Please Ignore the "Debunkers".

When is everyone going to start ignoring these "debunkers"?

It's been awhile since I've gone over to SLC or JREF and read through their forums until the last couple of days, and now I know why: it is a complete waste of time. These people are either paid to oppose us or simply not willing or able to look at and understand the evidence. Either way they are beyond help and you have absolutely zero chance of converting any of them.

To those that fear newbies could stumble upon SLC and be convinced that the OCT is true, I can assure you there is little chance of that happening. The OCT defenders over there do not present persuasive arguments, and spend most of their time spewing ad hominems instead of addressing the real issues. The latest move by Troy of WV - posting Korey Rowe's personal cell phone number and encouraging people to call and harrass him - is but one example of the extreme vindictiveness these people feel towards us. My question again is why even engage these people in debate?

Let them spend all day congratulating themselves on their intellectual prowess. We should be spending our time reaching out to those that have never been exposed to the truth. When I make an effort to reach out to someone new, I am surprised to find that virtually every single time they have never even heard the SUGGESTION that 9/11 is anything other than Bin Laden + 19 hijackers. These are the people we should be concerned about. The mainstream media is not helping, so we have to do it. Forget the debunkers.

Plus, you should have confidence that any newbie who is truly interested in investigating 9/11 for themselves is going to look at more than one source for information. I know I did. I looked for months at all of the "debunking" material I could find. I remember reading through the "Loose Change Viewer's Guide" and breaking out in laugter. I don't know if they have revised it since, but at the time it was a childish attempt at debunking Loose Change. Again, have confidence that newbies will be smart enough to look at the "debunking" materials and see them for what they are - total crap.

In the off chance that a particular newbie is persuaded by the debunking materials, that is 100% fine with me. Coming to grips with the fact that 9/11 was an inside job isn't an easy thing to do. One of my friends used to get angry during debates with me on the subject because he could never effectively counter my points. The last time we debated he just flat out told me he thought what I was saying was legitimate, but that he "didn't want to believe it" because (1) he doesn't want to think our government could be so evil, and (2) if the truth did get out, it would have horrible consequences for our economy, etc. I said ok, and haven't brought it up in conversation since. Like I said, it's not for everyone. It's definitely easier (at the moment) for Americans to live life believing the OCT. Whether that remains true in the future remains to be seen.

For those that want to practice their debating skills and refine their arguments over at the debunking forums, this is only an admirable use of time if you are actually going out into the real world and using those refined skills and arguments to spread the truth to newbies. If you aren't applying your skills in the real world, you probably just enjoy debating the debunkers as a sort of hobby. Please don't. Time is precious in this movement, and your time would be much more effectively spent reaching out to those that have never heard of 9/11 Truth.

Finally, if you ignore the debunkers, the ones that aren't getting paid to do it may just get bored, stop their "debunking" activities altogether and go find something better to do. After all, they don't have the same challenge we have of reaching out to newbies, because the mainstream media spreads their message for them. Can you imagine Mark Roberts going around New York handing out DVDs purporting to prove Osama was behind it? People would tell him "Yeah, I know, I saw that on CNN last night, and the night before that, and the night before that." In other words, because newbies by definition already believe the OCT, the debunkers won't have anything to do with their time if those of us that are already converted stop engaging them in debate.

This blog may be a little late because right now there is a thread over at SLC about how quiet it's been around there and JREF lately, while dz is over here fighting to keep the 9/11 Blogger server up and running due to heavy traffic. We are making progress, people, and ignoring the debunkers can only help.

Good point

I agree, after reading through a couple threads last week I would say the whole point of those sites is to make hostility towards 9/11 activists seem acceptable.

I often wonder...

...if key players on the JREF forum are paid to oppose and ridicule us.

Good blog, Seve B

We spend far too much time and energy engaging an opponent whose primary goal is to waste our time, especially online.

One of the main purposes of on-the-street debunkers is to influence any newbies who may be listening to the conversation. Thus, they can be expected to show up at any large or extended street action.

