Conspiracy Theories

Post Reply New Topic

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

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.



I'm keeping all that evidence in account.



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.



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?!



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.



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

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



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.



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



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



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.



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



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



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.



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.



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).



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.



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



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.



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?

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.

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.



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.



If it did, where's the evidence?



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.



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



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.



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?



Oh, really?

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



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

And you're complaining about fantastic ...



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



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!



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.



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!



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.



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



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



The planes alone were enough to cause the damage.



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



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



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.

I don't know about the Lebanese government, but the British government and the Australian government PRETEND to care about their populations. I don't know how pretending to care is actually better than showing you don't care.



Which ones? Can you name some papers that were NOT published by a federal agency like the NIST?



Check out the Journal of 9/11 Studies and let me know if you can find any papers that aactually ddresses their arguments and succesfully manages to debunk them..



To my knowledge there's no direct evidence but a lot of circumstancial evidence that can only lead to the conclusion that either the CIA, Mossad or both were involved.

Anyway, let me reverse the argument here. Where's the evidence that muslem fundamentalists had anything to do with it?



It's been a while. I should take a look at the footage again before I can comment on that.



You're unfamiliar with this? This is pretty old news actually.

Anyway, here's what Wikipedia tells us :


You'll find some more info on the renovation program, the flight path and other issues with the Pentagon attack at the [/quote]Scholars for 9/11 Truth & Justice website. Also very interesting is this infamous video which is probably the first source most people think of when they think of the anomalies regarding the Pentagon strike.



True. That's precisely why the sceptics of the official side don't need to



First of all, I have been sceptical about the whole issue from the very start and back then I barely even contemplated about Jewish culture. Second, I have a problem with Jewish culture because of its corrosive influence on other cultures that has been well documented throughout history. I do not have any problem with Jews who do not engage in such behavior and condemn it, like eg. professor Norman Finkelstein or professor Israel Shahak.



I'm a former member of Mensa, used to be a maths whiz in high school, I'm currently a programmer by profession and in my spare time I've been doing research on psychology, history, political science and various other human sciences for more than 10 years now. Is it really that hard to believe that I just might know more about some of these issues than scientists who might be biased by any agenda?



Ever heard of COINTELPRO (an acronym for Counter Intelligence Program)? Ever heard of Operation Northwoods? If not, look it up. US intelligence agencies have a long history of aimed at surveilling, infiltrating, discrediting, and disrupting organizations and individuals, whether domestic or abroad, by any means possible.





Actually, I probably spent most of that bandwidth enjoying myself watching creationists make a fool of themselves at YouTube and downloading ebooks on programming.



So a genuine sceptic cannot criticise Jews without losing credibility? Is that what you're saying? Also, how does my opinion on Jewish culture make it any more or any less acceptable 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?



First of all, the US doesn't officially lock up people for their views. The first ammendment protects people from that although there are other ways to silence a person. However, there are many other countries where people can and have been charged, persecuted and locked up for no other reason but questioning a particular aspect of history. I live in one of those countries, but I'm simply not influential enough for my government to care. One of my countrymen did actually manage to reach quite a few people worldwide with his website and the books he sells and he has been sent to jail several times because of that. Of course there are many others with viewpoints just like him, but few have the balls to face a prison sentence just to stand up for what they know to be true.



Holocaust revisionists (or as you call them : deniers) do look into all the documents and witnesses. They don't deny any of the evidence at all. That's why the label "denier" itself is already a distortion of what they're actually doing. What they ACTUALLY do, is look at all the evidence from a sceptic perspective and their conclusions differ from the official story. Considering the controversial and off-topic nature of the issue I do not wish to go into any greater detail in this thread. If you want more details, let me know and I can send them via PM.



I don't believe in anything. I check for evidence, I analyse it and draw my conclusions. That's how rational people are supposed to act and that's a method I consistently apply.



So it's impossible for two different experts to agree, right? It's impossible for those experts publishing in peer-reviewed scientific papers to have an agenda, right? By the way, what peer-reviewed scientific papers are you referring to and can I find the articles as well as their reviews online?



Actually, when I saw the towers crumble my instant reaction was that something just didn't fit and the more I thought about it the more I realised it was just physically impossible for the towers to have collapsed the way they did without the use of explosives. It was only after I came to that conclusion that I started doing research and came to realise I was far from the only one who had come to that conclusion... some of whom have a degree in engineering and this more scientific data to back then up.



For example, I simply don't know how to verify whether or not the WTC towers were in fact operating at a loss or what exactly Silverstein's insurance payment was.



Just keep telling that to yourself





So because someone believes in a silly religion, he can't know anything about engineering? What about all the other experts? What evidence are so-called "conspiracy theorists" dismissing? IMO, it's precisely your side that's dismissing most of the evidence.



It matters, because if they were there's a financial motive as well.



No, it doesn't. But it does provide motive.



Look who's talking

Cheers for posting that!

By the way, I do not know if you are familiar with the theory but there is a theory with some supporting evidence that it may not have been planes involved with the WTC's at all.

Somebody did a video analysis and has come to the the conclusion that the manner in which the planes in the videos moved was not possible. That it also looks as if the planes were doctored onto the videos which made the news.

People do claim to have seen the claims for themselves, but studies have shown in the past that if you show somebody something, they can believe to have seen it themselves when what they saw was in fact slightly different. NOT that this has to be the case, but it is possible.

2 part video:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R41kiEq0sBw[/youtube]

I heard this claim years ago but I don't think it's credible. It's not just possible but in fact probable that a missile rather than an airplane hit the pentagon, but it seems pretty obvious to me that it were two airplanes that hit the WTC. After the first plane hit the first tower, numerous cameras were pointed at the WTC both by professionals and amateurs alike. I suspect this was actually planned just so EVERYONE watching TV at that time would see the second plane fly into the other tower LIVE. What better way to shock the entire world than showing the footage of a plane flying into one of the towers LIVE?!

I'm far from convinced that any of the footage we've all seen from different camera angles was doctored and I don't know why they would do that. Also, unlike with the Pentagon the WTC towers show a point of entry that's consistent with the shape of a plane and I've heard of no witnesses who question having seen a plane.

IMO, the whole "no plane at the WTC" theory is disinformation intended to discredit the truth movement.

My aunt happened to be in NYC during 9/11 and saw the 2nd plane hit.. ah, the internet, you glorious jewel of misinformation.

I did not say it was fact, just said that it seemed possible.

I think you might be right you know.

She and a few million others I guess...



Indeed. This doesn't mean there's no valid reason to question the official story, though

I agree

Came across some interesting stuff on FB relating to 9/11

Here is a 5th book the same guy just uploaded.

I take it you've never been to Australia. The Australian governnment actually helps with its citizens' financial needs.

Just so you know, I'm an Australian citizen ...



How about a paper posted in the Journal of Engineering Mechanics? A lot of 9/11 conspiracy theorists have tried to have their theories accepted by this journal but in vain. In fact, while I do know of one "paper" by a James Gourley that was published in the journal, it was not actually accepted by the experts as a scientific paper on its own. It was added for experts to respond to with corrections. So it was really more of a "discussion paper".

As for the paper that was fully accepted by the Journal of Engineering Mechanics, go to the following link:
http://www-math.mit.edu/~bazant/WTC/

And follow the relevant link(s) from there.



I don't trust journals that easily accepts unscientific papers. I want an actual peer-reviewed paper that supports your theories. The ones you linked me to don't sound like they were heavily reviewed by anonymous experts in the relevant scientific fields and such before being accepted.

Please check this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peer_review



So in other words, no actual evidence. Just you speculating and talking out of your ass as always.



So you want to attack a straw man, eh?

I told you to make sure you know what my exact position is before asking me irrelevant questions.



Lack of witnesses for a missile hitting the Pentagon NOTED.



So it would make sense for terrorists to hit that section. What better way to piss the American officials off other than to target the section that had almost been done renovated after all those years? It sounds like a move done out of hatred for America.

Thanks for quoting that.



No, thanks. I don't trust the liar Steven Jones and the likes.



I might be mistaken, but isn't that a video by the Zeitgeist Movement? Judging from the editing style and the kind of music that's in the background, it must be.

Anyway, videos like that one have been debunked from a long time ago. And, once again, I notice the quotes taken out of context in that video. Such a shame that people like you continue to resort to lies as if it's a normally acceptable thing to do.

Allow me to post some videos that debunk the claims made in that silly video above. Don't worry, they're not as long as the ones you previously posted.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=--_RGM4Abv8[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z8v8ai2-S0Q[/youtube]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=is_qBXqObes[/youtube]

I wanted to post more, but I don't want to exhaust you with too many videos. The videos above are not long, so do watch all three of them. If you can't be bothered watching them all, then at least watch the last one.



Yet, the video you posted did a lot of quote-mining, dummy. LOL!



Just as I thought, you have a bias that's affecting the way you think and that's leading you to resort to dishonesty instead of accepting the truth as it is.



Yet, you're not a scientist, aren't you?



Ok, let's see you write a paper for one of the trusted scientific journals out there (the neutral and impartial ones)!

Come on, tough boy! Get to work!



You really think a fool like Texe Marrs may be on the CIA payroll? Is the Zeitgeist Movement also part of the conspiracy?

What about you? Aren't you a CIA secret agent out there to spread disinformation?

I bet that's what Texe Marrs thinks about you!

Hey, where's our fellow member, Patrick? Somebody (other than me) doesn't like your Texe Marrs!



Oh, the irony! Creationists are not the only ones making fools out of themselves on YouTube. Look at yourselves first.



Stop deluding yourself. You are NOT merely questioning. You are DENYING the experiences of those who went through the Holocaust. I can see how some countries would consider this a crime as such denial actually harms the victims of the Holocaust. You do realize that most survivors, if not all of them, suffer from PTSD because of such horrifying events. Denying what they went through only adds more harm instead of good.

Show some f*****g empathy, dammit! The world doesn't revolve around your sh***y theories!



Martyr complex, anyone?

You know who the real victims are here? No, not you and your stupid friend. It's the Holocaust surviviors!

Your friend should've learned what shame is by being put in jail so many times. But it sounds like he has a very big ego that's only interested in attracting people with wild theories instead of being interested in facts alone.



Stop lying to me. You are not a Holocaust revisionist. You are exactly what a Holocaust denier would sound like.

Otherwise, you wouldn't DENY what witnesses say about Hitler's men using gas chambers to kill groups of Jews. You wouldn't DENY the documents written by witnesses themselves. You wouldn't DENY what documents written by Hitler and his men say.

In short, you are a D-E-N-I-E-R. If you talk like a duck, and you walk like a duck, you are a duck.



L-I-A-R!



I already linked you to one of the papers. As I said previously, I now need you to show me one PEER-REVIEWED paper that supports your wild theories and that has been published as a fully accepted scientific paper of its own in a trusted scientific journal.

Note what Wikipedia says about PEER REVIEW.



You thought that way because you WANTED to think that way. You were already a fan of conspiracy theories at the time, weren't you?



Is that why I can't find one single peer-reviewed scientific paper supporting your wild views?

By the way, it's not enough to have a degree in engineering, lol.



Oh, so you're only unsure of the things that wouldn't really change your mind about the 9/11 events. How convenient.



I don't need to. The evidence itself keeps telling me.



Steven Jones is the same "expert" who "has interpreted archaeological evidence from the ancient Mayans as supporting his faith's belief that Jesus Christ visited America", lol. Look it up on Wikipedia.

How can you trust someone like him if that's how he interprets evidence?



Who are those "experts"? Why don't they have papers published in trusted journals?



The evidence demonstrated by scientific papers, videos, and witnesses.



Nothing but vain words.



Motive to have the buildings go down, you mean? If so, we need actual evidence, not baseless words.



Motive for what? I don't want any more speculations wrongly perceived as evidence, got it?



The fact that you posted a deceptive video means that I had a point. You're not a fan of honest research, are you?