We See Conspiracies That Don't Exist

RolandTD20Kdrummer · May 2007

soulsinging wrote:

no, i consider michael moore to be just plain crazy and a sensationalist.

the wmd thing was not a conspiracy theory. it was widely uncertain from the beginning. the 9/11 thing is a conspiracy theory. jfk's assassination was a conspiracy theory. ufo coverups are conspiracy theories.

I think CT in this situation is more of a flowing movement rather than a specific event. I guess it could be called "Bush CT" or "US govt CT". That would be accurate. I think that's essentially called plain old cynicism or perhaps even patriotism.

There's varying degrees. Some people actually wear tinfoil hats...

If nothing MM says strikes you as concerning then you have forfeited your thought process to blind faith. Especially Farenheit 9/11.

Still waiting on building #7. In all reality that was majorly fucked up right there. For sure an impartial investigation would have been able to preserve and analyze large quantities of that wreckage. Maybe terrorists did demolish it? Maybe security was breached somehow and something is rotten from the inside out.. Is there a mole in the US govt? Wouldn't they want to know how and why a little better? Can NIST look into the future and know what will occur?

NIST says hmm.. dunno...evidence?...uhm yeah gone...hauled it away...burned it.... still not finished making up our minds yet...

See what I'm getting at? The impartial approach to the investigation is non existent. It's stinks pretty bad!

It's that in your face really nasty kind of stank actually

soulsinging · May 2007

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

I think CT in this situation is more of a flowing movement rather than a specific event. I guess it could be called "Bush CT" or "US govt CT". That would be accurate. I think that's essentially called plain old cynicism or perhaps even patriotism.

There's varying degrees. Some people actually wear tinfoil hats...

If nothing MM says strikes you as concerning then you have forfeited your thought process to blind faith. Especially Farenheit 9/11.

Still waiting on building #7. In all reality that was majorly fucked up right there. For sure an impartial investigation would have been able to preserve and analyze large quantities of that wreckage. Maybe terrorists did demolish it? Maybe security was breached somehow and something is rotten from the inside out.. Is there a mole in the US govt? Wouldn't they want to know how and why a little better? Can NIST look into the future and know what will occur?

NIST says hmm.. dunno...evidence?...uhm yeah gone...hauled it away...burned it.... still not finished making up our minds yet...

See what I'm getting at? The impartial approach to the investigation is non existent. It's stinks pretty bad!

It's that in your face really nasty kind of stank actually

i saw fahrenheit 9/11. he took the fact that becos bush was an oil man, and many saudi people were oilmen, bush was behind 9/11. it was bogus. ive never seen facts stretched so thin. he was onto something when he started asking senators to sign up their own kids though. that was mroe on the spot. but if you think his books and movies are cold hard fact, then YOU are the one with no thought process. moore is about as reliable as sean hannity for real news. sure they're using "facts." but they're cherry picking them and distorting them as much as possible to fit their agenda. it's entertainment, not news.

i stopped listening to the bullshit 9/11 pleas for information long ago. we still don't understand how the fucking romans built their roads... with all our technology, we still don't know how the hell the egyptians managed to build those pyramids. it's not exactly shocking to me that even scientists are pretty confused about what exactly happened to those buildings. nobody ever conceived of something like that, and what happens in a lab under very controlled circumstances rarely reflects accurately what happened in the real world where murphy's law has its way with the 10000 factors they couldn't account for in the lab.

soulsinging · May 2007

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

And who exaclty is running on their opinions of 9/11 or the view that anyone is evil. I, myself, don't even believe in evil. I believe there is, however, different perspectives, misjudgements and selfishness that cause people to do things that seem unthinkable to others.

come now. there were 2 sides on the left in the kerry campaign... bush and everything he does, stands for, thinks, dreams about, or ponders on the shitter is evil, horrid and wrong. and the "we're not sure what the fuck we stand for yet" dems. the left is supposed to be the party of empathy and understanding. when they get flooded by their hatred of bush, it makes them look as ridiculous and petty as gingrich did when he was going after clinton. people either didnt know what the dems stood for, or they associated them with the foaming at the mouth bush hater who believed 9/11 was an inside job.

RolandTD20Kdrummer · May 2007

soulsinging wrote:

i saw fahrenheit 9/11. he took the fact that becos bush was an oil man, and many saudi people were oilmen, bush was behind 9/11. it was bogus. ive never seen facts stretched so thin. he was onto something when he started asking senators to sign up their own kids though. that was mroe on the spot. but if you think his books and movies are cold hard fact, then YOU are the one with no thought process. moore is about as reliable as sean hannity for real news. sure they're using "facts." but they're cherry picking them and distorting them as much as possible to fit their agenda. it's entertainment, not news.

i stopped listening to the bullshit 9/11 pleas for information long ago. we still don't understand how the fucking romans built their roads... with all our technology, we still don't know how the hell the egyptians managed to build those pyramids. it's not exactly shocking to me that even scientists are pretty confused about what exactly happened to those buildings. nobody ever conceived of something like that, and what happens in a lab under very controlled circumstances rarely reflects accurately what happened in the real world where murphy's law has its way with the 10000 factors they couldn't account for in the lab.

Moore raises a lot or really important points and facts that still stand correct to this day. Mostly about why he just sat there reading a book doing nothing...that was the cover of the DVD afterall. The strongest image and lasting impression of the piece. It's the impression or idea as a whole he was trying to get across and it's actually pretty accurate. He couln't see into the future but he got a lot of it right. How do you explain that. Crazy man blind luck? Especially the oil scenario. You think CNN is going to show you this reality.

There's a difference between the romans and pyramids thing...the guys who designed and built the WTC are still alive and can speak, plus we have all the original design schematics, and they were built in our lifetime. I don't really see the comparison all that much.

Granted there are unknowns...but what was done to impartially eliminate the factors leading up to a providing a reasonbale conclusion... destroy and ban the evidence before the investigation has even reached a conclusion?

Seriously now think about it.

soulsinging · May 2007

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

Moore raises a lot or really important points and facts that still stand correct to this day. Mostly about why he just sat there reading a book doing nothing...that was the cover of the DVD afterall. The strongest image and lasting impression of the piece. It's the impression or idea as a whole he was trying to get across and it's actually pretty accurate. He couln't see into the future but he got a lot of it right. How do you explain that. Crazy man blind luck? Especially the oil scenario. You think CNN is going to show you this reality.

There's a difference between the romans and pyramids thing...the guys who designed and built the WTC are still alive and can speak, plus we have all the original design schematics, and they were built in our lifetime. I don't really see the comparison all that much.

Granted there are unknowns...but what was done to impartially eliminate the factors leading up to a providing a reasonbale conclusion... destroy and ban the evidence before the investigation has even reached a conclusion?

Seriously now think about it.

bush sat there becos he's a damn fool and didnt know what the hell else to do. he was and has been a puppet from day one. i dont doubt there are a lot of people getting rich off this, but i do doubt that bush flew the people who blew up the wtc out of the country to keep them safe. i dont doubt there was massive gross incompetence that allowed this to happen, nor that there was opportunism from the second it did happen. but i do doubt it was planned by those people to create the opportunity. ive yet to see anything that is very compelling reason for me to believe otherwise. your science mumbo jumbo is unconvincing becos for every one of yours, there are two more saying it coulda happened. that's where the pyramids come in... as i said it's easy to sit in a lab with a one inch piece of steel under a blow torch and say "look ma, no melting!" it's another to have two airplanes crash into a building and topple them and look back and say "my computers say that can't happen."

the country was a mess. the bureaucracy turned things upside down. nobody knew who the fuck was in charge or what was going on. im not surprised at all the post-handling was botched. but that's not necessarily evidence of a cover up. 9 times outta 10, the simplest explanation is true. until you give me a smoking gun (which, coincidentally, you DEMANDED from bush over his wmd claims) im not buying it.

RolandTD20Kdrummer · May 2007

soulsinging wrote:

bush sat there becos he's a damn fool and didnt know what the hell else to do. he was and has been a puppet from day one. i dont doubt there are a lot of people getting rich off this, but i do doubt that bush flew the people who blew up the wtc out of the country to keep them safe. i dont doubt there was massive gross incompetence that allowed this to happen, nor that there was opportunism from the second it did happen. but i do doubt it was planned by those people to create the opportunity. ive yet to see anything that is very compelling reason for me to believe otherwise. your science mumbo jumbo is unconvincing becos for every one of yours, there are two more saying it coulda happened. that's where the pyramids come in... as i said it's easy to sit in a lab with a one inch piece of steel under a blow torch and say "look ma, no melting!" it's another to have two airplanes crash into a building and topple them and look back and say "my computers say that can't happen."

the country was a mess. the bureaucracy turned things upside down. nobody knew who the fuck was in charge or what was going on. im not surprised at all the post-handling was botched. but that's not necessarily evidence of a cover up. 9 times outta 10, the simplest explanation is true. until you give me a smoking gun (which, coincidentally, you DEMANDED from bush over his wmd claims) im not buying it.

It's not up to Bush...there are people who's ENTIRE JOB it is to keep the president safe. The country is under attack is not a bloody suggestion...it's "sir the country is under attack...let's go...now!" If they Bush/Cheney did nothing the towers would probably still be standing. But the stand down order was upheld (obviously). As it's pretty usual scenario to scramble jets. It's routine. Protocol.

One opinion is more of a "reality scenario" than the other. One is based on on usual practices and measures of past proven history....another is well "they're just dumb and sleepy...see t's not their fault." Nothing to do at all with prior knowledge even eh?

That to me is the real bullshit mentality.

If you believe what you say then you're so hypnotized by blind faith of your blessed leader that it's castrated your patriotism.

Good luck with that path...

Abookamongstthemany · May 2007

soulsinging wrote:

come now. there were 2 sides on the left in the kerry campaign... bush and everything he does, stands for, thinks, dreams about, or ponders on the shitter is evil, horrid and wrong. and the "we're not sure what the fuck we stand for yet" dems. the left is supposed to be the party of empathy and understanding. when they get flooded by their hatred of bush, it makes them look as ridiculous and petty as gingrich did when he was going after clinton. people either didnt know what the dems stood for, or they associated them with the foaming at the mouth bush hater who believed 9/11 was an inside job.

Well, I guess it would be easier if everyone fit into these nice, neat little boxes...

I wasn't on the 'I hate Bush side' or the 'I don't know what I stand for side'. I did vote for Kerry but it was because I didn't want Bush to nominate any judges and I thought anyone could do a better job than he was doing. I don't think that equals hate or that I think Bush is evil...just complete disgareement with how he was running the country.

soulsinging · May 2007

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

It's not up to Bush...there are people who's ENTIRE JOB it is to keep the president safe. The country is under attack is not a bloody suggestion...it's "sir the country is under attack...let's go...now!" If they Bush/Cheney did nothing the towers would probably still be standing. But the stand down order was upheld (obviously). As it's pretty usual scenario to scramble jets. It's routine. Protocol.

One opinion is more of a "reality scenario" than the other. One is based on on usual practices and measures of past proven history....another is well "they're just dumb and sleepy...see t's not their fault." Nothing to do at all with prior knowledge even eh?

That to me is the real bullshit mentality.

If you believe what you say then you're so hypnotized by blind faith of your blessed leader that it's castrated your patriotism.

Good luck with that path...

you're a real genius you know that? becos i dont agree with your bullshit theories im a blind dubya sheep? newflash sherlock: i loathe george bush. i think history will show him to be one of the most inept and atrocious presidents we've ever had and we will be paying for his abohorrent policies for decades to come. i opposed the iraq war from day one and knew it was instantly a bullshit ruse, though at the time i thought it was just a maneuver to make people forget that we had no fucking clue where bin laden was. as i watched the towers fall i knew we were in for some serious shit becos he was going to be untouchable. and he has milked it for all it's worth. it's sickening really.

but that does not mean i have to believe dubya and cheney planned 9/11 and planted bombs in there to bring the towers down. things were fucked up that day and shit happens. they caught us with our pants down. it was handled poorly by a complacent leadership from the top down. but i see nothing that convinces me the cia or haliburton or your favorite bogeyman did it.

soulsinging · May 2007

Abookamongstthemany wrote:

Well, I guess it would be easier if everyone fit into these nice, neat little boxes...

I wasn't on the 'I hate Bush side' or the 'I don't know what I stand for side'. I did vote for Kerry but it was because I didn't want Bush to nominate any judges and I thought anyone could do a better job than he was doing. I don't think that equals hate or that I think Bush is evil...just complete disgareement with how he was running the country.

well, i guess it would be easier if every dem in the country fit into your neat little reasonable box :rolleyes: cmon... we all know how well they smeared the left in that election. all im saying is people like the 9/11 conspiracy theorists make the smear guy's job a helluva lot easier and they discredit and hamper the causes they are fighting for. they're the left wing equivalent of jerry "9/11 was god's punishment for your acceptance of homos" jenkins.

Abookamongstthemany · May 2007

soulsinging wrote:

well, i guess it would be easier if every dem in the country fit into your neat little reasonable box :rolleyes: cmon... we all know how well they smeared the left in that election. all im saying is people like the 9/11 conspiracy theorists make the smear guy's job a helluva lot easier and they discredit and hamper the causes they are fighting for. they're the left wing equivalent of jerry "9/11 was god's punishment for your acceptance of homos" jenkins.

So because people question the official 9/11 theory it makes it easy to discredit anyone on the left running for office? That makes no sense. I'll question what the fuck I feel like. It's not like I go around everytime I talk to someone about the war, the merits of socialism, UHC, etc bringing up 9/11....and no one else does this either. I can see that because there are assholes out there that want to call everyone 'crazy' for seeing something differently, you might want to keep those beliefs to yourself when running for office. But I'm not running for office and anyone that decided who to vote for based on what I or anyone else thinks about 9/11 is fucking moron to begin with who probably lacks the brains cell it takes to make any sound decisions for themselves. Those same morons would buy into any discrediting tactics the right spoon feeds them with. :rolleyes:

RolandTD20Kdrummer · May 2007

soulsinging wrote:

you're a real genius you know that? becos i dont agree with your bullshit theories im a blind dubya sheep? newflash sherlock: i loathe george bush. i think history will show him to be one of the most inept and atrocious presidents we've ever had and we will be paying for his abohorrent policies for decades to come. i opposed the iraq war from day one and knew it was instantly a bullshit ruse, though at the time i thought it was just a maneuver to make people forget that we had no fucking clue where bin laden was. as i watched the towers fall i knew we were in for some serious shit becos he was going to be untouchable. and he has milked it for all it's worth. it's sickening really.

but that does not mean i have to believe dubya and cheney planned 9/11 and planted bombs in there to bring the towers down. things were fucked up that day and shit happens. they caught us with our pants down. it was handled poorly by a complacent leadership from the top down. but i see nothing that convinces me the cia or haliburton or your favorite bogeyman did it.

If by genius you mean I'm perceptive and aware to the realities of the circumstances and factors involved in forming a realistic comprehension of the situation then...well...yes I am.

soulsinging · May 2007

RolandTD20Kdrummer wrote:

If by genius you mean I'm perceptive and aware to the realities of the circumstances and factors involved in forming a realistic comprehension of the situation then...well...yes I am.

indeed you are... so perceptive you picked right up on my love of george bush by the mere fact that i wasn't accusing him of personally planting bombs in the wtc :rolleyes:

RolandTD20Kdrummer · May 2007

soulsinging wrote:

indeed you are... so perceptive you picked right up on my love of george bush by the mere fact that i wasn't accusing him of personally planting bombs in the wtc :rolleyes:

Of course...now you finally got it all together. Glad you were able to manage the big concepts.

remind me to analyze and profile your various peculiarities and beliefs prior to our next conversation.

p.s. there's an audience and I'm speaking to it as well. I hate doing one thing at a time...life's too short.

We See Conspiracies That Don't Exist

Comments

Categories