'Conspiraloons' in the ascendancy?

[claphamboy]

this is going round in circles. Are you saying that as i didn't have personal PROOF that Michael Jackson was a paedophile, then he DEFINATELY WASN'T! This is the logic you're using, and you are forgetting just how powerful the establishment are. Look at David Kelly.

No it's not the logic I am using, completely stupid comparisons.

In the Diana case you are just ignoring the biggest set of circumstances that resulted in her death, none of which could have been taken into account by any plotters, those being – not wearing a seatbelt, car travelling at twice the speed limit and driver twice over the legal alcohol limit.

It doesn’t matter how many tiny bits of other so-called evidence that you focus on in attempt to prove a plot, all of which in this case seem to have very logical explanations, especially when considered as part of the complete picture instead of isolated on their own, doesn’t alter those three most important elements of the crash.

Dr Kelly is a totally different set of circumstances, there isn’t a shed load of evidence and witnesses pointing towards an accident, the [lack of] evidence in that case leaves me with an open mind.

Be buggered if I can see a conspiracy connection with the Michael Jackson case.

 

[William of Walworth]

depends how much faith you have in the media & establishment. I personally think they might LIE to us.

Do shut the fuck up about anti conspiracists being gullible establishment believers trev.

Perfectly possible to be sceptical about what the 'establishment version' says AND about conspiracy theories, especially the really barking ones.

Most anti conpiracists on here are no more pro establishment, or pro mainstream media, than they are pro CT.

 

[William of Walworth]

I don't usually have much time for Peter Hitchens, but he has a good blast against the "conspiracy theory" denialists in his recent book:

"by using this silly and misleading term they are blinding themselves to a real process, which takes place often in the modern world. Those who choose to believe that in modern London nobody has confidential discussions to obtain a co-ordinated purpose, in the hope that outsiders are unaware of this collusion, are voluntarily depriving themselves of important knowledge. They are also exposing their naivety about politics and the media."

And, I would add, a forteriori about "science."

very good quote, something the others on here should bear in mind.

You do appreciate don't you trev, that dwyer is no more sympathetic in reality towards conspiracy theories than I am?

He's trolling, adopting a pose of going along with conspiracies (or more to the point concentrating his fire exclusively on anti conspiracists, as shown by his selecting that Hitchens quiote, while totally ignoring the flaws of conspiracies). And just for shitstirring purposes.

His long track record on here of being 'contrarian' for the sake of it, picking a position deliberately for maximum controversy, should be well known by now.

Anyway, as for that well known far right character Hitchens, all he's doing is repackaging the conspiracists' favourite lie. That anti conspiracists/conspiracy sceptics are gullible and naive about the estabishment and that they (the anti conspiracists) believe everything they're told.

It's bollocks. One of the main reason why most Urban CT-sceptics get so pissed off with dubious theories sourced from even more dubious websites** is that they GET IN THE WAY of genuine investigations into Government dodginess, investigations by independent minded people using proper standards of proof and evidence, people who are equally sceptical to 'the establishment' and to CTers alike.


**(sites that dwyer and Jazzz for very different reasons, never criticise or question)

 

[Jazzz]

Dr Kelly is a totally different set of circumstances, there isn’t a shed load of evidence and witnesses pointing towards an accident, the [lack of] evidence in that case leaves me with an open mind.

I think we can pretty damn sure that the death of Dr. Kelly was no 'accident'. Even you, claphamboy.

 

[William of Walworth]

At OP.
It should be, the whole fucking point of the internet is less people blindly believing authority.
I mean, there might be a little overkill, but generally, it's a good thing.

How about not blindly believing any old conspiracy theories, just because the CT purports to be 'anti authority' and claims to expose 'them'

How about a few basic standards of research and proof and evidence and fact?

'Loon hating' as you put it is not hatred of the loons per se (necessarily ), just extreme impatience towards CTers gullibility and naivity towards whatever outlandish creatively created claim is repeated and embellished by the oddballs who post on Icke, Alex Jones, whale.to, Rense and similar bonkers sites.

 

[William of Walworth]

I think we can pretty damn sure that the death of Dr. Kelly was no 'accident'.

Very likely, even though I might not go so far as 'pretty damn sure', I'm also very far from accepting of the official versions.

There are also a lot of wild and exaggerated claims circulating about his case in the uncontrolled world of the conspiracist internet. Some of that material just as much gets in the way of the truth as do any establishment cover ups ...

 

[Jazzz]

In the Diana case you are just ignoring the biggest set of circumstances that resulted in her death, none of which could have been taken into account by any plotters, those being – not wearing a seatbelt, car travelling at twice the speed limit and driver twice over the legal alcohol limit.

"For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire together in the art of lying." - AH

One 'grossly impudent lie' here was the speedometer. With these things - 9/11/Diana/Kelly/whatever - it is crucial to spin your versions of events quickly. Then the forces of groupthink will hold and create that illusion for you. So with 9/11, the story of a high-speed accident driven by papparazzi was quickly spun with the magical passport. Anyway, yes, the speedometer.

The initial reports that the speedometer was frozen at 196km/h was complete bullshit. It was a lie, a lie, a terrible lie. How do we know this? Because Mercedes themselves (whose offer to examine the wrecked vehicle was refused) corrected it, by telling us that there was no way it could be true because in the event of a crash the speedometer would revert to zero.

But by the time that came out, the lie was spun.

 

[Jazzz]

Very likely, even though I might not go so far as 'pretty damn sure'

You think he might have been out for a walk in the woods, and then kind of tripped up, and fell on his knife which had just accidentally fallen out of his pocket?

 

[William of Walworth]

On the Kelly case, I'm not certain of anything, not having researched it in as much detail as I'd need to to even approach certainty. That doesn't mean though that I blindly accept official claims . Nor do I believe any wild conspiracist claim floating about the web in opposition to those, either.

Multi directional scepticism, the best kind , very much includes scepticism towards conspiracy theories as well as towards 'the Government'

 

[phildwyer]

You appear to categorise the anti conspiracists on Urban as the obsessive ones, which is a bit of a distortion of reality really.

True. After all, no-one could accuse you of obsession, eh William?

 

[claphamboy]

I think we can pretty damn sure that the death of Dr. Kelly was no 'accident'. Even you, claphamboy.

On the available [lack of] evidence it is impossible to conclude that Kelly was killed for sure, but it is certainly possible, unlike in the Diana case.

See, I have an open mind, I don’t just assume things as fact without a decent level of evidence, unlike you.

The initial reports that the speedometer was frozen at 196km/h was complete bullshit. It was a lie, a lie, a terrible lie. How do we know this? Because Mercedes themselves (whose offer to examine the wrecked vehicle was refused) corrected it, by telling us that there was no way it could be true because in the event of a crash the speedometer would revert to zero.

But by the time that came out, the lie was spun.

And here we have a classic example of how conspiraloons will grab one small bit of information as evidence of something more, without taking onboard the facts of the matter.

The speedometer situation came about because of initial media reports; the media often get things wrong, especially with early reports as everyone knows.

This was not part of the evidence presented to the jury at the inquest, because it was bollocks. What you ignore is the actual evidence of speeding from the French crash investigation team and several independent eyewitnesses.

The car wasn't travelling at 120mph as initial media reports claims, but at an estimated 65mph, twice the limit for the underpass, as presented in evidence at the inquest and from what I can see even Mansfield didn't dispute this fact.

 

[beesonthewhatnow]

The initial reports that the speedometer was frozen at 196km/h was complete bullshit. It was a lie, a lie, a terrible lie. How do we know this? Because Mercedes themselves (whose offer to examine the wrecked vehicle was refused) corrected it, by telling us that there was no way it could be true because in the event of a crash the speedometer would revert to zero.

One thing is wrong/a lie/misreported

Therefore everything is wrong/a lie/misreported

Jazzz logic at it's finest.

 

[xes]

Yeah but if 1 single thing has been lied about (and this goes for anything) then why beleve any of the original story? That's enough to be suspicious. What else has been lied about? You have to ask those questions, or blindly believe everything you've been told by goverments.
(I don't know enough about the Diana thing to pass comment, but I am skeptical of anything that is full of lies.....appart from the ufo subject )

 

[claphamboy]

Yeah but if 1 single thing has been lied about (and this goes for anything) then why beleve any of the original story?

It was media reports, not fucking official evidence.

 

[Jazzz]

On the available [lack of] evidence it is impossible to conclude that Kelly was killed for sure, but it is certainly possible, unlike in the Diana case.

See, I have an open mind, I don’t just assume things as fact without a decent level of evidence, unlike you.

The point was Kelly's death cannot possibly be 'accidental', as you and WoW seem to reserve an 'open mind' for. Some people think it may have been suicide.

I was just having a giggle at that.

 

[goldenecitrone]

I think we can pretty damn sure that the death of Dr. Kelly was no 'accident'. Even you, claphamboy.

I agree. I'm pretty sure he intended to kill himself. It wasn't a morning stroll that went horrifically wrong.

 

[trevhagl]

You claimed Diana's bodyguard was paid off by the security services, when it shown to you that Al Fayed's lawyer admitted that this claim wasn't substantiated, you changed your tune and claimed Paul Henri was the one paid off.

Idiotic nonsense.

could it be that i'm not a sad twat that has a legalese standard grip of cases from 12 years ago. If i was Al Fayed then yes i would remember exactly who got paid what , but i don't really care that much except when people start trying to cover up what most likely was murder. And i like arguing with you lot

 

[trevhagl]

One thing is wrong/a lie/misreported

Therefore everything is wrong/a lie/misreported

Jazzz logic at it's finest.

always best to believe the worst when dealing with the tabloids, can anyone remember their views leading up to the Iraq war for example?

 

[claphamboy]

The point was Kelly's death cannot possibly be 'accidental', as you and WoW seem to reserve an 'open mind' for. Some people think it may have been suicide.

I haven't suggestd it was 'accidental', you fruitcake.

I was just having a giggle at that.

I am sure you were, whilst dribbling insanely at the same time.

 

[phildwyer]

always best to believe the worst when dealing with the tabloids, can anyone remember their views leading up to the Iraq war for example?

You're not suggestıng that there was a conspıracy between polıtıcıans and the press to lead the Brıtısh publıc ınto war are you?

Hahahahaha loonspud, nutbobbın, bonkersman.

Shouldn't thıs barkıng CT-er be banned?

 

[claphamboy]

You're not suggestıng that there was a conspıracy between polıtıcıans and the press to lead the Brıtısh publıc ınto war are you?

Hahahahaha loonspud, nutbobbın, bonkersman.

Shouldn't thıs barkıng CT-er be banned?

Whilst most of the press certainly swallowed the government line and lies, there were plenty of articles questioning that position, so not much evidence of a conspiracy there.

But, then you don’t seriously believe there was anyway.

 

[trevhagl]

Whilst most of the press certainly swallowed the government line and lies, there were plenty of articles questioning that position, so not much evidence of a conspiracy there.

But, then you don’t seriously believe there was anyway.

the whole thing was so OTT and gung-ho that you hardly dared speak out against the war at the time because the medias lies and brainwashing were so severe that woulda made you an unpatriotic commie faggot or something. It's totally different now the public have seen it all to be lies though, and most people are anti war now.

 

[goldenecitrone]

the whole thing was so OTT and gung-ho that you hardly dared speak out against the war at the time because the medias lies and brainwashing were so severe that woulda made you an unpatriotic commie faggot or something.

You weren't on that 2 million strong march against the war then. Terrified of speaking out we all were.

 

[trevhagl]

You weren't on that 2 million strong march against the war then. Terrified of speaking out we all were.

unfortunately i was stuck in Stanley working with morons

 

[William of Walworth]

You're not suggestıng that there was a conspıracy between polıtıcıans and the press to lead the Brıtısh publıc ınto war are you?

Hahahahaha loonspud, nutbobbın, bonkersman.

Shouldn't thıs barkıng CT-er be banned?

Whilst most of the press certainly swallowed the government line and lies, there were plenty of articles questioning that position, so not much evidence of a conspiracy there.

But, then you don’t seriously believe there was anyway.

Dwyer doesn't seriously believe a single damn thing he ever posts, as you know ....

The above trollery from him is just part of his continuing smear campaign against conspiracy-sceptics, to lie (trollingly) about them being gullible sheeple-dupes of the establishment.

As I posted earlier, complete bollocks.

 

[trevhagl]

You weren't on that 2 million strong march against the war then. Terrified of speaking out we all were.

...but that comment reminds me of another aspect to the media/govt conspiracy to promote the war, the amount of underhanded tactics the old bill used to stop marchers getting there, even escorting coaches out of harms way...

 

[trevhagl]

Dwyer doesn't seriously believe a single damn thing he ever posts, as you know ....

The above trollery from him is just part of his continuing smear campaign against conspiracy-sceptics, to lie (trollingly) about them being gullible sheeple-dupes of the establishment.

As I posted earlier, complete bollocks.

he was just being sarcastic about people having a go at me for putting forward plausible theories

 

[William of Walworth]

...but that comment reminds me of another aspect to the media/govt conspiracy to promote the war, the amount of underhanded tactics the old bill used to stop marchers getting there, even escorting coaches out of harms way...

Didn't do a great job then did they? Rubbish, incompetent conspiracy ...

 

[William of Walworth]

he was just being sarcastic about people having a go at me for putting forward plausible theories

I think I more aware of his real agenda on threads like this than you are tbh.

He's no more a genuine supporter of conspiracy theories than I am.

 

[goldenecitrone]

...but that comment reminds me of another aspect to the media/govt conspiracy to promote the war, the amount of underhanded tactics the old bill used to stop marchers getting there, even escorting coaches out of harms way...

I think the jingoism that lead up to the Falklands war was far worse, to be honest. I wouldn't call that a conspiracy though, just the whipping up of nationalist fervour.