Page 10 of 12 [ 171 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12  Next

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 33,059
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

16 Jan 2011, 8:04 pm

Vexcalibur wrote:
Israel are evil. Not nearly as evil as NK, but pretty evil indeed. Human Rights violations. Fascist destruction of opposition. Sorry, but... once a state a state begins demolishing active schools and civilian houses as part of an invasion, that's evil.


I said I didn't support everything Israel has done - and that would include destroying schools, and the homes of terrorists. Not to mention looking the other way when right wing Israelis force Palestinians out of their homes, often by the villagefull, as well as the whole insane settlement scheme.
But the fact remains, Israel is the least oppressive Middle Eastern country, where citizens can and do speak out against their government, and religion is practiced freely. That's a far cry from the surrounding countries that jail or kill dissidents, and where Christians, Jews, and even Muslims of differing theology live in oppression and poverty.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,770
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

16 Jan 2011, 8:35 pm

Exactly, Israel's s**t stinks the least out of all of em. To call them evil sounds like a typical anti-war knee jerk response and is as stupid as calling Bush a Fascist or Obama a Commie. It's like those people who say "Bush lied, people died!". Hamas are the real evil chickenshit scumbags.



ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 81
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,726
Location: New Jersey

17 Jan 2011, 2:07 am

Have you heard about the latest North Korean outrage. They sprang a currency reform at the end of 2009 which, in effect, confiscates what little savings the people of North Korea have. The effect has been to increase the price of food in a country where malnutrition (by government fiat) is the norm.

See:

http://www.iie.com/publications/opeds/o ... rchID=1487

and

http://www.english.rfi.fr/asia-pacific/ ... rm-reports

The government of North Korea steals crusts of bread from the mouths of widows and children.

But some of you guys think what Israel does is the Most Evil Thing in the World.

ruveyn



sartresue
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 Dec 2007
Age: 63
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,766
Location: The Castle of Shock and Awe-tism

17 Jan 2011, 1:08 pm

AceOfSpades wrote:
Exactly, Israel's sh** stinks the least out of all of em. To call them evil sounds like a typical anti-war knee jerk response and is as stupid as calling Bush a Fascist or Obama a Commie. It's like those people who say "Bush lied, people died!". Hamas are the real evil chickenshit scumbags.


Critical mess topic

It is far easier to call Israel evil than it is North Korea which does not have an open press, and few if any poltical dissidents able to report problems.

I have noticed in this thread that some of the posters twist what others write and I find this a tad deceitful. I suppose this is what conspiracy theorists do. :P


_________________
Radiant Aspergian
Awe-Tistic Whirlwind

Phuture Phounder of the Philosophy Phactory

NOT a believer of Mystic Woo-Woo


skafather84
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 20 Mar 2006
Age: 33
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,156
Location: New Orleans, LA

17 Jan 2011, 2:41 pm

sartresue wrote:
I suppose this is what conspiracy theorists do. :P


That and extrapolate connections to be much more involved and notorious than they actually are.


_________________
Wherever they burn books they will also, in the end, burn human beings. ~Heinrich Heine, Almansor, 1823

?I wouldn't recommend sex, drugs or insanity for everyone, but they've always worked for me.? - Hunter S. Thompson


AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,770
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

17 Jan 2011, 3:23 pm

sartresue wrote:
AceOfSpades wrote:
Exactly, Israel's sh** stinks the least out of all of em. To call them evil sounds like a typical anti-war knee jerk response and is as stupid as calling Bush a Fascist or Obama a Commie. It's like those people who say "Bush lied, people died!". Hamas are the real evil chickenshit scumbags.


Critical mess topic

It is far easier to call Israel evil than it is North Korea which does not have an open press, and few if any poltical dissidents able to report problems.

I have noticed in this thread that some of the posters twist what others write and I find this a tad deceitful. I suppose this is what conspiracy theorists do. :P
lol I think the twisting has more to do with being a drama queen than being a tinfoil hat wearer. Seriously, isn't it blowing things outta proportion to say Israel isn't as evil as NK as if they're only a little better? North Korea practically lives in a bubble. If you wanna find something that's only a little better than NK, then there's tons of countries much worse than Israel. And hell, I hardly even consider Israel being anywhere near evil.

@ skafather: Extrapolating too far ahead has a lot to do with it, but I also find their fundamental concept of human nature is wacked. That people are such mindless gullible drones that you could actually coordinate huge groups of people to pull off 9/11 without getting away with it.

