» OLD MESSAGE ARCHIVES «
The Pop Culture Information Society...
Messageboard Archive Index, In The 00s - The Pop Culture Information Society
Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.
If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.
Custom Search
This is a topic from the Current Politics and Religious Topics forum on inthe00s.
Subject: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 02/18/06 at 12:54 am
The truth is out there.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Mushroom on 02/18/06 at 9:25 am
The truth is out there.
As I have stated in here many times before, I do not believe in Conspiracies.
I find that 99% of the time, when I hold them up against Occam's Razor, they slit their own wrists. Most are so convoluted and involved, there is simply no way they could have lasted more then a few weeks before somebody like Bob Woodward or another journalist would have found somebody willing to talk, and blow everything wide open.
I mean, think about it. Mark Felt was so upset about some of the things the Nixon Administration did, he became "Deep Throat" and blew open Watergate. Does anybody seriously believe that if any Government group was involved in JFK, that nobody credible would have come forward? Even after more then 40 years?
There are no UFOs in Area 51. In fact, they probably call it that because anybody who believes in it is one card short of a full deck.
There are a few "Conspiracies" that I admit that are real. Jimmy Hoffa is a good example. I would be surprised if more then 5 or 6 people really knew what happened to him, and most have probably taken that to the grave.
The "Final Solution" was a conspiracy, but within 2 years it moved from that to being "The Know Secret Nobody Talks About". This is because more and more people knew about it, it was impossible to hide. But the opressive Government kept people from commenting openly.
And yes, I think the "Republican Conspiracy Theories" are just as whacky as the "Democratic Conspiracy Theories" are. I laught at both sides when they do that. I no more believe in the "November Surprise", then I believe that Bill Clinton had Vince Foster killed. Neither one of those "Conspiracies" holds any water, other then in the head of the believers.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 02/18/06 at 9:38 am
people's taste for the occam's razor truism has always struck me as odd. take, for example, scientists learning about the existence of microbes. who would ever have thought that sickness was caused by tiny, invisible creatures conveyed through the air or through rat bites, rather than by evil spirits -- which had been the belief for hundreds of years and doubtless seemed the simplest and most obvious? i rather think "occam's razor" is used most often as a convenient rationalization for reaffirming the status quo. this is a complicated universe, there's no reason whatsoever in a given instance to think the simplest explanation for something is the right one, just because it's simple.
as for people coming out about JFK -- of course they're not going to, because if they did all the occam's razor buffs would call them crazy. it's a catch 22. people come out about JFK all the time -- and they're treated like cranks. many of them doubtless are, but if one was telling the truth we'd never know, because they get shouted down.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: MaxwellSmart on 02/18/06 at 12:05 pm
The Nazis fled to the South Pole after World War II in prototype flying saucers.
Never heard that before, that's a good one! Some of therm DID make it to South America, though! One served as president of Uruguay for a while. It's true! I forgot his name...
:D
As I have stated in here many times before, I do not believe in Conspiracies.
Of course you believe in conspiracies. People conspire all the time! You mean you would rather take the "official version" above a "conspiracy theory." I believe some of these "conspiracy theories" are concocted to confound a truth fare more savage.
No, I don't believe there are UFOs at Area 51 or down at Roswell, NM, either. I do believe the government is covering up horrible, atrocious, inhumane, nazi-type experiments in certain restricted spaces like that! If I was one of your "men in black," or like the cigarette-smoking agent on the X-Files, I'd rather have the public making conjecture about extraterrestrials than know about inhumane experiments on human beings, or atomic-powered flying craft gone awry, or something like that!
:o
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Harmonica on 02/18/06 at 2:50 pm
They make good movies...sometimes.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: philbo on 02/18/06 at 6:56 pm
i rather think "occam's razor" is used most often as a convenient rationalization for reaffirming the status quo. this is a complicated universe, there's no reason whatsoever in a given instance to think the simplest explanation for something is the right one, just because it's simple.
Occam's razor isn't simply the "simplest", but the argument that uses least assumptions is the most likely to be correct: in the case of microbes vs evil spirits, the assumptions you make about their existance is similar; but the assumption to make about motives (survival in one case, and "evil because that's what they are") are very different.
And very often you see people completely misusing Occam's razor to suit their own personal prejudice; and besides, it's only a "most likely", it ain't an "always". There are exceptions... in fact, almost everything is an exception apart from the bits that aren't (which therefore are)
Anyway, an excellent page on conspiracy theories here. Worth a giggle over...
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: MaxwellSmart on 02/19/06 at 5:15 pm
Occam's razor isn't simply the "simplest", but the argument that uses least assumptions is the most likely to be correct: in the case of microbes vs evil spirits, the assumptions you make about their existance is similar; but the assumption to make about motives (survival in one case, and "evil because that's what they are") are very different.
And very often you see people completely misusing Occam's razor to suit their own personal prejudice; and besides, it's only a "most likely", it ain't an "always". There are exceptions... in fact, almost everything is an exception apart from the bits that aren't (which therefore are)
Anyway, an excellent page on conspiracy theories here. Worth a giggle over...
Quite right. If you misuse Occam's Razor, you cease all scientific inquiry. When I was in kindergarten, my friend Timmy let go of a helium balloon. We watched it float up and get smaller and smaller. Timmy said, "It will pop when it gets too close to the sun." I said, "I think the sun's way too far away for that!" I couldn't explain the more probable demise for the balloon, but my dad had told me the sun is 93 million miles away, and 93 million is an awfully big number! But doesn't Timmy's explanation seem the simpler? The sun is very hot and it looks like it's only a mile or two away in the sky!
We confront a similar problem today with the Intelligent Design folks who say cellular mechanics are sooooo complex there MUST be some divine plan at work! What if in 1674 Anton von Leewenhoek looked at the amazing little critters he saw through his primitive microscope and declared, "Stop all research, I've discovered God!" Here are a few other fellows you should talk to about the supporters of Intelligent Design: Copernicus, Bruno, Galileo, Descartes, Newton, Halley, Darwin, Hubble, and Bertrand Russell!
Not to hijack this thread into another vicious cycle about I.D., I'd say applying Occam's Razor to conspiracy theories requires us to examine human contrivance whereas applying O.R. to science may not. If you want to say "the government is concealing extraterrestrial visitations from us," you need to ask "why would the government do that?" I can think of pros and cons on either side of the argument...
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: philbo on 02/20/06 at 7:36 pm
If you want to say "the government is concealing extraterrestrial visitations from us," you need to ask "why would the government do that?"
Because that's what governments do ;)
'sides, if ET is gonna phone home, who's going to pay the phone bill?
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 02/20/06 at 8:09 pm
oo! somebody voted for area 51. good choice.
you know the one about bobby kennedy and marilyn monroe?
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Donnie Darko on 02/21/06 at 3:04 am
Area 51 is interesting. I definitely think there's something there.
The Moon hoax has been debunked very, very, well. Anyone who knows the facts shouldn't believe in it.
Occam's Razor can be used sometimes, but it really does promote the dogmatic close-mindedness the scientific community has.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Sister Morphine on 02/21/06 at 3:46 am
Gotta go with the one about LBJ. It is classic, crackpot conspiracy theory material. I mean, it's old-school. If you believe in conspiracy theories of any kind, that was the first one you stuck in your pocket.
I don't believe it myself, but it sure is funny as hell!
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 02/21/06 at 4:51 am
i tried to avoid the grimmer/more controversial, messed up ones. i guess the ones about assassinations are the grimmest on the list. it's still wacky, though; i love the LBJ "wink" picture.
i forgot about RFID chips!
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Mushroom on 02/21/06 at 10:11 am
OK, let me explain what I mean by "Conspiracies".
I am sure that there are conspiracies. But by their nature, they have to be secretive, and with the smallest number of people involved as possible. This is why conspiracies like Jimmy Hoffa are still around, decades later.
But the more people you involve, the greater the risk that somebody will talk. And as we all know, there are "Whistleblowers" everywhere. And there are investigative reporters all over. Jack Anderson made his lifes work finding and exposing government coverups and "conspiracies".
