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 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.
Debra AI Prediction
Post Argument Now Debate Details +
Arguments
Aw. I wasn't gonna ask you for a date.
  Considerate: 27%  
  Substantial: 58%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 96%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level: 6.82  
  Sources: 0  
  Relevant (Beta): 96%  
  Learn More About Debra
Awww, that's a shame. You look like such a catch in your profile pic:-
Totally not creepy.
  Considerate: 62%  
  Substantial: 40%  
  Spelling & Grammar: 93%  
  Sentiment: Neutral  
  Avg. Grade Level: 4.16  
  Sources: 1  
  Relevant (Beta): 91%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Dreamer, the problem is that you must have an elementary understanding of science, or at least the ability to think critically, in order to differentiate pseudo-science from actual science. There are numerous highly qualified scientists who have published information which refutes the official 9/11 narrative. People like chemistry professor Nils Harrit and physics professor Steven Jones. Even Professor Jonathan Barnett's metallurgy study for FEMA makes abundantly clear the public were not told the truth about the collapse of the WTC buildings.
Your mind is trapped inside a box where you assume certain things to be true which are not true. You assume that the government is incapable of fooling you with pseudo-science. You assume that the government has no incentive to mislead you. You assume that what you see and hear on mainstream media is an accurate representation of reality rather than a representation of the interests of power.
You are living in a new type of totalitarian society. A society in which propaganda and deception are used to shape your opinions and limit the parameters of your thoughts. The beauty of such a society is that you will never try to escape it because you have been fooled into believing you are free. You will in fact defend such a society against all forms of criticism and dissent.
The destruction of the 47-story World Trade Center Building 7 in New York City late in the afternoon of September 11, 2001, was not a result of fires, according to the much-anticipated final report issued today by researchers at the University of Alaska Fairbanks.
https://thewashingtonstandard.com/final-report-issued-by-university-of-alaska-fairbanks-wtc7-not-destroyed-by-fire-on-9-11/
That one study alone proves that you were misled.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
You have not addressed the content you were given, which was a study by the University of Alaska. The University of Alaska is not connected to Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth. The way that debate works is that you address what the other person says. You don't attack something else with no relationship to what the other person has just written.
Momentarily ignoring the fact that your quote -- which is both untrue and an argumentum ad populum fallacy -- bears no relevance to anything I just wrote, how many times and in how many ways does it need to be explained to you that Wikipedia is not a reliable source of information for anything pertaining to controversial political issues? And in particular, in relation to 9/11? If you use Wikipedia as a reference in a university paper you will be failed. Even Wikipedia admits it is not a reliable source:-
As a user-generated source, it can be edited by anyone at any time, and any information it contains at a particular time could be vandalism, a work in progress, or simply incorrect.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Wikipedia_is_not_a_reliable_source
You are so incomprehensibly naive that instead of listening to what actual scientists (i.e. experts) have to say about science, you are instead listening to what the faceless non-expert editors of a Wikipedia page have to say about it. Complete strangers who could be operating under any number of different motives, or have any number of conflicts of interest. If the US government can plant false stories in the media -- something which is documented and proven to have happened many times in the past -- do you truly believe they are going to have trouble controlling a Wikipedia page which they can edit themselves?
Talking to you is genuinely like talking to a particularly naive 12 year old child who is too young to understand how the world really works. You are incapable of reason or debate, or even addressing any relevant source material you are given to view. Rather, you perpetually respond with fallacious appeals to (predominantly false) authority in order to avoid ever having to debate anything.
Stop wasting my time please.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Jesus H Christ. YOU ARE ARGUING WITH THE SCIENTIFIC COMMUNITY. I've literally just linked you to a study performed by the engineering department of the University of Alaska:-
The principal conclusion of our study is that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11, contrary to the conclusions of NIST and private engineering firms that studied the collapse. The secondary conclusion of our study is that the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.
https://ine.uaf.edu/projects/wtc7/
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
The collapse of World Trade Center (WTC) building 7 on September 11, 2001, was caused by a combination of factors, including the structural damage inflicted by debris from the collapse of the nearby North Tower and exposure to intense fires.
The building was hit by debris from the North Tower, which damaged multiple interior columns, starting fires on multiple floors. The fires burned for several hours, causing structural steel beams to heat up and eventually lose their structural integrity. The fires, combined with the damage caused by the debris, caused the building to become structurally unstable and ultimately collapse.
