It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


9/11 forum and the 911 pound Gorilla

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 08:26 PM
As most posters who venture over into the 911 forum know, there is a huge problem.

Civility and decorum apparently do not matter when talking about this conspiracy as most people are typically on one side or the other of this particular issue.

The 911 madness has not ended after the crackdown. It may have even gotten worse. In the past I tended to stay away from that forum because it was absolute chaos. Well, it still is chaos more or less.

Some people try to debunk the official story, and others try to debunk the counter-stories. There's only a few people I have in mind that actually honestly debunk on either side of the aisle in a respectful manner.

I am guilty for some of the partisan bickering. I am partly to blame. I admit that.

With that being said, I would like to see an official Abovetopsecret investigation. The 911 pound gorilla apparently has died and I thought that would be a great idea for those interested in honest journalism to come to the forefront.

The 9/11 research threads are tough to garner responses because only scholars are allowed to post there.

The main 9/11 forum typically ends in absolute madness when any theories or ideas that debunk the official story.

Let's come together as a community and conduct an open and honest investigation without the government.

Those who died on 9/11 as well as those who have died as a result of the military action in Afghanistan and Iraq deserve the truth. Americans and the world also deserve the truth.

Most of us here are seeking the truth in one form or another.

So what do you all say? Can we do it? Can we unite as a community and find out the truth without the partisan bickering?

Even if you believe the official story 100%, you may find it interesting to learn new details and clues from what happened. Even if you believe that Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden knocked down 3 world trade center towers, would it not hurt to learn more about that day?

"We deserve a better investigation" says the gorilla, so let's get to it!

[edit on 4/10/2008 by biggie smalls]

posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 11:00 PM
its a good idea and a noble goal, but in the end im afraid it will just end up like any other 911 thread on here so the net result will be similar to pissing in the wind.

ive been on ats for just over 2 years and the majority of my posts have been in the 911 forums. i find i have to take breaks every so often because there are days it really makes me want to gouge my own eyeballs out.

everybody wants "experts" opinions. BUT, only if they agree with their opinions. any dissenting opinions from anyone with any related experience is suddenly either a "nutjob toofer" or a "govt shill/disinfo agent".

if i had a dime for every time ive been called a disinfo agent i could have a great weekend in vegas at the highrollers tables.

for 12 years my military job was explosives or wmds. but, when i get into one of those great CD debates and post a lot of unbiased factual info (and when im posting data on demo stuff i go out of my way to stay neutral about it cuz its too easy for anyone with no effort to find out if im lying then my credibiility is shot so i stick to the facts about demo or if im posting an opinion i make sure i am clear that its an opinion) and the debate gets to where ive shot pretty big holes in some of the sillier cd theories ill invariably get something like (and im going to paraphrase here) "well, it could be some super duper secret stuff that only the govt knows about and doesnt tell anyone" at which piont the debate is over as its absolutly a waste of time to move forward from there.

and dont get me wrong...the OCT crowd can be just as bad and just as quick to name call. in the past ive posted things that supported various theories on CD's (insofar as to admit that that aspect of a given theory might not be impossible etc) and the OCT crowd turned on me just as fast.

so as you can personally in a no win situation and therefore its not really of interest to me personally to get into another 911 discussion that could get real involved. i pop in on a few from time to time but i dont let myself get into them to the point where they take up large parts of my day anymore. (most of my best/longest posts were wiped out in aug of 07 i think it was and i lost the first 8 months of posts id written)

so, i admire your spirit in this matter but for myself i wont be a huge participant. best of luck though, if you get any questions you'd like me to take a crack at let me know.

posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 11:23 PM
I've noticed a spike in the level of disrespect in 9/11 threads just in the past few days. I've seen plenty of heated debates in the past, but there have been several "low-pointers" really doing a bang-up job of inciting people without having anything actually valid to say, and generally just disrespecting everything that ATS is about.

