Okay, as of late, I've been studying both sides of the 9/11 debate. Both provide good info, sources, and evidence. What bothers me is when I will be
following two or three persons in a debate and they will each continually ignore some of the material that is presented to them. BOTH Debunkers and
Truthers do this; this is not wholly deliberate, nor is it oriented to one side of the debate. Another thing that bothers me is when some individuals
will resort to name-calling and using inappropriate adjectives like 'idiotic' and 'stupid'. I would like to see this eliminated and replaced with
praise idealically, or at least avoided altogether. Afterall, not all
Debunkers are paid disinfo agents and not all
incoherent nutjobs. Both sides have persons who are less informed and are opinionated, and persons who are highly educated and can independently back
up their claims.
I would like for a few of the common Debunker/Truthers and any willing new-comer to provide an explaination to all of the questions raised about their
posts. Try to provide evidence that covers every gap in the equation, if at all possible. I don't like reading 9/11 threads where I see a good
question and it is not acknowledged. Especially when it is quoted and brought back up, just for the Debunker/Truther to say 'Debunkers/Truthers
deliberately ignore this because they are unable to explain it'
and so on and so forth.
Now, any Debunker/Truther willing to organize posts that tackle every question they can possibly think of in their report, and without creating great
generalizations and accusations of the other side of the debate, am I very happy to read, consider, and engage in your constructive debate. I cannot
stop you if you wish to continue the endless cycle of obvious mistakes i.e. 'ignoring' important questions. I can just advise that you go over every
possible question you can think of as to why/why not 9/11 was a terrorist attack/inside job.
I am actually hopeful and excited to see what you all will come up with. I have been following 9/11 for quite some time now, and have seen the best of
both arguments. Which is what they should not be. I understand that it is a touchy subject, and that it gets people pretty rowed up, but it is these
same emotions and reactions that cause the intent of Debunkers/Truthers to be fogged up. It is easier to understand what others are saying if you are
a little less biased as well. If you see it from both sides of the argument, as I have, the opposite side seems unbelievable and you don't understand
why they think such things. On the other hand, if you be open and willing to accept each outcome (terrorist attack/inside job) as a
, then you won't find yourself constantly missing the point.
Well, have at it! I can't wait to see someone answer some of my longing questions regarding both sides of the debate. Give it you best shot and try
not to get caught up in a knot!
lol, that was dumb I know. Btw, I am not stating whether I am a Debunker/Truther. You can add this to the debate if you want
. Lets see if we can
put an end to the struggle once and for all, and I will either admit defeat, or accept a long anticipated victory. Like I said, I don't bias myself,
so I stay clear of accepting a label, and rather constantly put things into question until it is not possible any longer. It's a little idealistic to
hope that the subject is put to rest in this thread, but hey, you gotta keep trying right?
Tell me something I didn't know,
Please read my post below before adding any replies. Thanks.
[edit on 9/22/2009 by Psycontagious]