Evidence

starn

Can anyone provide verifiable evidence to support any of the alleged conspracys posted on this form. Or any evidence provided by reputible sources ie peer reviewed journels as opposed to Youtube, Wikipedia or some blokes web site.



This post is not intentionally directed at poster or allged conspiracy in paticular.
But I would be very intrested in any proof that can be provided to substanciate the claims made here.

Kind Regards
Starn

thecommander

starn wrote: »

Can anyone provide verifiable evidence to support any of the alleged conspracys posted on this form. Or any evidence provided by reputible sources ie peer reviewed journels as opposed to Youtube, Wikipedia or some blokes web site.



This post is not intentionally directed at poster or allged conspiracy in paticular.
But I would be very intrested in any proof that can be provided to substanciate the claims made here.

Kind Regards
Starn

Usually ask most days, but you get alot of hearsay and links to newspaper reports that have no bearing. Fair play if you do.

starn

Anytakers

GhostInTheRuins

Erm, more or less......no

javaboy

Conspiracy theories are just that: Theories about conspiracies. The emphasis is on the conspiracy bit. That means that somebody has been deliberately covering up the evidence. So it's expected that there will be less evidential support for the theories than one might like.

With that said, some people (not just on this board but in this area in general) take advantage of this aspect of conspiracy theories and use it as an excuse to make up some crazy story without providing a shred of evidence.

starn

javaboy wrote: »

Conspiracy theories are just that: Theories about conspiracies. The emphasis is on the conspiracy bit. That means that somebody has been deliberately covering up the evidence. So it's expected that there will be less evidential support for the theories than one might like.

With that said, some people (not just on this board but in this area in general) take advantage of this aspect of conspiracy theories and use it as an excuse to make up some crazy story without providing a shred of evidence.

No I understand that. But given the nature and the high level of some of the threats stated (Conspiracys with in the EU parliment, faked moon landings) here [Iam in no way trying to single out single thread or pick on any poster] there has to be something more then the ramblings of a unknown source or some blokes youtube video to back up the alllegations.

Otherwise what is stopping me from coming up with exspsoing a CT along the lines that all Letrim is actually a giant lake and not a county. The goverment atually made it up to recive EU funding. With the advent of satalite photography. The Irish goverment approached the US Navy allowing them to to test battleships secretly in Lake Letrim in return for secret payments and photoshopping all saltalite photography so that letrim appears as a landmass. Everyperson you have everment from letrim is a actor hired by the irish goverment. From source for this is a documentry on Youtube made by two TY students and a goverment insider [postman] from Ballbriggan. That the Irish govermenyt and US Navey has tried to suprese.

thecommander

starn wrote: »

No I understand that. But given the nature and the high level of some of the threats stated (Conspiracys with in the EU parliment, faked moon landings) here [Iam in no way trying to single out single thread or pick on any poster] there has to be something more then the ramblings of a unknown source or some blokes youtube video to back up the alllegations.

Otherwise what is stopping me from coming up with a CT along the lines that all Letrim is actually a giant lake and not a county. The goverment atually made it up to recive EU funding. With the advent of satalite photography. The Irish goverment approached the US Navy allowing them to to test battleships secretly in Lake Letrim in return for secret payments and photoshopping all saltalite photography so that letrim appears as a landmass. Everyperson you have everment from letrim is a actor hired by the irish goverment. From source for this is a documentry on Youtube made by two TY students and a goverment insider [postman] from Ballbriggan. That the Irish govermenyt and US Navey has tried to suprese.

Im sure someone would run with that. Add in some CCTV cameras, "expert" opinions, RFID chips, and a pinch of world bank and you're onto a winner

GhostInTheRuins

starn wrote: »

Letrim is actually a giant lake and not a county. The goverment atually made it up to recive EU funding. With the advent of satalite photography. The Irish goverment approached the US Navy allowing them to to test battleships secretly in Lake Letrim in return for secret payments and photoshopping all saltalite photography so that letrim appears as a landmass. Everyperson you have everment from letrim is a actor hired by the irish goverment. From source for this is a documentry on Youtube made by two TY students and a goverment insider [postman] from Ballbriggan. That the Irish govermenyt and US Navey has tried to suprese.

