Was This Just A Coincidence? - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally by activity where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.


DebateIsland Referral Program: Get a Free Month of DebateIsland Diamond Premium Membership ($4.99 Value) Per Each New User That You Refer!

Was This Just A Coincidence?

Debate Information

"Expert analyses of the visa-application forms of 15 of the 9/11 terrorists (the other four applications could not be obtained), show all the applicants among the 15 reviewed should have been denied visas under then-existing law. Six separate experts who analyzed the simple, two-page forms came to the same conclusion: All of the visa applications they reviewed should have been denied on their face." (Ahmed 2005, p217)

AHMED, NAFEEZ MOSADDEQ, 2005, The War On Truth: 9/11, Disinformation And The Anatomy Of Terrorism. Moreton-In-Marsh, Gloucestershire, England: Arris Publishing Ltd.



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted To Win
Tie

Details +



Arguments



Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • TreeManTreeMan 172 Pts   -  
    What is this debate about?
  • NomenclatureNomenclature 569 Pts   -  
    What is this debate about?

    Probability.

  • ProlifeInformerProlifeInformer 19 Pts   -  
    @TreeMan No, and a lot of money went missing on September, 10, some hijackers were allegedly found alive, predictive programing, and research!
    Nomenclature
  • NomenclatureNomenclature 569 Pts   -  
    @ProlifeInformer
    No, and a lot of money went missing on September, 10, some hijackers were allegedly found alive, predictive programing, and research!

    Various government authorities found six of the supposed hijackers alive and well. 

    Of course, they hadn't hijacked anything. Rather, their identities had been stolen. 

    Because they used false identities, it is not known who the hijackers were or who they worked for.

  • AlofRIAlofRI 1361 Pts   -  
    There are mistakes made every day. Today, I would hope, the same mistake wouldn't be made. 

    Today, the same thing likely would NOT be a MISTAKE. There are so many right-wing radicals it would likely be ON PURPOSE!
  • NomenclatureNomenclature 569 Pts   -   edited April 10
    @AlofRI
    There are mistakes made every day. Today, I would hope, the same mistake wouldn't be made.
    You cannot seriously believe that the United States government granted visas to 15 different terrorists who filled out "incomprehensible" and "incomplete" application forms, and who were all part of the exact same terrorist plot, by "mistake". 

    That is an absolutely farcical.thing to believe.
  • AlofRIAlofRI 1361 Pts   -  
    It was a different, more tolerable world back then. The country is much more careful today and STILL, mistakes are made. One dangerous mistake we make today is too many people exist that can't find a conspiracy theory they don't like. They are as dangerous to the country and democracy as most terrorists.
  • NomenclatureNomenclature 569 Pts   -  
    @AlofRI
    It was a different, more tolerable world back then. 

    It wasn't "tolerance" which approved 15 unsuitable visa applications all belonging to the same terrorist cell. You are being ridiculous. It has never been easy to acquire a US visa. 

    AlofRI
  • NomenclatureNomenclature 569 Pts   -  
    @AlofRi
    and STILL, mistakes are made
    Not only do you have no evidence that it was done by mistake, but given the facts involved the very idea that it was a mistake is absurd. It's just absolutely absurd. According to the experts who viewed these visa applications, they were "incomprehensible" and "incomplete".
    AlofRI
  • piloteerpiloteer 1274 Pts   -   edited April 11
    @Nomenclature

    So was it just a coincidence? You've not given us any valid evidence that demonstrates that it wasn't a coincidence. And this is especially true when we take into consideration the findings of a report done by the national review (they were the ones who first obtained the information regarding the visas) in which they state it was a "systemic problem" of the methods of screening done by the state department. In other words, the visas weren't overlooked because the conspirators wanted them to be. They were overlooked by the state department just the same as all the other tens of thousands of visas that also shouldn't have been granted. 

    I know you're so desperately trying to convince us Americans that 9/11 was an inside job done by pro-Israeli nationalists, and that the US should never feel that it was our destructive foreign policy that caused it. In my opinion, one of the most destructive of all of those policies was the CIAs mission to overthrow the democratically elected president of Iran. What urks me so much about this was it wasn't even done for the US, it was done as a favor for Britain, so they could continue to steal Iranian oil. Because of that, Iran was turned into a pro-western authoritarian regime, and the US needlessly gained an enemy for the sake of BP. What the US should have actually done was force Britain to renegotiate what they pay Iran for their oil, or face a military blockade so the US could get back all the funds it lost for aid and military personnel and equipment for Britain during ww2. Maybe some day we Americans will realize the suffering it causes us and others to go to the aid of countries that don't actually care about us.