While I do think people tend to have a herd mentality, people aren't as sheepish and gullible to the extreme extent conspiracy theorists hold as latent assumptions. A herd mentality is a double edged sword, it can tell you something's wrong when everyone else starts running the other direction, or it can tell you what a loner you are when everyone else is jumping off a cliff. And plus, they have this belief that a few people are the ones who start with power and control the masses, while ignoring the fact that it's the masses who give them the power

Power over people comes from them, not you. They give you power because they believe it is within their best interests and that it will benefit em, not because they're so mindless and gullible that they'll just get clingy out of insecurity.

I'm a believer in the fact that tyranny starts with the masses, which is a big reason why a lot of conspiracy theories instantly set off my bullshit detector. Hitler would've never became powerful if antisemitism wasn't already prevalent.



Vexcalibur
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Jan 2008
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,573

17 Jan 2011, 6:45 pm

Calling Obama a fascist or a communist is wrong because his actions are neither. He is being a useless president, he is not doing anything to stop the wars, he may start one soon but he is not within the definition of fascist or communist.

Calling Israel evil is accurate. the existence of far worse off countries like NK, do not make Israel's issues go away. The claim that it "is the least oppressive middle easter country" is actually a major claim that I will request some proof for. But again, just because worse countries exist, it does not mean Israel's actions are fine, they are really not fine, and I think that Israel has deserved the evil tag since a long time ago.

And I am sorry, but when a state goes imprisoning dissenters, I consider it to have crossed the line between democracy and non-democracy. Then we have intentionally bombing civilians, blocking aid and the red cross' access to a rival country ... I cannot believe you guys are managing to excuse such behavior by just saying "NK is far worse" or "The other mid east countries are worse". Israel is not Ok.

So, really, Israel are not as evil as NK, and I hope they have a long way to go to that level, but accepting their behavior just because NK are more evil is not something I can agree with.


_________________
.


AceOfSpades
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 11 Feb 2006
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,770
Location: Sean Penn, Cambodia

17 Jan 2011, 8:03 pm

Vexcalibur wrote:
Calling Obama a fascist or a communist is wrong because his actions are neither. He is being a useless president, he is not doing anything to stop the wars, he may start one soon but he is not within the definition of fascist or communist.

Calling Israel evil is accurate. the existence of far worse off countries like NK, do not make Israel's issues go away. The claim that it "is the least oppressive middle easter country" is actually a major claim that I will request some proof for. But again, just because worse countries exist, it does not mean Israel's actions are fine, they are really not fine, and I think that Israel has deserved the evil tag since a long time ago.

And I am sorry, but when a state goes imprisoning dissenters, I consider it to have crossed the line between democracy and non-democracy. Then we have intentionally bombing civilians, blocking aid and the red cross' access to a rival country ... I cannot believe you guys are managing to excuse such behavior by just saying "NK is far worse" or "The other mid east countries are worse". Israel is not Ok.

So, really, Israel are not as evil as NK, and I hope they have a long way to go to that level, but accepting their behavior just because NK are more evil is not something I can agree with.
The fact that Muslims are allowed to openly practice their religion and the fact that they have the same rights is proof that it is the least oppressive out of all the middle eastern countries What dissenters exactly are you talking about?

Where's the proof that they intentionally target civilians? Hamas has been known to hide among the civilian population and have been known to stash weapons in all kinds of buildings, as well as using civilians as shields. Those scumbags have been lobbing bombs into their neighbourhoods, so I don't expect Israel to stand by idly and watch it happen.

btw I apologize for labeling you a drama queen since it's wrong for me to assume that bringing NK up means you think Israel's only a notch down from their level of evil, but I still think the way you see it is completely blown outta proportion.



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,602

18 Jan 2011, 7:17 am

Salonfilosoof wrote:
I guess government is a necessary evil, however the situation can be far, far better than what we have here in the West today. Maybe not in any "democracy", but it's naive to believe that we live in an actual democracy or that the system is any better than dictatorship or kingdom.


Trust me, you're better off being in the West than in some Arab country. I know from experience.

Quote:
And who defines when a conspiracy theory is proven and thus an actual conspiracy? The media? Acaceme? The FBI? Politicians? Some consider it a proven fact that 9/11 was perpetrated by US and/or Israeli Intelligence and that they used controlled demolition to let the towers fall (using the airplanes for the shock value and to have a pretext for all TV stations filming and broadcasting on the two towers). Others consider it a proven fact that 9/11 was perpetrated by a bunch of Muslem "fundamentalists" using just a few airplaines. Both are conspiracy theories, both consider the other side utter nonsense and both sides are supported by articles written by experts. Nevertheless, only one is considered to be a genuine conspiracy because.... well because the media and politicians say so I guess.


