ADL fails to Rebut any 9/11 conspiracy theory involving Israel or Mossad on their website

www.adl.org...

The most popular conspiratorial allegations include the following:



· Variations of this theory assert that the Mossad, the Israeli intelligence agency, was behind the 9/11 attacks; the "proof" is in the "five dancing Israelis" arrested on 9/11 who were allegedly celebrating as the Twin Towers burned. Today, the theory claims that the five Israelis were actually directing the attacks and began dancing when they realized that their mission of creating a "false flag" operation had been accomplished.

· Proponents of this theory claim that neo-conservative American officials of Jewish faith within the Bush Administration methodically worked out a plan, with the assistance of the Mossad, to carry out the attacks to benefit Israel. This theory alleges that these officials orchestrated a plan well before 9/11, with the goal of invading Iraq and other Middle Eastern countries to allow the U.S. and Israel to seize control of resources in that area."

· The "truth" about Israeli and Jewish involvement in the 9/11 attacks will not be allowed to emerge, claim conspiracy theorists, since Jews are or were in charge of the 9/11 Commission report and control the media and government.

I didn't see any type of rebuttal for these conspiracy theories, just putting the words 'truth' and 'proof' in quotes. Is that how they expect to fight the truth? By just putting certain words in quotations? To their credit, I give them respect for actually reporting on the dancing Israelis, but there's no rebuttal It's like they just want people to reject the theory on its head since it is beyond the mainstream way of thinking. I find their lack of even an attempt at rebutting this information to be entertaining.

Not surprising though. It seems the more you write about something, the more possibilities you give, the more holes in the stories there are the harder it is to prove or disprove one way or another.

Its called information overload.

There is a major push for 9/11 in a lot of different outlets, Reader's Digest, magazines, etc, The ADL is just going along with this trend, but their plan is to accurately point out what they think are anti-semitic theories, and I say accurately because they do give the facts, but then they just put a quote around certain words or use the word anti-semitic incorrectly to suggest that the theory is wrong without giving any reason or argument for why it's wrong except that it's anti-semitic, but that is nonsense because the Palestinians are Semitic people, but I don't see the ADL coming out in defense of Palestine.

Here's the MO for how the ADL operates, and it's not necessarily a bad thing.

1. The main rebuttal of all conspiracy theories is they are anti-semitic, even if the person saying them is Jewish or claims to have no hatred towards Jews.

2. Describe in clear detail exactly what the conspiracy theories are (know thy enemy? Or something else?)

What's so weird about all this, is that aside from point 1), calling the theories anti-semitic, there is really no scientific argument against them. The anti-semitic argument is the only argument. If anyone can show me a factual argument the ADL uses I will gladly admit I was wrong.

But what really amazes me is the ADL is actually the conspiracy theorists best friend! I mean so long as you get passed the "he professes anti-semitic theories despite his insistence he is not anti-semitic" in every other paragraph, you can actually learn a lot about conspiracy theories by reading the ADL.

Wow, the mainstream media can't report on the news this well.

example:

These range from an alleged Israeli art student spy ring keeping track of the hijackers before the attacks, to Israeli companies controlling U.S telecommunications, to Jewish owners wanting to gain financially from the destruction of the World Trade Center complex.

www.adl.org...

I mean that quote right there is more clear and concise than some posts I see on ATS. And I give the ADL for not exaggerating it too much, they actually nail the theories quite clearly. The only problem is after they say the truth, they then intentionally call it anti-semitic over and over again. So the ADL's operation is very clear: turn the truth into anti-semitism. However, all you need to do is know how they operate and then you can read the ADL and actually pick up information you may not have known previously.

reply to post by filosophia

I notice the Federation of British Herpetologists doesn't debunk the theory that the Royals are all Reptilians, either.

The ADL isn't trying to debunk any conspiracy theories in Decade of Deceit. They're trying to elucidate the anti-semitic narrative that has evolved around 9/11, so they describe that narrative and the persons associated with it. It was purely descriptive writing. They weren't trying to debunk anything.

There is really no need to debunk conspiracy theories about Israel or the Mossad, anyway, because we already have a better theory. Truthers call it the "official story." If truthers want their theories about the Mossad to be taken seriously, they have to put forward a Mossad theory that explains the evidence better than the official story. Maybe then ADL will get into the debunking business.

Some accusations are so outlandish that they do not merit being dignified with a response.

Originally posted by micmerci
Some accusations are so outlandish that they do not merit being dignified with a response.

You can pretend to be high and noble but you're only fooling yourself. If they are so outlandish they are entertaining to debunk. That's the whole fun of using the power of reason.

reply to post by filosophia


Oh, I'm not pretending.

reply to post by filosophia


The way this is supposed to work is that alternate theories of events are to have some evidence to support them. Coming up with alternate theories and then saying that they must have merit if they can't be disproven is faulty logic. This concept is missed by many truthers and that is what continues to fuel the 911 conspiracies.
As an example, one could say that invisible reptilians hacksawed and unbolted the columns while projecting holograms of planes and then scattered burning fuel and airplane parts. When it can't be disproved, the genius who came up with it claims that it must be true. The problem is that this can be done ad infinitum. All theories proposed that can't be disproved can't all be true; only one is true.
If the common 911 conspiracies depended on evidence, there would be no source of income for the truther sites and their leaders.

reply to post by pteridine


It's one thing to pretend like truthers don't have arguments, but the ADL doesn't even bother to offer any counter arguments other than the anti-semitic line. Who are you trying to fool? Trying to say there are no facts to 9/11 conspiracy theories. Maybe you can fool yourself or your pet dog but you're not fooling me.

