RotoGuru Politics Forum

View the Forum Registry

XML Get RSS Feed for this thread


Self-edit this thread


0 Subject: News From And Of The Conspiro-Theoro-Sphere

Posted by: Mith
- [4310402110] Tue, Apr 30, 2013, 12:12

A sorting house for goofie birther documents, cockamamie false flag operations, nonsensical DHS ammunition hoarding reports, hilarious crisis actor evidence, Bigfoot, UFO and Nessie sightings and all that good stuff, along with information and articles about those lovable purveyors of tinfoil.

From the National Review: The Gospel of Alex Jones
Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well.
79nerveclinic
      Leader
      ID: 05047110
      Sat, May 04, 2013, 14:46


MITH

Let me agree with you on something. Post 35 if your figures are correct, that citizens bought 10x the amount of bullets as the government, then you are correct it could not be the govt. causing the shortage.

It has to be an increase by the average American stocking up.

Has hunting gotten more popular lately? I've been gone a while.



80Mith
      ID: 29182720
      Sat, May 04, 2013, 15:34
Oh I agree, it's very possible the FBI spokesman is lying to you

No FBI spokesman has delivered any information that there is any reason to question - unless you think a media organization quoting an anonymous source (that is quickly contradicted by other media sources and multiple other on-the-record official statements) is more reliable than an FBI spokesman.

I look at all the variants in the equation combined with what the government tells me, granted, coming from a skeptical perspective.

No, you look at a mess of confusion, ignore the consistent and steady voices from within it that turned out to be right, focus on the mistakes made by people who chose the priority of haste over the standards of their profession and decide their fleeting lapses are what is more reliable than the official statements that turned out to align exactly with what the cooler heads were saying at the time.

You use as your evidence what the government tells you.

No. I use as my evidence what I know from a career of first-hand experience about how the media lowers their standards for reporting in this kind of environment. I use as my evidence the fact that I work in a newsroom and understand how we would have received official word of an arrest if one had occurred and the fact there was no official word of a person in custody despite what some media outlets were reporting.


I swear to you I hope you are right.

With all due respect I don't see how I can believe this. I think you are only seeing exactly what you want to see. I don't know if it's fantasy or paranoia but you have to ignore an awful lot to arrive at the place you do with after all the info I've provided.

Look Nerveclinic, to whatever extent possible with a long-time online acquaintance, I like you. I respect you as much as anyone else I know exclusively from this forum, really. And I'm honestly not very comfortable with the way this discussion has gone. But I'm taken aback by the positions you insist on sticking with after all I've presented here.

Has hunting gotten more popular lately?

Nope, just the NRA's "Democrats will ban guns" propaganda over the past 5 years. Whether you think the propaganda is reasonable or not, there is no question, whatsoever that there has been a massive increase in private firearms and ammo sales in that time.

If this is news to you, I don't think it untoward to suggest that you might rethink some of the news sources that have delivered to you alarming reports about ammunition shortages without mentioning that crucial part of the equation.
81Nerveclinic
      Leader
      ID: 05047110
      Sat, May 04, 2013, 16:01

unless you think a media organization quoting an anonymous source (that is quickly contradicted by other media sources and multiple other on-the-record official statements) is more reliable than an FBI spokesman.

They claim 3 anonymous national and local government sources.

So that leaves 3 possible explanations.

1) CNN is lying.

2) The Government (3) sources were lying.

3) Something went wrong and the people within the government had to lie to protect themselves.

The details were too spelled out to be simple "Sloppy reporting"

I have no idea which of the 3 are correct, you seem certain based simply on what the government tells you.

I CERTAINLY wouldn't trust someone's statement simply because he is an FBI spokesman. But you do.


82Nerveclinic
      Leader
      ID: 05047110
      Sat, May 04, 2013, 16:13

I work in a newsroom and understand how we would have received official word of an arrest if one had occurred and the fact there was no official word of a person in custody despite what some media outlets were reporting.

The old I am a media expert card being played here.

OK and simply because your newsroom was not told a suspect was in custody. THAT is proof it didn't happen?

No offense, but you don't consider that perhaps CNN, the largest new organisation in the world, has a few "Anonymous government informants" on it's payroll that you don't?

