Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

A General discussion about everything other than South Park

Moderator: Big-Will

zzyzx 1
Posts: 4887
Joined: Tue Nov 24, 2009 3:20 am

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Postby zzyzx 1 » Sun Jun 10, 2012 3:33 pm

(ugly)Bob wrote:So... what religion are all of you?


A am of one of the numerous denominations of Judaism. Some non-Jews I have found think Judaism is just one religion. It isn't. There are many major denominations such as Orthodox, Conservative, a hybrid in-between: Conservadox, as well as Reform, Reconstructionist, and others.

There is also a concept that goes back centuries: Whatever little town a Jew may have lived in, there was usually only one Rabbi in that town. His interpretation of the Torah and the Oral Law was what the Jewish townspeople followed. It was a form of Orthodox, yet each town had their own variation based on the local Rabbi's beliefs.

Then there was an even bigger difference: Those Jews that lived in Eastern Europe and Germany centuries ago had certain practices (called Ashkenazic), and those who lived in the Mediterranean area, Spain, and Greece had other traditions. This is called: Sephardic. Even their own local languages were different: Ashkenazic Jews spoke a hybrid of Hebrew and German called: Yiddish. Sephardic Jews spoke a hybrid of Hebrew and Spanish called: Ladino.

Even today, Yiddish and Ladino are spoken.


Big-Will wrote:Title change, since the thread is moving towards conspiracies.


Okay. I'll continue this elsewhere, (ugly)Bob.
Zazaban
Posts: 3280
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 5:32 am

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Postby Zazaban » Sun Jun 10, 2012 8:12 pm

Atheist, essentially. Raised Buddhist, went through periods were I was very into Christianity, went to church once, then a point when I was really kinda seriously into Baha'i. But, Atheist now.
skurtz wrote:
nwt000 wrote:Get your trolling ass out of here!

I'm more friendlier drinking some espresso.
triplemultiplex
Posts: 6124
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:24 am

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Postby triplemultiplex » Sun Jun 10, 2012 8:16 pm

I think in the majority of cases where some see a grand conspiracy, there is in fact, just a bunch of different people acting in their own short term, self-interest.
This assumption that anyone who has ever benefited in any way from a big event in world history is somehow complicit in causing said event is utterly ridiculous, even without space aliens.

Let's take Tonkin as an example since that keeps coming up.
America is afraid of communists and wants to oppose communism's spread where ever they can. So the US is backing Diem down on Asia's ballsack (look at a map; SE Asia looks like a shriveled dong with huge nuts) but the US is concerned without direct intervention, it's a lost cause. Along comes a minor incident between a couple of destroyers and some NVA gun boats. Here's an opportunity turn up the heat and service a strategic goal in the region. And so the President gets authority to start with the troops and from there we all know the rest of the story.

Now the Tonkin Gulf incident allegedly had two separate acts of aggression; the first of which is not in doubt. It's that second attack that is. Whether or not it happened is not relevant to my point about how this is misconstrued by conspiracy theorists. They look at this and see a false flag operation planned out way in advance. I and most other people look at this and see a government taking advantage of the situation to further a strategic agenda, thus committing themselves to a series of unforeseen consequences in what eventually turned into an ever-escalating, ultimately un-winnable war.

The conspiracy theorist is quick to point the finger at the defense industry since they profited from the eventual outcome. But they're only evidence is basically a logical fallacy. It's the equivalent of accusing the back up quarterback of causing the starting quarterback to blow out his knee. Just because the back up benefits from the incident doesn't automatically mean he caused it. It's a version of the correlation vs. causation logical fallacy; just because event A preceded event B doesn't necessarily mean event A caused event B.

You can also start to see the other problem with conspiracy theories; they are easy to spout but it takes lots of explanation to debunk them. In this post, I won't even get in to how the military-industrial complex is not a conspiracy, but the cumulative result of numerous individuals acting in their own self interest. It's a real thing that swallows an enormous amount of money and makes it much easier to start wars, but it's not a conspiracy.
__________________________________________________

You read it! You can't unread it!
Unassumption
Posts: 3849
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 8:49 pm

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Postby Unassumption » Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:03 pm

The future can cause the past then? If someone profits from an action, they must have caused it, no matter how unable they would be to know they would profit down the line from it, or able to make the event happen at that time?