The motto of ATS is deny ignorance, not Ignorantly deny.

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by filosophia

 

alternate theories of events are to have some evidence to support them.

So, do official theories not need evidence to support them? This basically sounds like your mentality

Coming up with alternate theories and then saying that they must have merit if they can't be disproven is faulty logic

They have merit because they are based on the truth, unlike the official story which is based on lies and omissions.

You act like there is no such thing as a 9/11 theory supported by evidence, as if people just make up 9/11 conspiracy theories off the top of their heads. This is perhaps the most monumental form of denial I have ever seen on ATS

As an example, one could say that invisible reptilians hacksawed and unbolted the columns while projecting holograms of planes and then scattered burning fuel and airplane parts.

But, give me one link that says all that? You may be able to find a link that mentions holograms but the hacksaw part is a step too far, so you see YOU ARE THE ONE MAKING STUFF UP WITHOUT ANY FACTUAL PROOF.

And besides, even if you can find some half-baked theory as you described on a website, that is not what mainstream truthers think. That's an obviously false theory that only you believe in.

If the common 911 conspiracies depended on evidence, there would be no source of income for the truther sites and their leaders.

This just shows how completely wrong you are when it comes to 9/11 researchers. If they did not base their findings on evidence, NO ONE WOULD SUPPORT THEM.

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by pteridine

 

Coming up with alternate theories and then saying that they must have merit if they can't be disproven is faulty logic

They have merit because they are based on the truth, unlike the official story which is based on lies and omissions.

You act like there is no such thing as a 9/11 theory supported by evidence, as if people just make up 9/11 conspiracy theories off the top of their heads. This is perhaps the most monumental form of denial I have ever seen on ATS

1. Why would ADL bother to rebut anything?
2. Alternate theories are based on speculation as there is no real evidence for any of them.
3. People do make up theories off the top of....some body part or other. They don't trust the government or can't believe that something happened because it is "impossible" so they come up with some half-baked, poorly thought out theory. When taken to task, they refuse to answer questions that would cause them to take a stand and defend it; probably because they can't defend it or want things both ways. You were guilty of this when I asked you if you thought Shanksville was a crash, a shootdown, or a fake.
The "most monumental form of denial.... on ATS" are the daily threads of partially understood material or quotes taken out of context by those who have a psychological need for a 911 conspiracy. These desperate souls have no standards for evidence, generally are clueless about technical things, and make statements of incredulity like "buildings don't fall like that" because they've watched many buildings hit by airliners collapse. They also like superlatives like "absolute proof" and even "most monumental."

Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli
reply to post by filosophia

 

They're trying to elucidate the anti-semitic narrative that has evolved around 9/11, so they describe that narrative and the persons associated with it.

anti-semtic

Originally posted by pteridine

Originally posted by filosophia
reply to post by pteridine

 

Coming up with alternate theories and then saying that they must have merit if they can't be disproven is faulty logic

They have merit because they are based on the truth, unlike the official story which is based on lies and omissions.

You act like there is no such thing as a 9/11 theory supported by evidence, as if people just make up 9/11 conspiracy theories off the top of their heads. This is perhaps the most monumental form of denial I have ever seen on ATS

1. Why would ADL bother to rebut anything?
2. Alternate theories are based on speculation as there is no real evidence for any of them.
3. People do make up theories off the top of....some body part or other. They don't trust the government or can't believe that something happened because it is "impossible" so they come up with some half-baked, poorly thought out theory. When taken to task, they refuse to answer questions that would cause them to take a stand and defend it; probably because they can't defend it or want things both ways. You were guilty of this when I asked you if you thought Shanksville was a crash, a shootdown, or a fake.
The "most monumental form of denial.... on ATS" are the daily threads of partially understood material or quotes taken out of context by those who have a psychological need for a 911 conspiracy. These desperate souls have no standards for evidence, generally are clueless about technical things, and make statements of incredulity like "buildings don't fall like that" because they've watched many buildings hit by airliners collapse. They also like superlatives like "absolute proof" and even "most monumental."

1. Why would ADL feel the need to infringe on someone's freedom of speech?
2. Same can be said about the official story, it's based on speculation
3.Yes, the government makes things up too.

"psychological need for 9/11 conspiracy" I think the only psychological need comes from those who don't want to think their government betrayed them.

reply to post by filosophia




If you believe that you government betrayed you, how did it do so at Shanksville? Was it a crash, a shootdown, or a fake?

an interesting thing I've noticed on this website is that the greater majority of those who believe in the official story of 9/11 also believe that we should support israel and and it's zionist movement and the oposite is true of the truthers......in fact, i've noticed that they use the same circumlocuted manner of debating both israel and 9/11. I posted a thread in order to do a poll of this very phenomenon and the moderator moved it to the trash saying there was nothing to discuss about that subject.....i guess the mod didn't want these two facts put together but I thought it very interesting......

reply to post by patternfinder


Maybe you didn't find a pattern but let your own feelings cloud your data gathering. Many people don't connect the two.

Originally posted by pteridine
reply to post by patternfinder

 

Maybe you didn't find a pattern but let your own feelings cloud your data gathering. Many people don't connect the two.

I don't have any "feelings" about it, i kind of don't like people much anyways and think that whatever happens to those that don't care are deserving of the consequences of their apathy...just because most people haven't put it together doesn't mean it's not true....sometimes it takes someone to point things out to them before they give it any real thought.....

Originally posted by patternfinder

...just because most people haven't put it together doesn't mean it's not true....sometimes it takes someone to point things out to them before they give it any real thought.....

Just because some people have theories doesn't mean that the theories are true and the correlations are valid.