REAL WORLD EVENT DISCUSSIONS

Birthers, truthers, etc...

POSTED BY: NIKI2
UPDATED: Thursday, May 12, 2011 08:54
SHORT URL:
VIEWED: 3188
PAGE 1 of 2

Tuesday, May 3, 2011 10:59 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Where is all this coming from? What is happening in our country (the world?) that is causing so many people to come to believe, and hang onto desperately, conspiracy theories of all kinds?
Quote:

From left-wing 9/11 conspiracy theorists to right-wing Obama-hating "birthers"—-a sobering, eyewitness look at how America's marketplace of ideas is fracturing into a multitude of tiny, radicalized boutiques—each peddling its own brand of paranoia.

Throughout most of our nation's history, the United States has been bound together by a shared worldview. But the 9/11 terrorist attacks opened a rift in the collective national psyche: Increasingly, Americans are abandoning reality and retreating to Internet-based fantasy worlds conjured into existence out of our own fears and prejudices.

The most disturbing symptom of this trend is the 9/11 Truth movement, whose members believe that Bush administration officials engineered the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks as a pretext to launch wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. But these "Truthers" are merely one segment of a vast conspiracist subculture that includes many other groups: anti-Obama extremists who believe their president is actually a foreign-born Manchurian Candidate seeking to destroy the United States from within; radical alternative-medicine advocates who claim that vaccine makers and mainstream doctors are conspiring to kill large swathes of humanity; financial neo-populists who have adapted the angry message of their nineteenth-century forebears to the age of Twitter; Holocaust deniers; fluoride phobics; obsessive Islamophobes; and more.

For two years journalist Jonathan Kay immersed himself in this dark subculture, attending conventions of conspiracy theorists, surfing their discussion boards, reading their websites, joining their Facebook groups, and interviewing them in their homes and offices. He discovered that while many of their theories may seem harmlessly bizarre, their proliferation has done real damage to the sense of shared reality that we rely on as a society. Kay also offers concrete steps that intelligent, culturally engaged Americans can take to reject conspiracism and help regain control of the intellectual landscape.

That's the Amazon description of a book, called "Among The Truthers; A Journey Through America's Growing Conspiracist Underground".

It seems so weird to me that some people are bound and determined to disbelieve any simple explanation of anything and instead go hunting around the internet to find "facts" which prove a conspiracy. Once they've decided on one, no amount of actual facts will ever convince them otherwise. That the birther movement has gained such acceptance...more than 50% of Republicans (!)...blows my mind. What happened to accepting that the obvious is actually the obvious--about ANYTHING? This bin Laden thing is the latest; I KNEW the minute it was announced that there would be a new group of conspiracy theorists who would be CONVINCED it was all fake, and sure enough, they clocked in before the news reports were even over.

What an awful world it must be to live in, where nothing can ever be believed which is offered if it's not what you want to believe, where time must be spent digging up other explanations that better fit one's world view...or dreaming them up...where everyone's out to get us. How did we get to be this way? PN is a prime example. How much of his life must he spend looking for stuff to supposedly "back up" his preconceived notions, his racism, his hatred and then go to the internet to post it all (on how many forums, I wonder)? What a way to spend a life!

One writer who refers to the above book offers some suggestions:
Quote:

It's a familiar rationale for conspiracy theorists: They investigate as much in sorrow as in anger. They are always just one confession away from the truth. This kind of logic is much more understandable, if no more sensible, after reading Among the Truthers: A Journey Through America's Growing Conspiracist Underground, a smart and serious new book by Canadian journalist Jonathan Kay. His book shows why Americans are becoming so willing to believe lurid fantasies about the government or politicians they don't like or vaccines or the theory that the federal government was behind the attacks of 9/11. And you realize that the world of conspiracies is only going to get larger.

There are basically two reasons for this, and they're entwined. The media, as Kay points out, is more fragmented than ever. Information is easier to come across, and bogus information has a way of jumping to the top of Google's search pages. That fragmentation is happening at a time of intense partisan anger and economic angst.

All of those facts are well-known, and thoroughly studied. The Gallup Poll asks an annual question about whether voters trust the government. In 2010, only 19 percent said they did, and only 43 percent—a record low—said that they trusted the media. That same year, the Pew Research Center found that 61 percent of Americans got most of their news online, 54 percent got it from the radio, and only 50 percent got it from newspapers. The more people read news online, the easier it is for them to find news that jibes with their ideology.

Kay's book is half reportage and half evidence. Both halves demonstrate that mistrust in institutions—-which aren't doing the best job of running things right now—-is driving a wave of conspiracy-mongering. To a man, the leading 9/11 Truthers that Kay interviews say that they found their obsession because they didn't trust the government and they sought out information from some samizdat source. Richard Gage, the best-known member of Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth, tells Kay that he tuned into the lefty KPFA northern California radio station one day and caught a terrifying, authoritative-sounding-—and bogus-—interview with 9/11 Truther icon David Ray Griffin.

"How come I'd never heard of any of this?" Gage remembers thinking. "I was shocked. I had to pull my car to the side of the road to absorb it all."

Robert Balsamo, a co-founder of Pilots for 9/11 Truth, has a similar story. He turned on the news one day and saw Glenn Beck trying to debunk conspiracy theories about the 9/11 attack on the Pentagon with new, grainy video. Balsamo wasn't convinced, and he "started poking around on the Internet, seeing if he could find a clearer version of the video. Instead, what he found were Truther sites.

The Truthers who Kay quotes here are the leading lights of the movement. They're dug in more than the average Web surfer. But they started to dig because they felt uneasy, and they surfed the Web, and they found a whole alternate history (and occasionally, alternate science) that looked and felt more comfortable than the one they were living through. And so did a lot of other people. They were motivated by mistrust in their "leaders." And the motivations weren't always wrong.

Look at the 9/11 conspiracy. Some of Kay's sources have tenuous connections to reality. Most of them got interested in the conspiracy because something else seemed … wrong. As Kay points out, "Trutherism" didn't really take off until 2003, when it was clear there were no weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. If you were already inclined to think that George W. Bush had been unfairly put into office in 2000, if you had read the Project for a New American Century's letters from the end of the Clinton years, well, this was enough to drive you nuts.

A 2006 poll conducted by the Scripps Survey Research Center at Ohio University famously found that 36 percent of all Americans, and more than half of Democrats, suspected that "people in the federal government either assisted in the 9/11 attacks or took no action to stop the attacks because they wanted to United States to go to war in the Middle East."* There's some room for misunderstanding here. After all, most Americans are now aware of the intelligence failures that preceded the attacks. But the numbers remained high when respondents were pressed on other, darker conspiracy theories. They found that 21.1 percent of Democrats, and 18.5 percent of liberals, said it was at least somewhat likely that "the Pentagon was not struck by an airliner captured by terrorists but instead was hit by a cruise missile fired by the United States military." And 24.8 percent of Democrats, and 21 percent of liberals, said it was at least somewhat likely that "the collapse of the Twin Towers in New York was aided by explosives secretly planted in the building."

You can see what they were thinking. You can see what a large number of today's conservatives are thinking when they admit to pollsters that they've got some doubts about Obama's citizenship. Kay sums it up: "If the mainstream media isn't willing to investigate the dirt about Obama we do know to be true … who knows what other dirt is out there?" How and when do people stop thinking like that if they don't trust the media, and if "unreported facts" about their obsessions are a click of the "I'm feeling lucky" button away? They don't stop.

Kay's research is reassuring, in its way, because by taking all these obsessions seriously, he can diagnose their origin. The problem of the conspiracy theorist is the problem of the "failed historian." Kay gives an example. For a while, Sigmund Freud believed that Shakespeare wrote Hamlet after his father died. When Freud wrote The Interpretation of Dreams, he cited the play as a key Oedipal work. But in 1919, historians discovered that Shakespeare wrote the play before his father died. How did Freud respond? He became obsessed with the conspiracy theory that the 17th Earl of Oxford had written the plays credited to "William Shakespeare."

Are the paranoid Democrats of 2006 and the unhinged Republicans of 2011 following in the footsteps of Sigmund Freud? Maybe. They might even argue that the stakes are higher for them: All Freud had to do was defend a thick chunk of his book. They're on the cusp of losing their country. In that sense, these modern-day political conspiracy theories may actually be comforting: They assume that our political leaders are hyper-competent. They've developed, then covered up, Rube Goldberg designs to get what they want and maintain their power. This is no small achievement. If, on the other hand, the conspiracy theorists are wrong, well, that means the world is random, and the people who wield power or influence can screw up like everyone else. No one wants to believe that.

http://www.slate.com/id/2292081/pagenum/2

Of course, all that depends on whether you consider Slate a reliable source or not. And so it goes. By the way, there's DT's "36%" truthers...which was in 2006, five years ago, so I'd like some current numbers before I go off and shake my head at the idiocy of some people who'll believe anything, as long as it's not offered on the news or by the government...

Mind you, I don't swallow anything whole cloth, either, and I know the news media is "infotainment" which either spouts what the White House wants them to, puts up something started on the internet or a rumor as if it were fact, or has an agenda. But there's a difference between that and, when anything is announced, immediately disbelieving it and spending time searching to find anything that might "prove" it to be fake.

Or, conversely, believing something that has no basis in reality because it fits their preconceptions. If you want an example, look how fast that $200 million a day" stuff got into the mainstream media, when it was totally false. I don't think I want to live that way; healthy skepticism is one thing...seeing phantoms is another.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 3, 2011 11:02 AM

AURAPTOR

America loves a winner!


Quote:

Originally posted by Niki2:

Where is all this coming from? What is happening in our country (the world?) that is causing so many people to come to believe, and hang onto desperately, conspiracy theories of all kinds?



Ask Pirate News ? I dunno.


" I do not love the bright sword for its sharpness, nor the arrow for its swiftness, nor the warrior for his glory. I love only that which they defend. "

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 3, 2011 12:24 PM

BYTEMITE


...

I find this disrespectful. Is this an internet discussion board, or is this a cross-fire pit for insult-slinging?

You can wonder about why people have outlandish ideas without throwing words around like "idiocy." People who believe ideas that aren't accepted by the mainstream have their reasons for believing them. Some of them have mental illness, some of it is partisanism, and some of them have just been burned one too many times.

Not one of those is sufficient reason to call someone an idiot.


NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 3, 2011 12:58 PM

THEHAPPYTRADER


Quote:

I find this disrespectful. Is this an internet discussion board, or is this a cross-fire pit for insult-slinging?


Depends on the time, topic, and who is talking.

I'm uneasy with our new conspiracy culture as well. The problem is, so much of the 'history' we've been taught we later find out was less than true or severely edited. My first college history class was a wonderfully shocking and fascinating eye opener in this respect, but many of my fellow students seemed resistant to our text book and this new knowledge (Howard Zinn's "A People's History of the United States: 1492-Present. A great book, I kept mine).

Finding out that so much of what we've been told and taken for granted could very well be a lie makes it difficult to have faith in anything. I fear it has driven several to flock to our create many of these conspiracies not because of superior evidence but because they prefer the conspiracy's version of realty to what's generally excepted by the mainstream. And when the mainstream has lied to us in some way, shape or form since childhood, I can sympathize, even though I disagree.

EDIT: My worry applies to those who believe the conspiracies for reasons other than evidence. If you are merely advocating the possibility something could be not as we know it, or you have real evidence for believing what you do, I respect that.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 3, 2011 1:31 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!


33 Conspiracy Theories That Turned Out To Be True, What Every Person Should Know...
www.newworldorderreport.com/News/tabid/266/ID/980/33-Conspiracy-Theori
es-That-Turned-Out-To-Be-True-What-Every-Person-Should-Know.aspx


Quote:


http://www.fireflyfans.net/mthread.asp?b=18&t=34659

"I didn't shoot nobody no Sir! I'm just a patsy!"
-Lee Oswald, US Marine Corps, Naval Intelligence, murdering the the Dallas Police Station by a kosher Mafia stripclub owner, after President JFK was gunned down in front of that same police station, courthouse, FBI, CIA, DIA, Secret Service HQ, all located in Dealey Plaza

"The greater our knowledge increases the more our ignorance unfolds. The great enemy of the truth is very often not the lie, deliberate, contrived and dishonest, but the myth, persistent, persuasive and unrealistic. The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all."
-John F. Kennedy Sr

"The FBI has issued a BOLO on suspected terrorists driving a white delivery van from New York City to the Mexican border. The suspects are using Israeli passports. They are armed and dangerous."
-Knox County Emergency 911 Dispatch, BOLO Be On the Lookout, Knoxville, Tennessee, September 11, 2001, 11am EST
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines02/0622-05.htm
http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/fiveisraelis.html
http://www.infowars.net/articles/april2007/230407vans.htm
whatreallyhappened.com/IMAGES/record_9-11.jpg

"9/11 is not mentioned on Usama Bin Laden’s Most Wanted page. He has not been formally indicted and charged in connection with 9/11 because the FBI has no hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11.”
—FBI agent Rex Tomb, June 6, 2006
http://www.fbi.gov/wanted/terrorists/terbinladen.htm

"The goal has never been to get Bin Laden."
—General Richard Myers, chairman, US Joint Chiefs of Staff
http://www.myspace.com/911pressfortruth

American al Qaeda member Adam Gadahn Perlman acknowledges Jewish ancestry
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/meast/06/13/american.qaeda.message/index
.html


"'We are benefiting from one thing, and that is the attack on the Twin Towers and Pentagon, and the American struggle in Iraq,' Ma'ariv quoted the former prime minister as saying. He reportedly added that these events 'swung American public opinion in our favor.'"
-Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Haaretz, Netanyahu says 9/11 terror attacks good for Israel, 16 April 2008
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/975574.html

Israeli attack on USS Liberty to blame Arabs
www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=uss+liberty
http://www.gtr5.com/

"You can fool some of the people all of the time, and those are the ones you want to concentrate on."
-George W Bush, Gridiron Dinner, March 2001



"Half of writing history is hiding the Truth."
-Capt Malcolm Reynolds, Serenity

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 3, 2011 1:32 PM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


At one time, people depended on Walter Cronkite to tell us the "the way it is", but due to media fragmentation we no longer have a common set of facts to refer to. But that seems to suggest that we "need" a common narrative (propaganda, censorship)to create a common society. I suggest that what is missing isn't a "common set of facts" but good critical thinking skills.

There are a couple of indications, tho, why America is more prone to this than other developed countries:

1) We have a very religious population. More people are religious in the USA than any other developed nation. People in the USA are also more "brand-loyal"- they would rather buy according to name than specification.

Cultures which promote "belief" in one thing also are prone to "believe" other things. The nature of belief does not allow questioning or cross-checking, and therefore even widely held opinions are never self-correcting.

2) Americans tend to be anti-education. "Effete liberal snob", "Ivy-league elitist" and other derogatory names for the well-educated indicate a fundamental disrespect for thoughtfulness. We prefer people of action, and rich people.

3) Our whole economic and social order is under stress, and during times of stress and fear some people tend to refer to authorities rather than think independently. Unfortunately, this particular tendency is being taken advantage of by people with an agenda... specifically, the ultra-wealthy like the Koch Bros (who are reflexively viewed as authorities because they are wealthy) who are attempting to destroy any role of government.

People just don't understand what it means to think or discuss. They confuse "truth"... which means verifiable correspondence to reality... with "honesty". Feeling something deeply and fervently is enough to make it so, and expressing that feeling passionately is felt to be a "discussion".

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 3, 2011 2:14 PM

DREAMTROVE


The first time I heard birthers and truther grouped together was some media head a few months ago trying to do what Niki is trying to do here, which is to group investigative journalism together in a nuthouse to make way for the mainstream steamroller message. I find it pretty insulting. You know your mainstream heroes are out there commiting crimes against humanity, right? I'm sorry, I'd rather listen to Pirate News than either FOX or MSNBC. Sure, there's a bias there, but at least he tries, and isn't out to run over me with some made up nonsense about Bin Laden and terrorists.

When your country invades someone, that's them being an aggressor, an imperialist power. Attacking people. Killing them.

When the Media spouts an "official story" that's propaganda to convince the sheep that torture, killing, etc. is good.

Fortunately, the number go up, not down. I just searched, and found a lot of people saying Zogby said 48%, someone else 60% ... Russia Today has 88%.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 3, 2011 2:47 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


"at least he tries, and isn't out to run over me with some made up nonsense"

Hello,

He is, actually. He frequently overruns you and everyone else with some made up nonsense. Sometimes a cursory glance at his claims will show that his truths are self-contradictory, meaning that if one is true, another must be false. He frequently offers a grab-bag of random facts, clever deductions, rampant paranoia, vile hatred, and utter invention, peppered with what I will politely call 'photoshopped satire.'

I don't know how Pirate profits from his spam posts about the 'real' truth of things, but I've come to believe that he does profit from them. I mean actual profits, with dollar signs. He's not just out for self-satisfaction or to edify the world. Occasionally he posts something intriguing, but the signal-to-noise ratio is far too high to consider him a viable primary news source. Since most of his material is repackaged from elsewhere, he's little better than the 'main stream media' that many purport to despise. He simply regurgitates garbage from different sources than FOX and CNN.

ON THE TOPIC OF CONSPIRACY CULTURE:

I have recently done some reading about the CIA and the Cold War that is particularly illuminating. I can readily recommend Legacy of Ashes and The Dead Hand. These books merely use unclassified documents and interviews with involved professionals. Nothing that they reveal is in any real dispute. The revelations are nonetheless shocking in some cases.

The government lies. It lies all the time. Some of its lies are meant to serve a special agenda, some lies are for self preservation, and occasionally it lies by virtue of incompetence. It's not just our government, of course. Other governments are also fond of great big whoppers for all kinds of reasons.

The increasing realization of how many lies are poured from the government teapot is creating a strong cynicism that breeds conspiracy culture where none could foster before.

That having been said, while government lies all the time, not everything it says is a lie. Not everything is a secret plot. And even if it was, it would be premature to declare it as such factually until you have evidence. Most people find actual evidence beyond their reach, and so apply a standard of truth to their jumped-to conclusions that would make the devil's lawyer blush. After all, if there's no way to know for sure, there's also no way to be wrong for sure. Imagine anything, and stamp it approved if it satisfied your notions.

I imagine that at some point, people will become bored with conspiracy theories, and the thick veil of BS will thin, allowing the good stuff to rise to the top. Remember that investigative journalism is not a shotgun of accusations. It is a scalpel of truth, supported by the hand of evidence.

I miss the scalpel. I miss the hand.

--Anthony


_______________________________________________

“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”

Jacob Hornberger

“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”

Mahatma Gandhi

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 3, 2011 2:52 PM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:

At one time, people depended on Walter Cronkite to tell us the "the way it is"...



Funny how he never mentioned THIS little factoid...


Voice of Satan: Jewish Owl of Bohemia voiced by naked homosexual jew Walter Cronkite

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 3, 2011 3:49 PM

DREAMTROVE


Anthony,

Sorry, you're right, he posts a lot of dribble repeated from other sources, I just filter it out.

What he's after is what the rest of what you're calling "conspiracy culture" leaders are after: A following. That's what Alex Jones is about, it's what Michael Moore is about. Same goes for Glenn Beck and even Al Gore.

That's different from the thinking people on truther side, who call themselves that because they are searching for the truth, not because they claim to know the truth. I know a lot of them and have for some time. Most of what they do is post evidence to disprove govt. untruths, some of which are lies, but most of which are errors.

It's just that the burden of doing so is tremendous, and the effort needed to argue every single one of hundreds of points that someone would need to understand in order to "get" a particular situation is laborious and tedious, and we are all busy. This is why, when I started out, every truther site I went to said "start searching and find for yourself." If they gave you anything, it was one keyword, like "building 7" which is the door to a rabbit hole. How far you go down that rabbit hole is up to you, but they are everywhere, and no one can do anything more than that. No one is going to walk you step by step to the destination, and anyone who offers to is leading you down the garden path, and I think you already understand that.

On 9.11 alone there are many rabbit holes. One I ran into quite late in my search is that Larry Silverstein himself is a leader in a radical religious cult. This appears to be true, and has a lot of implications. I don't recall the name, but I find it odd that the landlord of the property was himself a radical religious extremist on the level of Osama Bin Laden, but there seems to be something to that theory. It doesn't mean he blew up the buildings any more than it means that Osama did, but it does change the picture. Everything changes the picture. My experience with 9.11 truth is like with all fields of investigation research and study: More information changes the picture; it does not make it clearer.

I have much less idea now who perpetrated 9.11 than I did when I started.

Consider this: The opposing side has no doubt at all who did 9.11. The official story has not only that, but all of the details spelled out, all neatly worked out by one man and his office staff in 24 hours, and then never questioned again by anyone on that side.

I'm a truther because I am interested in the truth. I don't accept the official story, not because I think it's a lie, I think it is an error, made in good faith by someone under a lot of pressure. I suspect that someone with a lot of power wanted a quick answer because they did not want an investigation because they were covering something up. Maybe it was their own involvement, but it might have been something much more minor, but still career-ending.

Think of the million things that a thorough investigation could have turned up. Someone stole a billion dollars. Had links to terrorism. Got campaign money from terrorists. Had been cheating data systems. Was holding a large stockpile of weapons. Had WMDs in NYC. Any number of things other than "they themselves attacked the WTC."

Who would have that much power? Cheney? Bush Sr.? Rumsfeld? Powell? Any of a number of people. Probably even the Clintons. Didn't have to be a republican, just someone with enough information on enough people that if their career sank, they could sink many others. So, a policy of "Don't question the story" was adopted. Such a policy is never kind to the truth.

Give you another example: The EU has such a policy towards the holocaust. This policy sprung up after (not nec. because of, but after) my senator d'Amato uncovered that there were businesses still operating in europe which were involved in the holocaust.

I don't think that an investigation into the holocaust would reveal that 6 million Jews didn't die, and I don't think it would reveal that the Germans didn't do it. I still find this refusal to accept investigation into an appalling policy, and I suspect it comes from someone(s) out there who have not yet been pegged as having done something wrong, enough wrong that it's worth playing this charade.


That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 3, 2011 4:07 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht


I don't like it when people call unpleasant dillusions or belief systems "fantasies". I'm not saying they aren't allowed to, I'm just saying it bugs me because when I think of fantasies I think of interesting and exciting things full of heroes, villains, things that don't really exist but are fun to pretend about, and the hero always wins in the end, even if things look grim for a bit. So I guess I have a positive connotation with that word so its hard for me to think of scary dillusions and paranoia as "fantasy". But that's just me, it isn't something I will vehemently insist on.

I think Byte's first post is good and rational and makes sense to me. She lists reasons why people tend towards conspiracy theories. Some of them have mental illness, some of them are looking for truth, some of them want answers, some of them are synical/skeptics. My dad is sort of a conspiracy theorist, not as much as some here, but he does it some. There is nothing wrong with him, he just has a conspiratorial temperment. He just doesn't accept that everything the government says is true and thinks that there's more to some things than meets the eye. I'm not that much of a conspiratorialist, I tend to believe the basic things put forth, but I think it can be healthy to hear other viewpoints and then decide for myself.

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 3, 2011 6:15 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Byte, there’s a difference between “idiocy” and “idiot”. Whatever the reason anyone believes anything, I can have the opinion that what they believe is idiocy; that doesn’t mean I believe them to be idiots. I suggest you might have read that more personally than it was written. I was not calling anyone an idiot, I was asking why there are so many conspiracies and why it seems to ME almost reflexive sometimes for people to automatically distrust anything they hear on the news or from the government.

Sig, I think you elucidated it very well; I hadn’t thought about the religious angle, or the very logical idea that societal stress might well contribute to some of this. Certainly fear is an excellent stressor, and fear is pretty prevalent today for most of us, in one way or another.

Ahhh, DT. It’s so nice to know that you can see inside my head and tell me what my intentions are. I didn’t know that! What a surprise!
Quote:

group investigative journalism together in a nuthouse to make way for the mainstream steamroller message
Damn! And here I thought I was expressing frustration with all the conspiracy theories out there, which didn’t seem to be the case as much as nowadays and wondering why people are so prone to them now. I’m so glad you put me straight about what I was thinking and what I intended...

Interesting you think PN, FauxNews and MSNBC are the only options OUT there...which is what you seem to be saying.

I’m sure glad you think PN isn’t
Quote:

out to run over me with some made up nonsense about Bin Laden and terrorists.
I think Anthony answered that one well enough, I actually found it surprising to think that you hadn’t noticed.

That last sentence about Zogby, I think you didn’t complete the thought, I can’t make it out.
Quote:

found a lot of people saying Zogby said 48%, someone else 60% ... Russia Today has 88%
About what?

Oh, and Anthony; some time ago Mike said PN gets money every time someone clicks on one of the links he posts. I don’t know if this is true or how it would work, but he’s mentioned it a couple of times and PN has never denied it. For whatever that’s worth.
Quote:

That having been said, while government lies all the time, not everything it says is a lie. Not everything is a secret plot. And even if it was, it would be premature to declare it as such factually until you have evidence. Most people find actual evidence beyond their reach, and so apply a standard of truth to their jumped-to conclusions that would make the devil's lawyer blush. After all, if there's no way to know for sure, there's also no way to be wrong for sure. Imagine anything, and stamp it approved if it satisfied your notions.
I agree; I think that’s my main frustration; that anything and everything said by the government or reported by any media seems to be considered a lie, no matter what it might be. I don’t get that.

I’m not sure PN is after a following...he doesn’t relate to anyone else much, I’ve gotten the impression he posts the same things on numerous sites, and if Mike is right that he gets paid if we click the links, that might be all he’s after. He doesn’t make arguments, he doesn’t debate, he just puts out volumes of what I would call idiocy

I so miss the scalpel, too, Anthony, and the hand. Unfortunately, I think those days are well and truly over, at least in my lifetime. Maybe, if/when our economy and society settles down, there will be less interest in this sort of thing; one can only hope. If people’s lives improved, there’d surely be less paranoia and spooking at shadows. Or not.

D:
Quote:

who call themselves that because they are searching for the truth, not because they claim to know the truth
But that’s exactly what hey DO, they claim to know the truth.

Riona, I tend to believe Sig had a better handle on it than what Byte posited.
Quote:

Some of them have mental illness, some of them are looking for truth, some of them want answers, some of them are synical/skeptics.
That doesn’t take into account people who are convinced of conspiracies for any other reason than mental illness, seeking truth (same as wanting answers) or being skeptical. The ideas Sig put forth are also valid, in my opinion, and it’s as often not about seeking truth/answers as it is believing the “truths/answers” that fortify people’s own beliefs/feelings. If you’ve heard some of them “explain” why they believe what they do, you can’t help but shake your head in wonder. I’m not talking about anyone here, more about all those out there who glom onto an idea and defend it to the death, in the face of proven facts. Nothing can be “proven” to them, no matter how rational or logical. The number of birthers alone shows that, as I see it. “Conspiratorial temperament” is also an interesting concept, no doubt there are people who fit that term (not your father, I’d call him more a skeptic); people who are drawn to conspiracies in general perhaps.

I agree about the term fantasy, by the way; that’s how I feel too. And I have NO problem listening to different viewpoints, I guess my problem is people stating things like "world war" as FACTs. Questioning is one thing; stating unequivocably that something is SO tends to make my hackles rise, I admit.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 3, 2011 8:37 PM

FREMDFIRMA


Well, see - that's where it is, right there.

When the people supposed to be honest with you have lied to you, when you find that they have lied about damn near EVERYTHING, this is the end result of that.

And you bet your ass that folks with ulterior motives will use it, those in power that did the lying will use it, and so forth and so on till the truth itself is so obfuscated that nobody knows anything anymore, a very toxic environment.

We invented an antidote to that, quite some time ago, and it was called JOURNALISM, only these days it's been co-opted, bought off, paid for, suppressed and silenced - and those who do try, often without a lot of skill or competence, to do it are derided, denigrated, scorned and despised, by folk true to their programming whether they realize it or not.

But sometimes, conspiracies and chicanery are real, too - not in the sense of a great, grand, all encompassing conspiracy, but in the devil of the details a hundred tiny petty onces combined with obfuscation, ass covering, blamestorming and office politics saturated with partisanship over something or other - and sometimes the evidence of those things is so mindbreaking to a person that they snap, and start to spiral down their own personal hell of paranoia and fear.

Consider the things I've dredged out of the mire when originally shouted down and hated on for them, the Gardasil Fiasco, which some of you watched, the FLDS mess in El Dorado/YFZ, one of the few times I felt the need to go as far as personal involvement instead of simple data gathering, or the Lower Merion Webcam scandal, which btw, has a new spin - I TOLD YOU this was coming...
http://www.ajc.com/business/pa-suit-furniture-rental-933410.html

And those are just the "clean" ones, where there was obvious evidence and an eventual conclusion however unsatisfying it may have been - but life is often NOT so clean, we often DON'T have all the facts, but certainly enough to suspiciously go "hey, wait just a damn minute here!", like the additional bombs found inside the Federal Building in Oklahoma, or the FBI giving KSM and Ramzi Youssef the bomb they used on the WTC back in 1993, stuff that clearly reveals *someone* supposedly on-our-side was involved or had nefarious intent, but you have no way to CONNECT it, and so one investigates as much as possible with the resources they have and provided they survive (as Gary Webb and many others did not) either finds enough to fully support a conclusion, or they don't.

This within a steam of information that is often being deliberately contaminated by "official sources" pouring lies and misinformation into it, wackos who mean well doing so as a result of their own mental static, and folks who wish to use the situation for power and gain manipulating things as well.

And so folks make assumptions, or estimated guesses on the info that they have, not just as a warning flag that something is rotten, but also as a plea to EACH OTHER, in that someone else might have more pieces to add to the puzzle, someone who knows something might take the risk and come forward - despite what we DO, socially and legally, to those who dare.

For mine own, the most useful skillset I have towards that isn't any of the nefarious or physical ones, the latter becoming less effective by the month - but rather that I was originally trained as a Quartermaster, and despite being less-than-fond of paperwork(understatement!), happened to be right DAMN good at it, the devil of the details - someone always puts shit on paper they shouldn't, and that paper gets filed somewhere, and so on and so forth.

Fuck FOIA requests, often enough one can determine with a high degree of accuracy what's IN a classified document simply by the satellite documentation which ISN'T classified - much like if you track everything that goes INTO and then OUT OF, a warehouse, you have a damn good idea of what its contents are, do you not ?

So people use the skills they have, and collectively try to forge a path to the truth, with all the world throwing shit at them for it, and often enough harried along by assholes who want them to find a certain "truth" that either doesn't really exist, or serves a political purpose, and it is those individuals, who muddy the waters and poison the flow, who SHOULD be derided and denigriated - but instead they are held up as bastions of truth and given multimillion dollar media contracts, put in charge of radio, TV, newspapers, while those who seek the truth are marginalized and hated on, often because they do it so badly or struggle with their own inner demons in the process.

But also because people are told to hate on them, conditioned to do it, and will do so whether aware of it or not.

Andrew Vachss has a series called Underground, sort of a post-calamity dystopia, and the calamity that precipitated the collapse wasn't war, or natural disaster...
You know what it was ?
The death of journalism.
The only remaining vestige is the enigmatic "Book Boys" which use an induplicable shade of blue paint on the walls to counter the lies.

Call em what you may, hate em all you like, but I value these folk no matter how damn crazy they are, John Lee, Jeff Rense, Alex Jones, Mike Rivero, all of them no matter how badly they do it, are in their own often misguided way trying to practice an art all but lost from our society these days...

Journalism.


-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Tuesday, May 3, 2011 9:03 PM

ANTHONYT

Freedom is Important because People are Important


"Call em what you may, hate em all you like, but I value these folk no matter how damn crazy they are, John Lee, Jeff Rense, Alex Jones, Mike Rivero, all of them no matter how badly they do it, are in their own often misguided way trying to practice an art all but lost from our society these days..."

Hello,

I respect your intentions, but I disagree with your conclusions. If the Journalist cranks out product that is so laden with crap that I need five grades of sieve to sort out the truth from the lies, half-truths, bigotry, racism, sexism, and random crazy-talk, then your 'journalist' is just as bad as the corrupted establishment.

That's Journalism Fail.

--Anthony

_______________________________________________

“If you are not free to choose wrongly and irresponsibly, you are not free at all”

Jacob Hornberger

“Freedom is not worth having if it does not connote freedom to err. It passes my comprehension how human beings, be they ever so experienced and able, can delight in depriving other human beings of that precious right.”

Mahatma Gandhi

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 3:15 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


Fact is, TPTB have no interest in a thoughtful, well-educated population. If peeps were self-aware, then who would go to war for them? Who would stand in line like little droids to buy their privacy-invading gadgets and take out their blood-sucking loans? Who would fight at the bottom of the barrel for the privilege of being profited from, and then defend their slavery as the best system possible?

Advertisement: propaganda. The messages it sells: You have the right to be happy, and you will be when you buy this product. All your problems will be solved in 15-30 seconds when you buy, buy, BUY!

Entertainment: propaganda. Everyone is rich, or a criminal. Everyone leads meaningful lives. Nobody works for a living. White husbands and blacks are entertainingly stupid most of the time, when they're not criminals. And all of your problems will be solved in 30-60 minutes.

Journalism: propaganda. Life it horrible, violent, tragic, gruesome. Nobody works for a living. And all of the worlds problems are solved in a few news cycles. (Look how fast Fukushima got shove off the front page!)

I once read a book (Logic and Contemporary Rhetoric) that 90% of all journalism comes from some sort of official announcement, from the dog-catcher to the White House. This was back in 1970!

No WONDER there are 32 flavors of conspiracy theorists out there! There ARE real conspiracies! Each time you read a tweet, or watch TV, or read a newspaper, you are on the receiving end of someone's agenda. The trick is to make sense to if.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 4:04 AM

FREMDFIRMA



Ayep, you have the right of it Siggy, and it's a damn shame that those who try to act counter to the flood are so goddamn bad at it, or often have THEIR own agenda as well.

Oh, and Anthony - that's kinda my point about it though, while they score an A+ for intent, on execution sadly that usually falls in the D+ to F- range and is generally fulla fail, sure - not just of its own, but in that it drags down the whole concept, making them their own worst enemies.

But I do credit the effort to TRY.

Often enough ones only recourse is to make the effort to find out themselves, and beyond local efforts, often this isn't possible and you have to act on the information you have.

Easiest way to do that is understanding the motivations at work - just because crabs march in lockstep doesn't make em a hive mind, and just cause greedy, sociopathic bastards all move in the same direction doesn't mean it's a coordinated conspiracy...
But you WILL know the direction in which they move, yes ?

And that's step one, step two is doin something about it - everything from metaphorical landmines and boobytraps, to distraction and diversion tactics by offering them what they think is juicier bait in another direction.
Step three is usually ducking or avoiding the inevitable retaliation, usually assisted by a misinformed populace all too willing to be told what they WANT to believe.
Quote:

Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.
-Patrick Henry


-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 4:06 AM

FREMDFIRMA



Oh, and this suggested addition from Alice.

From The Abyss
Quote:

Virgil: Hippy, you think everything is a conspiracy.
Alan "Hippy" Carnes: Everything is.


In light of Siggys comment, that's strangely profound.

-F

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 4:06 AM

BYTEMITE


I stand by my disrespectful comment. I do not call outlandish beliefs "idiocy." I do not believe even PN is engaged in "idiocy," because rather PN is either insane, or says what he does for profits. The first possibility suggests he has difficulty recognizing reality, and so his intelligence has to be measured from a different standpoint. The second possibility suggests he may in fact be very intelligent, and is fooling all of us.

As an atheist, there are many religious beliefs I consider outlandish and poorly supported by evidence, yet I do not call Buddhism or other religions "idiocy." I recognize people will believe things I don't agree with, or even that I think are false, yet this does not diminish who they are as a person, or whether they can be considered intelligent.

If you want to discuss facts and how they relate to whether beliefs are correct or incorrect, then I have no problem with that. But you didn't, rather your first post posited that 1) This is a problem, and 2) This is problem because it is idiocy. These are not logical arguments, these are ad hominem attacks.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 4:23 AM

PIRATENEWS

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!




Fed Govt excited that burying Obama Bin Laden evidence at sea can work to bury other evidence at sea, such as OK City controlled demolition bombing videotapes and videos of no Muslims boarding any hijacked airliners on 9/11:



Navy SEAL Governor Jesse Ventura don't buy the Obama Bin Laden Hoax
http://www.infowars.com/jesse-ventura-questions-official-bin-laden-sto
ry
/













Kid: "What's a Gina?"
Sheriff Nathan Fillion: "It's a country, where Chinese people come from."
-Slither

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 4:33 AM

BYTEMITE


Why do I post things when I know I'll regret them?

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 5:25 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
which is to group investigative journalism together in a nuthouse to make way for the mainstream steamroller message.



Sure, that's exactly what this is - and you are in no way being overblown with defensiveness since you are a conspiracy theorist....

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 5:35 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by AnthonyT:
[B If the Journalist cranks out product that is so laden with crap that I need five grades of sieve to sort out the truth from the lies, half-truths, bigotry, racism, sexism, and random crazy-talk, then your 'journalist' is just as bad as the corrupted establishment.




Damn straight.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 5:58 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

Originally posted by Storymark:


Sure, that's exactly what this is - and you are in no way being overblown with defensiveness since you are a conspiracy theorist....




I will now do this in the style of a game show host and buzz people out whenever they make a logical fallacy or ad hominem.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 6:36 AM

STORYMARK


Cute. I'm commiting a falacy by pointing out one of yours?

And you wonder why folks have trouble taking conspiracy wonks seriously.

Good luck.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 6:59 AM

BYTEMITE


Uh, no, it's not a logical fallacy to point out when someone is using a logical fallacy. However, it IS a logical fallacy, known as a circumstantial fallacy, to say that a person's disposition towards making a certain argument (a conspiracy theorist defending conspiracy theorists) disqualifies any truth in the argument they're making (that people are making unfair ad hominem attacks on the people who believe them, as opposed to debunking the theories themselves).

Also, you just made a Tu quoque fallacy responding to me, and a regular ad hominem with your "wonks" comment, as whether or not I'm a wonk has no relevance to my argument you're attempting to refute.

In short, *cow noises*

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 8:01 AM

DREAMTROVE


Quote:

Originally posted by SignyM:
Fact is, TPTB have no interest in a thoughtful, well-educated population.




Sig,

Spot on.

Cross that with my rants on eugenics, and you'll get to understanding why I think the "eugenicists" are limiting the births of the educated disproportionately over those of the uneducated.

Statistically, not only is the birth rate in developed nations among native populations 0.5-0.7, among the educated its even lower.

Statistically, 90% of the population believes whatever their parents believed.

Kill the smart, fool the stupid.

In WWI the best and the brightest of Britains colleges were sent to the front lines, where they were ordered to march directly into German machine gunfire. That's not a conspiracy theory, it's basically universally accepted history. The reasons given are usually "The people at the top were stupid, ignorant or insane." Sure, they may have been all of that, but they knew exactly what they were doing: The same thing Mao did, and Pol Pot did: Execute the educated. Tienanmen square? The educated represent a threat. The ignorant do not.

[rant]

ETA: Re Truth

My first doubt was before the towers fell. I was watching, and the newscasters were saying "they're going to fall" and I said "No, they're not, the jet fuel doesn't have the capacity to destroy the frame of those buildings." I was sure.

Then, they fell, and I was in denial and shock. I said "That wouldn't happen. Something's wrong. We're missing something." But I didn't figure it out.

So, the media and govt. snatched up all audio and video recordings, gave us their story, and I accepted it. For a while. Then I got into an argument with someone who said "wouldn't happen" and I said "did happen" and he said "3 buildings went down, there were only 2 planes." So, I searched, and found "building 7" I dug a lot, and I doubted for a long time, way passed reason. It was proven to me several times over before I caved, because I was clinging to a world view in which America didn't bomb Americans.

What really did it for me, and where I switched was probably when I started discussing it and people said "tinfoil hat conspiracy loon" and I said, "no, laws of physics." Official story needed to budge just a hair to match up with laws of physics.

But it wouldn't. Not an inch. So I started examining the Official story. It had a list of suspects. They had been "identified" by "passports" and stuff like that. Okay, an 1800 degree explosion will not destroy reinforced steel encased in several feet of concrete, but it will certainly do for a passport, or even a human. Then I started looking these guys up, one by one. 19 names. Some of them appeared to be alive, one had died before the attack, but all were on our FBI's most wanted list. The first two I might be able to dismiss (similar names, father/son) but that 19 or 19 terrorists were already on out most wanted list defied all laws of statistical probability. Maybe one in a thousands terrorists was on the FBI's list. So then I had to re-examine the whole theory of the official story. I decided it was about the most kooky conspiracy theory I'd ever read. And, it could not be questioned. It contains absolute absurdities. A piece of wreckage leaps over one building to hit another, leveling it.

That's where conspiracies come from: Some form of data has a better correlation than what you've been given. Here there were scads of theories that better correlated with the data than the one we were given, which was, itself a conspiracy theory: It was a theory, about a conspiracy:

Osama Bin Laden *conspired* with members of Al Qaeda, to attack the WTC, with box cutters. They circumvented all security measures and were met with a perfect storm of US military missions being out of range, and the FAA director not informing anyone because it was his first day on the job, and a long string of coincidences and events each with probabilities in the one in a million range unfolded, and Richard Clarke was able to figure out everyone involved in 24 hours and that just happened to be the people he was already looking for.

Pretty damn pat a theory if you ask me.[/rant]

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 8:08 AM

CANTTAKESKY


Quote:

Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Osama Bin Laden *conspired* with members of Al Qaeda,...

That is what I keep saying. The OBL story is a conspiracy theory as well. It is a matter of which Magic Ninjas you choose to believe are more likely to have committed the atrocity; both stories have elements that should rile all skeptics.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 8:39 AM

DREAMTROVE


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Why do I post things when I know I'll regret them?



That was hilarious, unlike how Kaneman finds everything else, I mean, I cracked up.

CTS,

Yes, I don't believe in magic ninjas, so my conspiracy theory of choice would run like this:

The planes were on preprogrammed flight paths. The autopilot had been rigged to not switch off. Since the flight paths carried the planes over NYC anyway, it wouldn't have been until the last minute that anyone would have noticed anything was off, tried to shut off autopilot and failed, because it was remotely controlled from somewhere else. I don't think this explanation adds much to the "whodunnit" part of the equality, just the how. Normal hijacks have a higher failure rate. Guys with boxcutters could take over a plane, but not 4, and not result in an incident (40º03'02" N 78º45'22" W is a cliffside. Hitting it is consistent with a low altitude preprogrammed flight path.) If they'd had google maps, they wouldn't have made this error.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 9:16 AM

STORYMARK


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
Uh, no, it's not a logical fallacy to point out when someone is using a logical fallacy. However, it IS a logical fallacy, known as a circumstantial fallacy, to say that a person's disposition towards making a certain argument (a conspiracy theorist defending conspiracy theorists) disqualifies any truth in the argument they're making (that people are making unfair ad hominem attacks on the people who believe them, as opposed to debunking the theories themselves).

Also, you just made a Tu quoque fallacy responding to me, and a regular ad hominem with your "wonks" comment, as whether or not I'm a wonk has no relevance to my argument you're attempting to refute.

In short, *cow noises*



I wasn't so much disqualifying the possibility that there was truth in what you say - but mocking your steadfast position that every piece of official info must be a lie, and the rediculous notion that cospiracy theorists do true investigative work, when a great deal of what they write/post is entirely fabricated.


But I shouldn't bother. Ive read enough of your posts to know where you're coming from. I'll just sit back and roll my eyes at the paranoia.


"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 10:18 AM

BYTEMITE


Hey, guess what? I'm actually skeptical of the 9-11 Truther theory, and actually out and out thought the Birther movement was bogus even before people decided to add Donald Trump to the three ring circus. So not only don't you know me, or my opinions, but you just committed a strawman fallacy. Because I never said they do research, never said there are no fabrications from the lunatic fringe, and never said I believe every piece of official info is a lie.

You can say that you weren't disqualifying the possibility that I might have had a point, but that doesn't really count for much if you don't mean it in spirit and continue to use "conspiracy theorist" to dismiss everything I say.

So, what does everyone think now? Is this thread a discussion, or is it an excuse to mock and attack conspiracy theorists?

If it's the later, go for it, I wouldn't be able to stop you guys from mocking, and I think you have every right to anyway. But if it's the former, if people wanted a discussion, this thread probably started out on the wrong foot. Just saying.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 10:53 AM

DREAMTROVE


All the "truther" movement says is that the official story doesn't add up. It's not a theory, but the rejection of a theory.

This is often confused with the "inside job" theory, which is a theory. It is something some truthers believe. Generally about 1/3-1/2 of them.

I tend to believe a hybrid. I think there were "outside terrorists" and they had "inside men" because I just don't think American defenses are that weak.


The birther movement is seriously discredited by the fact that it began as an effort to block McCain from office, and switched gears when they saw a blacker threat.

What hurts the birthers even more is that they still have yet to even consider providing any evidence that Obama's mother ever went to Kenya. It was really more of a fling, and she got knocked up, he went back to Kenya and IIRC married someone else. But she would actually have to be *in* Kenya at the time Obama was born, because dads just don't give birth. This fact has been missed by the wizards over in Birther Central, (which is in Moldova) and all of their followers (who are in Dumbfuckistan) ;)

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 11:15 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Quote:

If the Journalist cranks out product that is so laden with crap that I need five grades of sieve to sort out the truth from the lies, half-truths, bigotry, racism, sexism, and random crazy-talk, then your 'journalist' is just as bad as the corrupted establishment.
Speaks pretty well for me, too.

I don’t know, Sig, I don’t think that’s necessarily true. SOME politicians/legislators are that way, I agree...maybe even the majority of them. But I don’t think it’s “all” of ‘em.

Certainly advertising is propaganda; it’s supposed to be and any rational person accepts it as such. I don’t think what you described holds true for entertainment; many if not most people on TV series work for a living, and aren’t rich. I’d say there’s more propensity to divide people into good guys and bad guys, and definitely to wrap it all up neatly in 30-60 minutes. My impression may be because I don’t watch any sitcoms (except reruns of Scrubs), but what I do watch isn’t for the most part what you describe. Then of course there is that genre I NEVER watch: reality shows, in which nobody is what you described (I believe?).

When it comes to PN, Byte, I give him neither intelligence nor credit for offering much that’s substantial. I can’t credit him with giving it a good try, because of his outlandish claims and obvious racism and/or hatred toward just about everyone and everything. I just don’t think he’s worth paying attention to; he’s got SOME kind of agenda, that’s all I need to know. The fact that he virtually never engages with anyone tells me he’s not here for the reasons most of us are here, and he’s not actually part of the community, he just comes in to spout ugliness.

You still haven’t understood what I tried to explain. SomeTHING can be idiocy, that doesn’t mean anyone who believes in it is an idiot. They can be a perfectly rational, reasonable person who, for one reason or another, believes something that to me appears patently absurd. Most often it’s ignorance, lack of information, and often either conscious or subconscious deliberate blindness, but I don’t think they’re idiots. There doesn’t have to be any connection between idiocy and idiot.

