MrMentalInertia: Confession of an Ex-Conspiracy Theorist

Mick West

Administrator
Staff member


His turning point seems to have been when he started to question some of the accepted truths of his peer group, and then they turned on him, which gave him perspective about how dogmatic the "truth" movement is, and how questioning things is not acceptable.

then one day I began to ponder the state of the world and I asked myself a question: why are things the way they are, even with so many of us in the red pill club who have supposedly woken up and have been exposed to the real truth. It seems like the only thing we've done is just talk about it and try to initiate others into the club.

I then began to wonder if it was necessary to be part of a movement to learn the truth at all. I began to see how truly silly it all was. It was then that I made a video explaining the way I felt about it all, and I was then officially excommunicated by the red-pill club. I found myself being attacked in the exact same manner I had attacked people before in defense of the truth movement's conspiracy theories
Content from External Source
As a debunker I try to prod people towards this realization by politely explaining the places where they (and/or their adopted movement) has made mistakes. One could also then presumably bring up the question "why don't the leaders of your movement accept they have made mistakes". This is something I often shy away from, out of an abundance of politeness - perhaps even an excess of politeness. It's a valid question.

MrMentalInertia's turning point was when he realized that being "awake" was not awake at all, it was simply accepting a particular world view, and accepting it entirely without question. To be truly awake you have to genuinely question everything, not just automatically assume the official story is a lie. Question Obama, question Monsanto, sure, but also question Alex Jones, Richard Gage, and Michael J. Murphy.

And if people won't let you question them, if they ban you from their pages, if they delete your questions and accuse you of being a shill, then you should question yourself - why do you think they are avoiding your questions?

 
Last edited:
Interesting that he has been ostracised in the way that someone leaving a cult might be. In my opinion hard line conspiracy theorists are akin to religious zealots....blindly and fanatically defending a deep seated belief.

(They should appoint Icke as their diety......you'd have to have a sneaking respect for a religion with a god called "Dave").
 
This is a better one



"9/11 Truth is irrelevant... let's imagine 9/11 conspiracy was confirmed and all guilty parties were brought to justice... then what... would it change anything...think about it, it doesn't matter whether 9/11 was an inside job or not..."
 
This is a better one

"9/11 Truth is irrelevant... let's imagine 9/11 conspiracy was confirmed and all guilty parties were brought to justice... then what... would it change anything...think about it, it doesn't matter whether 9/11 was an inside job or not..."

I disagree that nothing would change, it would be a pretty major shake up. Historically ground-breaking. Pretty earth-shattering for non-truthers.
 
I disagree that nothing would change, it would be a pretty major shake up. Historically ground-breaking. Pretty earth-shattering for non-truthers.

Ah so we agree at last :)

But your 'reformed truther' doesn't think that... he says... 'It doesn't matter if 9/11 was proved an inside job, so stop looking and become a debunker and trash the truthers'.

These little examples and many more, would never have come to light if everyone adopted that attitude.


2004 Secret CIA Prisons
A story by reporter Dana Priest published in The Washington Post of November 2, 2005, reported that "The CIA has been hiding and interrogating some of its most important al Qaeda captives at a Soviet-era compound in Eastern Europe, according to U.S. and foreign officials familiar with the arrangement."[4]
The report contends that the CIA has a worldwide covert prison system with facilities in Asia, Eastern Europe, and in Guantanamo Bay in Cuba. The system is central to the agency's anti-terror role, and according to the report has been kept secret from government officials (including Congressional committees that oversee the CIA) through the agency's own efforts as well as cooperation with foreign intelligence services.
This conspiracy was proven in 2006 when President Bush admitted that indeed there are secret CIA prisons in Europe and elsewhere

1995 Oklahoma City bombing
The Oklahoma City bombing was a terrorist attack on April 19, 1995, in which the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building, a U.S. government office complex in downtown Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, was destroyed, killing 168 people. The (Oklahoma) McCurtain Daily Gazette has reported that at least one member of the secret services and an informant for the BATF (Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms) had prior knowledge that the attack was about to take place, a charge which the FBI deny. The newspaper also alleges that the FBI and the Southern Poverty Law Section, as part of a top-secret undercover operation, may have indeed assisted the bombers in their plans as part of a failed sting operation, citing evidence given in a court case by a BATF informant and data published under the Freedom of Information Act as 'proof'.