Holy christ :eek:

That explains why I've never met a single person from Letrim and I have never been there.

Thanks for opening my eyes :cool:

starn

Its funny you should say that. I cant say to much, without fearing for my safty and the safty of my family but I know others who want to come forward

starn

GhostInTheRuins wrote: »

Holy christ :eek:

That explains why I've never met a single person from Letrim and I have never been there.

Thanks for opening my eyes :cool:

All roads thru Letrim lead around the lake. There panorama on view are actually giant plasma screens on the verge of all the roads. Projecting a video feed from Kerry. With computer animators from the IMF {who are being used to launder the ill gotten gains} to add in the prevalent wheather conditions. I saw this on a website somewhere.

Sofa_King Good

random example... The Force Research Unit (FRU) in the North. The British Government were running double agents for over 20 years. Involved in bomb making, murder, and shooting RUC men.

thecommander

Sofa_King Good wrote: »

random example... The Force Research Unit (FRU) in the North. The British Government were running double agents for over 20 years. Involved in bomb making, murder, and shooting RUC men.

One example. By saying random you'd sweat there we're hundred of them to choose from.

starn

Sofa_King Good wrote: »

random example... The Force Research Unit (FRU) in the North. The British Government were running double agents for over 20 years. Involved in bomb making, murder, and shooting RUC men.

Im sorry random example of what ?????????


Random example Donuts

Sofa_King Good

thecommander wrote: »

One example. By saying random you'd sweat there we're hundred of them to choose from.

okay, random example; The sinking of the USS Liberty. This site was set up by surviving crewmen.

http://www.gtr5.com/quotes.htm

Sofa_King Good

starn wrote: »

Im sorry random example of what ?????????


Random example Donuts

Evidence?

Stevens Report, 3

http://www.madden-finucane.com/patfinucane/archive/pat_finucane/2003-04-17_stevens_report.pdf

Westminister Debate

http://www.madden-finucane.com/patfinucane/archive/pat_finucane/2003-05-14.htm

Press Release by NGO's

http://www.madden-finucane.com/patfinucane/archive/pat_finucane/2003-04-16.htm

Think I might have ballsed that up a bit.

starn

Im sorry Ive never heared of the USS Liberty can you please explain your point a little more clearly. Im afaid I can be quite slow when it comes to these things.


Random example Ice Cream

www.benandjerrys.ie

This web site was set by someone who works for Ben and Jerrys

starn

Your not cmparing like with like. It was assumed for years by most members of the public that the British Army and RUC where colluding with elements within the RUC. The papers had allegations on this almost eveyweek, from rats with in the paramillitarys. Given the way that the British Army and RUC where targeted by the IRA and its splinter groups its quite understandalby to see how members with in the organisations were so willing to collude.

As side from some posters here and on other web sites I have NEVER seen allegations in any repected Irish or European newspaper alleging that members within the The EU parliment had a secret agenda of a establashing a NWO.

Anyway unless there NWO is to be a province in a global China. There not going to get very far. Im more worried about what China might do then some secret organisation. For which there is not a shread of proof to support its exsistance.

Have none of these NWO people never heared of a death bed confession. Surely someone would of tried to come clean by now. Or are they immortal like Christopher Lambert in Highlander

Sofa_King Good

I'm not comparing anything. So you know the FRU had infiltrated and had hitmen in the UDA too?.

If that is not subsersive and sinister and therefore a conspiracy, I don't know what is.

You asked for one I gave you one, despite the fact the originial post was contradictory. How can anything "alleged" be "verifiable"?

Sofa_King Good

On the basis of that, is not an enormous leap of faith to believe that some of this is possible:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=KEE20050925&articleId=994

Therein lies the conspiracy theory "alleged" and "unverified". I'm not convinced one way or the other, but possible, yes?

starn

Sofa_King Good wrote: »

okay, random example; The sinking of the USS Liberty. This site was set up by surviving crewmen.

http://www.gtr5.com/quotes.htm

Im sorry I havent read this properly. But Im just wondering why would Isreal attack a US navel vessel. Since 1949 Isreal has recived more then 90 BILLION dollars in support from the US goverment along with numerous other donations from private indivuals. Why justification would they have to attack the US.

