Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
LastLast
  1. #21
    I am Murloc! Skroe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,076
    Quote Originally Posted by Zergal View Post
    At this point its not even really worth discussing that kind of events. No matter what there will be a horde of apologists that will do anything to defend the government and when all else fail, will simply pull the "crazy conspiracy theorists" card.

    Its called conditioning.

    Yeah, the guy randomly crashed his car at 100mph at 4am after while working on a possibly career-defining story. Completly logical.
    It's not conditioning. It's logic. It's simple, rationale logic.

    Without going into it (and I refuse to be drawn into a debate about it because it isn't a debate, but it is a defining example). Consider 9/11 conspiricy theories. There are people, lots of people, who up and down believe it was a false flag, inside job, something-er-rather with an endpoint that would financially and political benefit certain rich people. Of course, such a conspiracy would involve hundreds of people to pull off. It would require compartimentalization of information beyond any other operation in modern history. So how is it then, with the operation requiring so many people, there isn't one "black ops" fellow involved who didn't look into their young daughters eyes and see the monster he had become? Why was there not one whistleblower. How come there are NSA whistleblowers of this but not leaks over that... not one guilty consciounce in 10 years?

    And then these same people ascribe incompetence to the Bush Administration and FEMA over Katrina. So here you have one administration simultaneously extremely competent and devious to not let the 9/11 conspiracy leak after 12 years, yet also is so bad at its job, it can't organize the relief efforts in a major American city and stay on message... with FEMA of all things.

    Conspiracy theories, like the blossomong Michael Hastings ones, always fail, not because of "conditioning" or "apologists", but because of Basic Logic. They fail because the brains they originate in want simple or sensiscal solutions to complex problem, and more often than not want their world view confirmed. Michael Hastings, you see, under this world view WAS killed by the government. There is no way you can't believe it because not believing it would challenge this world view. And if the world view is challenged, it challenges how you live your life. Human beings don't do that. Rarely are they introspective enough.

    Michael Hastings died in a car crash traveling at 100 miles per hour. If the government wanted to kill him, there are tons of better ways. They could have poisoned his dinner, forged his medical records saying he was allergic to walnuts, and said he died due to an accute allergic reaction. They could have done it quietly in the woods on a fishing trip. You know... rocks do fall on people. Or it could have been completely random... LA is a big city and muggings do happen.

    But no, they chose a car accident, something that insurance companies, due to their liabilities in such events, are extremely careful to forensically analyze. They choose something that will have dozens of eyes on it who cant possibly be all on the payroll of Big Brother.

    And this is your conspiracy? Don't make me laugh.

    ---------- Post added 2013-06-24 at 09:00 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Venant View Post
    Thats funny because the administration has admitted to assassinating at least 4 American Citizens quite openly, one of them was a 17 year old who's crime was apparently that he 'chose' a bad father. They just keep slowly pushing the envelope with what they are doing, the population becomes complacent and sits back accepting it.

    It just seems like the vast majority of people do not realize that the government serves the will of those who have power and influence; and that patriotism, xenophobia and jingoism are simply tools to mislead and indoctrinate the population.
    Droning terrorists, American or not, in foreign countries is something quite different and you know it. And even that is controversial. Your point is flagrantly dishonest.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroesec View Post
    Droning terrorists, American or not, in foreign countries is something quite different and you know it. And even that is controversial. Your point is flagrantly dishonest.
    Droning american citizens would have been considered completely ridiculous 15 years ago, and people like you would have said 'that is completely ridiculous the US government would never do that!' At this rate, would you dare to predict what we will be willing to accept 15 years from now? I find it ridiculous to think that you should be more concerned with the bearded boogeyman living in a cave on the other side of the world than you are about a shadow government that is expanding its powers unchecked.
    Most people would rather die than think, and most people do. -Bertrand Russell
    There is not a flag large enough to cover the shame of killing innocent people. -Howard Zinn
    The stars may be far away, but people still reach for them. -My Grandfather
    Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away. -Philip K. Dick

  3. #23
    I am Murloc! Skroe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,076
    Quote Originally Posted by Venant View Post
    Droning american citizens would have been considered completely ridiculous 15 years ago, and people like you would have said 'that is completely ridiculous the US government would never do that!' At this rate, would you dare to predict what we will be willing to accept 15 years from now? I find it ridiculous to think that you should be more concerned with the bearded boogeyman living in a cave on the other side of the world than you are about a shadow government that is expanding its powers unchecked.
    No, I disagree. 15 years ago it would have been little different from today. Those days had their own controversies would could equally be called "completely ridiculous" today. It was after all, over 20 years ago we invaded Panama and Grenada. Do you see us invading Ecuador anytime soon? Those were about as controversial then as drone strikes are today.

    15 years from now it is likely to be something entirely new.

    I am not concerned about "a shadow government that is expandings its powers unchecked". You cannot demonstrate reasonably that such a thing exists, never mind is dangerous.

    And unlike "a shadow government", bearded boogeymen in caves actually exist.

    But for the record I'm more concerned with the Chinese Politburo than I am any terrorists. Islamic Terrorism is so first decade of the 21st century.

  4. #24
    Stood in the Fire lostprophet12's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Manchester
    Posts
    412
    Quote Originally Posted by Zergal View Post
    Yeah, the guy randomly crashed his car at 100mph at 4am after while working on a possibly career-defining story. Completly logical.
    I haven't heard of this reporter, or this car crash until I opened this thread but I have to ask what is illogical about it? People crash cars all the time.

  5. #25
    Epic! Slenderman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Guireag, Alba
    Posts
    1,604
    FBI remote controlled his car IMO

  6. #26
    Elemental Lord Dezerte's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    8,055
    Quote Originally Posted by Zergal View Post
    At this point its not even really worth discussing that kind of events. No matter what there will be a horde of apologists that will do anything to defend the government and when all else fail, will simply pull the "crazy conspiracy theorists" card.

    Its called conditioning.

    Yeah, the guy randomly crashed his car at 100mph at 4am after while working on a possibly career-defining story. Completly logical.
    What, car crashes usually don't happen that way? Is that what you're saying?

    4am, poor visibility. Possibly tired/worn out due to lack of sleep. Possibly stressed. Add driving at high speeds to this list, and it makes for a very logically sound deduction that it was just an accident.
    Last edited by Dezerte; 2013-06-24 at 12:43 PM.
    To declare that a personal, inner experience gives certainty about the workings of the universe is to assign far too much value to one’s subjective sense of conviction.
    I’m not that arrogant.

    The brain, marvelous instrument though it is, isn’t infallible. It can misfire, seize or hallucinate, and it can do so in a way that’s utterly indistinguishable from reality to the person experiencing it.

  7. #27
    Dreadlord MeHMeH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    right over mjah!
    Posts
    880
    The weird thing is that i have NEVER seen or heard of a brand new Mercedes bursting into flames from an accident such as this.
    Last edited by MeHMeH; 2013-06-24 at 12:51 PM.
    Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
    Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
    Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
    Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
    (Epicurus 341 - 270 BC)

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by MeHMeH View Post
    The weird thing is that i have NEVER seen or heard of a brand new Mercedes bursting into flames from an accident such as this.
    Well there's your proof,folks. Since it's imposible for a benz to catch on fire in a crash then it must be a government plot.

    Oh, wait, google has heard of Mercedes catching on fire.

    ---------- Post added 2013-06-24 at 01:30 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Skroesec View Post
    It's not conditioning. It's logic. It's simple, rationale logic.

    Without going into it (and I refuse to be drawn into a debate about it because it isn't a debate, but it is a defining example). Consider 9/11 conspiricy theories. There are people, lots of people, who up and down believe it was a false flag, inside job, something-er-rather with an endpoint that would financially and political benefit certain rich people. Of course, such a conspiracy would involve hundreds of people to pull off. It would require compartimentalization of information beyond any other operation in modern history. So how is it then, with the operation requiring so many people, there isn't one "black ops" fellow involved who didn't look into their young daughters eyes and see the monster he had become? Why was there not one whistleblower. How come there are NSA whistleblowers of this but not leaks over that... not one guilty consciounce in 10 years?

