conspiraloons

[Donna Ferentes]

So you don't find it ever so slightly dodgy that, among others, 'Dick' Cheney, and Donald Rumsfield signed a document presented to GWB expressing the need for a 9/11 esq attack on home soil?
How queer.

Again, I'm going to have to ask you for a source on that. Chapter and verse, please, and people can judge whether it says what you say it says.

I find it hard to believe, and I'm guessing many others do as well, that any real socialist would not doubt that the US admin are more than capable of killing thousands of their own citizens, and millions of Johnny Foreigners for a few quid

I would imagine not. I would imagine however that they might find it difficult recruiting the hundreds of operatives prepared to do it for them in conditions of absolute secrecy with not one of them ever confessing, speaking out or slipping up.

 

[zArk]

Sorry are you really saying that any conspiracy theory is as valid as any "government theory" (whatever that is)?

i am mearly following through the logic being applied towards 'conspiraloons'.

it is not my position, my position is here

 

[bluestreak]

1. conspiracy or conspiracy theory? there is a difference.

2. whooo hoooo you mentioned 9/11. You are obviouslly taking Chomskys and Moores view that the US used it to their advantage only and had no direct influence on it.
NORAD -- there is no question that the US government allowed those hijacked planes free flight around US aiirspace. That is called complicity and 'aiding and abeting"
NORAD is a key issue

3. Bob Fisk is saying there is a conspiracy going on in Iraq. People are secretly funding and encouraging death squads in Iraq. There is no openess, well unless you read up on the P2OG program "Pro-active Pre-emptive Operations Group" john pilger writes

Now to make clear;
4. people who indicate these things going on are called 'conspiraloons'. We do not scream "this is a conspiracy, everything is a conspiracy", it is a definition slapped on us by 'shills' and people who latch onto dis-information posters thinking it is funny

1. i know. you however are not entirely able to see it.
2. unfortunately there IS a question regarding this issue. which is why people argue with you.
3. no, he's saying the civil war is being encouraged by the governments who profit from the general instability in the war. this is pretty obvious to anyone though, so why bring it up? is it to lend credibility to less believable or documented theories?
4. yes, yes, we're all shills, all of anarchists who seek to bring down greedy, corrupt and murdererous governments, nationalise the industries, and seek a gentler kinder world. we're all shills. blah blah.

i think the trouble with you guys is that you don't know when to stop.

 

[editor]

it is not my position, my position is here

Your 'position' is a prog rock CD?

http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_CD.asp?cd_id=772

 

[bluestreak]

here is a classic example of a CONSPIRACY, no question no doubt

that is a classic example of why the conspiracy theorist lacks credibility. the inability to tell the difference between the UN and rogue elements within the UN's international peacekeepers. the inability to distinguish between the many disparate agencies within the UN, and the inability to understand why one department has problems breaking down the others. and also not understanding the intrinsic xenophobia and short-termism of the mainstream media...

a bbc news search for sex trafficking UN:

http://newssearch.bbc.co.uk/cgi-bin...sex+trafficking+UN&go=go&go.y=&scope=newsukfs

all sorts of stuff, some relevant and supporting zArk, some that oppose his view, and many that show that the world simply isn't as clear cut as he sees it.

 

[fractionMan]

ahh Mr Reality enters the chamber.

care to explain what reality is Mr Fraction?

It appears to be the set of all things minus you.

 

[bluestreak]

It appears to be the set of all things minus you.

*makes notes*

i'm using that one myself later.

 

[zArk]

Your 'position' is a prog rock CD?

my point about 'information' is well taken

 

[zArk]

It appears to be the set of all things minus you.

wonderful, i am impressed by your effort

 

[zArk]

the inability to tell the difference between the UN and rogue elements within the UN's international peacekeepers.

i guess you missed my posts waayyy back in this thread.

The UN have known about it happening for years, Kofi Annan has made statements literally saying that the UN know and have done nothing.

They are guilty of the crime being committed because they havent stopped it in full knowledge of the crimes.

The rogue elements therefore are not isolated people or groups but the entire machinic assembly of the UN, Annan and everyone below him in the UN.

 

[bluestreak]

and you missed MY point. your answer is evidence of your inability to understand the machinations of such institutions of the UN and NATO. you're simply not cynical enough, your demands for justice are admirable, your morality is not suspect for a second. but the point is, they know, there are wings of the UN dedicated to stamping this stuff out where they can, stamping it out ni the rest of the world where they can. but an organisation like that is hindered by the fact that, like police forces, companies, societies everywhere, they simply do not possess the skills, money, procedures or even sadly the willpower to eradicate crime and scummy behaviour.

you really think that if the UN could stamp it out they wouldn't?

 

[DrRingDing]

I would imagine not. I would imagine however that they might find it difficult recruiting the hundreds of operatives prepared to do it for them in conditions of absolute secrecy with not one of them ever confessing, speaking out or slipping up.

For a supposed book worm you seem to of missed the section on 20th century south and central american political struggles, not to mention SE Asia.

 

[William of Walworth]

For a supposed book worm you seem to of missed the section on 20th century south and central american political struggles, not to mention SE Asia.

Relevance?

 

[zArk]

you really think that if the UN could stamp it out they wouldn't?

the evidence shows that to be the case.

One can make all the excuses one can muster but the UN is guilty of sexually exploiting women and children.

It IS that simple.

The reason why the UN havent stopped it is no defense.

they simply do not possess the skills, money, procedures or even sadly the willpower to eradicate crime and scummy behaviour

and there you go, there is no skills required there is just the ability to stop. Nothing more. Just stop and face the law, but they dont. The UN is the psychotically derranged paedophile who wants to stop, is screaming for help but cannot and will not stop because it is beyond its own ability to do so.

Futhermore.. the mass media are complicit in covering up this by burying the story. The machinary is beyond the UN and is part of it. Where is the mass media? Who are the mass media protecting?

 

[DrRingDing]

Again, I'm going to have to ask you for a source on that. Chapter and verse, please, and people can judge whether it says what you say it says.

Have you ever read or heard of this before?

Serious question.

Anyhoo...

A line frequently quoted by critics from Rebuilding America's Defenses famously refers to the possibility of a "catastrophic and catalyzing event — like a new Pearl Harbor" (page 51). This quote appears in Chapter V, entitled "Creating Tomorrow's Dominant Force", which discusses the perceived need for the Department of Defense to "move more aggressively to experiment with new technologies and operational concepts” (page 50). The full quote is as follows: "Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor." Some opponents of the Bush administration have used this quote as evidence for their belief that the US Government was complicit in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

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

 

[editor]

Have you ever read or heard of this before?

Serious question.

So that proves, what exactly?

This is classic conspiraloonery.

Initiated on the basis of limited, partial or circumstantial evidence;
Conceived in reaction to media reports and images, as opposed to, for example, thorough knowledge of the relevant forensic evidence.

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

 

[DrRingDing]

I'm having trouble believing that the globe's sole superpower would set about the highly perilous political path of mass murdering their own citizens and blowing up a large chunk of their greatest city supposedly to provide a pretext to invade a weaker country - especially when their CV is already packed with examples of invasions/bombings elsewhere.

'They' didn't murder loads of 'their' citizens, a bunch of nutjob islamists did.

...and 'they' know NY is full of pinkos anyhoo.

And as for your last point they always need a reason to take people to war. Unless they think they can get away with it in secret, which in todays world must be near on impossible.

 

[ViolentPanda]

I think he means that, "If it isn't a conspiracy theory, it's a government theory."

(if so...........) Priceless.

I don't know about "priceless", more like about £2, the cost of a bottle of meths for a dosser, who once he's chugged down the purple stuff, will spew all the nonsense you want free, gratis and for nothing.

 

[DrRingDing]

*RUN PROG 1: 'dismiss evidence, without discusion by throwing insults'*

So that proves, what exactly?

This is classic conspiraloonery.

*Awaits PROG 2: 'Accuse thinker of arrogance'.*

 

[ViolentPanda]

Don't you think that posting up pictures of Rick Wakeman is a bit, well...disgusting? What have we done to deserve that?

 

[DrRingDing]

Relevance?

It's 100% relevant to my point that the necons are willing to kill their own population in their thousands, and many many more Johnny Foreigners for a little financial gain.

 

[zArk]

It's 100% relevant to my point that the necons are willing to kill their own population in their thousands, and many many more for a little financial gain.

I agree in part but would say

and many many more for the presevation of their way of life.

 

[editor]

It's 100% relevant to my point that the necons are willing to kill their own population in their thousands, and many many more Johnny Foreigners for a little financial gain.

So they've blown up huge great chunks of New York, demolished their prestigious landmarks and mass slaughtered their own citizens in highly complex plots involving the complicit involvement of hundreds of people before, have they?

I must have missed that.

 

[editor]

And as for your last point they always need a reason to take people to war.

So why didn't they just plant a huge load of WMDs in the deserts of Iraq/Iran/wherever else they want a scrap?

Easily done and reason enough to start an invasion.

 

[editor]

Don't you think that posting up pictures of Rick Wakeman is a bit, well...disgusting?

It looks like he's got a cash register in the background.

 

[Donna Ferentes]

For a supposed book worm you seem to of missed the section on 20th century south and central american political struggles, not to mention SE Asia.

Sorry, the relevance of this escapes me. Can we have some specifics please?

Conceivably the idea is to suggest that there are plenty of people prepared to murder citizens of their own country for financial and political gain. And so there are. There used to be (and are) such things as death squads for instance. They were not, however, super-efficient, super-secret people recruited by government high-ups to carry out highly co-ordinated operations like the supposed 9/11 conspiracy. They were thugs whose identities were pretty well known to everybody (as is the case in, say, present-day Colombia).

Have you ever read or heard of this before?

Serious question.

Anyhoo...



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

As it happens, I have. Indeed I assumed it was that to which you were referring, and guess what, it's a long way off demonstrating what you imagine to be your point, since it's hardly a proposal that anything be done, let alone that a specific act be carried out. Is it really the best you can do?

Christ, these people really don't understand what evidence is, do they?

 

[William of Walworth]

It's 100% relevant to my point that the necons are willing to kill their own population in their thousands, and many many more Johnny Foreigners for a little financial gain.

What, the history of US-backed dictators and their deeds in Central and South America proves not just that their backers would consider killing their own citizens in NY, but also lends support to theories saying thay actually have done?

There are some logic gaps in your chain of 'reasoning' here ...

 

[William of Walworth]

Christ, these people really don't understand what evidence is, do they?

And Do Us A Favour is one of the more reasonable ones, comparatively speaking ....

 

[Donna Ferentes]

Quite

So why didn't they just plant a huge load of WMDs in the deserts of Iraq/Iran/wherever else they want a scrap?

Easily done and reason enough to start an invasion.

It's not the first time I've seen this point made. And it's not the first time I've said "quite".

 

[Azrael23]

So why didn't they just plant a huge load of WMDs in the deserts of Iraq/Iran/wherever else they want a scrap?

Easily done and reason enough to start an invasion.

It came out publicly that before the war Blair and Bush were planning to paint a spy plane in US colours and try and tempt saddam into shooting it down to start the war.