I cant think of any, can you

starn

Sofa_King Good wrote: »

On the basis of that, is not an enormous leap of faith to believe that some of this is possible:

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=KEE20050925&articleId=994

Therein lies the conspiracy theory "alleged" and "unverified". I'm not convinced one way or the other, but possible, yes?

Im sorry on the basis of what. I really am quite slow so you need to be clereared with your posts please

strawberry-pc

The Resistance Manifesto

http://www.theresistancemanifesto.com/

And your eyes will be wide open

thecommander

strawberry-pc wrote: »

The Resistance Manifesto

http://www.theresistancemanifesto.com/

And your eyes will be wide open

The youtube ad is like a plot to a bad B movie.

I think I'm in love with starn.

thecommander

King Mob wrote: »

I think I'm in love with starn.

Hes a bit good.

starn

strawberry-pc wrote: »

The Resistance Manifesto

http://www.theresistancemanifesto.com/

And your eyes will be wide open

It kinda reminds me of a trailer for the video game Desus Ex 2

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RVZB5CJSHjM

starn

Sofa_King Good wrote: »

I'm not comparing anything. So you know the FRU had infiltrated and had hitmen in the UDA too?.

If that is not subsersive and sinister and therefore a conspiracy, I don't know what is.

You asked for one I gave you one, despite the fact the originial post was contradictory. How can anything "alleged" be "verifiable"?

No I have never heared of the FRU. I do know that a number of middle ranking Military officers and High ranking RUC officers independantly coluded with member of the UDA.

In the second part of your post youve taken my words out of context.

But to explain my point if I alleged that someone stole a copy of Combat form a newsagents. I can examine a security tape and verify if you did indeed steel the magazine

With the example of the north you looking at independant acts of collusion by indivual and unconneted members of the security servies.

The definion of a conspiracy is as follows

# a secret agreement between two or more people to perform an unlawful act
# a plot to carry out some harmful or illegal act (especially a political plot)

So if me and you decide to go out and rob a shop, and dont tell anyone about it before hand. Well then yes thats a conspiracy, and its very hard to prove that we conspiraed to do it. If we plan to make it spontanious. In a case like that I would accept yes that its very hard to prove we conspired to do it.

But thats not the type of disccused here. Here we have grandoise plans for world domination or trackin peple with RFID {Why would anyone bother} conspiracys that require hundreds and thosands of people. But yet there is not one scrape of evidence or one credile whistleblower. Not one Iota.

Have you ever tried to keep a secret with a small group of friends its impossile.

All I want is one piece of tangiable evidence to soemof the CT here. TBH im insulted by the some of the tat ive seen reported endorsing some of the CT. I saw one writing off the moon mission on the geological reports. By trade Im a geologist Ive seen thos reports. There very thorough, very detailed and cntain years of work. Why on Earth would anybody bother trying to fake that. Whats the point if the Russians can track the rockets and listen in on the radio transmissions there going to know. No one went to the moon. So why bother. The only people who benifit are those writting books on how the moonlanding were facked.
Im very sorry if ive gone off in a bit of a rant but its late and im tired. But please take on board what im saying.
Ask your self why. Why would Isreal decide to attack the United States. I cant think of a single reason. I put it to you to give me one. How would in serve Isreal to attack the US what would they have to gain.

Im using Isreal and FRU as random examples. So before you put another random example up. Can you please address my points


Kind Regards
Starn

Mahatma coat

starn wrote: »

Im sorry I havent read this properly. But Im just wondering why would Isreal attack a US navel vessel. Since 1949 Isreal has recived more then 90 BILLION dollars in support from the US goverment along with numerous other donations from private indivuals. Why justification would they have to attack the US.

