##ATTENTION ALL 9/11 POSTERS##

Associative Property

reply to post by GoldenFleece

The same could be said about those who spend similar amounts of time promoting one or more conspiracy theories.

In fact, speaking personally, I often wonder if that isn't itself part of the conspiracy: controlled opposition. Plant and promote stories that are easily discredited and then, by association, discredit anything considered unorthodox, "fringe" or "out of the mainstream". Bury the truth in all the noise.

It's a sword that cuts both ways, and that's why we -- each one of us, on our own behalf -- are the only people we can trust to honestly evaluate the evidence presented.

The fact that we are all fallible and subject to the influence of our own prejudices doesn't help things, but it's still better than having such decisions made for us by totalitarians.

It's not perfect, but it's the best we've got.

reply to post by esdad71

My question to you would be this however...Since ATSNN puts this in an 9/11 Conspiracy forum would that mean that they endorse the official story and they are placating the Truthers or does is mean they are trying to promote denying ignorance. I only ask this based on your response.With this latest 'rule' I am not so sure anymore. '

No, I don’t think ATS is endorse the official story or placating the Truthers

or does is mean they are trying to promote denying ignorance. '

No, ATS is not trying to deny ignorance; if that were the case then ATS would not last long if it did not allow both sides of the argument to be heard.

ATS has not and I am sure will never take sides in a conspiracy theory, that I am aware of.

The only thing the OP has made clear is the behavior of ”any posters” which includes you, me, Truthers, OS believers, Trolls, everyone, who chooses to ignore the T& C and continues to attack other posters by a continue of disrupted behavior such as ridiculing, insulting, name calling, Trolling, ganging up on posters, shouting buy using all caps, Baiting posters, derailing thread topics, avoiding thread Topics all together, and the likes…

Where do you get the idea that ATS is trying to take a side on a 911-discussion board? It’s all about people behavior and all ATS is trying to do is to help keep the 911 threads civil and promote courtesy which many 911 posters have seem to have forgotten, or they just don’t care. ATS has had enough and is laying down the law, so to speak.

Originally posted by Majic
Associative Property

reply to post by GoldenFleece

 

The same could be said about those who spend similar amounts of time promoting one or more conspiracy theories.

Please show me one "truther" (I also dislike that term) who spends ALL their free time ONLY on the 9/11 forum -- every single day, month after month and year after year.

You can't because they don't exist. Only professional debunkers would spend their lives defending false-flag terrorism, endless war, government lies and evil.

I challenge ANYONE to watch the new documentary Core of Corruption and tell me that 9/11 wasn't an absolute 100% inside job.

The film's introductory description is especially appropriate:

Countless millions of people are being manipulated and lied to by a network of individuals within government that work on behalf of private interests. These individuals were involved in the terrorist attacks of September 11th. Many of those same figures are connected to historical events that have shaped our understanding of government crime. For instance, the Iran-Contra affair involved many figures that showed up in the 9/11 attacks...

[edit on 21-12-2009 by GoldenFleece]

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
but what is ATS doing about professional 9/11 debunkers? By professional, I'm referring to those who spend ALL their free time ONLY on the 9/11 forum -- 24/7, day after day, month after month and year after year. Some even admit that they post from US military bases.

So what should ATS do about those CT's that do the same - they appear to be foreign or opposition agents, only interested in trying to discredit the USA government or past administration, not at all interested in the truth!

[edit on 21/12/09 by dereks]

Originally posted by dereks
So what should ATS do about those CT's that do the same - they appear to be foreign or opposition agents, only interested in trying to discredit the USA government or past administration, not at all interested in the truth!

Is that really what you think? That the 9/11 truth movement is somehow made up of "foreign or opposition agents" who are "trying to discredit the US government?"

Do you really think anyone would accuse their own government of a heinous mass-murder act of terrorism because they didn't like a previous administration or they didn't have enough evidence to prove it beyond any reasonable doubt?

Really?

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
Do you really think anyone would accuse their own government of a heinous mass-murder act of terrorism

That is exactly what ct's apparently believe.... so now do you see how silly the arguments of those pushing their conspiracy theories about 9/11 actually are?

[edit on 21/12/09 by dereks]

My "only thought" on this entire thread is that these rules are not new...

so IF they have "always" existed...then why were they not being enforced properly...and enforced on the whole, instead of the ones with views that conflicted with the general consensus

I would like to see some more intensive moderation in the 9/11 threads in regards to character attacks, but again, in the respects that EVERYONE is held accountable to the same standards...or NO ONE is

thanks be to tetragrammaton

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
Courtesy and decorum are all fine and dandy, but what is ATS doing about professional 9/11 debunkers? By professional, I'm referring to those who spend ALL their free time ONLY on the 9/11 forum -- 24/7, day after day, month after month and year after year. Some even admit that they post from US military bases.

What would you do without them? Have you considered that?

Plenty of 911 forums out there - all with v i a g r a and s ingles ads taking up most of the sites now though.

Face it: where else but here at ATS are you even given a hearing?

Originally posted by dereks

Originally posted by GoldenFleece
Do you really think anyone would accuse their own government of a heinous mass-murder act of terrorism

That is exactly what ct's apparently believe.... so now do you see how silly the arguments of those pushing their conspiracy theories about 9/11 actually are?

You failed to quote the rest of my post:

[if they didn't have] enough evidence to prove it beyond any reasonable doubt?

The evidence is now beyond overwhelming and incontrovertible...

...no matter how uncomfortable it makes you feel or what mental gymnastics you employ to continue denying it.




[edit on 21-12-2009 by GoldenFleece]

Originally posted by GoldenFleece

The evidence is now beyond overwhelming and incontrovertible...

Yes, that the USA government was not involved in 9/11.

There is no evidence whatsoever supporting the CT's claims of explosives, space born lasers, mini nuclear bombs, thermate, pod carrying aircraft, missile firing aircraft, UFO's watching the crashes, radio controlled planes, cruise missiles or US government involvement etc etc. that ct's claim.

Originally posted by dereks
There is no evidence whatsoever supporting the CT's claims

Take my challenge.

Go ahead, it's right here.

Or don't -- it doesn't really matter.


[edit on 21-12-2009 by GoldenFleece]

Stay on Topic

This thread is a staff announcement to let members know that staff is now keeping the 9/11 forum under tighter moderation.

This thread is not an invitation to a discussion on who what or why caused 9/11, so please don't post them here, it's Off Topic. members can post there opinions on 9/11 to there proper threads, and not derail the subject of this thread.

Thanks.

Letters, We Get Letters

We're seeing feedback from multiple members (including some who have received warnings and post bans) that suggests we are still not being strict enough with T&C enforcement in this forum.

In light of that, I urge everyone reading this to please be on your best behavior, ALERT posts that violate the rules (particularly as explained here) and avoid making the problem worse by responding in kind.

We generally try to give members the benefit of the doubt and avoid sudden changes in enforcement standards, but at this point, fair warning has been amply given, and ignorance of the rules will be no excuse.

To those who, despite so many repeated warnings, still see fit to post personal commentary, ridicule, insults, rudeness, resistance to moderation and general snarkiness in this forum, please be advised that post removals, large point deductions, post bans and account bans are likely to come your way without further notice.

To everyone who has managed to avoid falling into the childish, tit-for-tat schoolyard mentality which has been such a problem, has successfully resisted the various forms of baiting and has insisted on maintaining high standards of discourse even in the face of extreme ignorance, thanks.

You're the best.







N.B. One last time, for those who may have overlooked it:

8) Right of Community Management This is a privately owned discussion board community. The Owners and senior moderator staff reserve the right to take action against any member who is deemed to be devoted purely to disruption, whose actions represent behavior contrary to community building, or whose content is contrary to the core ideals of AboveTopSecret.com. This action may include complete banning of your username and IP address. The owners of The Above Network, LLC reserve the right to eliminate or edit any content deemed inappropriate for the discussion boards, news network or any affiliated sites. The owners of The Above Network, LLC reserve the right to establish limits on topics that may be discussed if, in their opinion, the discussion of those topics attract an audience that is counterproductive to maintaining the ideals set forth in these Terms & Conditions.

I don't recommend any further challenges on this point.

Click here to learn more about this warning.

reply to post by freedomandliberty

ooo the first mod kill...

looks like they are not bluffing

and that's a good thing!

Thanks for bringing civility back to this forum!

The sad part is that this should not be needed. To say ATS is not here to deny ignorance is another funny observation. Have you read the site tagline?

In this thread, with posters unnamed, you can see the attitude that is not needed since they cannot hold a 'why' conversation on the topic at hand but must challenge ANYONE who does not believe to take them on. This is what needs to be avoided and it was explained by the mod.

The forum suffers from NADS. It is entertaining now but is sad to see the same posts. I think instead of warning people, you must earn the right to post in that forum and maybe we would not have the same conspiracy rehashed on both sides.

I do hope that it stops some silliness but if it cannot be avoided in a wanring post, is there any light at the end of the tunnel?

Isn't it safe to say that one side of this debate, more then the other has been egging on a fight by taking very slanderous cheap shots at figure heads who are out there on the front lines putting everything on the line to get the truth out there. I don't know how this sophomoric drivel goes by unchecked? I should be seeing multiple warning labels under some of these cheerleaders avatars... and why is it that these guys feel the need to stoop so low? ...maybe out of desperation? ...maybe as pointed out earlier, to purely create noise to drowned out, frustrate and/or exhaust one side into walking away? This appears to be the over all prevailing strategy at play.

I appreciate the mods stepping up with the billy clubs, but i urge you to make notes of which side is inciting the fights and focus the bulk of your clubbing there. I have seen many great posters here get sucked in to the mind games these characters play, and unfairly get hit with warnings... when the warning really should have been pinned to the inciter/igniter.

So in short, i don't think i'm out of line here in this suggestion, but you have to do some profiling here. One side is clearly going out of their way to use every deceiving underhanded tactic in the book, to get the other side to come out swigging.

Side Out

From what I'm seeing, the two sides are clearly delineated:

1. Those who are on the side of discussing the issues courteously and respecting the rights of others to disagree, and

2. Those on the side of habitually derailing topical discussion, whose days on ATS are nearing their end.

My best advice: team up with the first and avoid being dragged down by the second.

Being On The Right Side Of Moderator Bias

I'm seeing accusations of uneven enforcement cropping up here and there, so I thought this might help:

Why Me?

No matter what your opinions about 9/11 may be, it is natural to be more sensitive to how you and others who agree with you are treated than how those who disagree with you are treated. It is also extremely easy to infer a sinister motive when you feel persecuted, even when there is none.

In other words, while moderators are human and therefore indeed prone to bias (and that's something we're constantly watching for in each other), members are also prone to see bias where it doesn't necessarily exist.

If we assume mod bias is running rampant, and that it's targeted against your particular point of view, the simplest and most effective response is to follow the rules.

If a moderator takes action against you when it is clearly not justified, it stands out like a sore thumb, and is exactly the sort of thing that should be reported to the staff. On the other hand, if you are breaking the rules, claiming moderator bias is utterly pointless, as explained in the link above.

In the case of the 9/11 Conspiracies forum, the biggest problem at hand is not differing opinions about 9/11. Different opinions are very much expected and offering members a place to express, compare and discuss them is the reason the forum exists in the first place.

Courteous discussion is not exclusive nor unique to any "side" (see: false dichotomy) of the issue. Enforcing it is neutral to the subject.

The prevailing bias among moderators in our forums is in favor of courteous discussion and against name-calling, ridicule, insults, abuse, harassment and anything else that disrupts topical discussion.

If you share this bias and are willing to post accordingly, you're on the right side.

reply to post by Majic


Majic, i appreciate the effort you have made to set the record straight and i think that in many cases what you have proposed is exactly what is going on, and the remedy you have suggested is on target.

What we are talking about is one and the same yet different. It's not a bias that i see... but a blind spot. The best way i can put it is in metaphorical terms. If you have a kid(s), with deliberate malice intent consistently antagonizing/egging-on/derailing others on a school bus, that kid is destine to get a tongue whipping eventually. In these cases, the mods are in the position of a bus driver. They turn around or look up in the rear view mirror occasionally barking "cut it out back there" and when things get really out of hand, they have a tendency to make snap judgments, singling out the last kid they saw throw a punch... while being completely oblivious to who initiated the feud, matter of fact it's worst then just being oblivious it's not even caring, all they care about is ending the fight... and what is lost is the opportunity to see that real justice has been served.

These guys are very well versed (possibly trained) at pull strings and pushing buttons, in a way that is not easily detected from anyone outside of the trenches. What i am suggesting is to keep a very close eye on these antagonists. If you can stop their orchestrated delivery of dirty tricks, you have in essence fixed the 911 forum... and avoided having great prolific posters who have a meaningful purpose unfairly take a fall.