Have you ever noticed that most 911 Debunkers on ATS are usually new memebers?

page: 1
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 5 2009 @ 05:47 PM
link   
I don't know if any of you have noticed this but please look for your selves to see.

Go to any 911 conspiracy thread and look for the debunkers. The one thing that strikes me is that they are usually new members, with less than 300 points.

Does this mean:

1) They are simply new members who feel strongly that the official story is true.

2) They are older members who operate a second account so they will not get caught arguing against a good conspiracy.

3) They are intelligence types trying to refute and argue all 911 Truth topics.

4) I'm mad and there are no more new debunkers than there are old debunkers!!!!!

Have a look, let me know! Especially if it's number 4!

Kiwifoot








[edit on 5-5-2009 by kiwifoot]




posted on May, 5 2009 @ 06:07 PM
link   
No, it's you. 9/11 debunkers have been on here since I joined in 2003, and some are still around. Debunkers, like believers, come and go in waves, or usually are drawn in when something major happens on ATS and the word gets out to other boards.

I highly doubt any "debunkers" on ATS are really working for the government. If spooks were on this board, they would be sowing confusion, disinformation, or false theories on purpose to disseminate and cloud investigation.

Just because someone believes the official story does not make them a spook. And there are plenty of people who simply think conspiracies in general are stupid fantasies concocted by substandard, guillable minds.



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 06:13 PM
link   
What are the tags of these "new" 911 debunkers? How do they try to muddy the waters? Do they have any common thread or claims to them? Are they usually beligerant or do they bring proof for their claims?



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 06:17 PM
link   
reply to post by dashen
 

I can't for obvious reasons name names or give examples. But just have a look. Go to a thread or two and see. Unless you get two truthers arguing amongst themselves ( which we always do!) you'll usually find the person arguing against the conspiracy is a new or relatively new member.

Have a look. I may be wrong but it sure looks that way to me.

kiwi



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 06:19 PM
link   
I suggest that there are no "old" debunkers on the 9/11 threads because at a certain point it just doesn't do any good to keep pointing out errors in logic and evidence to people who just refuse to listen to it or consider for even one moment that their elaborate web of conspiracy is more holes than substance.

You can only beat your head against the wall so long before you just get tired of it, and decide to let people joyfully languish in their own stubborn ignorance. What does it matter, really, in the end?



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 06:22 PM
link   
haha, I remember when I first joined this site. I was under the diluted idea that I knew everything about 9/11 and could refute ANY conspiracy because there truly was no conspiracy and that all those who believe in a conspiracy were ignorant fools.

No joke.

I still believe that the OS is in a general sense true, but there are holes in it that should be investigated. And there are "coincidences" that should be investigated as well. In addition, any theory needs to be critically examined just like the OS. In this way, we can come close to finding out what really happened on 9/11.

edit:

I've been meaning to ask, what the heck are the ATS and BTS and what do they say about someone?

[edit on 5-5-2009 by MrRandomGuy]



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 06:22 PM
link   
i think i know why...

Think of it like this, they come here looking for evidence on the subject because they heard of the 9/11 conspiracy through their fam/freinds and wanted to take a look at it themselves. since the 9/11 done by alqueda is hammered into most peoples minds, they cant fathom the thing being a setup, so its natural just to refute anything they can cuz, they have a hard time accepting that reality.

for the older members, they have the experience of previous threads, and more time to sift through a lot of facts.

Just my 2 cents.



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 06:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Just because someone believes the official story does not make them a spook. And there are plenty of people who simply think conspiracies in general are stupid fantasies concocted by substandard, guillable minds.



What else from a Tinwiki editor?


First they will call us lunatics
Then they will call us tinfoil hat users.
Then they will call us live-in mom's basement users and tell us to get a job


What are you going to call us next?



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 06:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
 
I believe the OP got it right; however, there are some old debunkers that have been here for years. It’s so funny I just posted about this topic in another thread about some of the rude debunkers who only enjoy coming into these 911 threads to attack the messenger.



Just because someone believes the official story does not make them a spook. And there are plenty of people who simply think conspiracies in general are stupid fantasies concocted by substandard, guillable minds.


You are initialed to your opinion and so am I. Just because some of us have done our research into the events of 911, and have found enough proof that supports real science that the OS is a lie doesn’t make us stupid fantasies concocted by substandard, gullible minds. One only needs to do a little research to see the lies, if one can take off their blinders. Anyone who believe in the OS with all the information’s that has been complied by real sciences and building engineers and firemen, police officers, and eyewitness testimony and videos from all the news networks has to blind or ignorant to say the lease. I just love how these negative posters come out swinging, with their insulting remarks as you have.



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 06:42 PM
link   
[

Originally posted by star in a jar

What else from a Tinwiki editor?


First they will call us lunatics
Then they will call us tinfoil hat users.
Then they will call us live-in mom's basement users and tell us to get a job


What are you going to call us next?



Virgins,
..........Kidding.

I guess you guys are right, you come here thinking youre personally going to refute all the BS outright, then slowly you start looking the the real facts. I didn't beleive in a 911 conspiracy till very recently after I saw a close-up of the second plane hitting on the CNN live feed. It was painted matte gray and had two huge pods on the belly that ran the length of the plane. That was no commercial liner.

[edit on 5-5-2009 by dashen]



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 07:20 PM
link   
I notice how many debunkers disappear when a well argued and sourced topic pops up or if they are around the best they can come up with are going off-topic or attacking the OP personally and even those who dare disagree with the official story.



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 07:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by dashen
It was painted matte gray

Maybe because that's what color a United Airlines jet is?





Originally posted by dashen
and had two huge pods on the belly that ran the length of the plane

They weren't pods, they are wing fairings. The "pod" disinfo has been debunked for many years and you can read about it here:

www.questionsquestions.net...

You can see in this video that there is nothing under the belly of the plane:

www.youtube.com...

[edit on 5-5-2009 by _BoneZ_]



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 07:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
 




Just because someone believes the official story does not make them a spook. And there are plenty of people who simply think conspiracies in general are stupid fantasies concocted by substandard, gullible minds.



The first thing I want to say is I do not think conspiracy people are stupid, fantasizers or gullible. I disagree with them. I cannot offer a perfect explanation for many of the reports. The FIRST reason I have for disagreeing with conspiracy theories is this: I do not believe it is possible to keep secret anything involving two or more people. I OTOH, accept the Warren Commission report. I was stationed at MacDill AFB, Tampa, FL, on that fatal Friday. Aside: Senator Arlen Specter of PA was a member of the Commission's investigating staff. He wrote the “magic bullet” part of the Warren Commission Report.

The FIRST American UFO. I was a very young person in 1947 but (I think) I remember hearing it on the news. (Sometimes you hear things repeated so much you think you heard the original story). See Note One. By 1954 I was in the US Air Force, an airborne radar repair technician. By a clerical mix-up I was transferred to Detachment B, 15th AISS, McGhee-Tyson AFB, near Maryville (Knoxville), TN. Air Intelligence Service Squadron headquartered at Brooks AFB, TX. My AFSC - like the Army MOS - Air Force Specialty Code - was 30151A. The clerical error listed me as a 10351A. An intelligence specialist. The error was discovered as soon as I reported in for duty. It took 6 days for me to get new orders to proceed to my next duty station which happened to be Loring AFB, Limestone, ME.

Detachment B was assigned the task of interviewing people who reported UFO sightings in Eastern Tennessee and Western North Carolina. Their reports ultimately made their way to Wright Patterson AFB, Dayton, OH, and Operation Blue Book. The AF does not allow you just to “stand around” getting in trouble. I was assigned to go with another man on an interview. We drove over into NC near a town called Silva. We interviewed an elderly couple who lived a mile or so out of town. They reported strange lights behind their little house. They were decent people who were telling the truth. Whether I thought it was swamp gas or not made no difference to them. The next day I left for Loring. See Note Two.

Another example of a conspiracy? Because First Century CE Judea was under Roman rule, I do not believe that the Jewish High Priest could have had Jesus crucified. The Romans were not dumb. Most healthy young prisoners were sentenced to 20 years "at the oars." Chained to the oar of a Roman warship. Crucifixion was reserved for rebels. I do not believe anyone can return from the dead. Slightly modified, I say, “Once Dead, Always Dead.” I think Jesus was not a real person but a montage of several wild stories circulating in the region at that time. But that’s me.

For interest, I have added these two notes.

Note One.
Friday, June 24, will be the 58th anniversary of the incident that set off our post World War II "Age of Flying Saucers." A private plane - Cessna 150 - piloted by Kenneth Arnold on June 24, 1947 radioed he had sighted nine mysterious flying objects over Mount Rainier in the Cascade Range, moving at incredibly high speeds in a somewhat erratic manner "like a saucer if you skip it across water."
www.mail-archive.com...@yahoogroups.com/msg00191.html

Note Two.
The Roswell UFO Incident involves the recovery of materials near Roswell, New Mexico, USA, on July 7, 1947, and since the late 1970s has become the subject of intense speculation, rumor, and questioning. There are widely divergent views on what actually happened and passionate debate about what evidence can be believed. The United States military maintains that what was actually recovered was debris from an experimental high-altitude surveillance balloon belonging to a classified program named "Mogul."
en.wikipedia.org...


[edit on 5/5/2009 by donwhite]



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 07:56 PM
link   
I have been lurking on ATS since it first started, was member and lost my account, started a new one - this site was ORIGINALLY only about debunking- the actual MOTTO is DENY IGNORANCE in case you haven't noticed, it is not about uncovering the hidden agenda of the cabal - it is about looking at conspiracies, UFO's, crop circles and rather than just screaming ALIENS, it is about gathering evidence.

It is new users like yourself who are the problem - the whole idea of ATS it so debunk - get with the programme.



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 07:59 PM
link   
So people who question someone's conspiracy theory is a disinfo agent?

Very good! Stay in the realm of disbelief.



posted on May, 5 2009 @ 10:39 PM
link   
reply to post by _BoneZ_
 


Your pictures shows a glossy shiny grey and blue plane, and no bulges at the joining of the wing and fuselage, on the other hand, I just want to know the truth, if it was osama fine, if it was rummy fine, just a little bit of unfalsified proof, anyone? please?



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 02:01 AM
link   
i know what the OP is saying...
Whilst there are the diehard debunkers(so called),who sport lots of points indicative of lengthy times spent on these forums, there are also newbs who spring up and vehemently argue such and such a point when often is the case they seem unfamiliar with the facts..

Does this happen in equal measure by the truthers??Probably...

Personally, it seems soo clear that something stinks about 9/11, it just seems sooo obvious to me that the whole thing was a false flag...from A to Z...

I do not live in the States, have no axe to grind either way, do not hate Americans etc so my standpoint is completely neutral...but, having researched, looked at both sides and listened to both sides of the debate I concluded, frighteningly, that it had to have been an inside job....theres just too much not making sense, too many freakish once in a lifetime convenient coincidences that supposedly took place for the merry tale to be even vaguely true...

Which brings me to my point...

Can someone please explain, given the overwhelming body of evidence that shows how proposterous the official word is, how anybody could even sit on the fence(as an above post shows) and suggest that whilst its not all good,and there may be some things that dont quite add up, most of it seems OK(so to speak) .....and on the whole go along with The Word??

Whilst not inferring the above fellow poster fits into this category, I have also, as the OP has,wondered about the modus operandi some of the 9/11 characters operate under....??
Is is it maybe possible that its a technique being used to confuse...it confuses me!!

Afterall,why would someone who has diametrically opposite views even waste their time debating the socalled Truthers??
Gridiron in my opinion is a waste of time...the game is ridiculous, I can see no redeeming aspects that would even vaguely draw me in ...hence, I keep away.
My "keeping away" extends to certainly not frequenting forums for people who, rightly, do have an interest.

Using this rationale, it seems odd that there are sooo many people who believe the 9/11 commission and its lies...

2c.....



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 10:08 AM
link   
reply to post by benoni
 




Can someone please explain, given the overwhelming body of evidence that shows how preposterous the official word is, how anybody could even sit on the fence (as an above post shows) and suggest that whilst its not all good, and there may be some things that don’t quite add up, most of it seems OK (so to speak) ..... and on the whole go along with The Word?

I have also, as the OP has, wondered about the modus operandi some of the 9/11 characters operate under.... ? is it maybe possible that it’s a technique being used to confuse... it confuses me!!



I equate the Nine Eleven Commission with the earlier Warren Commission. I offer this generalized reply why I accept the Warren Commission Report and by extension, the Nine Eleven Commission Report. The Warren Report can be summarized thus: There was a single shooter and one bullet hit both Kennedy and Governor John Connally. The so-called magic bullet theory.

Similarity the Nine Eleven Commission Report can be summarized thus: 19 young men of Arab descent hi-jacked 4 commercial passenger planes and rammed two of them into the Twin Towers of the WTC, the 3rd was crashed into the Pentagon and the 4th went down over rural western Pennsylvania apparently crashed while the passengers attempted to re-take the plane. The surprise (and genesis of conspiracy theories) was the collapse of the twin towers and later, of a 3rd tower which had been allowed to burn itself out, and also collapsed. Call it serendipity for Osama bin Laden, and a PARAMOUNT tragedy for America.

Argument. Earl Warren, the chairman of the Commission was the Chief Justice of the United States. Before being nominated by Eisenhower, Warren had already served 3 terms as governor of California and in his last election, ran unopposed. (That was the only time in the 20th century that the governor of a large state did that). Which showed the TRUST and CONFIDENCE the people of California put in him. He was instrumental in the unanimous judicial decision in the landmark case Brown v. Topeka Board of Education (1954) that found segregation based on race was unconstitutional in the US. A Republican.

Six other Commission members. Richard Russell, long-time senator from Georgia who was known as the Dean of the Senate. A Democrat. John Sherman Cooper, senator from Kentucky, my home state. A Republican. (I have voted for him!) Hale Boggs, a long time Congressman from Louisiana, a Democrat. See Note 1. Gerald Ford, a Congressman from Michigan with a splendid reputation, and who later became president, a Republican. Allen W. Dulles, who was head of the CIA under Eisenhower, a Republican. John J. McCloy, a corporate executive and US High Commissioner to Germany just after WW2, a Democrat.

The staff of the Warren Commission numbered 18 people. All were young - 20s and 30s - and high achievers. About half were Phi Beta Kappa. Another third were Order of the Coif - the legal profession’s equal to the Phi Beta Kappa - and a few were both. Arlen Specter was one of those staffers. There were 20 investigators and most had experience in both public and private investigative agencies.

The Warren Commission was
composed of 45 of America’s BEST. That cannot be gainsaid! As was also the Nine Eleven Commission. I have read the 9/11 Commission Report. I have also read the Warren Commission Repot through at least 3 times and I have referred to it 100s of times over the years. I visited Dealy Plaza in the mid-1970s. I have never doubted the conclusions contained in the Report. History Channel has done two docu-dramas that show the Commission was RIGHT ON!

Yet, millions of people as smart as or smarter than I, doubt that the Report is correct in its major fundamental conclusion. One shooter, three shots. I cannot explain that. I offer one reason is that Americans tend to be very skeptical, including of those in authority whose motives are not always clear.

It is my opinion that only 3 entities stood to gain or had what we accept as sufficient motive, to want to murder JFK. 4 if you count LHO. The USSR. Kruschev had been bested by JFK in the 1962 Cuba Missile Crisis. Cuba. The Bay of Pigs attempt to overthrow Castro’s government was a fiasco. Subsequently, the CIA had tried to poison Castro. But Fidel was not dumb, The First Marine Division of the USMC could have wiped up the Castro Communist Revolution in a few days! And Fidel knew that. Get caught killing Kennedy and your gig is over!

Finally, the MAFIA. JFK had put his energetic brother Robert, in as Attorney General and he, Robert, had declared WAR on the Mafia. My shortest argument against that is the MAFIA would not have hired a marginal at best man to HIT Kennedy. More likely than not he would have failed the job and if captured, would have “ratted” out his employers. Crime bosses do not hire mentally unstable UNKNOWNS to do important jobs. End of my arguments.

Note 1.
The events surrounding Boggs' death have been the subject of much speculation, suspicion, and numerous conspiracy theories. These theories often center on his membership on the Warren Commission. Boggs dissented from the Warren Commission's majority who supported the single bullet theory. Regarding the single bullet theory, Boggs commented, "I had strong doubts about it." en.wikipedia.org...

[edit on 5/6/2009 by donwhite]



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 01:36 PM
link   
so your saying having believed the Warren Commission you have to believe the 9/11 commission...??

Interesting!!

You give 5 lines of on topic commentary, followed by 40 lines referencing jfk.,,.

Are you one of the aforementioned folk??


i respect your views...but doubt youve understood the 9/11 comm....especially given your above simplistic "summary"....

but hey, whatever....!!



posted on May, 6 2009 @ 02:04 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 





new topics

top topics



 
7
<<   2 >>

log in

join