During last Sunday's visibility action in S.F. I had a 10 minute dialogue with a debunker. He had already spent about 30 minutes debating one of the other truthers with me and their interaction had gotten personal. This guy was in his early 30's, clean cut, wearing sunglasses and had a definite law enforcement vibe to him. He tried a few rhetorical tricks with me, which I called him on, and then he decided it was time to go. I think he was doing opposition research, testing arguments and probing for rhetorical gaps to exploit. It is always a good idea to take note of how they steer the conversation so you know how to counter their tactics the next time (yes, we need to do opposition research, too).

Another young man came up to us and wanted to debate, he was in his late 20's and pretty sharp. I wouldn't consider him a debunker so much as a skeptic. His main arguments ran along the lines of the government is too incompetent, the conspiracy would have to be too large and why would they do it, anyway. To me, this is just a smart guy who is struggling with his own cognitive dissonance and denial and needs to be given time to come to terms with the very painful reality of 9/11.

My point here is that not all in person "debunkers" are a waste of time, evaluate each encounter at the time and decide if entering into an extended debate is warranted. One can learn something from every interaction. If the debate gets heated I think it best to step away and let someone else take up the dialogue. Don't ever let them get to you, stay on message and within the known facts. If you have a serious debunker engaging you in the street, tag team him. Let one in your team engage him while you study his methods, then switch off. This will give you an advantage and allow everyone to learn more effectively from the interaction.

The bulk of our work as activists is in the street with the public. This is where we will grow the movement, this is where we will win and this is where we will meet the greatest resistance from dedicated debunkers. In the coming months and throughout the summer this will become very apparent to everyone in the movement.

Keep up the good fight, brothers and sisters!

The truth shall set us free. Love is the only way forward.

Good points.

There are healthy skeptics, and there are dedicated debunkers.

Alluding to Gandhi's "first they ignore you, then ridicule, then fight, then you win" quote: The dedicated debunkers have grown in force rather frighteningly over the past year. I think JREF and SLC are their main lairs. They then branch out into small groups and infiltrate other message boards. I post on the politics section of, a marijuana legalization site, and with the 9/11 Truth threads, several posters demonstrate the modus operandi of the SLC and JREF people. No amount of credible testimony can convince them; when you post a video of a demolition expert saying WTC7 was CD, they say, "For every so-called 'expert' who says it was a demolition, there are a thousand others who say nay-nay." One poster on yahooka even employs the hate tactics of calling people like Steven Jones an idiot. As for former CIA and MI5 agents who are blowing the whistle on the 9/11 coverup: Dedicated "debunkers" will say that these people have no structural engineering qualifications, therefore they are spewing unscientific nonsense.

Here is a Yahooka thread which I started about the BBC WTC7 controversy. In paticular, check out Geeno and Frodo's posts. After 7 pages, a mod had to close the thread because the debate had degenerated into bickering.

The Fifth Anniversary of 9/11 was marked by 1000+ people with the "investigate 9/11" shirts and big banners saying "9/11 was a US Black Op." The movement has made its existense known at Ground Zero. The sixth anniversary will be marked by an increase of all this, however, with every year from now on, we should expect an increase of dedicated debunkers holding big banners that say things like "Conspiracy Theorists: You have been debunked ad nauseum!" and "Don't Listen to the Twoofers -- Read Popular Mechanics."

I can't remember the news article, but I remember reading one article about a 9/11 Truth conference, I can't remember which town, and the last paragraph began with "About five protestors demonstrated outside the event, wearing tin-foil hats and handing out leaflets that debunk the conspiracy theories."

I've also noticed that JREF and SLC are, in their modus operandi, are exactly like the controlled opposition to Michael Moore after Fahrenheit 9/11 was a success. Take Moore's movie. All the info in it was public knowledge before, but Moore popularized it to reach millions. So then the smear campaign becomes to "prove everything Michael Moore says is wrong." This is exactly what Mark Iradian, Mark Roberts and the whole "debunking" crew are doing with Dylan Avery. SLC has all the vindictiveness of the rebuttal film "FahrenHYPE 9/11." When someone has achieved success at political activism, you tear them down.