1993 WTC terrorist attack
In the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, a truck filled with explosives was planted by terrorists and detonated in the underground garage of the north tower, opening a 30m hole through 4 sublevels of concrete. Six people were killed and over a thousand injured.
According to a presiding judge, the conspirators' chief aim at the time of the attack was to de-stabilize the north tower and send it crashing into the south tower, toppling both landmarks.
Content from External Source
Now this last one is interesting... see bolded.
 
Ah so we agree at last :)

But your 'reformed truther' doesn't think that... he says... 'It doesn't matter if 9/11 was proved an inside job, so stop looking and become a debunker and trash the truthers'.

No, I think he's more saying "why are you a truther?"

Why are you a truther Oxy?
 
No, I think he's more saying "why are you a truther?"

Why are you a truther Oxy?

I thought it was obvious. Not being in the least facetious here... I want to know the truth and I want' people held to account. The OS on so many things either does not add up or is patently false. I don't like the way the west is going with people being ever more controlled and monitored and conditioned, para military police and lockdowns like watertown etc. I don't like the way 'we' treat the people of other Countries, the millions that have died due to our governments ambitions in the areas. I worry about what sort of a place we are allowing our children to inherit. We are acting like the Romans and it is wrong and we should be advanced enough to know that.

Ok, it's never going to be a perfect world but bloody hell, some of the things that are being done in our name are diabolical and some of the things that are being foisted on us are nightmarish.

Freedom isn't free Mick, as you well know.
 
I thought it was obvious. Not being in the least facetious here... I want to know the truth and I want' people held to account. The OS on so many things either does not add up or is patently false. I don't like the way the west is going with people being ever more controlled and monitored and conditioned, para military police and lockdowns like watertown etc. I don't like the way 'we' treat the people of other Countries, the millions that have died due to our governments ambitions in the areas. I worry about what sort of a place we are allowing our children to inherit. We are acting like the Romans and it is wrong and we should be advanced enough to know that.

Ok, it's never going to be a perfect world but bloody hell, some of the things that are being done in our name are diabolical and some of the things that are being foisted on us are nightmarish.

Freedom isn't free Mick, as you well know.

Yes, there are lots of problems in the world, and a lot in this country (the US). I think it's a real shame though that so much energy gets devoted to (what I see as) imaginary problems - basically wasting energy on bunk and speculation.

It's a shame because it cripples the effectiveness of passionate people like yourself, by you not being taken seriously. It's a travesty that Guantanamo is still open, it's terrible that millions are in jail, but when you start to weave it into a picture of the WTC being brought down by controlled demolition, then people just look at you as a nut, and ignore everything you say.

Now I know that's not a good reason to stop. If you believe in something I would generally not recommend you pretend not to just so you can be taken seriously. I just wanted to explain my perspective, as it's one of the ways I think that bunk is harmful, and one of the reasons why I debunk.
 
The 'revelation' about the 1993 was not any secret information. I read that years ago in the my local newspaper. So WHAT ?

What evidence is there that the Murrah building bombing wasn't done by McVey and company?
 
I think it's a real shame though that so much energy gets devoted to (what I see as) imaginary problems - basically wasting energy on bunk and speculation.

Look at it this way, perhaps conduits of information need a source of energy and money and so forth to run. So that's why you get Alex Jones using a sort of fear loop to begin entertaining people with what amounts to a roller coaster ride over and over again, with Glenn Beck trying to imitate him and so forth. Given that Americans are busy with trampling each other to death at Walmart, this is the way that truth would have to be packaged and sold to most of them (Distorting it in the process.).

It's a travesty that Guantanamo is still open,

That could be framed as bunk. You're not trusting officials and their official reports that everyone there needs to be detained indefinitely. Why don't you trust the official story? Do you believe that the reptilians want some people kept there like all the other conspiracy theorists? Etc.

it's terrible that millions are in jail

Invest in Corrections Corporation of America... curious how people build their own prisons based on bunk, isn't it? E.g... they may be on Psychotropics Inc. and approve of giving SSRIs to kids but they're willing to put people in jail for years for marijuana.

...but when you start to weave it into a picture of the WTC being brought down by controlled demolition, then people just look at you as a nut, and ignore everything you say.

