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.

 

AboveTopSecret.com is a Government COINTELPRO Disinformation Operation

page: 11
55
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 15 2006 @ 08:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by Merc_the_Perp
I've got an idea, why don't you let me make a...

"A 757 *DIDN'T* Hit the Pentagon" thread


Like this one:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
or maybe this one:
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Or hell... start here:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
It's nearly 95% related to popular conspiracy theories.

Why so bitter?



Are they on your front page?

Remove it from your front page and I won't be so bitter.




posted on Jan, 15 2006 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Merc_the_Perp
Are they on your front page?

These have been on the main site for a long time: www.abovetopsecret.com...
That 9/11 index page is always in our top-50 most popular pages (out of 900,000+ every month).
The "757 did not", as you'll notice, is place above the "757 did" thread.



Remove it from your front page and I won't be so bitter.

Why is putting a link to our most popular piece of content on our site home page making you bitter? We've had lots of things on the site home... currently the most prominent thing is the "Skunk Works Forum" promotion where we've made a place that embraces all forms of while speculation (and discourages debunking).

But two things... (1) We'll be the judge of what's best for our site home... and (2) With that in mind, with the new version of ATS, the "site home" will be the discussion board home.



posted on Jan, 15 2006 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
OH MY GOSH! This is something that I have wanted to see for so long. When you know a certain member posted something you want to reference but you can't remember the thread name...


Rough Draft:
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...

Shows the most recent 300 threads started by the member.



posted on Jan, 15 2006 @ 10:40 PM
link   
That is pretty cool SkepticOverlord. I think that will be a valuable Mod tool. Were you thinking about making that a button at the bottom of everyone's posts?



posted on Jan, 15 2006 @ 10:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by Umbrax
That is pretty cool SkepticOverlord. I think that will be a valuable Mod tool. Were you thinking about making that a button at the bottom of everyone's posts?


Your username (in your mini profiles) will link to that page
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jan, 15 2006 @ 11:15 PM
link   
This is great SO, GREAT!

www.abovetopsecret.com...

However, the links don´t work. I have to remove "authors" from the thread-links before they will work. Otherwise this is a tool I have been wanting for a long time.






posted on Jan, 15 2006 @ 11:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hellmutt
I have to remove "authors" from the thread-links before they will work.

It's fixed.



posted on Jan, 15 2006 @ 11:55 PM
link   
Ok... this is kinda getting out of hand... someone is making a conspiracy theoery agaisnt a conspiracy theory website... am I the only one who thinks that is just a little too far?



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 01:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by Merc_the_Perp
Are they on your front page?

These have been on the main site for a long time: www.abovetopsecret.com...
That 9/11 index page is always in our top-50 most popular pages (out of 900,000+ every month).
The "757 did not", as you'll notice, is place above the "757 did" thread.



Remove it from your front page and I won't be so bitter.

Why is putting a link to our most popular piece of content on our site home page making you bitter? We've had lots of things on the site home... currently the most prominent thing is the "Skunk Works Forum" promotion where we've made a place that embraces all forms of while speculation (and discourages debunking).

But two things... (1) We'll be the judge of what's best for our site home... and (2) With that in mind, with the new version of ATS, the "site home" will be the discussion board home.




Look, all I know is morons were using your thread becuase it was the first thing they saw. The piece was very poory done. It mislead readers. It has been debunked many times over but still slowed the process of getting real answers and support for what happened at the Pentagon. You guys seemed to take this stance of promoting it as "the answer" of what really happened at the Pentagon. So don't give me that crap. You all fully supported this thread.

And by the way what's with all the control issues you guys have?

First I get a 'u2u' from someone asking if I was going to participate in "fine focus" but I can't respond until I have 20 posts or something?

Then I get a U2U from you. But I can respond to that. Presumably because you are an admin.

Then I get some BS U2U about some member complaining about excessive "quoting", when I looked about excessive as the rest of you.

You guys seem petty and ticky tacky, if there isn't some other motive behind it all.

You guys should get rid of all that BS on the side of the board. You are complaining about me and excessive quoting, and yet you can hardly make out who's post is who's, because of all the crazy graphics and avatars and points and all this other junk.



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 01:34 AM
link   



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 02:17 AM
link   
Well you heard it, looks like the huge success of the website is just an illusion. Better ring up the TV company and tell them they've made a mistake.
Kill all your avatars everyone, cease discussing anything unless it is to encourage the elaborate conspiracy side of things... You heard him..
All hail the new leader...


[edit on 16-1-2006 by AgentSmith]



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 06:40 AM
link   
Wow!

This is a Great!



www.abovetopsecret.com...




posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 06:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by shyataroo
Ok... this is kinda getting out of hand... someone is making a conspiracy theoery agaisnt a conspiracy theory website... am I the only one who thinks that is just a little too far?


It's not too far for some one who is trying to scare people away from a site that may contain information they don't want others to see. I think this troll is attempting to do just that. Look at his posts, they are riddled with misleading to outright false statements, and have no real points whatsoever. They are just attempts at planting seeds of dissent. I'm wondering what is on ATS that he wants people not to see?

hmmmm

[edit on 1-16-2006 by Valhall]



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 06:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Merc_the_Perp
And by the way what's with all the control issues you guys have?

It's more along the lines of managing of massively busy community to the standard our members have indicated. We seem to be doing something right as we've been growing fast every since we refined our moderation standards. The vast majority of members both appreciate and approve of our efforts to keep the tone of collaborative discussion and debate one of mature decorum.



Then I get a U2U from you. But I can respond to that. Presumably because you are an admin.

Incorrect, you did respond, and I did receive your response? Why would you say this?

Unfortunately, we get a significant percentage of new users who would use our size and popularity to spam their wares through messages and u2u. The 20 post minimum does not restrict communicating with staff. However, to make things easier in your case, I've increased your post count. We've indicated we'd make special case consideration for the Fine Focus project for any new member with experience on the subject matter, consider this an official invitation.



Then I get some BS U2U about some member complaining about excessive "quoting", when I looked about excessive as the rest of you.
You guys seem petty and ticky tacky, if there isn't some other motive behind it all.

It's two issues, database size (2+ gigabytes right now), and usability. It's explained here, which is the link provided to you in both your membership confirmation email, and your welcoming U2U:
www.abovetopsecret.com...



You guys should get rid of all that BS on the side of the board. You are complaining about me and excessive quoting, and yet you can hardly make out who's post is who's, because of all the crazy graphics and avatars and points and all this other junk.

In the past three years we've had these customized features for members, yours is perhaps our fourth of fifth complaint. The vast majoirity of members take advantage of this specifically as a means to better identify who is posting. However, this feature is only "on" when you're logged in, and you can "turn it off" using the "low bandwidth" switch in your ATS Store.

It seems you've arrived here with some inaccurate preconceptions of this community. Perhaps it might serve you best to take a step back, open your mind (and defenses?) just a touch, and take things in before you spend so much effort commenting.



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 01:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Merc_the_Perp
You guys should get rid of all that BS on the side of the board. You are complaining about me and excessive quoting, and yet you can hardly make out who's post is who's, because of all the crazy graphics and avatars and points and all this other junk.


What a tosser, the brats only been here 5 minutes and he thinks he knows all the answers. Great ideas kid, why not just use the suggestions tool and put your pearls of wisdom there instead of abusing the board and the members in public.



posted on Jan, 16 2006 @ 01:20 PM
link   
It is remarkable how the same technicalities have been discussed for nearly 5 years now, and whenever it looks like people might have come to a conclusion and move onto the next subject someone revives it again. Bit like the amazing, bombs in the WTC video... Smells very fishy to me.
Point is, 5 years later people are so busy arguing about the length of the passengers toe-nail in seat 56C that they have forgotten to look at the who and why in as much great detail.. And saying 'The Government did it' does not count, if it is anyone (individual or group) involved in the Government and/or it's agencies then a more detailed conclusion needs to be found.

If this was a proper murder investigation then it would be ridiculous to put all resources into hunting down the murder weapon when you have other leads to go on. People have been put away even when a weapon has not been found, so it's not always important. The most important thing in a murder investigation is to find out who did something and prove it, the whole time we waste time 'they' (whoever 'they' are) are laughing and carrying on. I'm not even talking specifically about the hijackers, they had orders from someone else. Their personal motivation may have been religon, but it may have just been the tool used to make them want to carry out this crime. Things like this should be discussed in far more detail than anything else, but instead people keep filling other people's heads with crap and distracting them, even making people on the same ultimate 'side' fight each other bitterly.

I'll say one other thing, if anyone here wants to make the world a better place for their kids (I opted out of that one, would have plagued my conscience) then they'd better get their act together, because the more time you allow yourself to be manipulated by people who are out of a fast buck, or to keep your mind elsewhere, the less time you're going to have to make a difference for them.
People also have to get this thing out of their heads that just because someone entertains parts of the official line on anything does not mean that they are not on the same side, sometimes it just means they have the ability to look at a wider, multi-coloured, picture.
The truth is likely to be made up of facts from all sides of the argument and more, trying to divide things up into two boxes is a primitive way of looking at it and as it won't be that simple, no accurate conclusion could be achieved.
Anyway, I thought a favourite quote from Star Wars was "Only Sith deal with absolutes" or something...
I've noticed that a lot of media from the conspiracy side of the argument, which ironically claims to be an independant and non biased source, seems to try and find an alternative explanation for every aspect of the subject. It's like they read all the official documents and make it their mission to say the opposite of everything that is stated. Sadly, ratehr then simply present this they seem to state it as fact, at the very least they present the information telling you that 'you can make your own mind up..', while doing so in such a way you would almost feel stupid to disagree.
When this is pointed out, some people are quick to show that these tactics are used in mainstream media..
But hang on, isn't the alternative supposed to be that much more morally superior, isn't it supposed to be a shining example of what things should be like? If you are presenting the truth, surely it does not need spicing up, or manipulating?
This brings on an Animal Farm scenario, where the ruling elite of the alternative side point out the flaws in the existing social structure and help demolish it, only to replace it with their own brand.
Yes, they may be right in the flaws they point out, yes they probably stop at very little to get it across (hell, as long as the end justifies the means and all that), but then are we actually any better off?
No, of course not, the only people better off are the ones behind the books and DVDs that use us to create their empire.
Look at people like Hitler, he didn't end up in power because people thought he was bad, he ended up in power by winning people over - and that's what people are constantly trying to do with us. Hitler started off as a orphan boy at a young age with a difficult childhood, he wasn't part of any 'elite' by birth. He was nothing and he became what he did, that's what's scary - it's the people you least expect.
They may claim to be your friend, they may tempt you with 'gifts' of enlightened knowledge - but are they really your friend and do they have your interests at heart, or their own?

[edit on 16-1-2006 by AgentSmith]



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 03:12 AM
link   
When I joined this website, I considered this possibility that the owners of this website were just trying to round up all of the conspiracy theorists into one place to keep them off of the rest of the internet....or so that "big brother" or whatever could keep track of us all easily....or to debunk our theories.

The more I read the postings here, the more I realize that this is a very well run forum to carry on some very heated discussions. There are a lot of hot topics here that are not discussed reasonably anywhere else that I know of. The other forums that I've been to have mostly been shouting matches....shouting matches are fun sometimes, but only for a few minutes.

Personally, I think that those interested in watching us are here, but "they" are probably not the owners of this website. "They" have had the ability to watch us for some time, so bringing us here to meet our fellow conspiracy theorists would not be in "their" best interest.

On another subject....As paranoid as I am, I curious to know if there is some sort of convention or gathering in the plans or in the thoughts of those who have been here much longer than me. I think it would be real interesting to see this community gathered in one place. I honestly expect to meet some of you all someday....hopefully not too far from today.

Just so you know...I'll be the guy with the tin foil hat. Oh, and my t-shirt with the answer to life, the universe and everything.


Thanks for the excellent forum, guys!!

DavenMan



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 03:18 AM
link   
A convention would be a bad idea. Then THEY would know exactly where to find everyone.
One well placed 2000 pound LGB and *poof* there goes the conspiracy community.



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 11:49 AM
link   
Zaphod,

I had thought about that, but then that would open up a whole new can of worms. All of the families that we'd leave behind would begin to realize that maybe we weren't the paranoid delusionals that they were so concerned about. Our martyrdom would bring about a whole new brand of CTs(Conspiracy Theorists), the type that haven't been known to wear tin foil hats in the past.

And yet, another possibility exists. There is a possibility that we are paranoid delusionists and that the world is actually run by men with the IQ of a Venus Fly Trap. In that case, there may very well be no conspiracies at all, just a whole lot of amazing coincidences brought about by these Great Witless Boobs. If that is the case, then they really don't give a hoot what we think.

Just in case, I'd rather that we all didn't stay in the same hotel. Vegas would likely be the safest place for us all. The NSA has learned a lot of lessons from Vegas security.



posted on Jan, 17 2006 @ 06:40 PM
link   
Well, I know that I took a while to open this thread, but when I finally did, I have been riveted to it. Reading every post has been quite dizzying for me.

I love this site, and take it for what I have always assumed it to be, as I'm sure that many others feel the same. However, I can't help but wonder (just a little) about the fact that the government is very sneaky, and IMO will stop at nothing to control the people, as I do believe that this is the direction in which this country is moving.

So, that said, it does make some sort of sense that perhaps the government is using us people, who already distrust "them", and cling to each other to search for the "truth" to attempt to plant ideas in our heads by pretending to be good, solid, respected contributing members of ATS.

I very much hope that this is not the case, and I believe that it is not. However, as I like to think that I do in any situation is to "queston everything". It would be sad if that motto must also extend to ATS, but hopefully any questions that ATS is anything but what I have always believed it to be will soon be answered in a favorable way.

I realize that I had sort of a hard time wording this post, so I hope that I have come accross as I had meant to.

//ed for grammar//

[edit on 1/17/2006 by CyberKat]



new topics

top topics



 
55
<< 8  9  10    12  13  14 >>

log in

join