It's worth noting that the collapse of WTC 7 was the first time in modern history that a tall building had collapsed solely due to fire. The incident led to new understandings of fire behavior in high-rise buildings and has influenced the design of new buildings to better withstand such events.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Laughably false rubbish. In any country other than the United States, such utterly ridiculous nonsense wouldn't fool a bright ten year old:-
The secondary conclusion of our study is that the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.
https://ine.uaf.edu/projects/wtc7/
Only one thing causes the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building, and I think we both know what.
Here's a side-by-side comparison of WTC 7 collapsing adjacent to three confirmed controlled demolitions. Have fun denying your own eyes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D7Rm6ZFROmc&ab_channel=AE911Truth
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Danny Jowenko was a Dutch expert in controlled demolition who testified on film in September 2006 when interviewed by a Dutch filmmaker[1] that the destruction of WTC7 could only be due to controlled demolition.[2][3]
https://www.wikispooks.com/wiki/Danny_Jowenko
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
And as usual all your sauces are total Exstream dog mess. He was an expert in controlled demolition all right because what he did was kill him self in his own car on a straight road. And they refused to let him tesify because he was so far gone in the brain matter that it wasn't funny.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
People believe conspiracy theories because they are looking for an explanation for an event or phenomenon that they don't understand. People may also be drawn to conspiracy theories because they want to feel like they have some kind of power or control over the situation. It can also be comforting to think that there is a hidden force behind certain events, rather than accepting that life can be randomly chaotic. Additionally, conspiracy theories can provide people with a sense of identity and belonging when they join a group of like-minded individuals who share the same beliefs.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Americans are trained like monkeys to believe labelling something a "conspiracy theory" automatically debunks it, with no requirement for further argument. Did you or that silly jughead of yours ever stop for a moment to consider that the official narrative is a theory about a conspiracy of radical Muslims who all failed their flight training? Let me answer that for you. No, you didn't. Your government sold you a conspiracy theory, contrary to all the known facts, and then they somehow managed to convince you that questioning the factual validity of that conspiracy theory makes you a conspiracy theorist. They exploited a well-documented logical fallacy known as The Emperor Has No Clothes.
You literally don't know up from down or left from right. It's shocking to witness the level of brainwashing in your country. Shocking.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
You're simply not listening. If you attempt to use Wikipedia as a reference at university your tutor will fail your paper. The editing format of Wikipedia allows controversial pages to be hijacked by special interest groups and propagandised to fit a particular narrative. I've already demonstrated that to you. The Wikipedia page on beansprouts is probably fairly accurate, but that does not remain true for the pages which have important political ramifications for the mechanics of world power. If you genuinely believe the people who run the world are going to let dissidents jump onto Wikipedia and contradict what they want the public to believe then you frankly haven't got the faintest idea how mass media operates.
No credible scientist or engineer in the world supports the official 9/11 narrative, because the official 9/11 narrative is not credible. It's a complete and total aberration of the most basic laws of physics, and a complete and total aberration of the genuine scientific studies which have been performed. If you'd followed the development of the research like I have for the last eighteen years, you'd be fully aware of the numerous times the government appointed "investigators" were caught with their pants around their ankles telling blatant and enormous lies. Over and over and over again they were caught inventing an alternative reality. If I thought for a moment that you were intelligent and open-minded enough to care, I'd give you examples, but it is abundantly clear to me that you have no idea how to analyse information critically and that you simply believe what you're told, no questions asked.
Given the dozens of eye-witness reports consistent with the use of explosives and/or bombs inside the towers, plus the extremely suspicious symmetry and speed of the collapses, the number one priority of government agencies should have been to eliminate the use of explosives from the enquiry. But that was never done. No tests for explosives residue were ever performed. When somebody calls you a "conspiracy theorist" for simply pointing out clear and objective facts like the government's failure to follow even the most basic and fundamental investigative protocol, that somebody can immediately be assumed to be a halfwit. There were 47 heavy core steel supports surrounding the perimeter of each of the main WTC towers, and hence in order for those towers to fall down vertically, with near-perfect symmetry, all 47 of those core supports would need to fail simultaneously. That's science. Science is not linking the baseless claims of an anonymous bullsh-tter on Wikipedia whose counterargument is, "Nah, never happened and everybody agrees with me."
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
These 10 reinstated accounts generate billions of Twitter views, all of which Elon Musk can monetize and sell to household brands, such as Apple, Amazon, and the NFL."
