The Instigator
MassDebater69
Pro (for)
Losing
5 Points
The Contender
Badtothebone
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

Zionist-Jewish Networks Should Be Considered as Some of the Most Probable Perpetrators of 9/11

Do you like this debate?NoYes-2
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...
Badtothebone
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/6/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 893 times Debate No: 33365
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (4)

 

MassDebater69

Pro

Investigations into the collapse of the World Trade Center, the beneficiaries of 9/11, and other issues surrounding this event have demonstrated, clearly, the overwhelming flaws contained within the "official narrative". A much more plausible theory is that Zionist and Zionist-Jewish networks, who were directly involved in the companies and institutions surrounding nearly every major aspect of 9/11, were probably involved in the attacks in order to bring US troops into war against Israel's enemies in the Middle East.

Some very significant elements of this theory are addressed in the following list:

http://instablogg.com...

My opponent must demonstrate that it is, at least, highly unlikely for Israel and subordinate Zionist networks to have had any major role in the attacks.

Rules:
- Standard debate conventions apply.
Badtothebone

Con

JEWS DONT DESERVE TO HAVE OPINIONS.
Debate Round No. 1
MassDebater69

Pro

That's verry intellijent Con. Way to progress humanity.
Badtothebone

Con

You can't even spell intelligent right. Way to let that door open on ya.
Debate Round No. 2
MassDebater69

Pro

I was trying to "get on yo' level", homeboy. Clearly, your intellect exceeds mine so I thought I'd bring it down a notch and stick to what I'm good at: keaping it reel. Das how 2ba troo jeenyiss. Duh.

Anyway, read the link in my first argument. It's pretty sweet. You can't refute it. The end. Bye.
Badtothebone

Con

Basically you didn't prove anything. Vote for con
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by MassDebater69 4 years ago
MassDebater69
@imabench - You would have suspected wrong. Now, I guess we'll never know. :(
Posted by 1Devilsadvocate 4 years ago
1Devilsadvocate
Too late.
Posted by 1Devilsadvocate 4 years ago
1Devilsadvocate
If I weren't in the middle of Finals, I'd love to take this, maybe I still will, don't think I'll need much time for this debate.

Went through the link most of the points were; unsourced, irrelevant, dubious, etc.
Posted by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
I suspect that MassDebator is going to drop a lot of stupid bombs all over this debate.... Will be watching
Posted by MassDebater69 4 years ago
MassDebater69
Demonstrate that, when compared to evidence for alternative theories including the US government's "surprise, Arab-terrorist conspiracy" theory, evidence in favor of a Zionist-orchestrated 9/11 for the primary purpose of benefiting Israel is less probable.
Posted by Ragnar 4 years ago
Ragnar
I'll accept if you define terms a little better.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by 1Devilsadvocate 4 years ago
1Devilsadvocate
MassDebater69BadtotheboneTied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro / instigator had BOP, which was not met.
Vote Placed by johnlubba 4 years ago
johnlubba
MassDebater69BadtotheboneTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con derailed the thread by not committing to the debate from the outset.
Vote Placed by justin.graves 4 years ago
justin.graves
MassDebater69BadtotheboneTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: You both are racist idiots.
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
MassDebater69BadtotheboneTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro massively failed to meet his Burden of Proof and cited one blog for his entire half argument that he gave. Con trolled like an idiot but it was still enough for him to win the debate.