Difference between revisions of "2010-01-29 Rebutting (Again!) the 9/11 Truthers/woozle"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m (misplaced parenthesis closing) |
m (missing context) |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
** '''Distortion''': Many truthers do believe this, but they are aware that the evidence is (so far) weak -- and it is not the core position of the [[9-11/truth|9/11 Truth movement]], which is basically that the [[9-11/official|official story]] is substantially incorrect and there needs to be a proper investigation to determine the truth. | ** '''Distortion''': Many truthers do believe this, but they are aware that the evidence is (so far) weak -- and it is not the core position of the [[9-11/truth|9/11 Truth movement]], which is basically that the [[9-11/official|official story]] is substantially incorrect and there needs to be a proper investigation to determine the truth. | ||
| + | Shermer continues: | ||
<blockquote> | <blockquote> | ||
In response to my blog here, [http://trueslant.com/michaelshermer/2009/12/28/911-truthers-foiled-by-1225-attack/ 9/11 Truthers Foiled by 12/25 Attack], the "truthers" have fired back with a series of questions for me, not about Al Qaeda and bin Laden taking credit for the Xmas day underwear bomber, or for 7/7, or Lisbon, or the attack on the World Trade Center buildings in the early 1990s, but on specific "anomalies" in the collapse of the WTC buildings...</blockquote> | In response to my blog here, [http://trueslant.com/michaelshermer/2009/12/28/911-truthers-foiled-by-1225-attack/ 9/11 Truthers Foiled by 12/25 Attack], the "truthers" have fired back with a series of questions for me, not about Al Qaeda and bin Laden taking credit for the Xmas day underwear bomber, or for 7/7, or Lisbon, or the attack on the World Trade Center buildings in the early 1990s, but on specific "anomalies" in the collapse of the WTC buildings...</blockquote> | ||