    There's also one tiny detail that takes away any credence for your antisemitic assertions. If those so called 9/11 conspirators didn't want anybody to find out about their little rouse, wouldn't it be in their best interest to make sure those visas were filled out correctly and valid? But instead these satanic conspirators thought it would be best to leave tiny tantalizing clues for self described "journalists" such as yourself, so you can uncover the hidden truth?!?!? Please grow a brain before you come on here and spew your offensive ignorant bulls h i t  mate. 
    Debater123JulesKorngoldNomenclatureAlofRIall4actt
  • NomenclatureNomenclature 569 Pts   -   edited April 12
    @piloteer
    So was it just a coincidence? You've not given us any valid evidence that demonstrates that it wasn't a coincidence.
    I asked you to make up your own mind. Is the problem that you struggle to determine the difference between a question and a statement?
    And this is especially true when we take into consideration the findings of a report done by the national review (they were the ones who first obtained the information regarding the visas) in which they state it was a "systemic problem" of the methods of screening done by the state department. 
    LOL!!! When exactly has the state department ever approved "incomprehensible" and "incomplete" visa applications? Don't make me laugh. Six different experts looked at the forms and said they would have rejected all 15 of them.

    You claim the National Review produced a "report", but that is a clear misrepresentation of the facts. What the National Review did is spoke to a media representative in the state department to ask why they approved visas for 15 applicants who had not even filled out their forms properly. You have misrepresented the answer given by a media representative in the state department as a "report" by the National Review!! It clearly isn't a "report". It's a paper thin excuse given to them by a bureaucrat. The National Review has not investigated why it happened past the point of asking the state department!!!!

    Some of you guys are so devoid of anything resembling intellect it is just bizarre.
  • NomenclatureNomenclature 569 Pts   -   edited April 12
    @piloteer
    I know you're so desperately trying to convince us Americans that 9/11 was an inside job done by pro-Israeli nationalists, and that the US should never feel that it was our destructive foreign policy that caused it.

    The only thing I'm trying to convince you of is to look at the facts with an open mind. You seem to have this upside down. It is not my responsibility to prove to you that it was an "inside job". It is your side making ridiculous claims about what happened which very evidently do not match the facts. Sure, my OP is a good example of that, but there are much better examples: such as the FBI rejecting the idea that bin Laden was involved, publicly admitting there was no evidence connecting him to 9/11, and there not being a single criminal conviction of anybody in relation to the 9/11 attacks in two decades!!!

    This is outside of Zacarias Moussaoui of course, who himself requested in federal court that he be permitted to provide evidence that the US government knew about the attacks in advance. Needless to say, that request was rejected.

    I said that you have this upside down. What I mean is that it is your responsibility to prove your absurd conspiracy theory that the worst attack on US soil since Pearl Harbor was masterminded by a man on kidney dialysis living in a cave in Afghanistan. Your mind is so twisted up with propaganda that you seem to have been convinced the official narrative is de facto true until proven otherwise. That isn't how it works.

  • NomenclatureNomenclature 569 Pts   -  
    You've really got to gawp at modern day America. We believe guns keep the peace, we believe in aliens at Roswell, but we've got a serious problem believing our government would ever attack us to create a false pretext for war. 

  • AlofRIAlofRI 1361 Pts   -  
    @AlofRi
    and STILL, mistakes are made
    Not only do you have no evidence that it was done by mistake, but given the facts involved the very idea that it was a mistake is absurd. It's just absolutely absurd. According to the experts who viewed these visa applications, they were "incomprehensible" and "incomplete".
    I agree. The "mistakes" were "incomprehensible" and the background checks "incomplete". See, we STILL often agree.  :love:
  • NomenclatureNomenclature 569 Pts   -  
    @AlofRI
    I agree. The "mistakes" were "incomprehensible" and the background checks "incomplete". 

    For God's sake man. Consider what the odds must have been of it happening by "mistake". What must the odds have been of them letting all 15 applications through if all of the applications should have been denied?????

    We do often agree, yes. But on this you are out in space somewhere.

  • AlofRIAlofRI 1361 Pts   -   edited April 12
    We have a big trial going on right now and many people think the man died "by mistake" (as in no intent). A few miles away from this trial another "mistake" was made in the last 24 hrs. Yesterday an Army Lt. was threatened and manhandled "by mistake". We, as a country, have LOTS of SERIOUS "mistakes" seemingly every day. We also have "conspiracies" of many types going on every day. When an outside country sets up or finds an ally in our country "the odds" of a "mistake" happening improve exponentially. That doesn't mean it's the "evil government" (or very st**** people), causing it. You can believe what you like. I prefer to believe our intelligence services, like the FBI and 16 others, over "evidence" published or spread by conspiracy theorists that have NO LOVE for this or a lot of other countries or types of government.

