Kooks and some of their conspiracies

Superlativeman

Eugenics:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/02/health/research/02infect.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_experiment
http://www.organicconsumers.org/epa-alert.htm (thankfully stopped)

Concentration Camps
http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/pdf/r210_35.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rex_84
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Endgame
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/03/AR2008040300067.html?hpid=moreheadlines

Funding of dictators
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sCpsq55uic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GhPsJCXPqY
For impressive evidence of Western participation in the early phase of Soviet economic growth, see Antony C. Sutton's Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development: 1917-1930, which argues that 'Soviet economic development for 1917-1930 was essentially dependent on Western technological aid' (p.283), and that 'at least 95 per cent of the industrial structure received this assistance.' Zbigniew Brzezinski

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/dec/31/iraq.politics
http://www.counterpunch.org/dixon06172004.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/13/benito-mussolini-recruited-mi5-italy

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/US_ThirdWorld/US_PolPot.html

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=3487

Taking the freedoms away
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2010/03/enemy-belligerent-interrogation-detention-and-prosecution-act-2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBdPEK5pNtE
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=3487
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-information-czar-calls-for-banning-free-speech.html

Just some of the things these clowns believe.

liah

The strangest thing about conspiracy theorists is the fact that they constantly say "don't believe everything they tell you" with a patronizing wink, while they totally eat up completely unfounded, undocumented, unable-to-be-proven myths and rumours from people who have little to no backgrounds in anything with no qualms at all.

It's mind-boggling. Fair enough, questioning is always a good thing, but questioning one thing doesn't mean you have to buy into every story Joe Internet has for you today.

Any CTer care to explain how the "don't believe everything they tell you" line applies only to government/whatever evil thing is fashionable to freak out about at the moment, and not a load of random websites/loudmouths on the internet who spout literally whatever their imagination can come up with with no verifiable facts to be found?

Genuine question, by the way..

joebucks

liah wrote: »

The strangest thing about conspiracy theorists is the fact that they constantly say "don't believe everything they tell you" with a patronizing wink, while they totally eat up completely unfounded, undocumented, unable-to-be-proven myths and rumours from people who have little to no backgrounds in anything with no qualms at all.

It's mind-boggling. Fair enough, questioning is always a good thing, but questioning one thing doesn't mean you have to buy into every story Joe Internet has for you today.

Any CTer care to explain how the "don't believe everything they tell you" line applies only to government/whatever evil thing is fashionable to freak out about at the moment, and not a load of random websites/loudmouths on the internet who spout literally whatever their imagination can come up with with no verifiable facts to be found?

Genuine question, by the way..

Yeah I know Liah. It is mind-boggling. How can CTers actually believe some of this stuff without any evidence for it??
Like how come so many of these 'nutjobs' actually believe that the Taliban were behind 9/11 when no evidence has been produced to show that they were behind the attacks and that the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan is legal.

This Chomsky fella must be full of it.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/149520.html

liah

I'm not talking about any one specific CT here. I believe what happened with regards to 9/11 and the subsequent sequence of evets remains to be seen. Regardless, the drivel that is put out by the majority of CTers is pseudo-science at best, if you actually do some research past what's shown in the videos and on the websites much of it is completely unfounded or has very, very suspicious sources (if any at all).

I'm not saying to believe everything the government spits out, either. Like I said, questioning is a good thing. What isn't a good thing is crying out "don't believe this highly questionable content, believe THIS highly questionable content!"

I'd rather wait and analyze all possibilities before believing any one of them wholly, and I'd much, MUCH rather know that what I believe is verifiable and not made up by some kook on the 'net with a big mouth, misinterpreted and altered facts and a sense of misplaced superiority.

joebucks

liah wrote: »

I'm not talking about any one specific CT here. I believe what happened with regards to 9/11 and the subsequent sequence of evets remains to be seen. Regardless, the drivel that is put out by the majority of CTers is pseudo-science at best, if you actually do some research past what's shown in the videos and on the websites much of it is completely unfounded or has very, very suspicious sources (if any at all).

I'm not saying to believe everything the government spits out, either. Like I said, questioning is a good thing. What isn't a good thing is crying out "don't believe this highly questionable content, believe THIS highly questionable content!"

I'd rather wait and analyze all possibilities before believing any one of them wholly, and I'd much, MUCH rather know that what I believe is verifiable and not made up by some kook on the 'net with a big mouth, misinterpreted and altered facts and a sense of misplaced superiority.

Personally I would have to disagree with your broad generalistion of CT'ers. Maybe if you go to specific CT site like infowars.com you will followers of Alex Jones wholeheartedly agreeing with his every point but that would be only a fraction of the people interested in CTs and a concentrated sample of that type of person.

However most who I have come across on this forum would be of the opinion that people should look at the different possibilities and make their own mind-up based on evidence or lack of evidence. Most people are just expressing an opinion or want to discuss possible alternatives to what is produced in the mainstream.

Lastly on the matter of verifiable sources, people vary on what they consider to be a verifiable source. Some people believe that mainstream media outlets are involved in all sorts of various conspiracies so therefor would not treat what they get from these outlets to be a verifiable source whereas others will only believe what something once it has been verified by the MSM. This is where the main problem lies in a lot of arguments about CT's as once it appears in MSM it ceases to be considered a CT jsut a conspiracy.

Yitzhak Rabin

Just a quick warning.

Often in the past, threads like this have descended into petty name-calling and generalisations, so keep in mind this line of the charter;

"Please don't use sweeping generalisations which indirectly attack or belittle other posters here. Posts which are insulting to those who believe conspiracies / the mainstream, for example, may be considered to be insulting to other posters, and as such will not be tolerated."

So please keep it civil.

Superlativeman

joebucks wrote: »

Personally I would have to disagree with your broad generalistion of CT'ers. Maybe if you go to specific CT site like infowars.com you will followers of Alex Jones wholeheartedly agreeing with his every point but that would be only a fraction of the people interested in CTs and a concentrated sample of that type of person.

However most who I have come across on this forum would be of the opinion that people should look at the different possibilities and make their own mind-up based on evidence or lack of evidence. Most people are just expressing an opinion or want to discuss possible alternatives to what is produced in the mainstream.

Lastly on the matter of verifiable sources, people vary on what they consider to be a verifiable source. Some people believe that mainstream media outlets are involved in all sorts of various conspiracies so therefor would not treat what they get from these outlets to be a verifiable source whereas others will only believe what something once it has been verified by the MSM. This is where the main problem lies in a lot of arguments about CT's as once it appears in MSM it ceases to be considered a CT jsut a conspiracy.

Can you explain explain how is it a conspiracy that every major plant in the 5 year plans was built by a western company like the Gorki plant, which was built by the Ford Motor company?

And the likes of Ford and General Motor's subsidiary in German, Opel, were given tax exempt status in 1936 by the Nazi's because they were producing the largest amount tanks for them?

Lastly on the matter of verifiable sources, people vary on what they consider to be a verifiable source.

The links I posted were all based on declassified documents or just admitted news.

Superlativeman

joebucks wrote: »

Yeah I know Liah. It is mind-boggling. How can CTers actually believe some of this stuff without any evidence for it??
Like how come so many of these 'nutjobs' actually believe that the Taliban were behind 9/11 when no evidence has been produced to show that they were behind the attacks and that the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan is legal.

This Chomsky fella must be full of it.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/149520.html

Some even believe it's kooky to be suspicious of Al-walaki dining in the Pentagon 3 months after 9/11.

And listening to the 9/11 commissioners admit it's a fraud means absolutely nothing.

People talk of Jones being a kook and a liar, yet the disinformation about him and hit pieces by main stream media are disgraceful. Why do they have to try and make him look bad?

I was called a conspiracy theorist last year by reading Mary Harney's article about how the IMF were going to run the country: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/ireland/2009/1017/1224256900013.html

I was called a "internet theorist" by a SWP outside my college for pointing out that Woodrow Wilson was a Fascist President and not a Capitalist. He had the sedition and espionage acts, helped set up the private Federal Reserve, gave Leon Trotsky a passport and engaged in criminal activity. But all this was brushed aside as "conspiracy of the internet."

h2pogo

Superlativeman wrote: »

Eugenics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buck_v._Bell
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/02/health/research/02infect.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskegee_syphilis_experiment
http://www.organicconsumers.org/epa-alert.htm (thankfully stopped)

Concentration Camps
http://armypubs.army.mil/epubs/pdf/r210_35.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rex_84
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Endgame
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/03/AR2008040300067.html?hpid=moreheadlines

Funding of dictators
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3sCpsq55uic
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7GhPsJCXPqY
For impressive evidence of Western participation in the early phase of Soviet economic growth, see Antony C. Sutton's Western Technology and Soviet Economic Development: 1917-1930, which argues that 'Soviet economic development for 1917-1930 was essentially dependent on Western technological aid' (p.283), and that 'at least 95 per cent of the industrial structure received this assistance.' Zbigniew Brzezinski

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/dec/31/iraq.politics
http://www.counterpunch.org/dixon06172004.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/oct/13/benito-mussolini-recruited-mi5-italy



http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/US_ThirdWorld/US_PolPot.html

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=3487

Taking the freedoms away
http://motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2010/03/enemy-belligerent-interrogation-detention-and-prosecution-act-2010
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XBdPEK5pNtE
http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=3487
http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-information-czar-calls-for-banning-free-speech.html

Just some of the things these clowns believe.

Why did you pick those CTs..do you actually know any one that believes all those?


The one about the US supporting poll pot is almost certainly been proven by Jhon Pilger the same journalist to blow the whistle on what was happening in Cambodia and east timor..I can provide links if required..

I have traveled alot in europe in the past few dacades and can confirm all eu states are loosing their freedoms big time..sorry no conspiracy there..fact.

Btw. was JFK a conspiracy clown or was he telling the truth when he said"There is a global ruthless conspiracy"?

Superlativeman

yekahs wrote: »

Just a quick warning.

Often in the past, threads like this have descended into petty name-calling and generalisations, so keep in mind this line of the charter;

"Please don't use sweeping generalisations which indirectly attack or belittle other posters here. Posts which are insulting to those who believe conspiracies / the mainstream, for example, may be considered to be insulting to other posters, and as such will not be tolerated."

So please keep it civil.

I can't be cicil when people brush aside murdering children and the mentally retarded and giving troops depleted uranium and letting them die. Can't be civil.

9/11 I don't care about because it's complex, but eugenics is not.

Superlativeman

h2pogo wrote: »

Why did you pick those CTs..do you actually know any one that believes all those?


The one about the US supporting poll pot is almost certainly been proven by Jhon Pilger the same journalist to blow the whistle on what was happening in Cambodia and east timor..I can provide links if required..

I have traveled alot in europe in the past few dacades and can confirm all eu states are loosing their freedoms big time..sorry no conspiracy there..fact.

Btw. was JFK a conspiracy clown or was he telling the truth when he said"There is a global ruthless conspiracy"?

Man, I was being sarcastic.

Lol, all those things are 100 per cent real.

Even when I read about Mao before I knew of Alex Jones and others, I thought it was suspicious the way the Americans didn't back Chiang. Anyway, we know that Henry Kissenger calls Mao an "egalitarian" in his private memoirs and that one of Obama's staff called him a "philosopher" and her favorite.

JFK: A guy in the army defects to your enemy, marry's an army colonels daughter, comes back to America, and isn't even investigated, that sounds like a conspiracy.

What do you expect? He didn't want the war in Vietnam, by the way, it's declassified that was all a lie. The NSA and Robert McNamara himself.

joebucks

Superlativeman wrote: »

Can you explain explain how is it a conspiracy that every major plant in the 5 year plans was built by a western company like the Gorki plant, which was built by the Ford Motor company?

And the likes of Ford and General Motor's subsidiary in German, Opel, were given tax exempt status in 1936 by the Nazi's because they were producing the largest amount tanks for them?



The links I posted were all based on declassified documents or just admitted news.

This is the point I am trying to make re: CTs. These things are no longer be considered conspiracy theories just news..

h2pogo

Superlativeman wrote: »

Man, I was being sarcastic.

Lol, all those things are 100 per cent real.

Even when I read about Mao before I knew of Alex Jones and others, I thought it was suspicious the way the Americans didn't back Chiang. Anyway, we know that Henry Kissenger calls Mao an "egalitarian" in his private memoirs and that one of Obama's staff called him a "philosopher" and her favorite.

JFK: A guy in the army defects to your enemy, marry's an army colonels daughter, comes back to America, and isn't even investigated, that sounds like a conspiracy.

What do you expect? He didn't want the war in Vietnam, by the way, it's declassified that was all a lie. The NSA and Robert McNamara himself.

Nice one..I appreciate people taking the time to get info out there..I only looked at a few links in your post may look again..

this is what JFK said if anyone interested..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaH-lGafwtE

Di0genes

joebucks wrote: »

Yeah I know Liah. It is mind-boggling. How can CTers actually believe some of this stuff without any evidence for it??
Like how come so many of these 'nutjobs' actually believe that the Taliban were behind 9/11 when no evidence has been produced to show that they were behind the attacks and that the invasion and occupation of Afghanistan is legal.

This Chomsky fella must be full of it.

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/149520.html

Well thats because the Taliban didn't carry out 9/11, Al Qaeda did.

Di0genes

h2pogo wrote: »

Nice one..I appreciate people taking the time to get info out there..I only looked at a few links in your post may look again..

this is what JFK said if anyone interested..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RaH-lGafwtE

JFK was talking about the Soviet Union.

h2pogo

Di0genes wrote: »

JFK was talking about the Soviet Union.

LOL..

Di0genes

h2pogo wrote: »

LOL..

What a eloquent and well written rebuttal

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=928_1217456062

h2pogo

Di0genes wrote: »

What a eloquent and well written rebuttal

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=928_1217456062

You cant be serious..Its in context with the rest of the speech about responsibility's and obligations of the press..

Di0genes

h2pogo wrote: »

You cant be serious..Its in context with the rest of the speech about responsibility's and obligations of the press..

Yes I'll think you'll find my link is the one that is longer and places the speech in context.

But Shall I post up a transcript of the full speech, and highlight the bits?

joebucks

Di0genes wrote: »

Well thats because the Taliban didn't carry out 9/11, Al Qaeda did.

The Taliban are considered by many to be complicit in the 9/11 attacks as they harbored Al Qaeda, as per The Bush Doctrine.

Any proof AL Qaeda carried out attacks?

h2pogo

Di0genes wrote: »

Yes I'll think you'll find my link is the one that is longer and places the speech in context.

But Shall I post up a transcript of the full speech, and highlight the bits?

I watched all the vid and have heard all the speech and its all in context..mentioning the secret society's and the global conspiracy and the way the press leaked the bay of pigs preparations is all in the context of the responsibility and obligations of the press..

Do post the transcript people should see it..

Di0genes

joebucks wrote: »

The Taliban are considered by many to be complicit in the 9/11 attacks as they harbored Al Qaeda, as per The Bush Doctrine.

Any proof AL Qaeda carried out attacks?

It's the way they admitted carrying out the attacks, the evidence at the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, etc etc etc...

joebucks

Di0genes wrote: »

It's the way they admitted carrying out the attacks, the evidence at the trial of Khalid Sheikh Mohammed, etc etc etc...