Anyone who has seen my posts knows that I don't shy away from a challenge and will fight my position tooth and nail, but it only makes sense to do so when someone is bringing up valid counter-material.

I have my opinions about 9/11, but the biggest thing that I know without a doubt, is that my opinions on the subject have changed over the years. My opinions are changed when valid material is presented to me, from either side. I have no agenda to carry out, other then fulfilling my genuine curiosity and sharing what I have learned so far. If I wanted to say it was an inside job, I wouldn't have to say that CD was the smoking gun. The same might be said the other way too. Just because there was controlled CD, say in Tower 7, does not mean that the government carried out 9/11. Maybe they're just lieing about it after the fact so they can get their insurance money, and maybe it really was in the interests of public safety to set that sucker down. Either way, I just want the truth. I will argue my point to the end, just so that I know without a doubt when my opinion has actually been wrong.

posted on Apr, 10 2008 @ 11:43 PM
reply to post by jackinthebox

and if more people had your attitude, the 911 forums would not only be fun to visit, but would be productive as well.

give classes or something

posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 01:01 AM
The thing I think causes problems in the 9/11 forums is that people put out ideas and theories (official and un-official), other people then, as with most ideas, either prove them right or wrong (or try to). The problem then happens that once someone is shown proof of fact that their theory is flaud (official or un-official 9/11 theory) they don’t and wont accept it.

This then leads to the name calling and the statements like “oh I know more than you” and “you have never done research” and “your paid to say this” etc etc etc.

There is also a lot of new member’s who come on a post things like “well it’s obviously an inside job because...” or “The official story is obviously true because...” Then members who have seen these statements before, and been proven to be wrong get agitated and heated and post replies, and it goes back and forth for a few pages.

With most 9/11 theories most people are not prepared to accept the other side of the argument, so no matter what proof or facts is shown for either side, if that’s not what the person wants to accept then wont. And this leads to all the problems.

Posters then spend more time arguing with each other than actually discussing the topic.


[edit on 11/4/2008 by Mikey84]

posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 02:38 AM
Thanks for the responses.

Damocles I'm sorry to hear you were attacked by both sides. I really cannot spend too much time on that forum as it gets too heated too fast.

I happen to lean more towards one side, but that doesn't mean the other side deserves respect and their fair say.

I definitely will have some further questions about a controlled demolition. Its quite possible all 3 were loaded, but that's a discussion for another thread. This is supposed to be a nonpolitical/partisan info board


I'd say its been the past few months where I've seen a surge in more disrespectful posts. I think there's always a large amount of new members every month. Its interesting to see people come in every month. Fresh faces are always a good thing. I do not have a problem with anyone joining. Heck, we were all new at one point. I've only been here for 2 years. Some members have been around for over 6. That's quite a long time...

Getting into a shouting match solves nothing and will probably only enrage the other party further. I find addressing their issue and not the poster themselves is a much more effective tool, and of course, follows the T&Cs
. It makes more sense and its the right thing to do, go figure.

Like I said in the opening post, all everyone is searching for is the truth. However, when people yell at each other over a very emotional subject, no truth is learned. Everyone has their own story to tell. They may all be valid from their point of view, but not every one is correct.

We need to sort through the disinformation and untruth to find what it is we're looking for; truth.


It is not the easiest thing to take a response personally, especially when someone has devoted a lot of time and energy formulating a theory.

There have been some "out there" ideas, but they are nonetheless valid. Correct? No, but valid just the same.

Telling someone to do your research falls along the line of someone having a power differential over another. I have definitely said this quite a few times and I don't do it to make someone feel bad. It is out of the honest opinion that they have not done their homework on the topic to make such a judgment.

If all debunkers and conspiracy theorists had researched every theory and event of that day, it would be one thing. However, that's certainly far from the truth.

Nothing is "obvious" from 911. How many years later and we still don't know exactly what happened? Some will claim to know all of the truth from that day, but most will concede we really don't know anything.

I'd like to start on a clean slate and conduct an independent investigation with skeptics and conspiracy theorists alike. We need experts from every field we'd be covering as well as people who are not bound to formulas and theories already ie people capable of critical thinking and creativity.

I really appreciate the time you all spent responding.

I'd still like to reopen the investigation and help out personally and so would this guy:

[edit on 4/11/2008 by biggie smalls]

posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 05:06 AM
The actual problems start when people are more interested in

being right / looking good (ego)

than exploring all sides of an issue.

As a psychological rule of the thumb, when two sides of a debate become fierce and unmoving, both of them are wrong.

One becomes unmoving when not wanting to admit partial wrongs.

In conclusion, the truth must be either somewhere in the middle or elsewhere.

posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 05:32 AM
You are a very smart member who I deeply admire biggie smalls

Thee 9/11 madness has reached a level that I and others do not post in the 9/11 section. A while ago, I considered constructing a thread to outline the whole 9/11 theory and playing a devil's advocate role towards it. Like a "what if the official story was true", could you imagine the outcome of that thread? I'll be a victim of a witch hunt by those thinking I was spreading government propaganda.

My personal opinion, I think it is wrong for members just to specifically post anything bias towards the conspiracy and ignore any specitical view point. The thread relating to a UN investigation is the classic example. Many pointed out it was hypocritical of members to suddenly start supporting the UN (after they said it was the NWO) when it gave a, apparent, critical view of the official 9/11 story. We were ignored because we did not share the euphoria.

My point? It will, to my deep sadness, be impossible for ATS to carry out a independent non-bias investigation. It will end up getting hijacked. Please, prove me wrong, but I really cannot see it.

I would not be surprised if the administration threatened to remove the 9/11 section if members did not start behaving

[edit on 11-4-2008 by infinite]

posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 05:54 AM
Ya I used to be on the 9/11 forum also.. I made alot of cool friends there and well enemies..

But you know I realized no matter how things were done/said it all ended the same. It didn't make to good for me but whatever.

In the end I don't even go there anymore, hell the site in my sig i don't even go to... But you know the info we do have on the forum there is good info on both sides of the camp..

Its a nice place for people to research, but to find an answer.. well it sure the hell isn't there.. There is no clear cut answers to anything that happened that day, so in the end your still standing there looking stupid as the same day u realized.. "hey something is odd."

I however think if ATS removes that area on here would be a bad move. A Lot of people put a lot of time and effort into where there..

BSbray, Griff, Vallhall, Damocles, Killtown, and a lot of others.. some I haven't seen to date cause i haven't been there but.... If they do decide to make it where nobody can post they should make it a read only forum..

It will be detrimental to the who study part of 9/11.

Sorry if this sounds stupid but hey.. just woke up.

[edit on 4/11/2008 by ThichHeaded]

posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 06:28 AM
Overblown Significance

Im not saying 9/11 is unimportant but do think that many of you (from both sides of the debate) have lost perspective by overblowing the events significance.

The wise conspiracy-researcher will not put all his eggs in one basket and even keep in mind that that one basket may be nothing but a deflection from more important and more behind-the-scenes events.

There is more happening in space (the rest of the world) and time (other events) than this.

The problem with invensting all one´s time and resources and knowledge into a single topic is that it leads to the unwillingness of being called wrong.

Afterall, one might say, Ive dedicated half of my life to this only to be wrong? No way.

Of course one could argue that by solving one tiny piece of the puzzle this will have implications for the big picture. If the government deceived us about that, what else did they deceive us about?...or even more staggering: If its possible to fake all this, is our entirely reality a fake?
But again, these questions can also be explored through other venues, and topics less charged and overloaded with confusion than this one.

When boxers become entangled to a stillstand, they are seperated. In this sense the movement might want to take a break for awhile and look at other conspiracy-issues that are fresh and rewarding.

posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 06:31 AM
Official Investigation

As for the thread title, I agree that neutral parties need to do an official investigation. The government is not neutral. But neither are conspiracy-activists.

posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 06:42 AM

Originally posted by Skyfloating
Official Investigation

As for the thread title, I agree that neutral parties need to do an official investigation. The government is not neutral. But neither are conspiracy-activists.

