one lie zero credibility 9/11 is the litmus test

.. belief is mostly done ...

  .. in the absence of evidence ...

    .. engineering relies on *proven* physics

Thesis/Subtitle: IF this really is *not* the best of all worlds

Concomitant: THEN doing nothing can not be an option

Corollary: dear reader, where do *you* stand?

-=*=-

Trigger article:

9/11 Is the LitmusTest
By: judeye
  «There is one thing that defines everyone over the course of these early years of this new century. That thing is the 9/11 attack. Everyone in government and every field of endeavor the world over is defined by their position on this event. It is not necessary to know the truth. It is only necessary to know the extent of the lies in order to define any leader in any position anywhere in the world. By what they have said and by what they have not said, one can accurately judge who is an enemy of the peoples of the world. One can accurately determine who is a tool of the psychopaths or one of them.» 
[whatreallyhappened/judeye]

Comment 1: See the youtube video here.

Comment 2: Just because I cite something, doesn't mean I *fully* endorse it; I expect readers to make their own minds up anyway.

Comment 3; BUT: At least two points are valid, and exist independent of the video:

Comment 3a: One (non-trivial) lie destroys *all* credibility. (All lies[1] are harmful.)

Comment 3b: All who do not *actively* oppose an evil bear some *responsibility* for that evil[2].

Lemma: Any choice between evils is itself evil (by definition), even if thought to be somewhat 'lesser.'

Comment 3c: As a non-trivial aside, given that in Aus, Lib = Lab, in US, Rep = Dem (and other 'Western' countries similar) - on far too many things (worst = war = murdering for spoil, next worst = erring-ideology neoliberal economics) = bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic = evil, choosing between two evils still results in some evil (and the policies implemented will be roughly comparable anyway); how can one ever justify actually voting for any of these evils, especially when merely doing so is taken as validation of that evil system? (Options = voting for some truly independent-from-evil party, or just not voting = all care, no responsibility.)

Comment 3d: As a least-trivial aside, the world's worst exemplars of both 3(a) and (b) are the whole I/J/Z-plex. Liars (hasbarah), thieves (of most of Palestine) and murderers (Deir Yassin massacre, all similar before, during and since, down to the current moment = ethnic-cleansing by genocidal methods = vicious crimes against humanity.) Each and every non-active opponent of the I/J/Z-plex evil bears some responsibility for that extreme evil of evils.

Comment 4: The US (accessoried by numerous SQSHsO, either coerced or worse, voluntarily) used 9/11 to embark on a berserk imperialist killing-to-steal bout of rapine, still on-going (Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, currently Syria plus sundry other targets in both ME and Africa with Iran next in the queue; ultimate targets = Russia and China), altogether = evil, attempted world domination. The situation in US itself is extremely fraught (falling incomes, exploding medical costs, ditto exploding unemployment, etc.) - and the EU (plus other 'West,' Aus & Cdn etc.) look like following the US spiral-down. Sooo, is US world-domination something we should tolerate, let alone encourage?

-=*=-

Fazit: That steel-framed high-rise buildings, such as WTC 1, 2 and 7 may be demolished by jet- or diesel-fuelled fire is one stupendous (= overwhelmingly non-trivial) lie, repeated three times, then echoed by all apologists, amongst whom are the true, and truly evil, perpetrators.

One cannot deny the evidence of one's eyes; too many videos exist showing planes hitting the towers. But simultaneously, one cannot deny the evidence of science; no fire could cause not one, not two but three towers to collapse sooo suddenly, sooo neatly, all into their own 'footprints.' No scientist worthy of the title could claim so; any who claim (either by omission or commission) that physical-law was somehow bypassed at WTC 1, 2 and 7 on 9/11 is a liar = evil.

The so-called 'official' explanation is totally inadequate (massive understatement - you could try researching it yourself). All known evidence was destroyed, exported as scrap or simply discarded = lost.

As in 3b above, all who do not *actively* oppose an evil bear *some responsibility* for that evil; how do you, dear reader, fit in?

-=*end*=-

PS I don't usually 'do' video, but you might wish to review these two:

911 Truth ~ The North Tower Explodes.

Comment: Quite serious.

World Collapse Explained in 3 Minutes.

Comment: Less so.

I don't pretend to have all the answers, but I do have questions - lots. And those (i.e. US regime, lackeys and factotums) who could attempt proper answers, have not - will not.

  «I hear you say "Why?" Always "Why?"
You see things; and you say "Why?"
But I dream things that never were; and I say "Why not?"» 
~George Bernard Shaw

Q: Why do they not give us straight answers?

A: The guilty must lie (commission/omission) - if only to avoid self-incrimination.

-=*=-

Ref(s):

[1] lie2  -n. 1 intentionally false statement (tell a lie). 2 something that deceives. —v. (lies, lied, lying) 1 tell a lie or lies. 2 (of a thing) be deceptive.  give the lie to show the falsity of (a supposition etc.). [Old English][POD]

[2] evil  -adj. 1 morally bad; wicked. 2 harmful. 3 disagreeable (evil temper). -n. 1 evil thing. 2 wickedness.  evilly adv. [Old English][ibid.]

Abbreviations:

ELO/Os = hapless erstwhile legal owner/occupiers

I/J/Z-plex; illegitimate IL squats on genocidally ethnically-cleansed = improperly alienated, mainly Palestinian ELO/Os' land/property = IL is an un-remedied crime-scene and *all* I/J/Z-plex (except any actively opposing) are guilty; sole remedy = reparations = revest where possible, adequate = acceptable recompense where not + *sincere* apology

M/I/C/$4a†-plex = military, industrial, Congress (US-speak for parliament); $ = banksters, 4 = 4th estate = MSM+PFBCs, 'a' = academia incl. think-tanks, † = the churches.

MSM = mainstream media (print and broadcast), aka 'corrupt&venal'

neoliberalism = 'economic rationalism,' 'supply-side,' (wicked) privatisations, 'small govt.' = minimised to no égalité etc. + globalisation = wage arbitration etc. = <1% rips off 99%+

PFBCs = publicly-financed broadcasters, like the AusBC

ppp-dd'd = pushed propaganda paradigm dumbed-down

PRopaganda = PR + propaganda, usual qualifier: 'lying'

SQSHsO = snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on

US-MMH = Media (aka press, radio + TV), Madison Ave., Hollywood

US&/Zs = the US of A and/or Zionists; sometimes indistinguishable

XS-CO2-CCC = excess CO2 climate-change catastrophe