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.

 

Skepticism of 9/11 Truth is Denial for Comfort Sake

page: 4
6
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 03:12 PM
link   
I think there are 2 distinct kinds of skeptics, and that creates some confusion within this topic.

There are skeptics that present evidence, engage in constructive conversations, with an ultimate aim of finding more truth than before. These are always needed, and in fact wanted.

However, the skeptics that make baseless statements, and throw insults under veiled attempts to discredit things like scientific laws, belong neither here nor anywhere in the world. They seem to serve one purpose - to derail and deconstruct any attempts to find truth, or deny ignorance. It is my opinion that these are the skeptics that need to be left behind, and don't seem to fit within the scope of the site.

Of course, the same probably applies in reverse - I suppose the point is that nobody needs people that just argue aimlessly for the sake of being right, or for the sake of defending a conclusion that isn't even theirs (the "official" story). These people embrace ignorance, not deny it.




posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 03:12 PM
link   

Originally posted by NewWorldOver




the 9/11 truth movement does not need to satisfy skeptics, we should stop wasting time on them altogether and recognize denial and skepticism as a legitimate roadblock that we can overcome - by MOVING ON. Moving past it.


Ah yes, the chains of logic can be a heavy burden to bear, so if we just ignore dissenting viewpoints, progress can be made.


The problem truthers and skeptics have is that they don't agree on the facts. If there is no consensus on what the facts actually are, then no meaningful debate can occur. If I say the sky is blue, and you say no it is yellow, then we're never going to be able to reach common ground.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 04:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by Conundrum04
I not sure how any of what you just posted has anything to do with my questions posted above.

I'm not even going to entertain your little scernario because it doesn't have any relevance in what we are discussing.

So was it as simple as 19-20 hijackers acting alone in the US(micro level)? Or was it complex, did they have help in the US by some other source that we don't know about(macro level)?

Remember. It's simple and complex right????? Just like you told me.


And you claim to be so adept at 'connecting the dots'.... I'm the second coming - just so you know.

If you can't understand a simple conundrum such as that, or the concept of individual perception, insight, and mental occlusion - then I suggest you spend less time here and more time at a library or reading scientific theories, as opposed to conspiracy theories (although, I got into conspiracy theories by studying scientific theories...)



so far, the only skeptic argument has been to regurgitate the current, unacceptable official explanation. I mean, anything other than the official explanation is just another Conspiracy Theory by definition, right?


And what makes the official explanation so unacceptable? Aside from the fact it "comes from the government?"



NO evidence exists, that we have been shown, that proves the Official Lie to be true: None. All allegations, and suppositions of the most absurd sorts..assumptions not based on fact but to make the lie work. How could anyone read David Ray Griffen's well documented books and come away thinking that all is peachy in Bushie land? HOW? ONLY denial..chronic, pronounced and ever present, could account for believing the lies that the government has told about these events.


Could it possibly be that you have things inverted, here? Why is this "Bushie land?" Last I checked, the approval rating for the President and his administration is ... well... excruciatingly low. How could I see this post and think that you are nothing but someone frustrated by pubescent hormones and aggravated by the current political atmosphere?



The facts are that most scientists/investigators don't subscribe to the 9/11 Truth theories.


Facts are typically supported through imperical evidence.

Topics such as this become difficult to debate. Why? I simply cannot communicate with a number of you. You have the preconceived notion that the government is behind it, come hell or high water. Like I said - I was involved in this issue long before you were aware it existed, I'm sure - and I came in WANTING to support the conspiracy. And, honestly, I tried... but every time I found my own knowledge, understanding, and experience to be in severe and drastic conflict with every piece of evidence put forth by the people involved in the truth movement - regardless of what they presented.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 05:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by NewWorldOver

Originally posted by intrepid
reply to post by NewWorldOver
 


Cool, I still think I know what "truth movement" you're talking about. Been there before. That being said, you WILL treat other members with courtesy or you can go back to your website and tell them that YOU got banned here as well. Another merit badge.

Consider the T&C which you agreed to when you registered.



If you say so. The condescending nature in which StudioGuy and others speak on these message boards leads me to wonder where the line is drawn. Telling me to 'leave the hard stuff to the grown ups' etc.
I have not retaliated and I won't attempt to from now on.