I mean just because you work in a newsroom you imagine your organisation has all the inside scoops that CNN does?

Sorry but again that seems like a ridiculous counter argument. "I work in a newsroom"

And isn't it strange that CNN claims, 3 different govt officials told them they had a suspect, MITH that is either 3 sloppy people and /or CNN is lying.

So now the alternative reality is basically CNN is lying, which certainly is possible, but that also is in and of itself strange in a case like this, no? They are claiming 3 sources, and they didn't even back down when the govt said wrong.



83Nerveclinic
      Leader
      ID: 05047110
      Sat, May 04, 2013, 16:46

Look Nerveclinic, to whatever extent possible with a long-time online acquaintance, I like you. I respect you as much as anyone else I know exclusively from this forum, really.

And I thank you for that but our discussion has nothing to do with that.

And I'm honestly not very comfortable with the way this discussion has gone. But I'm taken aback by the positions you insist on sticking with after all I've presented here.

My observations started back in the late 1980's, so don't feel badly that I stick to my instincts after "All you've presented here". Old dog new tricks kinda story. Nothing to do with your lessons.

Nope, just the NRA's "Democrats will ban guns" propaganda over the past 5 years.

I guess my sarcasm flew past you, I didn't really think it was hunters. Don't worry, they will ban guns eventually by the way.


I don't know if it's fantasy or paranoia but you have to ignore an awful lot to arrive at the place you do with after all the info I've provided.

Time to wind this down I think. But let me leave on this note.

I am 100% paranoid, there is no question about that:

Sometimes paranoia's just having all the facts..... William S. Burroughs

“Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't after you” Joseph Heller, Catch-22

This is a mournful discovery. 1)Those who agree with you are insane 2)Those who do not agree with you are in power.” Philip K. Dick, VALIS

“I know a secret,and secrets breed paranoia.” Simon Holt, The Devouring

“Strange how paranoia can link up with reality now and then.” Philip K. Dick, A Scanner Darkly

“Paranoia is just the bastard child of fear and good sense." (Charlie) ?

“Anyone not paranoid in this world must be crazy. . . . Speaking of paranoia, it's true that I do not know exactly who my enemies are. But that of course is exactly why I'm paranoid.” Edward Abbey,

“My paranoia wasn't always right, but just to be on the safe side, I never went to sleep with a clown in the room.” Mark Henwick, Hidden Trump

And with that I will head to sleep, with no clown in the room.








84Boldwin
      ID: 27443423
      Sun, May 05, 2013, 00:43
In 1984 there is always a clown in the room.
85Boldwin
      ID: 27443423
      Sun, May 05, 2013, 02:39
You computer that you leave connected and on all the time, your phone whether it's on or not, tomorrow your alarm clock.
86Boldwin
      ID: 27443423
      Sun, May 05, 2013, 02:44
And it won't just allow spying. It will be intelligent and decide when to alert authorities to do so.

87Boldwin
      ID: 3418620
      Tue, May 07, 2013, 07:52
“The real hopeless victims of mental illness are to be found among those who appear to be most normal. Many of them are normal because they are so well adjusted to our mode of existence, because their human voice has been silenced so early in their lives that they do not even struggle or suffer or develop symptoms as the neurotic does. They are normal not in what may be called the absolute sense of the word; they are normal only in relation to a profoundly abnormal society. Their perfect adjustment to that abnormal society is a measure of their mental sickness. These millions of abnormally normal people, living without fuss in a society to which, if they were fully human beings, they ought not to be adjusted.” – Aldous Huxley – Brave New World Revisited
88Mith
      ID: 4310402110
      Wed, May 15, 2013, 10:34
They don't know what to do with themselves this week.
If you spend every hour of your working life inventing new ways to attack Barack Obama or the government (or both), this is a very good week for you — or at least it should be. After trudging through the deserts of Benghazi and Fast and Furious for four years, trying to extract any tiny drop of scandal from stone, now suddenly comes manna from heaven, courtesy of the IRS and its misguided attempt to prevent political groups from taking advantage of the non-profit tax code. Then, even before you could digest the first course, the Department of Justice snoops on reporters. Glory be to Ronald Reagan’s ghost! The Promised Land of Impeachment can’t be far off.


