To open a small can of worms or 2….
1) There seems to be as it was said before, only 2 sides… you either believe some theory or you accept the official story.. and doing the later makes you a FOX news lovin’ Neo-con... This simply seems a lot like the Global warming debate, where if you agree with the scientists who think it is occurring (as a result of man) OR you agree with those who think it isn’t, and then you are an ignorant bush lover who wants to bathe your babies in mid-east oil and drive an SUV. I don’t think anyone on either issue is going to be 100 percent correct, but the 2 sided, no-nuance approach to both is laughable. Unfortunately, in a infotainment society… where the news is not the news unless it satisfies your need to be entertained at some level… the crackpot theories get equal play as the scientifically proven facts. In so doing, we allow for the facts to be marred in speculation because of the theory’s false elevation in importance.
spiral out wrote:
Interesting lets forget the theorys for a second here, what exactly would you say are the facts of the matter?
The way i see it for every engineer that believes the offical story there is an engineer who doesn't.
So are the engineers who don't agree with the offical version in your book nuts?
I don't think that is what my post was getting at. I think that saying there are equal numbers of engineers with identical qualifications on each side of the argument is a false premise to begin with.
My post isnt about whos off their rocker...
the crackpot theories get equal play as the scientifically proven facts. In so doing, we allow for the facts to be marred in speculation because of the theory’s false elevation in importance....
spiral out wrote:
Ok what would you say are the crakpot theories then? and what are the facts?
The way i see it people who are not satisfied with the offical version should not be lumped in with people who belive in UFO's and the elvis presely is alive crowd. Are there really people out there who belive that? I've yet to meet one.
I think if you give these people enough attention then it gives them some legitimacy. MIT professors and engineers would likely look for every reason to oppose the Bush administration if indeed 9/11 had been a conspiracy. But, they know that the evidence of a conspiracy is completely fabricated in most cases.
It's immoral for people with no background, expertise, or legitimate research on this topic to go around spreading lies about a conspiracy. This is akin to Young Earth Creationism, claiming against all the evidence that the earth is 6,000 years old and that nuclear dating is completely untrue. This is also similar to Holocaust denial.
I would urge those who feel the need to oppose the conspiracy theorists to just ignore them. Sure, they may still post threads but it would be better if the only people who responded were themselves. We've attempted to argue with them, but they simply can't be reasoned with. You just have to let this whole thing die a slow death I suppose.
To say that 9/11 is not a conspiracy is to say that it happened by accident. You need to clean up your language on this. Even if you believe it was done soley by bin laden and/or al quaida, and the means by which they did it (all on their own), it is still a conspiratorial act.
Well certainly, bin Laden and Al Qaida conspired to bring down the WTC towers. But, the conspiracy most people here are referring to was hatched by the US Government, not a foreign body.
i dont have the time to go point by point here, but the term crackpot thery is called so because a cracked pot doesnt hold water... thus the idea is that the theory doesnt hold water... there are plenty of examples of theories that are debunked, you can use google for that one... ill just try one example...
"the pentagon was hit by a missle because there are no wings or luggage to be found."
Ok, there were hundreds of eyewitnesses who saw a comercial plane hit it... parts of the plane were found and no one took their eyes off of it long enought to plant that evidence... all that and the poeple on the plane are all dead, so there is that...
To your other point. The history chanel *(take it for what you will) reported that the leaders of the 911truth gorups are career skeptics who also are determined to prove the CIA killed JFK and other govenment "cover-ups". So there are people out there who live their life and try to get famous by putting forward their less than reputable theories.. Also, I wish elvis was alive, i think he'd have loved to play with Pearl Jam.
spiral out wrote:
Could the history channel not just be propaganda what makes you so sure that the history channel doesn't have an agenda?
I'm not sure what can of worms you have opened, you basically just came across like someone who believes what the media tells you. No real argument there, as far as i can see.
Make up your mind, is Bush competent, or incompetent. The biggest flaw in conspiracy theories is that they require a level of competency that even teh most rabid supporters cannot subscribe to.
It's like all those James Bond and MI movies with all teh bad guys in black running around willing to be killed by the good guy while earnimg a minimum bad guy wage. Fuck, in real life those dudes would all be sitting back saying, not me bucko, you get shot, they ain't paying me enough, or gioing to the boss and asking for a longer tea break in exchange for being killed.
So far, not one of the thousands of necessary secret operatives has come forward to spill their guts, in a country full of gut spillers, to say, oh yeah, I organised the planes, or helped hide thousands of passengers who didn;t mind starting a new life and leaving all their family and friends behind.
Oh, that's right, Elvis was flying the plane, and Marilyn and James Dean were serving drinks.
Give it up Einstein, take your pills, get your bolts loosened, whatever, but give up on this whole conspiracy theory.
You are bonkers !!!!!
I did wonder who the powers that be might be at the History Channel while I watched that program. Television isn't always about the ratings, however, when it is about high ratings, I'm guessing most of the time, in this day and age, we've got some greasy fingers on the controls of what we're watching.
spiral out wrote:
I just googled history channel propaganda and it would appear i'm not alone in my views.
I don't think there are any programs out there that don't have an agenda anymore.
channel 4 used to be good, but the last couple of documentries i watched were so one way i avoid it now.
"Paranoia is often associated with psychotic illnesses, particularly schizophrenia, although attenuated features may be present in other primarily non-psychotic diagnoses, such as paranoid personality disorder. Paranoia can also be a side effect of medication or recreational drugs, particularly marijuana and stimulants such as methamphetamine."
I don't even know what to say to that, or where to begin...so I wont.
Because you can't, or you have to rush off for another shock therapy session.
Make up your mind, is Bush competent, or incompetent.
Bumping this so peeps can see Roland is full of shit !
No answer to the conundrum of whether BUsh is competent or not yet.
Come on man, I'm waiting. According to your conspiracy theory, the man managed to orchestrate the preparation and destruction of the World Trade Centre Towers and the murder of over 4000 people without anyone except you and a few other superheros catching on.
You cant see what shit really is if you wallow in it my friend...(and it appears you are in the deep end) You're up to the teeth and eyeballs, if you really think this way... drop the loser ego and open your mind for a change...
hatred is a bitch eh?
Man, I don't hate anything. You are still not addressing the question of the degree of competency required to pull off your conspiracy.