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.

 

Why is this only a 9/11 and 7/7 forum?

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 06:14 AM
link   
The simultaneous attacks in Egypt yesterday were far far worse than what happened in London. Why is nobody here talking about a conspiracy there? Do the 76 dead (and rising) count for less than the 49 dead in London? Can terrorists only attack in African and Middle Eastern countries? Why is it when they attack Western countries it's "obviously" the work of our government?

What gives?

[edit] (Death toll now 83)

[edit on 23-7-2005 by CatHerder]




posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 06:31 AM
link   
There appears to be an assumption amongst sceptics that if there is a bombing in Britain or the US and it is supposedly claimed by Al Qaeda then it could be a setup from the Blair/Bush group, but that if a bombing happens in the Middle East and it is supposedly claimed by Al Qaeda then it probably is Al qaeda and not Bush/Blair and co. This is understandable but not entirely sensible.

My take is that all terrorism is, in a broad sense, sponsored by those who wage war in any form, and that there are so many ways in which the likes of Bush and Blair sponsor terrorism ( whether by direct order, by starting a war which breeds 'independent' terrorists, or by funding 'rebel' groups) that any attempt on their part to say that they are against any war or bombing is an outright lie whether it is apparently perpetrated by the supposed enemy or not.

The sponsors of war cannot do business without an enemy, so they create one. that is the overall conspiracy IMO.

To put it another way: When they condemn the enemy they lie because they enjoy war and terrorism and crave the power which it gives them. This lie is the basis of all other conspiracies which they are part of.




[edit on 23-7-2005 by Roy Robinson Stewart]



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 06:45 AM
link   
Right on CatHerder
I agree

But just to answer your question
"Why is this only a 9/11 and 7/7 forum?"
Umm, maybe this forum or topic was made before the Egypt attacks

and give it a day or so, and the hard corps loonies, err I mean conspiracy believers will start up on Egypt.(joking)

Just my 2 1/2 cents



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 07:13 PM
link   
Agree - it's ATS censorship.

Relegating discussions containing many valid news items and observations to 'conspiracies' isn't Denying Ignorance IMO.

It also seems a very arbitrary calfing of the WoT section - where do discussions about the Madrid bombings go? links between the London & Madrid Bombings?



[edit on 23/7/05 by CTID56092]



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 07:23 PM
link   
I think this is a severely delayed attempt to respond to the overflow of 9/11 related posts in the other forums. It would have made sense in the few years after 9/11 to have a single thread for 9/11 related conspiracies (I think I posted something to that effect a long time back) but now it doesn't seem to make sense to lump the "7/7" attack in with 9/11.

I could understand a 9/11 conspiracy thread even this late, since there will probably always be a steady number of those (like JFK conspiracies) but I can't figure out why 7/7 was included and why this new thread seems to have come out only after 7/7, and not after 9/11. After 9/11, one could probably safely assume that the events of that day alone would long be discussed, but after 7/7, it seems bizarre to assume that this date alone will "live in infamy," when as we have already seen so shortly afterwards in London the bombing attempts continue.

I think ATS management does a great job, in general, but the forum naming always seemed one of the weaker points here. A big pet peeve of mine is "Peak Oil"... as if peak oil theories, a small niche compared to the decades of scholarship and conspiracy theorizing on oil- were somehow more important than a discussion of oil as a geopolitical resource in general. I think it comes from ATS (and the sister sites) having grown so large. Not that it's a bad thing necessarily, but I think it takes a toll on the efficiency of classification.

-koji K.

[edit on 23-7-2005 by koji_K]



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 07:26 PM
link   
People have been asking for a 9/11 forum for sometime now. I'm guessing 7/7 got attacked to the title due to the flood of 7/7 conspiracy threads.

I don't see how this could be considered censorship. If there were any Egypt attack conspiracy threads I'm sure they were not trashed.



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 07:29 PM
link   
It's a question of evidence.

When a bomb goes off in NY or London, there is an immediate flurry of information, some of which later disappears for whatever reason.

When a bomb goes off in Egypt, there is VERY little information for the first 24-48 hours, and sometimes for weeks to come. It's hard to create conspiracy theories without some form of evidence pointing in the direction of various conclusions.

So, no, I don't think it's a question of an Egyptian life being worth less. I think it's a question of being unable to connect the dots due to a lack of dots to begin with.



posted on Jul, 23 2005 @ 07:51 PM
link   
There is some common ground in the form of conspiracy theories related to both the attacks on 9/11 and 7/7.

