It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Unapproved Conspiracy Theories?

page: 2
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 04:41 PM
link   

originally posted by: Lice00
and No plane theories are off limits.

To expand a little on what SkepticOverlord said above; as a 9/11 researcher myself for over a decade, I can personally tell you that the no-plane peddlers are hoaxers. There are may links around the Googles that show as much, as well as countless links around ATS debunking the "no-planes" hoax, or showing that it was, in fact, a hoax.

The no-plane peddlers actually manufactured "evidence" and tried to pass it off as real. That alone automatically discredits anything no-plane-related.




posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 04:42 PM
link   
a reply to: loam

sadly, the truckdriving mystic who started the thing is hiding out in morocco, trying to figure out how to turn cosmic nonsense into gold bullion.

or something.



posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 04:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Crakeur
So turning to another deleted thread, what was wrong with the discussion about allegations of a mother encouraging her daughter to attack a fast food worker which had MSM video to support the debate?
It wasn't my thread so I didn't really care, but now we are talking about only controversial threads getting deleted I wonder what was controversial in that example.
I've seen others over the years, and again I repeat I don't really care about the deletions, but the pretence that there are never any politically decided deletions by staff is almost insulting to the members in itself.



posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 04:52 PM
link   
a reply to: _BoneZ_

No plane theories don't need to be researched. Just come to NY and talk to anyone who was here. Plenty of eye witnesses here that day. Plenty of people who saw the first, second or both planes hitting the towers.



posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 04:54 PM
link   
a reply to: Crakeur

That too. Not to mention all the private home videos.



posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 04:55 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

Can't say as I wasn't involved in the discussion on that thread. I'd have to locate the thread or OP so I can track down the discussion but, suffice it to say, there are no thread removals without a discussion, unless, of course, the thread is so horrible that leaving it up while the staff debates, would be bad for the site. These would include porn, criminal talk (killing people etc) and similar topics.



posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 04:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Lice00

Try the Skunk-work forum.

There is a tad bit more room to maneuver but still mind the sites T & C



posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 04:58 PM
link   
a reply to: Lice00
I thought your original post was a riot, and proved a good point. If you ask me Sandy Hook and anything 911 should be on the table, they both reek of Tyranny.



posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 05:05 PM
link   
a reply to: ugmold

And there are plenty of threads open on both subjects.
You can call for unrestricted talk of it all you want, but you don't have that right here, sorry to burst your bubble.
Our board, their eraser.



posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 05:06 PM
link   
a reply to: Crakeur
Fair enough, but I have seen many a thread deleted over the years which had nothing overtly 'wrong' with it as far as I could see. Like I said, I don't really care about a private enterprise enforcing it's own rules (I actually support it as a small business person myself) but pretending that internal/business politics do not infuence decisions is something that commands little respect from me.
At least I'm honest, up front, and eye-to-eye, like when I (as someone in England) refuse Scottish banknotes because I don't handle them often enough to know they are not fake.
If I ran a website then I'd have my own rules of course, but I'd be honest enough to assert that I and my staff will delete anything we don't like as we see it, even if it ain't in the T&C's. ATS does not do that as far as I see it...but I support it's right as an independent business to do that.



posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 05:17 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

Why does that matter? You've already acknowledged they have a right to do it. Why is an assumption they will remove things that are bad for the site not enough?

If you're honestly concerned about what can be posted, then just ask. Seems pretty straight forward to me.



posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 05:32 PM
link   
a reply to: grainofsand

You may have run across section 22 of the T&C. It begins:


22) Disclaimer: TAN does not and cannot review all of the content of every message Posted and does not accept responsibility for the contents of any messages. We reserve the right to delete any message and/or restrict Posting rights on the message board for any reason whatsoever.



posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 05:41 PM
link   
a reply to: loam
Just enjoying interesting debate



posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 05:44 PM
link   
a reply to: charles1952
Ah thank you for the pointer, I agree of course, if ATS was under my control I would reserve similar rights.
It is the members sometimes complaining that it is not a democracy who make me chuckle...of course it's not, it's a business, and I'd do the same if I was in the same game.



posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 05:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Sremmos80
No bubble burst, I was aware, thanks.



posted on Aug, 14 2014 @ 07:48 PM
link   
a reply to: Lice00

Its you not understanding. You did not read the rules (T's & C's) here when you joined this private members only forum. Its explained quite well there for all to see when they join.

Just because you signed up doesnt mean much...until you read them and join us in equal conversation: both ways!


edit on 07-31-2014 by mysterioustranger because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 15 2014 @ 03:23 AM
link   
I would imagine that even the topics that are pretty much off-limits would be allowed if you were bringing some compelling new evidence to light, but that is not likely to happen with the majority of known hoaxes. There is also the problem that some people don't have the common sense to realize just what is good evidence and what is not. Not to mention that the vast majority of issues regarding a known hoax have been discussed and beaten to death at one point or another. So most threads on these issues would just be repeating the same things. It would not be worth it to reintroduce a topic that has little or no evidence just to present the same evidence in a different way, or to take a slightly different approach.

Generally what I have found to the best way of searching ATS is to go to Google and do a search like this- site:url "keyword or phrase." Without the quotes. I personally feel it works better than trying to search on the forum, but maybe that is just a biased opinion. Try it though if you want to determine what has already been discussed regarding any particular topic, or if you cannot find it utilizing the ATS search. Other than those things it really just is common sense, and these issues have been addressed by others in this thread. Just have some tact and don't reintroduce the same stuff if the topic is widely considered to be a hoax due to a lack of evidence.



posted on Aug, 15 2014 @ 06:35 PM
link   
Sense and no sense,
I've seen on ATS, common sense, seems to prevail, so set up your angle/pitch explore your dimension, if it’s against T&Cs you will soon be informed.

THREAD CLOSED (tic) (just my bit, is now complete)

Write the type to see if your write?




top topics



 
10
<< 1   >>

log in

join