9/11 Disbelievers

[Mia]

I am tired of the "conspiracy theorist" label being thrown every time I point out the anomalies in the Official Story on the terror attacks of September 11, 2001.

I link it to a tyranny in the center of the US government, and say so forthrightly.

Anybody else want to form a private group around unfettered discussion of this catalyzing event of our time? http://www.volconvo.com/forums/showt...201#post115201

Then Sean can have us off his front page at the same time we are able to freely discuss the approaching tyranny...

I'm in.

It's not conspiracy theory to use logic and facts to question a ridiculous story!

[Mia]

So you guys have decided to not have this forum as a general conspiracy/alter-news group but rather a 9/11 theory-focused forum? The latter would be more useful to the forum as a whole, but it is all fine by me. Let me know when you guys hammer this out.

Oh and guys, while I am flexible on names and I want to encourage you to come up with idea, I am not going to accept something like "911 and Tyranny" or something that seems to imply a bias on the site-especially since I feature each group on the site. Simply state the purpose. If it is for conspiracy then call it what it is. If it is for Alter-9/11 discussion then call something clear and impartial like that please.

My suggestions: (The first 3 sound/look good in my opinion)
Alter-News
Alter-Debate
Alter-Perspective Alternative Perspective
Alternative News
Conspiracy Group

You're wrong. A simple disclaimer that they views expressed by members do not reflect the ones's of the site owner is sufficient to cover your concerns.

No one is going to judge the whole site based on one group - if anything, a newby will be relieved he/she is not restricted it what they can discuss.

I don't know what your story is on this issue - IT IS NOT CONSPIRACY THEORY AND WE SHALL NOT NAME IT SUCH!

[Prometheus]

Also, personally I see no reason why believers of the official line shouldn't join in, provided they conduct themselves with utmost circumspection and absolutely stick to an argument based on verifiable fact. They would have to be open-minded -- one jeer and they're out.
This would require active enforcement.

But if you welcome people from both sides of the debate, dosen't it defeat the purpose of the group? I mean, the purpose of the religious group is so that we can discuss religion without having to defend the concept of religion in every thread. Isn't this group to be so you can discuss the conspiracy without peopole attacking your basic premise?

[Nono]

If you welcome people from both sides of the debate, dosen't it defeat the purpose of the group? (...) Isn't this group to be so you can discuss the conspiracy without peopole attacking your basic premise?

Again, it's Pat's idea -- he knows what it's supposed to be. As I see it the purpose would be to enable us to discuss something we haven't really been able to because it always immediately went up in flames owing to incessant snarky sniping from people interested only in shouting down anyone who posits non-Qaeda conspirators.

At the risk of being wearyingly repetitive, I'm open to the idea of a conspiracy by Bushista/Neocons to give them both draconian powers and the much-yearned-for pretext to snatch Iraqi oil and other goodies. 911 was perfect for that. This fact alone is suspicious, or at least worthy of close scrutiny. But since 911 any suggestion of such scrutiny has been howled down as unpatriotic.

On the other hand I'm also open to the cock-up theory as explanation (if this can be convincingly backed up). Or a mixture of the two involving a heavy dose of opportunism.

So I'm a skeptic yet would enthusiastically welcome this debate. The reason for a separate forum is to keep the wreckers out.

[Nono]

PS Another thing 911 was perfect for was miraculously elevating Boy George from the status of mug to that of hero. Now that's suspicious. :)

[gr8fuldaniel]

We should call it "9/11 Truths Vs. 9/11 Lies".

I like it

[Sean]

So I'm a skeptic yet would enthusiastically welcome this debate. The reason for a separate forum is to keep the wreckers out.

Hmm..this gave me an idea. How about the "9/11 Skeptics" group?

[Thunder Wave]

I'll be happy with just any name.

[Mia]

Hmm..this gave me an idea. How about the "9/11 Skeptics" group?

That sounds good.

[Thunder Wave]

How about taking '9/11 Truths Vs. 9/11' Lies to 9/11 Truths & Lies or 9/11 Truths vs Lies

[Prometheus]

Wait - are you guys seriously considering the idea that Bush caused the 9/11 attacks? I thought you were debating wheather it was the reason to go to war in Iraq or something. Bush may be a freaking moron, but I don't see him as willing to slaughter thousands of US citizens.

[Lou Minotti]

I've never heard anyone on this forum suggest Bush was behind 9/11.