It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Anderson Cooper "Attacks" Conspiracy Theorists

page: 13
40
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:05 AM
link   
There are people calling for him to be fired and I do not blame them. He has a right to say what he wants protected by the constitution however the constitution does not protect his job. If the university finds that they no longer wish to employ a person that is so thoughtless then I will applaud them in their decision.
I have no problem with those who question the government or media and I believe it to healthy when people do however I have distaste for those who have no taste and demonstrate such stupidity. The man showed zero common sense in his blog and if he loses his job over it then I have no problems with that. To be honest I question a university who employs an educator who shows such stupidity and if they keep him employed then that may be a conspiracy in itself. Common sense would dictate that his job would be on the line for such moronic statements. However I find that common sense is in short supply in this day and age.



"Shame on you, too, FAU, to even have someone like this on your payroll," Llodra, herself a former teacher and school administrator, told FoxNews.com in an email. "Professor Tracy is an embarrassment to me as an educator and should be to you as well. I can assure you, sadly, that the events here in Newtown unfolded exactly as are being reported, with the horrible outcome of the violent death of 26 innocent people, including 20 children.

"It is outrageous and an insult to all caring people to think that this man would chose this event as a stage for his outlandish conspiracy theories," she added, calling his statements "wrong, inconsiderate and insensitive."


Read more: www.foxnews.com...

www.foxnews.com...




posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:10 AM
link   
Anyone can get on the internet on any forum and say they are the parent of a child that was in the shooting at Sandy Hook. Anyone can make a throw away account and say anything.

CNN is actively trying to destroy all conspiracy theorists and make them look nuts. They are taking the most extreme examples and using them for all they can to try and discredit people who question anything.

They are setting the parameters for you and what you should believe. They want you to believe what they say is the truth. If you don't, then *you're* the nut job. If you question anything outside of what you are told then you're crazy.

If you own a gun, then you're crazy and nuts. If you think the moon landing was hoax, you're a fruit loop. Believe in UFO'S? Oh man, you're crrraaaazyyyy. And so on and so on.

Having Alex Jones on Piers was their great opportunity to discredit anyone who thinks independently. They are going to be blasting the heck out of conspiracy theorists, sites, blogs, people, etc

Piers is as anti American as they come, and he does not respect this country, nor does he like our constitution. He claims to have studied our constitution in depth, however the man cannot even discuss proper American history on his shows.

Think ..... think, why do they let Piers stay on CNN and have his hateful platform? What are they wanting us to hear? What are they wanting to do next?

There are a lot of clues on that show as to what is coming for America.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:11 AM
link   
reply to post by theAnswer1111
 


The later one doesn't say that it still was though. At least not that I can see. It says that the incident happened while the body was in possession of the medical examiner. Speaking retrospectively, a new story about something that happened while it was still in ME possession was they way I saw it.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:13 AM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


Piers Morgan hates our constitution, and hates everything America was founded on or what we stand for. Get him the hell off our networks. He's a bigot, he's a bully, ignorant and extremely anti American. I'm sure he was brought in to help finish off our country though. He's there for a reason.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:19 AM
link   
reply to post by TheMythLives
 


There are different levels of conspiracy theorists. Ranging from casual, inquisitive and curious to the deranged and dangerous. But it's Piers and Anderson's business now to make sure that everyone is painted with the same brush and color.

I've been questioning things since my childhood, and will continue to.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:19 AM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


I disagree whole heartedly.
He wasn't teaching it in his class was he? It was his private blog, and he is allowed to think and say what he wants. Does it in anyway effect how well he teaches? I think the reason they blew it up in the media was an attempt to get him fired. They don't want independent thinkers. They don't want students to open their minds. How many people would be offended, how many people would even know if the media hadn't brought attention to it? It's not like he's the first and only one to put such ideas out.

If he gets fired you are seeing just another symptom of America going down the drain. 50 years ago no one would have thought twice about someone having theoretical discussions about events. Back then free thinking was a good thing. Now ignorant people over react and feign disgust over idiotic things, they only stop watching reality t.v. long enough to have an ignorant (sometimes phony) emotional response to using your brain.

