Don't You Fkn Hate Conspiracy Theorists...Or Are YOU One Of Them?

[arraamis]

Mindless ******ed ramblings omitted

If you wish to challenge a theory you have to do it properly. Simply claiming that "something" is wrong about it and declaring any evidence in favour of it to be evidence of a cover-up isn't challenging anything. Theories are challenged every day, sometimes successfully. But they are challenged systematically and logically.

Not to get on a 9/11 binge, but to prove a point, there are movies, books and even papers filed by noted Scientists and Physicists, questioning and challenging almost every aspect of the conclusions formed by the 9-11 commission. Yet, the only response they received from the Govt. was to discredit the work as unfounded and unsupported -- They never even addressed the information presented. So, this theory that you have of challenging properly doesn't hold a drop of water.

[citation needed]

There is a dwindling group of internet cranks who have a bizarre notion that 9/11 was an "inside job". They tend not to actually suggest their alternate theories any more because all of them are patently ridiculous.

GEORGE W. BUSH, JR: "Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories"




For anyone to openly state, that the US Government doesn't LIE, CHEAT and cover-up, makes them the biggest fool on the planet.

Economic Hitman reveals shocking truths about the Government

[arraamis]

http://whatstheharm.net/conspiracytheories.html
http://="http://www.ufos-aliens.co.u...capollo.html"]
http://="http://blogs.discovermagazi...ck/"]dangerous.
.

I'm going to use a page out of your {Squealpiggy's} playbook of denial ....

"These sources aren't credible, they're internet hacks that lack any measure of credibility."

[Canelo Phresh]

I'm going to use a page out of your {Squealpiggy's} playbook of denial ....

"These sources aren't credible, they're internet hacks that lack any measure of credibility."

Fire with fire.

[squealpiggy]

Im giving the facts and possibilities therein. You want to get down to it, state your position clearly. Are you saying that their is absolutely no possibilty the government is using the vague wording of section 1021 of the NDAA bill to violate rights of detention without charge and trial by a jury of our peers?

I would say that's a danger. Not a huge one though. This is derailing the topic at hand, I'll make a new topic for this and link it below momentarily.

EDIT - link to new thread

If thats your case then why is the government fighting so hard to secure that vague definition of enemy combatants as opposed to just rewording that section to clearly define their intentions and practices? Instead of changing topics stick to the subject. Are you confident enough in your opinion to say that the government wouldnt abuse this power the way Judge Katherine Forrest said it could be used. If you change topics or avoid answering these questions then you have definitively lost this debate.

A few states have identified a possible constitutional danger and are fighting it through the courts. This is what should happen in a democracy. But tying this back into the topic at hand, concerns over the constitutional validity of this "new" legislation (it enacts nothing new and affirms legislation passed over ten years ago) do not mean that protesters are being held under its auspices.

In fact the only references I have seen to this "speculation" are conspiracy theory websites and Russia Today!

[Bermuda]

What does the Gulf of Tonkin incident have to do with a conspiracy thread? Just like 'Nayirah' and the baby incubators, It's proof the government lies to go to war.

Although... I guess you're right. They have no place in a conspiracy thread, as they are undeniable facts.

yup...like they lied about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. millions of Iraqi civilians and thousands of soldiers lost, and for what?

[Canelo Phresh]

I would say that's a danger. Not a huge one though. This is derailing the topic at hand, I'll make a new topic for this and link it below momentarily.



A few states have identified a possible constitutional danger and are fighting it through the courts. This is what should happen in a democracy. But tying this back into the topic at hand, concerns over the constitutional validity of this "new" legislation (it enacts nothing new and affirms legislation passed over ten years ago) do not mean that protesters are being held under its auspices.

In fact the only references I have seen to this "speculation" are conspiracy theory websites and Russia Today!

Our opinions on the severity of bills like NDAA and the Patriot Act differ. I feel its important to examine all trains of thought and opinions on these matters as I feel major American media is extremely lacking in legitimate journalism as opposed to being a mouthpiece for which ever administration is in power. Im aware that Putins totalitarianism is more sever than Bush or Obamas but fear that if we dont fight tooth and nail for every right our government takes away in 20 years time or less we'll see Greenday being imprisoned for mocking President Hailey Joel Osmant.

[Gino Ros]

Here's the thing about these conspiracy theorists:

They want me to believe that this highly organized and secretive group meticulously coordinated airplane attacks that would bring down the World Trade Center, yet they forgot to account for things such as, oh I don't know... having an actual plane as evidence at the Pentagon.

That is ridiculous.

They will meticulously plan to kill JFK....but sloppily planned the diversion by putting an unqualified marksman as the patsy in an impossible shooting position "a half mile"* away.

That makes no sense.


Side note: I have been to the site of the JFK assassination on several occasions.

[squealpiggy]

Not to get on a 9/11 binge, but to prove a point, there are movies, books and even papers filed by noted Scientists and Physicists,

Who are these "noted Scientists and Physicists"? Why are they noted? What are they noted for? What papers were published? Where were they published? What was the response of the rest of the scientific community? Why did you capitalise the word "scientist" and the word "physicist"?

You're attempting an argument for authority. It's fallacious.

questioning and challenging almost every aspect of the conclusions formed by the 9-11 commission. Yet, the only response they received from the Govt. was to discredit the work as unfounded and unsupported --
They never even addressed the information presented. So, this theory that you have of challenging properly doesn't hold a drop of water.

Are you seriously suggesting that nobody has challenged any 9/11 conspiracy theories?

GEORGE W. BUSH, JR: "Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories"

Thankyou. He's right, by the way. We shouldn't tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories that attempt to shift the blame from the terrorists who committed these terrible crimes. Why should we?

For anyone to openly state, that the US Government doesn't LIE, CHEAT and cover-up, makes them the biggest fool on the planet.

Nobody has made this claim. Politicians are fairly notorious for being untrustworthy.

Economic Hitman reveals shocking truths about the Government

Youtube, didn't watch. Summarise please.

I'm going to use a page out of your {Squealpiggy's} playbook of denial ....

"These sources aren't credible, they're internet hacks that lack any measure of credibility."

I would never insist you accept any link I post at face value. I always encourage you to seek the original source. Check my assertions.

yup...like they lied about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. millions of Iraqi civilians and thousands of soldiers lost, and for what?

I opposed a unilateral invasion of Iraq, and the blundering insistence of the Bush administration (and it was the administration in this circumstance) that all intelligence be focused on finding these WMDs instead of in counterinsurgency meant the deaths of thousands of people both allied and Iraqi. By retroactively attempting to justify the war instead of effectively fighting it they allowed competing groups of insurgents to make a foothold in the country and it was this, primarily, that led to the mess it became.

I shed no tears for Saddam Hussein, but the invasion of Iraq was bizarre given the timing and the ludicrous misplacement of priority demonstrates that both Bush and Blair had little confidence in their justification for war.

Having said that I would have supported a multilateral invasion but of course this was vetoes at the UN by various nations who were benefiting from Saddam's leadership of Iraq. That's a different topic altogether though.

[MindBat]

I'll admit to jumping on the conspiracy bandwagon from time to time.

However, I do acknowledge that many conspiracy theories have yet to be proven as valid. And there are many folks who go overboard with the CT's to the point of outlandish fantasies.

At the very least, they've proven to be a subject of unending discussion.

My take on it is many people are on 'high alert', so-to-speak, due to numerous events of the past which have occurred throughout history.

I believe the root cause of conspiracy theories originate from the fact that human beings are capable of the most malicious and atrocious acts upon other human beings since the beginning of time.

Most folks just don't plain believe that the entire world is full of the most beautiful, loving, caring, and compassionate human beings who would never lie to, cheat, and deceive another human being.

In my opinion, the following historical events have contributed to the continuous belief in conspiracy theories ...

The deceit and subsequent murder and land-steal of the Native Americans, slavery, the holocaust, The Tuskegee Experiment, and whistle blowing events that were uncovered by other humans after a period of sabotage and secrecy by the perpetrators, just to name a few.

I may be somewhat off point, but that's my personal perspective on why conspiracy theories have been and will continue to exist.

[squealpiggy]

Our opinions on the severity of bills like NDAA and the Patriot Act differ.

The fact that we can openly discuss and debate these things without any fear whatsoever of consequence demonstrates that your worst fears aren't even close to being realised.

I feel its important to examine all trains of thought and opinions on these matters as I feel major American media is extremely lacking in legitimate journalism as opposed to being a mouthpiece for which ever administration is in power.

Here I strongly disagree. The issue with American journalism is that it is all about the ratings. It's competing with other news networks and withother entertainment media and so it aims for audience share and not actually providing the truth. At least that's what's on TV. But all easy-access media has the same aims including Alex Jones' various endeavours: They're looking to entice advertisers by getting an audience share.

Im aware that Putins totalitarianism is more sever than Bush or Obamas

Which is why I find it so objectional when the former KGB official news agency engages in such handwringing about US human rights abuses.

but fear that if we dont fight tooth and nail for every right our government takes away in 20 years time or less

In history there has never been a situation in which the rights of the populace were slowly eroded. Authoritarian states are always, without exception, the result of revolution.

we'll see Greenday being imprisoned for mocking President Hailey Joel Osmant.

This was pretty funny though