This is why I laugh at beliefs like the Moon Landings were faked. The number of people involved in such an undertaking simply boggle the mind. The same goes for UFO's. If the Government had them, where are the people that worked on them? Over 50 years, there must have been thousands of them. You mean everybody is keeping quiet, even after all this time?
JFK is an example of this. To believe some people, the CIA, FBI, Mafia, several large Corporations, and even LBJ were involved in this. and 42 years later, none of them have talked? If Mark Felt could come forward about something as relatively minor as Watergate, then how on earth could so many people keep quiet about something much worse, like assasinating a President?
And do not confuse Occam's Razor with cognitive thinking. Occam's Razor deals with probability and believeability with human actions, not the natural world. If you look at the Earth under Ocam's Razor, then it is flat. But if you do a little more observation, then it becomes obvious that it is round. Even 10's Century Navigators knew this, by observing how a ship would "rise" as it moved away, then it would sink, until only the mast was visible. It was the landlubbers that believed it was flat, because they had never seen this phenomonon.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 02/21/06 at 10:18 am
didn't you already say all this? :)
like i said, people "come out" regarding the JFK assassination all the time. they "come out" about all that other stuff too -- people like bob lazar who claim to have worked at area 51 etc. for the record, most of them are cranks but some might be telling the truth. so it doesn't really work to say, oh, well, so many people would have had to be in on it that someone would have come out by now. people have in throngs, you don't believe them because you only accept the official version of things. that's fine, but the argument you make begs the question. it assumes what you're trying to prove in order to prove it.
for instance, take MK-ULTRA. it's no longer controversial that the CIA engaged in the charming practice of slipping mental patients LSD without their knowledge. (there's a great book on this called "the men who stare at goats" that i just recently finished.) now that just happens to be the claim of schizophrenics the world over -- "the CIA did experiments on me!" -- but it just so happens in one case out of a thousand, they're right.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Mushroom on 02/21/06 at 10:48 am
for instance, take MK-ULTRA. it's no longer controversial that the CIA engaged in the charming practice of slipping mental patients LSD without their knowledge.
Did you know that in the 1950's and 1960's, LSD was an accepted drug for many things, including alcoholism? It was also used as a treatment for Mania, bipolar disorders, and other psychological problems? It was used for this worldwide, not just in the US. And it was used in most mental hospitals.
Fortunately, this was discarded about the same time as Frontal Labotomy. It was barbaric, but the mind was still very unknown at the time, and anything that seemed to pacift people with these problems was considered great by the doctors of the era.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: karen on 02/21/06 at 10:57 am
Occam's Razor can be used sometimes, but it really does promote the dogmatic close-mindedness the scientific community has.
I don't believe that the scientific community is close-minded. But you cannot just produce your 'theory' without having evidence to back it up and some prediction of what else might happen/be seen etc.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 02/21/06 at 10:59 am
Did you know that in the 1950's and 1960's, LSD was an accepted drug for many things, including alcoholism? It was also used as a treatment for Mania, bipolar disorders, and other psychological problems? It was used for this worldwide, not just in the US. And it was used in most mental hospitals.
Fortunately, this was discarded about the same time as Frontal Labotomy. It was barbaric, but the mind was still very unknown at the time, and anything that seemed to pacift people with these problems was considered great by the doctors of the era.
well, of course what the CIA was using it for was as a tool in hostile interrogations. LSD isn't necessarily a bad drug, but if it's given to you in a context where you're surrounded by people you don't trust, in a hostile environment, when you suffer from paranoia, it basically amounts to torture.
of course, the government is far from averse to torture, as we're currently relearning.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Satish on 02/21/06 at 2:27 pm
Area 51 is interesting. I definitely think there's something there.
Well, we already know Area 51 is used by the US Air Force to test its new, experimental aircraft. Satellite photos of it show that it contains a number of runways:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_51
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 02/21/06 at 2:43 pm
Well, we already know Area 51 is used by the US Air Force to test its new, experimental aircraft. Satellite photos of it show that it contains a number of runways:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_51
there's a book called "dreamland" which puts up the interesting idea that the whole alien thing is actually cooked up by the government to disguise the fact that the construction of a lot of these experimental aircraft is environmentally hazardous and toxic to the people working on them.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Donnie Darko on 02/21/06 at 3:59 pm
there's a book called "dreamland" which puts up the interesting idea that the whole alien thing is actually cooked up by the government to disguise the fact that the construction of a lot of these experimental aircraft is environmentally hazardous and toxic to the people working on them.
Perhaps. Maybe there's both.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Mushroom on 02/21/06 at 7:02 pm
there's a book called "dreamland" which puts up the interesting idea that the whole alien thing is actually cooked up by the government to disguise the fact that the construction of a lot of these experimental aircraft is environmentally hazardous and toxic to the people working on them.
To be more accurate, it was to cover the fact that aircraft existed that had no right to exist in the first place.
The F-117 was originally designed in 1973, and basic flight testing started in 1975. The first prototype flew in 1977.
Imagine if you had seen the prototype in 1973, what would you have thought? It made almost no noise, would not show up on radar, and had the apparent aerodynamics of a brick. Of course it would be passed off as a UFO. I remember reading a report after it was finally made public, and the USAF actually was able to show that roughly 65% of the UFOs in the area at the time were actually F-117 sightings.
And you might be surprised at the amount of "hazardous materials" are involved in almost everything, like making a car.
And finally, the F-117 has never been made in Area 51. The originals were made in Burbank California, and the final ones were made in Palmdale California. Area 51 is a testing facility, not a construction facility.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 02/21/06 at 7:33 pm
To be more accurate, it was to cover the fact that aircraft existed that had no right to exist in the first place.
The F-117 was originally designed in 1973, and basic flight testing started in 1975. The first prototype flew in 1977.
Imagine if you had seen the prototype in 1973, what would you have thought? It made almost no noise, would not show up on radar, and had the apparent aerodynamics of a brick. Of course it would be passed off as a UFO. I remember reading a report after it was finally made public, and the USAF actually was able to show that roughly 65% of the UFOs in the area at the time were actually F-117 sightings.
And you might be surprised at the amount of "hazardous materials" are involved in almost everything, like making a car.
And finally, the F-117 has never been made in Area 51. The originals were made in Burbank California, and the final ones were made in Palmdale California. Area 51 is a testing facility, not a construction facility.
whatever, man. take it up with the author of the book.
funny thing is, they had stealth bomber toys in the local stores before it was ever de-classified.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Mushroom on 02/21/06 at 7:44 pm
funny thing is, they had stealth bomber toys in the local stores before it was ever de-classified.
Yea, I remember the speculation about it. And about the F-117 as well.
Of course the B-2 was basically a modification of the old YB-35 and YB-49 bombers. I can't remember a single toy that included the tail section right until after it was released.
In fact, the F-19 Stealth Fighter game released by Microprose was what most thought the plane would look like. Even Tom Clancy thought that it would look like "A Frisbee". For the most part, it was expected to look more like an SR-71 then anything else.
Boy were they wrong!
http://www.fantastic-plastic.com/TESTORS%20F-19%20STEALTH%20PAGE.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/F-19
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YB-35
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northrop_YB-49
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 02/21/06 at 7:51 pm
sounds a bit like when they entrapped the folks trafficking in the fake godzillas in advance of the 98 movie.
hmm, that's interesting actually. looks like an impression of some folks who saw it in the air and didn't remember it perfectly.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Mushroom on 02/21/06 at 8:08 pm
sounds a bit like when they entrapped the folks trafficking in the fake godzillas in advance of the 98 movie.
hmm, that's interesting actually. looks like an impression of some folks who saw it in the air and didn't remember it perfectly.
Well, The F-117 gas an very unusual look. If you were told to describe it, how would you do it? And even more important, who would believe you?
The only experience most people had with "Stealth Aircraft" before that was the Sr-71. So of course, that is what most people used as a basis for what it would look like. Most just took a 71, and made a fighter out of it.
For the B-2, a flying wing was rather obvious. It was known during the trials of the YB-49 that it was very difficult to detect on radar. The only reason they were scrapped was the inability of them to fly safely, and that problem was fixed by the computer controls of the 1980's.
They knew it would look nothing like the B-1 or the XB-70. Neither of those was designed with Stealth in mind, both being replacements for the B-52. Because of this, the wing was an obvious choice for speculation.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 02/21/06 at 9:18 pm
My fav is the "faked moon landing" simply because it's so whacked, it's funny. A guy in my Comm 100 class did his persuasive speech on it ;)
i love those fake moon shot guys. my favorite bit is, look, if you watch carefully you can see it wave in the wind, although there is no wind on the moon. well, um, yo, i believe they made it outta some tinfoil-y type stuff, yo.
it'll probably turn out the weirdest ones are all true. turns out they never DID land on the moon, and yup, everyone in the government is secretly a lizard from beta reticulae. but, turns out oswald acted alone. ??? :-\\
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 02/21/06 at 9:23 pm
Well, The F-117 gas an very unusual look. If you were told to describe it, how would you do it? And even more important, who would believe you?
The only experience most people had with "Stealth Aircraft" before that was the Sr-71. So of course, that is what most people used as a basis for what it would look like. Most just took a 71, and made a fighter out of it.
For the B-2, a flying wing was rather obvious. It was known during the trials of the YB-49 that it was very difficult to detect on radar. The only reason they were scrapped was the inability of them to fly safely, and that problem was fixed by the computer controls of the 1980's.
They knew it would look nothing like the B-1 or the XB-70. Neither of those was designed with Stealth in mind, both being replacements for the B-52. Because of this, the wing was an obvious choice for speculation.
i think it's the blackhawk helicopter has a curious triangular shape made out its onboard lights, and there's lots of UFO spotters saw this light configuration and thought they were triangular craft with lights on their edges.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 02/22/06 at 11:49 am
http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_3529716
hmm. ten years from now the few survivors who remain will remember this was how the nightmare began.
Mystery blob eating downtown
By Dana Bartholomew, Staff Writer
Los Angeles officials were still scratching their heads today over what caused a mysterious black goo to burble from streets downtown, forcing the evacuation hundreds of apartment dwellers.
A Los Angeles Fire Department spokesman said investigators had yet to identify the ``black tarry substance'' more than 24 hours after it erupted at Olive Street and Pico Boulevard.
But he said there might be ``a correlation'' with a petroleum company drilling operation nearby.
``The samples we have taken _ this was determined to be (a) nontoxin, nonflammable, nonhazard,'' said fire Capt. Ernie Bobadilla. ``We're looking to I.D. the scope of the problem.
``This problem is not a simple fix.''
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/20/06 at 5:19 pm
THE CARE AND FEEDING OF UNSOLVED MYSTERIES
Finally, it is safe to say that those who ridicule these inquiries, describe their researchers as conspiracy theorists, and are generally dismissive of any residual curiosity fall into a number of categories themselves including fools, CIA or similar operatives with a vested interest, sedated members of the establishment, or those fearful that the land of Oz may not, after all, exist and would like to postpone their acceptance of the fact.
The very use of the term 'conspiracy theorist' is an anti-intellectual attempt to silence argument for which the labeler has no factual answer. Ironically, it is often the very accuser who is more inclined to believe in conspiracies, albeit benign ones, because it implies a small number of people deciding the course of history, which is how these critics were taught in college that society properly functions. They are, after all, more likely to be Skull & Bone or Council on Foreign Relations members than they are to be social historians or anthropologists who view change as occurring in less elite ways.
Thus anyone who attacks someone else as a conspiracy theorist should be ignored on grounds of simple incompetence with the possible additional liability of disingenuousness.
http://prorev.com/sam.htm
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Mushroom on 03/20/06 at 6:48 pm
The very use of the term 'conspiracy theorist' is an anti-intellectual attempt to silence argument for which the labeler has no factual answer. Ironically, it is often the very accuser who is more inclined to believe in conspiracies, albeit benign ones, because it implies a small number of people deciding the course of history, which is how these critics were taught in college that society properly functions. They are, after all, more likely to be Skull & Bone or Council on Foreign Relations members than they are to be social historians or anthropologists who view change as occurring in less elite ways.
Thus anyone who attacks someone else as a conspiracy theorist should be ignored on grounds of simple incompetence with the possible additional liability of disingenuousness.
Actually, I ignore 98% of conspiracies, because they are unworkable. Most of the time, they require so many different things to work just perfectly. One thing out of step, and they all collapse like a house of cards.
And as everybody knows, the more steps and complications in something, the more likely something will go wrong. And then add into the mix the fact that by definition, a conspiracy has to be secretive. The more people that are involved, the lower the chance of secrecy.
Benjamin Franklin said it best, when he stated "Three can keep a secret, if two of them are dead." Most conspiracy theories simply require far to many people to ever remain a secret. I read that most JFK conspiracy theories would require as a minimum 20-30 people in order to work. The Moon Landing would require a cast of thousands in order to work. ROswell, there you are talking of a conspiracy going back over 50 years, with thousands of people.
On the inverse, Watergate was a real conspiracy, and only a dozen or so people knew about it originally. And look how long that secret lasted. WIthin 2 years it was public, and within 3 years the President had to resign.
To me, most assasinations tend to be the operation of a single man, who is normally mentally deranged. Most political assasinations are the work of a single person, because more then that and it is more then likely to fail.
Gavrilo Princep, Charles J. Guiteau, Leon Czolgosv, Carl Weiss, Dan White, Mark David Chapman, Charles Harrelson, Squeaky Fromme, Sarah Jane Moore, Joseph Paul Franklin, John Hinkley, Arthur Bremer, and the list goes on. Every one of these people unquestionably acted alone.
The few cases where a conspiracy did occur, the conspiracy did not last long. John Wilkes Booth, Ram
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: La Sine Pesroh on 03/20/06 at 8:28 pm
The Franklin Cover-Up.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/20/06 at 10:46 pm
Actually, I ignore 98% of conspiracies, because they are unworkable. Most of the time, they require so many different things to work just perfectly. One thing out of step, and they all collapse like a house of cards.
And as everybody knows, the more steps and complications in something, the more likely something will go wrong. And then add into the mix the fact that by definition, a conspiracy has to be secretive. The more people that are involved, the lower the chance of secrecy.
Benjamin Franklin said it best, when he stated "Three can keep a secret, if two of them are dead." Most conspiracy theories simply require far to many people to ever remain a secret. I read that most JFK conspiracy theories would require as a minimum 20-30 people in order to work. The Moon Landing would require a cast of thousands in order to work. ROswell, there you are talking of a conspiracy going back over 50 years, with thousands of people.
On the inverse, Watergate was a real conspiracy, and only a dozen or so people knew about it originally. And look how long that secret lasted. WIthin 2 years it was public, and within 3 years the President had to resign.
To me, most assasinations tend to be the operation of a single man, who is normally mentally deranged. Most political assasinations are the work of a single person, because more then that and it is more then likely to fail.
Gavrilo Princep, Charles J. Guiteau, Leon Czolgosv, Carl Weiss, Dan White, Mark David Chapman, Charles Harrelson, Squeaky Fromme, Sarah Jane Moore, Joseph Paul Franklin, John Hinkley, Arthur Bremer, and the list goes on. Every one of these people unquestionably acted alone.
The few cases where a conspiracy did occur, the conspiracy did not last long. John Wilkes Booth, Ram
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/20/06 at 11:37 pm
http://www.artwhore.com/images/portfolio/men-in-black-poster.gif
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Mushroom on 03/21/06 at 1:58 am
and yet they were able to invade normandy? how many people knew about that? hundreds? thousands? and the word never got out. the stealth bomber was largely kept a secret, how many people were involved with that? thousands? tens of thousands? that was actually the result of several multi-billion-dollar contracts, and yet it got sprung on us. so how exactly is it that the point you're making makes any sense at all?
The factor here is the time that it was a secret. And don't forget, that the invasion itself was a "public secret", the fact that the destination was Normandie was a very closely held secret. The invasion itself was not a secret at all. The Allies had been doing a massive misdirection campaign, but there was no hiding the preperations nor the buildup for the invasion. Most of the Generals themselves did not know the exact location of the landings until weeks or days before. This was more a situation of misdirection then outright conspiracy. If the preperations had gone on another 2-3 months, Hitler more then likely would have figured out where the landings would have been.
And the same with the Stealth projects. Those also were secret for a period of time, but it was never planned to be a permanent secret. And things started to leak out about them by the mid 1970's. One of the larget leaks came when President Carter killed the B-1 project. He stated that it was to vulnerable and other systems were under development. Since there were no known bombers under development at the time, that could only mean that a Stealth Bomber was in development. And ample facts about both the F-117 and B-2 were known, taht there was little secret about either one when they were revealed.
You have to remember, the things you are bringing up were Classified items, but they all had a "shelf life". None were intended to be a permanent secret. Even some other things that were even more tightly classified (like Magic and VENONA) eventually became public knowledge. The things that most people consider a Conspiracy are the thing that can never be known.
Do not confuse Classified with Conspiracy. Classified tends to cover legal things, that are a secret for National Security purposes. Conspiracy tends to be illegal activities. People can be put in jail for life for giving out classified information. People are turned into heroes for revealing a conspiracy.
If Mark Felt would become Deep Throat over something that is as trivial as Watergate, then how could a government conspiracy about something like an assasination of JFK, RFK, or Martin Luther King still be a secret? If I knew about something like that, you better believe that I would go public with it at the first opertunity, no matter what the consequences to myself might be. And I simply find it hard to believe that I would be the only one that felt that way.
And most of those who "come out" about things like JFK are either nutcases, or grasping at incredibly thin straws. In fact, the JFK assasination was the most photographed and filmed assasination in history. And every analysis I have ever seen at them points to 1 assassin, in the School Book Depository. Not to mention that Lee Oswald was a Marine Expert Marksman. He was shooting at a slow moving target, less then 200 yards away. That is so close, you can almost hit it with a rock.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/21/06 at 7:16 am
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/46228
Conspiracy Theorist Has Elaborate Explanation For Why He's Single
March 13, 2006 | Issue 42
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/21/06 at 7:45 am
vis a vis mushroom, above (you must be a very fast typist!):
1. i'd rather think that the longer something remains a secret, the longer it's likely to stay one. people die, forget things, it starts to seem like it matters less. there's a classified file on the jfk assassination that they're supposedly gonna release in 2055 or sometime. someone, somewhere knows what's in it. all these years, they haven't talked.
2. the jfk thing wasn't about whether oswald could HIT kennedy. it was about whether he could have created all that collateral damage with only three bullets.
3. i don't think the legal-illegal distinction here is terribly instructive. a lot of things got classified or kept off the books explicilty because they were either questionable or illegal -- iran-contra, the real use and effect of agent orange, the bombing of cambodia, MK-ULTRA. the bottom line is, do you think the government is benign? or a potential menace? it's fine to look on it as a big brother, but the evidence that the government is capable of truly horrendous things is pretty clear.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: KKay on 03/21/06 at 9:18 am
1. nazi ufos for your enjoyment...
http://www.ufo.se/ufofiles/images2/naziufos.jpg
2..Sometime sooon you 'll be reading my rant on gov't mind control and the side effects of Ambien, the end of the world as we know it and why I'm beginning to accept my alien DNA.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: La Roche on 03/21/06 at 9:28 am
2. the jfk thing wasn't about whether oswald could HIT kennedy. it was about whether he could have created all that collateral damage with only three bullets.
Impossible. To create the wounds that the Governer and Kennedy suffered it would have taken 2 gunmen due to the amount of shots Oswald is known to have fired. This automatically makes it a conspiracy.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/21/06 at 9:42 am
and why I'm beginning to accept my alien DNA.
but will you accept mine????
sorry, had to do it fast before la roche did.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: KKay on 03/21/06 at 9:45 am
but will you accept mine????
sorry, had to do it fast before la roche did.
Just for being quick and for being funny...
yes.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/21/06 at 9:54 am
Just for being quick and for being funny...
yes.
:)
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: KKay on 03/21/06 at 10:39 am
:)
Actually, it's the ultra-fast healing of last week's injury that is making me come to grips with my extraterrestrial origin.
I alwasy though that we were an accident that ocurred when a bolt of lightning struck a puddle of amino acids...you'll find that right next to your primordial ooze..
and now that I see the nanobots have sewn my thumb back together, I am changing my tune.
I know that the alien dna in my blood repaired my flesh and I know that the visitors' interns built the pyramids.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: La Sine Pesroh on 03/21/06 at 2:24 pm
Impossible. To create the wounds that the Governer and Kennedy suffered it would have taken 2 gunmen due to the amount of shots Oswald is known to have fired. This automatically makes it a conspiracy.
I have discovered a declassified document which should clear up any questions you may have concerning the Kennedy assassination.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Don Carlos on 03/21/06 at 3:44 pm
Rhese choices just don't cut it. But if you want a conspiracy, Sadam asked the US if we would object to his invasion of Kiwait and was told we had "no objections" to his "rectifying his boarders". So he did it, and you all know the rest. Is that a "conspiracy theory"? Actually, its fact.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/21/06 at 3:56 pm
Rhese choices just don't cut it. But if you want a conspiracy, Sadam asked the US if we would object to his invasion of Kiwait and was told we had "no objections" to his "rectifying his boarders". So he did it, and you all know the rest. Is that a "conspiracy theory"? Actually, its fact.
Well I sorta tried to keep the choices a little breezy, nothing too solemn about the 1st ID burying 10,000 iraqis alive, or the ATF sniper crews who allegedly picked off women and children in fhe final conflagration at waco, or the air-force stand-down rumors about 9/11. that stuff is plain frightening.
Still didn't succeed in keeping the discussion breezy, ah well.
April glaspie, I believe, is the name of the ambassador who green-lighted Hussein to invade Kuwait.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Mushroom on 03/21/06 at 5:55 pm
Impossible. To create the wounds that the Governer and Kennedy suffered it would have taken 2 gunmen due to the amount of shots Oswald is known to have fired. This automatically makes it a conspiracy.
Actually, The History Channel a few years ago did a fascination computer recreation of the Zapruder film. It was comissioned with the idea of showing how other theories are possible. Instead, the exact opposite happened, and the recreation showed that it happened just like the Warren Comission said it did.
It is shown every few months, and was on just a week ago. They did a computer recreation of the Zapruder film, in addition to a lot of other photos and movie films of the event. When you watch the recreation, it is obvious that nothing else is possible.
Of course, my question to most of those who follow the "Oswald was innocent" people is simply this: Then why did he kill Officer Tippit? And why would he participate in an operation in which they were killing him for the bungled invasion of Cuba (Like Oliver Stone and Jim Garrison believe), when he was very strongly Pro-Cuba, and opposed the invasion in the first place?
Not to mention almost everybody who knew him, including his brother, his wife, and even Donald P. Bellisario all believe he was guilty? Normally it is the other way around, where friends and family scream the innocence, while everybody else says they are guilty.
And last but not least, if you are going to pick a patsy (or hire an assasin), you do not pick one that can potentially set off World War III. This was only a few years after the Bay Of Pigs, and the Cuban Missile Crisis. You do not choose to involve somebody who was at one time a Soviet Defector, and who was well known as being an outspoken supporter of Fidel Castro and Cuba. That is the type of thing that can quickly escalate out of control and end up as a holocost of global proportions. LBJ put NORAD at DEFCON 3 for a short time before he landed in Washington.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/21/06 at 7:41 pm
Actually, The History Channel a few years ago did a fascination computer recreation of the Zapruder film. It was comissioned with the idea of showing how other theories are possible. Instead, the exact opposite happened, and the recreation showed that it happened just like the Warren Comission said it did.
well, the history channel always sides with the establishment view of history, they're pretty much a propaganda arm of the u.s. military. i defy you to find a wwii documentary on the history channel, for instance, that doesn't end with the exact same narrative, that the atomic bomb was dropped on hiroshima and nagasaki were selfless acts to end the war. there are LOTS of other interpretations out there, and a lot of them make more sense than this version, but that's the only one the history channel will cover.
Of course, my question to most of those who follow the "Oswald was innocent" people is simply this: Then why did he kill Officer Tippit?
was anyone saying oswald was "innocent"? just that he wasn't the lone shooter. if he was involved in any way, even as patsy, he would have shot tippit because he sensed he was about to be set up, or because he thought at that moment that he HAD acted alone.
And why would he participate in an operation in which they were killing him for the bungled invasion of Cuba (Like Oliver Stone and Jim Garrison believe), when he was very strongly Pro-Cuba, and opposed the invasion in the first place?
the narrative i read has him as a double agent, actually in with right wingers who were posing as communists because that's who they thought would ultimately be blamed for the assassination.
Not to mention almost everybody who knew him, including his brother, his wife, and even Donald P. Bellisario all believe he was guilty? Normally it is the other way around, where friends and family scream the innocence, while everybody else says they are guilty.
i haven't heard this. i know his wife hated him, yes? because he beat her all the time?
And last but not least, if you are going to pick a patsy (or hire an assasin), you do not pick one that can potentially set off World War III.
no, that's exactly what they wanted. not wwiii exactly, but a pretense to invade cuba and clear up the way to escalate in vietnam. war makes money and gains power for the decisionmakers who wage it, and kennedy was in the way of that.
i don't know if that's what happened, but that's basically the version i've seen.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Mushroom on 03/22/06 at 10:41 am
well, the history channel always sides with the establishment view of history, they're pretty much a propaganda arm of the u.s. military. i defy you to find a wwii documentary on the history channel, for instance, that doesn't end with the exact same narrative, that the atomic bomb was dropped on hiroshima and nagasaki were selfless acts to end the war. there are LOTS of other interpretations out there, and a lot of them make more sense than this version, but that's the only one the history channel will cover.
I guess you somehow have never seen all the UFO and conspiracy shows they run. Let's see the rundown of the next few nights:
Tonight: The Philadelphia Experiment
Thursday: Secret History of the Freemasons
Monday: UFO Files (this is a weekly show)
Monday: The Bermuda Triangle
History actually devotes a lot of time to "speculation" type shows. In fact, they were the ones several years ago that updated and cleaned up the old "In Search Of..." TV series of the 1970's. For those that are to young to remember, that was a series full of UFO, Conspiracy, and speculation type events, narrated by Leonard Nimoy. For a "Pro Establishment" stance like you claim, it is odd that they air so many speculation type shows. And even last weekend, they ran the movie JFK 4 times, along with interviews of people who backed Oliver Stones viewpoint.
was anyone saying oswald was "innocent"? just that he wasn't the lone shooter. if he was involved in any way, even as patsy, he would have shot tippit because he sensed he was about to be set up, or because he thought at that moment that he HAD acted alone.
the narrative i read has him as a double agent, actually in with right wingers who were posing as communists because that's who they thought would ultimately be blamed for the assassination.
i haven't heard this. i know his wife hated him, yes? because he beat her all the time?
no, that's exactly what they wanted. not wwiii exactly, but a pretense to invade cuba and clear up the way to escalate in vietnam. war makes money and gains power for the decisionmakers who wage it, and kennedy was in the way of that.
And his borther has been outspoken for many years about his stance that Oswald was a lone gunman. As well as Donald P. Bellisario.
Donald P. Bellisario served with Oswald in the Marines. I watched an interview with him once, talking about them serving together. Oswald was always considered unstable by those he served with. He was known for always having unauthorized weapons stashed in his gear and vehicle. In fact, he shot himself with one, earning a court martial. He then assaulted another Marine. When he was in the Philippines, he started to wildly fire into the jungle for no reason. After that, he was assigned to menial duties, and was forbidden to handle any form of weapon.
And do not forget, Kennedy was not his first attempt as assasination. In April 1963, Oswald tried to kill General Edwin Walker, an outspken anti-communist. He used the same gun that was used to kill Kennedy. In fact, General Walker was the commander of the 24th Infantry Division in Germany, and was fired by Kennedy for passing out "Right Wing Literature" to the troops. So if this was some vast conspiracy, why would they want to assasinate one of their own?
And why escalate Vietnam? We had already been there for over a decade. It was a nothing insurgency, with less then 20,000 advisors. If anything, some "Military Industrial Complex" attempt to make money would concentrate on increasing pressure in Korea, where we had recently had a shooting war. Or Germany, where we were posing against the Soviet Union. Or even the Philippines or Panama, where we were battling communist forces in both countries. And nobody can deny that PI and Panama were much more important to this country then Vietnam.
Oh, I forgot. Kennedy was pulling troups out of Vietnam. Yea, less then 1,000 of a force of around 20,000. That is what, 5%? And most of those were moved to Germany, where tensions were much higher.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: JamieMcBain on 03/22/06 at 10:46 am
I voted for the moon shot was fake.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/22/06 at 11:17 am
I voted for the moon shot was fake.
good choice! i love that one.
although my favorite is still "chemtrails." this would have been a totally different thread if i'd put it in PPP. there's a dude wrote a book called "Conspiracy Theories" that talks about them as something people believe in and also as kinda pop culture game, sorta a fun thing people play with with the X-Files and all that.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: JamieMcBain on 03/22/06 at 11:21 am
What about the Lone Gunman theory?
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/22/06 at 11:38 am
What about the Lone Gunman theory?
is this the canadian t.v. show that talked about 911 before it happened?
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: karen on 03/22/06 at 11:42 am
I voted for the moon shot was fake.
Just watched an excellent show debunking all of the reasons
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/22/06 at 11:47 am
Just watched an excellent show debunking all of the reasons
i don't believe the moon shot theory but i'm quite fond of it.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/22/06 at 11:48 am
the chemtrails thing i wonder about, i'll be honest.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: KKay on 03/22/06 at 11:50 am
the chemtrails thing i wonder about, i'll be honest.
you'veinspired me to read more about it...when I first discovered that I was intrigued...
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: karen on 03/22/06 at 11:56 am
the chemtrails thing i wonder about, i'll be honest.
Seriously?
Has anyone who thinks this might be what causes vapour trails asked what cuases them. And can be shown to be what causes them.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/22/06 at 11:58 am
you'veinspired me to read more about it...when I first discovered that I was intrigued...
http://educate-yourself.org/ct/
http://educate-yourself.org/ct/Photos/chemtrails_2_files/clip_image052.jpg
chemtrial spotting is a good way to walk into telephone poles and stuff.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/22/06 at 11:59 am
Seriously?
Has anyone who thinks this might be what causes vapour trails asked what cuases them. And can be shown to be what causes them.
well, that's the hell of it. chemtrails would theoretically look the same as contrails. that's always the way with conspiracy theories.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: karen on 03/22/06 at 12:00 pm
I just don't get why people are so convinced that their government is trying to mass poison everyone.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/22/06 at 12:05 pm
I just don't get why people are so convinced that their government is trying to mass poison everyone.
didn't you see "serenity" man! it's about keeping the rabble medicated and in check!
anyway, your government is nice. it's OUR government that's mean.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: KKay on 03/22/06 at 12:56 pm
didn't you see "serenity" man! it's about keeping the rabble medicated and in check!
when we have ambien in the water and we learn to work in our sleep and not remember it...
that's when they will know you were right.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Mushroom on 03/22/06 at 12:58 pm
Here is one of my favorite Conspiracy nutcases.
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/fe-scidi.htm
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/22/06 at 1:00 pm
flat earth society! i like it. i think i'll believe it.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: CatwomanofV on 03/22/06 at 1:16 pm
Here is one of my favorite Conspiracy nutcases.
http://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/fe-scidi.htm
So, what kind of drugs was this guy taking?
Cat
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: La Roche on 03/22/06 at 1:20 pm
Whilst de-clogging my bowels this morning, a thought popped in to my head.
If you take all of the letters out of the bible except for E, H, I, J, K, L, T and W you can make an amazing sentence. It tells you what it's all about.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: KKay on 03/22/06 at 2:34 pm
Whilst de-clogging my bowels this morning, a thought popped in to my head.
If you take all of the letters out of the bible except for E, H, I, J, K, L, T and W you can make an amazing sentence. It tells you what it's all about.
hmmmmm
THE JET KITE HIT WHILE I KILT HIM.
wow...that's mind-numbingly fascinating.
and poorly spelled! :)
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: La Roche on 03/22/06 at 2:42 pm
hmmmmm
THE JET KITE HIT WHILE I KILT HIM.
wow...that's mind-numbingly fascinating.
and poorly spelled! :)
Nearly.. think what you're neighbours probably are.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Mushroom on 03/22/06 at 3:05 pm
So, what kind of drugs was this guy taking?
Well, Mr. Johnson was quite a character. I met him several times when I lived in Lancaster. He was a regular at a coffee shop I used to hang out at, and he was always going on about conspiracies. He stated that Flouride was put in the water in order to sterilize people, and that a local fast food chain was bigoted because it only hired minorities And yes, I was even a member of the FES for a time (as a joke). Their quarterly newsletter was 3 or 4 pages, printed on a photocopying machine. And this should come as a shock, one of their sources was the Weekly World News.
Something about the Antelope Valley seems to create weird, unique, and even frightening people. Must be all the borax in the water and soil.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/22/06 at 3:14 pm
Something about the Antelope Valley seems to create weird, unique, and even frightening people. Must be all the borax in the water and soil.
i bet They're spraying that borax into the reservoir from the air.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: KKay on 03/22/06 at 3:16 pm
Nearly.. think what you're neighbours probably are.
They aren't. That would be if you left the letters W-H-I-N-Y W-I-T-C-H A-N-D W-I-F-E B-E-A-T-I-N-G I-N-G-R-A-T-E
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: La Roche on 03/22/06 at 3:39 pm
They aren't. That would be if you left the letters W-H-I-N-Y W-I-T-C-H A-N-D W-I-F-E B-E-A-T-I-N-G I-N-G-R-A-T-E
..Termination required?
Did ya'll know.
No pro-shooter has ever managed to shoot the 3 rounds in 5.9 seconds that Oswald supposedly did, with the old Italian rifle he used.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: KKay on 03/22/06 at 3:41 pm
..Termination required?
Yes...and their kids too. Pleeeeeeze. Then, acquire their land and move in.
Did ya'll know.
No pro-shooter has ever managed to shoot the 3 rounds in 5.9 seconds that Oswald supposedly did, with the old Italian rifle he used.
Yes...saw them talk about that on TV. But it's ok...it happens to lots of guys and it's not a big deal.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: KKay on 03/22/06 at 4:14 pm
everyone wants in on it...
Actor Charlie Sheen Questions Official 9/11 Story
Calls for truly independent investigation, joins growing ranks of prominent credible whistleblowers
Alex Jones & Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | March 20 2006
Actor Charlie Sheen has joined a growing army of other highly credible public figures in questioning the official story of 9/11 and calling for a new independent investigation of the attack and the circumstances surrounding it.
Over the past two years, scores of highly regarded individuals have gone public to express their serious doubts about 9/11. These include former presidential advisor and CIA analyst Ray McGovern, the father of Reaganomics and former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury Paul Craig Roberts, BYU physics Professor Steven Jones, former German defense minister Andreas von Buelow, former MI5 officer David Shayler, former Blair cabinet member Michael Meacher, former Chief Economist for the Department of Labor during President George W. Bush's first term Morgan Reynolds and many more.
Speaking to The Alex Jones Show on the GCN Radio Network, the star of current hit comedy show Two and a Half Men and dozens of movies including Platoon and Young Guns, Sheen elaborated on why he had problems believing the government's version of events.
Sheen agreed that the biggest conspiracy theory was put out by the government itself and prefaced his argument by quoting Theodore Roosevelt in stating, "That we are to stand by the President right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
"We're not the conspiracy theorists on this particular issue," said Sheen.
"It seems to me like 19 amateurs with box cutters taking over four commercial airliners and hitting 75% of their targets, that feels like a conspiracy theory. It raises a lot of questions."
Sheen described the climate of acceptance for serious discussion about 9/11 as being far more fertile than it was a couple of years ago.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/22/06 at 4:17 pm
there's an interesting charlie-sheen snuff movie connection, but i'm leaving so i can't get ito it.
that's cool he's doing that, about 9/11. if the goverment has nothing to hide, they've got nothing to worry about. isn't that what they're telling US all the time?
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Mushroom on 03/22/06 at 4:21 pm
i bet They're spraying that borax into the reservoir from the air.
LOL. Actually, the borax is native to that area.
Lancaster is only about 30 miles from the US Borax mine. This is where the famous "20 Mule Team" worked, and is where over half of the worlds supply of borax comes from. The crystals are found everywhere in the area, and of course are in the air, dirt, and water supply.
And interestingly enough, it is why cockroaches in the area are so hard to kill. Most roach killers use Borax as a main agent (like Boric Acid). Evolving in that environment, the local ones are immune to it's effects.
The mine is absolutely huge. I worked there in 1998, and it is the biggest hole I have ever seen. It lies just north of Edwards Airforce Base.
http://maps.google.com/maps?ll=35.015177,-117.660799&spn=0.11,0.18&t=h
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: CatwomanofV on 03/22/06 at 4:24 pm
there's an interesting charlie-sheen snuff movie connection, but i'm leaving so i can't get ito it.
that's cool he's doing that, about 9/11. if the goverment has nothing to hide, they've got nothing to worry about. isn't that what they're telling US all the time?
Oh, Tia, Tia, Tia. Don't you know with the government it is do as we say not as we do? ::)
Cat
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: JamieMcBain on 03/22/06 at 6:05 pm
is this the canadian t.v. show that talked about 911 before it happened?
I'm thinking more on the line of the conspriracy theory, that suggested that Lee Harvey Oswald, acted alone in assasinating John F. Kennedy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lone_gunman_theory
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: JamieMcBain on 03/22/06 at 6:11 pm
Just watched an excellent show debunking all of the reasons
There's a intersting movie called Capricorn One, about astonaunts discovering that the landing on Mars (not the moon) is faked. They ended getting hunted down by government agents, who want to kill them, before they leak the truth out.
http://www.soundtrackcollector.com/images/movie/large/Capricorn_One_01.jpg
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: JamieMcBain on 03/22/06 at 6:21 pm
There is actual man out there named Bart Sibrel, who believes that the landing on the moon was faked. He even confronted Buzz Aldrin, and tried to get him to sware on the Bible, that he either landed or the moon, or that the landed was faked.
He even went one step further and called Aldrin, 'a coward, a liar, and a thief", only to be punched out by Aldrin. ;D
He suffered no permanent injury, and charges were never filed.
It gets even better.....
Apparently, Stanley Kubrick was recruitted to direct alteast three moon landings, while 2001: A Space Odyssey was in post production.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moon_Landing_Faked#Individuals_featured_in_the_controversy
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: JamieMcBain on 03/22/06 at 6:37 pm
I read on Wikipedia, about the Flat Earth Society. It sounds interesting! ;D
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/23/06 at 12:23 am
i love capricorn one! i saw that in the theaters, i don't think it was when it came out (it was really, really early, 1974ish or thereabouts) but i caught it on a couple of rereleases, i've definitely seen it on the big screen.
that's fascinating about kubrick. there's something about 2001 that as a moon landing it's far more convincing than the actual one. and 2001 came out a year earlier. unspeakably beautiful, the moon footage in 2001. i'm not sure how, 37 years later, with all the technology you have now, you'd improve on it. i think it's basically perfect.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: deadrockstar on 03/23/06 at 1:14 am
Some people also believe that somebody in the government knew what was coming with 9/11, and they intentionally did nothing to stop it to serve their own political interests.
Interestingly enough, a 90 page defense paper released by the Project for a New American Century(a neo-con think tank) in 2000 called "Rebuilding America's Defenses" proposed that in the wake of the U.S.S.R.'s collapse, the U.S. should make efforts to entrench it's status as the world's sole hyperpower, and even prevent the rise of other powers, be they friendly or not. It called for things such as withdrawing from the Anti-Ballistic Missle Treaty(which Bush did in 2002), increasing defense spending by large amounts, using military force to challenge regimes hostile to U.S. interests, pre-emptive strikes, and most tellingly, a long-term U.S. military presence in the Gulf region.
The document even said that the need to establish a U.S. military presence in the Gulf was bigger than just removing Saddam Hussein from power, and that the forces needed to be in place and remain there to keep Iran in check, regardless whether or not Iranian-American relations improve. The document said that the changes it calls for would have to be accomplished slowly over a long period of time barring a "catastrophic and catalyzing event- like a new Pearl Harbor".
Members of PNAC include Vice President Dick Cheney, Ambassador to the U.N. John R. Bolton, Undersecretary of State for Global Affairs Paula Dobrianksy, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, fmr Defense Policy board member Richard Perle, fmr Cheney chief of staff I. Lewis Libby, Assistant Secretary of Defense for International Security Peter W. Rodman, fmr Deputy Secretary of State and World Bank president Paul Wolfowitz, Deputy Secretary of State Robert B. Zoellick, fmr Deputy Secretary of State Richard Armitage, and Elliot Abrams of the National Security Council.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Mushroom on 03/23/06 at 9:21 am
Some people also believe that somebody in the government knew what was coming with 9/11, and they intentionally did nothing to stop it to serve their own political interests.
Of course, there were also people who stated that Japan would attack Pearl Harbor with carrier based aricraft and destroy our fleet there.
Major Earl Ellis (USMC) wrote shortly after World War i that the next war would be with Japan. A lot of people thought he was nuts, since Japan was our Ally in the "War To End All Wars". He predicted that the fledgling Aircraft Carrier would become a major factor in future wars, and that they would be able to sink battleships.
He even went as far as to say that Marines would need to re-invent the lost skill of "Amphibious Assaults", and the only way to fight back would be through a series of "Island Hopping" attacks across the Southern Pacific. He was considered a nutcase at the time, and he was put on sabatical.
He decided to try and proove his points, and left on his own clandestine mission to investigate Japanese held islands. He was exploring Palau (a Japanese Army stronghold) when he died under mysterious circumstances.
And he was hardly the only person who made such predictions about an attack on Pearl Harbor. Billy Mitchell also predicted a similar attack a decade later. Just because people can imagine something, that does not always equate to prevention. Before 9/11, suicide attacks had always been small 1 or 2 man operations. Nobody could have expected 11 hijackers all working together, to work on a suicide attack including crashing airplanes into buildings. Even when Tom Clancy wrote about a similar attack, it involved a single plane, which was empty except for the pilot.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/24/06 at 7:07 am
http://www.popmatters.com/columns/lindsey/060322.shtml
"In general, the arid Middle East has proved fertile ground for conspiracy theories. A great many of them are outlandish. The idea that 9/11 was carried out by Israeli and/or the American Secret Service has proved to have an unfortunate resonance. Israel, in particular, seems to have a reach in Middle Eastern affairs that is nothing short of astounding. I've heard the country blamed for everything from the Taba bombings in Egypt in the fall of 2004
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Mushroom on 03/24/06 at 9:31 am
http://www.popmatters.com/columns/lindsey/060322.shtml
But just because many conspiracy theories are false doesn't mean that conspiracies don't in fact take place.
I do not say that they do not exist at all. I simply state that they almost never "last the test of time". Invariably, the truth leaks out and it becomes wide public knowledge.
The "Final Solution" was a conspiracy. So was Watergate. The assasination of President Lincoln was another Conspiracy. I believe that in the later years, ENRON was a conspiracy.
However, every one of those became public knowledge, with no doubt that it happened. A lot of the active participants came forward and admitted to what they did. And the hard circumstancial evidence was overwhelming.
The only way to keep a conspiracy a lasting secret is to ensure that nobody ever knows about it. I am talking about only 1-2 (maybe 3) people knowing what happened. More people then that, and your chances of a leak expand exponentially. This is why the only real conspiracy I believe in that is still a tightly held secret is the dissapearance of Jimmy Hoffa. Most people who have looked into it believe it was a conspiracy between no more then 3 people. And of those people, 2 of them are dead.
Most "Conspiracy Theories" are so large and Byzentine, there is no way they could have lasted more then a year, let alone decades. An accredited active member would have talked. Or written down something to be found by other people. In a conspiracy, there is frequently a "CYA" feeling between the members. They leave behind statements, to be revealed in the event that another member has them killed.
If the moon landing was a hoax, I will only believe it when an Astronaut comes public and admits to his involvement. If JFK was part of a conspiracy, I will only believe it when somebody comes forward and states "I gave the order" or "I pulled the trigger". And they have to have the clout to show that it is feesable, and the evidence to show how it could really have happened.
Remember, you have people all the time who come forward claiming to do murders they did not really commit. There is a weird psychosis that drives some people to admit to almost anything, simply to get attention. I remember during the "Night Stalker" murders in LA that there were dozens of people who tried to convince people it was really them.
And of course you have people who try to create some elaborate conspiracy in order to cover up their own crimes. Andrea Yates comes to mind in this instance.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Abix on 03/26/06 at 1:41 pm
everyone wants in on it...
Actor Charlie Sheen Questions Official 9/11 Story
Calls for truly independent investigation, joins growing ranks of prominent credible whistleblowers
Alex Jones & Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | March 20 2006
Actor Charlie Sheen has joined a growing army of other highly credible public figures in questioning the official story of 9/11 and calling for a new independent investigation of the attack and the circumstances surrounding it.
Over the past two years, scores of highly regarded individuals have gone public to express their serious doubts about 9/11. These include former presidential advisor and CIA analyst Ray McGovern, the father of Reaganomics and former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury Paul Craig Roberts, BYU physics Professor Steven Jones, former German defense minister Andreas von Buelow, former MI5 officer David Shayler, former Blair cabinet member Michael Meacher, former Chief Economist for the Department of Labor during President George W. Bush's first term Morgan Reynolds and many more.
Speaking to The Alex Jones Show on the GCN Radio Network, the star of current hit comedy show Two and a Half Men and dozens of movies including Platoon and Young Guns, Sheen elaborated on why he had problems believing the government's version of events.
Sheen agreed that the biggest conspiracy theory was put out by the government itself and prefaced his argument by quoting Theodore Roosevelt in stating, "That we are to stand by the President right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
"We're not the conspiracy theorists on this particular issue," said Sheen.
"It seems to me like 19 amateurs with box cutters taking over four commercial airliners and hitting 75% of their targets, that feels like a conspiracy theory. It raises a lot of questions."
Sheen described the climate of acceptance for serious discussion about 9/11 as being far more fertile than it was a couple of years ago.
I work with someone who is really into the 9/11 conspiracy theory, as well as a rabid Alex Jones fan. He lent me a few DVDs on this subject and when I had finished watching them, I have to admit, I did have a sick feeling. Though the world saw the horror of 9/11 with their own eyes on television, everything isn't as it seems. I guess it does raise a few questions that our national security can be so full of holes that these destructive acts all could have ensued as seamlessly as they did.
I find it hard to swallow all of the theories out there, but I'm also not so naive as to blindly believe everything that comes out of our government's mouths.
Some of those DVDs mentioned above are:
9/11 The Road To Tyranny.
Painful Questions by Eric Hufschmidt
Loose Change
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: La Roche on 03/26/06 at 11:27 pm
everyone wants in on it...
Actor Charlie Sheen Questions Official 9/11 Story
Calls for truly independent investigation, joins growing ranks of prominent credible whistleblowers
Alex Jones & Paul Joseph Watson/Prison Planet.com | March 20 2006
Actor Charlie Sheen has joined a growing army of other highly credible public figures in questioning the official story of 9/11 and calling for a new independent investigation of the attack and the circumstances surrounding it.
Over the past two years, scores of highly regarded individuals have gone public to express their serious doubts about 9/11. These include former presidential advisor and CIA analyst Ray McGovern, the father of Reaganomics and former Assistant Secretary of the US Treasury Paul Craig Roberts, BYU physics Professor Steven Jones, former German defense minister Andreas von Buelow, former MI5 officer David Shayler, former Blair cabinet member Michael Meacher, former Chief Economist for the Department of Labor during President George W. Bush's first term Morgan Reynolds and many more.
Speaking to The Alex Jones Show on the GCN Radio Network, the star of current hit comedy show Two and a Half Men and dozens of movies including Platoon and Young Guns, Sheen elaborated on why he had problems believing the government's version of events.
Sheen agreed that the biggest conspiracy theory was put out by the government itself and prefaced his argument by quoting Theodore Roosevelt in stating, "That we are to stand by the President right or wrong is not only unpatriotic and servile, but is morally treasonable to the American public."
"We're not the conspiracy theorists on this particular issue," said Sheen.
"It seems to me like 19 amateurs with box cutters taking over four commercial airliners and hitting 75% of their targets, that feels like a conspiracy theory. It raises a lot of questions."
Sheen described the climate of acceptance for serious discussion about 9/11 as being far more fertile than it was a couple of years ago.
Sooooo true.
Look, here are the facts as we know them.
Guys with blades no bigger than an infants dick managed to scare everyone on a major airliner in to submission.
There is no possible scenario in which I would not be barreling down on their asses gung-ho style.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/27/06 at 4:02 am
I work with someone who is really into the 9/11 conspiracy theory, as well as a rabid Alex Jones fan. He lent me a few DVDs on this subject and when I had finished watching them, I have to admit, I did have a sick feeling. Though the world saw the horror of 9/11 with their own eyes on television, everything isn't as it seems. I guess it does raise a few questions that our national security can be so full of holes that these destructive acts all could have ensued as seamlessly as they did.
I find it hard to swallow all of the theories out there, but I'm also not so naive as to blindly believe everything that comes out of our government's mouths.
Some of those DVDs mentioned above are:
9/11 The Road To Tyranny.
Painful Questions by Eric Hufschmidt
Loose Change
this government has access to more power than any government in history. but to get real access to that power, you have to negate the only real check on that power that exists, and that comes from the american people. and in order to do that, you have to scare the bejesus out of them. don't think for a minute there aren't people who would readily fly planes into the wtc, and kill 3000 innocent people, to get that power. much worse has been done for much less.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Abix on 03/27/06 at 5:57 pm
this government has access to more power than any government in history. but to get real access to that power, you have to negate the only real check on that power that exists, and that comes from the american people. and in order to do that, you have to scare the bejesus out of them. don't think for a minute there aren't people who would readily fly planes into the wtc, and kill 3000 innocent people, to get that power. much worse has been done for much less.
this is true. For those who doubt or balk at the idea of 9/11 conspiracies, one should just google the term "Operation Northwoods 1963" and see that the US is capable of conjuring up support for their agenda(wars), in the most unusal means possible.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Mushroom on 03/27/06 at 10:42 pm
Sooooo true.
Look, here are the facts as we know them.
Guys with blades no bigger than an infants dick managed to scare everyone on a major airliner in to submission.
There is no possible scenario in which I would not be barreling down on their asses gung-ho style.
Here are some other facts:
In each case, they were able to take control of the cockpits in under 1 minute. They would kill the pilot & copilot, then toss them outside of the door before locking themselves inside.
And in every hijacking in the past, the most logical thing to do is to simply do what the hijackers say. The past it was always a case of flying to an airport, then going through 1-14 days of sitting there before they either surrender, or fly to another country and leave the plane.
Tell me of any other instance where the plane was deliberately flown into a target, without at least some attempt of negotiation by the hijackers. Come on, give me one, just one.
Now tell me all the times that they used the hijacking as a stunt to get attention to their cause. There are dozens upon dozens of those. FOr a while in the 1980's, it seemed like we had one every other week.
And remember, there was one instance where the passengers did exactly what you say. Those were the ones that took so long to change course, that they all knew what their final outcome would be. When it was obvious to the hijackers that they would be taken over, they turned the plane upside down and crashed into the ground.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: La Roche on 03/27/06 at 10:57 pm
Here are some other facts:
In each case, they were able to take control of the cockpits in under 1 minute. They would kill the pilot & copilot, then toss them outside of the door before locking themselves inside.
And in every hijacking in the past, the most logical thing to do is to simply do what the hijackers say. The past it was always a case of flying to an airport, then going through 1-14 days of sitting there before they either surrender, or fly to another country and leave the plane.
Tell me of any other instance where the plane was deliberately flown into a target, without at least some attempt of negotiation by the hijackers. Come on, give me one, just one.
Now tell me all the times that they used the hijacking as a stunt to get attention to their cause. There are dozens upon dozens of those. FOr a while in the 1980's, it seemed like we had one every other week.
And remember, there was one instance where the passengers did exactly what you say. Those were the ones that took so long to change course, that they all knew what their final outcome would be. When it was obvious to the hijackers that they would be taken over, they turned the plane upside down and crashed into the ground.
You make some fair points, I hadn't considerd all of that.
I still maintain that If I had even the slightest idea what was happening I would have done something but of course, as you pointed out, It's conceivable nobody did.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Abix on 03/30/06 at 5:55 pm
Ok, bear with me here. The WTC attack was plastered all over the news and ingrained in the world's memory, repeatedly, yet very little is seen or known about the Pentagon attack. These hijackers, who barely passed flight school, were able to fly a commercial airliner nearly parallel to the the ground without so much as scorching the pentagon lawn, and the only images captured are 4 still frames showing a white streak, then a white hot fireball? No luggage was found, no bodies, nothing. Same goes for the footage of the site where the plane crashed in the field in Pennsylvania. No wreckage, no debris, just a big scorch mark. I am not an aviations expert by any means, but this is odd. If the government has nothing to hide, then why not let the American people see the evidence?
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: danootaandme on 03/31/06 at 4:34 pm
In 25 years you will have revisionists who will insist there weren't any WTC towers, that all the photos were doctored, etc etc.
Just like the Holocaust deniers.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: La Roche on 03/31/06 at 5:17 pm
Ok, bear with me here. The WTC attack was plastered all over the news and ingrained in the world's memory, repeatedly, yet very little is seen or known about the Pentagon attack. These hijackers, who barely passed flight school, were able to fly a commercial airliner nearly parallel to the the ground without so much as scorching the pentagon lawn, and the only images captured are 4 still frames showing a white streak, then a white hot fireball? No luggage was found, no bodies, nothing. Same goes for the footage of the site where the plane crashed in the field in Pennsylvania. No wreckage, no debris, just a big scorch mark. I am not an aviations expert by any means, but this is odd. If the government has nothing to hide, then why not let the American people see the evidence?
You'd think maybe just the cameras on the parking lot could spot something, never mind the thousands of cameras all over the infrastructure it'self.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: deadrockstar on 03/31/06 at 5:38 pm
You'd be surprised how many people are suspicious if not downright unaccepting of the official story on the WTC. A lot of people don't say anything out of fear because its such a taboo, but I've had conversations with many people in private in which they expressed their suspicions about the whole thing.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Tia on 03/31/06 at 9:28 pm
You'd be surprised how many people are suspicious if not downright unaccepting of the official story on the WTC. A lot of people don't say anything out of fear because its such a taboo, but I've had conversations with many people in private in which they expressed their suspicions about the whole thing.
i think back in the day the kennedy assassination was much the same. there's lots of hinky weirdness surrounding both but people are loath to talk about it unless you sorta break the ice with them first.
Subject: Re: Conspiracy Theories
Written By: Abix on 04/06/06 at 3:54 pm
If the government would just release the footage and information that it has, in relation to the attacks, then maybe people wouldn't be so suspicious.
The Pentagon has camera surveillance every 10 to 20 feet or so, completely around the structure.. as well as cameras on the surrounding areas, yet the government releases 4 grainy shots of video that show nothing but a fireball. You never actually see a commercial airliner hit the pentagon. In stark contrast, the trade towers were shown over and over, ad nauseum , world wide. Why ?
Again, if they don't want conspiracy theory brewing, they should take the pot off the burner. Answer our questions. Simple as that.