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
This is a research paper:-
https://ine.uaf.edu/projects/wtc7/
And Wikipedia is not a good source unless your level of education happens to be below university level. At university level we address criticism and opposing arguments directly. What we do not do is ignore what the other person says and simply reply with opposing links, because that solves absolutely nothing.
I agree. Most of the time you are wrong, and this is one of those times.
What conspiracy theory? I haven't proposed any theories. All I have said is that the WTC buildings were brought down via controlled demolition, which is self-evidently true and supported by a treasure trove of direct and circumstantial evidence. Disputing the laughable conspiracy theory which you are dumb enough to have fallen for does not constitute a conspiracy theory, and you have somehow managed to avoid reading the part where I have already pointed that out to you twice. I am posting material evidence that what I am saying is true while you are trying to win a game of semantics. You are using smear attacks like "conspiracy theory" as an alternative to actually having any legitimate counterargument to anything I have written.
As are some geological formations, but let's not dwell on such things. Far more important is that even smart people can be fooled. Smart people are not immune to deception or propaganda. There were many thousands of smart Germans who believed the lies Hitler was selling, a pertinent example being the burning of the Reichstag, in which Hitler orchestrated an arson attack on his own building in order to manufacture a pretext for aggression against communists and Jews. False flag attacks are nothing new, and the US government has planned them too, for example Operation Northwoods, in which the US government proposed murdering its own citizens and blaming the Cubans as a pretext for war. Your naive misconception that the US government would never kill its own citizens for political advantage is plain wrong and contradicted by the documented historical record.
Don't make me laugh. I have written book content for the university press in the social sciences and I was the proud receiver of a national university award specifically for critical thinking. I'm not saying those things to brag, but rather to explain that I am somebody who is at least moderately qualified enough to inform you that you wouldn't know critical thinking if it arrived at your bedroom door in the early hours of the morning and attacked you with a stuffed animal.
I have explained the fallacies in your allegations at least half a dozen times and yet you continue to use them. That is not critical thinking. That is religious thinking. That is refusing to alter your belief structure in light of new information which somebody else patiently provides for you. For the sake of clarity, let me try one final time to explain where your thinking is deviating from reason.
1) The narrative sold to the public regards 9/11 is the conspiracy theory. It's a theory about a conspiracy: ergo, it's a conspiracy theory. Quite how you have been convinced that rejecting it makes someone a conspiracy theorist is anybody's guess, but for the record, you are the conspiracy theorist for believing that self-contradictory, literally impossible bag of trash, and I am the lonely voice of reason trying to guide you through the dark.
2) Rejecting any hypothesis exclusively on the basis of an arbitrary label such as "conspiracy theory", and without any concern for the merits of the hypothesis, is a particularly egregious logical fallacy sometimes referred to as a "false association". The premise is very simple, and it works like so. I work at a court and see several Italians jailed for being part of the mafia. The next Italian walks in, and I make a false association between him and the other Italians, concluding that he must be part of the mafia. I do so without actually knowing the first thing about the man. Moreover, the concept of rejecting any hypothesis on the grounds of labelling it a "conspiracy theory", pushes the logical fallacy one full step further, since "conspiracy theory" is an arbitrary label with no basis in objective fact like being Italian is. Hence, if I hold influence with the media, I can simply make sure any hypothesis I don't like is labelled a "conspiracy theory", ensuring it immediately receives negative attention or mockery, regardless of whether it is true or not. Welcome to your class on the mechanics of modern public relations propaganda.
Well, I suppose this is progress, but the truth is that there are no maybes. I am 100 percent, cast iron guarantee correct. 9/11 was an inside job. The only reasonable point of contention when all the facts are taken into consideration is whether it was a soft inside job and the government let it happen, or a hard inside job and the government was actively involved in planning it. That at least is debatable.
Several anonymous buyers got mega rich purchasing highly suspicious volumes of put options (i.e. bets on the price of stock declining) on United Airlines prior to the stock collapsing in the wake of the attacks.
