Simply put...Topics that do not belong on ATS.

reply to post by cordonna


that is a conspiracy topic that involves homosexuality - not a homosexual topic.

reply to post by alyosha1981


I challenge you to read this paragraph (quoted below) without feeling the need to rub your eyes , shake your head and slap yourself a couple of times:

"No vehicle shall be turned so as to proceed in the opposite direction within an intersection, or upon any street in a business district, or upon a freeway, expressway or controlled-access highway, or where authorized signs are erected to prohibit such movement, or at any other location unless such movement can be made with reasonable safety to other users of the street and without interfering with the safe operation of any traffic that may be affected by such movement."

Source: legalcareers.about.com...

This is the feeling I got when I read your post.

reply to post by notsympl


Hahaha wow, really? Really? I could also argue that those two are the exact same thing, because they are. What do you think about this one?

www.gayconspiracy.info...

reply to post by cordonna


you could argue all you want.
the fact is you are bringing up perfect examples reguarding the OP.
these topics are relevant and have theirs roots in theories that are open to discussion and can be supported by evidence - not just empty statements filled with rhetorical opinions/emotions....
you, my friend, are 100% in your examples. but, they too support the OP. regardless of the content, there is some food for thought within them and their roots are in conspiracy, even if their fruit is of homosexuality - no pun intended.

[edit on 6-1-2010 by notsympl]

Well I agree with everything you said...

Except this one:

Gender/transgender/gay topics- These topics are sensitive to many as thy pertain to the livelihood of those included in this category. Sexual orientation should have no bearing on topics concerning major conspiracy's. People are people...bottom line. When concerning the religious aspects of said topic the burden is placed on the "normal" person rather then the homosexual or the trans gender individual to "defend" their beliefs against the latter. This argument has no place in the conspiracy related world that is "ATS"

Now we have a whole board, actually a few of them dedicated to political discussion which doesn't always revolve around conspiracies. This topic above is a big player in today's politics and is an important topic in human rights as well as civil rights discussions.

And there are some conspiracy related topics that would include this particular line of discussion as well. Such as the attempt to divide and conquer the populace to fight amongst themselves while the NWO quietly work their plan for world domination.

I'm generalising ofcourse, but it goes just goes to show that even if these topics make people uncomfortable and more often than not lead to a hate fest on these boards, it's just an indication of extremely effective way of making us hate each other for nothing.

~Keeper

It is possible, and quite easy, to find conspiracy in virtually any topic. While I understand that most people believe ATS is for UFOs and stuff...but I like it most as a sounding board and education medium for ANY free speech. Anyone who tries to stifle free speech does so for a reason, and that reason can be considered a conspiracy.

KEEP ATS FREE!

If you want to move certain topics to other areas...go for it. However, if I want to debate, discuss, etc. such things as Obama's place of birth...I don't appreciate a U2U by the admins suggesting (or demanding) that the topic be dropped. When I (and everyone else) received that message...my first thought was "why are they trying to end discussions?".

Anyway...with too many restrictions on WHAT can be discussed, ATS looses (in my opinion) much of it's worth as a tool of education and information.

[edit on 1/6/2010 by WeAreAWAKE]

Originally posted by WeAreAWAKE

However, if I want to debate, discuss, etc. such things as Obama's place of birth ... I don't appreciate a U2U by the admins suggesting (or demanding) that the topic be dropped. When I (and everyone else) received that message...my first thought was "why are they trying to end discussions?".

Erm, this is slightly off topic I guess, but what on earth are you talking about?
I certainly never received such a U2U from ATS staff.

There are a few subjects which are understandably taboo on ATS, some in precisely because of the OP's concerns regarding younger members, others for legal issues but certainly not THAT one. Hundreds of threads on the BC subject, ATS News casts, podcasts etc ... it certainly isn't a forbidden topic.

Perhaps I am misunderstanding you ...



[edit on 6 Jan 2010 by schrodingers dog]

reply to post by alyosha1981


All you can do is treat it like Cable TV. Most of it is junk so only turn on the channels you are interested in and ignore the others as if they were not there. I sympathize fully.

