He sounds like illogical, judgmental and offensive. In only one paragraph he managed to display several unpleasant traits.
I don't believe any of the conspiracies he listed off, in fact I think they're all idiotic. You'll have seen me arguing against them many times
with plenty of passion and commitment.
However, I can't accept claims that people who believe them are "sick" or "heartless". People who believe these are conspiracies BELIEVE them,
the act of believing it wholeheartedly surely prevents the individual from being sick or heartless? It would be sick or heartless to promote these
events as government invented conspiracies if you didn't believe it, but if you did in fact believe it, you might be wrong and stupid, but I don't
think you can be "heartless". What exactly is heartless in believing 9/11 was a conspiracy? I don't understand the reasoning, if there is any - and
I doubt that there is.
Here's one example of what I mean. I support Mumia Abu-Jamal, now people hear this, people who believe the official story and they say things like
"my god, you're vile, how can you support somebody who murdered a cop in cold blood?"... while not realising the most obvious of facts... I don't
believe the official story! So as far as I'm concerned I'm supporting an innocent, wrongly convicted person, not a cold blooded murderer. People
seem to have a logical shutdown when things like this are concerned.
I don't see how people can't understand this. I know masses of people who believe 9/11 was a conspiracy. I think they're all wrong. But I wouldn't
dream of saying they're sick or heartless because, simply put, they aren't. They're every day people who think and feel like everybody else. Most
of these people are campaigning against wars, they have high levels of empathy and feel for both the victims of the twin tower attack and the victims
in the middle east dying as a consequence of that attack. They're anything but heartless. Wrong? Most likely. Heartless? Not that I can see.
You can put a lot of things to conspiracy theorists, but questioning their humanity is really a bit much. Furthermore, it's cheap.
Perhaps somebody who knows the man can point out the irony in attacking irrational people while making numerous character judgements in the process,
most of them irrational. An intelligent, rational person would engage in intelligent, rational debate, no? They wouldn't make insanely idiotic
character assessments about a massive portion of society, guilt tripping and morally shunning them in the process.
You don't have to believe every conspiracy you come across to be moronic and heartless, Jaimie Muehlhausen is proof of that.
For the record I don't think there's anything wrong with this man buying the domain, but his remarks don't sit well with me. There's so many good
people on ATS alone, might be a little crazy but most are good humans none the less. I'm even tempted to go out on a limb and rubbish my own side
here, because I find many skeptic forums I frequent the people are a little cold, distant and fairly lacking in emotional intelligence by comparison
to the folk on ATS. Hugely intelligent and right about almost everything, don't get me wrong, but not the type of people I'd share a beer with.
I understand completely how Jaimie has grown to dislike irrational people though. It's more than likely a natural consequence of being given a girls