Are conspiracy theories destroying democracy?

[symyjym]

It's like debating with a 6year old.

"Son, please can you pass Daddy your plate"

"Can I do drawing?"

"After you've passed your plate. Please."

"Can I stay up for another 10 minutes?"

"After I have your plate. Can you pass it please?"

"Can I wear the red pyjamas?"

Etc etc etc

Great analogy, exactly this

 

[The Truth]

Even if they thought they could be wrong they would never admit it anyway because of the time and effort they have invested in it, and would be admittance they are easily fooled and highly gullible.

I admit, I was wrong. The 9/11 Theory made official by the government is totally correct. I've realised thanks to a building collapsing in Amsterdam, that any 9/11 theory other than the official version must be incorrect and damaging to society. The US government would never attempt false flag operations and would never ever lie to the public about foreign affairs.

 

[Goldstone76]

The problem with closed minded people is that their mouth is always opened... Theres a lot of white noise here but nothing to be said by those who yell 9/11 happened as it happened by the official accounts. I guess we will all have to wait and see.. the truth always comes out.. eventually

 

[Goldstone76]

He doesn't even write it himself, this mantra is all copy and paste and a monkey could do it. If that's being open minded and engaging in a debate there is no hope for these diehard 911 CTers.

Even if they thought they could be wrong they would never admit it anyway because of the time and effort they have invested in it, and would be admittance they are easily fooled and highly gullible.

So far slimjam you have posted nothing but Youtube links.. nothing more. Come back when you have an opinion. I will take a wild guess and assume you believed Archer when he said all was ok back in 95'.. But of course people in authority always tell the truth dont they.

 

[beorhthelm]

Since 2001, the base USA defence budget has risen from $287 billion to $530 billion per year. Who profits from this?

China. now how do you work China into the script?

 

[symyjym]

So far slimjam you have posted nothing but Youtube links.. nothing more. Come back when you have an opinion. I will take a wild guess and assume you believed Archer when he said all was ok back in 95'.. But of course people in authority always tell the truth dont they.

Of course and likewise some no named anonymous person who could be any old freak posting on an insignificant forum is always going to tell the truth as well. Like initiating rumours of supporting Archer is the most recent example.

If you were that believable on your 911 CT Quest, you wouldn’t even have to lower yourself to the depths of NSC. So obviously you are failing to get your message across in the real world as well.

 

[beorhthelm]

I admit, I was wrong. The 9/11 Theory made official by the government is totally correct. I've realised thanks to a building collapsing in Amsterdam, that any 9/11 theory other than the official version must be incorrect and damaging to society. The US government would never attempt false flag operations and would never ever lie to the public about foreign affairs.

what your sarcam is ignoring is that two "facts" of the CT world are false: the buildings collapsed at freefall speed and no other steel framed building has collapsed due to fire. there may well be a coverup, even a conspiracy leading up to the event, but you and the CTers have got the wrong one.

 

[Goldstone76]

China. now how do you work China into the script?

Priceless stupidity..

 

[beorhthelm]

Priceless stupidity..

thanks for your insightfull respone. i suppose my terse point either flew over your head or challenges your beliefs so you'll just try and ignore it?

 

[Goldstone76]

thanks for your insightfull respone. i suppose my terse point either flew over your head or challenges your beliefs so you'll just try and ignore it?

Are you talking about China being benefactors post 9/11? They certainly did benefit from the debris from the Twin Towers yes. In no particular order the other benefactors are.. the arms industry, construction companies, energy companies with Israel being a very obvious benefactor.. Add to the list Rumsfeld, Bush, Cheny etc.. and thats financial benefits..

 

[BadFish]

Really is there any point in doing any kind of timeline.. its well documented enough. Instead the areas of unbelievability are surly more worth discussion beginning with when the foundations for a new America were laid down which was way before 9/11.. To understand the foundations is to understand the intent of why 9/11 is a lie..

A plan for American Military Domination first surfaced during the administration of George H.W. Bush, In 1992, Paul Wolfowitz, working in the Department of Defense, was asked to write the first draft of a new national security strategy, a document entitled “The Defense Planning Guidance.” The most controversial elements of what would later come to be known as the “Wolfowitz Doctrine” were that the United States should dramatically increase defense spending, that it should be willing to take preemptive military action, and that it should be willing to use military force unilaterally, with or without allies. This new reliance on Military force was necessary, according to Wolfowitz, to prevent the emergence of any future or potential rivals to American power, and to secure access to vital resources, especially Persian Gulf oil. Paul Wolfowitz's involvement in shaping the U.S. Neoconservative foreign policy implemented after the attacks of September 11, 2001, including his role in the creation of the PNAC document “Rebuilding America's Defenses” during the year 2000 which suggested "In relation to the Persian Gulf, citing particularly Iraq and Iran, Rebuilding America's Defenses states that "while the unresolved conflict in Iraq provides the immediate justification [for U.S. military presence], the need for a substantial American force presence in the [Persian] Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein" and "Over the long term, Iran may well prove as large a threat to U.S. interests in the [Persian] Gulf as Iraq has. And even should U.S.-Iranian relations improve, retaining forward-based forces in the region would still be an essential element in U.S. security strategy given the longstanding American interests in the region."

The Bush administration began planning to use U.S. troops to invade Iraq within days after the former Texas governor entered the White House, former Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill told CBS News' 60 Minutes.

So the scene is set.. long before 9/11 the USA neoconservatives were planning to flex their military muscle to make sure their role as a military super power wasnt lost and the main interest was/is the control of resources which the country (and the West) needed to function. Lets also add into this the value of conflict to the arms industry.. Peace isnt a profitable option. Fear is required to sell.

Since 2001, the base USA defence budget has risen from $287 billion to $530 billion per year. Who profits from this? Can we agree that there is a huge amount of profit to be made from conflict and that the USA will not tolerate the idea that they will lose their oil supply.. therefore they need to control regions and governments?

---

Aside from the very obvious point that has been pointed out and that the invasion of Iraq didn't need the twin towers to happen (the WMD debacle and saddam's human right violations wer enough). if this part in bold is correct and the US were allowing themselves to make preemtive strikes (i seem to remember reading at the time that they continued bombing Iraq between the two wars anyway) and fight wars with no support then they would need some to react to anyway!

 

[BadFish]

Great analogy, exactly this

rather insulting to a six year old i think. my boy had better reasoning skills and media literacy at 6 than these two.

 

[symyjym]

rather insulting to a six year old i think. my boy had better reasoning skills and media literacy at 6 than these two.

Forgive me, yes I am sure he would know what 2+2 equals

 

[Goldstone76]

Aside from the very obvious point that has been pointed out and that the invasion of Iraq didn't need the twin towers to happen (the WMD debacle and saddam's human right violations wer enough). if this part in bold is correct and the US were allowing themselves to make preemtive strikes (i seem to remember reading at the time that they continued bombing Iraq between the two wars anyway) and fight wars with no support then they would need some to react to anyway!

I would agree with you on this. The USA has a habit of getting involved in 'other stuff' regardless of opinion. Link to CNN report about O'Neill's comments here.

 

[Seagull on the wing]

Each to their own,I don't believe the CT for the fact that the pentagon plane took out 125 lives...55 of them top military defence chiefs.
"We need to go to war Mr President."
"OK! let's smash up our major defense base and blame it on the Taliban,we might kill a few top military personnel but Hey! it'll be worth it."

 

[Goldstone76]

Each to their own,I don't believe the CT for the fact that the pentagon plane took out 125 lives...55 of them top military defence chiefs.
"We need to go to war Mr President."
"OK! let's smash up our major defense base and blame it on the Taliban,we might kill a few top military personnel but Hey! it'll be worth it."

Why would the loss of 100 or even 3,500 people make any difference to the long term objectives? Its kinda naive to think that the loss of life means anything to any extremist from the extreme right to the extreme left. ts the human condition that is the underlying issue.. power, greed and jealousy and underpinned by money.

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

 

[Ninja Elephant]

Does anyone think we'll ever see what really happened at the Pentagon?

 

[Seagull on the wing]

Why would the loss of 100 or even 3,500 people make any difference to the long term objectives? Its kinda naive to think that the loss of life means anything to any extremist from the extreme right to the extreme left. ts the human condition that is the underlying issue.. power, greed and jealousy and underpinned by money.

"If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”

As I said,Each to their own,but,The Pentagon was the US armour in defense,you don't take off some of your armour to go to war.
Are you really saying that no terrorist were involved and America attacked itself just to justify war if so,why was the WMD excuse used then.

 

[Seagull on the wing]

I love Conspiracy theories...especially the Moon landings,it's funny that people always see things different.

 

[Guinness Boy]

rather insulting to a six year old i think. my boy had better reasoning skills and media literacy at 6 than these two.

Fair point. I'll apologise to mine when he wakes up in the morning.