But if he put on a clown costume and entertained them with an emotional roller coaster ride then they might listen to what he had to say. And if they began listening to what he had to say and began believing that the WTC was brought down in that way because he was entertaining enough then your focus on marketing to the masses wouldn't support your original position.

The interesting thing about it is that perceptions are reality in politics. So the best marketing techniques that money can buy are important, thus we've had a good entertainer in chief lately. (Always simpler when you can create money out of nothing instead of trying to sell tangy tangerine or putting on a clown costume like the men in tights that represented the NWO in the WWF, I suppose.)
 
The 'revelation' about the 1993 was not any secret information. I read that years ago in the my local newspaper. So WHAT ?

So I assume that you already know about the Egyptian whistle blower who recorded the FBI organizing the plot to blow up the WTC and so forth?

From part of the transcript:
FBI Special Agent John Anticev: But, uh, basically nothing has changed. I'm just telling you for my own sake that nothing, that this isn't a salary, that it's—you know. But you got paid regularly for good information. I mean the expenses were a little bit out of the ordinary and it was really questioned. Don't tell Nancy I told you this. [Nancy Floyd is another FBI Special Agent who worked with Emad A. Salem in his informant capacity.] FBI undercover agent Emad A. Salem: Well, I have to tell her of course. Anticev: Well then, if you have to, you have to. Salem: Yeah, I mean because the lady was being honest and I was being honest and everything was submitted with a receipt and now it's questionable. Anticev: It's not questionable, it's like a little out of the ordinary. Salem: Okay. Alright. I don't think it was. If that's what you think guys, fine, but I don't think that because we was start already building the bomb which is went off in the World Trade Center. It was built by supervising supervision from the Bureau and the D.A. and we was all informed about it and we know that the bomb start to be built. By who? By your confidential informant. What a wonderful, great case! Anticev: Well. Salem: And then he put his head in the sand and said "Oh, no, no, that's not true, he is son of a bitch." [Deep breath.] Okay. It's built with a different way in another place and that's it. Anticev: No, don't make any rash decisions. I'm just trying to be as honest with you as I can. Salem: Of course, I appreciate that. Anticev: And as far as the payments go, and everything like that, they're there. I guarantee you that they are there.

Notice how when they organize a terrist plot on 33rd Liberty Street how they seem to wind up being a little more careful that it doesn't go live.

What evidence is there that the Murrah building bombing wasn't done by McVey and company?

Beginning with the official story leaked on mainstream journalists by factions and members of secret societies within the FBI and then using that to engage in unfalsifiable forms of "was not" or "could not possibly" and so forth is a dubious way to begin your investigation. What evidence is there that their story, such as it is, is true in the first place? At least in that case other FBI agents didn't begin falling out of helicopters later and so forth. Just kidding, what if they did?

In any event... curious that WTC 7 could collapse fairly symmetrically into its own footprint due to office fires and exploding donuts apparently creating a furnace like effect while windows were blown out but also closed* and so forth... but the Murrah building was still standing after a single truck bomb blew the entire front of the building away, isn't it?

*Not to mention beams heating and expanding while floor slabs didn't, at least according to the best official reports that money could buy. I wonder if they entered flammable pens in their equations and simulations.
 
I just wanted to explain my perspective, as it's one of the ways I think that bunk is harmful, and one of the reasons why I debunk.

The bunk/debunking process is an important dialectic. But you don't seem to be applying it to the government. In other words, it seems like you're taking the position that everything official sources (people in uniforms, etc.) say is true but that everything people without uniforms or the entertainers wearing their clown costumes is bunk. (Edit: except in the case of Guantanamo... baby steps?)

Given the pathetic state of Team America, World Police and patriotic Americans capable of trampling each other to death at Walmart before they're put into Corrections Corporation of America and so forth I'm not too hard on Alex Jones (town) and other entertaining clowns. Isn't the real source of bunk the American people themselves and their ruling class made up of secret societies and so forth?
 
Where is your 'evidence' from? You copy and post it, and fail to give any links to it. I want to see the ENTIRE story, not some of it.
 
Where is your 'evidence' from? You copy and post it, and fail to give any links to it. I want to see the ENTIRE story, not some of it.

