The Political Screwballs Thread

[Augustine2004]

Augustine pretty much sees everything as a conspiracy, there's a reason I don't interact with him much since it's kind of hard to debate with a person that believes everybody is out to get you.

Well, I do operate on the theory that we are failing to keep sociopaths out of our governments. Look at Germany's failure to keep Hitler out and the consequences.

I've already posted about Mitt Romney showing his fascistic colors in a speech to the Citadel the other day. Subsitute 'Germany' for 'America' in the speech, and you might imagine that's what Hitler would say in Munich in that documentary http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triumph_of_the_Will

Please don't close your mind because I sound like a nut.

[rogue06]

Like you know anything. 'Slight'? Not!


Read this article http://healthimpactnews.com/2011/coc...-for-children/
And ask yourself: if that's true, how come the government lets Coca-cola get away with that!?

Whenever your source claims to be providing information that "other media sources may censor" in their banner be prepared to take what they say with a large grain of salt

[lilpixieofterror]

Well, I do operate on the theory that we are failing to keep sociopaths out of our governments. Look at Germany's failure to keep Hitler out and the consequences.

I've already posted about Mitt Romney showing his fascistic colors in a speech to the Citadel the other day. Subsitute 'Germany' for 'America' in the speech, and you might imagine that's what Hitler would say in Munich in that documentary http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triumph_of_the_Will

Please don't close your mind because I sound like a nut.

Let us see,

The German's gathered up people who disagreed with them and threw them in jail. You're allowed to make post on a forum critical of the government even though if the government really wanted to, they could hunt you down and throw you in prison right now. It's not that hard to trace your internet connection and yet you and all your conspiracy nutters are allowed to write forum post, make your own web sites, and even write your own articles to discuss your conspiracy theories with one another and anybody within ear shot.

Hummm, want to try this again or do you think that everything the government does, is part of a giant conspiracy? Thus far, you've claimed the military is evil, that the US is an empire, that 9/11 was an inside job, that JFK assassination was also an inside job, and you're now claiming that the evil drug companies and FDA are poisoning us with vaccinations and lying about them too. Sorry Augustine, not only does your 'facts' not fit into reality, you don't even understand the difference between real tyrants (such as Hitler or Stalin) and mostly good people, that sometimes make mistakes (like the US government) we could talk, but for now, you're a conspiracy nut that sees evil behind anything and everything and thus will be seen as a nut, until you produce an actual argument.

[Augustine2004]

Whenever your source claims to be providing information that "other media sources may censor" in their banner be prepared to take what they say with a large grain of salt

OK. Do that for everything.

[Augustine2004]

Let us see,

The German's gathered up people who disagreed with them and threw them in jail. You're allowed to make post on a forum critical of the government even though if the government really wanted to, they could hunt you down and throw you in prison right now. It's not that hard to trace your internet connection and yet you and all your conspiracy nutters are allowed to write forum post, make your own web sites, and even write your own articles to discuss your conspiracy theories with one another and anybody within ear shot.

Hummm, want to try this again or do you think that everything the government does, is part of a giant conspiracy? Thus far, you've claimed the military is evil, that the US is an empire, that 9/11 was an inside job, that JFK assassination was also an inside job, and you're now claiming that the evil drug companies and FDA are poisoning us with vaccinations and lying about them too. Sorry Augustine, not only does your 'facts' not fit into reality, you don't even understand the difference between real tyrants (such as Hitler or Stalin) and mostly good people, that sometimes make mistakes (like the US government) we could talk, but for now, you're a conspiracy nut that sees evil behind anything and everything and thus will be seen as a nut, until you produce an actual argument.

Hell, don't you know what LINCOLN did!? Alien and Sedition Act all the way back in the 19th Century?

I've explained before, freedom of speech is still highly valued by the people. You seem to be thick-headed. One must explain over and over until something gets through to whatever brain cells you have left.

[Augustine2004]

My uncle Sam died from what I think I can paraphrase as taking a drug that includes death as one of many side effects. Slight! Oh, boy. Mom was devastated.

I've seen reports before today on how ineffective and indeed harmful vaccines are or may be. Here's the latest news that I saw this morning.

In a double-bind study, Vitamin D3 (only 1,200 IU daily) reduced flu infection rates compared to a placebo.
'Randomized Trial of Vitamin D Supplementation to Prevent Seasonal Influenza A in Schoolchildren,' American Journal of Clinical Nutrition (check ajcn.org) [I take 5,000 IU daily myself]

You may be thinking, surely flu shots would work better with less side effects. Nay, nay, my little fairy. Take a gawk at this: 'Physical Interventions to Interrupt or Reduce the Spread of Respiratory Viruses: Systematic Review' British Medical Journal, Vol 399, 9/22/09, bmj.com

[lilpixieofterror]

Hell, don't you know what LINCOLN did!? Alien and Sedition Act all the way back in the 19th Century?