I've always found the best stuff on random searches through the threads. Many of the best never get flagged or see the light of day. Those little ignored threads are full of gems. The ones posted to share information by people who don't care about flags and other nonsense contain the real information. Not always, but often that is true.

reply to post by drock905


I couldn't agree more. I think some threads posted on here are funny........the ones that don't interest me I ignore, it's that simple.

reply to post by alyosha1981


this is a reply directly to the op, sorry if it had been stated before, but!

Even though I am guilty myself, I believe this particular thread fits the OP's description of a thread that "does not belong on ats" beeing that it is a front page topic that had NOTHING to do with conspiracy, simply wasting front page space if you ask me.

In the word's of a comic god.... " Well excussssseeee meeeeeee " I stand corrected, and will obey....lol

I like the way ATS lets members express themselves through their post there are a lot of serious threads and if I were to read only those threads id be very depressed. I like the odd ball threads they make me laugh and giggle, yes I know, you think if I wanted to have a laugh and giggle I should go to a silly giggly web site. I haven’t been here for long, but I’ve been on allot. So thank you for all the odd ball posts they make my day x x x

[edit on 6/1/10 by Whateva69]

reply to post by Whateva69


Here, Here... what he said, after all, who know's perhap's in years to come we shall find out, that our mere posting here, was a vast conspiracy....hmmmm

[edit on 6-1-2010 by freetree64]

One man's trash is another man's treasure.

Same goes for female type persons.

You don't like that idea? Call the waaaahhh-mbulance.

Originally posted by alyosha1981
Celebrity issues-

I disagree w/ this b/c celebrities are used to further the agenda. Celebrities bring up the issues of mind control, replaCIAment, manipulation & control of the entertainment industry, & other topics that are important & sometimes over-looked.

reply to post by alyosha1981



I may agree with some points you made my friend. But you also must remember that ATS is MADE of SOCIAL INRERACTION. It is only human nature and worth for some to be more respected for their dedication than others. ATS, like life, is all about what you put in to it.



BUT NEVER forget EVERY MEMBER is importnat in their own way...


PS: Hope your having a great 2010!!



[edit on 1/7/2010 by jkrog08]

I cannot agree with the OP that when it comes to transgender/gay issues the "normal" person (!) has to defend themselves from the gays. From my perspective exactly the opposite is true. It is the gays that more often must defend themselves against charges of having a "gay agenda" and recruiting kids into their so-called "lifestyle". I usually find that several of these threads are not started by gay people, and they often run into pages. Because of some repetition in the subject matter (at least for me as a bit of longer term member) I'm no longer immediately attracted to them, but when I see what I regard as fallacious arguments being pushed I am still promted to comment. I ignore them when they make the same points, but I cannot complain about them because newer members would also like to address those issues.
The fact is that "conspiracy" can be in the mind of the beholder, and both the homosexualists and heterosexualists feel that the other has an agenda. I mean must I refrain from defending my point of view just so that what you call "normal" persons don't have to feel defensive? The issue seems tied to left-wing/right-wing politics, and you can't bar politics from ATS. Furthermore powerful fundamentalsit groups have allegedly meddled in countires like Uganda to set dangerous precedents of anti-gay witch-hunts. If that's not "conspiracy", then I'm not sure what is.
I'm not sure how resolved the issue of race is in the US - take the issue of Obama, the so-called "lying African" (where was he born?) and supposed closet Muslim. That could be seen as an issue of race or celebrity. Similarly porn is relevant to those who feel there is an agenda against traditional values, although I must have missed those recent posts.
Although you don't state specifically what you do want to see, I can only assume there would be a greater focus on the supernatural?
Well, gay issues reflect the wider issue in society and it can be found on other conspiracy sites, such as rense.com. Conspiracists like David Icke have such a grand view of all-encompassing conspiracy networks, that race and celebrties are issues involved in social control. I just feel that people sometimes omit making the connection in their posts, and so what could be conspiracy discussion ends up as social commentary. So thats what I get from your post and it's a nice reminder.
Although there are some guidelines on what defines conspiracy, they are far from watertight, and I think many of thses suggestion posts raise the question of a "conspiracy canon" by which topics can be justified. There are certainly some "conspiracy experts" who have detailed knowledge on the more obscure topics, and I'm partially here to learn from them. But it's also the threads on which everyone can have an opinion that gather posts, and nobody likes to see a thread disappearing without comment, so one does follow what seems to work. Sometimes I'm still surprised by what gets popular reponses, so a topic on homophobia in general may get lots of posts, while a thread on the shadowy "Fellowship" group in Uganda gets nothing - simply because it falls outside most people's knowledge and expertise.