It's when all the competition gets forgotten i laugh, weather international (especially in wartime) or between companies, or even individuals who wanted the same job. Herding the cats that are the rich and powerful into a single conspiracy is hard, and not in most of their interest!

It's the problems caused by 'the system' that scare me... man (god i sound like a hippie :cartmansopissedrightnow: ).

they are easy to spout but it takes lots of explanation to debunk them

Only because they modify it every time you debunk it, into a form that doesn't have that particular hole. Not being anchored to reality (or consistency) has it's advantages!
AND BY THE WAY, I WIN
Zazaban
Posts: 3280
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 5:32 am

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Postby Zazaban » Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:30 pm

Unassumption wrote:Only because they modify it every time you debunk it, into a form that doesn't have that particular hole. Not being anchored to reality (or consistency) has it's advantages!

My favourite incident of that type, that I experienced, was a person who supported Hamas.

Them: Hamas is a liberation organization, it's just like the french resistance in WW2
Me: No, they're anti-semetic theocrats.
Them: Prove it, racist fascist!
Me: *Provides extensive quotes from Hamas leaders talking about exterminating the Jews and (no joke) talking trees.*
Them: Yeah, well you only like Israel so much because you hate brown people!
*Then they proceed to take over control of the forum and ban me.*

Maybe that wasn't a good example in the end, but it's funny.
skurtz wrote:
nwt000 wrote:Get your trolling ass out of here!

I'm more friendlier drinking some espresso.
Big-Will
Board Moderator
Posts: 18835
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2003 8:57 am

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Postby Big-Will » Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:38 pm

"Racist fascist," :lol: I like that. Nice turn on words.
The South Park Scriptorium
The South Park Scriptorium on Facebook

Favorite Character: Butters
Need to look for something on the board? Use the search links below: US version
Zazaban
Posts: 3280
Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2010 5:32 am

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Postby Zazaban » Sun Jun 10, 2012 10:08 pm

Big-Will wrote:"Racist fascist," :lol: I like that. Nice turn on words.

That particular individual was one of a kind. He actually attempted to make the case that ad hominem attacks were logically valid arguments.
skurtz wrote:
nwt000 wrote:Get your trolling ass out of here!

I'm more friendlier drinking some espresso.
(ugly)Bob
Posts: 5860
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2012 6:54 am

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Postby (ugly)Bob » Sun Jun 10, 2012 10:29 pm

I am to cease speaking of religion here as this thread is really supposed to be a conspiracy debate thread... and most people no like off topic conversations anyway. as zzyzx1 may have subliminally warned, i am to cease my discussion and carry on elsewhere. unsubscribing this thread, i warn i shall not respond on here if you want to respond to me so don't take offense if all you see are tumbleweeds on my end.
"We're all just a bunch of multi-coloured humans!"
RedStone2
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 6:57 am

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Postby RedStone2 » Wed Jun 13, 2012 4:15 am

triplemultiplex wrote:I think in the majority of cases where some see a grand conspiracy, there is in fact, just a bunch of different people acting in their own short term, self-interest.
Your statement is a little confusing. If selfish psychopaths in the military/industrial complex fraudulently instigated the Vietnam War out of selfish interests (as you're acknowledging)...that would mean they had (wait for it) conspired to instigate a war. And since it was a conspiracy with very large parameters and very large and tragic consequences...we might then refer to it as a "grand conspiracy".

What's wrong with describing a grand conspiracy...as a grand conspiracy? There have been grand conspiracies throughout all the millennia of human history. The Japs' conspiracy to attack Pearl Harbor is just one of thousands of examples. Some of you folks come across as though acknowledging the reality of grand conspiracies is like believing in unicorns. I'm not following the logic.

