Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Don't BELIEVE IN CONSPIRACY THEORIES ? Come HERE!!!

page: 3
10
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join

posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 03:22 PM
link   

Originally posted by Doomzilla
Can you justify what your government and Canadas government did to its Own Inocent people during (CONFIRMED CONSPIRACY ) MK ULTRA ?
I'd like to see your rationale for that please .


There is no justification for it whatsoever. It was abuse of power and arrogant as hell. They fed people '___' without their knowledge and people died from it.

The problem for you is that even Congress and the president thought it was arrogant as hell. It was because of the investigations of a presidential commission and a Congressional committee on secret CIA activities that revealed the details of MK Ultra to the public to begin with. The CIA themselves made a de facto admission it was arrogant as hell when they burned all the notes when Congress started sniffing around. Congress awarded the family of Frank Olson $750,000 in restitution, President Ford gave his personal apology, and Sen, Kennedy pretty much read the CIA the riot act. The claim that this was a "gov't conspiracy" is a misrepresentation.

I said before that the gov't isnt some disembodied immortal brain in a vat of fluid controlling everything, but a gigantic committee of many, many people, some thoroughly corrupt, some genuinely wanting to serve the public, and some completely incompetent. I invite you to explain how your example somehow shows my position is incorrect.




posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 03:50 PM
link   
WHY do I come here?
Sometimes for the debunking, sometimes for the conspiracies.
Sometimes for the science fiction, sometimes for the frustration.
Sometimes for the entertainment, sometimes for the "warning signs".

Am I government?
I was a LEO. I still catch bad guys, in a different manner. haha. With camera's. All big brother ish. Does that make me pro government? No, that makes me pro ORDER.

We do need a gov't. It's been proven. But do we need this much micro governing? Absolutely not.

Let the "common" people run stuff...NO WAY. The people who would end up in charge would be MUCH WORSE than we have now. I know "people". Trust me.

Why do I come here?

Sometimes this site has the real answers without panic.
Sometimes you can find the questions, with and without panic.
It's a way to keep an open mind, while maintaining balance and order within my own mind.

Sometimes I laugh at what I read.
Sometimes I cry.
Sometimes I'm intrigued
Sometimes I'm amazed.

If life is living through feelings, this place evokes some. And no matter good or bad...it is life experience for the soaking.

I come here,


....because I can.



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 04:18 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


I agree with what your saying but it is more than just mere arrogance . Its about crimes against humanity .

What in your opinion were they trying to achieve with these experiments ?
You are correct that the government is a big entity and that some good is done by some people in it , However I feel there has and always will be the sick elements that ensure their powers are abused .

I see no reason to think there are no shady activities going any more .

The people ABOVE the government remain the same as they were back in mk ultra era .

Let it be known I'm not singling out USA and Canada as the Tavistock institute in London was/is argueably a big player too



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 04:28 PM
link   
reply to post by Demoncreeper
 


I have never spoken to you but from what you posted you seem to take the middle ground .
Sometimes things are not black or white and the middle ground is best .
Although you think like this which is commendable The elite do not concur and there lies the problem .

We are all generally good people but we are being used as pawns for the benefits of the physcho-capitalists.
Those who dont care if we live or die .



posted on Mar, 4 2011 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by Doomzilla
reply to post by Demoncreeper
 


I have never spoken to you but from what you posted you seem to take the middle ground .
Sometimes things are not black or white and the middle ground is best .
Although you think like this which is commendable The elite do not concur and there lies the problem .

We are all generally good people but we are being used as pawns for the benefits of the physcho-capitalists.
Those who dont care if we live or die .


Nor have I spoken to you. But here we are, and here's to it



Know what's funny? I do not care if the psycho capitalists live or die either.

Eventually we all gonna die. 80 years, give or take, is all we get. That is a short amount of time. I may not be able to effect the price of gas with magic hurricane making powers, or reviving the assholiness of Gadhafi... Seems a small price to pay for the damage it does to mother earth, though..
But also, I don't really feel enslaved
I don't feel that free either.
You are right. There is no real black or white. It's all disputable and ends up in red tape.



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 12:39 AM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 




All to often I'm seeing that their agenda is NOT to learn any of the fact behind the events of 9/11, but to zealously promote some conspiracy theory or another regardless of what the facts are.

and

I think I've met perhaps only TWO conspiracy theorists who claim to have read it. The remainer openly state they refuse to read it because "it's a pack of lies". The only reason how someone can declare something is a pack of lies without knowing what the lies even are is if they want it to be a pack of lies.

Tell me, did you read it?


Well, lets look at the issue from both sides. You have a zeal about you because you believe the opposite of the others and want to impose or promote your beliefs to negate the conspiracy theory of (insert conspiracy theory here).

Yeah, I read it.
Make me number 3, but my main focus isn't 911 as yours seems to be. Although I am not involved in "debunking" or "truthing" 911 - I have heard various issues from both sides. I did raise an eyebrow when I overheard an architect and a structural engineer from Bovis LL talking about how both towers could have been "controlled demolition." I have not researched the topic heavily because my main interests are in other areas...

Also - didn't Bob Kerrey (one of the commission) say that 911 was a 30 year conspiracy? Perhaps he was referring to Osama Bin Ladin and Al Qaeda - but it still constitutes a conspiracy. Now people have a variable to work off of, not a scenario.