When was that trial ?

Di0genes

joebucks wrote: »

When was that trial ?

The trial that started in 2008 and is still ongoing...

Bharara will have to make the case under very unusual circumstances. "The challenge for prosecutors is to try and present a case that is not tainted by evidence that is inadmissible," says Joshua Dratel, a criminal lawyer in New York who has appealed cases against terrorists on the basis of torture allegations. Holder testified at his Senate-confirmation hearings earlier this year that he believes waterboarding is torture, and any evidence obtained after Mohammed's waterboarding will likely be inadmissible.

That means the government will likely have to rely on evidence that predates the 2003 waterboarding, as well as Mohammed's 2002 statement to al-Jazeera in which he took credit for the attack.

That means the government will likely have to rely on evidence that predates the 2003 waterboarding, as well as Mohammed's 2002 statement to al-Jazeera in which he took credit for the attack.
Holder said at his press conference announcing the trials Friday that he has seen evidence previously unavailable that made him confident the prosecution will be successful. "If the government's going to prosecute Mohammed for 9/11, it will have diligently and thoroughly scrubbed the evidence to obtain certainty" that it can make the case, says David Laufman, a former prosecutor in the Eastern District of Virginia, who tried and won cases against al-Qaeda members charged in terrorist plots.




Read more: http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1939374,00.html#ixzz16FLCAzBD

joebucks

Di0genes wrote: »

The trial that started in 2008 and is still ongoing...

So nothing is conclusive yet?

If it is conclusive then why do you continue to debate the matter?

gizmo

joebucks wrote: »

So nothing is conclusive yet?

If it is conclusive then why do you continue to debate the matter?

Er...

That means the government will likely have to rely on evidence that predates the 2003 waterboarding, as well as Mohammed's 2002 statement to al-Jazeera in which he took credit for the attack.

Sounds pretty conclusive to me.

Di0genes

joebucks wrote: »

So nothing is conclusive yet?

If it is conclusive then why do you continue to debate the matter?

The trial has stalled because the accused has changed his plea to guilty, and the US are now examining his mental competence to change his plea. Does really seem like a rail roading towards a show trial now does it?

joebucks

gizmo wrote: »

Er...


Sounds pretty conclusive to me.

So this guy:



was "the principal architect of the 9/11 attacks."
He also claims reponsibility for the World Trade Center 1993 bombings, the Operation Bojinka plot, an aborted 2002 attack on the U.S. Bank Tower in Los Angeles, the Bali nightclub bombings, the failed bombing of American Airlines Flight 63, the Millennium Plot, and the murder of Daniel Pearl.

They have physical evidence for all of this?


You should get on to Chomsky about this.

Di0genes

joebucks wrote: »

So this guy:



was "the principal architect of the 9/11 attacks."
He also claims reponsibility for the World Trade Center 1993 bombings, the Operation Bojinka plot, an aborted 2002 attack on the U.S. Bank Tower in Los Angeles, the Bali nightclub bombings, the failed bombing of American Airlines Flight 63, the Millennium Plot, and the murder of Daniel Pearl.

They have physical evidence for all of this?

it was presented at his trial, a trial he's changed his plea to guilt during proceeding.

You should get on to Chomsky about this.

You appear to have dropped some of the straws you're clutching at.

joebucks

Di0genes wrote: »

it was presented at his trial, a trial he's changed his plea to guilt during proceeding.

So you have no evidence other than a confession given under extreme duress?

You appear to have dropped some of the straws you're clutching at.

sarcasm.

Di0genes

joebucks wrote: »

So you have no evidence other than a confession given under extreme duress?

You missed the Al Jazeera interview in 2002 where he claimed responsibility.

Are you saying Al Jazeera waterboarded him?

sarcasm.

Yes it was. And yes this is.