KimmyCharmeleon
Well-Known Member
Also, if they aren't experts of some sort, what DOES make a person an expert in their field?
Conspiracy Thread..
- Thread starter Francis
- Start date
Users who are viewing this thread
-
145Replies
-
3KViews
-
0Participant count
-
Participants list
Hummm Fell upon this little item.. Very interesting..
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods
TommyTooter
Banned
[SIZE=+2][/SIZE][SIZE=-1] The following was written by John Judge in response to a post on minneapolis.indymedia.org about how citing something is "Conspiracy Theory" avoids examination or discussion of facts. [/SIZE]
[SIZE=+2]
Not all conspiracies are created equal [/SIZE] [SIZE=+1] by John Judge [/SIZE] 30 October 2002
You get the details of the first three right, but then I doubt you did your own homework to get there. The ballistics don't work in the MLK case either, and the rifle Ray purchased was not the murder weapon. Then again, just because someone tells you the government is lying to you it doesn't mean they are telling you the truth. Especially not some French novel writer concocting a fantasy about what happened on 9/11 at the Pentagon.
I can tell you are not from DC, nor have you done your homework on American Airlines Flight 77, which did indeed hit the Pentagon and kill all aboard, several construction workers outside and about 15 Pentagon employees. The pilot went 270 degrees out of his way in an amazing full speed descending spiral to hit the empty side of the building. This minimized the number of deaths actually, as had been the case with hitting the first of the Twin Towers at 8:43 instead of an hour later when tens of thousands would have died.
How do I know Flight 77 hit the Pentagon? First, local news immediately interviewed and broadcast eyewitness accounts of the plane going in. I have since interviewed many local people who watched the plane and even ducked as it flew so low overhead. The Pentagon has not released footage of it, and the local news media did not catch the moment as they had in New York City. It was not for lack of knowing it was coming, they had told us that a good 35-40 minutes ahead.
Second, I was convinced I had lost a dear friend and fellow assassination researcher that day, who was a regular flight attendant on Flight 77 from Dulles to LAX. Thankfully, she was home with her ailing father and was not killed. She was taken with other ground crew and attendants who worked that route to see the damage at the Pentagon, and she recognized parts of the plane she had flown so often.
There was rubble and remains despite your claims. She was shown autopsy photos of her fellow crew members, including the severed arm of her best friend at work, which she recognized from the bracelet she wore.
Third, others who expound on this idea that the plane did too little damage to the building may not realize that the fuel is in the wings, and that they disintegrated on contact, while spreading the fireball that burned the fuel, the building and the plane. They may not recall that part of the purpose of rebuilding that side of the Pentagon, which they had been doing quite visibly for almost 4 years, was to reinforce it against just such an attack, and there is a clearly visible difference in the level of destruction done on either side of that reinforced section.
As to the water putting out the fire, it did not for quite a while. The fire was still smoking into the next day. The water denied extra tinder to the initial fire perhaps, by soaking it. Airplane fuel burns very hot but also very quick. They also used foam and other firefighting techniques, not just streams of water.
Do your homework. I am no friend of The Nation and the anti-conspiracy fetish their writers exhibit and have since the time of the Kennedy assassination. I am, if anything, one of the first to wear the moniker "conspiracy theorist". John McLaughlin on his News Hour once claimed that the character portrayed by Mel Gibson in the movie "Conspiracy Theory" was based on my "personality." Another laughable claim, but evidence that what I have been researching and saying gets under their skin enough to make them drag me out of obscurity into the national media.
I'm willing to be called a conspiracy theorist as long as you call everyone else a coincidence theorist. The U.S. military-industrial-intelligence state and its police forces were intimately involved in the murders of John and Robert Kennedy and Dr. King, and we are still working hard to get final release of their own massive documents and files that relate to that history.
We have convinced all but the most unthinking elements of the American public that these murders were not the work of the patsies assigned to them, but of the highest levels of government. We have done so partly by hard and exhaustive forensic and medical and historical research, and partly because the same national security state has wanted us to know, without a full confession, that they did it. It was a warning and a way to try to kill our hope for change.
Similar diamond-hard research needs to be applied to the facts and events of 9/11 and since, as well as the history that led up to it. Rumor is not research, and we only sully the truth by jumping to believe the sensational. Cynicism is healthy, but informed cynicism is the only way to avoid paranoia and confustion.
Not all "conspiracies" are created equal. The government did kill JFK, and they lied about it. That does not mean there was never a Holocaust, or that the world is run by the Illuminati. The blindness of Chomsky and the other left structuralists is that they make the class out to be monolithic and without mechanisms to carry out its will. They fear that if you think there was any reason to kill a president then you don't understand how capitalism works, and that you will be filled with false hope about the Kennedy clan, who were only more of the same old ruling class. They can't let themselves think JFK could really have intended to pull out of the Vietnam war, since he went along with legacy left him by Nixon and the 40 committee, which included the Bay of Pigs operation already on the books.
But when JFK saw the CIA and the Cubans in action he refused to be pushed into sending American troops into Cuba. When the Joint Chiefs were ready and raring to go into full scale nuclear war with the USSR during the missile crisis, JFK was almost the only level head in the room who refused. And he WAS pulling out of Vietnam. He had given the orders and forced the Joint Chiefs to project that withdrawal by the end of 1964 during the month of April, 1963.
The Joint Chiefs reversed him 180 degrees plus on the Monday following his assassination, projecting instead a 10-year war with 57,000 dead that freaked out my mother enough to take it back up to the Chiefs and question it, the first civilian protest to the war in Vietnam by their highest paid woman manpower analyst.
And even today you can go into the homes of poor Black people in the South and find pictures on the wall of Jesus, Dr. King and the Kennedy brothers because of the hope for change they represented in their response to popular movements like civil rights and nuclear disarmament. Kennedy called for an end to the Cold War in June of 1963. He was going after the Mafia and threatening the tax writeoffs of the oil rich. He said in October he would "scatter the CIA to the four winds", and behind the scenes he was reaching out to normalize relations with Cuba that last year.
But it's not enough for Howard Zinn and Alexander Cockburn, much less Max Holland and David Corn. They want more dirt, and they want us never to notice a tree for fear we will miss the forest. The hard truth of the matter is that the left critique of Kennedy, and there is one to be made, is not the issue. It is the right's critique of him that mattered, what Generals Curtis Lemay and Lyman Lemnitzer thought of him and what they did about it.
Chomsky says that such "conspiracies" only exist outside the mechanisms of state power, are rare and are stopped when discovered (like Contragate he claims). And yet, when you raise the assassination of Martin Luther King with him then he becomes a "conspiracy theorist" too, saying that it was planned at the highest level of government, maybe using the Mafia, and covered up. He says they had a REASON to kill Dr. King. So, with them, it's just a function of how much you liked the guy whether he was done in by coincidence or not. Gee, maybe they'll start to wonder about the Wellstone plane crash?
But in the end you can only get to the truth with hard work, comparing and sorting facts and rumors, and digging for the hidden reality as well as the obvious. We are paralyzed in America, says Martin Schotz in his great book History Will Not Absolve Us: Orwellian Control, Public Denial, and the Murder of President Kenned (Kurtz, Ulmer and DeLucia, 1996), by the fact that we can BELIEVE anything but we are allowed to KNOW nothing.
Until we know, we cannot act. And if we act on rumor and impulse then we are no less a slave than those who live in the denial that the propaganda machines promote. So, be cynical and question things, but be analytical and scientific so you can approach the truth when you speak. Three truths don't make a fourth just by mentioning them. All lies, in fact, depend on having elements of the truth in them for verismilitude as its called. Read, don't repeat what you last heard. And if you are going to be more than a theorist, then give conspiracy the respect it deserves, and prove it. Good hunting, and always come clean.
[SIZE=+2]
Not all conspiracies are created equal [/SIZE] [SIZE=+1] by John Judge [/SIZE] 30 October 2002
You get the details of the first three right, but then I doubt you did your own homework to get there. The ballistics don't work in the MLK case either, and the rifle Ray purchased was not the murder weapon. Then again, just because someone tells you the government is lying to you it doesn't mean they are telling you the truth. Especially not some French novel writer concocting a fantasy about what happened on 9/11 at the Pentagon.
I can tell you are not from DC, nor have you done your homework on American Airlines Flight 77, which did indeed hit the Pentagon and kill all aboard, several construction workers outside and about 15 Pentagon employees. The pilot went 270 degrees out of his way in an amazing full speed descending spiral to hit the empty side of the building. This minimized the number of deaths actually, as had been the case with hitting the first of the Twin Towers at 8:43 instead of an hour later when tens of thousands would have died.
How do I know Flight 77 hit the Pentagon? First, local news immediately interviewed and broadcast eyewitness accounts of the plane going in. I have since interviewed many local people who watched the plane and even ducked as it flew so low overhead. The Pentagon has not released footage of it, and the local news media did not catch the moment as they had in New York City. It was not for lack of knowing it was coming, they had told us that a good 35-40 minutes ahead.
Second, I was convinced I had lost a dear friend and fellow assassination researcher that day, who was a regular flight attendant on Flight 77 from Dulles to LAX. Thankfully, she was home with her ailing father and was not killed. She was taken with other ground crew and attendants who worked that route to see the damage at the Pentagon, and she recognized parts of the plane she had flown so often.
There was rubble and remains despite your claims. She was shown autopsy photos of her fellow crew members, including the severed arm of her best friend at work, which she recognized from the bracelet she wore.
Third, others who expound on this idea that the plane did too little damage to the building may not realize that the fuel is in the wings, and that they disintegrated on contact, while spreading the fireball that burned the fuel, the building and the plane. They may not recall that part of the purpose of rebuilding that side of the Pentagon, which they had been doing quite visibly for almost 4 years, was to reinforce it against just such an attack, and there is a clearly visible difference in the level of destruction done on either side of that reinforced section.
As to the water putting out the fire, it did not for quite a while. The fire was still smoking into the next day. The water denied extra tinder to the initial fire perhaps, by soaking it. Airplane fuel burns very hot but also very quick. They also used foam and other firefighting techniques, not just streams of water.
Do your homework. I am no friend of The Nation and the anti-conspiracy fetish their writers exhibit and have since the time of the Kennedy assassination. I am, if anything, one of the first to wear the moniker "conspiracy theorist". John McLaughlin on his News Hour once claimed that the character portrayed by Mel Gibson in the movie "Conspiracy Theory" was based on my "personality." Another laughable claim, but evidence that what I have been researching and saying gets under their skin enough to make them drag me out of obscurity into the national media.
I'm willing to be called a conspiracy theorist as long as you call everyone else a coincidence theorist. The U.S. military-industrial-intelligence state and its police forces were intimately involved in the murders of John and Robert Kennedy and Dr. King, and we are still working hard to get final release of their own massive documents and files that relate to that history.
We have convinced all but the most unthinking elements of the American public that these murders were not the work of the patsies assigned to them, but of the highest levels of government. We have done so partly by hard and exhaustive forensic and medical and historical research, and partly because the same national security state has wanted us to know, without a full confession, that they did it. It was a warning and a way to try to kill our hope for change.
Similar diamond-hard research needs to be applied to the facts and events of 9/11 and since, as well as the history that led up to it. Rumor is not research, and we only sully the truth by jumping to believe the sensational. Cynicism is healthy, but informed cynicism is the only way to avoid paranoia and confustion.
Not all "conspiracies" are created equal. The government did kill JFK, and they lied about it. That does not mean there was never a Holocaust, or that the world is run by the Illuminati. The blindness of Chomsky and the other left structuralists is that they make the class out to be monolithic and without mechanisms to carry out its will. They fear that if you think there was any reason to kill a president then you don't understand how capitalism works, and that you will be filled with false hope about the Kennedy clan, who were only more of the same old ruling class. They can't let themselves think JFK could really have intended to pull out of the Vietnam war, since he went along with legacy left him by Nixon and the 40 committee, which included the Bay of Pigs operation already on the books.
But when JFK saw the CIA and the Cubans in action he refused to be pushed into sending American troops into Cuba. When the Joint Chiefs were ready and raring to go into full scale nuclear war with the USSR during the missile crisis, JFK was almost the only level head in the room who refused. And he WAS pulling out of Vietnam. He had given the orders and forced the Joint Chiefs to project that withdrawal by the end of 1964 during the month of April, 1963.
The Joint Chiefs reversed him 180 degrees plus on the Monday following his assassination, projecting instead a 10-year war with 57,000 dead that freaked out my mother enough to take it back up to the Chiefs and question it, the first civilian protest to the war in Vietnam by their highest paid woman manpower analyst.
And even today you can go into the homes of poor Black people in the South and find pictures on the wall of Jesus, Dr. King and the Kennedy brothers because of the hope for change they represented in their response to popular movements like civil rights and nuclear disarmament. Kennedy called for an end to the Cold War in June of 1963. He was going after the Mafia and threatening the tax writeoffs of the oil rich. He said in October he would "scatter the CIA to the four winds", and behind the scenes he was reaching out to normalize relations with Cuba that last year.
But it's not enough for Howard Zinn and Alexander Cockburn, much less Max Holland and David Corn. They want more dirt, and they want us never to notice a tree for fear we will miss the forest. The hard truth of the matter is that the left critique of Kennedy, and there is one to be made, is not the issue. It is the right's critique of him that mattered, what Generals Curtis Lemay and Lyman Lemnitzer thought of him and what they did about it.
Chomsky says that such "conspiracies" only exist outside the mechanisms of state power, are rare and are stopped when discovered (like Contragate he claims). And yet, when you raise the assassination of Martin Luther King with him then he becomes a "conspiracy theorist" too, saying that it was planned at the highest level of government, maybe using the Mafia, and covered up. He says they had a REASON to kill Dr. King. So, with them, it's just a function of how much you liked the guy whether he was done in by coincidence or not. Gee, maybe they'll start to wonder about the Wellstone plane crash?
But in the end you can only get to the truth with hard work, comparing and sorting facts and rumors, and digging for the hidden reality as well as the obvious. We are paralyzed in America, says Martin Schotz in his great book History Will Not Absolve Us: Orwellian Control, Public Denial, and the Murder of President Kenned (Kurtz, Ulmer and DeLucia, 1996), by the fact that we can BELIEVE anything but we are allowed to KNOW nothing.
Until we know, we cannot act. And if we act on rumor and impulse then we are no less a slave than those who live in the denial that the propaganda machines promote. So, be cynical and question things, but be analytical and scientific so you can approach the truth when you speak. Three truths don't make a fourth just by mentioning them. All lies, in fact, depend on having elements of the truth in them for verismilitude as its called. Read, don't repeat what you last heard. And if you are going to be more than a theorist, then give conspiracy the respect it deserves, and prove it. Good hunting, and always come clean.
KimmyCharmeleon
Well-Known Member
My questions still go unanswered...
But why does the US spend 54 times the amount on terrorism when coronary heart disease kills 6600 times more people?
But why does the US spend 54 times the amount on terrorism when coronary heart disease kills 6600 times more people?
Well for one coronary heart disease is preventable and it doesnt affect the country as a whole per say, its not going to kill me unless I lead a life that will cause it. Where terrorism is something that is completly out of my control and Id rather not die without someone of a higher power stepping in to try to save my ass when Im just an innocent bystander in this.
So do you have a conspiracy you think is valid ?
I really think Aliens are being hid from us so we don't panic..
How the hell can we be the only ones in this freaking galaxy or universe..
How many believe Area 51 really has something hidden in it ?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Area_51
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Not to mention how many others are still floating such as 9/11, Elvis is still alive and eating Donuts...
I believe there is life out there, but I do not quite know if it is our government who is hiding their existence or the fact that aliens do not wish to be found. I can not blame aliens if they do not wish to contact us anymore due to our nature to destroy or enslave things we consider to be low intelligence. I do hope one day that we can make contact, but as equals and not in some "War of the Worlds" situation. If our government is hiding them then perhaps we should just remain a bit alert at the fact there must be a reason. I tend to want to believe in the good that exists within in all of us. No matter, if aliens were to finally come into contact I would hope that we as human beings who claim to be civilized could welcome them as friends. I suppose that is why I star gaze so much. I just want to believe that someone or something out there is looking at the stars like me. For instant we are as one in a sense. Just my own thoughts as usual though.
78,874Threads
2,185,387Messages
4,959Members