    And then these same people ascribe incompetence to the Bush Administration and FEMA over Katrina. So here you have one administration simultaneously extremely competent and devious to not let the 9/11 conspiracy leak after 12 years, yet also is so bad at its job, it can't organize the relief efforts in a major American city and stay on message... with FEMA of all things.

    Conspiracy theories, like the blossomong Michael Hastings ones, always fail, not because of "conditioning" or "apologists", but because of Basic Logic. They fail because the brains they originate in want simple or sensiscal solutions to complex problem, and more often than not want their world view confirmed. Michael Hastings, you see, under this world view WAS killed by the government. There is no way you can't believe it because not believing it would challenge this world view. And if the world view is challenged, it challenges how you live your life. Human beings don't do that. Rarely are they introspective enough.

    Michael Hastings died in a car crash traveling at 100 miles per hour. If the government wanted to kill him, there are tons of better ways. They could have poisoned his dinner, forged his medical records saying he was allergic to walnuts, and said he died due to an accute allergic reaction. They could have done it quietly in the woods on a fishing trip. You know... rocks do fall on people. Or it could have been completely random... LA is a big city and muggings do happen.

    But no, they chose a car accident, something that insurance companies, due to their liabilities in such events, are extremely careful to forensically analyze. They choose something that will have dozens of eyes on it who cant possibly be all on the payroll of Big Brother.

    And this is your conspiracy? Don't make me laugh.

    ---------- Post added 2013-06-24 at 09:00 AM ----------



    Droning terrorists, American or not, in foreign countries is something quite different and you know it. And even that is controversial. Your point is flagrantly dishonest.
    There is so much beauty and truth in this post it brought a tear to my eye. /slowclap.
    Get a grip man! It's CHEESE!

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by lostprophet12 View Post
    I haven't heard of this reporter, or this car crash until I opened this thread but I have to ask what is illogical about it? People crash cars all the time.
    what is illogical is how come an idiot who travels over 100 mph in the wrong place and crashes is given too much attention.

  10. #30
    Dreadlord MeHMeH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    right over mjah!
    Posts
    880
    Quote Originally Posted by poser765 View Post
    Well there's your proof,folks. Since it's imposible for a benz to catch on fire in a crash then it must be a government plot.

    Oh, wait, google has heard of Mercedes catching on fire.

    ---------- Post added 2013-06-24 at 01:30 PM ----------

    There is so much beauty and truth in this post it brought a tear to my eye. /slowclap.
    Sigh, yay, way to go, get stuff out of context, all i said:" i've never heard of such a thing happen", never said anything about some weird plot. But do you really think that cars just explode whenever they hit a tree?? They would not be able to sell such a thing....
    You know cars only explode on impact in Hollywood movies right?!!
    Last edited by MeHMeH; 2013-06-24 at 02:08 PM.
    Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able? Then he is not omnipotent.
    Is he able, but not willing? Then he is malevolent.
    Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
    Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?
    (Epicurus 341 - 270 BC)

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by MeHMeH View Post
    Sigh, yay, way to go, get stuff out of context, all i said:" i've never heard of such a thing happen", never said anything about some weird plot. But do you really think that cars just explode whenever they hit a tree?? They would not be able to sell such a thing....
    You know cars only explode on impact in Hollywood movies right?!!
    lol ok maybe I was a bit more confrontational then i needed to be. Sorry. With that said though, no cars do not just explode when they crash into a tree, but what they will do is catch on fire. Often. Car fires as a result of a major accident is not a far fetched notion.
    Get a grip man! It's CHEESE!

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroesec View Post
    Islamic Terrorism is so first decade of the 21st century.
    You have proved yourself to be a gentleman and a scholar. Sig'd.
    Quote Originally Posted by supertony51 View Post
    I'm probably the nicest person on this whole damned forum, and you can make a sig from that.
    Quote Originally Posted by TZK203 View Post
    Just have a sig that says "I'm Batman."

  13. #33
    It's sickly humorous how the Obama supporters won't believe any possibility of government doing anything wrong under emperor great barry the great.
    The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities.