There is no evidence for controlled demolition being used. So I go with what I (meaning I) see is true.

Personally, I have no interest in which side was behind the plane attacks.

Quote:
That's your opinion. In my opinion, official theory is totally groundless while the alternatives ARE supported by evidence. What makes you so absolutely sure your interpretation of the data is correct and mine is wrong?


First of all, I take what witnesses say seriously. Do you have any witness who saw a missile hit the Pentagon instead of a plane? And also, in my personal observations, it's always the 911 conspiracy theorists that resort to quoting what people say out of context and misinterpreting things according to their fantasies (like the 45 degree cutouts).

Quote:
When the media told us there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, many people accepted it as truth without question. When the media told us that a bunch of muslem fundamentalists hit the twin towers on 9/11, many people accepted it as truth without question. Now I think we can both agree on the fact that the first claim was pure propaganda, but we seem to disagree on the second claim. What makes you so sure the media did tell the truth? What makes you so sure NIST (which imo delivered a purely pseudoscientific piece of nonsense) and the CIA tell the truth? Are you sure they're totally objective and have no reason to tell the truth?


Did you read what I said in the previous post? Don't ask such deceptive questions. Know my position first!

Quote:
So what you do think makes us believe what we believe then?


I will only speak for myself.

Intellectual honesty. Nothing more.

Quote:
I only mentioned two theories here, both pretty fantastic in their claims yet taken at face value by most people.


In what way are they fantastic? What kind of world do you think you live in?

Quote:
Which ones?


Browse the thread. I can't be stuffed posting them again. And, anyway, you can just watch them on YouTube if you're so interested.

Quote:
I watched through all of them any many more. It only takes a few hours to do so, really, and I think some of this information is pretty VITAL for people to make up their minds about the society we live in.


No, thanks. I've had enough of wild conspiracy theory videos. Used to watch a lot of them in the past (before developing critical thinking and realizing they were full of nonsense).

Quote:
Can you link them again? This thread is getting a bit long so it might not be a bad idea to repost them.


Since I'm feeling generous at this very moment, I'll post just one video here. It should be more than enough for you.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elKov_UZDQE&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]

Quote:
No one denies that Jews had only limited rights in the Third Reich. No one denies there was intense antisemitic propaganda in the Third Reich. no one denies that from '39 onwards Jews were sent to concentration camps and ghettoes in large numbers. No one denies that typhus and starvation killed many people in those camps, especially by the end of the war. No one denies that many of the inmates are treated horrible by the capos. etc.

No one denies all that. No one denies that large numbers of Jews suffered in camps and that many of them died. There are just some people who don't see any evidence for the existence of homicidal gas chambers or a plan to murder the Jews. What's peculiar, is that these people are called deniers and actually punished by law in about a dozen Western countries for what in any other era of history would have been regarded as legitimate questions.


I bet you think there's some bigass conspiracy going on against poor deniers like you.

I perosnally don't have a problem with honest questioners of the Holocaust (honest skepticism is always encouraged). I have a problem with those who deny it (despite any evidence) because they have a personal agenda of some sort.

Quote:
Yet in my opinion that's exactly what YOU're doing. You say that the evidence points to the contrary of what zer0netgain is arguing, but I and about 1300 experts disagree on that. Now I may be just some random shmuck, but what makes you so sure those 1300 experts are wrong when they say the evidence does NOT support the official version?!?


Because I have eyes to see and ears to hear. I only need experts to clarify certain aspects of the evidence I see. I don't need experts to tell me things that I can know for myself on my own.

Quote:
Didn't you say anything about evidence? It's quite well-known that building 7 fell to the ground following the pattern of your typical controlled demolition. No plane flew into it and there were just a few small unexplained fires. Still, most so-called "sceptics" even deny that controlled demolition was used in building 7 because they just can't wrap their simpleminded heads around the idea.


I've already posted enough videos (addressing the points you made in the comment above) that show that you need to start being honest with yourself and with us. You are not fooling anyone but your fellow conspiracy theorists and yourself.