Yes, it is simple common sense to suspect there are cold-hearted psychopaths in the military/industrial complex who desire to foment fake wars. All the industries that get gigantic, fat contracts to provide military goods and services (think Halliburton, Blackwater, etc.) have HUGE motive to foment fake wars.

And all those half-crazed military generals running around the Pentagon, champing at the bit for some "action"...a bunch of cowardly desk-jockey, chicken-hawks. Gen. Wesley Clark has become quite critical of Pentagon culture and has humorously described the dysfunctional mind-set of your typical Pentagon war-monger:

"If the only tool you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail."

triplemultiplex wrote:America is afraid of communists and wants to oppose communism's spread where ever they can. So the US is backing Diem...etc.
Right. That's exactly the 'line' that was coming from the McMainstream McMedia on the Evening News with Ken and Barbie back in those days. Believe it if you want but...it isn't close to the truth, IMO.

Communism was a "Hegelian Dialectic" scam from Day One. The age-old game of the rich and powerful: Create an artificial problem...step in with an artificial solution...and thereby seize ever increasing power, control, and the fruits of the community's labor through ever-increasing taxation.

The beginnings of Communism were directly financed by the super-bankers. The infamous "sealed train" carrying Lenin and 6 million dollars in gold straight through war-torn Europe, smack in the middle of WW1...and the train was not touched.

The Bolshevik Revolution was fake. Lenin was fake. Marx was fake. Mere lackey-monkeys for the guys who financed Communism.

The entirety of the so-called Cold War (starting after WW2)...nothing but fakery, all 45 years of it. Think about it: In a million years, the Soviets could never have actually competed economically and therefore militarily with the US. They HAD no economy. Communism kills economies dead. People living behind the Iron Curtain would get on a three-year waiting list just to buy a refrigerator.

For 45 long years the American people were made to foot the bill for BOTH sides of this ‘Cold War’…by means of various Federal Reserve Bank and Pentagon shell games. A gigantic 'professional wrestling' con job.

triplemultiplex wrote:You can also start to see the other problem with conspiracy theories; they are easy to spout but it takes lots of explanation to debunk them.
Let me clear up one thing--I am not a "conspiracy theorist". I have no interest in 'theories'. I am only interested in facts. I don't go around "spouting" random claims. I present facts. That's all I have presented here.

If someone wants links to more documentation on some of these issues...like I said you can quickly google for this stuff but...I don't mind providing links if someone insists. I had earlier provided links and docs on the whole "UFO/ET" thing...and never heard a peep.
CrocoDuck
Posts: 37
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 6:23 am

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Postby CrocoDuck » Wed Jun 13, 2012 8:30 am

Christianity.
I really like the sense of familiar community.
Hit me up if you're in So Cal.
Mamont
Posts: 2411
Joined: Sun Aug 21, 2011 4:52 pm

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Postby Mamont » Wed Jun 13, 2012 5:01 pm

OK, I didn't want to get involved, but now I have to. RedStone, what proof do you have for all this wild claims? I don't want speculations and assumptions. I want hard, indisputable evidence, if I am to believe any of this. And so far I have seen none.

RedStone2 wrote:The beginnings of Communism were directly financed by the super-bankers.

Prove it.

RedStone2 wrote:The Bolshevik Revolution was fake. Lenin was fake. Marx was fake. Mere lackey-monkeys for the guys who financed Communism.

Prove it.

RedStone2 wrote:The entirety of the so-called Cold War (starting after WW2)...nothing but fakery, all 45 years of it.

Prove it.

RedStone2 wrote:Think about it: In a million years, the Soviets could never have actually competed economically and therefore militarily with the US. They HAD no economy. Communism kills economies dead.

You're underestimating the power of oppression. Soviet Union was military super-force because they were putting all they got into military. Even more than US, and that's a lot.
Why do you think today whole world relies on USSR technology to get in space. Soyuz is one of the most reliable scpacecrafts there is.
How do you think Soviets got those rockets? Where they also financed by super-bankers?