In an interview with WorldNetDaily — so we already know it’s going to be good — Bachmann said she thought the Obama administration intentionally released embarrassing news about the IRS targeting the Tea Party in some kind of elaborate Wag the Dog-style plot to distract from Benghazi:
Bachmann said the IRS announcement of misbehavior was intended to provoke conservatives and draw their anger and attention.

“I was in that Benghazi hearing,” she told WND. “I think the Obama administration is desperate to spin Benghazi, and they can’t. I think they saved this story up for a day like today so that conservatives would focus on this admission.”

It won’t work, she insisted.

“Conservatives can handle two shocking stories at the same time,” she said. “Both are equally unconstitutional and call into question the very president.”
This makes no sense, even for Bachmann. Why would the White House want to trade a 70 percent bogus scandal for a 70 percent real one? And if they did want to distract from Benghazi, there has to be a better way than manufacturing negative information about yourself. This is a bit like a child intentionally peeing himself to “distract” his classmates from the fact that his pants just fell down.


Roger Aronoff, the editor of the conservative media watchdog group Accuracy in the Media worried that the IRS Scandal “threatens to overshadow Benghazi.” Rush Limbaugh laid out a related “theorem” on Monday, adding a splash of Obamacare. The idea is that media, at the behest of the White House, is being overly aggressive on the IRS scandal because it wants to get it over with so that the IRS then can be left to implement Obamacare.“The media is never on our side,” Limbaugh said of the negative coverage of Obama.

He also downplayed the AP snooping, predicting that the media is so sycophantic that “in two weeks, this will be forgotten, they will have made up over this and it’s not going to be that big of a deal.” He added that he hopes he’s wrong, but doesn’t expect to be.


Why would Bachmann, Limbaugh, and Jones, who have never met an Obama conspiracy theory they didn’t like, pass up this one? Because the truth is way less sexy than fiction. When you’ve been claiming for years that Obama is willing to manipulate hurricane forecasts for political gain, or use Census records to round up political opponents, or deploy drones to kill journalists and political enemies, then asking a few dozen Tea Party groups from some extra paperwork is small potatoes.

And there’s little room to add value here — the dots are already connected, the mainstream media is on board, and the administration is taking action. The system seems to be working and you certainly don’t want to highlight that if your livelihood depends on convincing people the system is always rigged against them. What’s more, actual attention-grabbing scandals covered by the mainstream press may not be ideal, from a business perspective, for professional skeptics; if viewers can get coverage about them from regular news outlets, there’s less incentive for them to go to the conspiracists. Hence, it may be better for the Joneses and Limbaughs to publicly doubt the scandals’ veracity or relevance.

There’s also an intellectual poison pill that comes with the IRS and AP scandals. With Benghazi and Fast and Furious, conservatives insisted the media ignoring the controversies to protect Obama. But the media is all over these two newer scandals. “Why is the media hammering away at the IRS scandal?” Glenn Beck’s The Blaze asks, noting journalists were reluctant to make hay of out Benghazi at first.

Finally, it could also show that the media is doing its job by downplaying the mostly bogus Benghazi scandal and focusing on the mostly real IRS scandal, and that it’s willing to attack Obama when deserved. But it seems, ironically, they’d rather have the media ignore the scandals than pay attention to them, because at least that way it confirms their media bias narrative.
89Perm Dude
      ID: 201027169
      Wed, May 15, 2013, 11:11
Interesting. So for some CT's, the theories get more legs the less that they are covered?
90Mith
      ID: 4310402110
      Wed, May 15, 2013, 11:19
Sure, especially if you are in the business of opposition propaganda - whether the opposition happens to be competing political leadership or a competing media industry.
91Perm Dude
      ID: 201027169
      Wed, May 15, 2013, 12:38
Yeah, that's a good point. The fact that there is an industry of people out there, making huge amounts of money off the arrogantly gullible, makes this a puppeteer exercise at times.
92Mith
      ID: 4310402110
      Wed, May 15, 2013, 12:42
And high irony of terms like "sheeple".
93Boldwin
      ID: 294281510
      Wed, May 15, 2013, 13:47
MITH#88

It makes perfect sense. Hillary is at the center of the scandal. She is one of the world's foremost experts in how to manage a scandal and the media.

They are playing the 'use one scandal to displace the last one' strategy the Clintons lived and breathed.

Take very seriously just how much Obama will lean on their expertise in this area.

In this case the person who raised the issue of the IRS is a very tight personal friend of the administration of the IRS, I think it's the head.

I'll flesh that out later.

This is an interesting time for the admin to cultivate the image of cracking down on IRS power. Obamacare as it gets implimented vastly increases the power of the IRS and this will impact the psyche of the American people negatively.

There are plenty of unpopular and insignificant people in the IRS to throw under the bus. Countless numbers of them.
94Boldwin
      ID: 294281510
      Wed, May 15, 2013, 16:07
NRO says outright, that the question was planted.

Taking one for the team, as she would be high on the list of those to be thrown under the bus.
95Mith
      ID: 4310402110
      Thu, May 23, 2013, 10:16
No tragedy is too great or unlikely to exploit.
Conspiracy talk show host Alex Jones, increasingly a favorite of conservative media for his extremely vocal support of gun rights, outed himself Tuesday as a tornado truther by telling a caller on his show, “Of course there’s weather weapons stuff going on.”

Jones, a longtime proponent of the idea that the U.S. government can manipulate and even produce weather systems like tornadoes and hurricanes, went on to say that if people saw helicopters or small aircraft in the area, then “you better bet your bottom dollar they did this.”

“But, who knows if they did?” he asked. “You know, that’s the thing. We don’t know.”
Who knows? I mean, yes of course bet your last dollar on it (or just spend it on a t-shirt from the merchandise page on my website) but, you know, who knows?
96Boldwin
      ID: 2254279
      Fri, Jun 07, 2013, 18:09
The 'plane' flying into the pentagon. The clip they tried to prevent you from seeing.
97Mith
      ID: 4310402110
      Fri, Jun 07, 2013, 18:26
Who is they? And why would "they" have tried to prevent me from seeing this clip? What is it you think it shows?
98Tree
      ID: 33547717
      Fri, Jun 07, 2013, 18:48
i think it shows that CNN and the rest of the MSM reported on something that is apparently a big ol' secret. even though it was on CNN. /sarcasm
99Mith
      ID: 4310402110
      Fri, Jun 07, 2013, 19:09
The primary argument appears to be that since no clearly discernible plane appears in the video, that no plane hit the pentagon.

If anyone besides Boldwin thinks this is proof of anything I'm happy to discuss but I think it pretty obviously requires an impressive leap to arrive at that notion.

Particularly because I'm not so sure that the light-gray blob that you see disappear and reappear from behind the highway overpass as it moves from left to right just before the explosion isn't the plane in the moment before it crashed into the building.
100Perm Dude
      ID: 201027169
      Fri, Jun 07, 2013, 19:16
So despite all the eyewitness accounts, physical evidence, other video evidence--this is all they have?

101Mith
      ID: 4310402110
      Fri, Jun 07, 2013, 19:31
Well that and that in the confusion of that terrible morning, someone went and misreported the Pentagon explosion as a truck bomb.
102Boldwin
      ID: 1757723
      Sat, Jun 08, 2013, 00:14
MITH

Did you notice the plane flying into the building?

Me neither.
103Mith
      ID: 29182720
      Sat, Jun 08, 2013, 01:00
Of course I didn't. I don't even see the building, which is almost a mile off in the distance behind a massive highway overpass.

If I did see a plane fly into the pentagon from that vantage it could only have been faked - or it would have to occur after the overpass was removed. Are you saying you can see through it?

Me neither.

Why would anyone care to prevent me from seeing that?
104Boldwin
      ID: 3955585
      Sat, Jun 08, 2013, 07:12
Why would anyone care to prevent me from seeing that?

They actually did confiscate it. Why would you pretend they couldn't possibly have done something so ridiculous?

There was hardly a window mullion broken in the alleged 'plane smashes into building'. There wasn't a commercial airliner striking the pentagon. That's why.
105Mith
      ID: 29182720
      Sat, Jun 08, 2013, 10:26
They "confiscated" it because it is evidence. Law enforcement takes private surveillance footage of any crime they investigate.

I'm not "pretending" that the Bush Administration could or couldn't have done anything. "Could" or "couldn't" has nothing to do with it - I'm considering facts.

You think my political loyalty and fondness for W prevents me from seeing the full picture here?

Pretty sure I saw a lot of broken mullions.

What do you think happened to Flight 77 and all the people that were on it?

What sense could faking that attack possibly make?

Just apply a moment's worth critical thinking. You think 3 planes were hijacked but that it was necessary for them to fake a 4th hijacking?

Perhaps you believe the live video I personally watched of a plane flying into the WTC was doctored as it was being shot and transmitted around the world? As was all of the other news cameras focused on the WTC after the first plane hit? That the literally thousands of eyewitnesses were duped by their own lying eyes?

Why I had not considered such outside-the-box possibilities!

And again, why would anyone care to prevent me from seeing a video shot from a vantage where the pentagon was not even visible?
106biliruben
      ID: 21841115
      Sat, Jun 08, 2013, 10:34

Now you are talking like the good little sheeple "they" prefer.
107Boldwin
      ID: 3955585
      Sat, Jun 08, 2013, 11:06
A long time ago I posted an extreme hi-res picture of the pentagon after the event. Sorry if you can't remember it accurately but the mullions came thru it like a champ. You could hardly fit a sheep thru the windows that actually did have broken mullions.

108Boldwin
      ID: 3955585
      Sat, Jun 08, 2013, 11:16
Perhaps you will remember Sarge's infamous 'switchblade plane' theory where despite flying forward at several hundred miles an hour, the wings retracted 'thwooop' back into the body of the plane so that just the fuselage could fit thru the sheep sized hole.

I'll always remember Sarge fondly for that one.
110Mith
      ID: 29182720
      Sat, Jun 08, 2013, 11:42
I remember the photo. I'm sure I could find it again if I looked hard enough. I remember much being made of the lack of damage that some thought the plane's wings should have caused the building.

I'm sure you're very confident in the depth of your knowledge and the processes of measuring the likely result of the lightweight frame and material of the wings of a 757 (including however much presser traveling at several hundred miles per hour exerts on the bolts that hold the wings to the fuselage) would have on a heavily reinforced bulletproof and blast-resistant structure such as the Pentagon.

Sorry, doesn't seem so absurd to me that those mullions might hold up better than what you see in a typical 6 story concrete building with a row of standard commercial Andersons lining each floor.

And for the record, while I've never counted the number of mullions left intact, I very specifically recall the photo did in fact show lesser damage to the building extending out from the central crater that seemed an appropriate length to be caused by the wings.

Enough of my saturday wasted on this.
111Boldwin
      ID: 3955585
      Sat, Jun 08, 2013, 11:52
I had a much better picture than this in the original thread, but I don't believe I can find my original.



With fascia damage this slight [compared to 2-300,000 pounds of commercial airliner at high speed], I want and expect to see the tapes that were confiscated.

I don't have a need for this part of the OVE [official version of events] to be wrong, all I'm insisting on is that it was allowed to happen, but hey, I just don't believe in magic mullions that survive airplane crashes. My curiosity isn't this easily satisfied.

I'll even grant, they had some amazing building materials, granite if I remember correctly, but there isn't a building material in the world that can explain those mullions in my estimation.
112Mith
      ID: 29182720
      Sat, Jun 08, 2013, 12:07
The left wing did not weigh 2-300,000 pounds.

113Mith
      ID: 29182720
      Sat, Jun 08, 2013, 12:10



114bibA
      ID: 54522612
      Sat, Jun 08, 2013, 13:10
Thanks mucho Baldwin. That flight 77 actually did not crash into the Pentagon is really good news.

My daughter is in the advertising business. She had been booked on that flight, but had changed her plans several weeks prior to the day of the events on 9-11. However, two of her co-workers were on it.

Now that Baldwin has shown that the plane actually did not crash into the Pentagon must mean that her friends are still alive.