And do people know about this Augustine? Yes or no? I know about some of those history events and the funny thing is that the government was unable to keep a lid on it for those reasons. The government isn't very good at keeping a lid on things and I would think the fact that Nixon was unable to keep a lid on the Watergate scandal and Clinton was unable to keep a lid on his sexual adventures is an indication of this fact. The simple fact is that the more people that are let into the loop, the less secure the secret is. This isn't to say that the government cannot keep a secret, but the amount of work that would have to be involved in the 9/11 conspiracy makes it highly unlikely that the government would be able to keep a lid on such a large operation. Thus one of the main reasons why I find such an operation highly unlikely, due to that fact. Think about it, how much work would it have taken for 9/11 to have been carried out, by the US government and why has nobody come forward with any sort of concrete evidence to support such a conspiracy? 9/11 was a government failure, but it wasn't a conspiracy, it was more to do with the different government agencies not talking to one another and underestimating their enemy that lead to 9/11.

I've explained before, freedom of speech is still highly valued by the people. You seem to be thick-headed. One must explain over and over until something gets through to whatever brain cells you have left.

That's nice and did I deny this? No, what I said (and you've ignored) is that the mere fact that the government isn't gathering up nuts like you, but letting them speak their mind is an indication that many of these whacked theories of yours are full of bunk. However; no amount of evidence will ever convince the conspiracy theorist that his theories are flawed, even when many of his conspiracies are shown to be false, he still keeps going and thus the reason I find debating you a waste of time.

[rogue06]

OK. Do that for everything.

Actually that isn't a bad idea. But I think those claiming to provide news that "other media sources may censor" are more prone to passing on questionable information in need of being independently confirmed.

[Augustine2004]

And do people know about this Augustine? Yes or no? I know about some of those history events and the funny thing is that the government was unable to keep a lid on it for those reasons. The government isn't very good at keeping a lid on things and I would think the fact that Nixon was unable to keep a lid on the Watergate scandal and Clinton was unable to keep a lid on his sexual adventures is an indication of this fact. The simple fact is that the more people that are let into the loop, the less secure the secret is. This isn't to say that the government cannot keep a secret, but the amount of work that would have to be involved in the 9/11 conspiracy makes it highly unlikely that the government would be able to keep a lid on such a large operation. Thus one of the main reasons why I find such an operation highly unlikely, due to that fact. Think about it, how much work would it have taken for 9/11 to have been carried out, by the US government and why has nobody come forward with any sort of concrete evidence to support such a conspiracy? 9/11 was a government failure, but it wasn't a conspiracy, it was more to do with the different government agencies not talking to one another and underestimating their enemy that lead to 9/11.

Explain Building 7. How could its collapse happen, it wasn't hit by an airplane?

How was the Alien and Sedition Act repealed? Did the government go ahead on its own to repeal it without the people doing anything?

Didn't you see the Warren Commission Report at all? If you know any physics, why were your suspicions not aroused at all? You didn't know how fast a bolt-action rifle can be worked, for one thing.

You are too naive and trusting.

The government can generate large amounts of disinformation, so it becomes very difficult to sift out the facts. I think that's what happened in the Kennedy assassinations. It took years for authors to write books, and even then nobody could be sure what the facts are.


Once again, when the people hand a small group lots of power, that attracts smart sociopathic con artists. The worst elements of society rise to the top of our government. That is essentially what Fredrich von Hayek, a Nobel Prize winner, said. Why are you still incredulous such people can fool us easily?


As for my continuing to write such posts, I'm only small fry--and rather in a very small minority. Why take a chance of taking me down. Better to maintain the illusion of free speech by letting me blather on.

Anyway, look at your attitude regarding Bradley Manning and perhaps also Julian Assange. I think that is generally the attitude of most Americans. No outcry for their freedom at all!?

[Augustine2004]

Actually that isn't a bad idea. But I think those claiming to provide news that "other media sources may censor" are more prone to passing on questionable information in need of being independently confirmed.

Despite that, I guess you'd rely on those organizations:

American Diabetes Association
American Cancer Society
American Heart Society

They appear to have patients' interest at heart, but . . .

Look at what Barbara Mintzes is saying. Big Pharma is using organizations (about 70) like those to make its profits bigger, usually at the patients' expense.

Want more detail?

[rogue06]

Didn't you see the Warren Commission Report at all? If you know any physics, why were your suspicions not aroused at all? You didn't know how fast a bolt-action rifle can be worked, for one thing.

CBS News did a test with 11 volunteer marksmen back in 1967 most of whom were able to hit the moving test target two times in under the time allowed (averaging 5.6 seconds with three of them firing all three rounds in under 5 seconds ). One hit it all three times.

Watch the segment yourself:



While some have alleged that it's impossible to fire a Carcano rifle in less than 2.3 seconds the CBS tests showed this wasn't the case. In fact this was confirmed when the chief lawyers for the House Select Committee on Assassinations decided to see how fast they were able to do it back in the 70s. Both were able to do it in 1.5 seconds or less.

[lilpixieofterror]

Explain Building 7. How could its collapse happen, it wasn't hit by an airplane?

Slow structural failure caused by fires raging in the buildings that eventually weakened the building to a point where it fell down. Again, this is in the reports, but I guess you know more than the engineers and builders that designed and built the buildings, eh? Again, conspiracy theorists never look at the facts.

How was the Alien and Sedition Act repealed? Did the government go ahead on its own to repeal it without the people doing anything?

Did I say that? No, so perhaps you should respond to what I say instead of what you want to hear?

Didn't you see the Warren Commission Report at all? If you know any physics, why were your suspicions not aroused at all? You didn't know how fast a bolt-action rifle can be worked, for one thing.

Yes and people have demonstrated, on TV and video's that it isn't that hard to aim and shoot in a quick succession. Also, I OWN and shoot firearms, do you? I even own a bolt action and again, it's not a whole lot slower, for those experienced in their operation and the fact that even to this day, snipers prefer it over semi-auto says something. Perhaps you should you know, read reports and watch studies that are set out to do this and all confirm the findings that JFK was shoot by a lone gunmen.

You are too naive and trusting.

I've watched plenty of reports and read what experts have to say and they all agree with the government view of these actions or let me guess, they are all part of the conspiracy to hide the truth too, right?

The government can generate large amounts of disinformation, so it becomes very difficult to sift out the facts. I think that's what happened in the Kennedy assassinations. It took years for authors to write books, and even then nobody could be sure what the facts are.

Or it's because of typical human nature where it's hard to discern facts because the day that JFK was shot started out as any other day. Likewise, the day 9/11 happened started out as any other day. Some things we may over look and make conspiracies after the facts because we like to believe that big events must have happened though equally big things. We don't want to believe that one man, with a gun, can change the course of history. We do not want to believe that a small group of people can steal a group of passenger jets and use them to kill thousands. Human nature doesn't want to accept those facts and thus why conspiracy theories are born out of the normally mundane and unexplained things that happen every day, that become huge deals when a huge event happens.

Once again, when the people hand a small group lots of power, that attracts smart sociopathic con artists. The worst elements of society rise to the top of our government. That is essentially what Fredrich von Hayek, a Nobel Prize winner, said. Why are you still incredulous such people can fool us easily?

Simple logic augustine, the more complex a conspiracy is, the more people that have to be let in on it and the less likely it is to stay secret. As I gave two examples of attempted government conspiracies that totally fell apart. Nixon was unable to suppress the evidence against him in the Watergate scandal and Clinton was unable to suppress his sexual actives. These are some pretty small conspiracies and neither president was able to suppress them, so if they can't suppress something as simple as that, what makes you think the government is capable of suppressing a much more complex event (such as 9/11) that would have to involve many more people and thus increase the likelihood of a leak. Yet, we have no evidence of the government taking part in any activity to cover up the truth about the JFK assassination or about 9/11 and if anything, the reports written make many government agencies look foolish and rather incompent at their jobs. The most logical path is that there is no conspiracy to hide the truth because the truth is already known.

As for my continuing to write such posts, I'm only small fry--and rather in a very small minority. Why take a chance of taking me down. Better to maintain the illusion of free speech by letting me blather on.

Yep, nothing will ever convince the conspiracy theorist that his theories are whacked...

Anyway, look at your attitude regarding Bradley Manning and perhaps also Julian Assange. I think that is generally the attitude of most Americans. No outcry for their freedom at all!?

Sorry augustine, but people who steal information and give it to a foreign intelligence service are called spies by every definition in the book. It's just lucky for them that they live in the US and not in the USSR or China because they would be dead by now.

[rogue06]

the more complex a conspiracy is, the more people that have to be let in on it and the less likely it is to stay secret. As I gave two examples of attempted government conspiracies that totally fell apart. Nixon was unable to suppress the evidence against him in the Watergate scandal and Clinton was unable to suppress his sexual actives.

There IS a reason why Benjamin Franklin wrote: "Three can keep a secret, if two of them are dead."

[lilpixieofterror]

There IS a reason why Benjamin Franklin wrote: "Three can keep a secret, if two of them are dead."

Pretty much and even government 'secret' projects, there are still hints and roomers running around about them.

[Augustine2004]

CBS News did a test with 11 volunteer marksmen back in 1967 most of whom were able to hit the moving test target two times in under the time allowed (averaging 5.6 seconds with three of them firing all three rounds in under 5 seconds ). One hit it all three times.

Watch the segment yourself:



While some have alleged that it's impossible to fire a Carcano rifle in less than 2.3 seconds the CBS tests showed this wasn't the case. In fact this was confirmed when the chief lawyers for the House Select Committee on Assassinations decided to see how fast they were able to do it back in the 70s. Both were able to do it in 1.5 seconds or less.

I stand corrected.