RedStone2 wrote:Let me clear up one thing--I am not a "conspiracy theorist". I have no interest in 'theories'. I am only interested in facts. I don't go around "spouting" random claims. I present facts. That's all I have presented here.

OK, what facts?

And, if someone still didn't got it, I'm a skeptic. Therefore, I am an atheist.
triplemultiplex
Posts: 6124
Joined: Mon Jan 31, 2005 5:24 am

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Postby triplemultiplex » Thu Jun 14, 2012 11:06 pm

First let us distinguish some terminology, because there's too much semantics going on right now. Obviously there are real conspiracies. Frat guys conspire to play a prank on a pledge. The Japanese conspired to bomb Pearl Harbor and the US conspired to develop the atom bomb.
When I talk about 'Grand Conspiracy' I'm referring to how in the minds of some people, literally everything in history is not as reported and some secret cabal is pulling the strings so that everything happens exactly as the cabal wants it to. RedStone is one of these pseudo-history types.

This brings me to my next major point about this type of fake history. One of the biggest problems with these narratives is that it assumes the secret cabal has some sort of hyper-competency and world history has played out exactly as they wanted due to their perfectly exact string pulling. This is despite the fact that every human endeavor in the history of time is fought with mistakes, disagreements, shoddy work, mismanagement and general fuck ups. Yet somehow when it comes to conspiring to alter the course of world history, everything goes EXACTLY as planned.

This happens because the pseudo-historian is retroactively assuming the events that took place were, in fact, the intended consequences of the manipulations of the conspirators. Never is there a conspiracy/pseudo-history where something goes wrong. So not only are THEY of absolutely one mind about what to do with the world, THEY can flawlessly carry out their plan every single time. So basically, the conspirators are God. And that's where the conspiracy theory/fake history starts to overlap with religion. After all, what's the difference between an all knowing god with a long term plan for humanity and an all knowing conspiracy cabal with a long term plan for humanity? (A: people singing badly in an expensive building every week.)

This is the eventual outcome of the conspiracy theory. In order to explain away countervailing evidence for the initial conspiracy like 9/11 or the JFK assassination, the conspiracy needs to keep getting wider to include more and more people and organizations and countries; and then it starts going further and further back in time. A person starts into that rabbit hole chasing 9/11 "truth" or something, and before you know it, communism is fake, Atlantis was real and Zionist space reptiles secretly run the world.

Occam's razor: The explanation that makes the least assumptions is most often the correct one.
__________________________________________________

You read it! You can't unread it!
Unassumption
Posts: 3849
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 8:49 pm

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Postby Unassumption » Thu Jun 14, 2012 11:07 pm

Just because god exists, doesn't mean your religion is true. Just because there is a conspiracy, doesn't mean YOUR conspiracy is true. If you want to play semantics and call this situation a conspiracy that is.

Even if the generals were mad (which you prove by quoting a general you say isn't?) they had different goals to the people they were 'conspiring' with.

Poverty is not an artificial problem; some folk in the USA still don't have fridges. Communism wasn't a good solution, but with what they knew at the time, it wasn't obviously worse. I smell projection on your breath, as the problem you describe is the one Marx did. Commies and free marketeers, they're the same thing to me.

If you think Marx and the revolutionaries who worked after his death conspired together, you must believe had a time machine; how would they communicate, how would he profit?

Communism goes back long before Marx, and there are many non-marxist brands of it, how are they ALL in on it? How is China, which had lots of conflict with the USSR in on it? Are all the little communist groups in western nations in on it? Is my university's Marxist society part of a conspiracy dating back to Marx, and the utopian socialists before him? Is the libertarian society at my college part of it too, as a pressure valve for resistance?

If they're that powerful, how do you know you're not being controlled by it to do it's bidding. How do we know (if we accepted your conspiracy) that you're not part of it? How would the info of it get out if it's so big and powerful, and if it was out how could anyone do anything about it?