The sheer abundance of 9/11 conspiracy discussions alone here at ATS was worthy of having it’s own forum. The bombings in London on 7/7 along with the 9/11 conspiracy discussions are both relevant to this new forum, because many of the theories surrounding these terrorist attacks are being brought into question, based on assumptions or alleged complicity, and/or involvement in said attacks by US and UK governments. Also some theorists surmise that both the US and British governments may be seeking to propagandize these attacks to further national and global support for war. That being said this does not mean that any of these theories have merit, substance or facts to support these conspiracies. This new forum is the perfect place to index, find and join in these discussions.

This is by no means censorship, it is giving the members of this site a forum to discuss these conspiracies.

All other discussions relevant to the War on Terrorism will remain in that forum.

This forum changes very little, as all of the pre-existing discussions moved here are still just as open and available to members and guests, in one place!


UM_Gazz



posted on Jul, 24 2005 @ 03:46 PM
link   
i think it would be perfectly fine to post a egypt attack conspiracy theory in this forum

it fits with the overall nature of this forum imo *if im wrong let me know moderators thanks*

no one knows what really happened during any of these attacks u can say whatever but it dont matter
we dont really know

my suspicions lead me to think the CIA or organizations like them are responsible for the egypt attack , saudi attacks, 911 77 and most other attacks
thats my opinion and i have no evidence
none of u have hard evidence to disprove or prove it ...
so im not trying to start a debate
if u do have evidence please post it in a new thread called "Hard Evidence bla bla"

i was simply saying that im sure the mods will find it acceptable to put ur egypt or saudi terrorist bombing conspiracy theorys in this thread

It is releveant ; because like i said; we could tie it all togeather in the "war on terror" and suggest the conspiracy theory

ill stop rambling now

just my 2cents


edit ::
correct me if im wrong

any "Conspiracys related to war on terror"
would go here right?

and all "news" or "reports" of the war on terror; goes in the "war on terror" thread section

??? am i misreading something or am i correct in my assumption???

please clear this up moderators im a bit confused sorry



[edit on 24-7-2005 by muzzleflash]



posted on Jul, 24 2005 @ 03:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by CatHerder
Why is nobody here talking about a conspiracy there? Do the 76 dead (and rising) count for less than the 49 dead in London? Can terrorists only attack in African and Middle Eastern countries? Why is it when they attack Western countries it's "obviously" the work of our government?


Perhaps ATS knows its audience and that the majority of people at ATS are, in fact, concerned with 911 and 77 instead of the numerous other attacks, being from either America or Britain.

And I believe that its obvious this forum is concerned with all theories regarding the attacks of 911 and 77. For one, your thread about the legitimacy of the government's report regarding the Pentagon attack should tell you that its not all about blaming the government. If the forum was only concerned about ways to blame the government, then surely your thread would not be in here, would it?

If you want to see ATS sponsorship of conspiracy theories, go to the Evolution&Creationism forum, they explicity call anything contrary to evolutionary theory a conspiracy to undermine science. It's there in the intro, read it.



posted on Jul, 24 2005 @ 03:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by CatHerder
The simultaneous attacks in Egypt yesterday were far far worse than what happened in London. Why is nobody here talking about a conspiracy there? Do the 76 dead (and rising) count for less than the 49 dead in London?

What gives?

[edit] (Death toll now 83)



The high death Toll, or high severity of an attack does not equate to a larger probability of it being a conspiracy than a smaller attack, that is absurd logic.


CatHerder
Can terrorists only attack in African and Middle Eastern countries? Why is it when they attack Western countries it's "obviously" the work of our government?


WyrdeOne explains it better than I can ...


Originally posted by WyrdeOne
It's a question of evidence.

When a bomb goes off in NY or London, there is an immediate flurry of information, some of which later disappears for whatever reason.

When a bomb goes off in Egypt, there is VERY little information for the first 24-48 hours, and sometimes for weeks to come. It's hard to create conspiracy theories without some form of evidence pointing in the direction of various conclusions.

So, no, I don't think it's a question of an Egyptian life being worth less. I think it's a question of being unable to connect the dots due to a lack of dots to begin with.


Perhaps add Oklahoma City to the forum title though?

[edit on 043131p://00074 by MERC]



posted on Jul, 24 2005 @ 05:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by WyrdeOne
It's a question of evidence.

When a bomb goes off in NY or London, there is an immediate flurry of information, some of which later disappears for whatever reason.

When a bomb goes off in Egypt, there is VERY little information for the first 24-48 hours, and sometimes for weeks to come. It's hard to create conspiracy theories without some form of evidence pointing in the direction of various conclusions.



I agree, I was listening to WOWO (radio station) and ABC news was reporting on the Egyptian bombing and the pointed out that the were quoting a Egyptian policeman on condition of anonymity on some of the evidence.

Before they stated the evidence, they stated how unusual it is to get any Egyptian officials to talk about any incident so quickly after an incident.



new topics




 
0

log in

join