What is a truther?

And what percentage of DUers could be considered truthers?

It seems to me that deriding truthers is nothing more than a call out of well over half of DU members.

WHO CARES WHAT A TRUTHER IS!?!!?

YOU MUST STOP BUSHCO!!!!

something like 100,000 people. It could take years just to write up the citizen arrest paperwork.

Delegate some of that work out!!

for you to back up your statement that over half of DU are troofers.
what's taking you so long?

As much as some here throw the term around one would expect a least a sliver of honest discussion from those that sling.

Guess all they can do is sling? Is there not one honest so called 'enemy' of the movement willing to define their favorite term used to describe so many great DUers?

Me too.
Still waiting for you to back up your claim of "more than half of DU are troofers".

Even if they didn't, a "SLOP poll" (with self-selected participants) wouldn't reveal very much.

A randomized survey would be pretty interesting, but I'm not sure it would be on point. People who agree in a survey that, say, "We need an independent investigation of the September 11 attacks," or "Bush administration officials are withholding information about the 9/11 attacks," or "Some elements of the Bush administration had prior knowledge of the 9/11 attacks," or whatever, aren't necessarily members of the 9/11 Truth Movement, aka truthers, any more than people who agree in a survey that the debt ceiling should not be raised are necessarily Tea Party adherents or supporters. My impression is that most criticisms of "truthers" aren't directed at an abstract group of people who would passively agree with one or more propositions about the 9/11 attacks; they are directed at people who actually do something. One might use a more or less inclusive definition of "truthers" depending on the context.

It is, in general, false that criticisms of "truthers" here are "nothing more than a call out of well over half of DU members" -- regardless of the result of any opinion survey. However, some posts here might fit that description. If anyone cares enough to provide an example -- as the original poster apparently did not -- that might be useful.

If any lurkers are actually interested in this issue, perhaps one of them can post a question or comment. Otherwise, this thread appears to be another one of your odd deflections from the events of 9/11.

That says it all.

The problem is the way the term is used.

That's why the opposition can't have an honest discussion, because then they would be showing they are being dishonest. Maybe you can, but I've yet to read such.

Put it this way: If the definition is that 'Truthers' are interested in finding the truth about 9/11, then calling them clowns, or idiots, etc., is a rule violation, and such uses should be well regulated.

Who are you accusing of being unable to have an honest discussion, and on what basis do you lodge that accusation?

If the definition is that 'Truthers' are interested in finding the truth about 9/11, then I'm a Truther. But I don't think that is how it is generally used, and I don't use it that way.

Now lets see what your definition is. Honestly.

1. "more than half of DU are "truthers"".
2. "88% of DU are "truthers"".
3. "Most DUers are "truthers""
Of course, you can't back up one of those claims.
still running away from them?

But I construe "truther" as shorthand for "self-identified member of the 9/11 Truth Movement." I don't self-identify as a member of the 9/11 Truth Movement.

just like "birther" is shorthand for "self-identified member of the birther movement".
or anyone who thinks Obama was not born in America.
"truther" and "birther" are similar terms as they are both shorthand for their respective movements.
good to know!

Honestly, I have no idea whether anyone self-identifies as a "birther." I know that some people have self-identified as "truthers," at least as a convenient shorthand.

But I think this whole business about "truther" being pejorative is a red herring. I recently saw someone (not on DU, of course) complain that the term "Tea Party" was pejorative. I suppose what he really meant was that some people say disrespectful things about Tea Party members. Imagine that!

I have yet to meet anyone who self-identifies as an "OCTer." But somehow, in certain circles, it seems to be open season on people who think that (say) maybe NIST got things basically right.

against anyone who questions the official story of the events of 9/11/2001.

That is why I am attempting to get those who use the term on DU, to come out and use it in a way that is not a smear. So far... I hear nothing but crickets.

both terms to describe someone who believes a certain thing.
why is that a smear?

call themselves.

Much ado about nothing.

i think not

There is no correlation. Two different subjects. Besides, birthers are not allowed on DU.

Truthers, however, are.

Try again. And this time try to be in the ballpark and not just smear.

yet they cry like babies when someone calls them on their bullshit.
more in the ballpark for you, sweetums?

And they don't cry like babies. In fact, they are the only brave ones, that I can see.

Let's see... so far you equate good DUers with birthers, then you smear them as crying babies.
These are your definitions?

you've asserted that
1. "more than half of DU are "truthers"".
2. "88% of DU are "truthers"".
3. "Most DUers are "truthers""
Of course, you can't back up one of those claims.
and yes, "truthers" sure seem to cry like little babies when asked to back up their claims.
so, here's your big chance...instead of whining, just back up one of the above claims.
should be easy, right babe?

But you have fingers in your ears and eyes, I guess.

