I participate on a theology forum (Well there's a shocker!!) and I run into a fair amount of people there that truly believe that 9/11 was an inside job. I am curious to see what the fine people on this forum think of 9/11.
I don't know that "Terrible Tuesday" was an inside job, but I do know that many questions weren't answered to my satisfaction. I don't think the official version was the entire truth of it. But I don't especially want to talk about it here, either, since it won't do a bit of good. I, and the world, have moved on.
The only conspiracy I have ever seen in play on 9/11 was the obvious one of twenty-someodd Muslim extremists hijacking and crashing 4 planes. All the others fail to live up to any sort of credibility.
Not much of a conspiracy theory kind of guy. Don't know if it was an inside job or not. I think not. But what was sort of brushed aside then and now, is that most of the participants were Saudies and not from Iraq or Iran. And Bush was pretty quick to use that as an excuse to attack Iraq.
Well, cabinetmaker, what do you think about it??
I watched the second plane live hit the second tower while I was at work. My parents only experienced news reals of Pearl Harbor. The TV was on in the patient waiting room, and the first news report on the first plane had stirred some interest. And of course later in the day we heard about the crash into the Pentagon, and into that field in Pennsylvania. Where I worked, we went to FPCON Delta (highest level of lockdown, worldwide). That is the only time I have experienced that. I wasn't particularly afraid. I was still married, and my daughter was still young.
Having worked with the US government for several decades ... I can tell you that nothing the government tells you is the complete truth, nor is it a complete lie. That isn't how government rolls. The public isn't entitled to anything, including the full truth ... other than death and taxes. That was certainly true concerning the US invasion of Iraq in 2003. National security dictates that the truth is used, only if it is of benefit to the current operation, and falsehood is used, only if it is of benefit to the current operation. Winning is the only standard of comparison.
Other than that, I don't know anything more than any other American about 9/11, then nor now ... and if I did, it would be wrong of me to share it. I don't support Edward Snowden (though I understand what he did and why), anymore than I supported the Vietnam War demonstrations (though I understand what they did and why). I have sympathy for all parties in a political conflict, but usually few wins are to be had, if any. Not all anti-government activity can cover itself with virtue signaling.
Snowden had predecessors:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4N2Iw953cc4
A typical start to the workday at a government office ;-)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yu_eXegPAWc
This is pretty funny, to spot this the same day as I passed the new 501 series Security + certification test ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WLh4kuaFKlI
I think its not even the slightest bit surprising that people on a theology forum would also be big into conspiracy theory. Once you've gotten to the point where evidence isn't required or even desired, you'll more or less believe anything anyone tries to sell you so long as it aligns with your own internal narrative.
Quote from: Johan on January 31, 2018, 08:20:09 PM
I think its not even the slightest bit surprising that people on a theology forum would also be big into conspiracy theory. Once you've gotten to the point where evidence isn't required or even desired, you'll more or less believe anything anyone tries to sell you so long as it aligns with your own internal narrative.
Except that real shit does happen ... including double agents etc.
Real shit does happen. And when it does, there is evidence. There is ALWAYS evidence.
Quote from: Johan on January 31, 2018, 08:47:28 PM
Real shit does happen. And when it does, there is evidence. There is ALWAYS evidence.
Not unambiguous evidence. And not any that you or I would ever be allowed to see. How long before a story about Enigma (but maybe not the real story) was allowed in public?
Inside job? Probably not.
Taken advantage of by the warmongers and war profiteers? Yeah, that's pretty clear. If they were serious about rooting out the 9/11 conspirators after invading Afghanistan, the next target should have been Saudi Arabia, not Iraq, and that should have been dones only after being damn sure the job in Afghanistan was complete.
Instead, they left Afghanistan half in the hands of Taliban thugs and immediately moved on Iraq. And given the number of times Dubya moved the goalposts in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, it's pretty clear that war there was their goal once they saw they had an opportunity. remember that they prioritized defending the oil ministry while the museumâ€"and by extension, the historical legacy of human civilizationâ€"was looted. That should tell you what their ultimate goal really was.
And, predictably, they fucked *that* up too.
Conspiracy? No. Greed? You betcha.
I believe most of the official story, that Muslim extremists, mainly from Saudi Arabia, crashed 2 planes into the WTC, 1 plane into the Pentagon and 1 plane into a field. That building 7 fell from falling debris from the WTC. I remember watching the whole ordeal on BBC world news and how surreal the whole thing felt.
The whole "jet fuel can't melt steel beams" is the first indication that people haven't even listened to the official story, because they never melted, but buckled under strain - this was explained in detail in the official story.
Conspiracy advocates are never about getting the truth, because it's obvious they ignore it when they get it. Their goal is to attack a person, persons, or an organization. This results in the resolute refusal to admit that there are fatal flaws in their advocacy, they steam right past that insoluble problem and continue their attacks.
With that in mind the way to deal with them is to address their claims, not them. Prove it wrong and show that proof whenever they bring up a "gotcha!" point.
Quote from: trdsf on January 31, 2018, 10:52:08 PM
Inside job? Probably not.
Taken advantage of by the warmongers and war profiteers? Yeah, that's pretty clear. If they were serious about rooting out the 9/11 conspirators after invading Afghanistan, the next target should have been Saudi Arabia, not Iraq, and that should have been dones only after being damn sure the job in Afghanistan was complete.
Instead, they left Afghanistan half in the hands of Taliban thugs and immediately moved on Iraq. And given the number of times Dubya moved the goalposts in the run-up to the invasion of Iraq, it's pretty clear that war there was their goal once they saw they had an opportunity. remember that they prioritized defending the oil ministry while the museumâ€"and by extension, the historical legacy of human civilizationâ€"was looted. That should tell you what their ultimate goal really was.
And, predictably, they fucked *that* up too.
Conspiracy? No. Greed? You betcha.
Yeah, PNAC was just fake news. Republicans are humanitarians ;-(
Quote from: Baruch on January 31, 2018, 09:25:29 PM
Not unambiguous evidence. And not any that you or I would ever be allowed to see. How long before a story about Enigma (but maybe not the real story) was allowed in public?
The perfect conspiracy, like the perfect murder, is difficult to pull off. Not to say they don't exist. I believe they do. Not identifying a conspiracy doesn't mean there is no conspiracy.
I run construction jobs...small to medium 6-30 million. Large jobs like the towers that have several hundred workers may seem like an easier target but larger jobs are far more restrictive simply due to the amount of tools and equipment open for snatching. Trying to convince anyone familiar with this role that somehow some peeps were able to strategically place explosives in the main frame for an attack coming thirty years in the future.....yeah....that's not "conspiracy theory" that's straight up stupid.
Quote from: Baruch on February 01, 2018, 06:26:07 AM
Yeah, PNAC was just fake news. Republicans are humanitarians ;-(
Actually NPR did an interview with an Iraq War critic who was explaining PNAC and who was obviously critical of its motives. At one point, the interviewer got ahead of himself and suggested that it was a conspiracy. The critic quickly negated the suggestion, adamantly protested, and clarified that it was not a conspiracy because all one had to do was go to the New American Century website and read what they had been openly pushing for years and years.
It would seem like a conspiracy to the average American for sure, because few Americans had ever heard about PNAC, but in fact is was there for anyone to read. New American Century had even lobbied a Mideast invasion to the first Bush administration, and afterwards, to the Clinton Administration, but both flatly rejected the idea, although the website didn't specify Iraq. Any Mideast country would suffice for their goals. Iraq only presented itself as an opportunity, because Saddam had pissed off a lot of Americans.
This got me interested in learning more, and when I googled it, even websites that disagreed with NAC, defined the organization as "a group of intellectuals." Further reading convinced me that this group of so called "intellectuals" was actually sincere and believed they could achieve a semblance of world peace through starting another war. It turns out they hadn't really followed their arguments to a logical conclusion, as ideologists often tend to do. I'm not sure what the meaning of "intellectuals" is, but NAC was clearly misguided, and in my opinion unforgivably stupid, because they lacked understanding of Muslim politics.
The actual conspiracy occurred during the Bush Administration that manufactured the propaganda to start the war. Bush was probably aware of the actual goal, but he and the "intellectuals" of NAC who comprised the majority of the inner circle were more naïve than smart.
Quote from: Mike Cl on January 31, 2018, 04:13:11 PM
Well, cabinetmaker, what do you think about it??
Regarding the collapse of the three buildings, I think that the official report completely explains that.
There are some interesting question that linger regarding some stock trades in the days before and there is no question that it has been ruthlessly exploited since.
I think the saddest thing is that we lost a huge portion of our freedoms that day and everybody is okay with that.
Quote from: cabinetmaker on February 01, 2018, 10:57:22 AM
I think the saddest thing is that we lost a huge portion of our freedoms that day and everybody is okay with that.
That ^^
I absolutely agree. The naked use of the 'fear' factor just makes me sick. I grew so tired of hearing people ask me if that attack did not make me afraid. Finally, I simply told them that I was not, and never was afraid--I was and am angry about it, not fearful.
Quote from: SGOS on February 01, 2018, 10:39:01 AM
Actually NPR did an interview with an Iraq War critic who was explaining PNAC and who was obviously critical of its motives. At one point, the interviewer got ahead of himself and suggested that it was a conspiracy. The critic quickly negated the suggestion, adamantly protested, and clarified that it was not a conspiracy because all one had to do was go to the New American Century website and read what they had been openly pushing for years and years.
It would seem like a conspiracy to the average American for sure, because few Americans had ever heard about PNAC, but in fact is was there for anyone to read. New American Century had even lobbied a Mideast invasion to the first Bush administration, and afterwards, to the Clinton Administration, but both flatly rejected the idea, although the website didn't specify Iraq. Any Mideast country would suffice for their goals. Iraq only presented itself as an opportunity, because Saddam had pissed off a lot of Americans.
This got me interested in learning more, and when I googled it, even websites that disagreed with NAC, defined the organization as "a group of intellectuals." Further reading convinced me that this group of so called "intellectuals" was actually sincere and believed they could achieve a semblance of world peace through starting another war. It turns out they hadn't really followed their arguments to a logical conclusion, as ideologists often tend to do. I'm not sure what the meaning of "intellectuals" is, but NAC was clearly misguided, and in my opinion unforgivably stupid, because they lacked understanding of Muslim politics.
The actual conspiracy occurred during the Bush Administration that manufactured the propaganda to start the war. Bush was probably aware of the actual goal, but he and the "intellectuals" of NAC who comprised the majority of the inner circle were more naïve than smart.
"Mar 9, 2008 - The Washington Post got its hands on a manuscipt of Douglas Feith's attack memoir and dribbles out excerpts. Calling it a "massive score settling work", there is nothing shocking or revealing, other than it cements Feith's reputation as what General Tommy Franks calls stupidest fucking guy on the planet."
Yes, there were patsies. There usually are. Lots of funny minions. General Powell didn't plan on being a patsy but he became a "token" patsy.
There are all kinds of "think tanks" around Washington DC. Partisan think tanks. A Republican think tank, the Heritage Foundation, created Romney Care which morphed into Obama Care. But RICO doesn't just apply to things done in secret. You don't know what criminal conspiracy means. Anytime a group of people work together, even in the public halls of Congressional hearings, it is a conspiracy. If what they are doing is criminal, then it is a criminal conspiracy, rather than an ordinary one (which happens at any political or corporate meeting). Conspiracy in a positive sense, simple means that people are working together toward a common goal. Now "cabal" might mean the more secret kind. Like what happened in the FBI in 2016-2017. But it won't be very secret much longer.
Quote from: cabinetmaker on February 01, 2018, 10:57:22 AM
Regarding the collapse of the three buildings, I think that the official report completely explains that.
There are some interesting question that linger regarding some stock trades in the days before and there is no question that it has been ruthlessly exploited since.
I think the saddest thing is that we lost a huge portion of our freedoms that day and everybody is okay with that.
Yes, regarding the two main buildings. Building 7 (which was left standing after the attack) was deliberately taken down ... as a safety measure. That is where all the Enron files were ;-)
You never had any freedoms, except for the lies the Matrix tells you. Used to be a holy Trinity of CBS, ABC and NBC in my childhood.
Some of the financial trades may have been coincidental. But it hasn't been explained, why the wing of the Pentagon (Navy), where the 2 trillion missing dollar audit was to be shortly revealed, was the side that was hit and all records destroyed.
Just because something is considered a "conspiracy theory" doesn't necessarily mean it can't be true:
5 US national security-related conspiracy theories that turned out to be true (http://www.businessinsider.com/5-conspiracy-theories-that-turned-out-to-be-true-2015-6)
Quote from: Unbeliever on February 01, 2018, 06:18:44 PM
Just because something is considered a "conspiracy theory" doesn't necessarily mean it can't be true:
5 US national security-related conspiracy theories that turned out to be true (http://www.businessinsider.com/5-conspiracy-theories-that-turned-out-to-be-true-2015-6)
Those are still ongoing. Operation Blue Book on UFOs was USAF COINTELPRO. I bet the Grey aliens with the "probes" were actually messed up memories of victims in the grip of J Edgar himself ;-)
Yes, the people tried for conspiracy to kill Lincoln, were just innocent bystanders railroaded (they had those back then) by the evil Pinkertons.
Quote from: Baruch on February 01, 2018, 06:09:46 PM
You don't know what criminal conspiracy means. Anytime a group of people work together, even in the public halls of Congressional hearings, it is a conspiracy. If what they are doing is criminal, then it is a criminal conspiracy, rather than an ordinary one (which happens at any political or corporate meeting). Conspiracy in a positive sense, simple means that people are working together toward a common goal. Now "cabal" might mean the more secret kind. Like what happened in the FBI in 2016-2017. But it won't be very secret much longer.
I do have my own meaning for conspiracy, and correct or not, it happens to agree with yours. I was going to get into that definition in my post, but I felt it was already long enough, and getting into it would NOT add much to intent of my post. But I do personally believe like you that we are surrounded by conspiracies, many of the criminal type, which ordinary people don't even know about, and for which a conspiracy theory doesn't even exist. That's the way government works. That's why we are not privy to what happens in private meetings. That is the reason for secrecy and lack of transparency. They make plans that if known, would get them voted right out of office. It's why legislative outcomes don't match the promises. I've seen it happen at lower levels in the work place. It's how administrators further their personal agendas.
Quote from: Unbeliever on February 01, 2018, 06:18:44 PM
Just because something is considered a "conspiracy theory" doesn't necessarily mean it can't be true:
5 US national security-related conspiracy theories that turned out to be true (http://www.businessinsider.com/5-conspiracy-theories-that-turned-out-to-be-true-2015-6)
I have no doubt there are more than 5 too. Unfortunately, the link wouldn't work correctly unless I turned off my ad blocker. I can't even remember what blocker I have installed, and I didn't want to fiddle around trying to figure out how to turn it back on after I read the article. However, I did want to read it, although I'll accept the existence of the article in and of itself is a vindication of my own suspicions.
There was a very long thread several years ago where I was arguing with a guy over this very topic. Unfortunately I have had no luck finding it.
Anyway, I don't think there's any reason to doubt the official story.
Nevermind, I found it.
http://atheistforums.com/index.php?topic=3569.0
Ah, memories.
The closest thing to a conspiracy theory I am willing to give the time of day is the suggestion that NASA was pressured to launch Challenger by the White House, because Ronnie wanted a photo-op/sound-bite "phone call" to Christa McAuliffe during his State of the Union that year. It's exactly the sort of PR scene he would've loved.
All I will say about it is that it's plausible, not that it's probable. I definitely do not claim that it's demonstrably true. It is not proven, certainly. Richard Feynman followed up this possibility during the Rogers Commission investigation and all he determined was that it would have been easy to set up from a strictly technical basis.
The part that doesn't sit well with me is that the NASA I grew up with would, under normal circumstances, not have launched under the conditions that prevailed that January morning. The temperatures were outside the known safety margins for multiple systems -- that alone would typically have been an automatic scrub, and that is why I think it's plausible (NOT demonstrated) that there was some sort of outside pressure to launch anyway.
I have seldom seen any "conspiracy theory" that holds up. Most situations are too easily factually demonstrated.
Conspiracy theories usually involve extremely unlikely events, claims that seem generally disprovable, or even laughable on the basics.
I worry more about the people who believe in them than I do about the "interesting" ideas themselves.
Here is a current conspiracy theory ...
President Trump is President Putin's fuck toy ;-( I have two words for that ... Uranium One.
Quote from: Baruch on February 02, 2018, 01:14:41 PM
Here is a current conspiracy theory ...
President Trump is President Putin's fuck toy ;-( I have two words for that ... Uranium One.
I judge some people by the things they deny. If they are provable.
Uranium One is like Benghazi, only less so...
Quote from: SGOS on February 01, 2018, 09:41:51 PM
I have no doubt there are more than 5 too. Unfortunately, the link wouldn't work correctly unless I turned off my ad blocker. I can't even remember what blocker I have installed, and I didn't want to fiddle around trying to figure out how to turn it back on after I read the article. However, I did want to read it, although I'll accept the existence of the article in and of itself is a vindication of my own suspicions.
Well, I can list the CTs they have in the link, and you can google, separately, any you think worthwhile:
1. The US Navy fired on North Vietnamese torpedo boats that weren’t even there.
2. The FBI infiltrated, surveilled, and tried to discredit American political groups it deemed “subversive.â€
3. US military leaders had a plan to kill innocent people and blame it all on Cuba.
4. The CIA recruited top American journalists to spread propaganda in the media and gather intelligence.
5. The CIA conducted “mind control†experiments on unwitting US and Canadian citizens, some of which were lethal.
Quote from: Unbeliever on February 02, 2018, 02:30:08 PM
Well, I can list the CTs they have in the link, and you can google, separately, any you think worthwhile:
1. The US Navy fired on North Vietnamese torpedo boats that weren’t even there.
2. The FBI infiltrated, surveilled, and tried to discredit American political groups it deemed “subversive.â€
3. US military leaders had a plan to kill innocent people and blame it all on Cuba.
4. The CIA recruited top American journalists to spread propaganda in the media and gather intelligence.
5. The CIA conducted “mind control†experiments on unwitting US and Canadian citizens, some of which were lethal.
Just an aside, but if you HAVE to read ads to see an article, it's a scam... Do you buy a ticket to enter a shopping mall?
I don't see it as much different from watching all those TV commercials over the years.
Quote from: Unbeliever on February 02, 2018, 02:48:49 PM
I don't see it as much different from watching all those TV commercials over the years.
They come, they go. I just change channels. Seriously, I always have a backup channel like PBS (no commercials).
When I had a TV I used to read during commercials. I was often surprised when a word would be said on the TV exactly as I was reading it in my book. I know it's just coincidence, but it was sometimes really spooky.
Quote from: Unbeliever on February 02, 2018, 03:05:53 PM
When I had a TV I used to read during commercials. I was often surprised when a word would be said on the TV exactly as I was reading it in my book. I know it's just coincidence, but it was sometimes really spooky.
Coincidences are always fascinating. Ever changed channels and seen the same commercial on both? THAT isn't coincedence.
Quote from: Cavebear on February 02, 2018, 02:45:15 PM
Just an aside, but if you HAVE to read ads to see an article, it's a scam... Do you buy a ticket to enter a shopping mall?
You do (sort of) at Costco and people seem happy to do that. I'm single, and shopping at Costco is close to break-even in my case, but I have to drive a hundred miles just to get there, so the whole process basically shoots a day, wears out my car a little bit, and requires gas. A family of four, and you can actually save substantially, but I can't. But their prices are lower, and even seeing the big picture, I wish it was a benefit. One other thing, which maybe I focus on as a sour grapes thing, is that they have huge supplies of everything, but if you want soup or many other items, it's a very limited selection. They have better selection of soup and various items at Walmart.
(https://images.huffingtonpost.com/2016-02-12-1455281976-5234978-NOSOUP-thumb.jpg)
Quote from: Hijiri Byakuren on February 02, 2018, 01:15:58 AM
Nevermind, I found it.
http://atheistforums.com/index.php?topic=3569.0
Ah, memories.
Yeah. I notice a few of my posts are yernked. I don't know if it's just me or everyone's seeing it.
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on February 02, 2018, 10:38:43 PM
Yeah. I notice a few of my posts are yernked. I don't know if it's just me or everyone's seeing it.
"yernked"?
Quote from: Cavebear on February 07, 2018, 02:27:31 AM
"yernked"?
Messed up. It's also the onomatopoetic when you get a wedgie.
Quote from: Unbeliever on February 01, 2018, 06:18:44 PM
Just because something is considered a "conspiracy theory" doesn't necessarily mean it can't be true:
5 US national security-related conspiracy theories that turned out to be true (http://www.businessinsider.com/5-conspiracy-theories-that-turned-out-to-be-true-2015-6)
Those weren't promoted by lunatic conspiracy advocates, were they?
Well, the lunatic may be in the mind of the beholder.
Quote from: Unbeliever on February 07, 2018, 02:56:15 PM
Well, the lunatic may be in the mind of the beholder.
Or just plain fact.
If you think enough random thoughts, some of them are true ...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=adYGUai7PNc
Quote from: Baruch on February 07, 2018, 09:13:58 PM
If you think enough random thoughts, some of them are true ...
CONSPIRACY THEORY
I liked that movie. I might buy it just to see if I still like it as much as I did years ago, even though I've mostly boycotted Mel Gibson. It was like a conspiracy theorist's fantasy. "You see? I told you. I told you so."
Quote from: SGOS on February 07, 2018, 09:20:37 PM
I liked that movie. I might buy it just to see if I still like it as much as I did years ago, even though I've mostly boycotted Mel Gibson. It was like a conspiracy theorist's fantasy. "You see? I told you. I told you so."
Yeah, kind of its own genre. Who would suspect their dentist is a Nazi war criminal?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2xBJERznOgA
Operation Paperclip was real. The US is the 4th Reich.
Quote from: SGOS on February 07, 2018, 09:20:37 PM
even though I've mostly boycotted Mel Gibson.
Well, Christ! I said that with a lot of Passion!!
Quote from: Mike Cl on February 07, 2018, 10:47:11 PM
Well, Christ! I said that with a lot of Passion!!
The Passion of the Christ!
I always thought that was a somewhat awkward title for a movie, but I suppose it might be awkward enough to make people wonder and get curious. I never saw the movie. I read the book. Didn't enjoy it much, though.
Quote from: SGOS on February 08, 2018, 10:43:46 AM
The Passion of the Christ!
I always thought that was a somewhat awkward title for a movie, but I suppose it might be awkward enough to make people wonder and get curious. I never saw the movie. I read the book. Didn't enjoy it much, though.
I worked for a prof. of German heritage whose main interest was the Obergamerau Passion Play. Weird, no?
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on February 08, 2018, 10:53:25 AM
I worked for a prof. of German heritage whose main interest was the Obergamerau Passion Play. Weird, no?
Maybe a little, but I suppose I can allow for that as a weird idiosyncrasy. Was he OK to work for?
Quote from: SGOS on February 08, 2018, 11:05:38 AM
Maybe a little, but I suppose I can allow for that as a weird idiosyncrasy. Was he OK to work for?
Mork was a very good guy, never saw him angry.
Quote from: SGOS on February 08, 2018, 10:43:46 AM
The Passion of the Christ!
I always thought that was a somewhat awkward title for a movie, but I suppose it might be awkward enough to make people wonder and get curious. I never saw the movie. I read the book. Didn't enjoy it much, though.
I saw it in the theater with a friend who was also a Christian. He bet me I would not see it. So I did with he and his son. But they were not thrilled with my thoughts about if after the movie; it was not really accurate with anything other than Gibson's ideas.
Quote from: SGOS on February 08, 2018, 10:43:46 AM
The Passion of the Christ!
I always thought that was a somewhat awkward title for a movie, but I suppose it might be awkward enough to make people wonder and get curious. I never saw the movie. I read the book. Didn't enjoy it much, though.
Just propaganda by Mel Gibson, who holds extreme Catholic views.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on February 08, 2018, 10:53:25 AM
I worked for a prof. of German heritage whose main interest was the Obergamerau Passion Play. Weird, no?
That was key to the rise of Nazis in Germany. Closely connected with Wagner.
Quote from: Mike Cl on February 08, 2018, 12:13:18 PM
I saw it in the theater with a friend who was also a Christian. He bet me I would not see it. So I did with he and his son. But they were not thrilled with my thoughts about if after the movie; it was not really accurate with anything other than Gibson's ideas.
It was good to use Aramaic, but not good to use Latin. The Romans in that part of the world officially used Greek.
Which is why the gospels were written in Greek, since they were written by the Roman Flavians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar%27s_Messiah). Now there's a good conspiracy theory!
Quote from: Mike Cl on February 08, 2018, 12:13:18 PM
It was not really accurate with anything other than Gibson's ideas.
That's not a surprise. Gibson is out there on a singular limb. One of the characters he would occasionally assume in a role was some guy with one whacky affectation or another. He was good a playing a guy who was more or less running around in circles, just like the guy in Conspiracy Theory. Of course, he would also have a few endearing qualities because he was the star. But I get the sense he never had to dig that deep to get into character.
I loved how the "black helicopters" could hover over a New York street and drop bad guys without any one around the store even blinking.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on February 08, 2018, 06:30:49 PM
I loved how the "black helicopters" could hover over a New York street and drop bad guys without any one around the store even blinking.
People making movies do that all the time. The bystanders are paid to react in a particular way.
Quote from: Unbeliever on February 08, 2018, 01:28:43 PM
Which is why the gospels were written in Greek, since they were written by the Roman Flavians (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caesar%27s_Messiah). Now there's a good conspiracy theory!
Indeed. In any case, 250 years later, Christianity was a Roman Government Monopoly ... and has been ever since.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EIxE332XQqA
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on February 07, 2018, 02:47:48 PM
Those weren't promoted by lunatic conspiracy advocates, were they?
They aren't conspiracy theories when they are factual and known at the time.
Quote from: Cavebear on February 09, 2018, 02:13:45 AM
They aren't conspiracy theories when they are factual and known at the time.
Even known facts are disputed. Less likely true of course.
Quote from: Cavebear on February 09, 2018, 02:13:45 AM
They aren't conspiracy theories when they are factual and known at the time.
This is why I use "conspiracy advocacy" and "conspiracy advocate" rather than "conspiracy theory". The use of "theory" give their slanderous attacks too much dignity.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on February 09, 2018, 07:59:57 AM
This is why I use "conspiracy advocacy" and "conspiracy advocate" rather than "conspiracy theory". The use of "theory" give their slanderous attacks too much dignity.
There is no slander against the human race, that isn't true.
Non-sequiturs are not mandatory.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on February 09, 2018, 01:13:12 PM
Non-sequiturs are not mandatory.
I would prefer in politics that political speech not be slanderous, because all the politicians are in FEMA camps, where speaking is strictly verboten.
If you like conspiracy theories try sticking with the NFL conspiracy theories which are much more believable and retatively easy to pass muster.
One of my favorite sports conspiracy theorists is Brian Tuohy of www.thefixisin.net. He lays it out in real simple terms and on page one asks a real simple question."Would you leave a billion dollar business up to chance?" Of course you wouldn't and neither does the NFL..
Conspiracy advocate almost sounds like someone you could call to represent you when trying to prove or disprove something when applying for some type of government assistance of any sort..
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on February 09, 2018, 04:22:56 PM
If you like conspiracy theories try sticking with the NFL conspiracy theories which are much more believable and retatively easy to pass muster.
One of my favorite sports conspiracy theorists is Brian Tuohy of www.thefixisin.net. He lays it out in real simple terms and on page one asks a real simple question."Would you leave a billion dollar business up to chance?" Of course you wouldn't and neither does the NFL..
Lucha Libre! Pro-wrestling is for real. My dad learned this in Mexico City, from actual Mexican wrestlers who hung out at a cafe, back in 1937.
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on February 09, 2018, 04:33:13 PM
Conspiracy advocate almost sounds like someone you could call to represent you when trying to prove or disprove something when applying for some type of government assistance of any sort..
All people on the dole, are in conspiracy against the tax payers ;-)
People "on the dole" also pay taxes, at least whenever they buy something.
Quote from: Unbeliever on February 11, 2018, 06:11:59 PM
People "on the dole" also pay taxes, at least whenever they buy something.
Confusing, isn't it? No wonder economists get away with bullshit. And since 1971, nobody has needed to pay taxes anyway, once Nixon took over the financial planet (to keep it out of the hands of the French).
Quote from: Unbeliever on February 11, 2018, 06:11:59 PM
People "on the dole" also pay taxes, at least whenever they buy something.
Don't bother trying to convert Baruchistani to English.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on February 12, 2018, 05:37:13 AM
Don't bother trying to convert Baruchistani to English.
Don't pay taxes directly or indirectly? Then you are not alive (actually estate taxes mean that you may have to pay, even if dead).
Criminals have to pay taxes, therefore criminals are good people, am I right?
Quote from: Baruch on February 09, 2018, 07:39:33 AM
Even known facts are disputed. Less likely true of course.
Please DON'T try "fake facts" here...
Quote from: Cavebear on February 13, 2018, 01:32:46 AM
Please DON'T try "fake facts" here...
People love to argue. They do argue over facts (see Flat Earth people). I am not claiming that their side is legitimate. And some things people do claim to be facts ... are not.
People like to argue intelligently. Some people love to argue any which fuckin' way. You're the latter.
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on February 13, 2018, 08:04:23 AM
People like to argue intelligently. Some people love to argue any which fuckin' way. You're the latter.
There are no intelligent animals. People are animals. Therefore ... there are no intelligent people. We are all in the same boat.
Quote from: Baruch on February 13, 2018, 08:57:39 PM
There are no intelligent animals. People are animals. Therefore ... there are no intelligent people. We are all in the same boat.
I give that intelligence is a matter of degree. And some advanced intelligent beings might not see much difference between humans and the other apes.
But here, there is also a matter of degree of intelligence and the human difference is substantial. Who else here could create the ways to kill ourselves off?
Quote from: Gawdzilla Sama on February 13, 2018, 08:04:23 AM
People like to argue intelligently. Some people love to argue any which fuckin' way. You're the latter.
Ad hominem isn't factual.
Quote from: Cavebear on February 15, 2018, 02:17:31 AM
I give that intelligence is a matter of degree. And some advanced intelligent beings might not see much difference between humans and the other apes.
But here, there is also a matter of degree of intelligence and the human difference is substantial. Who else here could create the ways to kill ourselves off?
We work very hard to extinct ourselves ... we aren't competent at it ... until we are ... when nobody will be around to celebrate it.