    You believe what you want. I would agree with you, but, that would make us BOTH wrong.
  • piloteerpiloteer 1274 Pts   -  
    @Nomenclature

    There is someone on debateart who put up a debate about 9/11 being planned, and carried out by Al-Qaida and Osama bin Laden, and they only post debates about particular topics that they have advanced knowledge of. I wonder if you'd be willing to put your "theory" to the test and have it voted on by competent voters? The title is 

    There is enough to suggest that it is very likely that Al-Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden were indeed behind 9/11


    and it was posted by Nevets.
    Nomenclature
  • NomenclatureNomenclature 569 Pts   -  
    @piloteer
    There is someone on debateart who put up a debate about 9/11 being planned, and carried out by Al-Qaida and Osama bin Laden, and they only post debates about particular topics that they have advanced knowledge of. I wonder if you'd be willing to put your "theory" to the test and have it voted on by competent voters?
    I understand this will come as quite a shock to someone of your poor intellectual calibre, but objective reality is not settled by a vote or by big black letters. It is settled by the facts.

    I have yet to see you offer any type of credible argument as to why it might have been possible, through any type of mistake or inadvertent action, for the US government to have green lighted the visa applications of 15 different terrorists who didn't even fill out their application forms properly.

    If you want to offer a theory on that then that would be good, given that it is the subject of the debate.

  • anarchist100anarchist100 447 Pts   -  
    @Nomenclature
    What I find interesting was that none of the four hijacked planes had alerted ground control of a hijacking when the procedure only takes two seconds, all they have to do is dial 7500, and these pilots are all trained to do this in the event of a hijacking.
  • anarchist100anarchist100 447 Pts   -   edited April 18
    @Nomenclature
    Also the towers proved to be quite costly with all the work that needed to be done on them, and the owners made quite a bit of money of an insurance policy that they got shortly before 9 11.
    Nomenclature
  • piloteerpiloteer 1274 Pts   -   edited April 19
    @Nomenclature

    There is no theory, it is a plain fact that there was a systemic failure of the state departments vetting system, and it has been shown that there were tens of thousands of visas that also shouldn't have been granted because they were improperly filled out, and also filled out by known terrorists and criminals. You had nothing in the way of a response to that. You've also failed to address my counterpoint about how any supposed conspirators with inside access to the state department vetting system would have a damm good reason to ensure that those visas were filled out correctly so there would be no evidence of said conspiracy. But I guess in this world of illusions and conspiracies, it's somehow a part of the conspiracy culture to purposely leave behind tantalizing clues for self described journalists such as yourself?!?! Or it just could have been that these members of al-Qaida just took advantage of how easy it was to get a visa to the US.     

    As far as your claim that objective facts aren't governed by judges, that is true, but obviously you have another motivation beside what you consider to be proposals of "objective facts". You are obviously also motivated to persuade others of your opinions because you are posting this tripe on a debate site. So to somehow flirt with the idea that it would somehow undermine your theory if you were to put it up against another debater who is also schooled on the issue is an obvious cop-out because you are already posting your theories on a site that is specifically made for debating. So to claim that you do not have the motivations to persuade others is redundant. It can also be argued that your unwillingness to stand up against an objectively based debater is derived from a fear of losing.   
    Nomenclature
  • NomenclatureNomenclature 569 Pts   -   edited April 19
    @piloteer
    There is no theory, it is a plain fact that there was a systemic failure of the state departments vetting system

    Just utterly laughable. You have shown no evidence that this is even likely, let alone a fact, so I can only presume that you suffer from delusion. The six different experts who looked at these forms used the words "incomprehensible" and "incomplete" to describe them, so it had nothing to do with "systemic failure" in "vetting". The damned forms weren't even filled out correctly!!!!!

    The things that imbeciles like you are prepared to believe is just absolutely shocking to me. Had only half the applications been approved, there may have been an argument that it was a mistake. Hell, even three quarters might be possible. But the fact -- I mean the actual fact, rather than your fake fact -- is that the US government let all 15 terrorists into the country and gave them all visas. That's a coincidence and/or a mistake in the same way that I am Santa Claus. It is simply beyond the realm of plausibility for anybody who isn't intellectually incompetent.

    With respect, you strike me as the type of person who has two brain cells, both of which fight for third place.

Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2021 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch