911 OS Debate Facts, Bring sources, not Opinions.

New members on ATS who have never done any real research on 911 OS and believe in the OS “need” to do some real research.
Having an opinion is one thing, stating a fact is another. Facts need to be supported by sources NOT by opinions.

This is my take on debating any issue not just 911.

If you are going to debate an issues with a person please bring creditable internet sources to back your claim.
Leave out the insults.
Leave out proven disinformation, this is not a game.
If you state an opinion then please state it as your opinion.
Opinions are not facts.
Leave out your emotions when debating your topic, stick to the facts and the topic.


What I find amazing is all the “creditable evidences” that many ATS members have uncovered, that proved the OS is all a fabrication.
Perhaps if these OS believers would spend a little more time researching from creditable websites that have professionals, and creditable experts who have done scientific analysis, mathematics and hear what expert pilots and engineers and firemen have to say, and research the hiding records that have been release from FOIA in all areas of 911.

In my opinion, the OS is pretty much a proven lie.

My advices for newbie, who still believe in the OS is to take your time researching 911 it is painful and an emotional rollercoaster ride, you will gradually see the truth.
For me it took several years before I was able to put all the shocking evidences together that verified 911 was an inside job.

Researching 911 opened many doors to many events for me, several years down the road, after the truth started to sink in. I realized I had been asleep most of my life and I didn’t realize how ignorant I really was, about the Press, government secrecies, military secrecies, propaganda in America, big corporations and the strangle hold they have on congress, and rigged elections, I had no idea how corrupt everything is.

Trust no one, everyone tells lie, “everyone” the government, FBI are no exceptions, the evidences, and truth, speaks for itself and cannot be disputed.

So here is a question should everyone bring sources when debating any issue?

I believe they should, if the posters cannot validate his or her claim then it should be considered unproven, or opinionated.

S & F

I am pleased you started this thread as hopefully it will help others look into the events of 9/11 with an open mind and do a little research for themselves before closing their minds to the possibility that horrific events are not what they always seem and that governments do lie to people.

It was only about a year ago that someone mentioned that 9/11 was an inside job and at the time it sounded too horrific to believe, so I crawled the internet and researched as much material as possible and came to my own conclusion - the more you look into it, the more questions there are, it really is frightening.

I would be interested to know if anybody on ATS personally knew any of the victims on any of those flights and would like to know what your opinion is of what the truth is, that is if it's not too painful for you to talk about?







[edit on 23-1-2010 by findlesticks]

This is one of the reason I started this thread what I found quite disturbing is most OS believers are convinced that the United States government does not tell lies.
In my years of research, I found inconsistencies repeatedly in every government report concerning 911.

Yet, the OS believers refuse to even knowledge this. Either they have never really read all the reports and compared the inconsistencies, or they are ignoring them. If that is the case then one has to realize they are in denial and cannot except the fact that their government is covering something and cannot keep their stories straight.

I am not picking on the OS believers because of their beliefs, when I ask these posters to back their OS topics or claims, most will give you gov.org websites as their proof or they will not give you anything, but the same old ridiculing and insult we see all the time.

In my opinion, most people who have done years of research know 911 was an inside job.
The problem we have here is (We The People) allowed these criminals to investigate themselves, and they were sloppy at covering up some of their mistakes.

Originally posted by Swampfox46_1999

Anyone/anything that doesnt support your beliefs, you routinely declare a 'lie' or misinformation.

Thats funny we can say the same thing about you and others who still believe the OS even though its been proven to be full of holes.





[edit on 23-1-2010 by REMISNE]

Hello,
I have an opinion on the matter. And no, I'm not an expert. And even before I became internet savvy, (which I'm not) I knew that those buildings had to have fallen toward the side that the structural integrity would be the weakest- if it were to fall at all. But instead, they both toppled straight down, all the way down. And building 7? Maybe you can explain to me the physics of that occuring?
OK. So that got my attention...Iraq has weapons of mass destruction? "Let's roll." Only, there were no WMD's. Did you see in Saddam's eyes the way he held his beard? Yes, he was to answer for his crimes against his own people, but what I saw in his eyes was; "He was being made to pay for a crime he was actually innocent of." He had nothing to do with the toppling of our towers, for he was hanged before he could be tried, if Dubya was gonna even pursue it. I didn't follow the MSM as closely... Isn't it obvious we are occupying an oil-rich nation? What is the key-word in that sentence? Isn't or wasn't Dubya an oil magnate? Or, maybe he wanted to get some licks-in on behalf of his Father?
You know? The only reason why, in my opinion this has become so trivial is because not all of us are governed by our US Constitution alone, some of us have the capacity to look beyond what our instructors teach us. All signs on the road are saying this is a koleptocracy we are up against. Is not the writing on the wall? I see the elephant, don't you?
My point is that in my opinion, if it wasn't so trivial, I'd have the answer as to why my money is being spent to wage war-like operations I simply do not believe in. I don't believe the MSM. Because of the trivia. I'm not being informed, I'm being played for a fool, and I don't appreciate it. Peace and love to all.

OK, got a question here. I firmly believe flight 93 was shot down. There is a lot of circumstantial evidence to support it without a doubt. In short what seems like "evidence" to some really isn't in reality and to others who just don't believe and that needs to be clarified up front. So if we cited & posted pics, docs etc to support CE is that opinion, speculation or theory in the context of this thread's proposals?

Circumstantial evidence is not direct evidence from a witness who saw or heard something. Circumstantial evidence is a fact that can be used to infer another fact.

Indirect evidence that implies something occurred but doesn't directly prove it, proof of one or more facts from which one can find another fact, proof of a chain of facts and circumstances indicating that the person is either guilty or not guilty.

The law makes no distinction between the weight given to either direct or circumstantial evidence. I think some on ATS needs to understand this.

Originally posted by impressme
If there are no creditable sources to a story being presented by anyone, then it is most likely untrue, don’t you agree?

Problem is that people like swampfox do not even know what credable sources are.