The Instigator
jimmyking22
Pro (for)
Winning
10 Points
The Contender
eb904
Con (against)
Losing
2 Points

9/11 was a conspiracy.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
jimmyking22
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/19/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 355 times Debate No: 91527
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (4)

 

jimmyking22

Pro

I will argue that 9/11 was a conspiracy while con will argue the opposite. I will provide definitions the next round. Good luck.
eb904

Con

Hello! I'm excited to hear your arguments, why do you believe that 9/11 was a conspiracy?
Debate Round No. 1
jimmyking22

Pro

9/11 was a conspiracy.

Conspiracy: a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose
http://www.dictionary.com...

9/11 was planned by several people in order to terrorize the United States--i.e., al-Qaeda.
Even if it was done by the U.S. government, it was still a conspiracy as a combination of persons planned and performed the evil act.
eb904

Con

Wait, are you joking? I thought you were going to argue that the government did it or something :D

Of course it was a conspiracy, but done by Al Qaeda, not the United States. If you truly believe that this is a justifiable argument, then you don't understand the difference between a debate and a ploy to win instantly.
Debate Round No. 2
jimmyking22

Pro

My opponent failed to argue that 9/11 was not a conspiracy. Therefore, I win. Vote Pro.
eb904

Con

Hahaha yall should actually vote for that guy^^

I applaud you and your excellent trolling, you have truly set the bar high. Well done, well done.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by whiteflame 9 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Ockham// Mod action: NOT Removed<

7 points to Pro. Reasons for voting decision: Pro used semantics to trick Con into joining the debate, so conduct goes to Con. Spelling and grammar were similar on both sides. Pro's arguments and sources don't count because the debate was based on a semantic trick, so those are tied.

[*Reason for non-removal*] The voter sufficiently justifies awarding conduct in this instance. Contrary to the report, the voter is not required to award argument points.
************************************************************************
Posted by kasmic 9 months ago
kasmic
I even gave it away in the comments.
Posted by eb904 9 months ago
eb904
First off, she. Second off, I think I did you quite a bit of grace in trusting that you would post a debate with actual arguments, not just a joke.
Posted by jimmyking22 9 months ago
jimmyking22
I can't report the voter's vote. That is completely unfair. I won the debate--I don't care if it was semantics. He could have seen it coming. I've seen this done before and saw it as an easy win so I did it. I deserve to win this debate.
Posted by jimmyking22 9 months ago
jimmyking22
Then argue against me and we'll see who has more evidence....
Posted by jimmyking22 9 months ago
jimmyking22
Then argue against me and we'll see who has more evidence....
Posted by kasmic 9 months ago
kasmic
It sure was... a conspiracy committed by terrorists.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by BenD 9 months ago
BenD
jimmyking22eb904Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: I am not willing to let trolling win. Sadly, others don't feel the same way.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 9 months ago
dsjpk5
jimmyking22eb904Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Concession.
Vote Placed by RainbowDash52 9 months ago
RainbowDash52
jimmyking22eb904Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: concession
Vote Placed by Ockham 9 months ago
Ockham
jimmyking22eb904Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro used semantics to trick Con into joining the debate, so conduct goes to Con. Spelling and grammar were similar on both sides. Pro's arguments and sources don't count because the debate was based on a semantic trick, so those are tied.