I’m not the only person who perceives an increase in conspiracy mentality, so for me to state “this is a problem” doesn’t seem to me to be attacking. It frustrates me, to see people gloming onto this stuff SO quickly and hanging on to it SO hard, especially people I respect in other matters. I expressed my frustration and wondered why it is this way, and a number of people have come up with rational explanations. Ergo my saying it’s a problem (which I didn’t, but it is a source of frustration for ME) doesn’t seem to be being negated by others who have noticed it too, ergo, I’m not sure there’s anything wrong with my initial query.

As to discussing facts relating to these theories, that’s just not possible in reality. I’ve yet to see anyone here give up any conspiracy theory, even when it flies in the face of logic or facts, so I recognize the futility of trying to get through to people like birthers. I’m not going to get into trying to debate with people who hold a conspiracy theory of one kind or another; my question was WHY is there so much of it going around, and I’ve gotten some excellent theories in response.

You don’t think birtherism is idiocy, I take it. To me it is patently that, along with manipulation and racism. It doesn’t make sense on its face, and I can’t think of any more facts that could be presented than what already have been, yet look at the percentage of people who still believe. To me, the idea that Obama is some kind of Manchurian Candidate, that this was all a huge conspiracy, that it wasn’t dealt with early in his candidacy, IS idiocy. That doesn’t make those who believe in it idiots, do you understand what I’m trying to say?

I wouldn’t call anyone’s religion idiocy for any reason. I have a lot of negative feelings about organized religion, but that’s something people feel respectful about. There’s no respect inherent in conspiracy theories, they’re almost invariably something that is distinctly DISrespectful of those they are trying to dismiss. That’s just how I feel about it, and I think my feelings are as valid as anyone else’s. Gawd knows I’ve taken enough disrespect for many of the aspects of MY life here, so expressing my frustration with something I think is unhealthy for our society isn’t anything I’ll feel ashamed of.

Yes, Story, I get the feeling some here have taken my question and the quotes I offered rather more personally than is necessary, or than I intended it. I wasn’t intending to attack anyone who holds conspiracy theories, it’s just that there are so MANY out there, some of the motivation for some of them seems nothing but hatred of anything having to do with established authority, and some are so desperately clung to as “fact”, that I wondered why we’re experiencing that at this time. I’m not sure why it should set people off so intensely, but I accept that obviously it does, and it makes me wonder just how secure in their beliefs some people are. Or how un-self-aware. Because yes, DT had a lot to do with starting me wondering, and seeking to see if it’s something that only I believe (that there are so many), and the sole reason he frustrates me is because he makes statements that are way out in left field and makes them as if they’re “just SO”, that everyone obviously agrees with him, yet keeps saying he’s here to “learn”. It’s a dichotomy that boters me somewhat every time I see it. But it’s not ABOUT DT, that’s just what got me started wondering.

Hah! I see you had the same impulse when you read Anthony’s remark as I did (see beginning of this post). It rings very true for me, and probably explains why I more tend to dismiss some theories out of hand. They tend to be poorly posited, poorly WRITTEN, and full of hate and emotion.

Byte:
Quote:

to say that a person's disposition towards making a certain argument... disqualifies any truth in the argument they're making
Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that precisely what DT DID, in judging why I was making the remarks that I made, and dissing me for it? He pretty much DECIDED my”disposition” and judged me negatively, as well as putting negative intentions as why I was saying it.

There you go again, DT:
Quote:

Statistically, 90% of the population believes whatever their parents believed
Proof, please. I disagree with pretty much everything you said, and I don’t know how you get there, given that OUR military is more often made up of people who are unemployed, poor, uneducated and, nowadays, even criminals. Nor how, during the draft, people in universities were given exemptions, while those who could prove they had no other “viable” reason for not fighting were drafted. It just doesn’t fit

What do I think now, Byte? I think there are pretty much two camps. Those who are into conspiracy theories, who seem to be taking offense and attacking, and those who feel a lot of conspiracy theorists have reasons for believing as they do which go beyond simply seeking truth, and have been ruminating on WHY there is so much of that going on these days.

I posted this out of frustration and wondering WHY; it feels like half of what I got back was a defense of conspiracy theories as valid and that I'm wrong to think any conspiracy theory might be unworthy of belief, or tht it might be "idiocy".


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 11:38 AM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

You still haven’t understood what I tried to explain. SomeTHING can be idiocy, that doesn’t mean anyone who believes in it is an idiot. They can be a perfectly rational, reasonable person who, for one reason or another, believes something that to me appears patently absurd. Most often it’s ignorance, lack of information, and often either conscious or subconscious deliberate blindness, but I don’t think they’re idiots. There doesn’t have to be any connection between idiocy and idiot.


Well, no, it's more that I didn't respond to it, because Storymark distracted me. I can kind of see what you mean, but there's still some unfortunate implications there. You're basically saying you think people are wasting time with beliefs you don't agree with, and, okay, in some cases that might be true, but people are going to go on believing stuff, you know? They're not going to stop because everyone else thinks they're wasting their time, and what's more, they shouldn't stop. They have every right to pursue their outlandish beliefs, just as I told Storymark he has a right to mock them for it.

I also think you honestly didn't expect that people would react this way over what you said. So I think you weren't trying to stir anything up, and this result was accidental.

Quote:

Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t that precisely what DT DID, in judging why I was making the remarks that I made, and dissing me for it? He pretty much DECIDED my”disposition” and judged me negatively, as well as putting negative intentions as why I was saying it.


I actually haven't been paying much attention to DT in this thread, so I don't know exactly what he said, but that sounds more like a strawman fallacy if it was one. Strawman is when you construct someone's position and motives and attribute things to them that they didn't say to prove them wrong.

Circumstantial fallacy is when you take someone's known associates or circumstances (where the name comes from) and try to dismiss their argument as the product of bias.

Quote:

What do I think now, Byte? I think there are pretty much two camps. Those who are into conspiracy theories, who seem to be taking offense and attacking, and those who feel a lot of conspiracy theorists have reasons for believing as they do which go beyond simply seeking truth, and have been ruminating on WHY there is so much of that going on these days.



You think I'm attacking Storymark? Well, I guess that's it then. If I can't convince someone which side is attacking who when another someone on one of the sides says they outright INTEND to mock the other, then this is a futile effort.

I never said it was wrong to think a conspiracy belief might be idiocy, I said it was an ad hominem fallacy to call conspiracy theorists idiots without qualification. As I said, they have a right to believe what they do. As you say, apparently that wasn't what you meant, but it's still a point that I have to make.

Especially when we can see the fallout all around us here, when people see what you've written, jump on it, and don't show your same restraint. I also have to say, I'm troubled that you don't think some people deserve respect, because for me, respect is the basis through which we can even have communication on a board like this. In light of that, I still can't take back the disrespectful comment, because you have said outright that you do not have respect for the people your post is directed at.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 12:43 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


I blame the X Files.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 1:11 PM

BYTEMITE


I never watched the X-files.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 1:17 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


That's very strange. The one that really got to me was "you have said outright that you do not have respect for the people your post is directed at." My post was directed at the people HERE, and I respect most of them. Some of them apparently agreed with my frustration and confusion about conspiracy theorists, or they wouldn't have simply offered answers to my question of why there are so many currently, would they? They would have said it was my imagination or something if they didn't agree, yes?
Quote:

You're basically saying you think people are wasting time with beliefs you don't agree with
Nope. That's not what I said at ALL. I've expressed confusion and frustration about people who latch onto a conspiracy theory, or come up with one, whether I agree with it or not (and some I DO agree with), which are not appropriately backed up with reasonable facts, and which they then cling to and defend in SPITE of any and all facts proving it wrong.

Certainly there are conspiracies, I never denied that. I have said that it's my feeling that humans aren't great at keeping secrets or having effective conspiracies, not on as huge a scale as some of these theories or for as long a time, but there have been many conspiracies in my lifetime which were proven, like the Iran-Contra thing, or Watergate, for examples. My frustration is when I see people cling to conspiracy theories which are idiocy, like birthers, and fanatically defend them, or, for example, when they express a conspiracy theory AS fact, like DT's "world war". Doesn't matter whether I LIKE what they believe in or not, it's about how much sense it makes and the determination on some of their parts to believe it, no matter what.

And no, I didn't expect the kind of backlash which appears to have come exclusively from those here who are more prone to conspiracy theories. I should have, but I didn't think people would immediately see themselves in what I was asking about. I kinda thought we'd all be talking about people like PN and others who cling to things like birtherism, or that Jews run the world or Obama is a Jew or all the other "idiocy" he comes up with.

I didn't think you attacked Story, nor did I say so. As I said before, if I'm going to respond to a number of people's posts, I tend to hit "reply" to the last post in the thread, that's all. If anything with regard to attacking, I was thinking of DT stating flatly my intentions, and that those intentions were malicious. It was a pretty hefty "attack", and there've been other back-and-forths along those lines.
Quote:

Strawman is when you construct someone's position and motives and attribute things to them that they didn't say to prove them wrong.

Circumstantial fallacy is when you take someone's known associates or circumstances and try to dismiss their argument as the product of bias.

I’m not sure which you would consider DT’s remarks, it seems a bit of both to me. He wrote
Quote:

The first time I heard birthers and truther grouped together was some media head a few months ago trying to do what Niki is trying to do here, which is to group investigative journalism together in a nuthouse to make way for the mainstream steamroller message. I find it pretty insulting. You know your mainstream heroes are out there commiting(sic) crimes against humanity, right.
However you categorize it, it’s pretty obviously a diss, a subjective judgment of my intent and a misrepresentation of my words.

Immediately after that I felt your remarks to be somewhat attacking:
Quote:

Is this an internet discussion board, or is this a cross-fire pit for insult-slinging?
On the other hand, Trader agreed with me
Quote:

I'm uneasy with our new conspiracy culture as well
and said the same thing I was trying to say in my initial post:
Quote:

My worry applies to those who believe the conspiracies for reasons other than evidence. If you are merely advocating the possibility something could be not as we know it, or you have real evidence for believing what you do, I respect that
Logically one might assume Sig agreed with me about the issue, because of
Quote:

There are a couple of indications, tho, why America is more prone to this than other developed countries
Anthony seems to have agreed as well:
Quote:

The increasing realization of how many lies are poured from the government teapot is creating a strong cynicism that breeds conspiracy culture where none could foster before.

That having been said, while government lies all the time, not everything it says is a lie. Not everything is a secret plot. And even if it was, it would be premature to declare it as such factually until you have evidence.

As for
Quote:

I never said it was wrong to think a conspiracy belief might be idiocy, I said it was an ad hominem fallacy to call conspiracy theorists idiots without qualification
I NEVER CALLED ANYONE an idiot, that I’m aware of, and I actually don’t think I can find where anyone else did, either. So you’re responding to something that simply isn’t there. That’s the third and last time I’m going to address that one, so I’d respectfully request you’d stop saying anyone called anyone an idiot.

Magons, I agree. X-Files obviously started the whole thing. If it weren't already gone, I think we should hang them in effigy and call for their cancellation...they've just plain RUINED our country...(sigh...)


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 1:40 PM

BYTEMITE


Quote:

That's very strange. The one that really got to me was "you have said outright that you do not have respect for the people your post is directed at." My post was directed at the people HERE


Hmm...

Quote:

I wouldn’t call anyone’s religion idiocy for any reason. I have a lot of negative feelings about organized religion, but that’s something people feel respectful about. There’s no respect inherent in conspiracy theories, they’re almost invariably something that is distinctly DISrespectful of those they are trying to dismiss. That’s just how I feel about it, and I think my feelings are as valid as anyone else’s. Gawd knows I’ve taken enough disrespect for many of the aspects of MY life here, so expressing my frustration with something I think is unhealthy for our society isn’t anything I’ll feel ashamed of.


So saying that you feel some conspiracy theories are disrespectful was not a justification to treat their believers with disrespect. ...I can accept that.

Quote:

(and some I DO agree with), which are not appropriately backed up with reasonable facts, and which they then cling to and defend in SPITE of any and all facts proving it wrong.


I had to think about this one for a bit. I'm assuming that the ones you do agree with are the ones that you don't think facts have proven wrong.


Quote:

However you categorize it, it’s pretty obviously a diss, a subjective judgment of my intent and a misrepresentation of my words.


I THINK that's strawman. It's a harder one to call. Generally I go with the rule of thumb where an argument or motive is made up to discredit someone.

Quote:

Immediately after that I felt your remarks to be somewhat attacking:


I didn't know what you meant by idiocy at that point. So storymark does have a point about being defensive - though that doesn't negate my point to him about circumstantial fallacies or whether it's right to pile on conspiracy theorists as opposed to the theories.

From my point of view, it's been me and DT and a few others, I think I saw CTS in there, defending ourselves, while your post unintentionally made us into Acceptable Targets for attacks.

And I didn't insult you, or Storymark, that I can see. I only objected to how I felt you were treating us. So in my view I don't see that as attacking. Perhaps the intensity of my response made it seem overly harsh? If I came on too strong and was as such uncivil then that's on me.

Quote:

I NEVER CALLED ANYONE an idiot, that I’m aware of, and I actually don’t think I can find where anyone else did, either. So you’re responding to something that simply isn’t there. That’s the third and last time I’m going to address that one, so I’d respectfully request you’d stop saying anyone called anyone an idiot.


...You didn't read my next line after that? I recognized this. And I didn't say you did THAT time, either.

I may not agree with calling anything idiocy, as I believe that even the most out-there and reaching of theories may potentially bring up SOME good points. But I can see how you might want to call something idiocy if it is factually just completely wrong.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 1:49 PM

THEHAPPYTRADER


Quote:

And I didn't insult you, or Storymark, that I can see. I only objected to how I felt you were treating us. So in my view I don't see that as attacking. Perhaps the intensity of my response made it seem overly harsh?


Remember when I defended my religion in much the same manner and people (whom I had not attacked) got angry? I suspect it works the same way. Maybe it is intensity but it doesn't make much sense to me either.

The only thing I can see that Byte has really done 'wrong' is refuse to say silent when she disagreed with something that applied to her.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 3:11 PM

DREAMTROVE


Quote:

Niki:

There you go again, DT:
Quote:


Statistically, 90% of the population believes whatever their parents believed


Proof, please.



I like the opening character assassination that begins each address. That number has been around my whole life, and probably yours. It's a generalization. I had the good fortune to meet John Zogby of Zogby polls a couple years back, and so I asked him about it. He said "well, it's an axiom, but it's pretty accurate statistically." He avowed it might very a little from one population to another, but most of his results fell pretty close to the mark. Curiously, around 90% of Amish return to their faith after being introduced to the modern world.

It's a generalization, sure, but the reality is that people don't just oppose their parents, they actually tend to agree with them.

The lowest that I know of right now is the Satmars, who are losing a large % of their children to defection, however, the defection doesn't go far. Many defectors remain hasidim, or at least actively religious jews, they just abandon the ultra orthodox community.

Point being, they don't become atheists, communists, christians, hindus or muslims. They inherited their beliefs, much like the rest of us.

I believe what my parents believed to some degree, but I am closer to what my grandparents believed. My sisters both believe very close to their mother, and my brother has shifted recently, he still votes the way they do, but he and I diverge on globalism, in a way in which my sisters are in the indifferent middle, me and my brother are on the extremes. But for my parents and grandparents, this was not an issue, and so there was no view to inherit.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 4:45 PM

RIONAEIRE

Beir bua agus beannacht


I do have a lot of beliefs that are similar to those of one or both parents. However I'm passionate about issues that tend to be different than the ones they're interested in. I tend to think right on "moral" issues, and left on "social" issues, but even those vague guidelines aren't fool proof, plus one can argue that "moral" and "social" issues overlap a lot.

Even though my dad has a conspiratorial temperment I don't tend to share that tendency. I believe we really went to the moon, that the Holocost really happened and that Al qaida was really involved with 9/11. But I also believe that China might be poisoning our medicines and food and that the EU is out to screw everyone in Europe into becoming Euroland, all one nation, yucky. So I guess I do believe some out-of-norm things.

Mooooooo

"A completely coherant River means writers don't deliver" KatTaya

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Wednesday, May 4, 2011 5:10 PM

DREAMTROVE


Quote:

Riona

the EU is out to screw everyone in Europe into becoming Euroland, all one nation



Euronation


That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 5, 2011 1:27 AM

SIGNYM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.


DT: The three competing theories about 9-11 are:

It was an outside job and our intelligence, air traffic control and Air Force are abysmally incompetent.

It was an outside job that the upper echelon enabled, by deliberately doing nothing. (LIHOP- let it happen on purpose)

It was an inside job with outside "terrorists" being used as cover (MIHOP- make it happen on purpose)

I'm tending to the LIHOP theory myself.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 5, 2011 4:06 AM

BYTEMITE


Yeah, I like LIHOP too. Mostly because I do think the airplanes would've been enough to damage the support structure to result in pancaking, without needing planted explosives. And because I can believe that Saudi Arabian Al Qaeda operatives did it. The last time explosives were attempted on the World Trade Centers (which probably WAS a false flag attack, the releasing the perpetrators after capture is pretty suspicious) it caused plenty of damage but failed to knock them down.

Building Seven might've been a controlled demolition though, and I do think that might've been to cover SOMETHING up.

Whether the government was directly involved really depends on how close they still are with the ISI and Al Qaeda, because during the Afghanistan-Russian war, we were actually funding them.

But I'm willing to use LIHOP as a basic starting point, because it's flexible enough to give a whole picture of global motivations that caused 9-11 and ramifications that resulted.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 5, 2011 6:32 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Bear in mind that, as I'm responding to several people's posts, I just "replied" to the last post, which was Byte's, only the first person I'm responding to.
Quote:

So saying that you feel some conspiracy theories are disrespectful was not a justification to treat their believers with disrespect
I’m not aware that I treated “their believers” with disrespect. I expressed lack of respect for people who have reasons other than truth seeking who come up with conspiracy theories, and for those who refuse to acknowledge in the face of facts that their theories could be wrong, and some for those who don’t seem to give theories as much skepticism as the other side of the issues, but when it comes down to it, I think almost all conspiracy theories, be they valid or not, are disrespectful in that they seek another explanation than that which is offered. That doesn’t mean I think they’re WRONG, or that they should BE respectful of the original explanation of something; I’m not respectful of what I’ve been told about some things, but it is nonetheless inherently disrespectful to reject what one is told and seek another explanation. Again, that’s not necessarily WRONG, and in some cases it’s certainly the right thing to do, but that doesn’t make it respectful, do you see what I’m saying?
Quote:

I'm assuming that the ones you do agree with are the ones that you don't think facts have proven wrong.
Sigh...whether I agree or disagree with a theory doesn’t have anything to do with it. Some theories I don’t agree with, or don’t like, could well be true; I don’t invest the time in trying to figure out for myself. Again, please see my explanation of those theorists who I don’t respect...and I would add to that people on the internet who spew virulent ugliness at those they believe are involved in a conspiracy; I’ve been told that how one phrases things determines whether people take them seriously, may be convinced, etc. Same thing is true of conspiracy theories; if I read an article which is obviously biased against someone or something and is written with such an ugly bias, I’m more likely not to pay any attention and to disrespect the author.

If you feel my post made you the target of attacks, no, it wasn’t intended that way. I was addressing the obvious “nutcases”, like Orly Tatz for example, not anyone here. I hear so much of this crap, and it’s almost invariably aimed at one party or person and to me shows that it’s been glomed onto because it’s negative about that party/person, not because there is any logic to it or facts to support it.

Yes, for me it was the intensity of your verbiage, plus that you were claiming I was calling people idiots, which I wasn’t and which I felt was an unfair characterization.

The problem, Trader, is that there was no intention for what I posted to apply to Byte. She apparently took it that way, but that was not the intent. By now I hope we’ve cleared that up.

DT, again we come up against my finding things you say not believable most likely because of how you frame them. You say “statistically 90%”---but according to you, Zogby actually said “pretty accurate statistically”. Beyond that, I just simply disagree and was hoping for something I could read which would let me make up my own mind. I don’t think the percentage is that high; many of us rebelled against and rejected what our parents believed, I think a lot more than 10%. As to “character assassination”, that’ your opinion; it was intended as a sigh of frustration, because as I said, you state things as flat fact when they are in actuality your conclusion or your opinion. I’m not the only person who has found that a difficulty; it’s just jarring to me, especially from someone who keeps saying he’s here to “learn”. I can’t remember you saying very often that you’ve learned something from an opposing viewpoint, it’s more like you believe only you know the truth, and are “teaching” US.

Riona, I’m with you on the EU, but I don’t believe China is trying to poison us. I tend to believe Al Qaeda was responsible for 9/11, at least until I see some viable proof otherwise, and the Holocaust and moon landing are, to me, unquestionable.

Sig, I lean more toward LIHOP when it comes to 9/11, tho’ I don’t like to believe that, but until I see some facts verifying it, I’ll go with incompetence.


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 5, 2011 7:15 AM

BYTEMITE


Niki, those two lines you quoted are actually me not being argumentative anymore. You don't have to defend yourself. Tone over the internet is not getting through, leading to misunderstanding of my intention and what I was saying.

First line was stating that after rereading I see that you were not promoting disrespect. Second line was ONLY me trying to understand what you just said. Paraphrasing.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 5, 2011 7:41 AM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...


Apologies on that first one; I misread. I thought it said "So saying that you feel some conspiracy theories are disrespectful WAS a justification to treat their believers with disrespect." Now I'm getting defensive and reading through a veil of expectations.

As to the second one, it's becoming a sore point to me, the claim that I only accept theories I "agree with". That's been said several times by more than just you, and I dislike the implication that it's only conspiracy theories I disagree with that I find fault with, as that's not the case. So again, defensiveness, but defensiveness born out of repeated negative accusations/suppositions, if you will. In that respect I feel I have a right to be "miffed" (not pissed off or offended, just miffed and hoping I've clarified that one and put it to rest).


Hippie Operative Nikovich Nikita Nicovna Talibani,
Contracted Agent of Veritas Oilspillus, code name “Nike”,
signing off



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 5, 2011 8:01 AM

BYTEMITE


Understandable. Well, this seems sorted. Thanks for elaborating on everything.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 5, 2011 9:01 AM

FREMDFIRMA


Quote:

Originally posted by Bytemite:
The last time explosives were attempted on the World Trade Centers (which probably WAS a false flag attack, the releasing the perpetrators after capture is pretty suspicious) it caused plenty of damage but failed to knock them down.


The last time explosives were attempted on the World Trade Centers, the FBI *gave* the badguys the friggin bomb, and an expert to wire it up for them.

WHY nobody factors in that particular piece of data always bothers me, it's this big white elephant in the room everyone tries so hard to ignore, pretend isn't there, and refuses to talk about, because it cannot be dismissed as "theory" and has been proven beyond all doubt - whatever the motivations are, the fact that they did this, and then tried to hang Emad Salem out to dry is not in question.

And when you consider all the plots since have had at the core, an FBI plant feeding them money, equipment and ideas that these losers are incapable or unwilling to use in a fashion any kind of dangerous to us...

Given how often they've done it, over and over and over and over, and every time we pretend it's an isolated event, and no one wants to talk about it - I do not whatever think it beyond the pale that just as in 1993, our own so-called protectors by virtue of intent or incompetence, aided and abetted the destruction, and then frantically covered their asses when it blew up in their face, and nobody really in their heart WANTS to know, to believe, that such a thing was even possible.

And so people deliberately fail to ask the questions because they fear what the answers might be, because their own concept of the way things are, the way the world is, may well be endangered by the answers they recieve.

Thus, because of that, they vilify or dismiss those that do ask the questions - you can see this same occurance in most religions, the ones asking inconvenient questions are quickly ostracised, dismissed, and run out of town on a rail, because when people have chosen to believe something, and you go fracturing that belief, you're messing with the reality they have chosen for themselves, and they don't like it very much.

You also have to remember why this is important to me - because at one time abuse within the Catholic Church was "conspiracy theory" and the Hellcamps were just "an urban myth", and even when exposed with evidence - more often than not those who brought that evidence to light were pariahs, hated and despised....

HOWEVER - look at it now, those doing the denying are now the ones looked at like they're mad, yes ?

This is why I find the immediate knee-jerk reaction of "no such thing" or "conspiracy theory" to be a bit offensive, skepticism is all well and good, but total knee-jerk denial of even possibilities indicates a motivation to preserve ones own reality at the expense of the facts if necessary.

I dunno how well that'll get across, but at least I tried to explain it, meh.

-Frem

I do not serve the Blind God.

NOTIFY: N   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 5, 2011 3:42 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER


I'm sorry that this thread descended into a 'Did Niki insult Byte' obsession or a rehash of 'justification why I believe my particular theory', because the orginal article quoted has some interesting points that are worth further discussion.

The article talks about why conspiracy theories have reached such a level, where it will be expected that a huge chunk of the population will not believe any official story about anything. Of course when the Osama story broke, there was going to be a rush of claims that he wasn't dead, that he had already been killed, that dispute how he died and so on. I love the fact that the Whitehouse, fully aware of these 'rumours' has changed their official story about four times since the first announcement. Fully stupid.

These are the reasons I can see why conspiracy theories are so popular -

1. American citizens appear to be inherently distrustful of government, therefore it creates a paradox for most citizens that their government is so immensley powerful, the most powerful entity in the world (hand in hand with a number of immensley powerful corporations). It creates a duel sense of powerful patriotism (USA! USA!) with equally powerful fear.

2. The consumer world is awash with lies. We are inundated with them on a daily basis, where everyone claims their product is the best, and will bring us happiness, wealth, love, sex, power etc. None of which are true because no product can bring any of these things. And we know it in our hearts but we still allow ourselves to be seduced. We are used to being lied to, and as long as it looks pretty and has status, we still will buy it. Then we will be disappointed. That kind of mentality goes all the way from products we buy to who we vote for.

3. Our culture is awash with stories imaginery or supernatural entities, for which ther is no proof required for their existence, including angels and ghosts, father christmases and easter bunnies, and of course gods that are worshipped. All these defy scientific reasoning, but are still believed in by large chunks of the population and few people see anything strange in this. We are programmed to believe things when there is no evidence, or even where there is counter evidence.

4. Modern technology means that most everything can be recorded, filmed, photographed etc, even remote places can be spied on by satelitte technology. There is no privacy anymore. This technology also allows for everything to be doctored, edited, faked, touched up. we literally cannot believe our eyes, so how can we ever ascertain the truth/

We live in a time when reality is no longer consistent or static, but malleable and changeable, so it is no wonder that one of the dominant discourses of the modern world is 'whose reality is right'.

Strange days.



NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

Thursday, May 5, 2011 3:55 PM

DREAMTROVE


Frem,

Apply that idea to motive. Clinton had a planned expansion of powers act which didnt pass, and later got pieced out and he wkn some points like the domestic wiretapping. His administration is extremely similar in this regard (and many others) to bush in that he came in with an unpassable agenda. His wife even headed up Bush's patriot act committee.

What else did they have in come (a ton of stuff, sure, but... ) shortly after being sworn in, terrorists suspected by a large segment of the american population to be working with the govt, tried to blow up the world trade center.

To quote Oz: ,how about Like exact same guy, like exact same guy."

I remember my brother saying to me in the 90s "when youre in china and say Tiananimen Square they don't automatically think of the protest, its a very important place. Its sort of like when you say "World Trade Center" in the US, we think of the buildings, not the bombing."


That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y   |  REPLY  |  REPLY WITH QUOTE  |  TOP  |  HOME  

YOUR OPTIONS

NEW POSTS TODAY

USERPOST DATE

OTHER TOPICS

DISCUSSIONS
Kamala Harris for President
Wed, November 6, 2024 22:13 - 644 posts
That didn't take long...
Wed, November 6, 2024 22:08 - 36 posts
Electoral College, ReSteal 2024 Edition
Wed, November 6, 2024 21:59 - 43 posts
Trump wins 2024. Republicans control Senate.
Wed, November 6, 2024 21:54 - 11 posts
Elections; 2024
Wed, November 6, 2024 21:46 - 4613 posts
Will Your State Regain It's Representation Next Decade?
Wed, November 6, 2024 20:54 - 111 posts
Get Woke, Go Broke
Wed, November 6, 2024 20:36 - 66 posts
Suspect arrested after attack on Paul Pelosi, American businessman, married to Nancy Pelosi Speaker of the United States House of Representatives
Wed, November 6, 2024 20:22 - 62 posts
Where are the Libertarians?
Wed, November 6, 2024 20:16 - 91 posts
Multiculturalism
Wed, November 6, 2024 20:07 - 54 posts
For the record.
Wed, November 6, 2024 20:00 - 224 posts
India
Wed, November 6, 2024 19:52 - 140 posts

FFF.NET SOCIAL