If you don't ask questions learning ends right then and there. This guy is a professor, I would much rather have him as a teacher than some idiot parroting the media and kicking me out of class (for a round of applause by the other ignorant students in class) for asking questions and posing theoretical scenarios.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:31 AM
link   

Originally posted by Starchildren
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


Piers Morgan hates our constitution, and hates everything America was founded on or what we stand for. Get him the hell off our networks. He's a bigot, he's a bully, ignorant and extremely anti American. I'm sure he was brought in to help finish off our country though. He's there for a reason.



I have no idea why you are responding to me about Piers Morgan. What does that have to do with anything I just posted in this thread? Perhaps you posted in the wrong thread or maybe you didn’t take your meds but I don’t see what he has to do with this thread.

Look someone gave you a star for it as well.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:35 AM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 




If he gets fired you are seeing just another symptom of America going down the drain. 50 years ago no one would have thought twice about someone having theoretical discussions about events.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:42 AM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


If he wasn’t a teacher he wouldn’t be getting any attention and it is that same reason why the university would be justified in firing him. It is the same as if he committed some lewd act in public that brought unwanted attention on the university. It doesn’t matter if he did it while on the job or in his free time the result is the same. As I stated he has a right to say what he wants under the constitution but the constitution does not protect his job. It is their right to hire or fire. In fact my state of Florida is a right to work state which really means right to fire at any time for anything. Actions have consequences and his may cost him his job.

I certainly agree with questioning things however his questions demonstrate an utter lack of common sense and idiocy which is unbecoming of a teacher. He may be protected by a contract with the school however I guarantee once that contract is up so is his position. Every action has an equal and opposite reaction as a teacher he should know that.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by Superhans
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 




If he gets fired you are seeing just another symptom of America going down the drain. 50 years ago no one would have thought twice about someone having theoretical discussions about events.

en.wikipedia.org...


Good job and star for you.
I love when people make comments like that one and they are so far off base it’s like reading something from opposite world. 50 years ago things were much different but that was a blatantly false representation of what they really were.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 01:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by Grimpachi

Originally posted by Superhans
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 




If he gets fired you are seeing just another symptom of America going down the drain. 50 years ago no one would have thought twice about someone having theoretical discussions about events.

en.wikipedia.org...


Good job and star for you.
I love when people make comments like that one and they are so far off base it’s like reading something from opposite world. 50 years ago things were much different but that was a blatantly false representation of what they really were.


Yeah, whenever someone says something "50 years ago" or "the founding fathers". What they really mean is "please read what I just made up"



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:07 AM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


Thank you. I try to be as equal to both sides as possible, but somethings are just beyond the realm of reality that it just needs to be said straight up and not bouncing around the barn... so to speak.

reply to post by Banananananana
 





You should remember that your notion of what is "fanatic" stems from what you view as reality, which is socially constructed in and of itself.


With all respects reality is not constructed it is what it is. Perception of that reality is the only thing that can be obscured. I could use your same argument right back at you, it is a circular herring. A Fanatic is a Fanatic. If it smells like a dog, and quacks like a dog, then chances are it is a dog. If you do not think it exists (only my interpretation) then that is ok. That is your opinion, but if you cannot see that fanaticism of any kind is bad, such as the Westboro Baptist church, The KKK, and many others then I do not know what type of evidence you need. You can look up the studies on Conspiracy theorist I rarely link anything anymore, because no one was looking at what I posted (especially in the vaccine forum). If you are interested the evidence that you want is out there.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:11 AM
link   
reply to post by Superhans
 


Haha good point, but I wasn't talking along political lines really. I didn't equate the two. I wasn't around then so I don't know that the media tried to out people.. I always thought it was more of secret tabs by the government. Anyway, I meant like, even back then scholars demanded a little more respect. They could talk about the bible as literature when it was less acceptable and could kick around controversial ideas.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Superhans
 

I meant like, even back then scholars demanded a little more respect. They could talk about the bible as literature when it was less acceptable and could kick around controversial ideas.


www.uclaextension.edu...
www.usc.edu...
www.writing.upenn.edu...

Maybe you should just read a bit more and post less, its all cool bro. Nothing wrong with not knowing everything just don't pretend to talk about something you know nothing about.
We still teach bible as lit today and back then professors were subject to the red scare too



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:17 AM
link   
reply to post by Grimpachi
 


It is NOT the same as committing a lewd act in public as that would be criminal in most instances and it is a far cry between being lewd and giving a theoretical scenario for an event. So you seem to be saying that free speech is a crime. You are actuall advocating a man lose his livelihood because he had an idea and wrote about it. Not an idea that could hurt anyone or does ANYTHING negative. He is just targeted because he is the most prominent figure they could nail.

Do you not see that you fighting against freedom of speech, you are directly opposing the first amendment. It is a form of control on freedom of speech, because if there are repercussions for speaking your mind then you are dissuading more people from doing it. Basically you are supporting the media (and so the government) in scaring people from speaking out. It has massive implications and extends far beyond this example. Professors will have to start thinking before they speak about anything. Important things will go unspoken because it MIGHT be one of those things.

It's just bad all around, you should really consider it further.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:22 AM
link   
reply to post by Superhans
 


Duh.. of course we still teach bible as lit today. I took it. It's cool though bro just read a little closer next time.
Maybe if you weren't so intent on being a douche you wouldn't have been in such a hurry to rush through the post and get to your chance to condescend. Trying to equate the red scare and the pressures it put on professors to a professor talking about theoretical alternative scenarios of a single shooting is actually idiotic, I was just being nice..

Regardless of your terrible "point," I am still absolutely right. Of course there are examples to the contrary, but what you are proposing was incredibly weak, I was just being nice and giving you a point because I know how you are. McCarthyism isn't relevant because it was widespread and based on something much deeper, like if a Professor started talking sympathetically towards radical Muslims today. We are talking about a single event and people that discuss alternative scenarios are being attacked in a way that isn't proportionate. Since you are apparently incapable of understanding the difference think of it this way.. it was easy for professors to avoid the red scare, it's not so easy if you are at risk talking about small unrelated incidences in a way that offends people. It would be impossible to know what triggers you losing your job so you have to shut up about everything (not just communism).

I should have just shut you down rather than being polite I guess. You're wrong, your point was ignorant, and I do know what I am talking about.
edit on 13-1-2013 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Superhans

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow
reply to post by Superhans
 

I meant like, even back then scholars demanded a little more respect. They could talk about the bible as literature when it was less acceptable and could kick around controversial ideas.


www.uclaextension.edu...
www.usc.edu...
www.writing.upenn.edu...

Maybe you should just read a bit more and post less, its all cool bro. Nothing wrong with not knowing everything just don't pretend to talk about something you know nothing about.
We still teach bible as lit today and back then professors were subject to the red scare too


Maybe YOU should just read a bit more and post less. The red scare is actually irrelevent in regards to this incident and a horrible comparison.
edit on 13-1-2013 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:38 AM
link   
LOL, Anderson Cooper is "defending" the blatant inconsistencies and contradictions THEY reported on Sandy Hook that day! Just... wow.
edit on 13-1-2013 by Shaxuul because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:44 AM
link   
reply to post by GogoVicMorrow
 


No you completely missed the point. The reason I compared it to committing a lewd act is that the views he paraded out in public for all to see are considered distasteful to most and brings the university under scrutiny the same as if he was caught on camera committing a lewd act. Do you honestly not understand that concept?

You talk about rights and freedoms but you fail to recognize that the university has those same freedoms and rights. I never said he committed a crime and if that is what you took away from what I wrote you are completely mistaken.

The things people do and say have implications and what he did brings a negative light on the university. They have the right to hire and fire who they want and you want to take those rights away. That is the very opposite of freedom and liberty that you claim to be in favor of. Whether he is at the campus or on his computer he represents the university as an employee and if I was on the board of that university I would not want to be associated with his views.

No one is taking away his freedoms but you need to understand those freedoms extend to both him and the university it is a double edged sword it cuts both ways. I certainly would not hire such a person for my business and there isn’t a law that says the university has to either.



posted on Jan, 13 2013 @ 02:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by GogoVicMorrow


Maybe YOU should just read a bit more and post less. The red scare is actually irrelevent in regards to this incident and a horrible comparison.
edit on 13-1-2013 by GogoVicMorrow because: (no reason given)


Really??? Are you trying to be funny? You were just spouting off about how back then people could speak their minds and be happy blah blah blah and people could teach the bible as literature blah blah blah . Then I showed you it was not so. We used to have things like the red scare that prevented people from speaking their minds and still the bible is taught as literature.


edit on 13-1-2013 by Superhans because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
40
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join