Anyway, what you describe as truthers is just wrong. Or you would back it up.
Really, you don't have a clue about your spew.

All you can do is smear good DUers. How you get away with it amazes me.

must have missed it.
please repost.
not smearing anyone.
just asking you to back up your claims.
what are you so scared of?
guess you got nothing, eh?

Look at the DUer names in the polls on the front page.

Calling them cry babies and birthers!!

What is your secret? How do you get away with smearing these people? Have you read the rules?

let's try again, shall we?

you've asserted that
1. "more than half of DU are "truthers"".
2. "88% of DU are "truthers"".
3. "Most DUers are "truthers""
Of course, you can't back up one of those claims.
and yes, "truthers" sure seem to cry like little babies when asked to back up their claims.
so, here's your big chance...instead of whining, just back up one of the above claims.
should be easy, right babe?

Personal attacks, insults, name-calling, or questioning the character or motives of other DU members; discussing DU members rather than ideas.
Insensitive (bigotry, hate, ridicule, stereotyping) toward certain groups of people.
Disruptive and likely to derail an otherwise thoughtful discussion.

Disrespectful nicknames, crude insults, or right-wing smears against Democrats.

care to try again?

you've asserted that
1. "more than half of DU are "truthers"".
2. "88% of DU are "truthers"".
3. "Most DUers are "truthers""
Of course, you can't back up one of those claims.
and yes, "truthers" sure seem to cry like little babies when asked to back up their claims.
so, here's your big chance...instead of whining, just back up one of the above claims.
should be easy, right babe?

... has long been on the agenda of far-right pseudo-populists.

n/t

I have been called a truther, on DU, and I call myself a truther, on DU.

So now that I own the term on DU and have defined the term to mean that a truther means "Seeking the truth" from this point forward any use of the moniker that is meant in a derogatory way is seen the same way as using other monikers (do I really need to spell them out?) and should not, henceforth be condoned on DU.

There being other people who, in the past, having now protected monikers that once were often used to demean and belittle, and now having overcome by making those monikers used derogatorily be rule breaking uses, it is only fair that no longer on DU should there be any allowance of using truther to demean and diminish me or my fellow seekers of truth.

No one should be allowed to demean me just because they don't agree with me or my fellow truth seekers, nor should they be allowed to demean me or my fellow truth seekers just because there are some who they hate and whom travel parallel paths.

I have been a damn good member of DU for 9 years now and I damn sure demand my rights to not be demeaned because of my belief of seeking the truth about 9/11.

You running the site now.
Good luck with that, "truther".

Really?

More delusional truther nonsense.

You have called me a truther. Is that right? Of course that is right.

What did you mean by truther when you called me a truther?

A truther believes "Bushco" (a completely undefinable term) created 9/11.

I sure it was the BFEE messing with me (again).

Has brought to my mind an apt moniker for the opposition: The Children of 9/11.

Apt is not the word that came to my mind.

The word that came to my mind is huh?

"Really, you don't have a clue about your spew."
"As to your question about the democratic party and my reference to it: Go Fly a Kite. I will put my democratic credentials up to yours any fucking day, dude."
"Bwahahaha... Talk about odd..... bwahahaha"
"Bwahahaha"
"I guess I just get into your head and make all 7 (heh) of you act crazy? Bwahahaha"
"Shit, I'm sorry, I really shouldn't make (7) fun of you people.
Maybe I deserve the gitmo style responses? Bwahahaha"
"Don't fuck with me."
"more than half of DU are "truthers". Indeed, it could be said that according to polls from GD, 88% of the responders are "truthers"". So, it is my belief that most DUers are "truthers"" and if you don't like my beliefs that is just too f'n bad."
"Bwahahahaha!"
"Does harassing people and defending bushco make you feel big?"
"You are just harassing me. I suggest you just quit. However, I guess I should feel flattered that your focus is on me. You can't get ol' befree out of your head can you? Too, your focus on me is an affirmation that I am doing the right thing by focusing on bushco and their crimes, so keep it up. But, realize, 90% of what you have posted is just stupid and you have no credibility here."
"Maybe you don't know shit from shinola?"
"You call what you were doing a debate? Bwahahah"
"Bwhahaha Oh, baby that hurt!! Why you wanna treat me this way? I'm still your lover boy, I still feel the same way. I love your attention, you 'betcha!"


Add in an equal number of posts the either make no sense or are outright lies and it definitely seems like a child has grabbed the keyboard.

oh...back to you..you've asserted that-
1. "more than half of DU are "truthers"".
2. "88% of DU are "truthers"".
3. "Most DUers are "truthers""

Why do you keep running from your claims?

back to you...
you've asserted that-
1. "more than half of DU are "truthers"".
2. "88% of DU are "truthers"".
3. "Most DUers are "truthers""

Why do you keep running from your claims?

Has anyone heard from him?

now back up your claims.
honestly, why are you so scared to do so?
you've asserted that-
1. "more than half of DU are "truthers"".
2. "88% of DU are "truthers"".
3. "Most DUers are "truthers""

Why do you keep running from your claims?

Who else would you stalk and spam if I wasn't here for you?

A chance to "kick ass"?? Bullied too much in school and now this is a place where you can talk shit and feel big and proud about yourself?

And asking one to back up their claims is not spam.

But you keep on keepin on tough guy. With big tough foot soldiers like yourself, I expect the truth to break free.... Any day now.

Yep....







........................ Any day now.

The group attacks demanded it.

It's like you right here. What the hell do you want with me? Not that I give a shit, really.

But... I am still here and so and so is not and what does that tell you?

I am here to seek the truth. There has been, over the years, a lot of education and evidence presented on these pages and I hope to see more and more. And now, it is a lot more civil here than I can remember.

And, I am still here.

Me too.
That's why I call bullshit on your claims.
Now that you've had numerous chances to back them up, I guess they are just lies.
Typical.
Wouldn't it make more sense for "truthers" to call themselves "liars"?
Bwahahahahahahahaha

Why didn't you just call on the other 88% of DUers to help come to your defense from these "group attacks".

For someone who alleges to be in a clear majority, you certainly seem to find yourself alone quite a bit.

And you know it.

Unfortunately the children have been successful in turning the discussion into personal attacks and disrupting the conversations. But, the best disruptor is now gone. And most everyone is in mourning. Bwahahaha

best disruptor, who also says childish things like "bwahahaha" is still here...and still all alone.
:cry:

And I'm still here.

Actually you just called me a disruptor, didn't you?

"best disruptor, who also says childish things like "bwahahaha" is still here...and still all alone.
:cry:"

If the tombstone fits?

You've asserted that-
1. "more than half of DU are "truthers"".
2. "88% of DU are "truthers"".
3. "Most DUers are "truthers""

Why do you keep running from your claims?
Should we re-name "truthers", "truth-dodgers" or "fantasists"?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=295501&mesg_id=317900

BeFree Almost 23,000 posts Thursday July-21-11 11:47 PM

8. According to recent polls on DU more than half of DU are "truthers". Indeed, it could be said that according to polls from GD, 88% of the responders are "truthers"". So, it is my belief that most DUers are "truthers"" and if you don't like my beliefs that is just too f'n bad.

Bwahahahaha!

a "belief"?
BWHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!
gee, "truthers" sure like to make things up, eh?

you simply post a link to... your claim.

I seriously hope they televise this trial you're working so hard on, because quite frankly, it would rival the decade's best sitcom.

BeFree: "Your Honor, 9/11 was an inside job."

Judge: "Prove it."

BeFree: "Your Honor, I just told you. 9/11 was an inside job...."


Bwhahahaha indeed.

Calling me a disruptor and getting away with doing so. Wow.

The rules sure are different here in the dungeon.

I don't see anyone calling you out.
Feeling persecuted for no reason?
Why do you never back up your assertions?
Could it be that they are false?
eh?
Bwhahahahahahhaaha!

When you wrote:
"best disruptor, who also says childish things like "bwahahaha" is still here...and still all alone.""

You were describing yourself as the last disruptor. Since what's his name has pizza'd out.

Fuck, yeah, then. We totally agree!

you really need to buck up if you want to take on BUSHCO!
Can't be crying about every little thing if you want to take on the big boys.

oh, and by the way...
You've asserted that-
1. "more than half of DU are "truthers"".
2. "88% of DU are "truthers"".
3. "Most DUers are "truthers""

Why do you keep running from your claims?
Should we re-name "truthers", "truth-dodgers" or "fantasists"?
Cuz they certainly don't seem very truthful!

Now that you finally outted yourself as a disruptor, I am done with you.

I mean why even continue? You've claimed you are the last disruptor. It is just a matter of time, now.

like all your claims, you just made that one up.
really, your act is getting tired and boring.
maybe you should hang out in the fiction forum?
thanks for showing this forum that, once again, you just make things up.
eh?
Too-doo-loo!

Yep. Still here. Truth, Justice and the American way.

Did you read the headline: "Bush Knew"

How about: "Bush just sat there as the attack raged"

Or: "I don't even think about Osama"

Fuck that punk. He best stay away from me. He would not be glad to ever meet me.

But my invitation for a walk on the beach still stands.

HO! HA HA! GUARD! TURN! PARRY! DODGE! SPIN! HA! THRUST!

LOL, he had it coming.

that Bush stole the election.

It is entirely fitting and appropriate that the last few lines of nauseating rhetoric from him were spent defending the forces he always stood up for... the Right Wing.

He was consistent at that, if anything.