Furthermore, according to a US Federal Emergency Management Agency employee, a large quantity of gold bullion which had been stored in WTC 6 was mysteriously removed immediately prior to the attacks.
https://www.thesun.co.uk/living/1376503/september-11-cameraman-claims-hes-got-proof-the-george-w-bush-administration-was-behind-terror-attacks/
Rejecting any hypothesis exclusively on the basis of an arbitrary label such as "conspiracy theory", and without any concern for the merits of the hypothesis, is a particularly egregious logical fallacy sometimes referred to as a "false association". The premise is very simple, and it works like so. I work at a court and see several Italians jailed for being part of the mafia. The next Italian walks in, and I make a false association between him and the other Italians, concluding that he must be part of the mafia. I do so without actually knowing the first thing about the man. Moreover, the concept of rejecting any hypothesis on the grounds of labelling it a "conspiracy theory", pushes the logical fallacy one full step further, since "conspiracy theory" is an arbitrary label with no basis in objective fact like being Italian is. Hence, if I hold influence with the media, I can simply make sure any hypothesis I don't like is labelled a "conspiracy theory", ensuring it immediately receives negative attention or mockery, regardless of whether it is true or not. Welcome to your class on the mechanics of modern public relations propaganda.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
The 9/11 attacks on the World Trade Center (WTC) in New York City were caused by the impact of two commercial airliners, American Airlines Flight 11 and United Airlines Flight 175, that were hijacked by terrorists and flown into the Twin Towers. The subsequent fires caused by the crash and fuel explosions, along with structural damage, caused the towers to collapse.
There is no credible evidence that the collapses were the result of controlled demolition. The 9/11 Commission Report, conducted by the US government, concluded that the collapses were caused by the impact of the airplanes and the subsequent fires. This conclusion is supported by extensive scientific evidence, including studies by engineers and scientists from the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST).
The idea that the WTC buildings were brought down by controlled demolition has been widely discredited and is not supported by credible evidence. It is important to rely on the results of comprehensive, evidence-based investigations, rather than misinformation and conspiracy theories.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
A conspiracy theory is a belief or idea that suggests that events or situations are the result of a secret and often sinister plot by a group of individuals or organizations. This belief typically lacks empirical evidence and is often based on circumstantial, incomplete, or unreliable information. Conspiracy theories are often fueled by a distrust of authorities, institutions, and the mainstream media, and can spread rapidly through social media and other channels.
Conspiracy theories are baseless, and some can be dangerous, as they can spread misinformation and sow division in society. It's always important to approach claims of conspiracy with a critical and skeptical eye and to seek out reliable sources of information.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
That claim is so false it deserves to be pinned up somewhere as an example of how to tell an egregious lie with a straight face.
You have literally replied to credible evidence that WTC 7 was brought down by a controlled demolition with the claim that there is no credible evidence WTC 7 was brought down by controlled demolition. It doesn't get more ridiculously dishonest than that.
From the engineering department of the University of Alaska:-
A Structural Reevaluation of the Collapse of World Trade Center 7
This is a study of the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7 (WTC 7) — a 47-story building that suffered a total collapse at 5:20 PM on September 11, 2001.The principal conclusion of our study is that fire did not cause the collapse of WTC 7 on 9/11, contrary to the conclusions of NIST and private engineering firms that studied the collapse. The secondary conclusion of our study is that the collapse of WTC 7 was a global failure involving the near-simultaneous failure of every column in the building.
https://ine.uaf.edu/projects/wtc7/
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
That article is trash and it has been debunked hundreds of times by actual scientists and academics. Popular Mechanics is owned by the Hearst Corporation and most of its revenue comes from advertising for the defence industry. The lead researcher on that article was Benjamin Chertoff, cousin of Michael Chertoff, the man who let the "dancing Israelis" caught celebrating the attacks out of jail and sent them back to Israel, contrary to the protests of the FBI agents who had been interrogating them. It's a textbook propaganda piece and a mixture of half-truths, straw men and outright falsehoods. Let's start with this, just as an example:-
In the decade before 9/11, NORAD intercepted only one civilian plane over North America
That is laughably untrue:-
AHMED, NAFEEZ MOSADDEQ, 2005, The War On Truth: 9/11, Disinformation And The Anatomy Of Terrorism. Moreton-In-Marsh, Gloucestershire, England: Arris Publishing Ltd
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
There is extensive evidence linking Al-Qaeda, a Sunni Islamic extremist group, to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States. Here are some key points:
Responsibility claim: Al-Qaeda claimed responsibility for the 9/11 attacks in a statement issued shortly after the events of September 11.
Hijackers: The 19 hijackers who carried out the 9/11 attacks were members of Al-Qaeda and several of them had trained in Afghanistan, where the group maintained training camps.