[edit on 11-12-2007 by NewWorldOver]


Just to be clear, I was totally trying to insult you. Your arguments sound like something one of my kids would say when I tell them they can't have something they want. Even if EVERYBODY ELSE gets it, they still can't have it. My oldest child is under 5 years old. Perhaps one day he can use the "I'm just gonna get out of here and leave you behind" argument. Thanks for giving me some practice laughing at that argument before I face it in real life.

Perhaps I'm violating the T&C. Sorry about that ATS land!

[edit on 11-12-2007 by StudioGuy]



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 05:47 PM
link   
Wow, I guess this will be one of those mysteries that puzzle mankind for all of time.

I used to worry about all this 9/11 stuff until I came across this site:

www.pointlesswasteoftime.com...

I don't sweat 9/11 anymore and you guys can argue until hell freezes over. This passage below makes pretty good sense to me.

In order for this or any conspiracy to "work" everyone involved has to keep quiet - keep it a secret and we all know 2 people can't keep a secret!

I'm going to copy 2 paragraphs from this site that shows the amount of people that would have to have been involved and the amount of money it would have taken to keep people "quiet".

Huge teams of demolitions experts, who had no problem wiring a building full of innocent New Yorkers to explode, hired in secret, worked every night for what had to be a year (and that's only if they had a big enough crew) placing maybe 10,000 separate charges in each tower and another few thousand in WTC 7 (the smaller WTC tower that also collapsed, later in the day on 9/11).

And nobody notices.

Truckloads of bombs, dozens of mysterious workers, going in and out of the building, night after night. Security at the building doesn't catch them, Port Authority Police don't catch them, random eyewitnesses who stumble across the operation and call the cops don't catch them, maintenance workers who stumble across wet paint and repaired walls and bits of strange wire don't catch them, security cameras don't catch them.

The bomb-sniffing dogs who were brought in from time to time (remember, these buildings were bombed by terrorists in 1993) who are trained to find even one bomb, fail to notice the 10,000 bombs lining their building.

This is when all of the many, many people who could have blown the lid off the whole thing chose to stay silent because they were paid off by the government.

That includes hundreds of private researchers and government employees who prepared gigantic reports about the collapse of the towers from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).

Also, officials in the New York City Fire Department.

All were written fat checks, say the conspiracy guys, to cover up the murder of 3,000 New Yorkers. Keep in mind, some of them were New Yorkers themselves - all of the FDNY guys were - and some of them had friends who died in the towers. The theory even says it was the commander of the FDNY itself who detonated one of the buildings, and therefore he was in on the decision to kill 343 of his own firefighters and 60 police officers.

For money. If that were you... how big would that check have to be? These are people he saw every day, worked with every day. He went to weddings, birthday parties, to baseball games with these guys. In the mind of the 9/11 conspiracy, he'd kill them all for a big enough pile of cash.

Would you?

We're getting a nice sized payroll here. Now let's add in the hundreds of people from a dozen different agencies and police departments who claim to have helped clean up flight 93 wreckage, including 300 volunteers. The conspiracy guys say there was no plane, therefore they were paid to lie, along with all of the witnesses in Pennsylvania who claim to have seen the plane go down.

The conspiracy guys' explanation?

You guessed it. They were paid to stay silent. Hey, why not? Probably half a million people there, but, you know. Since we've got the checkbook out anyway...

Also, think of all of the friends and family of these paid conspirators, who suddenly see all this mysterious wealth...

And here's the kicker...

100% of the people who were offered the deal, took it.

After all, we don't have a single person who has come running into the offices of the New York Times, waving a check and saying, "look! Here's a check for ten million smackers that the government gave me to be silent about 9/11! Can you believe these assholes? Now give me my book deal!"

Not one. Even with the lure of fame and fortune and a chance to go down in history as The Guy Who Saved American Democracy, even with the crushing guilt of seeing thousands of bodies hauled out of the rubble, even seeing the horrors of a nation turned inside out by war and paranoia that was completely manufactured as a gruesome hoax, some of these people having their own friends and families and colleagues die in the attacks, not one turned down the money... or took the money and came forward anyway.

SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!!!

SLEEP WELL ALL OF YOU WHO BELIEVE IN THE 9/11 CONSPIRACY!!!!



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 06:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by ProfTom
Not one. Even with the lure of fame and fortune and a chance to go down in history as The Guy Who Saved American Democracy


Do you really believe this would happen?

This is what would happen...They would first have to find some media outlet willing to handle his/her story without any spin. Then if it did get reported they would be character assassinated, and than fired or forced to leave their job. That's if they even made it to the media before they were 'suicided'...

But if someone did really know the full story, and had enough evidence that no one could deny it, they would have to be part of the inner core and would not give two scraps about dead New Yorkers. You have to realise the 'elites' are not like you and me, they don't see 3000 dead New Yorkers as a loss like we do, to them it's just collateral damage, an unfortunate but necessary loss. Just like when they send young men to die in wars to increase their power, it's no different to them. They care only for their own kind and the rest of us are here to be used as they deem necessary. Their agenda is more important to them than your life. They are not mommy and daddy, sry.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 06:07 PM
link   
And yet another point made on this site;

B-T-W thank you anok for proving this point;

And that, is the conspiracy mindset.

It's not a belief in corrupt leaders. Hell, we all believe in corrupt leaders. It's a belief in a corrupt everybody. It's driving around in a world where every single person you see out of your windshield is utterly bloodthirsty and amoral, all except for you and a few, brave friends. What could make you feel more important than that?

You can see the attraction right away. Most people, to feel special, have to actually do something special. But why not do what these guys do, and just make the rest of the world out to be wretched? Hell, once we've painted everyone else as mindless or murderous, all we have to do to feel superior to them is roll out of bed.

Remember what I said earlier about Dylan Avery and how it was probably just a desire for fame that drove him to do all this? Look at the parallel here. At the heart of all this is that basic human need to feel special somehow, twisted in the most warped and corrosive way imaginable.

In conclusion, the 9/11 Conspiracy Guys aren't evil and they aren't liars. They're merely filling a basic human need, using their imaginations and paranoia to elevate themselves to a level the real world will never elevate them to. Also, they're retarded.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 06:52 PM
link   

Originally posted by NewWorldOver
As I said - the skeptics are emotionally and mentally incapable of discussing the 9/11 truth subject WITHOUT clinging desperately to the official story.


Wow, I think congrats are in order. I think you have created your own Fallacy of logic here.

Your brash statement has several elements to it:

You have created a whole new fallacy which I now dub:

911 Truther Logic

In true Xmas spirit I present you with the recipe to make a 911 Truther Logic statement. In other words you too can be a truther by inserting ALL of these elements in any bombastic post

I cup of the oldie but goodie Ad Hominem attack

A generous pinch of the good old Appeal to Authority

Add a dash of Begging the Question

Add an ounce of Poisoning the Well

Red Herring can be added for taste.


Place in an over and make sure its half baked



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 07:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by AshleyD
What I mainly have to go on are the phone conversations from flight 93. It pretty much disproves
the theory of remote-controlled planes and other ideas.

Well Ashley I hate to inform you but in my opinion you're
theory is flawed if you believe the cell phone calls from the planes.

Washington Post

911 Lies

Maybe these will shed some new light on your theory of the
cell phone calls



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 07:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Aim64C

And you claim to be so adept at 'connecting the dots'.... I'm the second coming - just so you know.

If you can't understand a simple conundrum such as that, or the concept of individual perception, insight, and mental occlusion - then I suggest you spend less time here and more time at a library or reading scientific theories, as opposed to conspiracy theories (although, I got into conspiracy theories by studying scientific theories...)


You know what? You have really ticked me off! And as you can see from my mood, I'm already very pyschotic and wandering around this huge hotel with an axe in my hand desperately looking for my wife Wendy and my little son Danny. So don't mess with me!


But I really can't take you seriously any more. I quickly read over your simple "conundrum" late last night and I just can't see why you answered my questions with, what would appear to be, an analogy. You see, I'm trying to establish common ground here to try and understand how you think, but all you want to do is play games. So unless you would like to answer my simple questions, this convo is over.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 08:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Operation AJAX
Note: If this recipe does not take, simply serve Ad Hominem attacks untill anybody with a contrary opinion leaves the thread.

Pot, meet kettle. You're both black.

(talk about "ad hominem" -- I've never encountered that phrase as much as I now do in conversations between 9/11 debunkers and 9/11 truthers... it's getting terribly passe')

If this type of focus on personalities rather than issues continues here in the 9/11 forum, we'll simply have to resort to terminating the accounts of those who can't alter their style.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 08:18 PM
link   
reply to post by ProfTom
 

Not that I expect you to take this to heart but here is a transcript of Emad Salem speaking with his FBI handlers re the 93 WTC bombing.

At a minimum this would be rock solid proof of FBI foreknowledge of the 93 WTC bombing. Ofcourse what it really means is that the FBI assisted in supplying the explosives. These guys are for real whether you choose to see them or not.


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.
Salem also mentions in his testimony Operation Bojinka, a plot by the "Blind Sheikh" Omar Abdul-Rahman and his nephew, Ramzi Yousef, to, among other things, fly about 12 hijacked airplanes into prominent US buildings. They were subsequently convicted of "seditious conspiracy" in connection with the Bojinka Plot.

However my feeling is that 911 will go the way of JFK and that makes me sad.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 08:22 PM
link   
Excellent post, and I brought up this exact same thing as to why people will not accept that 9/11 was at the very least L.I.H.O.P. (as in our government 'let it happen on purpose'), or at the very worst MIHOP (that our gov. 'MADE it happen on purpose'.)

I believe many people cannot accept these things even though there is SO much evidence to support that this was a self inflicted wound, because of a few different reasons.

They may either had a loved one die on 9/11, or someone very close to them. Or they have a loved one, or again a very close friend fighting the War in Iraq right now, so they CANNOT admit to themselves that the government did this, and thier loved ones died, and are still dieing everyday for greed, and not to protect other Americans from terrorists, and not for justice.

I am not saying the people who died on 9/11 died for no reason, but I believe this could be the thought process a person might have if they do admit to themselves what they know deep down to be true.

The fact that the plane over Shanksville was taken out by a missile, does not make any of those passengers on board any less heroes, or patriots in my mind, and it shouldn't for their families either. That goes for all of those who were on board these flights. As well as everyone who died on 9/11

I believe they died for a cause, and it will come to light in this coming election, when the perverbial crap hits the fan, and the evil that is plguing the leaders of our nation is finally extinguished. All of the people who died on 9/11 will have died for the greatest cause then.

There is nothing more patriotic than a Revolution, our country was Born of Revolution.

But the fact that this was an inside job DOES NOT make anyone's death on 9/11 any less meaningful. It makes it MORE meaningful if you will come to terms with what you know to be true.

and yes I had a close friend die on 9/11, and I will carry on the pursuit of "Truth" in his name, which is as plain to see as the nose on your face, if you look at the evidence. If I were to wear blinders and believe this was just 19 terrorist, and no Controlled Demolitions took place on 9/11, and our leaders had no prior knowledge, for me personally, I would be doing this friend a diservice in death. I know he would want the truth to come out, and those responsible brought to justice as well.

As soon as Bush and Ghouliani are done and are more or less out of power positions, I hope charges will be brought against them. Mr. Silverstein also needs to be put on trial. He should have been already in my opinion.

But they need to start small. I believe the easiest crime to prove would be the collapse of building 7. Or even get the tapes from the hotel and station across from the pentagon so that we the American people, the taxpayers, and the men and woman dieing still till this day in Iraq (and possibly soon thousand more if we muck with Iran) can see what hit the Pentagon. I ask the non truthers, if there is nothing incriminating on those tapes, why hasn't the American government released them to the public?

The hard truth is if the REAL perputrators of these crimes go unpunished, then sadly all our friends and loved ones who lost their lives on 9/11 will have meant nothing. That would be the greatest tradgedy of all in my opinion.

It hurts me all the time when I think about all those innocent people dieing for nothing As well as innocent children and people in Iraq being killed as well as our soldiers, and still it goes on. But that doesn't have to be, we as Americans CAN come together and change that. But we all have to agree on what is in my opinion the very obvious fact that 9/11 was a self inflicted wound for the President(government)-Illuminati, Zionists, call them what you want(yes other countries are involved in this and profiting as well) to gain public support to attack Iraq, basically for money.

In conclusion I want to say if I upset anyone who lost a friend or loved one on 9/11 in anyway I am truely sorry, but this is the only way I can think to try and get my point across, and hopefully help some people to change thier minds, and see what is so obvious to everyone else in the world who was watching it from the outside in. Again my sincerest apologies if I upset anyone with this post. But I truely believe a major change is needed if this country is to continue to be the great place of freedom it once was, and one can be proud to say they are an American.

**If you are looking for an unbiased opinion, and scientific, and forensic proof that WTC1,2,7, were brought down in a Controlled Demolition, and the Pentagon was not hit by a plane, and that this was an inside job, I suggest you do a you tube search, or a google search for "Zeitgeist" and watch the middle portion (which pertains to 9/11). There are alot of things that aren't covered in other films like loose change or the other more well known and biased films with many flaws and opinions instead of fact.**

--If you can watch the entire thing(and I believe everyone should) there is a website that has the entire 2 hour film(easily googled), it may very well change your thoughts on a great many things.--



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 08:59 PM
link   
Cult Of Personalities


Originally posted by SkepticOverlord
If this type of focus on personalities rather than issues continues here in the 9/11 forum, we'll simply have to resort to terminating the accounts of those who can't alter their style.

