious president then I don't think you'll find any "true believers" here.

[BeFree]

21. I see it differently

I see a great deal of unquestioning acceptance of the theory. If there are no 'true believers' here then that must mean there is widespread reasonable doubt? I don't even see much reasonable doubt expressed here by the OCT defenders.

Reasonable doubt in our justice system is enough to keep the hangman at bay. But in this case the hangman (bushco) has been unleashed by the OTC, bringing death and destruction to many innocent people.

And with that our justice system is now in shambles.

[AZCat]

45. Remember that what you see here is not the totality of someone.

I think that a process of polarization is at work here - that a number of posters who would normally display "reasonable doubt" about the Bush administration in general and about the Bush narrative of September 11th in particular end up acting as "shills" because they don't agree with the particulars of various theories and aren't shy about saying so. Some of us (me, for example) end up arguing about the so-called physical evidence (it's all physical IMO, but that's a completely separate discussion) because that is what we are most familiar with. It is pretty easy to judge the validity of some of the conspiracy theories because they fail certain physical principles and therefore can be "debunked" easily. If a topic should arise that I'm not very familiar with, I'm less likely to be able to critically analyze it properly and therefore won't be able to determine its validity with the same degree of efficacy. It has been said before that the OCTers tend to stay out of certain kinds of threads. I can't speak for others, but I'm not going to post in those threads because they deal with topics I don't feel I am capable of analyzing properly and would rather not make unsupported or foolish claims. I like to know what I am talking about.

We don't get a lot pro-Bush posters in this forum so there aren't going to be many opportunities for us to disagree with opinions of that nature. Instead, we end up discussing these events with posters who are generally more radical in their opinions than ours, even though ours may be fairly radical when compared to the general population.

[Twist_U_Up]

4. Its a rotating shift with on call backup.

I just cant figure out what their benefits are.

[LARED]

5. Benefits?

Well once you get a daisy committee like me, you get to pick your own work schedule. The secret Dick Cheney decoder ring impresses the girls to no end. Other than that the bennies are not too good.

[salvorhardin]

6. You've got to admit though

Anarcho-Socialist's annual Bohemian Grove Picnic & Canned Puppy Hunt is a blast. Where else can you see Ethel Merman (the real one -- not J. Edgar in drag) and Elvis belting out Coldplay tunes?

[LARED]

9. As you know I missed it last year.

It conflicted with the annual NIST baby eating contest, and you know how I can't pass up watching those Bush appointed scientists and engineers scarf down the young'uns - even for Ethel.

[AZCat]

12. I enjoy a good ol' baby BBQ myself.

Almost as tasty as all those aircraft passengers we deep fried in September '01.

[Kingshakabobo]

32. Here's some video from the 2006 "Gate Keeper Award Banquet"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-cCfZrkCFI

[Laurier]

16. Ooooooooooh, you have a

Dick Cheney decoder ring?

This girl is impressed to no end :D

[greyl]

17. Welcome to DU! : ) nt

[Laurier]

19. Thanks. :) nt

[LARED]

33. Not only that honey

but because I head a Daisy committee, Old Dicky (only his friends get to call him that) gave it to me personally.

[Grateful for Hope]

49. Welcome to DU

I a little confused. I thought you were a "guy"?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=389&topic_id=60666#61389

[Big Pappa]

7. Thats right

Blue cross, Blue shield, the works. Although late nights in a subterranean lair get a little damp.

[angstlessk]

8. You people who are gubment agents are so funny! you trash everyone

with all six barrels...only they are all blanks...you got nothing but the 'official conspiracy theory' and it cannot hold water! How very sad you people are. You go no facts on your side..just 'officials'..and they do not have a clue (see pancake theory)

[truthpowertruth]

10. They are an interesting bunch...

They have such a motivation to disprove a 'stupid' belief. If the stupidity of our beliefs is so self-evident why put so much time into proving us wrong? Don't you have better things to do than waste your time with supposed stupidity?

[AZCat]

11. It's because they aren't self-evident...

that we choose to spend time here.

[Laurier]

18. There used to be

a poster here who called herself *************** who said the same thing repeatedly, but unfortunately, she got tombstoned. It must have been a conspiracy.

Edited to remove reference to the tombstoned poster's name as that might be a breach of the rules, sorry.

[petgoat]

29. I think you're talking about sweet politeness?

Found some interesting posts in the archives.

I miss poxamericana and stickdog.

[petgoat]

28. They don't put much time in.

It's all hit and run.

"I have a master's degree... in SCIENCE! And you don't."

It's all bluff and bullying.

[Kingshakabobo]

13. How about we take you to the OWNER of DU.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=364&topic_id=2110777#2111012

Skinner ADMIN (1000+ posts) Mon Sep-11-06 05:57 PM
Response to Original message

8. Why is it that people expect 100% perfection from the "official" story...
Edited on Mon Sep-11-06 05:59 PM by Skinner
...but they do not hold the alternative "theories" to nearly such a high standard?

Do I believe that the official story is 100% correct? No.
Do I believe that the official story is WAY closer to the truth than the conspiracy theories? Absolutely.

The conspiracy theories don't hold up to scrutiny. They are mostly a lame collection of faith-based wishful thinking.

Wondering about what happened is not qualification for disdain and ridicule. But if someone believes idiotic claims about controlled demolitions or missing airplanes -- then yes, that person is deserving of disdain and ridicule.

Except for the fact that doing so to another member of this website would be a violation of our personal attacks rule. So don't do it.

[BeFree]

15. Why is it...

...that people expect perfection from the OCT?

Because that OCT is responsible for the deaths of over a hundred thousand people.

And since there is a reasonable doubt about that theory, it seems our system of justice has been perverted. It is no laughing matter, although I see from the responses here that many OCTers are making a joke of it.

Gawd, I hope none of them ever are called to jury duty, because if they are justice will likely be perverted again and again.

[Kingshakabobo]

20. It is no laughing matter?

The why did you post a snarky "take me to your leader" thread?

Or were you serious about the, so called, OCTers having a leader? ....and do you REALLY think there is some sort of team?

[BeFree]

22. You got me there

It was snarky, wasn't it? I guess I have little respect for people who don't question the OCT to the nth degree. The questions should never stop unless there is acceptance and total agreement with the theory.

In that case, one simply has to wonder: why bother posting here? The only answer that makes any sense is that that kind of poster has a deep seated fear that the real truth will somehow come out, shattering his or her belief. Therefore, all attempts must be made to keep the truth from coming out. Sure looks that way to me, how 'bout you, King?

[William Seger]

23. Total baloney

> In that case, one simply has to wonder: why bother posting here? The only answer that makes any sense is that that kind of poster has a deep seated fear that the real truth will somehow come out, shattering his or her belief. Therefore, all attempts must be made to keep the truth from coming out.

I can tell you why I post here: Because, with too few exceptions to make any difference, the so-called "truth movement" has absolutely no respect for the truth. From the ground up, it's based on bullshit. The one and only thing that "truthers" seem to care about is getting more people to believe the same things they believe. It's all about the "movement" -- and fuck the truth when it gets in the way. Just look at what really happens on this board: The "truth movement" is positively allergic to the truth. And then, I have to read crap like, "that kind of poster has a deep seated fear that the real truth will somehow come out."

[BeFree]

24. So

You know the truth, huh?

You above all others are the keeper of the truth? What makes you think you are so special? The 9/11 commission? Bushco and the FBI?

So tell us, oh great one, what is the truth?

[William Seger]

26. First, go back and read your own post

You claim that people who dispute you must be afraid the "real truth" is going to come out. You are a hypocrite.

Second, you say we "fear that the real truth will somehow come out." Somehow? And just how would that be? According to "truthers" it's apparently some kind of special intuition that we "OCTers" just don't possess. All the evidence that proves them wrong must be fake, all the evidence that would prove them right must have been covered up, all the witnesses (who are the backbone of the "official story" -- not Bushco -- whether they are civilians or career government employees) must be either mistaken or lying because they are part of this mass murder plot.

You mentioned juries in another post, so let me ask you a question: In our criminal justice system, where we trust juries to determine "the truth" and their decisions have tremendous effect on people who may be innocent, how do we expect those juries to determine "the truth?" Just whatever "seems about right" to them?

But I'll answer your question with two words: critical thinking. Technically speaking, of course, that isn't the same thing as "the truth" -- certainly not to a logician -- but in the real world, you need to find some realistic way of dealing with some degree of uncertainty about everything, and just making up your own "truth" ain't it for me. Critical thinking is simply the process of weighing alternative hypotheses against ALL the evidence, objectively and logically, and estimating relative probabilities. When one hypothesis is so far ahead of the others that there isn't any real comparison, I tend to call that (loosely speaking) the "truth," but more to the point here, when one hypothesis makes no sense at all on its face and isn't supported by any credible evidence, I call that bullshit. You want to convince me that I don't know the "real truth?" That's cool; show me some reason for believing it! Why does that seem to be so damn hard for "truthers" to understand?

Critical thinking isn't perfect for finding "the truth," but as far as I'm concerned, it beats the holy shit out of whatever is in second place.

And, no, in case you hadn't noticed, there's nothing at all special about me. If you look at some the polls about astrology or homeopathic medicine of talking to dead people or whatever, it's appalling that a whole lot of people believe a whole lot of crap. But fortunately, there are still quite a few people in the world who value critical thinking.

[BeFree]

35. Just what I figured

You don't know the truth.

Critical thinking is a path to the truth but critical thinking requires an open mind, a mind which you don't seem to have. Otherwise you wouldn't be calling me a hypocrite, you'd be talking about how there are many things about the OCT that don't jibe. That much outside information has been obstructed, and readily admit that the holders of the OCT are not letting all the evidence flow freely.

Critically thinking about this would lead one to realize that the truth about 9/11 remains unknown, still, 5 and a half years later. So try some critical thinking and get back to me. Try to critically think about the OCT and find the holes and think about why they are lying to us. If you really want the truth, that is where you start.

[William Seger]

42. You lose

As soon as someone who is promoting an implausible hypothesis with no credible evidence drags out the "open mind" fallacy, that's the same as saying you have no more arguments, and you're conceding the debate. It's a logical fallacy because, of course, a closed mind is certainly not the only reason for rejecting an hypothesis. And here, I've just explained to you that critical thinking involves evaluating the supporting evidence and reasoning, but instead of trying to come up with any, your would like to change the definition of "critical thinking" to mean retaining an open mind despite the fact that the hypothesis makes no sense and is not supported by evidence, after being analyzed over and over and over.

But no, even then I don't have a completely closed mind. If and when you ever come up with better evidence and valid reasoning, you're allowed to start to process over again.

> Try to critically think about the OCT and find the holes and think about why they are lying to us. If you really want the truth, that is where you start.

Man, you really gave yourself away there. These "holes" -- those would be things you don't understand about the "OCT", correct? Things like: you don't understand how 19 Arabs could hijack 4 jets and manage to fly 3 of them into buildings; you don't understand how 500+ mph 767s and fires could cause the towers to collapse; you don't understand how a 757 could fit in that "small hole" in the Pentagon and leave "no debris" -- stuff like that? And then your very next step would be to try to figure out why they are lying to us -- that's where you "start" if you "really want the truth!" LMAO, that's CT thinking in a nutshell, alright, but no, that bears no resemblance whatsoever to critical thinking.

[BeFree]

43. Hey, we have a winner!

You think it all makes perfect sense. And I don't. You don't know the truth (you didn't say so, but you know you don't) but you believe in those possibilities that, like magic, occurred on that fateful day.

The first steel frame building to collapse from a fire.

The lack of metal from an airplane that smacked the side of a building (it turned to dust!)

The lack of the Air Force to protect the skies. Excused away because they were training for just such an occurrence. Wow, what luck. There's that magic again.

The president sits while buildings burn and people jump to their deaths and their spouses to this day are still wanting a real investigation.

The 19 claimed hijackers work for a man who was employed by the CIA and whose kin were in business with the president. No connection there, eh?

Well, I could go on, but you probably don't have enough critical thinking capability to put those truths in your mind and come up with a better theory. Obviously.

[William Seger]

44. Critical thinking capacity

You're a funny guy: You perfectly illustrate the CT thinking process while claiming that's what "critical thinking" is. CTers usually claim to be "just asking questions" but in fact that step is almost always concurrent with speculating on answers that always involve sinister conspiracies and cover-ups. You have an "open mind" to any and all possibilities except that the "official story" is true. The attempt to confirm those speculations then triggers a search for evidence, but when all you can find is evidence that supports the "official story," you ignore or discount all of that as faked and instead search for "anomalies" -- which you define as anything that you don't understand. Since these anomalies become such an an important part of confirming your speculations -- your only "evidence" -- your lack of understanding of them must be protected by willful and persistent ignorance: you refuse to understand them. Then, bolstered by all this "evidence," you conclude that yup, your speculations and assumptions were basically right all along. But then, when you can't really come up with any hypothesis that actually makes any sense at all, you play coy, claiming that you don't have all the answers yet -- you're "just asking questions" because you've proved to yourself (via your denial of the actual evidence and your willful ignorance of the explanations for your "anomalies") that the "official story" can't be true.

No, that is not critical thinking.

But this whole thread is basically pointless; you asked some questions and I'm answering them, not trying to convince you I'm right. What you really need to do is get back to the business of coming up with some conspiracy hypothesis that's supported by credible evidence and valid reasoning, because that's what it's going to take to make them convincing. If you can do that, people who really are critical thinkers will start to take you seriously, and there's no point in worrying about those who are not really critical thinkers.

[BeFree]

46. Yep

Not worried about you at all.

Except that the same people who told you there were WMD in Iraq, are the same who told you there was nothing to see about 9/11, move along. And that is what you've done.

Critical thinking is taking what someone tells you, and turning it over in your mind to find out whether or not what they told you has merit.

There being much that has no merit about the bushco conspiracy theory, one has an awful lot of critical thinking to do about the story. Like how did those planes get lost to defenders. Like why did the FBI agents warnings about known bad guys who wanted to learn how to land big jets (but not launch) get lost. Like why did bush ignore the CIA's warnings that a bad guy was planning an attack. On, and on, the merit less stories beg, just flat out beg, for answers.

But what do you do? Take the story hook, line and sinker. Don't ask questions. Don't look at it with any doubt. I expect the next thing you will say is that they did find WMD in Iraq.

I got a theory right here, short and sweet: Somebody in the US government planned it all out and used the warmongers desire for war to get them to go along with them in deceiving the public. Part of the plan was selling a plausible scenario that non-critical thinkers would go along with and let them get their war on.

But I like your idea about putting together a hypotheses that details how they might have done it. If you have any ideas about what could possibly be wrong in the OCT, let me know, I may use it in the compilation, thereby helping tell the alternative story. How 'bout it? You in?

[William Seger]

47. You really have no idea what I'm talking about, do you?

> But what do you do? Take the story hook, line and sinker. Don't ask questions. Don't look at it with any doubt. I expect the next thing you will say is that they did find WMD in Iraq.

I think I've wasted enough time with you.

[BeFree]

48. I got a pretty good idea

But your idea of critical thinking is not well exemplified by your remarks. So, no, I don't know what you are talking about.

Try again, later.

[piobair]

34. Most of the posts

that take on the various ct's deal with what is usually flawed science or a complete lack of knowledge of their subject matter.{see Nebula} If no one in the ct camp will call bullshit when their fellow travelers start talking about steel combusting or shape shifting chem trail sprayers then it's left to those who actually care about accuracy to say something. I didn't start posting here until some yahoo started making the claim that the FDNY was in on the attacks and was complicit in the deaths of 343 of their brothers. Maybe if you would police yourselves then you wouldn't face such strident opposition.

[BeFree]

36. Police ourselves?

There are too many police around as it is and those are the OCTers. Granted there are some far out theories presented here and there. Of course, some of those could be total disinfo agents here just to lead others astray. And if you think you are seeing BS, by all means call it out. But for the most part, what I have seen is too much closed mindedness and constant knee-jerk reactions.

My OP was directed to the OCT defenders, and that is what I am after. I'd like to hear why yall think I should believe your pet theory.

[wildbilln864]

37. I am with you BeFree!

The OCT as you call it, I prefer the Bush/PNAC CT, is total BS! Anyone with eyes can see that!
Bravo to you for your efforts and keep up the good work BF. :yourock:

[BeFree]

38. Of course

The lives we save may even be our own.

Ya know, whenever I get into with a right-winger I bury them with this closing argument:

I don't trust the government. It seems the only difference between you and me is that you do trust the government, and I DON'T!

[piobair]

39. If that burys them

then you must be arguing on the short bus.

[BeFree]

41. It seems

The difference between you and I is that you trust the government. I say that since you have not yet stated otherwise. You have a healthy level of distrust, I see, but still, you do seem to have too much trust in the government.

Now this is where you can state whether you do, or do not.

Most right-wingers claim to have never trusted the government, so when they keep telling me to trust what I have been told, I point out how stupid they sound. Really, they bury themselves.

[petgoat]

30. Another reason to expect perfection from the OCT is that

the 9/11 Commission got $15 million, FEMA got $600,000,
and NIST got $20,000,000.

While we trudge forward with our old computers, our homebrew
DVDs, and cooperativeresearch.

[William Seger]

14. Do you mean the Sector Chief, Disinfo Agent 53 ?

Sorry, but of course nobody knows who he is. We get our orders from tiny little links hidden all over the internets. (This is cool: some of them are on Scholars for 9/11 Truth.)

And of course, I can safely tell you all that because it just sounds too crazy to be true, so nobody will believe you. Haaaaaaaaaa-ha-ha-ha!

[MervinFerd]

40. I think he means "The Boss".

Us Disinformation Specialists don't know the name of "The Boss", of course. Heck, we would barely identify each other if we met on the street.

Need to know.

There's the secret handshake, of course.

[Laurier]

25. It is easy to grow complacent

in the employ of the NWO because the benefits are so good, and sometimes,we forget to consult our calendars for the changing of the guard, and forget who the current assigned Leader is as a result.

Who has an up-to-date calendar, guys?

[salvorhardin]

31. I could tell you but...

Then you'd have to be suicided. Would you prefer that be by light aircraft or tsunami?

[petgoat]

27. Oh, you're looking for the Bull Goose Loony? nt