Jump to content

conspiracy theories

Easties EL

By Easties EL
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

Easties EL

Easties EL

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Oh Mr. Kipling I will double check the sell by date on my cakes next time :-S


I agree with you Mr.Huguenot, 100% I do have some problems, many problems. It's a shame I am like this. But I respect your thoughts, cause there's a bit of what you have said in this thread, that does make sense.

SeanMacGabhann

SeanMacGabhann

Posted
Posted

Hal - the thread was bumbling along with Easties and his 20-something conspiracy videos and people like Huguenot rebutting him - do you really need me to type which side of the fence i'm on with this one?



The reason I responded to your post wasn't a cheap dig at you it was just shock - you are an erudite guy, with a few more years of experience behind you than a 20-something but instead of talking about specifics you came onto the thread with a breathtaking piece of catch-all generalisation and paranoia it brooked no argument - let's have a look at it again


"Since prehistoric times the masses have been controlled and manipulated by the conspiracies of the ruling elite. "


Care to back that up? Course not. But in any case, by your logic either I am being controlled and manipulated OR I'm one of the ruling elite


But allow me to argue back and say the problem with "the masses" is they couldn't give a monkeys. Give them/us alcohol, sex and flashing light and we're largely happy. We live in interesting times where the sum of human knowledge is not just written in books which are taught in academies available only to those with the means to access this information - but to everyone. And people are as disinterested now as they ever were. They/we aren't being controlled, they/we are just essentially not interested enough. The price we pay for that is reduced influence on events.


"In Europe, the poor were kept in their place with myths about blue blood, divine appointment and the terrors of hell - conspiracies that served the interests of the ruling elite. "


Plenty of people rich and poor still believe a lot of that nonsense - and I spend a lot of time arguing with them in religious threads. I don't think they are being kept in place by anyone tho



"Conspiracies by vested interests are everywhere."


such vagueness is by it's nature almost impossible to argue with. hence my exasperation

HAL9000

HAL9000

Posted
Posted

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

HAL9000 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>> "Conspiracies by vested interests are everywhere."


> such vagueness is by it's nature almost impossible

> to argue with. hence my exasperation


I can illustrate the point with a recent conspiracy that has already evolved an associated conspiracy theory:


The conspiracy: the assassination of Hamas guerrilla Mahmoud al-Mabhouh in Dubai by a team using false passports.


The conspiracy theory: that an Israeli assassination squad under the sanction of the Government of Israel carried out the murder.


And here's another recent conspiracy: The Greek Government's derivative dealings with Goldman Sachs in order to mislead EU observers about the gravity of its financial problems.


Goldman Sachs is a long-standing focus of conspiracy theories ? this conspiracy turns out to have been true.


> But allow me to argue back and say the problem with "the masses" is they couldn't give a monkeys.


True, in general ? but some people do care: in some cases their efforts to make sense of events leads to bizarre conspiracy theories but occasionally they stumble across the truth and a scandal is revealed.


The bottom line is that vested interests are constantly entering into agreements to gain advantage over those not party to the agreement (a broad definition of conspiracy, BTW) - it is part of the human nature.


Those with power, money and influence (such as governments and international corporations for example) are able to enter into secret agreements that affect the lives of millions. One man's paranoia is another man's vigilance.


My attitude towards conspiracy theories changed decisively when it was revealed that South Africa's BOSS had tried to engineer a virus that was only pathogenic to blacks.


I think it's a healthy sign of democracy and freedom of speech that ordinary people can enquire, gather evidence and speculate about unusual events - the alternative is oppression, censorship and dictatorship.

SeanMacGabhann

SeanMacGabhann

Posted
Posted

Hal


Pick a sentence - any sentence - from your post above . That'll be reason enough


All human beings, not just moneyed, powerful people, have vested interests. Wanting to keep sensitive info from the public - be that the general public or your neighbours - is no proof of conspiracy theories on the scale of the 9th November 2001 being an inside job

HAL9000

HAL9000

Posted
Posted

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> is no proof of

> conspiracy theories on the scale of the 9th

> November 2001 being an inside job


I'm not arguing that 9/11 (9th September, actually) was an inside job. You are jumping to conclusions in that respect.

????

????

Posted
Posted

HAL9000 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ???? Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > conspiracy? It's what most of the world

> including

> > HMs governnemt thinks!

>

> That may be what everyone thinks - but until it is

> proven it remains a theory - a conspiracy theory.


Well, that's a fairly abitary and wide definition. I would argue that most people would accept that a CT is one where groups of people disagree with the consensus or 'establishment' view about something and one where they think the 'establishment' is hiding the truth for various reasons (eg 9/11, Diana's Death. MMR etc) your definition seems to be anything not proven in a court of law...

Santerme

Santerme

Posted
Posted

Easties EL Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> The UDT was merged with the US Navy SEALs in 1983,

> 8 years after Ventura was no longer in the Navy

>

> Yes you are right. How come building 7 theory is

> dumb?



Quite simply that the substantial amounts of explosives that would be required to carryo out such an operation would have caused some remark, together with the opening of wall spaces and cutting of beams to weaken the structural integrity of the building.


It really is nonsense.

Ladymuck

Ladymuck

Posted
Posted

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I give up

>

> I may well join Piers and retire



HAL9000 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>What now?



*approaches nervously*


Please guys - someone will get hurt:

HAL9000

HAL9000

Posted
Posted

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> >

> Oh dear god - do you actually think I have spent

> the last 8 + years thinking this happened in

> November and not September? I get that little

> credit??


11th September - just to be pedantic about it.

HAL9000

HAL9000

Posted
Posted

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Well, that's a fairly abitary and wide definition.


It does help to define things properly before arguing about them.


> I would argue that most people would accept that a

> CT is one where groups of people disagree with the

> consensus or 'establishment' view about something

> and one where they think the 'establishment' is

> hiding the truth


By your argument, it is the Israeli government that is hiding the truth. Are they somehow exempt from being the focus of a conspiracy theory? I don't think so.

HAL9000

HAL9000

Posted
Posted

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> CT ... your definition seems to

> be anything not proven in a court of law...


In this particular case - an allegation of murder - I think that criterion would be appropriate.


If we were discussing, for example, a CT concerning climate change, then it probably wouldn't be appropriate.

Ladymuck

Ladymuck

Posted
Posted

Huguenot Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So far as I can tell any decision that takes place

> to which HAL9000 is not party is a conspiracy.

>

> It doesn't even matter whether it's proven in a

> court of law - because HAL9000 wouldn't believe it

> anyway.



When using a grenade, the objective is to have the grenade land with too little time for the enemy to throw it back.


One grasps the grenade in the strong hand. The grasp should include the handle. Then one pulls the pin out of the grenade. Then one estimates the time of flight to the enemy, and subtracts it from four. Then one releases the handle, counts the time not needed for flight, and throws the grenade at the intended target.


One of the classic mistakes is to grasp the grenade in the weak hand, pull the pin, and then throw the pin.


Another classic mistake is to fail to grasp the handle, and then pull the pin. In this case, the grenade might explode while one is calculating times.





I trust you used the stronger hand, and grasped the handle BEFORE pulling the pin?;-)


*dives for cover*

Man Of Mystery

Man Of Mystery

Posted
Posted

SeanMacGabhann Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I give up

>

> I may well join Piers and retire


Please do it Sean then somebody can create a forum where the moderators don't hide and everybody is treated as an equal and the ganging up on people because somebody upset one of the inner-circles friends stops.


If Only.....

????

????

Posted
Posted

HAL9000 Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ???? Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Well, that's a fairly abitary and wide

> definition.

>

> It does help to define things properly before

> arguing about them.

>

> > I would argue that most people would accept that

> a

> > CT is one where groups of people disagree with

> the

> > consensus or 'establishment' view about

> something

> > and one where they think the 'establishment' is

> > hiding the truth

>

> By your argument, it is the Israeli government

> that is hiding the truth. Are they somehow exempt

> from being the focus of a conspiracy theory? I

> don't think so.


> I would argue that most people would accept that a

> CT is one where groups of people disagree with the

> consensus or 'establishment' view about something

> and one where they think the 'establishment' is

> hiding the truth


I think you missed this bit,,,you telling me if you want to apub in London, a bar in Tel Aviv or a Cafe in The West Bank and said.."Pssst.that assassination in Dubai..it was Mossad", you'll get any reaction other than "no sh1t Sherlock"!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...