I'm skeptical of anyone who derides skeptics for being skeptical.

Why?

Because such denunciations are denunciations of reason. They are a protest against logic and rational thought.

To abandon logic and reason is to abandon truth and embrace ignorance.

There are many different opinions about 9/11, which is natural and to be expected. On ATS, all opinions on all topics are equally valid, because it is not for anyone here to decide what members should believe but the members themselves.

For my part, I don't know enough to tout any theory as "truth", and I prefer to be honest about it rather than claim certainty where there is none. Others may choose differently, as is their right.

Much has been made of "disinformation" and "agendas" in the discussions surrounding 9/11.

As a moderator, I see such allegations as worthy of consideration, but I'm far more concerned with disruption.

Disruption doesn't involve having a different opinion, but deliberately acting in such a way as to prevent others from expressing theirs.

On ATS, the terms & conditions give us a powerful and capable tool for identifying disruptive behavior.

It's quite simple: whatever their opinions, members who honor the T&C are never guilty of disruption, and their contributions -- no matter how controversial they may be -- will always be welcome (and often applauded).

But attacks against members simply for holding different views are a sure sign of an intent to disrupt discussion and thus work against the purpose of our forums.

Such behavior has no legitimate place on ATS and will be dealt with accordingly.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 09:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by AshleyD
If there was a controlled demolition to completely bring down the towers, Occam's Razor would dictate the ones who performed the attacks were the same ones who planted the necessary bombs.


However Occam's Razor also applies only if you look at all the facts, not just the ones that most easily make your thesis answer your hypothesis. You should look at all solutions, not just the first one, and not at the expense of truth, by ignoring evidence. Occam's Razor means that the simplest answer is usually the correct one, but not always. Sometimes the solution to a hypothesis is anything but simple.

From Hypothesis on Wikipedia:

Scientific hypothesis

People refer to a trial solution to a problem as a hypothesis — often called an "educated guess" — because it provides a suggested solution based on the evidence. Experimenters may test and reject several hypotheses before solving the problem.
According to Schick and Vaughn,[2] researchers weighing up alternative hypotheses may take into consideration:
Testability (compare falsifiability as discussed above)
Simplicity (as in the application of "Occam's Razor", discouraging the postulation of excessive numbers of entities)
Scope - the apparent application of the hypothesis to multiple cases of phenomena
Fruitfulness - the prospect that a hypothesis may explain further phenomena in the future
Conservatism - the degree of "fit" with existing recognised knowledge-systems


Unfortunately, as things are, I cannot fully put my hypothesis to a test, because not all the evidence has been released to the public. However, there is enough evidence that supports my hypothesis, that "Occam's Razor" compels me to make the conclusion that the "Official Story in Regard to the Events of 9-11-01" warrants further investigation in a public forum.

Simply put, if in fact my hypothesis were true, it would mean that some of our 'leaders' are in fact traitors. One would think that a Billionaire Political family would be able to make all the 'coincidences' happen easier than a Religious Fanatic living in a cave. The military stand down, the pentagon plane 'hitting' where the pentagon had been recently renovated and reinforced, the president's brother running the security firm at the WTC up until 9-10-01. In fact, you stated that "Occam's Razor would dictate the ones who performed the attacks were the same ones who planted the necessary bombs."

My hypothesis, if correct, would then require 'too much' investigation into the past dealings. Overall, the scope of my hypothesis is perhaps too damaging to the psyche of most Americans, who would revolt at the prospect of being lied to for at least the last 6 years, but probably closer to 60.

Also, my hypothesis would be too damaging to the capitalist fascists who would be implicated by association. Ironically, these same capitalists have made billions of dollars at the expense of you and me, due to the Wars waged in the name of the victims of this event. While it be a hard task to accomplish, the fruits of our labors after truthfully and transparently investigating the events of 9-11-01 would be a society more rooted in constitutional freedoms and human rights.

Unfortunately, my hypothesis goes against the status quo of what we have been programmed to believe, and I doubt it will ever be taken seriously in the mainstream. We grow up thinking the President is a good person, and puts the welfare of the many above those of the few. If my hypothesis is true, then one has to look in hindsight at all past presidents with a skeptical eye in regard to their actions on behalf of the Nation. If one president tries to bankrupt a country to line the pockets of his friends and family, maybe they all do. That is probably too much to bear witness to...

Luckily for me, my frustration at how clueless many of my fellow Americans have been since 9-11 to the 'truth' (or I should say 'my truth'), has encouraged me to further investigate any and all connections the Bush family and their Business and Political associates have had to corruption. Before 9-11 I never knew that the Bushes like to perform mock sacrifices with their friends. I never knew that The President's grandfather was a Nazi sympathizer who tried to foment a coup to install a Nazi government. I could go on and on. There is quite a lot of circumstancial 'evidence', and I recommend all "Official Story" supporters to really take a look at, and then ask yourself the question, "Why do you think that evidence regarding 9-11 that doesn't support the 'official story' be left out?"

Perhaps the answer to that question is actually my hypothesis,
DocMoreau



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 09:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by adjay
They seem to serve one purpose - to derail and deconstruct any attempts to find truth, or deny ignorance. It is my opinion that these are the skeptics that need to be left behind, and don't seem to fit within the scope of the site.

...

nobody needs people that just argue aimlessly for the sake of being right, or for the sake of defending a conclusion that isn't even theirs (the "official" story). These people embrace ignorance, not deny it.


Those two statements ring especially true with me. All I ever meant to say as well. Skepticism is healthy until it becomes outright denial and they are shoving the packaged-tv-news version of truth down people's throat.

Thanks for putting things alot clearer than I have managed to in this entire thread.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 09:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by DocMoreau
Before 9-11 I never knew that the Bushes like to perform mock sacrifices with their friends. I never knew that The President's grandfather was a Nazi sympathizer who tried to foment a coup to install a Nazi government. I could go on and on. There is quite a lot of circumstancial 'evidence', and I recommend all "Official Story" supporters to really take a look at.



Amen!

As I said in my first post, the whole '9/11 truth' campaign is about something larger. You will NEVER be able to convince 'skeptics' that they are citizens of a nation run by satanists. It's simply beyond them. They find it laughable.

Meanwhile, the rest of us find it deadly serious, and we are not laughing. We are also getting TIRED of entertaining the endlessly circular logic of skeptics who want nothing more than to step into a verbal debate on a topic they have no interest in educating themselves on...



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 09:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by Majic


As a moderator, I see such allegations as worthy of consideration, but I'm far more concerned with disruption.

Disruption doesn't involve having a different opinion, but deliberately acting in such a way as to prevent others from expressing theirs.

But attacks against members simply for holding different views are a sure sign of an intent to disrupt discussion and thus work against the purpose of our forums.

Such behavior has no legitimate place on ATS and will be dealt with accordingly.




By all means. Let the skeptics talk. Let them debate. Let them endlessly dance around the same issues which truthers have been espousing for years... nobody is disrupting their effort.

I'm simply throwing my hands up in the air and declaring them a lost cause. We aren't going to convince skeptics that 9/11 was an inside job. At least... that's how I feel.



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 09:27 PM
link   
Circular Logic


Originally posted by NewWorldOver
Meanwhile, the rest of us find it deadly serious, and we are not laughing. We are also getting TIRED of entertaining the endlessly circular logic of skeptics who want nothing more than to step into a verbal debate on a topic they have no interest in educating themselves on...

I assure you, you don't even want to know what I think of those who insist I believe what they have to say without proof. The terms involved are the diametric opposite of flattering.

Rather than rail against people for being honest in their opinions and asserting their right to have them, why not focus on presenting a convincing case to support your beliefs?



posted on Dec, 11 2007 @ 09:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by Majic

Rather than rail against people for being honest in their opinions and asserting their right to have them, why not focus on presenting a convincing case to support your beliefs?


The case has been made. It's on dozens of websites. It is called the 9/11 truth movement. This is a forum FOR the 9/11 conspiracy discussion.

The information is everywhere. I am not a spokesmodel for 9/11 truth and I will not copy-paste pages of information to appease people who are free to study the same information themselves. If they aren't willing to study the information, what right do they have to debate in the first place? Freedom of speech, I suppose.

Regardless, this is a message board for the 9/11 conspiracy. Skeptics and believers alike are expected to have studied the case by now.

[edit on 11-12-2007 by NewWorldOver]



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in

join