Could you just let us know where they ended up? No one has seen hide nor hair of them since.
115Perm Dude
      ID: 201027169
      Sat, Jun 08, 2013, 13:42
They are part of the conspiracy bibA.
116Tree
      ID: 564211423
      Sat, Jun 08, 2013, 18:13
they're just actors, of course.

in fact, i am sure if you look closely at the footage of the Boston Marathon bombings, your daughter's "friends" will be involved in that too.

i will say this again. Conspiracies are the new religion. much like the bible was used to explain things we didn't quite understand thousands of years ago, conspiracies are a way to grasp things today that we can't, or won't, make sense of.
117Boldwin
      ID: 4453598
      Sun, Jun 09, 2013, 09:39
Just show all the security cam tapes. Is that so much to ask?
118bibA
      ID: 54522612
      Sun, Jun 09, 2013, 14:20
OK - I can accept that if you say the plane did not fly into the Pentagon because you haven't seen video evidence, that it obviously didn't happen.

The question remains, what happened to the people who boarded the plane in D.C.?
119Frick
      ID: 432501512
      Mon, Jun 10, 2013, 11:00
So we have to have video evidence to believe something? The bible is going to need some serious rewriting. Or does that mean that Hollywood film crews are our new Gods?
120Perm Dude
      ID: 201027169
      Mon, Jun 10, 2013, 12:39
And forget all those people who actually saw the thing fly into the building. Clearly they are all part of it as well.

I, for one, am tired of dancing the tune of the conspiracy theorists. I genuinely don't care for their changing definitions of "proof" or their doubts or their indecision masked as intelligence.
121Boldwin
      ID: 31541109
      Mon, Jun 10, 2013, 12:43
bibA

If you had been following the alternative news, you'd have seen a story very early on about a plane that had everyone herded off the plane [in Phil? if I remember right] and into a military hanger on 9/11 never to be heard from again. Why? They didn't say why. I don't buy actual stock in it, but the evidence at the time I first read it was by no means the worst I'd ever seen and the probability indicator on my internal estimator while still low, gradually and relentlessly creeps upward.

Not saying that story ties up all the questions and loose ends either, but hey, you asked.
122bibA
      ID: 54522612
      Mon, Jun 10, 2013, 12:57
So maybe "they" had the plane taken somewhere, maybe Philadelphia, where they did something with the it, removed the passengers, herded them into a hanger and either killed or imprisoned them, so that they could pretend to fly the plane into the Pentagon while they actually bombed it with explosives they had earlier planted.

I guess this would be encouraging news to the families of the passengers of flight 77, as it holds out hope that they are alive somewhere.
123Perm Dude
      ID: 201027169
      Mon, Jun 10, 2013, 13:00
You just have to follow the "alternative" news, bibA. You know--the ones with hard hitting fictional pieces.
124Mith
      ID: 29182720
      Mon, Jun 10, 2013, 13:20
Layers of crap built on a foundation of crap.

What a sucker. A sucker for crap.
125Tree
      ID: 265361012
      Mon, Jun 10, 2013, 13:36
did you guys hear the moon landing was staged?
126Perm Dude
      ID: 201027169
      Mon, Jun 10, 2013, 20:02
Alex Jones gets on the BBC.
127Boldwin
      ID: 25111019
      Mon, Jun 10, 2013, 20:54
bibA

It has occurred to me that a virtually untrained Yemeni who can't even land a plane can dodge an overpass and hit the first floor of the pentagon.

Maybe a radio controlled drone can tho.
128Boldwin
      ID: 25111019
      Mon, Jun 10, 2013, 21:00
Of course such an idea would never occur to our high minded best and brightest.
129Boldwin
      ID: 25111019
      Mon, Jun 10, 2013, 21:02
Don't be ridiculous.
 If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect,
you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com 
RotoGuru Politics Forum

View the Forum Registry

XML Get RSS Feed for this thread


Self-edit this thread




Post a reply to this message: News From And Of The Conspiro-Theoro-Sphere

Name:
Email:
Message:
Click here to create and insert a link
Click here to insert a block of hidden (spoiler) text
Ignore line feeds? no (typical)   yes (for HTML table input)


Viewing statistics for this thread
Period# Views# Users
Last hour21
Last 24 hours21
Last 7 days21
Last 30 days97
Since Mar 1, 2007112961725