[edit on 7-1-2010 by halfoldman]

I will not argue anything specifically, but as a newer member:

I started coming here, because I do not talk about the topics alledgedly discussed on ATS with my real life friends.

Its kinda of a let-down, when people post nonsense like the "ATS sucks" threads. I want to read about science, space, ufo's, astronomy and things the government is hiding from us.

Not about Britany Murphy passing away. I can see that on regular news.

reply to post by alyosha1981

A zoo has an African lion, the whitehouse has a lying African.

i find that very very distastefull..

more so because your stupid enough to have it as your sig..

I do often wonder what makes mankind tick .. as it is pathetic .

i mean a zoo? so you eqaute ZOO with the WHITEHOUSE yes? and LYING when a LION dose not in fact lie DOES IT? yet AFRICAN does because its the same place BLACK people come from

nice i like it

you sad little little man

I was in fact going to post about the topic untill i did in fact read your sig..

undertones of a racist biggot if i ever did see one.. and i shall tell you why my good sir.

Sataire is based on facts. basic ones... now if you wish to make a funny comment about a aspect of them then please do not use racial undertones

just because your fellow idiots are not smart enought to understand the very sig you have.. we are not all as stupid as you may think and let me show you again . as i am english and you do in fact speak it. all be it a version even the english define as "BROKEN"

When one is trying to make a point as you did so.. as

A zoo has an African lion

this means .. IN ENGLISH you are useing ZOO and AFRICAN


as your target joke or satire..

then you do this.!

the whitehouse has a lying African.

lets put them above each other in grammatics in english ..

A zoo has an African lion
the whitehouse has a lying African.

Now the first letters and words are not the point - A and THE as they are not descripions but statments in of them selvs..

ZOO
whitehouse

They are in fact the "link" of the givin smart arsed remark or "joke"

then you see we have a problem with 1 word here

LION

it has NOTHING to do with what you in fact said! its a facllicy to suggest becuase of this

lying

lying and LION may sound the same i give you that but "in its context" has nothing to do with it.. its very imature to do so when you factor in this part!

African

thus you wonder why people who are white have no clue they are in fact being racsit..

its not they are its they just lack the education and understanding of words and the reason why they are saying such BS in the first place.

so please just for me.. remove your racist idiotic sig.

becuase thats what it in fact is.. anyone with half a brain could tell you thats a joke about a black person

and not the similarites with a lion or africa



just so you know



[edit on 7-1-2010 by 13579]

Originally posted by 13579

A zoo has an African lion, the whitehouse has a lying African.

i find that very very distastefull..

more so because your stupid enough to have it as your sig..

I do often wonder what makes mankind tick .. as it is pathetic .

becuase thats what it in fact is.. anyone with half a brain could tell you thats a joke about a black person

and not the similarites with a lion or africa

just so you know

[edit on 7-1-2010 by 13579]

And therein you have the sum that is the American psyche, the OP wishes to constrain those who would moot topics that are not to his liking while using his "right to free speech" to lampoon and cast aspersions at your president.

Is Obama "black"? no, in fact Obama is a shade of gray or perhaps gray/brown, African? no, multi-ethnic? perhaps. Lying? no, your president is just the figurehead of the government, steered to be the spokesperson you all watch on your TV.

Be discerning, read those threads that interest you, your head is a receptacle, fill it with things than make you go hmmmmm.