I cant think of any, can you

Do you accept now however that they did attack it, does the fact that 'you never heard of it before' suggest that it may have been covered up, do you feel slightly suspicious that someone somewhere conspired to hide the truth

but on to your last point, YOU cant think of a reason, so therefore there isnt one, is that what you are saying?

conventional wisdom amongst the CT community is that the IDF intended to Sink the Liberty and blame the Arabs with whom they were at war, another Tonkin incident if you will, however once the Liberty managed to get a signal out they had to stop.

what about the other links, it is fairly well documented that members of the British security forces were involved in terrorist activities throughout the troubles in Northern Ireland, it has also been postulated that without their involvement the death toll may have been a lot lower.

Kernel

Enter Starn. A man on a mission, the mission, to troll. He brings the_commander, a new user by all accounts as his faithful companion - because if someone agrees with you, that makes your logic even more impervious to rebuke.

A man who doesn't believe in a new world order. A man who wants peer reviewed scientific evidence for non-scientific politics [unless you consider sociology, economics and eugenics as sciences] which by definition are not broadcast to the general populace (the profane). But starn is about to start posting outside of the normal realms of boards. Starn has posted on, the conspiracy zone.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7a9Syi12RJo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uv5cqh26CC0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bKwH3kJew4&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkKbE9qCzQo&feature=related

Check those out for starters. Just because I know you love youtube. Love. K.

Kernel

Mahatma coat wrote: »

is fairly well documented that members of the British security forces were involved in terrorist activities throughout the troubles in Northern Ireland, it has also been postulated that without their involvement the death toll may have been a lot lower.

Tell him how Watergate would be a load of old ****e except it was proven in the end! Although now the pseudo-skeptics claim that as evidence against other conspiracies being real. Such bad logic... Pseudo skeptics are like the borg, they just assimilate everything into their arguments and dismiss what doesn't fit. An accusation often levelled at conspiracy theorists (often correct too, admittedly).

Kernel

Kernel wrote: »

A man who wants peer reviewed scientific evidence for non-scientific politics [unless you consider sociology, economics and eugenics as sciences] which by definition are not broadcast to the general populace (the profane).

You know history papers and political science papers are subject to peer review as well. Most papers are available to the public as well. But a citation works almost as well.
Hell, anything other than misinterpreted news articles and the websites of people with mental issues would make a welcome change.

starn

Kernel wrote: »

Tell him how Watergate would be a load of old ****e except it was proven in the end! Although now the pseudo-skeptics claim that as evidence against other conspiracies being real. Such bad logic... Pseudo skeptics are like the borg, they just assimilate everything into their arguments and dismiss what doesn't fit. An accusation often levelled at conspiracy theorists (often correct too, admittedly).

No I think you have it all wrong. My point is someone always talks. Who tipped off the papers about watergate of collusion of security forces in the North. Whistleblowers talk and point people who can really can do something about thses things in the right direction.

Your part of a interbational conspiracy. You wanna talk. Who do you leak to. A journo at the Washington Post or some 18 year old. Who can put a video on Youtube.

What exactly is a pseudo skepic and how exactly is my logic flawed. I dont rember dimissing anything either

starn

Do you accept now however that they did attack it, does the fact that 'you never heard of it before' suggest that it may have been covered up, do you feel slightly suspicious that someone somewhere conspired to hide the truth

I cant say for definite that it was attacked no. But I cant say for definate it was. Ive never heared of the Ship up until a few hours ago. I cant take it on the word of one person on a internet buttlion board and one web site that it was attacked. Give me a week or two. To look into it more and I can tell you then exactly what I think.

but on to your last point, YOU cant think of a reason, so therefore there isnt one, is that what you are saying?

I cant think of a reason. Thats why I asked the poster if he knew of one. Rember the USS Liberty is completely new to me I have never heared of it up until a couple of hours ago.

conventional wisdom amongst the CT community is that the IDF intended to Sink the Liberty and blame the Arabs with whom they were at war, another Tonkin incident if you will, however once the Liberty managed to get a signal out they had to stop.

Well aside form the CT community have any unbiased jouros or papers looked into this or found any evidence to support your arguement. Liberal whistleblowers within the Isreal goverment or high ranking officails within the american military. They really dont like there troops being killed. A story along the lines of the one your suggesting. Would be the making a jurnalistic carrer for any copy boy sitting in the print room of a newsppaer. Not to mention the increased sales of the paper running it.

what about the other links, it is fairly well documented that members of the British security forces were involved in terrorist activities throughout the troubles in Northern Ireland, it has also been postulated that without their involvement the death toll may have been a lot lower.

If you go back a few posts I think youll find Ive covered this already

starn

Im Sorry Kearnel. Im a little slow when it comes to these things so can you just bear with with and help clear up a few thing

Enter Starn. A man on a mission, the mission, to troll. He brings the_commander, a new user by all accounts as his faithful companion - because if someone agrees with you, that makes your logic even more impervious to rebuke.

What exactly do you mean by that. Ill agree my first post here was quite flippant and Im sorry about that. I can understand why you might be slightly hostile to me. But why the abusive comment about the_commander are you saying that becasue he is only posting a short while he has nothing to add. Finally I would of thought logic makes itself impervious to rebuke.

A man who doesn't believe in a new world order. A man who wants peer reviewed scientific evidence for non-scientific politics [unless you consider sociology, economics and eugenics as sciences] which by definition are not broadcast to the general populace (the profane). But starn is about to start posting outside of the normal realms of boards. Starn has posted on, the conspiracy zone.

Sociology, economics are actually sciences. Economic theories and models are peer reviwed and citated. In fact John Nash who developed game theory and is one of the better known economic nobel laureates is a mathematician. Who submits all his work to peer reviewed journels. All peer reviewed journals are accseible on line. I suspect nexuslexis to be slightly more reliable a sourrse then Youtube. But I could be wrong

I dont quite understand why your brining up Eugenics.

The reason Ive evn read anything on this forum was due to teh thread on the moon landings, Ive seen peer reviewd papers on the geology of moon rocks. But bizzarly a documenty narrated by Neil Morrisy is a more reliable sourse of information. I donk see anything wrong with applying some critical thinking to some of the posts on this forum

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7a9Syi12RJo

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uv5cqh26CC0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bKwH3kJew4&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lkKbE9qCzQo&feature=related

Check those out for starters. Just because I know you love youtube. Love. K.

I havent looked at youe vidos yet. But will have a lok ath them tomoroow. I found the tone of your post to be over all to be needlesy nasty and mocking. I dont think there was any need for it

Mahatma coat

Kernel, a quick and friendly warning, Attack the Post not the Poster, some of your posts are coming across as hostile, there have been bannins for this already this week

Mahatma coat

eh Starn, you almost had it, when you break a single quote up into paragraphs you have to end wach section with a / so where you were using

you really need to put a / in the second one

ie [ / q u o t e ] but without the spaces

Run_to_da_hills

starn wrote: »

But thats not the type of disccused here. Here we have grandoise plans for world domination or trackin peple with RFID {Why would anyone bother} conspiracys that require hundreds and thosands of people. But yet there is not one scrape of evidence or one credile whistleblower. Not one Iota.

There is a scripture reference to a coded implant required for commercial transactions and thats enough evidence its self to set off alarm bells amongst some CT's.

Mahatma coat

WhaloShi : PM's are just that, Private Messages

they should not be dragged out int the debate without the consent of both parties, I'm off home for the evening but I put a hold on theat post of yours, as I'm not sure what the rules are on it.

I'm sure that either Bonkey or Miju will contact me to clarify the position on these things.

until then I would ask you and the rest of the posters to play by the rules of the CT charter and the general rules of the Board.

Thanks

MC

thecommander

Kernel wrote: »

He brings the_commander, a new user by all accounts as his faithful companion

I suggest you go look at records before you start. Been posting here for alot longer than starn. Cant handle more than 2 people not agreeing with you?

starn

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

There is a scripture reference to a coded implant required for commercial transactions and thats enough evidence its self to set off alarm bells amongst some CT's.

Im not familiar with the line can put post the book and verse or the line of scripture. Thanks

Sofa_King Good

starn wrote: »

Your not cmparing like with like. It was assumed for years by most members of the public that the British Army and RUC where colluding with elements within the RUC. The papers had allegations on this almost eveyweek, from rats with in the paramillitarys. Given the way that the British Army and RUC where targeted by the IRA and its splinter groups its quite understandalby to see how members with in the organisations were so willing to collude.

As side from some posters here and on other web sites I have NEVER seen allegations in any repected Irish or European newspaper alleging that members within the The EU parliment had a secret agenda of a establashing a NWO.

Anyway unless there NWO is to be a province in a global China. There not going to get very far. Im more worried about what China might do then some secret organisation. For which there is not a shread of proof to support its exsistance.

Have none of these NWO people never heared of a death bed confession. Surely someone would of tried to come clean by now. Or are they immortal like Christopher Lambert in Highlander

"Sorry, don't know how to quote properly)As side from some posters here and on other web sites I have NEVER seen allegations in any repected Irish or European newspaper alleging that members within the The EU parliment had a secret agenda of a establashing a NWO.
Hope you consider the Irish Times respected.

See Here
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/opinion/2002/1002/1033174039982.html

You don't seem to like reading the links so...

"There is widespread concern about the direction in which the European Union is heading. In the Laeken Declaration, agreed a year after Nice, a European constitution is signalled. It considers Europe as a power with a "leading role to play in a new world order", taking action "to deal with trouble spots" around the world and "resolutely doing battle against all violence."Laeken also saw the setting up of the Convention on the Future of Europe. Last May, the EU Commission President, Romano Prodi, introduced the Commission's first submission to that convention. Sweeping new powers are sought for the Commission in an enlarged EU.It proposes a common asylum and immigration policy, a single European legal framework and a European border guard.The Commission seeks the leading role in a Common Foreign and Security Policy which "sets out to safeguard, outside the union's own borders, certain values which are essential to our democracies."

So you know, the Laeken document was a 2001 precursor to the European Constitution, which then became the Lisbon Treaty.

starn

[quote/]
Hope you consider the Irish Times respected.
[/QUOTE]

Ican open the papd because I dont have a online subsciption but it apperars to be a opionion pieces as opposed to a piece of serious investigite jounalism.

When I googled Colm Roddy {the author of the peice} and Irish times. It didnt generate anyother links for storys within the paper by Mr Roddy.

If anything the fact that Mr Roddys opion piece was pulished and the story never followed up {as far as I can see} by any other journo from the Times or Indo, or any other paper as far as I can see. Goes to show how little there is to the story

starn

In fact the only place the only place I can find anything else written by Colm Roddy is on Indymedia

A site well known to have serious censor ship issues.Indymedia describes itself as

The Independent Media Centre Network is a network of collectively run media outlets for the creation of radical, accurate, and passionate tellings of the truth. We work out of a love and inspiration for people who continue to work for a better world, despite corporate media's distortions and unwillingness to cover the efforts to free humanity

The site frequently deletes posts that might contraict a story posted, or by posters who might question the authicity of the articles posted on it.


Does that make Indymedia a part of the NWO.

Why has no one ever posted in this forum{as far as I can tell} about the very clear and verifiable conspiracy within Indymedia to put forward there agenda and delete posts and belittle posters who might question it. A small but very real conspiracy

Sofa_King Good

starn wrote: »

[quote/]
Hope you consider the Irish Times respected.

Ican open the papd because I dont have a online subsciption but it apperars to be a opionion pieces as opposed to a piece of serious investigite jounalism.

When I googled Colm Roddy {the author of the peice} and Irish times. It didnt generate anyother links for storys within the paper by Mr Roddy.

If anything the fact that Mr Roddys opion piece was pulished and the story never followed up {as far as I can see} by any other journo from the Times or Indo, or any other paper as far as I can see. Goes to show how little there is to the story[/quote]

My Apologies, I forgot.


For me, the key point in your last point was "the fact that Mr Roddys opion piece was pulished "

Still though. It was an article in the "respected" Irish Times connecting the EU with the 'New World Order'. So know you've almost seen one.


here ya go, just for you

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/breaking/2003/1114/breaking69.html

Sofa_King Good

starn wrote: »

In fact the only place the only place I can find anything else written by Colm Roddy is on Indymedia

A site well known to have serious censor ship issues.Indymedia describes itself as

The Independent Media Centre Network is a network of collectively run media outlets for the creation of radical, accurate, and passionate tellings of the truth. We work out of a love and inspiration for people who continue to work for a better world, despite corporate media's distortions and unwillingness to cover the efforts to free humanity

The site frequently deletes posts that might contraict a story posted, or by posters who might question the authicity of the articles posted on it.


Does that make Indymedia a part of the NWO.

Why has no one ever posted in this forum{as far as I can tell} about the very clear and verifiable conspiracy within Indymedia to put forward there agenda and delete posts and belittle posters who might question it. A small but very real conspiracy

ok..."the very clear and verifiable conspiracy within Indymedia"" ... "any evidence provided by reputible sources ie peer reviewed journels as opposed to Youtube, Wikipedia or some blokes web site." ???

Sofa_King Good

Starn, "With the example of the north you looking at independant acts of collusion by indivual and unconneted members of the security servies. "


That's just plain wrong. Did you even read any of the "evidence"?

starn

We can sit here and argue over sematics all day but there is a very big differne between a thourghy reaserced article with refernces and a opinion piece or editorial. Kevin Myers used to publish his Irish Mans diary in the Irish Times. What you have sited in an an opionion peice. With out being able to read the peices of being able to rember that far back. Id imagine it was the case [as they have done recently with the Lisbon treaty] of publishing a number of opionion peices prior to the referemdum.

Without being able to read it I can only assume it furthers the ideology of a NWO. If it had any merit. Why has no one within the paper or any other media outlet pursuded it further.

The only thing it shows is that the Irish Times unlike Indymeidia. Is willing to allow all voices be heard.

You said the key point for you in my privious post was th Mr Roddys opioion piece was publish.

WHY IS THAT THE KEY POINT FOR YOU.

As I have pointed out already Im quite slow and no near as smart as the majority of people posting on boards. Nor am I able to read peoples minds.

So in future can you please qualify any statement along those lines you wish to make.

ie. The key point of your post is ....... because

starn

Sofa_King Good wrote: »

ok..."the very clear and verifiable conspiracy within Indymedia"" ... "any evidence provided by reputible sources ie peer reviewed journels as opposed to Youtube, Wikipedia or some blokes web site." ???

To be honest your being quite pedantic and childish now.

Indymedia selective censorship is quite different to a gobal conspiracy involving hundreds and thosnads of people.
At this stage I honestly think there is very little point replying to your posts. You quitw clearly have a very narrow minded view and are far to willing to even consider anything that might deviate form that. You pick on minutia and technacalities in my post and have failed to address any questions directed at you. While I have been quite happy to answer honestly anything you have asked me.

Im sorry if im coming across as condescending but have added very little since your first post on this thread and have taken the view that you cant possible be wrong and that I can never be right.

starn

Sofa_King Good wrote: »

Starn, "With the example of the north you looking at independant acts of collusion by indivual and unconneted members of the security servies. "


That's just plain wrong. Did you even read any of the "evidence"?

Why is it wrong. Please qualify.

Is it wrong because your never wrong and dont agree with something Ive written or because of something in one of the reports ???

Also SKG unless to start to make qualified posts instead of isolated statements I wont br responding to any more of your posts. Its takes to long to try and figure out what your trying to say

Regards

Starn

Sofa_King Good

starn wrote: »

Why is it wrong. Please qualify.

Is it wrong because your never wrong and dont agree with something Ive written or because of something in one of the reports ???

They key point of this post is that statement "independant acts of collusion by indivual and unconneted members of the security servies" is incorrect on the basis that it was NOT "independant acts of collusion by indivual and unconneted members of the security servies" - FACT

starn

Ah jesus ffs.

WHY IS IN NOT A FACT. YOU TELLING ME ITS NOT A FACT DOES NOT MAKE IT TRUE. QUALIFY YOUR STAEMENT YOU NEED TO EXPLAIN WHY ITS NOT A FACT

FACT

Im just going to ignore you from now on unless you qualify your post. You tellin me something is a fact does not make it so

FACT

Ive asked you to qualify your posts three or four times

You have been warned so dont start moaning when I ignore your posts laster