As I suggested, with the "what if the official was right?" post , but it would be impossible to post it within the current climate.

However, a neutral party investigation is something that interests me deeply.

posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 06:46 AM
Far be it from me to have any input on board business, but wouldn't it be simpler to specifically open a topic for the sole purpose of discussion of conspiracy theories other than that of the official conspiracy?

I'm not saying that we should alienate those who believe in the official story, but an easy way of eradicating the 'bickering' the OP mentions would be to simply eliminate the possibility for pointless contradictions.

Yes, we know we might be wrong and that it was terrorists, but we happen to think that it is quite unlikely that we've been told the truth.

Hench, denying ignorance.

Under the pretext of denying ignorance, i really see no reason why there should be any contradictions in the first place.

posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 06:53 AM

Originally posted by infinite
However, a neutral party investigation is something that interests me deeply.

The only problem being that true neutrals often lack interest in the subject. Thats why they are neutrals. Therefore this would only work out if funded.

But I wouldnt put it beyond the 3 amigos to act in the spirit of neutrality.

It has to be a group of people who are not interested enough to be partisan and at the same time interested enough to do the investigation.

posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 06:55 AM
reply to post by Skyfloating

So, you want someone who is simply interested in finding that single needle of truth in the haystack of speculation?

You want a historian, m8.

posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 07:04 AM

Originally posted by Skyfloating
It has to be a group of people who are not interested enough to be partisan and at the same time interested enough to do the investigation.

As I said to a new member the other week, I came to ATS with extreme thinking and believed everything on this site. I was 17 then, I'm 22 now. To describe my current thinking would be sceptical, I do not believe anything until I've researched it myself and come to a sensible conclusion after careful evaluation.

That's what we all should be doing.

And that is the way we should address any 9/11 investigation. Get all the facts before believing anything. The current problem is people already have the outcome in their mind and are searching for anything to prove their belief (i.e Alex Jones thinking)

posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 07:06 AM

Originally posted by infinite

And that is the way we should address any 9/11 investigation. Get all the facts before believing anything.

Like a historian would.

p.s; Alex jones is the perpetrator of much of the disinfo on the web - he might not be an agent himself, but he still spreads it around a lot.

posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 07:21 AM
In a Court of Law - ATS Law

Another valid approach to refresh the whole 9/11 idea would be to take it to the ATS Debate Forum and have it judged by neutral judges.

We would take the 3 most respected proponents (as voted by members) from each side of the discussion and have them fight the entire thing out under strict debate or courtroom rules and the scrutiny of seasoned judges (neutrals as voted on by members or Supermoderators).

This would be a learning experience for all and it would educate the public on the essentials cut down to the most important concepts and disgreements.

All later discussions could refer and link to that legendary Tournament.

posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 07:36 AM
reply to post by Skyfloating

I agree that it would certainly be interesting, however i believe that it would be a somewhat oblique approach to the problem - there will always be doubts and contradictions being held back, and just because we do things with democracy doesn't mean it will be any different.

p.s; tournament?

I sincerely hope you aren't suggesting that we use 9/11 as some sort of popularity contest...

posted on Apr, 11 2008 @ 07:39 AM

Originally posted by Anti-Tyrant

I sincerely hope you aren't suggesting that we use 9/11 as some sort of popularity contest...

By "Tournament" I mean a debate of many "rounds" because the entire subject cannot be objectively judged on the grounds of one single round.

In any case, when people out in real life have a fight that just wont find any relief, they have to take it to a neutral court of law.

A Debate-Tournament would be like that neutral court of law.

If not the entire truth everyone could at least get the distilled version of both sides, stripped of all the superficial and personal stuff.

new topics

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in