There's a bit more to the FBI connection than he mentioned:

Correction: October 29, 1993, Friday An article yesterday about accounts of a plot to build a bomb that was eventually exploded at the World Trade Center referred imprecisely in some copies to what Federal officials knew about the plan before the blast. Transcripts of tapes made secretly by an informant, Emad A. Salem, quote him as saying he warned the Government that a bomb was being built. But the transcripts do not make clear the extent to which the Federal authorities knew that the target was the World Trade Center.
Content from External Source
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/10/28/n...o-thwart-bomb-used-in-trade-center-blast.html


[snip]...[/snip]

Info about Charlie Veitch moved to:

https://www.metabunk.org/threads/1688-Charlie-Veitch-former-prominent-9-11-truther
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There's a bit more to the FBI connection than he mentioned:

Correction: October 29, 1993, Friday An article yesterday about accounts of a plot to build a bomb that was eventually exploded at the World Trade Center referred imprecisely in some copies to what Federal officials knew about the plan before the blast. Transcripts of tapes made secretly by an informant, Emad A. Salem, quote him as saying he warned the Government that a bomb was being built. But the transcripts do not make clear the extent to which the Federal authorities knew that the target was the World Trade Center.
Content from External Source
http://www.nytimes.com/1993/10/28/n...o-thwart-bomb-used-in-trade-center-blast.html

There is a lot of info on what the FBI knew and how they allowed it to go through. There were 2 years of tapes which he made. NYT, had some but many were not released by order of the Court. Even the ones that were released clearly demonstrate the involvement of knowledge and how easy it would have been to stop. Your boldened line says 'they knew', it is simply the transcripts do not make clear the extent.

The FBI messed up for whatever reason and where they could have ensured a non explosive substance was used, they did not
 
The 'revelation' about the 1993 was not any secret information. I read that years ago in the my local newspaper. So WHAT ?

So WHAT?

WHAT REVELATION? It is public knowledge.

You didn't read about it until after the informant spilled the beans did you? If it had been left to the FBI you still would not know. Even now it is public knowledge you still deny it.

You are supposed to debunk stuff by using fact and logic, this is not the same as simply denying everything that you do not like. That is being a Denier.
 
I was referring to the part where they hoped that the bombed tower would fall into the other one and knock it down. I believe that came out in their trial.

As to the other part, I read the other post and I found this there

William M. Kunstler, a defense lawyer in the case, accused the Government this week of improper delay in handing over all the material. The transcripts he had seen, he said, "were filled with all sorts of Government misconduct." But citing the judge's order, he said he could not provide any details.

The transcripts do not make clear the extent to which Federal authorities knew that there was a plan to bomb the World Trade Center, merely that they knew that a bombing of some sort was being discussed. But Mr. Salem's evident anguish at not being able to thwart the trade center blast is a recurrent theme in the transcripts. In one of the first numbered tapes, Mr. Salem is quoted as telling agent Floyd: "Since the bomb went off I feel terrible. I feel bad. I feel here is people who don't listen."

Ms. Floyd seems to commiserate, saying, "hey, I mean it wasn't like you didn't try and I didn't try."
Content from External Source
No EVIDENCE that the officials knew what would be bombed and when. Knowing that someone is making a bomb and then catching them before they use is, is hard. Catch they without the bomb and you have nothing to prosecute, miss that small window and the bomb is used.
 
There is a lot of info on what the FBI knew and how they allowed it to go through. There were 2 years of tapes which he made. NYT, had some but many were not released by order of the Court. Even the ones that were released clearly demonstrate the involvement of knowledge and how easy it would have been to stop. Your boldened line says 'they knew', it is simply the transcripts do not make clear the extent.

The FBI messed up for whatever reason and where they could have ensured a non explosive substance was used, they did not

Yes, it is quite clear the FBI knew something about the attack. However, I think the better question here is created through applying Hanlon's razor - is this the result of intentional malice on the part of the FBI? Did they intend to destroy the WTC in '93? Have we seen any other examples where the FBI knowingly allowed a terrorist attack to occur? Or is this a case of negligence or outright ignorance(i.e. they did not know the extent of the planned attacks)? It seems to me you are implying the former are more likely, when in actuality they make a lot more assumptions that are so far not supported by evidence.
 
The police often know "something" about lots of things - however that is not the same as knowing that "it" is going to happen, and they are restrained by precedent and law to acting only when they have ENOUGH information to do so.

And when they do act and it is found that in fact things were not as they seemed they get slammed for being fascist and abusive. and even when there is a good case the CT community will often accuse them of having made things up.
 
Back
Top