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by lockedout View Post
    The problem is the tree didn't cause the fire here is a video of right after it happened and some spanish guy sis interviewed and he says the car was already on fire before it crashed.
    How do we know it was on fire before crash?

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Aristeus View Post
    How do we know it was on fire before crash?
    He (lockedout) said that spanish guy that is interviewed says it was on fire before it crashed. If you watch the video, I think he may have said something like that, but his english is so bad it's hard to tell.

    It is amusing in it's own way to watch the video, as the guy stands there with a garden hose trying to put out the fire. I'm not sure who the cameraman is though. He responds after the police, but before the firetrucks.

    ---------- Post added 2013-06-24 at 11:13 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Skroesec View Post
    But for the record I'm more concerned with the Chinese Politburo than I am any terrorists. Islamic Terrorism is so first decade of the 21st century.
    Between this and the israeli thread, you're going to wear out your keyboard.

  16. #36
    I am Murloc! Skroe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    5,076
    Quote Originally Posted by Decklan View Post
    You have proved yourself to be a gentleman and a scholar. Sig'd.
    It's what I do.

    ---------- Post added 2013-06-24 at 03:34 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by oblivionx View Post
    It's sickly humorous how the Obama supporters won't believe any possibility of government doing anything wrong under emperor great barry the great.
    I said the exact same things about Bush and Clinton, buddy.

    Really. I'm asking a completely serious question here. Can you give me the name of a convicted hit man hired by this President or any President in the last century, to kill a political enemy, a reporter or "someone who knows too much"?

    I just want one name oblivionx. Surely you can give me that one name that legitimizes your entire world view.

    Show me the court case with the testimony, where the President of the United States was named as the guy who told someone to do it.
    Last edited by Skroe; 2013-06-24 at 03:35 PM.

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroesec View Post
    It's not conditioning. It's logic. It's simple, rationale logic.

    Without going into it (and I refuse to be drawn into a debate about it because it isn't a debate, but it is a defining example). Consider 9/11 conspiricy theories. There are people, lots of people, who up and down believe it was a false flag, inside job, something-er-rather with an endpoint that would financially and political benefit certain rich people. Of course, such a conspiracy would involve hundreds of people to pull off. It would require compartimentalization of information beyond any other operation in modern history. So how is it then, with the operation requiring so many people, there isn't one "black ops" fellow involved who didn't look into their young daughters eyes and see the monster he had become? Why was there not one whistleblower. How come there are NSA whistleblowers of this but not leaks over that... not one guilty consciounce in 10 years?

    And then these same people ascribe incompetence to the Bush Administration and FEMA over Katrina. So here you have one administration simultaneously extremely competent and devious to not let the 9/11 conspiracy leak after 12 years, yet also is so bad at its job, it can't organize the relief efforts in a major American city and stay on message... with FEMA of all things.

    Conspiracy theories, like the blossomong Michael Hastings ones, always fail, not because of "conditioning" or "apologists", but because of Basic Logic. They fail because the brains they originate in want simple or sensiscal solutions to complex problem, and more often than not want their world view confirmed. Michael Hastings, you see, under this world view WAS killed by the government. There is no way you can't believe it because not believing it would challenge this world view. And if the world view is challenged, it challenges how you live your life. Human beings don't do that. Rarely are they introspective enough.

    Michael Hastings died in a car crash traveling at 100 miles per hour. If the government wanted to kill him, there are tons of better ways. They could have poisoned his dinner, forged his medical records saying he was allergic to walnuts, and said he died due to an accute allergic reaction. They could have done it quietly in the woods on a fishing trip. You know... rocks do fall on people. Or it could have been completely random... LA is a big city and muggings do happen.

    But no, they chose a car accident, something that insurance companies, due to their liabilities in such events, are extremely careful to forensically analyze. They choose something that will have dozens of eyes on it who cant possibly be all on the payroll of Big Brother.

    And this is your conspiracy? Don't make me laugh.

    ---------- Post added 2013-06-24 at 09:00 AM ----------



    Droning terrorists, American or not, in foreign countries is something quite different and you know it. And even that is controversial. Your point is flagrantly dishonest.
    Our government would never kill it's own people.

    Operation Northwoods was a series of false flag proposals that originated within the United States government in 1962, but were rejected by the Kennedy administration.[2] The proposals called for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or other operatives, to commit perceived acts of terrorism in U.S. cities and elsewhere. These acts of terrorism were to be blamed on Cuba in order to create public support for a war against that nation, which had recently become communist under Fidel Castro.[3] One part of Operation Northwoods was to "develop a Communist Cuban terror campaign in the Miami area, in other Florida cities and even in Washington".
    Operation Northwoods proposals included hijackings and bombings followed by the introduction of phony evidence that would implicate the Cuban government. It stated:
    The desired resultant from the execution of this plan would be to place the United States in the apparent position of suffering defensible grievances from a rash and irresponsible government of Cuba and to develop an international image of a Cuban threat to peace in the Western Hemisphere.
    Several other proposals were included within Operation Northwoods, including real or simulated actions against various U.S. military and civilian targets. The plan was drafted by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, signed by Chairman Lyman Lemnitzer and sent to the Secretary of Defense. Although part of the U.S. government's Cuban Project anti-communist initiative, Operation Northwoods was never officially accepted; it was authorized by the Joint Chiefs of Staff, but then rejected by President John F. Kennedy.

    Now just replace Cuba with whatever FotM country we want to go to war with.
    This is their handbook and how they do business.
    Kennedy disagreed with this shit and well RIP best president ever.
    http://i5.minus.com/iT9gBOC94PbmU.jpg
    NON SINE DIIS ANIMOSUS INFANS
    Quote Originally Posted by PRE 9-11 View Post
    Accessibility, ownership, availability; these are all essentially the same thing.

  18. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Skroesec View Post
    It's what I do.

    ---------- Post added 2013-06-24 at 03:34 PM ----------



    I said the exact same things about Bush and Clinton, buddy.

    Really. I'm asking a completely serious question here. Can you give me the name of a convicted hit man hired by this President or any President in the last century, to kill a political enemy, a reporter or "someone who knows too much"?

    I just want one name oblivionx. Surely you can give me that one name that legitimizes your entire world view.

    Show me the court case with the testimony, where the President of the United States was named as the guy who told someone to do it.

    Heh and meanwhile in realityland we all know you would be ranting and raving if it Bush.
    The most successful tyranny is not the one that uses force to assure uniformity but the one that removes the awareness of other possibilities.

  19. #39
    Dreadlord Srg56's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Undisclosed location in southeast Asia
    Posts
    846
    Quote Originally Posted by lockedout View Post
    http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/l...,2806628.story

    Anyone heard about this?
    Apparently he thought he was under investigation by the FBI.
    Yeah, it's pretty obvious what happened. Droned. This guy was extremely vocal lately and apparently upset someone. Car engines don't travel that far, unless there's a powerful explosion involved. Give this cast a listen, they cover this: http://www.noagendashow.com/

  20. #40
    Elemental Lord Noomz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    In my head, where crazy happens.
    Posts
    8,750
    Quote Originally Posted by Waaldo View Post
    He was going well over 100mph and hit a tree, no conspiracy bull shit here.
    You'd think that driving so fast that the engine flew 100 feet would make said driver take a flight as well.

    Why was he out driving at 4AM? Why was he driving so fast on such a small road? If he didn't fly out the window when the engine did, he might've wore the best seatbelt in the states, and if that's the case I doubt he was driving drunk. Drunk people usually don't care for seatbelts.

    Nah, this doesn't add up. On the other hand, why'd they kill this guy over killing, say, Snowden or any other major whistlers?

    ---------- Post added 2013-06-24 at 07:32 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Srg56 View Post
    Yeah, it's pretty obvious what happened. Droned. This guy was extremely vocal lately and apparently upset someone. Car engines don't travel that far, unless there's a powerful explosion involved. Give this cast a listen, they cover this: http://www.noagendashow.com/
    If it was a drone, there would be more parts of the car spread across the street. This would imply a very small projectile, which seems unlikely.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •