Arguing the Case
[Home] [Investigations, more] [Arguing the Case]

Are you tired of hearing the same old 9/11 arguments over and over again on your favourite Internet forums and message boards? Then you might want to use this site as ammunition in your arguments and debates, and I've no problem with that. I'd recommend you consider a point or two before you start, though.

#1, you're probably tired of people automatically believing everything they read on conspiracy sites, then posting it as fact, right? Fair enough, but don't you make the same mistake. Just because I might post an argument that agrees with what you believe, doesn't make me right. Do not read a page on here for the first time, then use it in a forum debate 5 minutes later: Think before you post.

Start by carefully reading what I'm saying (that is, not simply skipping over the arguments to the conclusion). Does my argument hold up, does it all make sense?

Next, look at an opposing site to see if I've covered the key points being made. You might read a page here saying there's no proof a particular hijacker is alive, for instance, and it may look convincing, but am I missing some key piece of evidence you'll find elsewhere? Do a quick Google to see exactly what the conspiracy sites are saying, and make sure I'm addressing whatever points they present.

Finally, do your own research into the topic. At a minimum, that means following the source links I've provided. I often edit quotes to extract just the relevant information, for instance, and while I try to ensure the original meaning of a piece isn't changed, mistakes could be made. Check the full article or whatever I'm referring to: does it still mean what I've said it means?

This may sound like a hassle, but it'll pay off in the long run. If I've made a mistake, or referred to a source link that no longer exists, say, whoever you're debating with will be quick to pick that up, and you'll lose the point. By doing your research first you greatly cut down the chances of being caught out by my error.

#2, you might also be tired of the way some people believe their argument has been proved, conclusively, no point discussing it further, only idiots ever disagree with them. We know exactly what you mean, but again, make sure you don't do the same thing.

In particular, don't oversell what we're saying here. The point of many of these pages isn't that we've completely disproved an idea, just provided more information showing it's less likely than some have claimed.

Let's take the "insider trading" story, for instance. We do not (and cannot) prove definitively that this wasn't based on foreknowledge of 9/11. But on the other hand, we can show that a) the volumes weren't as remarkable as some people claim, and b) there was good reason to be selling the stocks involved.

When you do post links to this kind of page, then, don't tell people it "blows their stupid conspiracy out of the water". Or whatever. That's a claim based on faith, not evidence, and you'll just hear back that "it doesn't prove anything".

Explain that the page just suggests the usual conspiracy explanation might not be necessary, though, and they've no false certainty to attack. Now they're forced to consider the issues, which explanation is more probable, and that's a far more interesting area of debate.

#3, you're probably most tired of the way that anyone who doesn't swallow every 9/11 conspiracy theory is automatically a Government shill/ stooge/ paid disinformation agent/ neocon/ Bushite/ idiot. And we are, too, but you know what? If you spend half your posts calling your opponents "conspiracy nutjobs" and talking about tin foil hats then you're not very much better.

Be polite, then, if you can. Remember the reason that people smear you in this way: they're worried. They have no real answer to your arguments, because if they did, then wouldn't you be hearing those answers now? And so they want to try and invent a reason to say your posts aren't to be trusted, somehow, to stop people listening to you. To provoke an argument, make you look as bad as them.

If this happens to you, the best thing you can do is return to the issues. If they've not answered a particular point, ask them why not? If you want to move to another area, then do that. Don't let the thread degenerate into pointless name-calling, or if it does, at least make sure everyone can see that you're not responsible.

And #3, please try to avoid linking directly to images on, especially on popular message boards -- it can drain my bandwidth allowance surprisingly quickly, and if it happens often I'll have to turn hot-linking off altogether.

What you should do instead is save the image locally, then upload it to a hosting site like ImageShack ( It's easy, quick and free (no registration required), and you'll get a URL that you can use from your message board or forum.

[Home] [Hijackers] [Foreknowledge] [Stand down] [WTC (demolition)] [WTC (other)] [WTC7 and Silverstein] [Pentagon] [Flight 93] [bin Ladin] [Obstructing Justice] [Afghanistan] [Others] [Investigations, more] [What's New?]