Quote:
The claims with regards to Larry Silverstein are pretty wellknown and all over the net. I haven't been able to verify them yet, but they definitely do make sense and would explain a lot. It's peculiar you dismiss this as "crap" without even a single argument of why you believe that. Weren't you the one who said that the evidence didn't support zer0netgain?!? You seem to know only very little about the evidence.


I don't give a s**t for what you think. You said it yourself. You haven't been able to verify those claims for yourself. So why already accept them as true. Do you enjoy believing things blindly?

Anyway, if you actually care for the truth, then just check any of the videos on YouTube that address this. The claims have been shown to be exaggerated and resulting from taking what Larry Silverstein said out of context. Typical of conspiracy theorists as they don't mind lying to people to get their points across.



marshall
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Apr 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,000
Location: Turkey

18 Jan 2011, 5:00 pm

AceOfSpades wrote:
I'm a believer in the fact that tyranny starts with the masses, which is a big reason why a lot of conspiracy theories instantly set off my bullshit detector. Hitler would've never became powerful if antisemitism wasn't already prevalent.

I agree. Tyranny based on ideology is almost always a bottom up phenomenon. There was little dissent or resistance to the Nazi party. It wasn't until Hitler began his invasions that some of the population began to wonder if he was nuts, but by then it was too late.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Age: 51
Gender: Male
Posts: 33,059
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

18 Jan 2011, 5:44 pm

marshall wrote:
AceOfSpades wrote:
I'm a believer in the fact that tyranny starts with the masses, which is a big reason why a lot of conspiracy theories instantly set off my bullshit detector. Hitler would've never became powerful if antisemitism wasn't already prevalent.

I agree. Tyranny based on ideology is almost always a bottom up phenomenon. There was little dissent or resistance to the Nazi party. It wasn't until Hitler began his invasions that some of the population began to wonder if he was nuts, but by then it was too late.


Actually, there were elements in Germany who had resisted Hitler from the very beginning - Social Democrats, socialists, communists, artists, actors etc. - but a great many of them ended up in concentration camps even before the Jews - or simply were killed, or disappeared. Others simply went abroad to America, Britain, or France, such as the actor Conrad Veidt ( ironically, who despite his anti-Nazi sentiments ended up playing Nazis) or the artist George Grosz, whose warnings to the American public, prior to Pearl Harbor, were seen as the rantings of a leftist alarmist.

-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer



Salonfilosoof
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,184

18 Jan 2011, 9:01 pm

Macbeth wrote:
I notice a touch of clever manipulation in your post. "Treated horribly by the capos, etc" is a little misleading, don't you think? The CAPOS get a mention (and is it so very evil for people to take the only out they get given?) but the SS guards and officers and doctors and their families are just an etc. Turning people into LAMPS is worthy only of an ETC? Should it not read "treated horribly by the SS, etc?"


First of all, no one was being turned into lampshades or soap. Those are both claims that have been dismissed a long time ago by mainstream historians.

With regards to the behavior of the SS in the camps, most reports I've read on abuse within the concentration camps deal with the capos who seem to have had quite a lot of independence in their actions. I'm not suggesting that the SS never harmed the inmates at all, however to me they seem far less common than claims about abuse by the capos. Claims about the SS doctors do not seem to be very reliable.

Macbeth wrote:
You deny the evidence of the SS themselves as well, not to mention the eyewitness reports of thousands of people, be they victims or otherwise, not to mention scientific and political evidence by the ton. You forget that of all the regimes in history to collapse, few have left such an intact corpse, nor the paperwork of an entire state mechanism free to be reviewed and read. The Soviet Union changed into something else, and thus the "evidence" of its own activities are controlled by another state. Nazi Germany left everything lying out for anyone to see. The small amount that is missing is out-weighed by the sheer volume of material.


I'm keeping all that evidence in account.

Macbeth wrote:
There are some people who don't see any evidence of gas chambers and genocide because they choose not to see it.


Actually it's the other way around. Those who don't see any evidence of gas chambers and genocide are the ones who actually studied the available evidence.

Macbeth wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
Salonfilosoof wrote:
ruveyn wrote:
The U.S. government is evil enough, but it is far from The Greatest Evil.


That's true. Israel is worse, though only slightly.



How about the government of North Korea which is starving its people to maintain its military. They are a major evil. They won't let anyone out.

ruveyn


Which is worse? An evil masquerading as good, or an evil that wears a big hat with EVIL written on it, carrying a banner with EVIL on it?


I would say evil masquerading as good because at least the latter isn't fooling anyone...

I'm not convinced that North-Korea is as evil as we're supposed to believe, though. Nearly all info we get about North-Korea comes comes from sources I've learnt to distrust. In fact, what DO we actually know about North-Korea?!

AceOfSpades wrote:
You do know your home address can be traced back to your IP right? So if the government was really behind 9/11, then why are you making it easy for em to find you? Your tinfoil hat doesn't help much when they can see what you're thinking on a forum :roll:


THe only people who are silenced by Big Brother are those who manage to influence a large amount of people. Usually they first try to ruin a person's credibility by defamation (eg. calling him a "racist", a "terrorist", a "fundamentalist", ...). If that doesn't work, they next step is ruining a person financially by having him fired, forcing advertisers to take a step back, etc. If that doesn't work either, they try false accusations, often involving paedophilia or rape (eg. the Julian Assange case). Only very rarely do people get imprisoned or killed for expressing their views for obvious reasons : more people would take them seriously. The only exception are those who question the murder of 6 million Jews during WW2. Apparently that heritage is considered so sacriligious it's pretty easy to be thrown in jail when you manage to reach enough people.

Kraichgauer wrote:
But the fact remains, Israel is the least oppressive Middle Eastern country, where citizens can and do speak out against their government, and religion is practiced freely. That's a far cry from the surrounding countries that jail or kill dissidents, and where Christians, Jews, and even Muslims of differing theology live in oppression and poverty.
AceOfSpades wrote:
Exactly, Israel's sh** stinks the least out of all of em. To call them evil sounds like a typical anti-war knee jerk response and is as stupid as calling Bush a Fascist or Obama a Commie. It's like those people who say "Bush lied, people died!". Hamas are the real evil chickenshit scumbags.


Israel and Saudi-Arabia (two close allies of the US) are actually the most oppressive Middle Eastern countries, whereas eg. Iran, Turkey or Lebanon are far less oppressive. Also, Hamas is actually doing a lot of great things to help the Palestinian people and one of the few to do so.

You should really stop taking the lies of the Zionist mainstream media for granted ;)



Salonfilosoof
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,184

18 Jan 2011, 9:34 pm

MCalavera wrote:
Trust me, you're better off being in the West than in some Arab country. I know from experience.


What country did you live in and what was it better than the West in your opinion?

MCalavera wrote:
Quote:
And who defines when a conspiracy theory is proven and thus an actual conspiracy? The media? Acaceme? The FBI? Politicians? Some consider it a proven fact that 9/11 was perpetrated by US and/or Israeli Intelligence and that they used controlled demolition to let the towers fall (using the airplanes for the shock value and to have a pretext for all TV stations filming and broadcasting on the two towers). Others consider it a proven fact that 9/11 was perpetrated by a bunch of Muslem "fundamentalists" using just a few airplaines. Both are conspiracy theories, both consider the other side utter nonsense and both sides are supported by articles written by experts. Nevertheless, only one is considered to be a genuine conspiracy because.... well because the media and politicians say so I guess.


There is no evidence for controlled demolition being used. So I go with what I (meaning I) see is true.


Actually, all the evidence seems to point towards controlled demolition. Not only that, it's physically impossible for the WTC towers to have collapsed the way they did without the used of explosives.

MCalavera wrote:
Personally, I have no interest in which side was behind the plane attacks.


So you wouldn't want to know if the US government planned it or not?

MCalavera wrote:
Quote:
That's your opinion. In my opinion, official theory is totally groundless while the alternatives ARE supported by evidence. What makes you so absolutely sure your interpretation of the data is correct and mine is wrong?


First of all, I take what witnesses say seriously. Do you have any witness who saw a missile hit the Pentagon instead of a plane?


I've seen footage of the most diverse witness reports varying from a missile to all kinds of airplanes. There is little consistency in the witness reports, actually.

Still, I personally don't know or care what hit the Pentagon. It is peculiar, however, at what angle the Pentagon was hit considering the supposed airplane supposebly came from another direction yet managed to hit a side of the Pentagon that was under construction. How nice of the "terrorists" to do so :wink:

MCalavera wrote:
And also, in my personal observations, it's always the 911 conspiracy theorists that resort to quoting what people say out of context and misinterpreting things according to their fantasies (like the 45 degree cutouts).


Quote-mining is not typical for one side. It's a common human flaw that can be find on both sides to a smilar degree.

MCalavera wrote:
Quote:
So what you do think makes us believe what we believe then?


I will only speak for myself.

Intellectual honesty. Nothing more.


It is intellectual honesty, evidence and rational thinking that led me to reject the official version of 9/11.

MCalavera wrote:
Quote:
I only mentioned two theories here, both pretty fantastic in their claims yet taken at face value by most people.


In what way are they fantastic? What kind of world do you think you live in?


When you look at both claims in detail, they burst like a bubble. They're as credible as your average Christian myth, really.

MCalavera wrote:
No, thanks. I've had enough of wild conspiracy theory videos. Used to watch a lot of them in the past (before developing critical thinking and realizing they were full of nonsense).


There's a lot of disinformation out there. Alex Jones, David Icke and Texe Marrs are a few well-known examples. Some are probably in it for the money and others are probably on the CIA payroll. Other sources are reliable, though. You just need to wade through piles of s**t before you stumble on some fine gems and what I did what precisely that : hand-pick a few gems beneath a pile of s**t.

MCalavera wrote:
Quote:
Can you link them again? This thread is getting a bit long so it might not be a bad idea to repost them.


Since I'm feeling generous at this very moment, I'll post just one video here. It should be more than enough for you.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=elKov_UZDQE&feature=player_embedded[/youtube]


I'll check it out ASAP. I'm currently on a smallband connection because I exceeded my limits and I won't have broadband for another two or three days.

MCalavera wrote:
Quote:
No one denies that Jews had only limited rights in the Third Reich. No one denies there was intense antisemitic propaganda in the Third Reich. no one denies that from '39 onwards Jews were sent to concentration camps and ghettoes in large numbers. No one denies that typhus and starvation killed many people in those camps, especially by the end of the war. No one denies that many of the inmates are treated horrible by the capos. etc.

No one denies all that. No one denies that large numbers of Jews suffered in camps and that many of them died. There are just some people who don't see any evidence for the existence of homicidal gas chambers or a plan to murder the Jews. What's peculiar, is that these people are called deniers and actually punished by law in about a dozen Western countries for what in any other era of history would have been regarded as legitimate questions.


I bet you think there's some bigass conspiracy going on against poor deniers like you.


Why do you insist on calling sceptics deniers?! Also, don't you think it's peculiar that people are thrown in jail for questioning historical accuracy on one particular part of history while this is pretty much common practice in ANY other part of history (although some governments are currently trying to make any questioning with regards to any officially recognised genocide illegal).

MCalavera wrote:
I perosnally don't have a problem with honest questioners of the Holocaust (honest skepticism is always encouraged). I have a problem with those who deny it (despite any evidence) because they have a personal agenda of some sort.


How do you distinguish the first from the latter? What is in your opinion valid scepticism and what is in your opinion denial? What is in your opinion reasonable to question and what isn't? What evidence do you consider valid and what evidence do you not? Have you ever read any article or book from the people you accuse of "denial" or do you know all you know about them from their opposition? If you know all you know about them from their opposition, how can you possibly make up your mind objectively on whether or not they have any solid arguments?

Just for the record, I've read quite a lot of material from BOTH sides and whereas imo the revisionist side (whom you call deniers) have a pretty strong case, the official position is as full of holes as swiss cheese.

MCalavera wrote:
Quote:
Yet in my opinion that's exactly what YOU're doing. You say that the evidence points to the contrary of what zer0netgain is arguing, but I and about 1300 experts disagree on that. Now I may be just some random shmuck, but what makes you so sure those 1300 experts are wrong when they say the evidence does NOT support the official version?!?


Because I have eyes to see and ears to hear. I only need experts to clarify certain aspects of the evidence I see. I don't need experts to tell me things that I can know for myself on my own.


So you know for a fact that it's physically possible for the airplanes alone to have caused the collapse of the WTC towers, without having any knowledge of structuring engineering? Well, I'm not a structural engineer either but imo this is physically impossible by any standards. Don't you think we need experts to sort out who's right? Isn't it arrogant to assume you're right without even looking into the arguments against your position?

MCalavera wrote:
Quote:
Didn't you say anything about evidence? It's quite well-known that building 7 fell to the ground following the pattern of your typical controlled demolition. No plane flew into it and there were just a few small unexplained fires. Still, most so-called "sceptics" even deny that controlled demolition was used in building 7 because they just can't wrap their simpleminded heads around the idea.


I've already posted enough videos (addressing the points you made in the comment above) that show that you need to start being honest with yourself and with us. You are not fooling anyone but your fellow conspiracy theorists and yourself.


I am honest with myself. You are the one ignoring the evidence.

MCalavera wrote:
Quote:
The claims with regards to Larry Silverstein are pretty wellknown and all over the net. I haven't been able to verify them yet, but they definitely do make sense and would explain a lot. It's peculiar you dismiss this as "crap" without even a single argument of why you believe that. Weren't you the one who said that the evidence didn't support zer0netgain?!? You seem to know only very little about the evidence.


I don't give a sh** for what you think. You said it yourself. You haven't been able to verify those claims for yourself. So why already accept them as true. Do you enjoy believing things blindly?


I don't accept them as either true or false as long as I haven't been able to verify them, however they do provide an answer to some of the questions those defending the official theory often have.

MCalavera wrote:
Anyway, if you actually care for the truth, then just check any of the videos on YouTube that address this. The claims have been shown to be exaggerated and resulting from taking what Larry Silverstein said out of context. Typical of conspiracy theorists as they don't mind lying to people to get their points across.


So then what is the truth? Where are the so-called conspiract theorists wrong? Do you deny that the WTC towers were running at a loss and if so on what data do you base that denial? Do you deny that Silverstein made quite a profit from the insurance policy he had on the WTC towers? If not, on what data do you base that denial?



Salonfilosoof
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Dec 2009
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,184

18 Jan 2011, 9:43 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Actually, there were elements in Germany who had resisted Hitler from the very beginning - Social Democrats, socialists, communists, artists, actors etc. - but a great many of them ended up in concentration camps even before the Jews - or simply were killed, or disappeared. Others simply went abroad to America, Britain, or France, such as the actor Conrad Veidt ( ironically, who despite his anti-Nazi sentiments ended up playing Nazis) or the artist George Grosz, whose warnings to the American public, prior to Pearl Harbor, were seen as the rantings of a leftist alarmist.


There are and will always be dissidents in every political system. These dissidents have always and will always be persecuted. It happened in Third Reich, it happened in the Sovietunion and it's happening in out so-called "democratic" societies today as well. The only difference is both in the Third Reich and in the Sovietunion authorities were pretty clear about there not being any free speech because they believed it to be harmful to the system, whereas in our "democratic" societies we're given the illusion of freedom of speech and political freedom while at the same time people can get expelled from college, lose their jobs, be forced to pay fines and/or get sent to jail for expressing opinions that don't fall within the narrow range of accepted opinions. Also, the indoctrination of our youth today is done in a far more subtle way under the pretext of "education" or "entertainment", yet their content is so extreme by nature many kids have lost the ability to think for themselves altogether once they leave college, thus becoming the perfect drones for Big Brother.



MCalavera
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Dec 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,602

20 Jan 2011, 4:39 am

Salonfilosoof wrote:
What country did you live in and what was it better than the West in your opinion?


I lived in Lebanon for several years. To the Lebanese government there, the people are nothing but unwanted garbage. I can't say the same about the American government or the British government or the Australian government.

Quote:
Actually, all the evidence seems to point towards controlled demolition. Not only that, it's physically impossible for the WTC towers to have collapsed the way they did without the used of explosives.


That's not what peer-reviewed scientific papers say.

And I have yet to see conclusive evidence for controlled demolition causing the buildings to collapse. Where is that evidence?

Hope you understand what I mean by conclusive evidence. No, I don't mean speculations by some Mormon "scientist" or quotes taken out of context.

Quote:
So you wouldn't want to know if the US government planned it or not?


If it did, where's the evidence?

Quote:
I've seen footage of the most diverse witness reports varying from a missile to all kinds of airplanes. There is little consistency in the witness reports, actually.


I've yet to see one witness report seeing a missile. Is it that guy who's well known for having his words taken out of context by conspiracy theorists? If so, I wouldn't trust that footage.

Quote:
Still, I personally don't know or care what hit the Pentagon. It is peculiar, however, at what angle the Pentagon was hit considering the supposed airplane supposebly came from another direction yet managed to hit a side of the Pentagon that was under construction. How nice of the "terrorists" to do so :wink:


Ok, I'm unfamiliar with this bit here. Where did you get such information from?

Quote:
Quote-mining is not typical for one side. It's a common human flaw that can be find on both sides to a smilar degree.


I have no problem agreeing with this bit. I just haven't seen any quote-mining being done by the other side. In fact, I don't see why they need to. Anyone who's telling the truth doesn't need to resort to such deceptive tactics.

Quote:
It is intellectual honesty, evidence and rational thinking that led me to reject the official version of 9/11.


Are you sure it's not you having a problem with the Jews that you reject the "official" version of 9/11? I mean, let's face it. Judging from your posts, you seem to have a problem with them. Did they do anything bad or naughty to you when you were a child?

Quote:
When you look at both claims in detail, they burst like a bubble. They're as credible as your average Christian myth, really.


Oh, really?

You seem to know more than all the scientists out there who disagree with you. Doesn't that sound so fantastic?

Quote:
There's a lot of disinformation out there. Alex Jones, David Icke and Texe Marrs are a few well-known examples. Some are probably in it for the money and others are probably on the CIA payroll. Other sources are reliable, though. You just need to wade through piles of sh** before you stumble on some fine gems and what I did what precisely that : hand-pick a few gems beneath a pile of sh**.


CIA payroll? So now there's a conspiracy going on between several conspiracy theorists? LOL!

And you're complaining about fantastic ...

Quote:
I'll check it out ASAP. I'm currently on a smallband connection because I exceeded my limits and I won't have broadband for another two or three days.


That's what happens when you watch too many conspiracy theory videos.

Quote:
Why do you insist on calling sceptics deniers?! Also, don't you think it's peculiar that people are thrown in jail for questioning historical accuracy on one particular part of history while this is pretty much common practice in ANY other part of history (although some governments are currently trying to make any questioning with regards to any officially recognised genocide illegal).


First of all, if you want me to call you a skeptic instead of a denier, then start acting like one ... and get rid of this agenda that you seem to have against the Jews. It's making you sound very biased.

Oh, and why aren't you in jail yourself? Is it because you live in a country that treats disrespectful deniers like you in a civilized manner? Which country do you live in? Don't tell me it's the USA, the country allegedly controlled by the Jews! ;)

Quote:
How do you distinguish the first from the latter? What is in your opinion valid scepticism and what is in your opinion denial? What is in your opinion reasonable to question and what isn't? What evidence do you consider valid and what evidence do you not? Have you ever read any article or book from the people you accuse of "denial" or do you know all you know about them from their opposition? If you know all you know about them from their opposition, how can you possibly make up your mind objectively on whether or not they have any solid arguments?


The historical evidence is there ... just as there is evidence ofr the theory of evolution. If you deny all the documents and witnesses as evidence, then obviously you're a denier. A skeptic would look at all these evidence and accept them as evidence because they are conclusive and because there is no evidence that shows otherwise. All you have is denial on the other side.

Quote:
Just for the record, I've read quite a lot of material from BOTH sides and whereas imo the revisionist side (whom you call deniers) have a pretty strong case, the official position is as full of holes as swiss cheese.


You're like the typical creationist who thinks the theory of evolution is ridiculous and full of holes while his belief makes more sense, lol.

I really do want to take you conspiracy theorists seriously. But damn!

Quote:
So you know for a fact that it's physically possible for the airplanes alone to have caused the collapse of the WTC towers, without having any knowledge of structuring engineering? Well, I'm not a structural engineer either but imo this is physically impossible by any standards. Don't you think we need experts to sort out who's right? Isn't it arrogant to assume you're right without even looking into the arguments against your position?


I already have. The peer-reviewed scientific papers say that it's physically possible. Any "expert" who says otherwise is a liar.

I didn't even know about the claims that it was physically impossible until I watched some conspiracy theory videos.

Quote:
I am honest with myself. You are the one ignoring the evidence.


Keep yourself in denial. I'm tempted to mock you soon.

Quote:
I don't accept them as either true or false as long as I haven't been able to verify them, however they do provide an answer to some of the questions those defending the official theory often have.


Just out of curiosity, what are the claims that you have yet to verify for yourself?

Quote:
So then what is the truth?


The planes alone were enough to cause the damage.

Quote:
Where are the so-called conspiract theorists wrong?


They're wrong by dismissing the evidence and listening to liars like Steven Jones (who happens to be a Mormon).

Quote:
Do you deny that the WTC towers were running at a loss and if so on what data do you base that denial?


Were they running at a loss? I have no clue. I just don't care, really.

Quote:
Do you deny that Silverstein made quite a profit from the insurance policy he had on the WTC towers? If not, on what data do you base that denial?


If he did, then good for him. Do you have a problem with him making profit?

I make quite a profit from customers sending me their computers infected with viruses and malware. It doesn't mean that I put the viruses in those systems myself.

So you see what I mean by conclusive evidence?

Looking forward to your next deceptive post. :)