ATS is not a conspiracy web site, per se. It's more like a conspiracy discussion forum where many different conspiracy theories are discussed and anyone on either side of the issue can come and have their say.




Um, if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck... I would have to say; that it is a duck sir.

Nearly everything on ATS is conspiracy - UFOs, 911, NWO, General Conspiracies, Deconstructing Disinformation... it goes on and on and on... You even seem to admit it when you state: "many different conspiracy theories are discussed and anyone on either side of the issue can come and have their say."



There are other examples, but you get the idea. The conspiracy theorists always always always leave out some critical detail that, if they actually revealed it, would show the exact opposite of what they're attempting to prove. There's no way such misdirection like this can be accidental.


Did you ever wonder why this happens? Sure, it could be people just coming up with crazed stories - but Conspiracies happen when governments are not transparent with their public. It could be said that everything with a Top Secret Crypto clearance, or even Secret clearance is a conspiracy - of which I believe it is. If there is no level of transparency, then how can people claim to have democracy - or even a republic for that matter? Yes, sure - there needs to be secrets for national security concerns... but to what level? I am becoming more and more convinced that the ends do not justify the means.

People who convey a false sense of 'reality' to people or persons are of course going to be frowned upon because that false sense is contributing to their thoughts about the conspiracy... another words, if you are showing me a duck, and I state that it is an American Wigeon - sure it is still a duck but now it is defined as a species... it is the level of the reality a person wishes to convey on the subject matter. In the end, it is still a frickin duck, I just forgot to tell you it had feathers - and how many it had... and what about the eyes and webbed feet?




I cannot address this one way of the other since I'm not certain in what context you mean by, "use of variables". To me, to develop an explanation, one needs to listed to the evidence and then draw up an explanation which best fits the evidence.


Evidence = Variables in logical aspects.
Variables = Evidence in logical aspects.

They kind of both equal each other because you can't have one without the other. You need "dependent variables" for proof and "independent variables" as a counter weight that can be modified or changed to suggest other variables and to see if the dependent variable has changed... god I hope I am making sense to you...

Lets take your dislike about 911 and use it in this sense:
The Evidence: The destroyed Twin Towers in NYC, a hole in the Pentegon, and also in a field in Pensylvania.
Variables (as in involvment in the attack): Al Queda, the CIA or US Government, US Citizens, and just for fun - the Illuminati/NWO

Dependent Variables: Al Queda, CIA or US Gov, US Citizens
Independent Variables: The Illuminati/NWO

You use each variable to probe the evidence, and the evidence to probe the variable for theories. It is way more complicated then what I am conveying to you, but it is all based on logic. Independent Variables are the "If" statements of logic and science, and it is also the proactive change that occurs.



Change, "Sirhan Sirhan" to, well, pretty much any other conspiracy, and the situation is exactly the same. How any variables would come into play here, I cannot say. Please explain.


Sirhan Sirhan...


Sirhan's lawyer, Lawrence Teeter, later argued that Grant Cooper was compromised by a conflict of interest and was, as a consequence, grossly negligent in defense of his client. The defense moved for a new trial amid claims of set-ups, police bungles, hypnotism, brainwashing, blackmail and government conspiracies


So - while you may want to change Sirah Sirhan to meet your agenda of how every other conspiracy is exactly the same - you fail to recognize the differences in the variables.

Look, the government admits it screwed up on 911 - the FBI had the 'terrorists' pegged down and knew they were in the USA - so perhaps the conspiracy is just a screw up that the government is trying to hide - or is it? Could it be more sinister? How about Sirhan Sirhan? Did you actually see first hand the assassination of RFK or are you just assuming the variables that are being shown to you are correct? Don't hide behind a grassy knoll (yeah, I know that was JFK), get up and look around a bit before pointing fingers at every conspiracy theory - you target yourself to look a bit like denying everything instead of ignorance.... which would be ignorance wouldn't it?



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 12:40 AM
link   
how did I end up here??



posted on Mar, 5 2011 @ 12:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Skate
I'm on neither side. I am so fly, I'm on Mars. Only place you'll find me. Can visit if you bring me a box of swisher sweets.



Word! Im there...You better have some of that Martian cryptonic ready for the damn swisher foo!



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 10:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by Doomzilla
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


I agree with what your saying but it is more than just mere arrogance . Its about crimes against humanity .


I'm not sure if secretly slipping people '___' can be compared to gassing millions of people, but I won't debate the point. It's not discussing whether something is actually bad. It's discussing exactly how bad, "Bad" is, which is outside the scope of the OP.


What in your opinion were they trying to achieve with these experiments ?


My opinion for whatever it's worth is that it's yet another dumbass stunt among a gigantic series of dumbass stunts instigated by the Red Scare paranoia of the 50's-60's. Either they believed they could figure out a way to manufacture their own Manchurian candidates in the Eastern Bloc, or they could figure out how to interrogate the imagined Manchurian candidates in US society. The only thing I know is that in the 50's everyone was still ignorant at just how dangerous '___' is and people were using it all over the place, the same way they used to use DDT for pest control and x-ray machines to measure feet in shoe stores. Psychiatry students would take '___' as part of their undergraduate studies.

I'm disgusted at what they did but I can understand the rationale for why they wanted to do it, dumbass as it may be.


You are correct that the government is a big entity and that some good is done by some people in it , However I feel there has and always will be the sick elements that ensure their powers are abused .


Of course there are. The whole reason sick elements go into public office to begin with is to obtain power. This was true 1,000 years ago and it will be true 1,000 years from now.


I see no reason to think there are no shady activities going any more .


Neither do I. It's when people become so paranoid of the possibility of shady activities that they start imagining shady acts that really aren't there that I object to, because once they do that, they start exaggerating the threat they think they're seeing to the point that it bears no resemblance to reality. This is the very BS that instigated the Red Scare to begin with.
edit on 7-3-2011 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 10:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Originally posted by Doomzilla
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 


I agree with what your saying but it is more than just mere arrogance . Its about crimes against humanity .


I'm not sure if secretly slipping people '___' can be compared to gassing millions of people, but I won't debate the point. It's not discussing whether something is actually bad. It's discussing exactly how bad, "Bad" is, which is outside the scope of the OP.


What in your opinion were they trying to achieve with these experiments ?


My opinion for whatever it's worth is that it's yet another dumbass stunt among a gigantic series of dumbass stunts instigated by the Red Scare paranoia of the 50's-60's. Either they believed they could figure out a way to manufacture their own Manchurian candidates in the Eastern Bloc, or they could figure out how to interrogate the imagined Manchurian candidates in US society. The only thing I know is that in the 50's everyone was still ignorant at just how dangerous '___' is and people were using it all over the place, the same way they used to use DDT for pest control and x-ray machines to measure feet in shoe stores. Psychiatry students would take '___' as part of their undergraduate studies.

I obviously don't condone what they did, but I can understand the rationale for why they wanted to do it.


You are correct that the government is a big entity and that some good is done by some people in it , However I feel there has and always will be the sick elements that ensure their powers are abused .


Of course there are. The whole reason sick elements go into public office to begin with is to obtain power. This was true 1,000 years ago and it will be true 1,000 years from now.


I see no reason to think there are no shady activities going any more .


Neither do I. It's when people become so paranoid of the possibility of shady activities that they start imagining shady acts that really aren't there that I object to, because once they do that, they start exaggerating the threat they think they're seeing to the point that it bears no resemblance to reality. This is the very BS that instigated the Red Scare to begin with.




Dave you are speaking sense there but your understating the goals of mk ultra .

This what they were trying to do .......

1) Substances which will promote illogical thinking and impulsiveness to the point where the recipient would be discredited in public.

2) Materials which will produce the signs and symptoms of recognized diseases in a reversible way so that they may be used for malingering, etc.

3)Substances which will enhance the ability of individuals to withstand privation, torture and coercion during interrogation and so-called "brain-washing"

4 )Substances which produce physical disablement such as paralysis of the legs, acute anemia, etc.

Another technique investigated was connecting a barbiturate IV into one arm and an amphetamine IV into the other.[29]The barbiturates were released into the person first, and as soon as the person began to fall asleep, the amphetamines were released. The person would then begin babbling incoherently, and it was sometimes possible to ask questions and get useful answers.


Lets see how widespread it was .....

Forty-four American colleges or universities, 15 research foundations or chemical or pharmaceutical companies and the like including Sandoz (currently Novartis) and Eli Lilly and Company, 12 hospitals or clinics (in addition to those associated with universities), and three prisons are known to have participated in MKULTRA

This was an important event Dave . Imagine the ireversible damage they have done to these people .
You can see from the 4 goals listed above they were trying to create some powerful weapons .
Did they succeed ? I dont know but if they did then it makes you wonder !



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 11:17 AM
link   

Originally posted by kroms33
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 

Also - didn't Bob Kerrey (one of the commission) say that 911 was a 30 year conspiracy? Perhaps he was referring to Osama Bin Ladin and Al Qaeda - but it still constitutes a conspiracy. Now people have a variable to work off of, not a scenario.


From here on in, when I say, "conspiracy" you may presume I will be referring to the claim that it was a conspiracy staged by someone other than the parties accused of being responsible. This appplies to "Secret Jewish World Order" conspiracies as much as it does "rogue Gov't agencies" conspiracies.



Um, if it walks like a duck, talks like a duck... I would have to say; that it is a duck sir.

Nearly everything on ATS is conspiracy - UFOs, 911, NWO, General Conspiracies, Deconstructing Disinformation... it goes on and on and on... You even seem to admit it when you state: "many different conspiracy theories are discussed and anyone on either side of the issue can come and have their say."


That does not detract from the point that this is a conspiracy discussion forum rather than a true conspiracy site. This site doesn't present any information on it's own; it's members do, which they bring in from elsewhere. Even the bulletins they email out aren't written by the ATS administrators, but by one member or another. This is in contrast to places like Loose Change and Prison Planet, whose creators intentionally present distorted information to support whatever conspiracy du Jour it is they're pushing, and who tolerate no opposition.

If ATS were a true conspiracy site, I'd have been banned in a week or two. That's how long it took Dylan Avery to ban me from his Loose Change site.


Did you ever wonder why this happens?


Not in the least, actually- for the most part the conpiracy people are getting their information from those very conspiracy web sites pushing out distorted information that I'm railing against to begin with. I know full well this is what's happening because they're constantly posting links back to those very conspiracy web sites to back up their claims, as well as the occasional plea to, "go watch Loose Change".

...and before you ask, yes it does include the supposed, "thousands of professionals" mentioned by some conspiracy web site or another. I look at the comments left behind by the signatories of these professionals, and what do I see? "Ever since I first saw Loose Change I knew..." yada yada yada.


Sure, it could be people just coming up with crazed stories - but Conspiracies happen when governments are not transparent with their public.


Define, "Transparency with the public". The muslim world becoming so outer space fanatic in their religious beliefs that they'll hijack aircraft and the occasional cruise liner, murder Olympic athletes, commit suicide bombings, and even riot over cartoons of Mohammed printed in Danish newspapers, is pretty transparent to me.

This leads me to a question I've repeatedly asked- just what evidence would you require to satisfy you that the way they explained things is really what happened?


Look, the government admits it screwed up on 911 - the FBI had the 'terrorists' pegged down and knew they were in the USA - so perhaps the conspiracy is just a screw up that the government is trying to hide - or is it? Could it be more sinister?


Asking "could it have happened" is soliciting opinions, rather than facts.


How about Sirhan Sirhan? Did you actually see first hand the assassination of RFK or are you just assuming the variables that are being shown to you are correct?


I am doing neither. I'm going by Sirhan Sirhan's own admission in a prison interview that he did it because he was drunk and angry, which until shown otherwise, I will consider to be a constant rather than a variable.
edit on 7-3-2011 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 12:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by Doomzilla
Dave you are speaking sense there but your understating the goals of mk ultra .

This what they were trying to do .......

1) Substances which will promote illogical thinking and impulsiveness to the point where the recipient would be discredited in public.

2) Materials which will produce the signs and symptoms of recognized diseases in a reversible way so that they may be used for malingering, etc.

3)Substances which will enhance the ability of individuals to withstand privation, torture and coercion during interrogation and so-called "brain-washing"

4 )Substances which produce physical disablement such as paralysis of the legs, acute anemia, etc.

Another technique investigated was connecting a barbiturate IV into one arm and an amphetamine IV into the other.[29]The barbiturates were released into the person first, and as soon as the person began to fall asleep, the amphetamines were released. The person would then begin babbling incoherently, and it was sometimes possible to ask questions and get useful answers.


All right, I acknowledge the point. The question is, why were they trying to learn ways to "discredit people", "withstand privation and torture" and to "brain wash people"? Were they doing it simply to fulfill some personal Schadenfreude desire to take pleasure out of other people's suffering, or were they doing it as part of a larger program? It makes more sense they would try to get someone with high visibility like Premier Khrushchev to behave foolishly and discredit himself rather than a nobody like some drunk guy who picked the wrong whorehouse for his prostitute shopping.



This was an important event Dave . Imagine the ireversible damage they have done to these people .
You can see from the 4 goals listed above they were trying to create some powerful weapons .
Did they succeed ? I dont know but if they did then it makes you wonder !


I doubt it, because this is a capitalist country and the one higher power over and above the US gov't is the dollar bill. The gov't doesn't have very many facilities to invent things so they need to go to commercial companies like Grumman and MIT...and those universities involved in the '___' research...for all their toys. If anything they developed turned out to be successful, it would eventually show up on the civilian market somewhere to make a profit off it. The computer you're using for example is the end result of a program to develop a machine that calculated artillery round trajectories.

Are you aware of any successful mind control drugs out there? Something like that would make psychiatric hospitals obsolete and make the phamaceutical manufacturers instant trillionaires.
edit on 7-3-2011 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 03:51 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 




From here on in, when I say, "conspiracy" you may presume I will be referring to the claim that it was a conspiracy staged by someone other than the parties accused of being responsible. This appplies to "Secret Jewish World Order" conspiracies as much as it does "rogue Gov't agencies" conspiracies.


No, that is not the definition of conspiracy at all – and this is where you are completely wrong because you misrepresent the word “conspiracy.” If you do not know the definition of the word, then how can you “debunk” or even “protest” what is being said about any type of “conspiracy?”
You can not just make up your own definition of what “conspiracy” is.
Conspiracy: An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.

Instead of looking outside of the box, you have duct-taped yourself in rather crudely.
According to you, others and the government Al Qaeda conspired against the United States to commit acts of terrorism. It was a conspiracy, yet you deny the very definition by stating that a conspiracy is “someone other than the parties accused of being responsible” which negates your responsibilities of being logical. You already have your mind made up without the help of “evidence” because you seem to reclassify evidence by changing the definition.



That does not detract from the point that this is a conspiracy discussion forum rather than a true conspiracy site.

I take it you have never watched any of the ATS videos? ATS boasts of being the “largest” and “biggest” “Conspiracy Site” on the internet... Proof is in the pudding.



Not in the least, actually- for the most part the conpiracy people are getting their information from those very conspiracy web sites pushing out distorted information that I'm railing against to begin with.

...and before you ask, yes it does include the supposed, "thousands of professionals" mentioned by some conspiracy web site or another. I look at the comments left behind by the signatories of these professionals, and what do I see? "Ever since I first saw Loose Change I knew..." yada yada yada.

Where do people get their information from? The Governments of the world, Wikileaks, MSM, various businesses, you name it. These “thousands” of professionals can not be discounted, unless they are not professionals at all... If I am a banker, or an engineer – and I state something pertaining to my field of work or study that pushes forward thoughts proving something, I am not sure why you have such a problem with that.



Define, "Transparency with the public". The muslim world becoming so outer space fanatic in their religious beliefs that they'll hijack aircraft and the occasional cruise liner, murder Olympic athletes, commit suicide bombings, and even riot over cartoons of Mohammed printed in Danish newspapers, is pretty transparent to me.

Look, I should not have to lead you on like this – to show you what I am talking about, you either can read or you can not. Transparency – see through. The governments of the world are NOT transparent and keep secrets from the public usually not out of national security, but out of necessity. The secrets being kept that are needed for national security should have oversight.
You went off on a tangent about Muslims and all kinds of stuff that I wasn't even talking about. I think the reason you don't understand many of these conspiracy theories is that, maybe you are confused?



This leads me to a question I've repeatedly asked- just what evidence would you require to satisfy you that the way they explained things is really what happened?


Well, I don't know – since I have never been a physical witness to any conspiracy – have you? Did you see the planes physically smash into Towers 1 and 2? Did you see JFK and RFK get whacked? Did you see what went on behind the scenes in the US government when any of the above happened? Or, did you – like the millions and billions of us watch it all happen second hand? I am not saying everything is a conspiracy that I have outlined, but for you to follow blindly without question only shows your willingness to obey.
Oh – wait... I take that back about not being a physical witness to a conspiracy. The housing market across the USA imploded in upon itself, taxes, food and gas have gone up, banks were bailed out of the biggest economic meltdown in the history of the world. The rich get richer while the poor get poorer – and there is nothing anyone can do about it... Conspiracy? All US manufacturing jobs shipped overseas, commodities are trading futures that just don't exist and raising food prices throughout the world – but you don't see anything wrong? Where have you been? Where do you live, under a rock?
But, hey – just listen to what “they” tell you...




Asking "could it have happened" is soliciting opinions, rather than facts.

A lot of stated opinions are facts.

If you want to delve into what facts are, what reality is, and how to decipher exactly what you are seeing, perhaps you need to redefine your sense of logic on what “conspiracies” are instead of making up your own definitions and “opinions” on the subject.



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 04:05 PM
link   
Since you ask: yes, as a matter of fact I do believe conspiracies exist, the problem is that most of the people on this BBS aren't interested in the real ones. Instead of trying to figure out what sort of deal was cut to extradite Viktor Bute, for example, people here are obsessed with lizard people and imaginary planets that hide under your bed at night. The few forums where there might be some truth lurking, like the 9/11 forum, are so riddled with crackpots that I'm embarrassed to even post a reply there. Holographic projections? Nano-thermite bombs?
Now if someone turned up a memo from Dick Cheney saying: "Let's just let these Mo-Fo's kill a few Americans and we can do whatever we want," fine, if it can be verified that might explain a lot. But "free energy destructo rays?" Give me a break.
edit on 7-3-2011 by DJW001 because: Edit to correct typo.



posted on Mar, 7 2011 @ 04:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by DJW001
Since you ask: yes, as a matter of fact I do believe conspiracies exist, the problem is that most of the people on this BBS aren't interested in the real ones. Instead of trying to figure out what sort of deal was cut to extradite Viktor Bute, for example, people here are obsessed with lizard people and imaginary planets that hide under your bed at night. The few forums where there might be some truth lurking, like the 9/11 forum, are so riddled with crackpots that I'm embarrassed to even post a reply there. Holographic projections? Nano-thermite bombs?
Now if someone turned up a memo from Dick Cheney saying: "Let's just let these Mo-Fo's kill a few Americans and we can do whatever we want," fine, if it can be verified that might explain a lot. But "free energy destructo rays?" Give me a break.
edit on 7-3-2011 by DJW001 because: Edit to correct typo.




Hi there . You are right in a sense . Have you realised though the far out ideas are encouraged here ?
We get u2us about ufo exhibitions/expos from the staff .

Id prefer ats to form other movements other than just UFO ones .
Think how much power we have as a community but we have no 9/11 movements no anti war movements just UFO stuff !

Its not our fault its the boards fault we are NOT allowed to unite and take action . Its against t n c !

I'm like you I look for documented evidence and testimony .



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by kroms33
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 

No, that is not the definition of conspiracy at all – and this is where you are completely wrong because you misrepresent the word “conspiracy.” If you do not know the definition of the word, then how can you “debunk” or even “protest” what is being said about any type of “conspiracy?”
You can not just make up your own definition of what “conspiracy” is.
Conspiracy: An agreement to perform together an illegal, wrongful, or subversive act.


I never said I was defining the word, "conspiracy". You're inventing a whole other alternative interpretation of what I said all on your own. I *said* that from now on you may presume whenever I refer to conspiracies I'm referring to these alternative theories rather than the actual conspiracy perpetrated by Islamic fundamentalists. If I really need to explain such an elemental thing then let me know now so I'll know that further discourse with you will be a waste of my time and yours.


Instead of looking outside of the box, you have duct-taped yourself in rather crudely.
According to you, others and the government Al Qaeda conspired against the United States to commit acts of terrorism. It was a conspiracy, yet you deny the very definition by stating that a conspiracy is “someone other than the parties accused of being responsible” which negates your responsibilities of being logical. You already have your mind made up without the help of “evidence” because you seem to reclassify evidence by changing the definition.


Al Qaida *IS* the party accused of being responsible, and there *IS* evidence they were responsible whether you happen to accept the actual validity of the evidence or not, so the rest of your statement is irrelevent.


Where do people get their information from? The Governments of the world, Wikileaks, MSM, various businesses, you name it. These “thousands” of professionals can not be discounted, unless they are not professionals at all... If I am a banker, or an engineer – and I state something pertaining to my field of work or study that pushes forward thoughts proving something, I am not sure why you have such a problem with that.


The moment these professionals step outside their established areas of expertise to postulate something, (a physics teacher trying to be a chemist, a religious studies professor trying to be a materials engineer, an economist being an architect, a doctor trying to be an MIT engineer, etc) it ceases being a professional opinion and it becomes a personal opinion, and is no more valid than your personal opinion or mine. Presenting a personal opinion as if it were a professional opinion is being disingenuous.



Look, I should not have to lead you on like this – to show you what I am talking about, you either can read or you can not. Transparency – see through. The governments of the world are NOT transparent and keep secrets from the public usually not out of national security, but out of necessity. The secrets being kept that are needed for national security should have oversight.


I am only going by your statement that, "Conspiracies happen when governments are not transparent with their public.". The NASA space program has been one of the most well documented and transparent gov't programs there are to the point where hobbyists even knew what radio frequencies the astronauts were using and were listening in on them...and yet there are still people who insist the moon landing was faked. The lack of transparency has absolutely nothing do do with it.

Conspiracies are NOT because of lack of transparency, but out of paranoia and ignorance. Whenever a monumental event is instigated by something otherwise ordinary sounding, someone, somewhere, will have a pathological need to embellish the cause into being some sinister thing equally as monumental as the event itself. Princess Di really wasn't killed by something as boring as her driver being drunk, it was all a secret plot by the SAS to protect the crown from scandal. JFK really wasn't killed by something as boring as a radical Communist sympathizer, it was all a secret plot by LBJ so that he could assume the presidency. The 9/11 attack really wasn't soemthing boring as a terrorist attack by islamic fundamnetalists, it was all a secret global plot by Mossad to frame muslim countries. The AIDS epidemic in Africa really isn't caused by somethign as boring as stone age social traditions to rut like rabbits, it's all a CIA plot to invent AIDS to kill off all the black people in Africa. And so on and so forth.

I understand these conspiracy theories betetr than you do. The question is, do *you* understand them? The last I checked, there isn't any lack of transparency on drunk driving causing accidents or unsafe sex leading to AIDS.




Well, I don't know – since I have never been a physical witness to any conspiracy – have you? Did you see the planes physically smash into Towers 1 and 2? Did you see JFK and RFK get whacked? Did you see what went on behind the scenes in the US government when any of the above happened? Or, did you – like the millions and billions of us watch it all happen second hand? I am not saying everything is a conspiracy that I have outlined, but for you to follow blindly without question only shows your willingness to obey.


Don't be an idiot. The "willingness to obey" as you put it has absolutely nothing to do with it. I base my opinion on the preponderance of the evidence. When a NYFD deputy chief testifies the fires in WTC 7 were burning out of control and were causing massive structural deformation in the side of the building, it adds credibility to the NIST claim that the fires brought the building down. When I see with my own eyes how water splashes out of milk jug toward the direction the bullet came from after being shot by a high powered rifle, it adds credibility to the Zapruder film showing the mortal shot came from above and behind, More importantly, it detracts credibility from the people claiming WTC 7 was brought down by secret controlled demolitions or that JFK was shot from the front.

With other conspiracies, such as Bush allowing the terrorist attack to proceed or that there were additional assassins besides Oswald, I will keep an open mind becuase there is little evidence either way. The conspiracy peopel put little faith is such conspiracies becuase they're simply not sinister sounding enough for their tastes. They always have to brign in these dumbass "lasers from outer space" and "the Zapruder film was faked" baloney.


Oh – wait... I take that back about not being a physical witness to a conspiracy. The housing market across the USA imploded in upon itself, taxes, food and gas have gone up, banks were bailed out of the biggest economic meltdown in the history of the world. The rich get richer while the poor get poorer – and there is nothing anyone can do about it... Conspiracy? All US manufacturing jobs shipped overseas, commodities are trading futures that just don't exist and raising food prices throughout the world – but you don't see anything wrong? Where have you been? Where do you live, under a rock?
But, hey – just listen to what “they” tell you...


Where have I ever made any mention one way or another about shipping jobs overseas or rising food prices? You are misrepresenting my position and you then proceed to make an accusation based upon misrepresentation. This is the definition of, "strawman argument".

It's clear you really aren't here to discuss anything. You're here simply to hear yourself talk and you'll continue to see whatever it is you want to see regardless of what I actually say. You really have no credibility.



posted on Mar, 8 2011 @ 01:32 PM
link   
reply to post by GoodOlDave
 




I never said I was defining the word, "conspiracy". You're inventing a whole other alternative interpretation of what I said all on your own. I *said* that from now on you may presume whenever I refer to conspiracies I'm referring to these alternative theories rather than the actual conspiracy perpetrated by Islamic fundamentalists. If I really need to explain such an elemental thing then let me know now so I'll know that further discourse with you will be a waste of my time and yours.

Right, I guess grouping them all into the term “conspiracy” would defeat your purpose. I don't like to play with words – especially discounting the 'actual' MSM/government account from the grouping of 'conspiracy' when it is the original conspiracy. I shouldn't have to explain why it would be a bad thing to do – but I guess I will have to for debate purposes.
Once you remove the original context of a conspiracy you no longer have a conspiracy. If you want to talk about and debunk alternative theories, you have no basis to formulate your arguments because of your alternative explanations without thought or premise of the original account.
You can not refer to alternative theories without first recognizing the actual conspiracy... this goes for both ends of the spectrum – 'debunker' and 'truther'.




Al Qaida *IS* the party accused of being responsible, and there *IS* evidence they were responsible whether you happen to accept the actual validity of the evidence or not, so the rest of your statement is irrelevent.

But yet, I never said they were not did I? So again, doesn't that make my statement relevant?
I never said Al Qaeda wasn't the responsible party, you are reading way to much into my words without realizing their meaning. Also, I never stated that I did not accept the actual validity of the evidence or not... You don't know where I stand on the issue – so please, don't put words in my mouth.



The moment these professionals step outside their established areas of expertise to postulate something, (a physics teacher trying to be a chemist, a religious studies professor trying to be a materials engineer, an economist being an architect, a doctor trying to be an MIT engineer, etc) it ceases being a professional opinion and it becomes a personal opinion, and is no more valid than your personal opinion or mine. Presenting a personal opinion as if it were a professional opinion is being disingenuous.

Sure, I will agree – unless they have been exposed to an element in their research or profession. Physics teachers could know a lot about the chemical make up of certain elements to promote their theories about how certain things react in a physical manner... There are a lot of people who have doctorates at MIT, who are engineers, there are a lot of 'investors' that are architects. Now, if I was strictly an electronics major – I would never give my opinion about human biology in a professional manner because it wouldn't be relevant. People who have an opinion and use their credentials to further their opinion – it all depends on what credentials a person has. Stanton Friedman is a Nuclear physicist, and talks about UFOs. Sure he states opinions – but yet he has worked on advanced propulsion systems...



I am only going by your statement that, "Conspiracies happen when governments are not transparent with their public.". The NASA space program has been one of the most well documented and transparent gov't programs there are to the point where hobbyists even knew what radio frequencies the astronauts were using and were listening in on them...and yet there are still people who insist the moon landing was faked. The lack of transparency has absolutely nothing do do with it.

But the counter claim to that is that NASA hasn't been transparent. Sure, they have documented a lot of data – but who is to say they have released everything to the public? Do you actually believe that if you had access to all of NASA's documentation, that you wouldn't find anything they have never released?
Chris Horner filed the FOIA request that NASA didn't comply with until he threatened to sue them. (Climategate)
Also
"NASA did not give an estimate of the volume of the documents being withheld"
In the following document titled:
Jed Margolin,
Plaintiff
v.
Charles F. Bolden, Administrator,
National Aeronautics and Space Administration


In which FOIA documents were requested about the X-38 project, and infringed on patents.
www.jmargolin.com/nasa/refs/jm_nasa_appendix_1.pdf
Transperancy? I think not.



Conspiracies are NOT because of lack of transparency, but out of paranoia and ignorance. Whenever a monumental event is instigated by something otherwise ordinary sounding, someone, somewhere, will have a pathological need to embellish the cause into being some sinister thing equally as monumental as the event itself. Princess Di really wasn't killed by something as boring as her driver being drunk, it was all a secret plot by the SAS to protect the crown from scandal. JFK really wasn't killed by something as boring as a radical Communist sympathizer, it was all a secret plot by LBJ so that he could assume the presidency. The 9/11 attack really wasn't soemthing boring as a terrorist attack by islamic fundamnetalists, it was all a secret global plot by Mossad to frame muslim countries. The AIDS epidemic in Africa really isn't caused by somethign as boring as stone age social traditions to rut like rabbits, it's all a CIA plot to invent AIDS to kill off all the black people in Africa. And so on and so forth.

Iran/Contra was because the public was paranoid and ignorant?
911 was because the public was paranoid and ignorant?
Stauffenberg Assassination attempt was because the public was paranoid and ignorant?
The plot to overthrow and assassinate Chaves was because of public paranoia and ignorance?
There would be no conspiracies if governments were transparent with their people. People wouldn't have theories if we had 100% access to the documentation of any event in history.
What, you don't think your government has secrets?
So, wouldn't hiding information from the public make the public more paranoid and ignorant?



I understand these conspiracy theories betetr than you do. The question is, do *you* understand them? The last I checked, there isn't any lack of transparency on drunk driving causing accidents or unsafe sex leading to AIDS.


No, you only understand one side of them – I look at both perspectives and identify logical theories and motives.
Drunk driving is not a conspiracy unless a group of people plot to do it for a motive.
Unsafe sex is not a conspiracy unless a group of 'infected' people plot to do it for a motive.
Sure, you can attest that you understand these “theories” better than I, but yet you don't even know my stance on any type of conspiracy, not even mentioning conspiracy theory... so wouldn't that be a bit ignorant for you to assume? Aren’t you doing the same exact thing that you seem to be trying to fight?
Aren't you jumping to conclusions without proof? Where have I taken a stance on any type of conspiracy in this thread? Keep looking for it... it just isn't there. Matter of fact, go to my profile and read what I have written, the only thing I have really written about are UFOs and Government, and Humanity. I take a scientific approach to everything, calling out skeptics and believers.



Don't be an idiot. The "willingness to obey" as you put it has absolutely nothing to do with it. I base my opinion on the preponderance of the evidence. When a NYFD deputy chief testifies the fires in WTC 7 were burning out of control and were causing massive structural deformation in the side of the building, it adds credibility to the NIST claim that the fires brought the building down. When I see with my own eyes how water splashes out of milk jug toward the direction the bullet came from after being shot by a high powered rifle, it adds credibility to the Zapruder film showing the mortal shot came from above and behind, More importantly, it detracts credibility from the people claiming WTC 7 was brought down by secret controlled demolitions or that JFK was shot from the front.


Okay. You state that you base your opinion on the weight and importance of evidence, so taking that into account and using your 'base' I could logically 'assume' that since there is a preponderance of evidence that the US government has released on UFO's (through FOIA) that it weighs in favor of a conspiracy to cover the information up. I could go through every conspiracy and find a preponderance of evidence either pro or con to justify a 'theory' based on what your opinions are.
But yet, you call me an idiot? Interesting assumptions.



With other conspiracies, such as Bush allowing the terrorist attack to proceed or that there were additional assassins besides Oswald, I will keep an open mind becuase there is little evidence either way. The conspiracy peopel put little faith is such conspiracies becuase they're simply not sinister sounding enough for their tastes. They always have to brign in these dumbass "lasers from outer space" and "the Zapruder film was faked" baloney.

Who are these 'conspiracy people'? Because, wouldn't you be contributing to the insanity one way or another? How can you educate people when people have a belief? That would be like you, going into any faiths church/temple/whatever and telling the people that their God didn't exist because your beliefs differ from theirs. Sure, you can use your scientific formulations that would be countered by their scripture – the argument would be circular and non-productive, neither side attaining any ground or convincing anyone but themselves at whose side is in the right.

I guess, this is my main point. You can try to convince people – but you convince no one because the argumentation is circular, always coming back to the exact same point of where you started in the first place with no new understanding of the topic. The only person you convince is yourself, and the opposition still remains true to it's cause, and perhaps even feels stronger about it's own justification.



Where have I ever made any mention one way or another about shipping jobs overseas or rising food prices? You are misrepresenting my position and you then proceed to make an accusation based upon misrepresentation. This is the definition of, "strawman argument".

It's clear you really aren't here to discuss anything. You're here simply to hear yourself talk and you'll continue to see whatever it is you want to see regardless of what I actually say. You really have no credibility.



You again missed my point. See how circular this is getting? You keep bringing up points about 911, terrorists, JFK -etc. I am talking generally about all conspiracies rather than a singular conspiracy.

As for my “strawman” argumentation: where is my “attacking” of your beliefs a distortion? I am merely pointing out that you are just as bad as the theorists you detest because of the circular argumentation you use that is neither progressive nor does it attribute more knowledge to the topics.

As for credibility: What is your worth? Why is it more than mine? Who are you to state such a fantastic assumptions when you have absolutely no clue about my beliefs on nearly every conspiracy?
Don't you think that again – you are assuming without facts? Isn't that something you supposedly detest?
If you assume I have no credibility without a factual basis of what my beliefs are, how can you attain any for yourself?



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 10:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Doomzilla
I 'd rather you just had the courage to tell us why your here ,
Are you "left " or "right " "wing " ?


Yes.



Anti immigration ?


Only anti them coming here.


pro war ?


Only if it is me or mine doing the dying.


Are you government agents ?


I have been told I am.

And I probably am since I work for a Govt atm.


If not why do you choose to spend your spare time here ?


Am I allowed to answer this if I am??


Whats your agenda ? Do you have the bottle/balls/cojones to wear you heart on your sleeve .


I came here chasing chemtrails - if htey exist I have to be part of it.

I know I am not, so the ocntunied carp about them is an insult to me & science, logic & rationality.

But mainly I care about me.


If your Pro Government why arent you in the army ?


I was. In the infantry, Assault Pioneer & Recce platoons. Voluneeered jsut after hte Vietnam war - you still had to force your young men to serve at that time - I did so by choice



I guess your not pro government enough to risk your life huh ?
Just like the government !


Just like the Govt for sure - old and slow!



You think its fair that in the western world is prosperous and materialistic while in "third " world countries babies starve to death and dont even have access to Safe Clean drinking water ?


No


You think its fair that there is a huge and growing wealth divide ?
Do you think its fine for the government to just lose trillions of dollars and not have to account for it ?


no and no


Will you be a loyal customer to Monsanto ,?


Only if it is cheap and tasty.

Since coming to ATS a few months ago I have found the world is drowned in stupidity - people who immediately leap to the most asinine conclusions based upon their fears of what might happen but completely ignoring rationality, logic, history, reason, science....and usually human behaviour as well.

IMO the great conspiracy in the world ATM is not HAARP, chemtrails, NWO, oil, or Libya - it is freakin' currency trading.

What a mind-bogglingly stupid system we have laboured ourselves with - gambling on the value of fiat money in order to make and break billions??


IMO the sooner there's 1 currency worldwide the better!



posted on Mar, 20 2011 @ 11:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Doomzilla
 

I am researching PARAPHRENIC SCHIZOPHRENIA for my bachelor's course and this forum was highly recommended by my fellow academics.
2nd line...





new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join