With so many people with little bits of power, from small business owners to the leaders of small nations, to state congressmen, union bosses, popstars and community organizers, how are they all kept in check by the conspiracy OR part of the conspiracy? Are they all in it together? How about all the little groups with different ideas, including the ones WITHIN the larger groups (i.e. the departments within a big corporation, branches of an ideology, regions of a nation) how are they all kept in check and/or assimilated?

Most people aren't psychopaths- banality of evil and all that. Those that are, will be constrained by the many who aren't. Groups are rarely more evil than they have to be. They may not have stopped a war they could profit from, but they didn't NEED to cause one, as other wars exist.

Not all rich folk work in the military industrial complex. The ones that don't wouldn't profit from these wars. All humans have beliefs. If we don't profit from going against them, we usually follow them, so why would ALL the other rich folk who don't profit from the war not be against it? Moreover how do you explain the rich folk who WERE against it? As they eventually succeed in ending the war, it can't be called a "Pressure valve."

Then there's the rich folk who actively lost out due to war, how were they controlled if they weren't in on it, if they were how did they profit by losing what they had and seemingly gaining nothing?

All wars have so many contingencies, no one knows or could control everything or even most things, and there are real opponents, how would something so risky play a part in a conspiracy? Since America lost that war, powerful folk lost out as a result, how did the powerful people "win" by faking it? How did the french, who took it over centuries ago, win out by losing their colony?

Lennin's train ride was a risk, that paid off. You might as well say the Japanise conspired with the shinto gods to get a divine win to push the mongol fleet away, sometimes it's just contingency on your side. I know it's hard to accept for some people but humans don't control everything in the world, sometimes randomness plays a big role.

How does Europe play into this? Being intermediate in military and economic power to the other forces, and with a LOT at steak (which we lost) going in as the world's foremost power and ending up at best equal to America how did we win out? How could our goals be the same as Americas?
Ignoring that the USSR is still the second biggest nuclear power in the world and that their economy isn't as bad as the propaganda films you seem to pick your facts from. The US isn't perfect, and no one's power in it is secure.

You have no facts to back up your conjecture.
If you make the claims, you provide the evidence, or at least the sources. It's always fun to see how conspiracy types wiggle out of providing evidence.

Every redstone post makes his conspiracy bigger, I'm curious to see how big the hole he's digging for himself will get. As usual, he does nothing to counter the official story and all it's evidence, instead throwing haphazard story at us and telling us to just believe or else.
AND BY THE WAY, I WIN
Unassumption
Posts: 3849
Joined: Tue May 24, 2011 8:49 pm

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Postby Unassumption » Fri Jun 15, 2012 10:32 pm

Sorry for the double post, but in the last 24 hours I've found a woman who thinks George Washington was really king George, was guy who thinks all black African dictators were imposed by white people, and a guy who denies gravity as an atheistic lie.

If you know where to look (the comments sections below any news article, mainly) you'll find people saying things as crazy as "the cold war never happened," in their masses.These guys need mental help, a debate won't help them.

It's when i see groups with some power using these sorts of tactics, when a mainstream group full of normal people is spouting sh*t this crazy, that it really needs to be countered.
AND BY THE WAY, I WIN
RedStone2
Posts: 32
Joined: Thu May 17, 2012 6:57 am

Re: Wanna Conspiracy Debate?

Postby RedStone2 » Tue Jun 19, 2012 8:55 am

Mamont wrote:what proof do you have for all this wild claims?
Who had determined these were "wild claims"? There is a very substantial portion of the American community that subscribes to all kinds of revisionist history. I've found it's usually among the more well-read, well-informed, the folks who've learned to surf the Net, research on their own, using non-'corporate owned', non-'elite controlled' non-'mainstream media' sources. No Katie Couric or Rush Limbaugh as far as the eye can see.

For example, the fact of the US military's Gulf of Tonkin false flag fraud with the resulting Vietnam War mass-murder atrocity is, to this day, only noted by the most literate, savvy, conscientious folks.

Here are a couple of books on the subject of the Bolsheviks:

Wall Street and the Bolshevik Revolution
http://www.reformation.org/wall-st-bolshevik-rev.html

The Sealed Train
http://www.yamaguchy.com/library/pearson/pearson_index.html

Both of these books are online at the links provided. Massive, massive documentation, evidence, testimony, corroboration, triangulation, etc.

Mamont wrote:How do you think Soviets got those rockets? Where they also financed by super-bankers?

Even the US military gets its funding through the big bankers and their counterfeit 'funny money'...much, much more so did the Soviets rely on funny money.


triplemultiplex wrote:some secret cabal is pulling the strings so that everything happens exactly as the cabal wants it to. RedStone is one of these pseudo-history types...

...the secret cabal has some sort of hyper-competency and world history has played out exactly as they wanted due to their perfectly exact string pulling.

...everything goes EXACTLY as planned.

This happens because the pseudo-historian is retroactively assuming the events that took place were, in fact, the intended consequences of the manipulations of the conspirators.
Firstly, you've described my worldview incorrectly about a dozen different ways. If, for example, I believe the cabalists are so brilliant, how would I explain their need to assassinate JFK? If they do everything "perfectly"...they would've gotten the 'right' president in the first place.

Fact is, I believe most of these guys are dumb as tree stumps...and that's just one thing you've gotten wrong in stepping in front of me to explain my own world view to me! Good grief.

Furthermore, you are falsely representing me when you claim I go about imposing a prefabricated view or philosophy on a discussion, and then start shoving the facts to fit. Pure nonsense.

One should NEVER impose their presuppositions up front...other than as an introductory comment (as I've done with the Bolsheviks topic, for example).

I start with facts. My involvement here at South Park began when I noticed someone (in another thread here) had posted links to my blog and this guy was lol-ing hysterically over my "claims" that high echelon religious and political leaders are involved in hugely creepy, secret occult practices.

I responded with facts. And documentation. Proof. I have no interest in grandiosely imposing my presuppositions. It's useless. Who wouldn't know that?

When I introduced the presupposition that such things as 'shadow governments' have existed and do exist...I presented evidence. Rock solid quotes from authorities and experts.

I've introduced the presupposition that the Bolsheviks were the creation of big money interests...and I then introduce evidence.

triplemultiplex wrote:In order to explain away countervailing evidence for the initial conspiracy like 9/11 or the JFK assassination, the conspiracy needs to keep getting wider to include...and then it starts going further and further back in time.
What in the world? You're really getting quagmired in useless generalities. I'm all about specific facts and evidence.

By the way, here's yet another heavyweight who, similarly to Woodrow Wilson, Benjamin Disraeli, and Sen. Inouye...testifies to a shadowy cabal attempting to consolidate world power. Professor Carrol Quigley (author of Tragedy and Hope):

"The powers of financial capitalism had another far reaching aim, nothing less than to create a world system of financial control in private hands able to dominate the political system of each country and the economy of the world as a whole. This system was to be controlled...by the central banks of the world acting in concert, by secret agreements, arrived at in frequent private meetings and conferences."

"I know of this network because I have studied it for twenty years and was permitted for two years in the early 1960s to examine its papers and secret records. I have no aversion to it or to most of its aims and have, for much of my life, been close to it and to many of its instruments...in general my chief difference of opinion is that it wishes to remain unknown..."


triplemultiplex wrote:Occam's razor: The explanation that makes the least assumptions is most often the correct one.
Occam's Razor is fundamentally flawed and virtually useless. You're assuming there is agreement on what is or isn't an "assumption". It's perfectly circular and self-canceling. Two different people use Occam's Razor...one concludes there are UFOs, the other concludes there aren't.

Unassumption wrote:As usual, he does nothing to counter the official story and all it's evidence.
Well, try this on for size: A 15 minute video documentary from the folks at "Architects and Engineers For 9/11 Truth":

http://newjerusalemchronicle.blogspot.com/2011/08/architects-engineers-solving-mystery-of.html

Come on. Fifteen measly minutes. You can do it.

Return to “Off Topic Discussion”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests