Jump to content

Conspiracy Theories


Rocky
 Share

Recommended Posts

^

Calius, it is a figure of speech, mate.

The only thing that separates us is a common language, oh, and it would appear, the ability to compartmentalize.smile.gif

Patronizing a fellow board member for the sake of a cheap thrill would be wrong. Agreed. Much like repeatedly -subtly or not- suggesting that anyone not buying into any of these revelations -Kennedy, Moon Landing, Area 51, 2000, 9-11, 2012, NWO, the evils of the mainstream media, etc., etc. yada, Yada- is somehow burying their head in the sand, closed minded, being lead down a path, or my personal favorite - brainwashed?

Cheers.

"Dick Cheney & the Boys from Halliburton did it"

Never heard of it.

Really, it hasn't been suggested that the government did the deed [insert deed here]?

Can you help this poor boy out? Who's the They then...The Sierra Club?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 279
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Figure of speech? Doesn't read like it, im all for having a laugh with some of it too but It just didn't read like that from here.

"compartmentalize."

Read like one big sarcasm slant to me my dear friend, sorry if that wasn't the case.

Patronizing a fellow board member for the sake of a cheap thrill would be wrong. Agreed.

True and also agreed.

Much like repeatedly -subtly or not- suggesting that anyone not buying into any of these revelations -Kennedy, Moon Landing, Area 51, 2000, 9-11, 2012, NWO, the evils of the mainstream media, etc., etc. yada, Yada-

Your view was clear from you previous post, thanks for extending it. But as regards "buying in" .. i think there are thousands upon thousands of people what would disagree with you on that note. Its not a game or a hobby you bother to switch on and off for kicks, we are actually talking about world effecting events here, throw away comments don't really help much.

burying their head in the sand, closed minded, being lead down a path, or my personal favorite - brainwashed?

Maybe all of the above, or maybe "agree to differ" might be a good one too.

Really, it hasn't been suggested that the government did the deed [insert deed here]?

Elements but ive never seen haliburton linked to "doing" it or Cheney like some one man army.

Can you help this poor boy out? Who's the They then...The Sierra Club?

You completely missed it, that's actually the Alfa Romeo club :)

As regards your umm, rather patronsing again question, the main quote above answers this one, IE: could be anyone for all it matters when your too far flung to bother to look at it or read more about it or simply slag it all off and shut it down, then its merry-go-round of the usual circus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On another note the whole "New World Order" which includes one-world government, you know, that conspiracy people go on about all the time ...

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm/cmallparty/register/memi589.htm

The Clue is in the "Title".

I guess soon this will be the norm and complaining will be "anti one world" or some other crap tagged against it. I wonder how long it will take before people might get the message?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

^

Scary monsters, those pretentious Brits. tongue.gif

____

... i think there are thousands upon thousands of people what would disagree with you on that note. Its not a game or a hobby you bother to switch on and off for kicks, we are actually talking about world effecting events here...
That's good to hear...I'd hate to think that it was just a bunch of lunatics playing fast and loose with the facts and making a mockery out of the deaths of 3,000 or so of my fellow citizens.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

^

Scary monsters, those pretentious Brits.

Well, maybe so, but lets face it World = everyone, right?

That's good to hear...I'd hate to think that it was just a bunch of lunatics playing fast and loose with the facts and making a mockery out of the deaths of 3,000 or so of my fellow citizens.

As ive said its like questioning the reasons why we are at war (WMD etc) and then having troops slam you as if you don't respect them or their job. Its not about that nor is it about mocking deaths, such a lame angle, it truly is.

So in your eyes then anyone posting about this that is not stuck to the official facts and are open to questioning it for valid reasons (other facts) are in a sense laughing and mocking 3000 people murdered? And in doing so are mentally ill? Quite a warped logic when you think about it.

To take that one step further, you could say that all the people not questioning anything and seeing official lines as facts (their choice and so be it and I understand) are in a sense laughing and mocking the deaths of thousands and thousands of innocent iraqi/afghan citizens (which are the deaths as the direct end result of the response to it all)? Right .. I mean that ISNT my view at all but if I wanted to say something as a mirror to yours, that would be it .. and as you might agree its a pretty awful label/angle isn't it.

None of this has anything to do with disrespecting those who passed away in this event or any event, nor disrespecting troops and people on the ground doing their jobs, using that as an argument is like ive said before "white noise" or background noise to muddle the information that matters.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, maybe so, but lets face it World = everyone, right?
Well, that's what They want you to believe.

...the reasons why we are at war (WMD etc)...
WMD was only, as it turned out, a less than reliable, or lame, means to an end, i.e, the enforcement of a dozen or so UN resolutions -long neglected for a dozen or so years.

Anyone gullible enough in believing otherwise is just as likely to believe that because the buildings fell in the manner they did that some sort of controlled demolition was involved -or that because of Lady Gagas current popularity she is somehow intimately involved in the grand NWO conspiracy.

Warped logic...boy howdy.

...the information that matters.
Facts.

Not speculation, alternative reality, fantasy, or outright dementia -sourced from sites whose sole purpose is to provide just that.

____

When you step outside your preferred echo chamber, it is best not to take everything so literally, or to be so easily offended. thumbsup.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

WMD was only, as it turned out, a less than reliable, or lame, means to an end, i.e, the enforcement of a dozen or so UN resolutions -long neglected for a dozen or so years.

Right, although I thought the "45 min" claims, actually "looking" for WMD when they invaded and the pretexts for war was a major part of this? I would also imagine then that "Green Zone" the latest film was another stupid conspiracy theory film much like Loose change or some such doc then, I thought as much .. Mat Deamon getting sucked into that drivel, shameful. It makes you wonder why so many people across the globe were annoyed when this wasn't true and nothing was found then, I cant think why in that case then.

Anyone gullible enough in believing otherwise is just as likely to believe that because the buildings fell in the manner they did that some sort of controlled demolition was involved -or that because of Lady Gagas current popularity she is somehow intimately involved in the grand NWO conspiracy.

Ah yes, one size fits all if you thought Iraq invasion was a little "iffy" .. your lampooning a vast group of people on the planet by coming to that conclusion, but each to their own I guess. Also that's a massive assumption to suggest from questioning Iraq invasion and WMD subject = you must be into all the rest .. I can imagine theirs plenty of folk against the Iraq war and the reasons for it that are not automatically taking on the rest, and that's up to them. Id also say that there may be some people who were all for the Iraq war and have later thought 9/11 really was strange ... nothings that cut & dried.

The only reason I brought that up in my last post was an example of the offending the dead angle / disrespecting the troops on the ground comparison was all.

Facts.

Not speculation, alternative reality, fantasy, or outright dementia -sourced from sites whose sole purpose is to provide just that.

That in itself is completely subjective right? So as this "subject" for said thread is "Conspiracy Theories" (you know, as in .. "post your conspiracy theories here") you are in fact justifying yourself out of the thread. IE maybe it should be changed at topic level too "Conspiracy claptrap : speculation, alternative reality, fantasy, or outright dementia" would then sort it out Id guess, ask Rocky see if he can get it changed or any moderator.

Unless you have anything to "add" to it, then why not just leave it be?

I don't get offended as you put it, I just don't see the logic in posting slanted replies which spell out how you feel (which is cool by me and totally made clear by you) and yet don't fit much or add to the subject matter of the topic, this is in effect a "troll" in thread terms ... no?

So ok, I am an easily offended mental nutjob encased in an echo chamber (clearly everything I post is just sprouted from my insane brain to keyboard and no place else like a mad dribbling scientist), your are a sane and a logical man ... great, that's that sorted then. In which case why does a sane and logical facts man spend his time point for pointing me in a "conspiracy theory" thread .. does it bother you that much? After all .. were all mad anyway, its all "speculation, alternative reality, fantasy, or outright dementia" .. so whats the point.

Meanwhile, the worlds actual madness still rolls on whether you want in or you don't, I don't mind if you do or do not, that's freedom for ya! :) Now can you just let us speculative, alternative reality, fantasy, dementia sufferers get on with it please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Addition -by subtraction. wink.gif

Abstract:

Many millions of people hold conspiracy theories; they believe that powerful people have worked together in order to withhold the truth about some important practice or some terrible event. A recent example is the belief, widespread in some parts of the world, that the attacks of 9/11 were carried out not by Al Qaeda, but by Israel or the United States. Those who subscribe to conspiracy theories may create serious risks, including risks of violence, and the existence of such theories raises significant challenges for policy and law. The first challenge is to understand the mechanisms by which conspiracy theories prosper; the second challenge is to understand how such theories might be undermined. Such theories typically spread as a result of identifiable cognitive blunders, operating in conjunction with informational and reputational influences. A distinctive feature of conspiracy theories is their self-sealing quality. Conspiracy theorists are not likely to be persuaded by an attempt to dispel their theories; they may even characterize that very attempt as further proof of the conspiracy. Because those who hold conspiracy theories typically suffer from a crippled epistemology, in accordance with which it is rational to hold such theories, the best response consists in cognitive infiltration of extremist groups. Various policy dilemmas, such as the question whether it is better for government to rebut conspiracy theories or to ignore them, are explored in this light.

____

To Repeat...when you step outside your preferred echo chamber, it is best not to take everything so literally, or to be so easily offended.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Those who subscribe to conspiracy theories may create serious risks, including risks of violence, and the existence of such theories raises significant challenges for policy and law.

What is commonly known as demonize those who have questions (valid ones) and then claim they are some threat ... I mean what you quoted is from an elitist cookbook. A child could cobble that together, its all background noise, its answers no serious questions. Again having questions that are valid = maybe a risk of violence / a risk (how?), wow whoever typed that up was really uptight. That read to me like .. if you have questions and its not towing the official line then you are potentially a threat ... that's very 1939 isn't it. The big question with that gem is ... risk to whom?

The first challenge is to understand the mechanisms by which conspiracy theories prosper; the second challenge is to understand how such theories might be undermined

What is this, the instruction book on "how to debunk for dummies"? You don't undermine anything, you just answer the un answered questions people have. To have to challenge and try to "undermine" spells out this inst the case, if it is all cut & dried and simple you don't need to take such steps. It takes a lot of effort to do this and keep it up, wasted on a bunch of lunatics if you ask me.

Answer the questions, look at the information, stop quoting self fulfilling propaganda dross to prove your already totally fixed without question angle (you may notice in what ive posted I have a number of views and don't always believe everything I read contrary to how you want me to fit into that mould you have in your head) and then you might be in the right thread.

Stop clogging up the thread with "anti conspiracy" things which isn't, again I say this taking a deep breath & a sigh ... what this thread was/is about. Also Ive posted on loads of other things not just 9/11 here (for example, finger printing for 4 year olds was a conspiracy to get finger prints on database without being a criminal first to obtain such personal ID, now its in schools to get books out, hardly a nutjob view when its fact) I don't see you really look at any of that, just pin it to the safest bet argument and keep going in a loop, please stop. I have said it more than 3 times, you have made you point clear where you stand on it, I get it ... thanks.

Everything you post will be the "apposing" view of pretty much the entire subject of the thread, so isn't that shooting fish in a barrel almost? Lets stick around and say black to their white ... great, solves a lot really, well done to you sir.

To Repeat...when you step outside your preferred echo chamber, it is best not to take everything so literally, or to be so easily offended.

Its more to do with not adding anything constructive/related to this threads subject matter, not about me or taking offense, does that make it any clearer?

As ive said before we are in a time of mind games (that pdf and quote is a perfect), welcome to the ride :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All right calius, lets approach it from a different angle then. When you see a theory, ask yourself "do the perpetrators have the means, motive, and opportunity to do this AND keep it secret?"

I've been over this before, but being accidentally right doesn't win you any credibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All right calius, lets approach it from a different angle then. When you see a theory, ask yourself "do the perpetrators have the means, motive, and opportunity to do this AND keep it secret?"

I've been over this before, but being accidentally right doesn't win you any credibility.

Its not a secret, its everywhere you look and care to look further, its all the un answered questions, all the myriad of docs asking the same things, all the news items that don't add up, all the information you can get as regards certain society's and affiliations & world structure information, the list goes on & on, but mainly its just the mind game of debunking, "undermining" and keeping as much of the majority away from anything other than what you want people to think (public opinion) to assist on shouting down everything else and keeping that background noise as loud as possible. Its a mind game, that's all it is right now. Everything is in plane sight as the cliche' goes.

That PDF quote from no quarter is literally the manual for "apposing the questioners" ... it reads like something right out of 1984, slap it under "conspiracy theory" and tar it with the same brush for all and undermine it as much as you can for as long as you can.

Another view is the non secretive "perpetrators" of 9/11 and the mastermind and most wanted enemy number one ... is ummm, still putting out "tapes" at the most convenient moments, Bin Laden is THE mastermind of 9/11 (apparently) the man that helped box cutters foil Norad (??) and melt towers to dust, destroy another building later that day (while TV news had clairvoyant powers of a 3rd collapse), had a massive stroke of luck with the fuel that cause molten lava plumes (??) and also planned to the crashing of a large jet into the pentagon that shrunk instantly .. but that's enough sarcasm, have you seen him being brought to justice? You know, this perpetrator that we are told had the means, motive, and opportunity to do this AND never even bothered to keep it a secret, A one man stealth ninja, the mastermind of 9/11 .. still at large ... doesn't that make you at least have one question, or anger you seeing as that's the official information about that event, all this and the mastermind has never been brought to justice??

Meanwhile .....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So as this "subject" for said thread is "Conspiracy Theories" (you know, as in .. "post your conspiracy theories here")
Or as in "Looking at them from both sides"...see OP.

____

I am quite sure that there are thousands upon thousands that would take issue with your quick dismissal (in this topic) of the 12-21-2012 pole shift/It's The End Of The World As We Know It. You did not bother to provide any answers or to refute any of their hypothesis, you just dismissed it as tripe and them as clones.

Selective, aren't we.

____

Its more to do with not adding anything constructive/related to this threads subject matter, not about me or taking offense, does that make it any clearer?
Can you clear this up for me, -when you linked to Dr. Judy Wood -you know, the one who suggested (complete with photographic evidence) that it (9-11) was a controlled demolition right up until that argument proved to be untenable, only to switch (using the same photographic evidence) to the theory that a directed energy weapon fired from an orbiting 747 was the culprit -did you consider that post to be constructive?

Awfully selective, aren't we.

Edited by NoQuarter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Or as in "Looking at them from both sides"...see OP.

I would completely agree this is fine, but most of the side you are taking are "boys beveling lunacy claims" .. my point is you have made it clear your view is most of it it B.S so where can you go from their in this type of thread?

I am quite sure that there are thousands upon thousands that would take issue with your quick dismissal (in this topic) of the 12-21-2012 pole shift/It's The End Of The World As We Know It. You did not bother to provide any answers or to refute any of their hypothesis, you just dismissed it as tripe and them as clones.

Selective, aren't we.

No, there is something very interesting about 2012, not that its "just" end of the world that the media would like to suggest in disaster films and such. If im selective why do I have this book in my collection (which covers all angles of information ref the whole 2012 arena (and is a very good read might I add) :

HERE

"end of world" is one view of it and not strictly anything that is remotely what its about. My point was that "end of world" = hollywood disaster tripe.

Can you clear this up for me, -when you linked to Dr. Judy Wood -you know, the one who suggested (complete with photographis evidence) that it (9-11) was a controlled demolition right up until that argument proved to be untenable, only to switch (using the same photographis evidence) to the theory that a directed energy weapon fired from an orbiting 747 was the culprit -did you consider that post to be constructive?

Awfully selective, aren't we.

I posted the link to that site, becuase im NOT selective ... becuase if I was, why would I link to that site that actually speaks of something other than explosives which ive posted about before, why would I link to something that contradicts myself? I will tell you why, and I answered it previous too, whether its energy weapon based or explosive based its still relative to this threads subject matter and also very interesting to see different views within it. Im sorry if I don't pick a side and fix on it, I am interested in both areas, Judy woods site is a great site for photos and aerial shots, and is just as constructive to post here as any explosive based information. I never said I had the definitive answer (collapse based), the point is to share information for others to decide, one thing is for sure taking all this into consideration the official story becomes less and less solid by the moment, and the collapse theory idea which I guess will run & run doesn't justify itself with jet fuel alone.

I do think NQ that you are now picking anything you can to trip me up (or something like that) ... you do realise that is trolling now in the official sense, your still not getting that im not here to prove you wrong, im posting on a subject I look into whether you want to think its B.S or you don't. Anybody can post and is free to do as they please, but when it comes from a (almost) cynical angle and quote for quote trying to pick things apart and using "lunatic" etc .. is that constructive? Are you a lunatic for not looking at this infomation? If I say clone ... I mean totally fixed on one thing and NOTHING else could be anything other than BS.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...why bother in this thread!
Stop clogging up the thread with "anti conspiracy" things...

Or as in "Looking at them from both sides"...see OP.
I would completely agree this is fine...
?

____

...my point is you have made it clear your view is most of it it B.S so where can you go from their in this type of thread?

Apparently, the same destination that all involved, from true believers to us trolls, are headed...the Land of White Noise -right after we get implanted with a chip.biggrin.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOL! .. I was honestly thinking, i wonder if NQ will post back a "quote diagram" .. and you did! :)

Your quote list implies I think that i contradicted myself. Well in a quote context that's just how it reads, reading the threads/posts and what was actually quoted and posted in replies is something else. I agree with posts on both sides, I don't agree that one side is just to dog the other that the other side is a nutjob/lunatic and some type of threat (ref the "anti conspiracy" part) that's my point in a nutshell.

BTW as regards 2012 that you dug up .. try that book out, reason is its a book that looks at all the areas/theories and then shortlist the most logical and one that parallel with astronomy/time-lines etc ... nice way of working, not fixing to a point but looking at it all overall. Not a book that says "this is what will happen" and nothing else.

Apparently, the same destination that all involved, from true believers to us trolls, are headed...the Land of White Noise -right after we get implanted with a chip

We will have to wait and see wont we NQ (or the rug rats will).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Documentary - Weaponization of Space

(10 min split sections)

That Bruce K. Gagnon guy who talks alot in the video really knows his stuff.

It's a very good documentary and there's a part (IIRC) that talks about how 'they' were planning the oil pipelines in Afghanistan before Sep 11th. Then, hey presto, after the terror attack the pipelines are in place. Hmmm, interesting!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes indeed its a very interesting subject all of its own.

Theres a follow up doc and is now showing in certain cinemas etc or about to be that you get to see at the end of this called "Pax Americana" :

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pax_Americana_and_the_Weaponization_of_Space

http://www.facebook.com/pages/PAX-AMERICANA/102424539828?v=info#!/pages/PAX-AMERICANA/102424539828?v=wall

What that doc (the youtube one) raises is the information ref terror as one card to play and the final being the alien card. Also this makes what Dr Judy Wood has been looking into not so far fetched at all ref her views on 9/11 collapse and tech, interesting stuff. Then also you have all this being thrown into the atmosphere costing billions and we pay for the privilege under a economic nose dive and have to "go green" as its our fault with bin routines and recycling etc, but you can throw uranium canisters up into the most delicate part of the planet any day of the week, nice.

Also more thing creeping in with the whole "order" side of it:

Obama Call for 'International Order' Raises Questions About U.S. Sovereignty

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/05/24/obama-international-order-raises-questions-sovereignty/?test=latestnews

In some ways links back to that doc also.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it safe to say that NASA was a continuation of the Nazi rocket program, or at least knowingly built upon the backs of thousands of slave labourers during the WWII?

When Albert Speer was put in charge of war production, the Germans built more aircraft in 1944 [the last eighteen months of the war] than at any other time. Thousands of brutally treated slave labourers were forced to produce these armaments. The man should never have been released from Spandau in the sixties.

DS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it safe to say that NASA was a continuation of the Nazi rocket program, or at least knowingly built upon the backs of thousands of slave labourers during the WWII?

I suppose you could look at it that way, if you were so inclined -but keep in mind if you do that the targeting of London, Norwich, and Ipswich was not. As in all things, you have to take the good with the bad. whistle.gif

But then, the same line of reasoning could be applied for the British post-war military aircraft industry (Vampire, etc.) whose ranks of designers were suddenly flooded with "Teutonic" surnames, or any of the other technological disciplines advanced thru the time-honored tradition of spoils of war.

Edited by NoQuarter
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I suppose you could look at it that way, if you were so inclined -but keep in mind if you do that the targeting of London, Norwich, and Ipswich was not.
Was not what?

But then, the same line of reasoning could be applied for the British post-war military aircraft industry (Vampire, etc.) whose ranks of designers were suddenly flooded with "Teutonic" surnames, or any of the other technological disciplines advanced thru the time-honored tradition of spoils of war.

Without looking it up I'll say I'm not surprised. Post war Europe was a case of 'rats leaving the sinking ship'. Hundreds of thousands of refugees and survivors of the Nazi and communist regimes criss-crossing the continent, whilst heading home, evading capture or trying to escape justice. Amongst them, former Allied and Soviet prisoners of war, Waffen SS and SS personnel posing as regular Wehrmacht or civvies. Throw in hundreds of Nazi officials from the top, down, and I'm sure Europe at that time was open to all sorts of shenanigans by Western and Soviet governments. What's the old saying...the best people to use against the Soviet Union are former Nazis?

My NASA 'bash' wasn't a U.S. 'bash' and if you think they're one and the same then you disappoint, NQ.

DS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it safe to say that NASA was a continuation of the Nazi rocket program, or at least knowingly built upon the backs of thousands of slave labourers during the WWII?

Why would it be "unsafe" to say?

I linked to a doc a few posts backs "one mainframe to rule them all" which details a lot about IBM roll within the numbering system tech that was also used in the camps, crazy stuff it truly is. I would say that its either as direct as you put it, or maybe a little more .."right they are good at what they do, no matter what lets get them in" type of thing.

I think though that in general yes a lot were "spread about" but this was more about key people getting key jobs that are specific to our time right now, as apposed to many people running and hiding. NQ - you tried to come back with the "Brit" thing to me before, this is a "global" setting nothing to do with being bias, just those up and above the ground level so to speak regardless of location, we all have bad apples that's for sure.

On another note ...

Great, lets put our emotions online for everyone to see on-the-fly... I will expect this to be added to emotions on Discracebook & twitter updates soon ... *Super Face Palm" .. although I doubt many will run out to buy this. I just don't understand why this couldn't just be a local software app that triggers the responses, notice it always has to be "online" ( a very similar patter to a lot, dare i mention games and DRM here).

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/10236143.stm

Just don't wear on on the London underground (See pic), especially with twitchy people like this fiasco:

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23843771-police-swoop-on-gallery-after-passer-by-spots-a-bomb-but-its-really-an-artwork.do

Bobby from Berkshire's comment at the bottom summed it up.

Maybe a little off topic to a point but all adds to the new decade themes of "Transparency" and "Vigilance" pummeled down us.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On another note ...

Great, lets put our emotions online for everyone to see on-the-fly... I will expect this to be added to emotions on Discracebook & twitter updates soon ... *Super Face Palm" .. although I doubt many will run out to buy this. I just don't understand why this couldn't just be a local software app that triggers the responses, notice it always has to be "online"

Electronic lithium?

DS

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...