Plotting and planning: Evidence shows that the 9/11 attacks were planned and directed by Al-Qaeda's leadership, including Osama bin Laden, who was the organization's leader at the time.
Financial support: Several individuals and organizations linked to Al-Qaeda provided financial support to the hijackers and helped them carry out the attacks.
Connections to other attacks: There are also links between Al-Qaeda and other attacks that took place around the same time, such as the 2000 attack on the USS Cole in Yemen.
In 2021, the FBI released a newly declassified document about the 9/11 attacks, which revealed details about the logistical support given to two of the hijackers in the lead-up to the attacks. The evidence indicates that the two hijackers received logistical and financial support from a handful of people inside the United States with connections to al-Qaeda.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
@JulesKorngold
When you quote things, include sources so they can be scrutinised. Failing to ever provide your sources only illustrates what a sickeningly dishonest person you are.
The hijackers "left no paper trail," FBI Director Robert Mueller said in the text of an April 19 speech the FBI released Monday.
"In our investigation, we have not uncovered a single piece of paper--either here in the United States or in the treasure trove of information that has turned up in Afghanistan and elsewhere--that mentioned any aspect of the Sept. 11 plot," he said.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/news/ct-xpm-2002-05-01-0205010399-story.html
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
What is the motive?
You are not describing any argument of grievance about an inside job, but rather simple questioning State or Federal intervention made in an ongoing disaster. Not that these suggestions are fact but as example a motive would be a story along the lines of Congressional rulings on past computer proprietor ship, possible evidence of organized crime gambling conspiracies in vast payouts to state lotteries, even the outlandish idea 9/11 is a signature for an attack made on the American people based on the unlucky victim of the crime as the people of America. The axiom of GOD which would be by comparison shown as the correct date of 08/09 has influence over such things as taxation balance. The axiom also relates to complex intellectual ideas of deep space navigation under the presumption all current methods being limited by its own requirements and Tech.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
In your case thats not necessary is it since no body wants to scrutinize such dum twisted exsteamist stuff any way. Any way even if any body goes to the sauces of your dum wiredo sites they wouldnt stop laughing any way. And your trying to tell that guy that he is sickenly dishonest Well strike me down if ever that was being even a bit rich coming from someone who invented the words dishonest and lie.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Listen buddy, if you don't have anything constructive to contribute to the debate then just go away you pointless troll.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Okay I will then but since I have contributed to the debate and am not a troll then I won’t go away then. Finding people out who lie and are dishonest and try to toe people along with exstream sites and made up stuff is a very good contribution don’t you think. Never actually saying something and refusing to answer and ignore and calling every one names and talking down and dictating to them like an Adolf is not contributing any thing don’t you reckon
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
I have seen the footage and it is so fake. Like a video where the plane looks like it literally just disappears as it is about to hit.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
- In 1992: Al-Qaeda attacked U.S. troops in Somalia.
- In 1998: Al-Qaeda bombs U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania, killing 224 people.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Calling Nomenclature's claim nonsense is simply a counter-claim, not a personal attack.
Nomenclature playing victim again.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Nomenclature's claims are pure conspiracy theory bullsh*t. Not worth the time to debunk. Bullsh*t in huge font is still bullsh*t.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Nomenclature refuses to disclose his ethnicity or country. What is he scared of? They must suck.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
RobertoDuran just answered to the username Nomenclature. How is that possible??
What a dufuss.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
They didn't test for explosives because they have a bit more brains than conspiracy stupidos and are not going to look for irrelevant things just because dum foolish dum wits like you have a mental problem.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Do us favour buddy , will you just shut your enormous ignorant spunk filled American gob.
You want to talk about people? You're from a nation that voted that dumb bustard Tump into office , he actually believed the continental army took over the AIRPORTS in 1775
Then the man Americans think another genius, the spastic Bush said ........
" Rarely is the question asked: Is our children learning?”—Florence, S.C., Jan. 11, 2000
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
9/11 was an inside job! Inside Nomenclature's substandard, diseased brain.
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
I think it's J K's sprog from a piglet ......ya know the way kikes love pork
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
He always wins races by a .......nose ........yeeee haaaaaaa
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra
Can they do photos that big ?
  Considerate: 100%  
  Substantial: 100%  
  Sentiment: Negative  
  Avg. Grade Level:   
  Sources:   
  Relevant (Beta): 100%  
  Learn More About Debra