Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Why Kooks Are Nuts
3 views
Skip to first unread message
HVAC
May 3, 2013, 5:28:50 PM5/3/13
to
Did NASA fake the moon landing? Is the government hiding Martians in
Area 51? Is global warming a hoax? And what about the Boston Marathon
bombing…an “inside job” perhaps?
In the book “The Empire of Conspiracy,” Timothy Melley explains that
conspiracy theories have traditionally been regarded by many social
scientists as “the implausible visions of a lunatic fringe,” often
inspired by what the late historian Richard Hofstadter described as “the
paranoid style of American politics.” Influenced by this view, many
scholars have come to think of conspiracy theories as paranoid and
delusional, and for a long time psychologists have had little to
contribute other than to affirm the psychopathological nature of
conspiracy thinking, given that conspiricist delusions are commonly
associated with (schizotype) paranoia.
Yet, such pathological explanations have proven to be widely
insufficient because conspiracy theories are not just the implausible
visions of a paranoid minority. For example, a national poll released
just this month reports that 37 percent of Americans believe that global
warming is a hoax, 21 percent think that the US government is covering
up evidence of alien existence and 28 percent believe a secret elite
power with a globalist agenda is conspiring to rule the world. Only
hours after the recent Boston marathon bombing, numerous conspiracy
theories were floated ranging from a possible ‘inside job’ to YouTube
videos claiming that the entire event was a hoax.
So why is it that so many people come to believe in conspiracy theories?
They can’t all be paranoid schizophrenics. New studies are providing
some eye-opening insights and potential explanations.
For example, while it has been known for some time that people who
believe in one conspiracy theory are also likely to believe in other
conspiracy theories, we would expect contradictory conspiracy theories
to be negatively correlated. Yet, this is not what psychologists Micheal
Wood, Karen Douglas and Robbie Suton found in a recent study. Instead,
the research team, based at the University of Kent in England, found
that many participants believed in contradictory conspiracy theories.
For example, the conspiracy-belief that Osama Bin Laden is still alive
was positively correlated with the conspiracy-belief that he was already
dead before the military raid took place. This makes little sense,
logically: Bin Laden cannot be both dead and alive at the same time. An
important conclusion that the authors draw from their analysis is that
people don’t tend to believe in a conspiracy theory because of the
specifics, but rather because of higher-order beliefs that support
conspiracy-like thinking more generally. A popular example of such
higher-order beliefs is a severe “distrust of authority.” The authors go
on to suggest that conspiracism is therefore not just about belief in an
individual theory, but rather an ideological lens through which we view
the world. A good case in point is Alex Jones’s recent commentary on the
Boston bombings. Jones, (one of the country’s preeminent conspiracy
theorists) reminded his audience that two of the hijacked planes on 9/11
flew out of Boston (relating one conspiracy theory to another) and
moreover, that the Boston Marathon bombing could be a response to the
sudden drop in the price of gold or part of a secret government plot to
expand the Transportation Security Administration’s reach to sporting
events. Others have pointed their fingers to a ‘mystery man’ spotted on
a nearby roof shortly after the explosions. While it remains unsure
whether or not credence is given to only some or all of these (note:
contradicting) conspiracy theories, there clearly is a larger underlying
preference to support conspiracy-type explanations more generally.
Interestingly, belief in conspiracy theories has recently been linked to
the rejection of science. In a paper published in Psychological Science,
Stephen Lewandowsky and colleagues investigated the relation between
acceptance of science and conspiricist thinking patterns. While the
authors’ survey was not representative of the general population,
results suggest that (controlling for other important factors) belief in
multiple conspiracy theories significantly predicted the rejection of
important scientific conclusions, such as climate science or the fact
that smoking causes lung cancer. Yet, rejection of scientific principles
is not the only possible consequence of widespread belief in conspiracy
theories. Another recent study indicates that receiving positive
information about or even being merely exposed to conspiracy theories
can lead people to become disengaged from important political and
societal topics. For example, in their study, Daniel Jolley and Karen
Douglas clearly show that participants who received information that
supported the idea that global warming is a hoax were less willing to
engage politically and also less willing to implement individual
behavioral changes such as reducing their carbon footprint.
These findings are alarming because they show that conspiracy theories
sow public mistrust and undermine democratic debate by diverting
attention away from important scientific, political and societal issues.
There is no question as to whether the public should actively demand
truthful and transparent information from their governments and proposed
explanations should be met with a healthy amount of scepticism, yet,
this is not what conspiracy theories offer. A conspiracy theory is
usually defined as an attempt to explain the ultimate cause of an
important societal event as part of some sinister plot conjured up by a
secret alliance of powerful individuals and organizations. The great
philosopher Karl Popper argued that the fallacy of conspiracy theories
lies in their tendency to describe every event as ‘intentional’ and
‘planned’ thereby seriously underestimating the random nature and
unintended consequences of many political and social actions. In fact,
Popper was describing a cognitive bias that psychologists now commonly
refer to as the “fundamental attribution error”: the tendency to
overestimate the actions of others as being intentional rather than the
product of (random) situational circumstances.
Since a number of studies have shown that belief in conspiracy theories
is associated with feelings of powerlessness, uncertainty and a general
lack of agency and control, a likely purpose of this bias is to help
people “make sense of the world” by providing simple explanations for
complex societal events — restoring a sense of control and predictability.
--
"OK you cunts, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo
Area 51? Is global warming a hoax? And what about the Boston Marathon
bombing…an “inside job” perhaps?
In the book “The Empire of Conspiracy,” Timothy Melley explains that
conspiracy theories have traditionally been regarded by many social
scientists as “the implausible visions of a lunatic fringe,” often
inspired by what the late historian Richard Hofstadter described as “the
paranoid style of American politics.” Influenced by this view, many
scholars have come to think of conspiracy theories as paranoid and
delusional, and for a long time psychologists have had little to
contribute other than to affirm the psychopathological nature of
conspiracy thinking, given that conspiricist delusions are commonly
associated with (schizotype) paranoia.
Yet, such pathological explanations have proven to be widely
insufficient because conspiracy theories are not just the implausible
visions of a paranoid minority. For example, a national poll released
just this month reports that 37 percent of Americans believe that global
warming is a hoax, 21 percent think that the US government is covering
up evidence of alien existence and 28 percent believe a secret elite
power with a globalist agenda is conspiring to rule the world. Only
hours after the recent Boston marathon bombing, numerous conspiracy
theories were floated ranging from a possible ‘inside job’ to YouTube
videos claiming that the entire event was a hoax.
So why is it that so many people come to believe in conspiracy theories?
They can’t all be paranoid schizophrenics. New studies are providing
some eye-opening insights and potential explanations.
For example, while it has been known for some time that people who
believe in one conspiracy theory are also likely to believe in other
conspiracy theories, we would expect contradictory conspiracy theories
to be negatively correlated. Yet, this is not what psychologists Micheal
Wood, Karen Douglas and Robbie Suton found in a recent study. Instead,
the research team, based at the University of Kent in England, found
that many participants believed in contradictory conspiracy theories.
For example, the conspiracy-belief that Osama Bin Laden is still alive
was positively correlated with the conspiracy-belief that he was already
dead before the military raid took place. This makes little sense,
logically: Bin Laden cannot be both dead and alive at the same time. An
important conclusion that the authors draw from their analysis is that
people don’t tend to believe in a conspiracy theory because of the
specifics, but rather because of higher-order beliefs that support
conspiracy-like thinking more generally. A popular example of such
higher-order beliefs is a severe “distrust of authority.” The authors go
on to suggest that conspiracism is therefore not just about belief in an
individual theory, but rather an ideological lens through which we view
the world. A good case in point is Alex Jones’s recent commentary on the
Boston bombings. Jones, (one of the country’s preeminent conspiracy
theorists) reminded his audience that two of the hijacked planes on 9/11
flew out of Boston (relating one conspiracy theory to another) and
moreover, that the Boston Marathon bombing could be a response to the
sudden drop in the price of gold or part of a secret government plot to
expand the Transportation Security Administration’s reach to sporting
events. Others have pointed their fingers to a ‘mystery man’ spotted on
a nearby roof shortly after the explosions. While it remains unsure
whether or not credence is given to only some or all of these (note:
contradicting) conspiracy theories, there clearly is a larger underlying
preference to support conspiracy-type explanations more generally.
Interestingly, belief in conspiracy theories has recently been linked to
the rejection of science. In a paper published in Psychological Science,
Stephen Lewandowsky and colleagues investigated the relation between
acceptance of science and conspiricist thinking patterns. While the
authors’ survey was not representative of the general population,
results suggest that (controlling for other important factors) belief in
multiple conspiracy theories significantly predicted the rejection of
important scientific conclusions, such as climate science or the fact
that smoking causes lung cancer. Yet, rejection of scientific principles
is not the only possible consequence of widespread belief in conspiracy
theories. Another recent study indicates that receiving positive
information about or even being merely exposed to conspiracy theories
can lead people to become disengaged from important political and
societal topics. For example, in their study, Daniel Jolley and Karen
Douglas clearly show that participants who received information that
supported the idea that global warming is a hoax were less willing to
engage politically and also less willing to implement individual
behavioral changes such as reducing their carbon footprint.
These findings are alarming because they show that conspiracy theories
sow public mistrust and undermine democratic debate by diverting
attention away from important scientific, political and societal issues.
There is no question as to whether the public should actively demand
truthful and transparent information from their governments and proposed
explanations should be met with a healthy amount of scepticism, yet,
this is not what conspiracy theories offer. A conspiracy theory is
usually defined as an attempt to explain the ultimate cause of an
important societal event as part of some sinister plot conjured up by a
secret alliance of powerful individuals and organizations. The great
philosopher Karl Popper argued that the fallacy of conspiracy theories
lies in their tendency to describe every event as ‘intentional’ and
‘planned’ thereby seriously underestimating the random nature and
unintended consequences of many political and social actions. In fact,
Popper was describing a cognitive bias that psychologists now commonly
refer to as the “fundamental attribution error”: the tendency to
overestimate the actions of others as being intentional rather than the
product of (random) situational circumstances.
Since a number of studies have shown that belief in conspiracy theories
is associated with feelings of powerlessness, uncertainty and a general
lack of agency and control, a likely purpose of this bias is to help
people “make sense of the world” by providing simple explanations for
complex societal events — restoring a sense of control and predictability.
--
"OK you cunts, let's see what you can do now" -Hit Girl
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CjO7kBqTFqo
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
May 4, 2013, 2:21:31 AM5/4/13
to
On Fri, 3 May 2013 17:07:07 -0700 (PDT)
zayton <jlske...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > They can’t all be paranoid schizophrenics.
>
> Why not?
Excellent question.
--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"Enjoy your slide down the razor blades of life!"
-- Anonymous
zayton <jlske...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Friday, May 3, 2013 4:28:50 PM UTC-5, HVAC wrote:
>
> > So why is it that so many people come to believe in conspiracy
> > theories?
Despite being a fallacy, the "bandwagon fallacy" is effective.
>
> > So why is it that so many people come to believe in conspiracy
> > theories?
> > They can’t all be paranoid schizophrenics.
>
Excellent question.
--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"Enjoy your slide down the razor blades of life!"
-- Anonymous
benj
May 4, 2013, 2:39:36 AM5/4/13
to
On Fri, 03 May 2013 23:21:31 -0700, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
atheist goddess wrote:
> On Fri, 3 May 2013 17:07:07 -0700 (PDT)
> zayton <jlske...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Friday, May 3, 2013 4:28:50 PM UTC-5, HVAC wrote:
>>
>> > So why is it that so many people come to believe in conspiracy
>> > theories?
So why is it that so many people ignore all evidence to believe the
atheist goddess wrote:
> On Fri, 3 May 2013 17:07:07 -0700 (PDT)
> zayton <jlske...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Friday, May 3, 2013 4:28:50 PM UTC-5, HVAC wrote:
>>
>> > So why is it that so many people come to believe in conspiracy
>> > theories?
criminals that they are innocent? Even more interesting why would anyone
believe some anonymous "voice" on the internet when they tell you to
close your mind to all evidence and believe THEM?
I presume the answer to both questions is that because most people are so
ignorant that it makes sense to them.
> Despite being a fallacy, the "bandwagon fallacy" is effective.
>
>> > They can’t all be paranoid schizophrenics.
>>
>> Why not?
>
> Excellent question.
examination or personal observations by an anonymous debunker with not
only no medical, let alone psychiatric credentials, but also with no
visible education at all? Is everyone THAT desperate to believe in
something that they they follow some cult leader to the kool aid tub?
I guess history answers that question.
Are you all scared shitless that some anonymous internet "voice" will
call you "insane"? Are you all really that SMALL?
Just ask yourself ONE question: IF a bunch of people start telling you
that criminal conspiracies don't exist, then ask yourself just WHAT their
interest is in getting everybody to NOT look at any evidence? Hmmm??
Oh no, officer, I didn't break into this man's house! I just came in for
a drink of water and he ATTACKED ME! ARREST HIM! He's INSANE!
(that means anything the home owner says can safely be ignored)
%
May 4, 2013, 3:17:22 AM5/4/13
to
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess wrote:
> On Fri, 3 May 2013 17:07:07 -0700 (PDT)
> zayton <jlske...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Friday, May 3, 2013 4:28:50 PM UTC-5, HVAC wrote:
>>
>>> So why is it that so many people come to believe in conspiracy
>>> theories?
>
> Despite being a fallacy, the "bandwagon fallacy" is effective.
>
>>> They can’t all be paranoid schizophrenics.
>>
>> Why not?
>
> Excellent question.
no it wasn't
> On Fri, 3 May 2013 17:07:07 -0700 (PDT)
> zayton <jlske...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Friday, May 3, 2013 4:28:50 PM UTC-5, HVAC wrote:
>>
>>> So why is it that so many people come to believe in conspiracy
>>> theories?
>
> Despite being a fallacy, the "bandwagon fallacy" is effective.
>
>>> They can’t all be paranoid schizophrenics.
>>
>> Why not?
>
> Excellent question.
HVAC
May 4, 2013, 8:15:37 AM5/4/13
to
On 5/4/2013 2:21 AM, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess wrote:
>
>>> So why is it that so many people come to believe in conspiracy
>>> theories?
>
> Despite being a fallacy, the "bandwagon fallacy" is effective.
>
>>> They can’t all be paranoid schizophrenics.
>>
>> Why not?
>
> Excellent question.
I think that most conspiracy kooks are not clinically insane.
>
>>> So why is it that so many people come to believe in conspiracy
>>> theories?
>
> Despite being a fallacy, the "bandwagon fallacy" is effective.
>
>>> They can’t all be paranoid schizophrenics.
>>
>> Why not?
>
> Excellent question.
Most are anti-American types and see this as a way to take a stab at
America when they aren't busy talking about George Bush. Another reason
is that it makes them a part of a group. Many people feel this need.
It's why religion is so popular. And what is a kooky conspiracy but
another religion? In *this* religion they get to feel smug just as in
many other religions because THEY are in the know and 'we' aren't.
THEY hold the sacred truth and 'we' don't.
For some people, this is too good to pass up. Their drab daily existence
is dull and boring, but when they don the cloak of TRUTH,
they become important (at least in their own minds).
benj
May 4, 2013, 11:07:02 AM5/4/13
to
On Sat, 04 May 2013 08:15:37 -0400, HVAC wrote:
> I think that most conspiracy kooks are not clinically insane.
>
> Most are anti-American types and see this as a way to take a stab at
> America when they aren't busy talking about George Bush. Another reason
> is that it makes them a part of a group. Many people feel this need.
> It's why religion is so popular. And what is a kooky conspiracy but
> another religion? In *this* religion they get to feel smug just as in
> many other religions because THEY are in the know and 'we' aren't.
> THEY hold the sacred truth and 'we' don't.
>
> For some people, this is too good to pass up. Their drab daily existence
> is dull and boring, but when they don the cloak of TRUTH,
> they become important (at least in their own minds).
Old Harlow sure is a pro! Just look at this "damning with faint praise"
> I think that most conspiracy kooks are not clinically insane.
>
> Most are anti-American types and see this as a way to take a stab at
> America when they aren't busy talking about George Bush. Another reason
> is that it makes them a part of a group. Many people feel this need.
> It's why religion is so popular. And what is a kooky conspiracy but
> another religion? In *this* religion they get to feel smug just as in
> many other religions because THEY are in the know and 'we' aren't.
> THEY hold the sacred truth and 'we' don't.
>
> For some people, this is too good to pass up. Their drab daily existence
> is dull and boring, but when they don the cloak of TRUTH,
> they become important (at least in their own minds).
would you!
Lets see if we've got his points down. Anyone questioning government
veracity:
1. Isn't clinically insane...just insane.
2. Are anti-American.
3. Talk a lot about George Bush.
4. Need to feel part of a group (other kooks, natch)
5. Are probably religious and believe in fairy tales like "god".
6. Need to feel "superior" by having information the public isn't given.
7. Daily life is drab, dull and boring.
8. Therefore they obviously make up lies about government stories to make
themselves feel important.
9. But of course this is all just "in their own minds" proving once again
they are all insane!
WoW Harlow! What a professional debunker post. There is about no
tradecraft you haven't included!
Actually it sounds like he's describing the life of faceless government
bureaucrats like himself.
Unanswered are:
1. Why would anyone who blindly believes all government stories without
question NOT be considered insane (like Harlow)
2. What credentials does Harlow have to back ANY statements he makes.
Clearly he has no more authority in Clinical Psychology than he does in
ANY science. No credentials or even basic knowledge has EVER been
demonstrated by him here.
3. But he nevertheless demands you blindly accept his every word even
though he has zero credibility or he threatens to ridicule you and call
you names (his one major skill)., Why is that?
4. Finally if he can't disrupt reasonable discussions he changes the
subject to sex to do the job. Why is that?
The bottom line is that if Harlow is talking about Propaganda and
"strategic writing" perhaps you need to pay attention as that is the ONE
area where he apparently DOES have credentials and ability. I just wonder
how many "personalities" he's putting on the internet in various groups
for those in power. The last government RFQ for Internet software was to
handle 18 per posting employee.
Bast
May 4, 2013, 1:35:08 PM5/4/13
to
And of course the sheeple don't even have to decide if they are patriotic or
not,.... just follow his advice, and you too can proudly shove a Chinese
made, American flag up your ass, then wiggle your bum and wave it.
.....And then you get a cookie.
HVAC
May 4, 2013, 4:42:53 PM5/4/13
to
HVAC
May 4, 2013, 4:50:23 PM5/4/13
to
On 5/4/2013 1:35 PM, Bast wrote:
>
> Ahhh, but hvac offers blissful ignorance,...
Yes. The ignorance that 98% of my fellow scientists agree with me on.
>
> Ahhh, but hvac offers blissful ignorance,...
Of course WE are not privy the the 'Truth' as are you. YOU have been
granted powers (from god, of course) to see the world that others
cannot. The world where good American citizens are looked upon with
scorn by you and your fellow kooks. The world where Uncle Sam is just
sitting around thinking up evil shit to do to everyone else.
You're fucked in the head, to use a technical term.
The lie about your sister dying on 9/11 was the ultimate in truly
disgusting behavior.
benj
May 4, 2013, 10:18:45 PM5/4/13
to
hanson
May 4, 2013, 10:21:39 PM5/4/13
to
"HVAC" <harlowc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
"OFF/ON"-kike Jacoby "benj" <be...@iwaynet.net> put
his Yarmulke ON, issued 9 new commandments & wrote:
<snipped, since they disturbed Harlow's law & order soul.
Look'em up in the thread above>
>
Harlow wrote:
That was quite a little melt you had there, BJ.... Congrats.
>
hanson wrote:
Harlow, don't be sarcastic with Yarmulke Ben, but
show him instead the circles you are rolling in,
where there are these good and patriotic folks...
expressing their support for you, Harlow:
> ----------------
>
Ladies 1st:
1994, Alabama's Heather Whitestone was
selected as Miss America 1995.)
Question: If you could live forever, would you and why?
Answer: "I would not live forever, because we should not
live forever, because if we were supposed to live forever,
then we would live forever, but we cannot live forever,
which is why I would not live forever,"
> ----------------
>
"Whenever I watch TV and see those poor starving kids all
over the world, I can't help but cry. I mean I'd love to be skinny
like that, but not with all those flies and death and stuff."
--Mariah Carey
> ----------------
>
"Smoking kills. If you're killed, you've lost a very important part
of your life," -- Brooke Shields, during an interview to become
spokesperson for federal anti-smoking campaign .
> ----------------
>
Now the guys:
"I've never had major knee surgery on any other part of
my body," --Winston Bennett, Uni of KY basketball forward.
> ----------------
>
"Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime
rates in the country," --Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .
> ----------------
>
"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a
jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --A cong. TX candidate.
> ----------------
>
"Half this game is ninety percent mental."
--Philadelphia Phillies manager, Danny Ozark
> ----------------
>
"It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the
impurities in our air and water that are doing it."
--Al Gore, Vice President
> ----------------
>
"I love California . I practically grew up in Phoenix ."
-- Dan Quayle, Vice President
> ----------------
>
"We've got to pause and ask ourselves: How much
clean air do we need?" --Lee Iacocca
> ----------------
>
"The word "genius" isn't applicable in football. A genius
is a guy like Norman Einstein."
--Joe Theisman, NFL football quarterback & sports analyst.
> ----------------
>
"We don't necessarily discriminate. We simply exclude
certain types of people." -- Colonel Gerald Wellman, ROTC
Instructor. (Jacoby Ben's distant relative)
> ----------------
>
"Your food stamps will be stopped effective as of June,
because we received notice that you passed away.
May God bless you. You may reapply if there is a change
in your circumstances." --Dept. of Social Services, SC
> ----------------
>
"If somebody has a bad heart, they can plug this jack in at
night as they go to bed and it will monitor their heart
throughout the night. And the next morning, when they
wake up dead, there'll be a record."
--Mark S. Fowler, FCC Chairman
> ----------------
>
See, Harlow. That is much better then BJ's
nine new commandments, right?... or
"do you want 50% more cash?"
...ahahahaha... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA....
>
>
"OFF/ON"-kike Jacoby "benj" <be...@iwaynet.net> put
his Yarmulke ON, issued 9 new commandments & wrote:
<snipped, since they disturbed Harlow's law & order soul.
Look'em up in the thread above>
>
Harlow wrote:
That was quite a little melt you had there, BJ.... Congrats.
>
hanson wrote:
Harlow, don't be sarcastic with Yarmulke Ben, but
show him instead the circles you are rolling in,
where there are these good and patriotic folks...
expressing their support for you, Harlow:
> ----------------
>
Ladies 1st:
1994, Alabama's Heather Whitestone was
selected as Miss America 1995.)
Question: If you could live forever, would you and why?
Answer: "I would not live forever, because we should not
live forever, because if we were supposed to live forever,
then we would live forever, but we cannot live forever,
which is why I would not live forever,"
> ----------------
>
"Whenever I watch TV and see those poor starving kids all
over the world, I can't help but cry. I mean I'd love to be skinny
like that, but not with all those flies and death and stuff."
--Mariah Carey
> ----------------
>
"Smoking kills. If you're killed, you've lost a very important part
of your life," -- Brooke Shields, during an interview to become
spokesperson for federal anti-smoking campaign .
> ----------------
>
Now the guys:
"I've never had major knee surgery on any other part of
my body," --Winston Bennett, Uni of KY basketball forward.
> ----------------
>
"Outside of the killings, Washington has one of the lowest crime
rates in the country," --Mayor Marion Barry, Washington , DC .
> ----------------
>
"That lowdown scoundrel deserves to be kicked to death by a
jackass, and I'm just the one to do it," --A cong. TX candidate.
> ----------------
>
"Half this game is ninety percent mental."
--Philadelphia Phillies manager, Danny Ozark
> ----------------
>
"It isn't pollution that's harming the environment. It's the
impurities in our air and water that are doing it."
--Al Gore, Vice President
> ----------------
>
"I love California . I practically grew up in Phoenix ."
-- Dan Quayle, Vice President
> ----------------
>
"We've got to pause and ask ourselves: How much
clean air do we need?" --Lee Iacocca
> ----------------
>
"The word "genius" isn't applicable in football. A genius
is a guy like Norman Einstein."
--Joe Theisman, NFL football quarterback & sports analyst.
> ----------------
>
"We don't necessarily discriminate. We simply exclude
certain types of people." -- Colonel Gerald Wellman, ROTC
Instructor. (Jacoby Ben's distant relative)
> ----------------
>
"Your food stamps will be stopped effective as of June,
because we received notice that you passed away.
May God bless you. You may reapply if there is a change
in your circumstances." --Dept. of Social Services, SC
> ----------------
>
"If somebody has a bad heart, they can plug this jack in at
night as they go to bed and it will monitor their heart
throughout the night. And the next morning, when they
wake up dead, there'll be a record."
--Mark S. Fowler, FCC Chairman
> ----------------
>
See, Harlow. That is much better then BJ's
nine new commandments, right?... or
"do you want 50% more cash?"
...ahahahaha... ahahahaha... AHAHAHAHA....
alie...@gmail.com
May 5, 2013, 4:05:08 AM5/5/13
to
On May 4, 8:07 am, benj <b...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 04 May 2013 08:15:37 -0400, HVAC wrote:
> > I think that most conspiracy kooks are not clinically insane.
>
> > Most are anti-American types and see this as a way to take a stab at
> > America when they aren't busy talking about George Bush. Another reason
> > is that it makes them a part of a group. Many people feel this need.
> > It's why religion is so popular. And what is a kooky conspiracy but
> > another religion? In *this* religion they get to feel smug just as in
> > many other religions because THEY are in the know and 'we' aren't.
> > THEY hold the sacred truth and 'we' don't.
>
> > For some people, this is too good to pass up. Their drab daily existence
> > is dull and boring, but when they don the cloak of TRUTH,
> > they become important (at least in their own minds).
>
> Old Harlow sure is a pro! Just look at this "damning with faint praise"
> would you!
>
> Lets see if we've got his points down. Anyone questioning government
> veracity:
Have you redefined "believes conspiracy theories" to mean "questions
> On Sat, 04 May 2013 08:15:37 -0400, HVAC wrote:
> > I think that most conspiracy kooks are not clinically insane.
>
> > Most are anti-American types and see this as a way to take a stab at
> > America when they aren't busy talking about George Bush. Another reason
> > is that it makes them a part of a group. Many people feel this need.
> > It's why religion is so popular. And what is a kooky conspiracy but
> > another religion? In *this* religion they get to feel smug just as in
> > many other religions because THEY are in the know and 'we' aren't.
> > THEY hold the sacred truth and 'we' don't.
>
> > For some people, this is too good to pass up. Their drab daily existence
> > is dull and boring, but when they don the cloak of TRUTH,
> > they become important (at least in their own minds).
>
> Old Harlow sure is a pro! Just look at this "damning with faint praise"
> would you!
>
> Lets see if we've got his points down. Anyone questioning government
> veracity:
government veracity" exclusively?
> 5. Are probably religious and believe in fairy tales like "god".
religions qualify as conspiracy theories.
Thank you for sharing that Sacred Truth.
Mark L. Fergerson
Bast
May 5, 2013, 9:47:14 AM5/5/13
to
nu...@bid.nes wrote:
> On May 4, 8:07 am, benj <b...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
>> On Sat, 04 May 2013 08:15:37 -0400, HVAC wrote:
>>> I think that most conspiracy kooks are not clinically insane.
>>
>>> Most are anti-American types and see this as a way to take a stab at
>>> America when they aren't busy talking about George Bush. Another
>>> reason is that it makes them a part of a group. Many people feel this
>>> need. It's why religion is so popular. And what is a kooky conspiracy
>>> but another religion? In *this* religion they get to feel smug just
>>> as in many other religions because THEY are in the know and 'we'
>>> aren't.
>>> THEY hold the sacred truth and 'we' don't.
>>
>>> For some people, this is too good to pass up. Their drab daily
>>> existence is dull and boring, but when they don the cloak of TRUTH,
>>> they become important (at least in their own minds).
>>
>> Old Harlow sure is a pro! Just look at this "damning with faint praise"
>> would you!
>>
>> Lets see if we've got his points down. Anyone questioning government
>> veracity:
>
> Have you redefined "believes conspiracy theories" to mean "questions
> government veracity" exclusively?
?
When obfuscation and inferred innuendo, or even ouright lies, are the
debunker's, only weapons.
Much more fun for them to just throw out witch-hunt blanket statements of
"you are with with us, or the enemy" to end any debate
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-23kmhc3P8U
As you can see, their ooze, drains right form the top down
>
>> 5. Are probably religious and believe in fairy tales like "god".
>
> Now that you point it out, it is blindingly obvious that organized
> religions qualify as conspiracy theories.
>
> Thank you for sharing that Sacred Truth.
>
>
> Mark L. Fergerson
And it's off to the FEMA camps for you.
Hägar
May 5, 2013, 10:55:08 AM5/5/13
to
"HVAC" wrote in message news:km3s3t$qv5$1...@dont-email.me...
On 5/4/2013 1:35 PM, Bast wrote:
>
> Ahhh, but hvac offers blissful ignorance,...
Yes. The ignorance that 98% of my fellow scientists agree with me on.
"Fellow Scientists" ??? You're starting to sound like treBert ....
alie...@gmail.com
May 5, 2013, 4:59:09 PM5/5/13
to
On May 5, 6:47 am, "Bast" <faken...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
"conspiracy theorists" or was his idea alone.
> When obfuscation and inferred innuendo, or even ouright lies, are the
> debunker's, only weapons.
For one thing, those are the typical tactics of conspiracy
theorists. For another, "debunkers" often have the unfair advantage of
verifiable facts on their side.
And please, don't point me at a bunch of youtube videos that show
select bits of footage and then make wild conclusions from them.
That's as bad as Sam and his AGW crapola.
> Much more fun for them to just throw out witch-hunt blanket statements of
> "you are with with us, or the enemy" to end any debate
Uh, that's "conspiracy theory" 101.
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-23kmhc3P8U
>
> As you can see, their ooze, drains right form the top down
Curious choice of video on your part. Yeah, I get it, you (and so
very many others) just can't get W out of your minds (you *do* realize
you confirmed what HVAC wrote above by posting that link, right?), but
I wonder if you realy object to his point that freedom and tyranny are
incompatible.
If you can get W's image out of your head for a moment, which do you
prefer, to be free, or to be the subject of a tyrant?
> >> 5. Are probably religious and believe in fairy tales like "god".
>
> > Now that you point it out, it is blindingly obvious that organized
> > religions qualify as conspiracy theories.
>
> > Thank you for sharing that Sacred Truth.
>
> > Mark L. Fergerson
>
> Oh yes,...admit a believe in ANY God,...and you are a conspiracy theorist.
Well, to claim that an invisible being directs all actions, rewards
believers and punishes disbelievers is a sort of theory. For many to
agree to this claim, and to flesh it out to the basis of whole
societies and cultures requires many to "conspire". So yeah, organized
religions qualify.
> And it's off to the FEMA camps for you.
Silly person; there's no need for FEMA camps when it's possible to
set up economic and political gradients that drive people from rural
areas into cities where they can be more effectively "managed". Oh,
wait; that's what we already have in place...
Mark L. Fergerson
> n...@bid.nes wrote:
> > On May 4, 8:07 am, benj <b...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 04 May 2013 08:15:37 -0400, HVAC wrote:
> >>> I think that most conspiracy kooks are not clinically insane.
>
> >>> Most are anti-American types and see this as a way to take a stab at
> >>> America when they aren't busy talking about George Bush. Another
> >>> reason is that it makes them a part of a group. Many people feel this
> >>> need. It's why religion is so popular. And what is a kooky conspiracy
> >>> but another religion? In *this* religion they get to feel smug just
> >>> as in many other religions because THEY are in the know and 'we'
> >>> aren't.
> >>> THEY hold the sacred truth and 'we' don't.
>
> >>> For some people, this is too good to pass up. Their drab daily
> >>> existence is dull and boring, but when they don the cloak of TRUTH,
> >>> they become important (at least in their own minds).
>
> >> Old Harlow sure is a pro! Just look at this "damning with faint praise"
> >> would you!
>
> >> Lets see if we've got his points down. Anyone questioning government
> >> veracity:
>
> > Have you redefined "believes conspiracy theories" to mean "questions
> > government veracity" exclusively?
>
> Why would "the debunkers" want to limit their arguments to specific issues?
I just wanted to find out if benj's statement applied to all
> > On May 4, 8:07 am, benj <b...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
> >> On Sat, 04 May 2013 08:15:37 -0400, HVAC wrote:
> >>> I think that most conspiracy kooks are not clinically insane.
>
> >>> Most are anti-American types and see this as a way to take a stab at
> >>> America when they aren't busy talking about George Bush. Another
> >>> reason is that it makes them a part of a group. Many people feel this
> >>> need. It's why religion is so popular. And what is a kooky conspiracy
> >>> but another religion? In *this* religion they get to feel smug just
> >>> as in many other religions because THEY are in the know and 'we'
> >>> aren't.
> >>> THEY hold the sacred truth and 'we' don't.
>
> >>> For some people, this is too good to pass up. Their drab daily
> >>> existence is dull and boring, but when they don the cloak of TRUTH,
> >>> they become important (at least in their own minds).
>
> >> Old Harlow sure is a pro! Just look at this "damning with faint praise"
> >> would you!
>
> >> Lets see if we've got his points down. Anyone questioning government
> >> veracity:
>
> > Have you redefined "believes conspiracy theories" to mean "questions
> > government veracity" exclusively?
>
> Why would "the debunkers" want to limit their arguments to specific issues?
"conspiracy theorists" or was his idea alone.
> When obfuscation and inferred innuendo, or even ouright lies, are the
> debunker's, only weapons.
theorists. For another, "debunkers" often have the unfair advantage of
verifiable facts on their side.
And please, don't point me at a bunch of youtube videos that show
select bits of footage and then make wild conclusions from them.
That's as bad as Sam and his AGW crapola.
> Much more fun for them to just throw out witch-hunt blanket statements of
> "you are with with us, or the enemy" to end any debate
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-23kmhc3P8U
>
> As you can see, their ooze, drains right form the top down
very many others) just can't get W out of your minds (you *do* realize
you confirmed what HVAC wrote above by posting that link, right?), but
I wonder if you realy object to his point that freedom and tyranny are
incompatible.
If you can get W's image out of your head for a moment, which do you
prefer, to be free, or to be the subject of a tyrant?
> >> 5. Are probably religious and believe in fairy tales like "god".
>
> > Now that you point it out, it is blindingly obvious that organized
> > religions qualify as conspiracy theories.
>
> > Thank you for sharing that Sacred Truth.
>
> > Mark L. Fergerson
>
> Oh yes,...admit a believe in ANY God,...and you are a conspiracy theorist.
believers and punishes disbelievers is a sort of theory. For many to
agree to this claim, and to flesh it out to the basis of whole
societies and cultures requires many to "conspire". So yeah, organized
religions qualify.
> And it's off to the FEMA camps for you.
set up economic and political gradients that drive people from rural
areas into cities where they can be more effectively "managed". Oh,
wait; that's what we already have in place...
Mark L. Fergerson
Bast
May 5, 2013, 5:38:22 PM5/5/13
to
photos.
...e.g. the one who claimed WTC - 1 fell on WTC-7, and that's why WTC - &
fell without any logical reason.
>
> And please, don't point me at a bunch of youtube videos that show
> select bits of footage and then make wild conclusions from them.
> That's as bad as Sam and his AGW crapola.
Why should I EVER want to provide actual videos, of things like actual news
broadcasts, to support what I say.
>
>> Much more fun for them to just throw out witch-hunt blanket statements
>> of "you are with with us, or the enemy" to end any debate
>
> Uh, that's "conspiracy theory" 101.
You really think that providing proof, is a witchhunt ?
>
>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-23kmhc3P8U
>>
>> As you can see, their ooze, drains right form the top down
>
> Curious choice of video on your part. Yeah, I get it, you (and so
> very many others) just can't get W out of your minds (you *do* realize
> you confirmed what HVAC wrote above by posting that link, right?), but
> I wonder if you realy object to his point that freedom and tyranny are
> incompatible.
>
> If you can get W's image out of your head for a moment, which do you
> prefer, to be free, or to be the subject of a tyrant?
Are you saying that a government that trashes the rights and constitution of
it's citizens, while making up laws that the people do not want, is NOT a
tyranny ?
>
>>>> 5. Are probably religious and believe in fairy tales like "god".
>>
>>> Now that you point it out, it is blindingly obvious that organized
>>> religions qualify as conspiracy theories.
>>
>>> Thank you for sharing that Sacred Truth.
>>
>>> Mark L. Fergerson
>>
>> Oh yes,...admit a believe in ANY God,...and you are a conspiracy
>> theorist.
>
> Well, to claim that an invisible being directs all actions, rewards
> believers and punishes disbelievers is a sort of theory. For many to
> agree to this claim, and to flesh it out to the basis of whole
> societies and cultures requires many to "conspire". So yeah, organized
> religions qualify.
the same as terrorist dogma.
That reeks of "thought police", profiling, tyranny.
....Someone MIGHT commit a crime, so they are guilty ?
>
>> And it's off to the FEMA camps for you.
>
> Silly person; there's no need for FEMA camps when it's possible to
> set up economic and political gradients that drive people from rural
> areas into cities where they can be more effectively "managed". Oh,
> wait; that's what we already have in place...
>
>
> Mark L. Fergerson
If you really think that,...you may just be a "conspiracy theorist".
Of course many will not want to live under NWO rules,....thumb their nose at
the system, and keep running back to the rural areas.
....For Those, that refuse to obey orders,....FEMA camps with locked doors
are needed.
What NWO types do not understand is that there will be far too many people
who still think for themselves,....and not enough FEMA camps.
Look at what has happened after their botched (and painfully exposed) Boston
bombings.
The majority of Americans are now more afraid of the U.S.. Government
terrorists, than they are of FOREIGN terrorists.
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
May 5, 2013, 11:05:02 PM5/5/13
to
that David Hume would probably agree, and I'm certain Karl Marx would.
> Thank you for sharing that Sacred Truth.
>
> Mark L. Fergerson
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"I think we agree, the past is over."
-- George Bush Jr. (May 10, 2000)
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
May 5, 2013, 11:06:23 PM5/5/13
to
--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"I'm playing for my life. You're working for money."
-- Charles Milles Manson
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
May 5, 2013, 11:15:43 PM5/5/13
to
evidence, and many scientific organizations (including Kodak) have done
tremendous work to credibly explain the artifacts in photographs, thus
ruling them out as mysterious (e.g., mysterious faces in windows).
> > And please, don't point me at a bunch of youtube videos that show
> > select bits of footage and then make wild conclusions from them.
> > That's as bad as Sam and his AGW crapola.
>
> Oh of course not.
> Why should I EVER want to provide actual videos, of things like
> actual news broadcasts, to support what I say.
> >> Much more fun for them to just throw out witch-hunt blanket
> >> statements of "you are with with us, or the enemy" to end any
> >> debate
> >
> > Uh, that's "conspiracy theory" 101.
>
> Huh ?
> You really think that providing proof, is a witchhunt ?
> >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-23kmhc3P8U
> >>
> >> As you can see, their ooze, drains right form the top down
> >
> > Curious choice of video on your part. Yeah, I get it, you (and so
> > very many others) just can't get W out of your minds (you *do*
> > realize you confirmed what HVAC wrote above by posting that link,
> > right?), but I wonder if you realy object to his point that freedom
> > and tyranny are incompatible.
> >
> > If you can get W's image out of your head for a moment, which do
> > you prefer, to be free, or to be the subject of a tyrant?
>
> Your point here ???
> Are you saying that a government that trashes the rights and
> constitution of it's citizens, while making up laws that the people
> do not want, is NOT a tyranny ?
better. Just because the people don't want it doesn't mean it's bad.
> >>>> 5. Are probably religious and believe in fairy tales like "god".
> >>
> >>> Now that you point it out, it is blindingly obvious that organized
> >>> religions qualify as conspiracy theories.
> >>
> >>> Thank you for sharing that Sacred Truth.
> >>
> >>> Mark L. Fergerson
> >>
> >> Oh yes,...admit a believe in ANY God,...and you are a conspiracy
> >> theorist.
> >
> > Well, to claim that an invisible being directs all actions,
> > rewards believers and punishes disbelievers is a sort of theory.
> > For many to agree to this claim, and to flesh it out to the basis
> > of whole societies and cultures requires many to "conspire". So
> > yeah, organized religions qualify.
>
> You mince words,....but you still infer, any religious beliefs
> "qualify", as the same as terrorist dogma.
>
> That reeks of "thought police", profiling, tyranny.
> ....Someone MIGHT commit a crime, so they are guilty ?
necessary where freedom of thought is restricted.
> >> And it's off to the FEMA camps for you.
> >
> > Silly person; there's no need for FEMA camps when it's possible to
> > set up economic and political gradients that drive people from rural
> > areas into cities where they can be more effectively "managed". Oh,
> > wait; that's what we already have in place...
> >
> >
> > Mark L. Fergerson
>
> Uh Huh,.....Except that is the plan of the NWO/Unesco/World
> Government. If you really think that,...you may just be a "conspiracy
> theorist".
>
> Of course many will not want to live under NWO rules,....thumb their
> nose at the system, and keep running back to the rural areas.
> ....For Those, that refuse to obey orders,....FEMA camps with locked
> doors are needed.
>
> What NWO types do not understand is that there will be far too many
> people who still think for themselves,....and not enough FEMA camps.
>
> Look at what has happened after their botched (and painfully exposed)
> Boston bombings.
> The majority of Americans are now more afraid of the U.S.. Government
> terrorists, than they are of FOREIGN terrorists.
for falsely reporting that the perpetrators were captured when this
actually wasn't the case, but I don't regard that as a government
conspiracy (at most, it could have just been a ploy orchestrated by the
police as part of a plan to find the real perpetrators, but I doubt it).
--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"Ground Zero Mosque supporters: Doesn't it stab you in the heart, as
it does ours throughout the heartland? Peaceful Muslims, please
refudiate."
-- Sara Palin (July 18, 2010)
benj
May 6, 2013, 12:06:40 AM5/6/13
to
On Sun, 05 May 2013 13:59:09 -0700, nu...@bid.nes wrote:
> Well, to claim that an invisible being directs all actions, rewards
> believers and punishes disbelievers is a sort of theory. For many to
> agree to this claim, and to flesh it out to the basis of whole societies
> and cultures requires many to "conspire". So yeah, organized religions
> qualify.
Clearly the term "conspiracy theorist" is intended to denigrate anyone
> Well, to claim that an invisible being directs all actions, rewards
> believers and punishes disbelievers is a sort of theory. For many to
> agree to this claim, and to flesh it out to the basis of whole societies
> and cultures requires many to "conspire". So yeah, organized religions
> qualify.
raising any questions about any, but in particular official actions. Note
that the questioner is only a "theorist" while those attempting to
neutralize those asking questions pretend that "truth" is on their side.
Hence, "conspiracy theorist" are interested in trying to find the
falshoods, prevarications and outright lies generated to cover up crimes.
Have you all forgotten that conspiracies are CRIMES?
>> And it's off to the FEMA camps for you.
>
> Silly person; there's no need for FEMA camps when it's possible to
> set up economic and political gradients that drive people from rural
> areas into cities where they can be more effectively "managed". Oh,
> wait; that's what we already have in place...
insane, or both. Interesting "theory"!
benj
May 6, 2013, 12:11:39 AM5/6/13
to
his "getting wood is good" theory?
Michael Moroney
May 6, 2013, 12:40:00 AM5/6/13
to
"Bast" <fake...@nomail.invalid> writes:
>Debunkers only have second and third hand information, and NEVER can provide
>photos.
>...e.g. the one who claimed WTC - 1 fell on WTC-7, and that's why WTC - &
>fell without any logical reason.
Debunkers don't have to provide such photos when the kooktards not only
>Debunkers only have second and third hand information, and NEVER can provide
>photos.
>...e.g. the one who claimed WTC - 1 fell on WTC-7, and that's why WTC - &
>fell without any logical reason.
provide the photos, they put them right on the front covers of their
kookbooks!
http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/buy/
Bast
May 6, 2013, 1:00:25 AM5/6/13
to
than the official 9/11 report.
Since NIST made up most of THEIR facts, including computer models, tweaked
graphs, and line drawings.
>
>>> And please, don't point me at a bunch of youtube videos that show
>>> select bits of footage and then make wild conclusions from them.
>>> That's as bad as Sam and his AGW crapola.
>>
>> Oh of course not.
>> Why should I EVER want to provide actual videos, of things like
>> actual news broadcasts, to support what I say.
>
> Ha ha! Because you have nothing better to do? (Which side are you on?)
http://www.ae911truth.org
>
>>>> Much more fun for them to just throw out witch-hunt blanket
>>>> statements of "you are with with us, or the enemy" to end any
>>>> debate
>>>
>>> Uh, that's "conspiracy theory" 101.
>>
>> Huh ?
>> You really think that providing proof, is a witchhunt ?
>
> It can be for debunkers.
Getting caught in lies they learned from reading the 9/11 report and Popular
mechanics, isn't a witchhunt though.
>
>>>> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-23kmhc3P8U
>>>>
>>>> As you can see, their ooze, drains right form the top down
>>>
>>> Curious choice of video on your part. Yeah, I get it, you (and so
>>> very many others) just can't get W out of your minds (you *do*
>>> realize you confirmed what HVAC wrote above by posting that link,
>>> right?), but I wonder if you realy object to his point that freedom
>>> and tyranny are incompatible.
>>>
>>> If you can get W's image out of your head for a moment, which do
>>> you prefer, to be free, or to be the subject of a tyrant?
>>
>> Your point here ???
>> Are you saying that a government that trashes the rights and
>> constitution of it's citizens, while making up laws that the people
>> do not want, is NOT a tyranny ?
>
> It's possible that it may not be a tyranny if the new laws are actually
> better. Just because the people don't want it doesn't mean it's bad.
Better for who ?
Slavery was legal, and BETTER for the slave-owners, so was Prohibition and
that was BETTER for the moonshiners/,.....and neither of those laws were
tollerated by the general public.
Wanna bet how banning guns will go over ?
>
>>>>>> 5. Are probably religious and believe in fairy tales like "god".
>>>>
>>>>> Now that you point it out, it is blindingly obvious that organized
>>>>> religions qualify as conspiracy theories.
>>>>
>>>>> Thank you for sharing that Sacred Truth.
>>>>
>>>>> Mark L. Fergerson
>>>>
>>>> Oh yes,...admit a believe in ANY God,...and you are a conspiracy
>>>> theorist.
>>>
>>> Well, to claim that an invisible being directs all actions,
>>> rewards believers and punishes disbelievers is a sort of theory.
>>> For many to agree to this claim, and to flesh it out to the basis
>>> of whole societies and cultures requires many to "conspire". So
>>> yeah, organized religions qualify.
>>
>> You mince words,....but you still infer, any religious beliefs
>> "qualify", as the same as terrorist dogma.
>>
>> That reeks of "thought police", profiling, tyranny.
>> ....Someone MIGHT commit a crime, so they are guilty ?
>
> Thought police, which is something I advocate against, are only
> necessary where freedom of thought is restricted.
>
Both thought police AND restricting freedom of thought.
>>>> And it's off to the FEMA camps for you.
>>>
>>> Silly person; there's no need for FEMA camps when it's possible to
>>> set up economic and political gradients that drive people from rural
>>> areas into cities where they can be more effectively "managed". Oh,
>>> wait; that's what we already have in place...
>>>
>>>
>>> Mark L. Fergerson
>>
>> Uh Huh,.....Except that is the plan of the NWO/Unesco/World
>> Government. If you really think that,...you may just be a "conspiracy
>> theorist".
>>
>> Of course many will not want to live under NWO rules,....thumb their
>> nose at the system, and keep running back to the rural areas.
>> ....For Those, that refuse to obey orders,....FEMA camps with locked
>> doors are needed.
>>
>> What NWO types do not understand is that there will be far too many
>> people who still think for themselves,....and not enough FEMA camps.
>>
>> Look at what has happened after their botched (and painfully exposed)
>> Boston bombings.
>> The majority of Americans are now more afraid of the U.S.. Government
>> terrorists, than they are of FOREIGN terrorists.
>
> The Boston Bombings were horrific. I'm also disappointed in the media
> for falsely reporting that the perpetrators were captured when this
> actually wasn't the case, but I don't regard that as a government
> conspiracy (at most, it could have just been a ploy orchestrated by the
> police as part of a plan to find the real perpetrators, but I doubt it).
Especially when people were still in shock over the bombing......in
Washington they already were pushing through legislation to BAN/REGULATE
BLACK (gun) POWDER.
Is it a coincidence that when they couldn't ban guns,...they are now going
to make getting bullets next to impossible, and buying up hundreds of
millions of rounds getting them out of the stores.
.....Using OUR TAX MONEY against us
Amazing how the politicians already knew. EXACTLY what to ban.
Especially since the paperwork alone would have taken several days to
prepare.
The people are starting to wake up, and we are all fed up with corrupt
politicians who regard human life, as little more than "acceptable losses".
Jeanne Douglas
May 6, 2013, 5:09:10 AM5/6/13
to
In article <20130505201543.c0b6...@fidemturbare.com>,
I just attribute it to the 24 hour news cycle. It's hard to fill that
time and some take the lazy way out.
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
"Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess"
time and some take the lazy way out.
--
JD
"Osama Bin Laden is dead and GM is alive."--VP Joseph Biden
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
May 6, 2013, 3:08:13 PM5/6/13
to
On Mon, 06 May 2013 04:06:40 GMT
benj <be...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 05 May 2013 13:59:09 -0700, nu...@bid.nes wrote:
>
> > Well, to claim that an invisible being directs all actions,
> > rewards believers and punishes disbelievers is a sort of theory.
> > For many to agree to this claim, and to flesh it out to the basis
> > of whole societies and cultures requires many to "conspire". So
> > yeah, organized religions qualify.
>
> Clearly the term "conspiracy theorist" is intended to denigrate
> anyone raising any questions about any, but in particular official
> actions. Note that the questioner is only a "theorist" while those
> attempting to neutralize those asking questions pretend that "truth"
Questioning a theory doesn't imply that the questioner has a clear
benj <be...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
> On Sun, 05 May 2013 13:59:09 -0700, nu...@bid.nes wrote:
>
> > Well, to claim that an invisible being directs all actions,
> > rewards believers and punishes disbelievers is a sort of theory.
> > For many to agree to this claim, and to flesh it out to the basis
> > of whole societies and cultures requires many to "conspire". So
> > yeah, organized religions qualify.
>
> Clearly the term "conspiracy theorist" is intended to denigrate
> anyone raising any questions about any, but in particular official
> actions. Note that the questioner is only a "theorist" while those
> attempting to neutralize those asking questions pretend that "truth"
idea of what the truth is. Refuting a theory, however, implies that
the debunker has enough knowledge to eliminate theory's plausibility,
but any claims they make in this process would also carry a burden of
proof.
> is on their side. Hence, "conspiracy theorist" are interested in
> trying to find the falshoods, prevarications and outright lies
> generated to cover up crimes. Have you all forgotten that
> conspiracies are CRIMES?
> >> And it's off to the FEMA camps for you.
> >
> > Silly person; there's no need for FEMA camps when it's possible to
> > set up economic and political gradients that drive people from rural
> > areas into cities where they can be more effectively "managed". Oh,
> > wait; that's what we already have in place...
>
> Sure Mark, truth is on your side and anyone who questions it is
> ignorant, insane, or both. Interesting "theory"!
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"On the internet you can be anything you want. It's strange that so
many choose to be stupid."
-- Unknown
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
May 6, 2013, 3:12:00 PM5/6/13
to
general public is held accountable if they yell "Fire!" in a crowded
theatre when they know there isn't really a fire.
--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"Everybody makes makes mistakes."
-- MAD Magazine
HVAC
May 6, 2013, 5:05:38 PM5/6/13
to
On 5/6/2013 3:12 PM, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess wrote:
>
>>> The Boston Bombings were horrific. I'm also disappointed in the
>>> media for falsely reporting that the perpetrators were captured
>>> when this actually wasn't the case, but I don't regard that as a
>>> government conspiracy (at most, it could have just been a ploy
>>> orchestrated by the police as part of a plan to find the real
>>> perpetrators, but I doubt it).
>>
>> I just attribute it to the 24 hour news cycle. It's hard to fill that
>> time and some take the lazy way out.
>
> The double-standard is that they get away with it while a member of the
> general public is held accountable if they yell "Fire!" in a crowded
> theatre when they know there isn't really a fire.
Whenever I start a fire in a crowded theater, I never tell anyone.
>
>>> The Boston Bombings were horrific. I'm also disappointed in the
>>> media for falsely reporting that the perpetrators were captured
>>> when this actually wasn't the case, but I don't regard that as a
>>> government conspiracy (at most, it could have just been a ploy
>>> orchestrated by the police as part of a plan to find the real
>>> perpetrators, but I doubt it).
>>
>> I just attribute it to the 24 hour news cycle. It's hard to fill that
>> time and some take the lazy way out.
>
> The double-standard is that they get away with it while a member of the
> general public is held accountable if they yell "Fire!" in a crowded
> theatre when they know there isn't really a fire.
So I'm good...Right?
Bast
May 6, 2013, 7:08:32 PM5/6/13
to
http://www.ae911truth.org
But why not save some of your Crack money, and buy the book.
You may learn something.
...And at the very least, keep that wobbly table steady
benj
May 6, 2013, 7:26:34 PM5/6/13
to
On Mon, 06 May 2013 12:08:13 -0700, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
atheist goddess wrote:
> Questioning a theory doesn't imply that the questioner has a clear idea
> of what the truth is. Refuting a theory, however, implies that the
> debunker has enough knowledge to eliminate theory's plausibility,
> but any claims they make in this process would also carry a burden of
> proof.
Of course the catch here is that "plausibility" proves nothing. That is
atheist goddess wrote:
> Questioning a theory doesn't imply that the questioner has a clear idea
> of what the truth is. Refuting a theory, however, implies that the
> debunker has enough knowledge to eliminate theory's plausibility,
> but any claims they make in this process would also carry a burden of
> proof.
the conspirators stock in trade. A "plausible" story is spun to cover up
the true facts of a crime, The hope is the lazy public won't demand
actual point by point verification of facts but merely accept a
"plausible" story. The burden of proof is on those spinning the
"plausible" stories to demonstrate that all questions about details of
their scenarios are true. To turn that around and do the old "Well if
UFOs are real then show me one in your back yard filled with aliens" is
simply a cover-up plan. The questioners are not the ones suspected of
being guilty.
>> is on their side. Hence, "conspiracy theorist" are interested in trying
>> to find the falshoods, prevarications and outright lies generated to
>> cover up crimes. Have you all forgotten that conspiracies are CRIMES?
>
> In which jurisdiction?
more people getting together to commit crimes!
Mahipal
May 6, 2013, 7:38:41 PM5/6/13
to
On May 6, 3:08 pm, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess"
> benj <b...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
all that evil. They are merely social media before the modern
smartestphones killed the social via their media. Yet they ramble on
and on how are you sure you've downloaded the latest great version of
their app?! Are you sure, by 3PM today? Well did you... and don't
forget... tomorrow's a new download. LLAP and try pretend, at least,
be Social!
> > Clearly the term "conspiracy theorist" is intended to denigrate
> > anyone raising any questions about any, but in particular official
> > actions. Note that the questioner is only a "theorist" while those
> > attempting to neutralize those asking questions pretend that "truth"
>
> Questioning a theory doesn't imply that the questioner has a clear
> idea of what the truth is. Refuting a theory, however, implies that
> the debunker has enough knowledge to eliminate theory's plausibility,
> but any claims they make in this process would also carry a burden of
> proof.
Why the word "Conspiracy" exists at all in dictionaries is a BigTime
Conspiracy in and of itself. It's always the last word I search for --
be it in my Dad's old paper physical dictionary or a virtual expensive
online dictionary.
> > is on their side. Hence, "conspiracy theorist" are interested in
> > trying to find the falshoods, prevarications and outright lies
> > generated to cover up crimes. Have you all forgotten that
> > conspiracies are CRIMES?
>
> In which jurisdiction?
That "jurisdiction" border has no boundaries anymore. Ask a USA
politician, who care more about there than here. You know what I
imply.
> > >> And it's off to the FEMA camps for you.
>
> > > Silly person; there's no need for FEMA camps when it's possible to
> > > set up economic and political gradients that drive people from rural
> > > areas into cities where they can be more effectively "managed". Oh,
> > > wait; that's what we already have in place...
>
> > Sure Mark, truth is on your side and anyone who questions it is
> > ignorant, insane, or both. Interesting "theory"!
That's right Mark! Next thing you'll be blasting Karn Evil 9 like
described here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karn_Evil_9 with your
plate full of Brain Salad!
> --
> Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
> "On the internet you can be anything you want. It's strange that so
> many choose to be stupid."
> -- Unknown
The, internet or not, reality is that the stupidity is not at all by
choice, IME.
-- Mahipal
"See the show...
Right before your eyes we pull laughter from the skies
And he laughs until he cries then he dies then he dies
Come inside the shows about to start
Guaranteed to blow your head apart"
EMERSON, LAKE & PALMER - KARN EVIL 9 LYRICS
> benj <b...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
> > On Sun, 05 May 2013 13:59:09 -0700, n...@bid.nes wrote:
>
> > > Well, to claim that an invisible being directs all actions,
> > > rewards believers and punishes disbelievers is a sort of theory.
> > > For many to agree to this claim, and to flesh it out to the basis
> > > of whole societies and cultures requires many to "conspire". So
> > > yeah, organized religions qualify.
Some religions, despite that Inaccessible Being Constraint, are not at
>
> > > Well, to claim that an invisible being directs all actions,
> > > rewards believers and punishes disbelievers is a sort of theory.
> > > For many to agree to this claim, and to flesh it out to the basis
> > > of whole societies and cultures requires many to "conspire". So
> > > yeah, organized religions qualify.
all that evil. They are merely social media before the modern
smartestphones killed the social via their media. Yet they ramble on
and on how are you sure you've downloaded the latest great version of
their app?! Are you sure, by 3PM today? Well did you... and don't
forget... tomorrow's a new download. LLAP and try pretend, at least,
be Social!
> > Clearly the term "conspiracy theorist" is intended to denigrate
> > anyone raising any questions about any, but in particular official
> > actions. Note that the questioner is only a "theorist" while those
> > attempting to neutralize those asking questions pretend that "truth"
>
> Questioning a theory doesn't imply that the questioner has a clear
> idea of what the truth is. Refuting a theory, however, implies that
> the debunker has enough knowledge to eliminate theory's plausibility,
> but any claims they make in this process would also carry a burden of
> proof.
Conspiracy in and of itself. It's always the last word I search for --
be it in my Dad's old paper physical dictionary or a virtual expensive
online dictionary.
> > is on their side. Hence, "conspiracy theorist" are interested in
> > trying to find the falshoods, prevarications and outright lies
> > generated to cover up crimes. Have you all forgotten that
> > conspiracies are CRIMES?
>
> In which jurisdiction?
politician, who care more about there than here. You know what I
imply.
> > >> And it's off to the FEMA camps for you.
>
> > > Silly person; there's no need for FEMA camps when it's possible to
> > > set up economic and political gradients that drive people from rural
> > > areas into cities where they can be more effectively "managed". Oh,
> > > wait; that's what we already have in place...
>
> > Sure Mark, truth is on your side and anyone who questions it is
> > ignorant, insane, or both. Interesting "theory"!
described here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karn_Evil_9 with your
plate full of Brain Salad!
> --
> Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
> "On the internet you can be anything you want. It's strange that so
> many choose to be stupid."
> -- Unknown
choice, IME.
-- Mahipal
"See the show...
Right before your eyes we pull laughter from the skies
And he laughs until he cries then he dies then he dies
Come inside the shows about to start
Guaranteed to blow your head apart"
EMERSON, LAKE & PALMER - KARN EVIL 9 LYRICS
Hägar
May 6, 2013, 8:37:41 PM5/6/13
to
"benj" wrote in message news:%3Ght.16090$5U.1...@newsfe16.iad...
that as "I love catching my trouser trout" ...
alie...@gmail.com
May 6, 2013, 9:36:38 PM5/6/13
to
On May 5, 9:06 pm, benj <b...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
Mind you I'm neither approving nor disapproving; I just wanted
clarification of terms.
> Note that the questioner is only a "theorist" while those attempting to
> neutralize those asking questions pretend that "truth" is on their side.
The use of the word "truth" annoys me greatly; as commonly used it
means some underlying philosophical framework or a particular facet of
same and is ever subject to interpretation. People love to talk about
"universal truths" but I don't know of any.
I prefer to stick to objectively verifiable facts, not
interpretations of them.
> Hence, "conspiracy theorist" are interested in trying to find the
> falshoods, prevarications and outright lies generated to cover up crimes.
OK, that follows logically as long as you specifically mean crimes
committed by elected or appointed officials. Yes, I'm picking nits,
but I really like clarity.
> Have you all forgotten that conspiracies are CRIMES?
The word means "to share breath" and refers to people having a
conversation while physically close enough to literally share the air
they breathe. Yeah, that implies intent to keep the conversation
private but does not, to me, necessarily imply criminal intent any
more than the classic line we get from some law enforcement types
about "if you have nothing to hide, why do you insist on privacy?"
Plenty of politicians lie like cheap rugs in public, every day, to
as many people as they can reach.
> >> And it's off to the FEMA camps for you.
>
> > Silly person; there's no need for FEMA camps when it's possible to
> > set up economic and political gradients that drive people from rural
> > areas into cities where they can be more effectively "managed". Oh,
> > wait; that's what we already have in place...
>
> Sure Mark, truth is on your side and anyone who questions it is ignorant,
> insane, or both. Interesting "theory"!
Hey, quit harshing on *my* conspiracy theory! Seriously, I suggested
no "truth", I just pointed out a possibility that seems to match facts
in evidence. If it looks like, walks like, and quacks like a duck...
This is another characteristic of conspiracy theorists; they focus
on *their* pet idea and see any other ideas even slightly different
from their own as part of the conspiracy. This makes it difficult for
them to seek assistance in their quest. That's a major difference from
the scientific method in which one assumes one can be wrong. (And yes,
that means that what Sam Wormley et. al. do is to me much closer to a
conspiracy theory than to science.)
Mark L. Fergerson
> On Sun, 05 May 2013 13:59:09 -0700, n...@bid.nes wrote:
> > Well, to claim that an invisible being directs all actions, rewards
> > believers and punishes disbelievers is a sort of theory. For many to
> > agree to this claim, and to flesh it out to the basis of whole societies
> > and cultures requires many to "conspire". So yeah, organized religions
> > qualify.
>
> Clearly the term "conspiracy theorist" is intended to denigrate anyone
> raising any questions about any, but in particular official actions.
Thanks; that's the clarification I was asking for.
> > Well, to claim that an invisible being directs all actions, rewards
> > believers and punishes disbelievers is a sort of theory. For many to
> > agree to this claim, and to flesh it out to the basis of whole societies
> > and cultures requires many to "conspire". So yeah, organized religions
> > qualify.
>
> Clearly the term "conspiracy theorist" is intended to denigrate anyone
> raising any questions about any, but in particular official actions.
Mind you I'm neither approving nor disapproving; I just wanted
clarification of terms.
> Note that the questioner is only a "theorist" while those attempting to
> neutralize those asking questions pretend that "truth" is on their side.
means some underlying philosophical framework or a particular facet of
same and is ever subject to interpretation. People love to talk about
"universal truths" but I don't know of any.
I prefer to stick to objectively verifiable facts, not
interpretations of them.
> Hence, "conspiracy theorist" are interested in trying to find the
> falshoods, prevarications and outright lies generated to cover up crimes.
committed by elected or appointed officials. Yes, I'm picking nits,
but I really like clarity.
> Have you all forgotten that conspiracies are CRIMES?
conversation while physically close enough to literally share the air
they breathe. Yeah, that implies intent to keep the conversation
private but does not, to me, necessarily imply criminal intent any
more than the classic line we get from some law enforcement types
about "if you have nothing to hide, why do you insist on privacy?"
Plenty of politicians lie like cheap rugs in public, every day, to
as many people as they can reach.
> >> And it's off to the FEMA camps for you.
>
> > Silly person; there's no need for FEMA camps when it's possible to
> > set up economic and political gradients that drive people from rural
> > areas into cities where they can be more effectively "managed". Oh,
> > wait; that's what we already have in place...
>
> Sure Mark, truth is on your side and anyone who questions it is ignorant,
> insane, or both. Interesting "theory"!
no "truth", I just pointed out a possibility that seems to match facts
in evidence. If it looks like, walks like, and quacks like a duck...
This is another characteristic of conspiracy theorists; they focus
on *their* pet idea and see any other ideas even slightly different
from their own as part of the conspiracy. This makes it difficult for
them to seek assistance in their quest. That's a major difference from
the scientific method in which one assumes one can be wrong. (And yes,
that means that what Sam Wormley et. al. do is to me much closer to a
conspiracy theory than to science.)
Mark L. Fergerson
alie...@gmail.com
May 6, 2013, 9:53:13 PM5/6/13
to
photos and videos provided by conspiracy theorists themselves. My
favorite was the guy who claimed the smoke from one of the towers
wasn't obeying aerodynamics...
> ...e.g. the one who claimed WTC - 1 fell on WTC-7, and that's why WTC - &
> fell without any logical reason.
> > And please, don't point me at a bunch of youtube videos that show
> > select bits of footage and then make wild conclusions from them.
> > That's as bad as Sam and his AGW crapola.
>
> Oh of course not.
> Why should I EVER want to provide actual videos, of things like actual news
> broadcasts, to support what I say.
> >> Much more fun for them to just throw out witch-hunt blanket statements
> >> of "you are with with us, or the enemy" to end any debate
>
> > Uh, that's "conspiracy theory" 101.
>
> Huh ?
> You really think that providing proof, is a witchhunt ?
reflexively see an attack rather than what's there. I responded to
*your* statement about "you are with with us, or the enemy", not about
"providing proof".
You seem to have already decided I am not with you, therefore I must
be against you.
> >>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-23kmhc3P8U
>
> >> As you can see, their ooze, drains right form the top down
>
> > Curious choice of video on your part. Yeah, I get it, you (and so
> > very many others) just can't get W out of your minds (you *do* realize
> > you confirmed what HVAC wrote above by posting that link, right?), but
> > I wonder if you realy object to his point that freedom and tyranny are
> > incompatible.
>
> > If you can get W's image out of your head for a moment, which do you
> > prefer, to be free, or to be the subject of a tyrant?
>
> Your point here ???
> Are you saying that a government that trashes the rights and constitution of
> it's citizens, while making up laws that the people do not want, is NOT a
> tyranny ?
Also, what *you* wrote above is characteristic of *all* governments.
> >>>> 5. Are probably religious and believe in fairy tales like "god".
>
> >>> Now that you point it out, it is blindingly obvious that organized
> >>> religions qualify as conspiracy theories.
>
> >>> Thank you for sharing that Sacred Truth.
>
> >>> Mark L. Fergerson
>
> >> Oh yes,...admit a believe in ANY God,...and you are a conspiracy
> >> theorist.
> > Well, to claim that an invisible being directs all actions, rewards
> > believers and punishes disbelievers is a sort of theory. For many to
> > agree to this claim, and to flesh it out to the basis of whole
> > societies and cultures requires many to "conspire". So yeah, organized
> > religions qualify.
>
> You mince words,....but you still infer, any religious beliefs "qualify", as
> the same as terrorist dogma.
certainly did not because I specifically wrote "organized religion".
> That reeks of "thought police", profiling, tyranny.
> ....Someone MIGHT commit a crime, so they are guilty ?
know me well at all if you're assuming I'm yet another "my government
right or wrong" type.
I dare you to try to get into the "secret cabals" of any organized
religion.
> >> And it's off to the FEMA camps for you.
>
> > Silly person; there's no need for FEMA camps when it's possible to
> > set up economic and political gradients that drive people from rural
> > areas into cities where they can be more effectively "managed". Oh,
> > wait; that's what we already have in place...
>
> > Mark L. Fergerson
>
> Uh Huh,.....Except that is the plan of the NWO/Unesco/World Government.
> If you really think that,...you may just be a "conspiracy theorist".
observable reality here...
> Of course many will not want to live under NWO rules,....thumb their nose at
> the system, and keep running back to the rural areas.
Population seven thousand here.
> ....For Those, that refuse to obey orders,....FEMA camps with locked doors
> are needed.
>
> What NWO types do not understand is that there will be far too many people
> who still think for themselves,....and not enough FEMA camps.
for "voluntary slavery". But what government types (mostly east coast
city boys) think is "essential" doesn't match my idea of it.
> Look at what has happened after their botched (and painfully exposed) Boston
> bombings.
> The majority of Americans are now more afraid of the U.S.. Government
> terrorists, than they are of FOREIGN terrorists.
Mark L. Fergerson
alie...@gmail.com
May 6, 2013, 9:56:44 PM5/6/13
to
On May 5, 2:38 pm, "Bast" <faken...@nomail.invalid> wrote:
Sorry, I meant to add this to my last post:
http://www.naturalnews.com/040214_seeds_European_Commission_registration.html
That's really gonna cripple us rural types if it becomes law here,
but then there's plenty more to eat out here than "approved" foods.
Mark L. Fergerson
P. S. Does not living in a city make me a "redneck"?
benj
May 7, 2013, 1:07:39 AM5/7/13
to
On Mon, 06 May 2013 18:36:38 -0700, nu...@bid.nes wrote:
> This is another characteristic of conspiracy theorists; they focus
> on *their* pet idea and see any other ideas even slightly different from
> their own as part of the conspiracy. This makes it difficult for them to
> seek assistance in their quest. That's a major difference from the
> scientific method in which one assumes one can be wrong. (And yes,
> that means that what Sam Wormley et. al. do is to me much closer to a
> conspiracy theory than to science.)
>
>
> Mark L. Fergerson
Well obviously if someone is questioning the commission of crimes by some
> This is another characteristic of conspiracy theorists; they focus
> on *their* pet idea and see any other ideas even slightly different from
> their own as part of the conspiracy. This makes it difficult for them to
> seek assistance in their quest. That's a major difference from the
> scientific method in which one assumes one can be wrong. (And yes,
> that means that what Sam Wormley et. al. do is to me much closer to a
> conspiracy theory than to science.)
>
>
> Mark L. Fergerson
group of people (you insist they must be elected but that is pretty much
a kook theory), of COURSE they are interested in their own theory. Your
idea is that if they are questioning one set of facts, that they should
only ask questions about some other set of facts? Now that IS kooky!
And what "conspiracy theory" is about is NOT about science as you imply.
The word theory may throw you, but it's really about criminal
investigation! Sure there is science in criminal investigations but they
are NOT scientific experiments. You can't just walk up to the serial
murderer (like the major media journalists always do) and ask them if
they killed all those people and expect to get a full confession. Sorry,
the guilty just don't typically operate that way. They'll lie about
everything. And if there is a group of them, every one of them will lie.
And when it's the government and controlled media then there are vast
numbers of lies that many unthinking people blindly accept as true.
So the bottom line is you think crimes should be revealed by Einstein
when in fact they are revealed by Sherlock Holmes. And the "science" in
conspiracy theory is not a matter of showing that what the theorists are
guessing are not the "facts" by pointing to "official" stories, because
government officials and mass media journalists have all said otherwise.
THOSE people are the conspirators that are being investigated. And since
you are supporting them that puts you under suspicion too!
The methodology of "conspiracy theory" is to take all those "plausible"
stories typically used to cover up the crimes and tear them apart one by
one showing that while plausible they simply cannot fit the actual truth
(facts) of the situation. Obviously this is difficult because those who
did the crime also often control the media and the justice and police
system. Surveillance tapes that easily could prove allegations one way or
another just disappear. Crime scenes are swept clean packed up and buried
in what would be clear obstruction of justice in any other crime, but
nobody says boo because those who did the crime control the
investigation. And lastly when people actually DO get suspicious we have
the lapdog media and the faithful like you to ridicule any question of
official "plausible" stories as "conspiracy theories" which you pretend
means "insane ranting". And finally we have the conspirators themselves
pretending to be conspiracy crackpots to discredit any further
investigations or questions.
So. Just where DID all those Murrah camera tapes go? Where IS that Waco
door that proves who shot first? How did these "lost" things just somehow
never be considered obstruction of justice? Oh that's right. The only
people raising a fuss about these illegal operations were looney
"conspiracy theorists" and what red blooded American sheeple would ever
pay any attention to them?
Not you. That's for sure.
benj
May 7, 2013, 1:14:16 AM5/7/13
to
Here in the states we have a different system. You grow your plants. And
then Monsanto contaminates the country with their modified seeds that
produce roundup chemicals to make them resistant. When their
contamination is found in your harvest, they sue you for millions for
illegal use of their patented genetics and put you out of business. For
the people worried about consuming the plant-made roundup, there is no
problem because they managed to make sure it's a crime if you label your
plants as NOT genetically modified. So you eat the nasty chemicals none
the wiser and if you get sick of die, well, no problem because nobody
knows why. Bon Appetit
In your case you had just better do as your authorities say, or you won't
have anything to eat.
HVAC
May 7, 2013, 8:09:38 AM5/7/13
to
At least from the POV of us here in New Hampshire.
I mean you probably have a gas station and everything.
HVAC
May 7, 2013, 8:14:52 AM5/7/13
to
On 5/7/2013 1:14 AM, benj wrote:
>
>> P. S. Does not living in a city make me a "redneck"?
>
> No. Redneck is view of life, not a location.
>
> Here in the states we have a different system. You grow your plants. And
> then Monsanto contaminates the country with their modified seeds that
> produce roundup chemicals to make them resistant. When their
> contamination is found in your harvest, they sue you for millions for
> illegal use of their patented genetics and put you out of business. For
> the people worried about consuming the plant-made roundup, there is no
> problem because they managed to make sure it's a crime if you label your
> plants as NOT genetically modified. So you eat the nasty chemicals none
> the wiser and if you get sick of die, well, no problem because nobody
> knows why. Bon Appetit
The food grown in the United States feeds the world. Without these
>
>> P. S. Does not living in a city make me a "redneck"?
>
> No. Redneck is view of life, not a location.
>
> Here in the states we have a different system. You grow your plants. And
> then Monsanto contaminates the country with their modified seeds that
> produce roundup chemicals to make them resistant. When their
> contamination is found in your harvest, they sue you for millions for
> illegal use of their patented genetics and put you out of business. For
> the people worried about consuming the plant-made roundup, there is no
> problem because they managed to make sure it's a crime if you label your
> plants as NOT genetically modified. So you eat the nasty chemicals none
> the wiser and if you get sick of die, well, no problem because nobody
> knows why. Bon Appetit
modern fertilizers, seeds and pesticides, many would starve to death.
Instead, people are living FAR longer than they did in the days before
these products became available.
Your anti-American agenda comes through loud and clear tho... Now it's
the American farmers who are at fault, according to you.
Brad Guth
May 7, 2013, 8:16:34 AM5/7/13
to
On May 3, 11:21 pm, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess"
<godd...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 3 May 2013 17:07:07 -0700 (PDT)
>
> zayton <jlskelto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Friday, May 3, 2013 4:28:50 PM UTC-5, HVAC wrote:
>
> > > So why is it that so many people come to believe in conspiracy
> > > theories?
>
> Despite being a fallacy, the "bandwagon fallacy" is effective.
>
> > > They can’t all be paranoid schizophrenics.
>
> > Why not?
>
> Excellent question.
> -- Anonymous
Harlow is exactly why we had to deal with a mutually perpetrated cold-
war era, and their status-quo dogma which followed. Everything else
is just mos used oligarch toilet paper that they get to toss at us.
<godd...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 3 May 2013 17:07:07 -0700 (PDT)
>
> zayton <jlskelto...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Friday, May 3, 2013 4:28:50 PM UTC-5, HVAC wrote:
>
> > > So why is it that so many people come to believe in conspiracy
> > > theories?
>
> Despite being a fallacy, the "bandwagon fallacy" is effective.
>
> > > They can’t all be paranoid schizophrenics.
>
> > Why not?
>
> Excellent question.
>
> --
> Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
> "Enjoy your slide down the razor blades of life!"
> --
> Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
> -- Anonymous
Harlow is exactly why we had to deal with a mutually perpetrated cold-
war era, and their status-quo dogma which followed. Everything else
is just mos used oligarch toilet paper that they get to toss at us.
HVAC
May 7, 2013, 8:22:15 AM5/7/13
to
On 5/6/2013 12:06 AM, benj wrote:
>
> Have you all forgotten that conspiracies are CRIMES?
No they're not.
>
> Have you all forgotten that conspiracies are CRIMES?
HVAC
May 7, 2013, 8:57:41 AM5/7/13
to
On 5/7/2013 8:16 AM, Brad Guth wrote:
>
>>>> So why is it that so many people come to believe in conspiracy
>>>> theories?
>>
>> Despite being a fallacy, the "bandwagon fallacy" is effective.
>>
>>>> They can�t all be paranoid schizophrenics.
>
>>>> So why is it that so many people come to believe in conspiracy
>>>> theories?
>>
>> Despite being a fallacy, the "bandwagon fallacy" is effective.
>>
>>
>>> Why not?
>>
>> Excellent question.
>>
>> --
>> Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
>> "Enjoy your slide down the razor blades of life!"
>> -- Anonymous
>
> Harlow is exactly why we had to deal with a mutually perpetrated cold-
> war era, and their status-quo dogma which followed. Everything else
> is just mos used oligarch toilet paper that they get to toss at us.
Yet another example of Brad Goth and his weird scat fetish.
>>> Why not?
>>
>> Excellent question.
>>
>> --
>> Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
>> "Enjoy your slide down the razor blades of life!"
>> -- Anonymous
>
> Harlow is exactly why we had to deal with a mutually perpetrated cold-
> war era, and their status-quo dogma which followed. Everything else
> is just mos used oligarch toilet paper that they get to toss at us.
BDK
May 7, 2013, 11:01:31 AM5/7/13
to
In article <km9cr4$llv$1...@dont-email.me>, fake...@nomail.invalid says...
>
> But why not save some of your Crack money, and buy the book.
> You may learn something.
That crack was a better investment?
>
> ...And at the very least, keep that wobbly table steady
One of only a few uses for a book of troofery. The others are toilet
paper and for burning. Same as any other religious book.
--
BDK- Head FUD-Master Blaster. Friend to all kOOkbashers.
>
> Michael Moroney wrote:
> > "Bast" <fake...@nomail.invalid> writes:
> >
> >> Debunkers only have second and third hand information, and NEVER can
> >> provide photos.
> >> ...e.g. the one who claimed WTC - 1 fell on WTC-7, and that's why WTC
> >> - & fell without any logical reason.
> >
> > Debunkers don't have to provide such photos when the kooktards not only
> > provide the photos, they put them right on the front covers of their
> > kookbooks!
> >
> > http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/buy/
>
>
>
>
>
> You can find plenty of 9/11 info without paying for it.
> http://www.ae911truth.org
Not on that page! All that's there is a lot of horseshit.
> Michael Moroney wrote:
> > "Bast" <fake...@nomail.invalid> writes:
> >
> >> Debunkers only have second and third hand information, and NEVER can
> >> provide photos.
> >> ...e.g. the one who claimed WTC - 1 fell on WTC-7, and that's why WTC
> >> - & fell without any logical reason.
> >
> > Debunkers don't have to provide such photos when the kooktards not only
> > provide the photos, they put them right on the front covers of their
> > kookbooks!
> >
> > http://wheredidthetowersgo.com/buy/
>
>
>
>
>
> You can find plenty of 9/11 info without paying for it.
> http://www.ae911truth.org
>
> But why not save some of your Crack money, and buy the book.
> You may learn something.
>
> ...And at the very least, keep that wobbly table steady
paper and for burning. Same as any other religious book.
--
BDK- Head FUD-Master Blaster. Friend to all kOOkbashers.
benj
May 7, 2013, 11:27:45 AM5/7/13
to
favor current law forbidding the labeling of genetically modified foods
that have never been proven safe. I suppose when people start keeling
over, you just say you were misquoted. You are such a worthless crank.
benj
May 7, 2013, 1:04:06 AM5/7/13
to
On Mon, 06 May 2013 18:36:38 -0700, nu...@bid.nes wrote:
> This is another characteristic of conspiracy theorists; they focus
> on *their* pet idea and see any other ideas even slightly different from
> their own as part of the conspiracy. This makes it difficult for them to
> seek assistance in their quest. That's a major difference from the
> scientific method in which one assumes one can be wrong. (And yes,
> that means that what Sam Wormley et. al. do is to me much closer to a
> conspiracy theory than to science.)
>
>
> Mark L. Fergerson
> on *their* pet idea and see any other ideas even slightly different from
> their own as part of the conspiracy. This makes it difficult for them to
> seek assistance in their quest. That's a major difference from the
> scientific method in which one assumes one can be wrong. (And yes,
> that means that what Sam Wormley et. al. do is to me much closer to a
> conspiracy theory than to science.)
>
>
> Mark L. Fergerson
HVAC
May 7, 2013, 5:32:08 PM5/7/13
to
On 5/7/2013 11:27 AM, benj wrote:
>
>> The food grown in the United States feeds the world. Without these
>> modern fertilizers, seeds and pesticides, many would starve to death.
>> Instead, people are living FAR longer than they did in the days before
>> these products became available.
>>
>> Your anti-American agenda comes through loud and clear tho... Now it's
>> the American farmers who are at fault, according to you.
>
> Monanto is "the American Farmer"? You are such a nut case! You obviously
> favor current law forbidding the labeling of genetically modified foods
> that have never been proven safe. I suppose when people start keeling
> over, you just say you were misquoted. You are such a worthless crank.
How can something be 'proven safe'?
>
>> The food grown in the United States feeds the world. Without these
>> modern fertilizers, seeds and pesticides, many would starve to death.
>> Instead, people are living FAR longer than they did in the days before
>> these products became available.
>>
>> Your anti-American agenda comes through loud and clear tho... Now it's
>> the American farmers who are at fault, according to you.
>
> Monanto is "the American Farmer"? You are such a nut case! You obviously
> favor current law forbidding the labeling of genetically modified foods
> that have never been proven safe. I suppose when people start keeling
> over, you just say you were misquoted. You are such a worthless crank.
BJ, face the facts...You're a fucking kook.
No offense, of course.
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
May 7, 2013, 11:25:36 PM5/7/13
to
On Mon, 06 May 2013 17:05:38 -0400
HVAC <harlowc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/6/2013 3:12 PM, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
> wrote:
>
> >>> The Boston Bombings were horrific. I'm also disappointed in the
> >>> media for falsely reporting that the perpetrators were captured
> >>> when this actually wasn't the case, but I don't regard that as a
> >>> government conspiracy (at most, it could have just been a ploy
> >>> orchestrated by the police as part of a plan to find the real
> >>> perpetrators, but I doubt it).
> >>
> >> I just attribute it to the 24 hour news cycle. It's hard to fill
> >> that time and some take the lazy way out.
> >
> > The double-standard is that they get away with it while a member of
> > the general public is held accountable if they yell "Fire!" in a
> > crowded theatre when they know there isn't really a fire.
>
> Whenever I start a fire in a crowded theater, I never tell anyone.
>
> So I'm good...Right?
Insofar as the charge I alluded to is concerned, yes.
HVAC <harlowc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/6/2013 3:12 PM, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
> wrote:
>
> >>> The Boston Bombings were horrific. I'm also disappointed in the
> >>> media for falsely reporting that the perpetrators were captured
> >>> when this actually wasn't the case, but I don't regard that as a
> >>> government conspiracy (at most, it could have just been a ploy
> >>> orchestrated by the police as part of a plan to find the real
> >>> perpetrators, but I doubt it).
> >>
> >> I just attribute it to the 24 hour news cycle. It's hard to fill
> >> that time and some take the lazy way out.
> >
> > The double-standard is that they get away with it while a member of
> > the general public is held accountable if they yell "Fire!" in a
> > crowded theatre when they know there isn't really a fire.
>
> Whenever I start a fire in a crowded theater, I never tell anyone.
>
> So I'm good...Right?
Ha ha! I just occurred to me that this thread really should have been
cross-posted to "alt.usenet.kooks" just because of its title.
--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"Quality."
-- Hugh Hefner
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
May 7, 2013, 11:28:33 PM5/7/13
to
On Mon, 6 May 2013 17:37:41 -0700
Hägar <hs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "benj" wrote in message news:%3Ght.16090$5U.1...@newsfe16.iad...
> On Sun, 05 May 2013 07:55:08 -0700, Hägar wrote:
> > "HVAC" wrote in message news:km3s3t$qv5$1...@dont-email.me...
> > On 5/4/2013 1:35 PM, Bast wrote:
> >
> >> Ahhh, but hvac offers blissful ignorance,...
> >
> > Yes. The ignorance that 98% of my fellow scientists agree with me
> > on.
> >
> > < snip >
> >
> > "Fellow Scientists" ??? You're starting to sound like treBert ....
>
> There is a great similarity of intellect! Has Harlow ever told you
> about his "getting wood is good" theory?
I didn't know he a cabin dweller.
Hägar <hs...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> "benj" wrote in message news:%3Ght.16090$5U.1...@newsfe16.iad...
> On Sun, 05 May 2013 07:55:08 -0700, Hägar wrote:
> > "HVAC" wrote in message news:km3s3t$qv5$1...@dont-email.me...
> > On 5/4/2013 1:35 PM, Bast wrote:
> >
> >> Ahhh, but hvac offers blissful ignorance,...
> >
> > Yes. The ignorance that 98% of my fellow scientists agree with me
> > on.
> >
> > < snip >
> >
> > "Fellow Scientists" ??? You're starting to sound like treBert ....
>
> There is a great similarity of intellect! Has Harlow ever told you
> about his "getting wood is good" theory?
> *** No, but he's really harmless. He loves fishing ... you can
> interpret that as "I love catching my trouser trout" ...
to marinate them.
--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
-- Phil Ken Sebben
%
May 7, 2013, 11:47:15 PM5/7/13
to
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess wrote:
> On Mon, 06 May 2013 17:05:38 -0400
> HVAC <harlowc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 5/6/2013 3:12 PM, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>> The Boston Bombings were horrific. I'm also disappointed in the
>>>>> media for falsely reporting that the perpetrators were captured
>>>>> when this actually wasn't the case, but I don't regard that as a
>>>>> government conspiracy (at most, it could have just been a ploy
>>>>> orchestrated by the police as part of a plan to find the real
>>>>> perpetrators, but I doubt it).
>>>>
>>>> I just attribute it to the 24 hour news cycle. It's hard to fill
>>>> that time and some take the lazy way out.
>>>
>>> The double-standard is that they get away with it while a member of
>>> the general public is held accountable if they yell "Fire!" in a
>>> crowded theatre when they know there isn't really a fire.
>>
>> Whenever I start a fire in a crowded theater, I never tell anyone.
>>
>> So I'm good...Right?
>
> Insofar as the charge I alluded to is concerned, yes.
>
> Ha ha! I just occurred to me that this thread really should have been
> cross-posted to "alt.usenet.kooks" just because of its title.
you should see how many years i've been posting there as %
> On Mon, 06 May 2013 17:05:38 -0400
> HVAC <harlowc...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On 5/6/2013 3:12 PM, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
>> wrote:
>>
>>>>> The Boston Bombings were horrific. I'm also disappointed in the
>>>>> media for falsely reporting that the perpetrators were captured
>>>>> when this actually wasn't the case, but I don't regard that as a
>>>>> government conspiracy (at most, it could have just been a ploy
>>>>> orchestrated by the police as part of a plan to find the real
>>>>> perpetrators, but I doubt it).
>>>>
>>>> I just attribute it to the 24 hour news cycle. It's hard to fill
>>>> that time and some take the lazy way out.
>>>
>>> The double-standard is that they get away with it while a member of
>>> the general public is held accountable if they yell "Fire!" in a
>>> crowded theatre when they know there isn't really a fire.
>>
>> Whenever I start a fire in a crowded theater, I never tell anyone.
>>
>> So I'm good...Right?
>
> Insofar as the charge I alluded to is concerned, yes.
>
> Ha ha! I just occurred to me that this thread really should have been
> cross-posted to "alt.usenet.kooks" just because of its title.
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
May 8, 2013, 12:58:53 AM5/8/13
to
On Mon, 06 May 2013 23:26:34 GMT
benj <be...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 06 May 2013 12:08:13 -0700, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
> atheist goddess wrote:
>
> > Questioning a theory doesn't imply that the questioner has a clear
> > idea of what the truth is. Refuting a theory, however, implies
> > that the debunker has enough knowledge to eliminate theory's
> > plausibility, but any claims they make in this process would also
> > carry a burden of proof.
>
> Of course the catch here is that "plausibility" proves nothing. That
> is the conspirators stock in trade. A "plausible" story is spun to
> cover up the true facts of a crime, The hope is the lazy public won't
> demand actual point by point verification of facts but merely accept
> a "plausible" story.
I actually clarified that by differentiating plausibility from claims.
benj <be...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 06 May 2013 12:08:13 -0700, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
> atheist goddess wrote:
>
> > Questioning a theory doesn't imply that the questioner has a clear
> > idea of what the truth is. Refuting a theory, however, implies
> > that the debunker has enough knowledge to eliminate theory's
> > plausibility, but any claims they make in this process would also
> > carry a burden of proof.
>
> Of course the catch here is that "plausibility" proves nothing. That
> is the conspirators stock in trade. A "plausible" story is spun to
> cover up the true facts of a crime, The hope is the lazy public won't
> demand actual point by point verification of facts but merely accept
> a "plausible" story.
> The burden of proof is on those spinning the "plausible" stories to
> demonstrate that all questions about details of their scenarios are
> true.
has the potential to be credible.
> To turn that around and do the old "Well if UFOs are real then show
> me one in your back yard filled with aliens" is simply a cover-up
> plan. The questioners are not the ones suspected of being guilty.
unreasonable since it's the first place skeptics would look for
evidence that you're faking your accounts of a flying saucer.
> >> is on their side. Hence, "conspiracy theorist" are interested in
> >> trying to find the falshoods, prevarications and outright lies
> >> generated to cover up crimes. Have you all forgotten that
> >> conspiracies are CRIMES?
> >
> > In which jurisdiction?
>
> In all jurisdictions, idiot. The DEFINITION of a conspiracy is two or
> more people getting together to commit crimes!
Jurisdiction is relevant because what is considered a crime in one
jurisdiction isn't necessarily a crime in another. The reason for this
is that laws vary from one region to the next.
If you want your claims to be taken seriously, then you'll have to stop
resisting the pain of the cuts inflicted with Occam's Razor. So, my
question remains applicable: "In which jurisdiction?"
--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"Dad! Tom Cruise won't come out of my closet!"
-- Stan Marsh
%
May 8, 2013, 1:29:50 AM5/8/13
to
you must really like trouble , bored
benj
May 8, 2013, 2:06:03 AM5/8/13
to
On Tue, 07 May 2013 21:58:53 -0700, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
atheist goddess wrote:
> On Mon, 06 May 2013 23:26:34 GMT benj <be...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
>> Of course the catch here is that "plausibility" proves nothing. That is
>> the conspirators stock in trade. A "plausible" story is spun to cover
>> up the true facts of a crime, The hope is the lazy public won't demand
>> actual point by point verification of facts but merely accept a
>> "plausible" story.
>
> I actually clarified that by differentiating plausibility from claims.
>
>> The burden of proof is on those spinning the "plausible" stories to
>> demonstrate that all questions about details of their scenarios are
>> true.
>
> Plausibility isn't a claim, it's a consideration of a possibility that
> has the potential to be credible.
Quite true. But the deception technique involved here is that people tend
atheist goddess wrote:
> On Mon, 06 May 2013 23:26:34 GMT benj <be...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
>> Of course the catch here is that "plausibility" proves nothing. That is
>> the conspirators stock in trade. A "plausible" story is spun to cover
>> up the true facts of a crime, The hope is the lazy public won't demand
>> actual point by point verification of facts but merely accept a
>> "plausible" story.
>
> I actually clarified that by differentiating plausibility from claims.
>
>> The burden of proof is on those spinning the "plausible" stories to
>> demonstrate that all questions about details of their scenarios are
>> true.
>
> Plausibility isn't a claim, it's a consideration of a possibility that
> has the potential to be credible.
NOT to examine if the "potential" is even scientifically possible, but
rather simply blindly accept the "plausible" story is the true story.
>> To turn that around and do the old "Well if UFOs are real then show me
>> one in your back yard filled with aliens" is simply a cover-up plan.
>> The questioners are not the ones suspected of being guilty.
>
> I wouldn't expect you to keep them in your back yard, that would be
> unreasonable since it's the first place skeptics would look for evidence
> that you're faking your accounts of a flying saucer.
show proof of a correct explanation". Of course, that is totally
misleading because the question is not about showing "proof" but about
questioning the details of the "plausible" story. Hence I can question
wild assertions that all UFOs are fake and all witnesses hoaxers, without
having to have one land in my back yard and aliens pile out to "prove"
that an alternative theory (which I never even raised) is correct. There
is a purposeful logical disconnect in these arguments which raises even
more suspicions of official stories.
>> >> is on their side. Hence, "conspiracy theorist" are interested in
>> >> trying to find the falshoods, prevarications and outright lies
>> >> generated to cover up crimes. Have you all forgotten that
>> >> conspiracies are CRIMES?
>> >
>> > In which jurisdiction?
>>
>> In all jurisdictions, idiot. The DEFINITION of a conspiracy is two or
>> more people getting together to commit crimes!
>
> Your fallacious ad hominem attack doesn't help your arguments.
Webster's New collegiate Dictionary: Conspire: to join in a secret
agreement to do an unlawful or wrongful act...
> Jurisdiction is relevant because what is considered a crime in one
> jurisdiction isn't necessarily a crime in another. The reason for this
> is that laws vary from one region to the next.
illegal or wrong it's not a conspiracy so law is only tangentially
relevant.
> If you want your claims to be taken seriously, then you'll have to stop
> resisting the pain of the cuts inflicted with Occam's Razor. So, my
> question remains applicable: "In which jurisdiction?"
anything. Give it up!
"Things should be as simple as possible, but not simpler". Einstein.
benj
May 7, 2013, 1:13:46 AM5/7/13
to
On Mon, 06 May 2013 18:56:44 -0700, nu...@bid.nes wrote:
No. Redneck is view of life, not a location.
Here in the states we have a different system. You grow your plants. And
then Monsanto contaminates the country with their modified seeds that
produce roundup chemicals to make them resistant. When their
contamination is found in your harvest, they sue you for millions for
illegal use of their patented genetics and put you out of business. For
the people worried about consuming the plant-made roundup, there is no
problem because they managed to make sure it's a crime if you label your
plants as NOT genetically modified. So you eat the nasty chemicals none
the wiser and if you get sick of die, well, no problem because nobody
knows why. Bon Appetit
Here in the states we have a different system. You grow your plants. And
then Monsanto contaminates the country with their modified seeds that
produce roundup chemicals to make them resistant. When their
contamination is found in your harvest, they sue you for millions for
illegal use of their patented genetics and put you out of business. For
the people worried about consuming the plant-made roundup, there is no
problem because they managed to make sure it's a crime if you label your
plants as NOT genetically modified. So you eat the nasty chemicals none
the wiser and if you get sick of die, well, no problem because nobody
knows why. Bon Appetit
HVAC
May 8, 2013, 6:54:09 PM5/8/13
to
On 5/7/2013 11:28 PM, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess wrote:
>
>>
>> There is a great similarity of intellect! Has Harlow ever told you
>> about his "getting wood is good" theory?
>
> I didn't know he a cabin dweller.
>
>> *** No, but he's really harmless. He loves fishing ... you can
>> interpret that as "I love catching my trouser trout" ...
>
> I've heard that cat fish are pretty good too, as long as you know how
> to marinate them.
I always marinate em slowly...
>
>>
>> There is a great similarity of intellect! Has Harlow ever told you
>> about his "getting wood is good" theory?
>
> I didn't know he a cabin dweller.
>
>> *** No, but he's really harmless. He loves fishing ... you can
>> interpret that as "I love catching my trouser trout" ...
>
> I've heard that cat fish are pretty good too, as long as you know how
> to marinate them.
HVAC
May 8, 2013, 7:01:37 PM5/8/13
to
On 5/6/2013 7:26 PM, benj wrote:
>
>>> is on their side. Hence, "conspiracy theorist" are interested in trying
>>> to find the falshoods, prevarications and outright lies generated to
>>> cover up crimes. Have you all forgotten that conspiracies are CRIMES?
>>
>> In which jurisdiction?
>
> In all jurisdictions, idiot. The DEFINITION of a conspiracy is two or
> more people getting together to commit crimes!
The definition of conspiracy includes non-criminal activities as well,
>
>>> is on their side. Hence, "conspiracy theorist" are interested in trying
>>> to find the falshoods, prevarications and outright lies generated to
>>> cover up crimes. Have you all forgotten that conspiracies are CRIMES?
>>
>> In which jurisdiction?
>
> In all jurisdictions, idiot. The DEFINITION of a conspiracy is two or
> more people getting together to commit crimes!
so you are wrong just on the face of it.
HVAC
May 8, 2013, 7:21:09 PM5/8/13
to
On 5/8/2013 2:06 AM, benj wrote:
>
>> If you want your claims to be taken seriously, then you'll have to stop
>> resisting the pain of the cuts inflicted with Occam's Razor. So, my
>> question remains applicable: "In which jurisdiction?"
>
> I just showed your question is irrelevant. Occam's razor is no proof of
> anything. Give it up!
Except that she took Occam's razor and sliced you with it like a hog at
>
>> If you want your claims to be taken seriously, then you'll have to stop
>> resisting the pain of the cuts inflicted with Occam's Razor. So, my
>> question remains applicable: "In which jurisdiction?"
>
> I just showed your question is irrelevant. Occam's razor is no proof of
> anything. Give it up!
the slaughterhouse.
PS- Pass the bacon~
benj
May 8, 2013, 7:44:19 PM5/8/13
to
On Wed, 08 May 2013 19:01:37 -0400, HVAC wrote:
> On 5/6/2013 7:26 PM, benj wrote:
>>> In which jurisdiction?
>>
>> In all jurisdictions, idiot. The DEFINITION of a conspiracy is two or
>> more people getting together to commit crimes!
> The definition of conspiracy includes non-criminal activities as well,
> so you are wrong just on the face of it.
Harlow. Again you pretend to know it all like Hanson's Yiddisher street
> On 5/6/2013 7:26 PM, benj wrote:
>>> In which jurisdiction?
>>
>> In all jurisdictions, idiot. The DEFINITION of a conspiracy is two or
>> more people getting together to commit crimes!
> The definition of conspiracy includes non-criminal activities as well,
> so you are wrong just on the face of it.
corner act, but in fact just keep proving that you are ready to move in
with Treeb.
Websters: Conspire: To join in a secret agreement with others do an
unlawful or wrongful act...You know Harlow, just like the secret
agreement between you and your employers to overthrow the lawful
constitution of the United States of America. No wonder, you are trying
to say conspiracies are OK because you are in the center of one.
benj
May 8, 2013, 7:46:53 PM5/8/13
to
On Wed, 08 May 2013 19:21:09 -0400, HVAC wrote:
> On 5/8/2013 2:06 AM, benj wrote:
>>
>>> If you want your claims to be taken seriously, then you'll have to
>>> stop resisting the pain of the cuts inflicted with Occam's Razor. So,
>>> my question remains applicable: "In which jurisdiction?"
>>
>> I just showed your question is irrelevant. Occam's razor is no proof of
>> anything. Give it up!
>
>
> Except that she took Occam's razor and sliced you with it like a hog at
> the slaughterhouse.
>
> PS- Pass the bacon~
I'm sure Einstein is irrelevant to liberal arts grads such as yourself,
> On 5/8/2013 2:06 AM, benj wrote:
>>
>>> If you want your claims to be taken seriously, then you'll have to
>>> stop resisting the pain of the cuts inflicted with Occam's Razor. So,
>>> my question remains applicable: "In which jurisdiction?"
>>
>> I just showed your question is irrelevant. Occam's razor is no proof of
>> anything. Give it up!
>
>
> Except that she took Occam's razor and sliced you with it like a hog at
> the slaughterhouse.
>
> PS- Pass the bacon~
but your lack of scientific training is showing, ACDC. Simple may mean
"better" to you but not to those of us not living in a fantasy novel.
HVAC
May 9, 2013, 7:17:03 AM5/9/13
to
On 5/8/2013 7:44 PM, benj wrote:
>
>> The definition of conspiracy includes non-criminal activities as well,
>> so you are wrong just on the face of it.
>
> Harlow. Again you pretend to know it all like Hanson's Yiddisher street
> corner act, but in fact just keep proving that you are ready to move in
> with Treeb.
>
> Websters: Conspire: To join in a secret agreement with others do an
> unlawful or wrongful act...You know Harlow, just like the secret
> agreement between you and your employers to overthrow the lawful
> constitution of the United States of America. No wonder, you are trying
> to say conspiracies are OK because you are in the center of one.
Conspiracy-
>
>> The definition of conspiracy includes non-criminal activities as well,
>> so you are wrong just on the face of it.
>
> Harlow. Again you pretend to know it all like Hanson's Yiddisher street
> corner act, but in fact just keep proving that you are ready to move in
> with Treeb.
>
> Websters: Conspire: To join in a secret agreement with others do an
> unlawful or wrongful act...You know Harlow, just like the secret
> agreement between you and your employers to overthrow the lawful
> constitution of the United States of America. No wonder, you are trying
> to say conspiracies are OK because you are in the center of one.
A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of
wind and tide that devastated coastal areas.
PS- I categorically deny currently working for any know government
agency or organization, or being involved in any prima facie conspiracy.
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
May 9, 2013, 11:52:25 PM5/9/13
to
On Mon, 6 May 2013 16:38:41 -0700 (PDT)
Mahipal <mahip...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 6, 3:08 pm, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess"
> <godd...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 06 May 2013 04:06:40 GMT
> > benj <b...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
> > > On Sun, 05 May 2013 13:59:09 -0700, n...@bid.nes wrote:
> >
> > > > Well, to claim that an invisible being directs all actions,
> > > > rewards believers and punishes disbelievers is a sort of theory.
> > > > For many to agree to this claim, and to flesh it out to the
> > > > basis of whole societies and cultures requires many to
> > > > "conspire". So yeah, organized religions qualify.
>
> Some religions, despite that Inaccessible Being Constraint, are not at
> all that evil. They are merely social media before the modern
> smartestphones killed the social via their media. Yet they ramble on
> and on how are you sure you've downloaded the latest great version of
> their app?! Are you sure, by 3PM today? Well did you... and don't
> forget... tomorrow's a new download. LLAP and try pretend, at least,
> be Social!
Ha ha! You know, the Flying Spaghetti Monster would have made a great
example in support of your point too.
> > > Clearly the term "conspiracy theorist" is intended to denigrate
> > > anyone raising any questions about any, but in particular official
> > > actions. Note that the questioner is only a "theorist" while those
> > > attempting to neutralize those asking questions pretend that
> > > "truth"
> Conspiracy in and of itself. It's always the last word I search for --
> be it in my Dad's old paper physical dictionary or a virtual expensive
> online dictionary.
Interesting point. More research will be necessary.
> > > is on their side. Hence, "conspiracy theorist" are interested in
> > > trying to find the falshoods, prevarications and outright lies
> > > generated to cover up crimes. Have you all forgotten that
> > > conspiracies are CRIMES?
> >
> > In which jurisdiction?
>
> That "jurisdiction" border has no boundaries anymore. Ask a USA
> politician, who care more about there than here. You know what I
> imply.
Ha ha! Indeed, I believe I see your IPU clearly, galloping valiantly
between the lines.
Jurisdiction only matters to politicians when it can get them out of
trouble.
> > > >> And it's off to the FEMA camps for you.
> >
> > > > Silly person; there's no need for FEMA camps when it's
> > > > possible to set up economic and political gradients that drive
> > > > people from rural areas into cities where they can be more
> > > > effectively "managed". Oh, wait; that's what we already have in
> > > > place...
> >
> > > Sure Mark, truth is on your side and anyone who questions it is
> > > ignorant, insane, or both. Interesting "theory"!
>
> That's right Mark! Next thing you'll be blasting Karn Evil 9 like
> described here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karn_Evil_9 with your
> plate full of Brain Salad!
...and a side of "Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage."
> > --
> > many choose to be stupid."
> > -- Unknown
>
> The, internet or not, reality is that the stupidity is not at all by
> choice, IME.
Perhaps most of the time. There are instances where I strongly suspect
that people are being purposefully stupid though. Remember high school?
> -- Mahipal
> "See the show...
> Right before your eyes we pull laughter from the skies
> And he laughs until he cries then he dies then he dies
> Come inside the shows about to start
> Guaranteed to blow your head apart"
>
> EMERSON, LAKE & PALMER - KARN EVIL 9 LYRICS
--
and three heads, had its birth and growth in the blood of thousands and
thousands of martyrs."
-- Thomas Jefferson
Mahipal <mahip...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On May 6, 3:08 pm, "Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess"
> <godd...@fidemturbare.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 06 May 2013 04:06:40 GMT
> > benj <b...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
> > > On Sun, 05 May 2013 13:59:09 -0700, n...@bid.nes wrote:
> >
> > > > Well, to claim that an invisible being directs all actions,
> > > > rewards believers and punishes disbelievers is a sort of theory.
> > > > For many to agree to this claim, and to flesh it out to the
> > > > basis of whole societies and cultures requires many to
> > > > "conspire". So yeah, organized religions qualify.
>
> Some religions, despite that Inaccessible Being Constraint, are not at
> all that evil. They are merely social media before the modern
> smartestphones killed the social via their media. Yet they ramble on
> and on how are you sure you've downloaded the latest great version of
> their app?! Are you sure, by 3PM today? Well did you... and don't
> forget... tomorrow's a new download. LLAP and try pretend, at least,
> be Social!
Ha ha! You know, the Flying Spaghetti Monster would have made a great
example in support of your point too.
> > > Clearly the term "conspiracy theorist" is intended to denigrate
> > > anyone raising any questions about any, but in particular official
> > > actions. Note that the questioner is only a "theorist" while those
> > > attempting to neutralize those asking questions pretend that
> > > "truth"
> >
> > Questioning a theory doesn't imply that the questioner has a clear
> > idea of what the truth is. Refuting a theory, however, implies that
> > the debunker has enough knowledge to eliminate theory's
> > plausibility, but any claims they make in this process would also
> > carry a burden of proof.
>
> Why the word "Conspiracy" exists at all in dictionaries is a BigTime
> > Questioning a theory doesn't imply that the questioner has a clear
> > idea of what the truth is. Refuting a theory, however, implies that
> > the debunker has enough knowledge to eliminate theory's
> > plausibility, but any claims they make in this process would also
> > carry a burden of proof.
>
> Conspiracy in and of itself. It's always the last word I search for --
> be it in my Dad's old paper physical dictionary or a virtual expensive
> online dictionary.
Interesting point. More research will be necessary.
> > > is on their side. Hence, "conspiracy theorist" are interested in
> > > trying to find the falshoods, prevarications and outright lies
> > > generated to cover up crimes. Have you all forgotten that
> > > conspiracies are CRIMES?
> >
> > In which jurisdiction?
>
> politician, who care more about there than here. You know what I
> imply.
Ha ha! Indeed, I believe I see your IPU clearly, galloping valiantly
between the lines.
Jurisdiction only matters to politicians when it can get them out of
trouble.
> > > >> And it's off to the FEMA camps for you.
> >
> > > > Silly person; there's no need for FEMA camps when it's
> > > > possible to set up economic and political gradients that drive
> > > > people from rural areas into cities where they can be more
> > > > effectively "managed". Oh, wait; that's what we already have in
> > > > place...
> >
> > > Sure Mark, truth is on your side and anyone who questions it is
> > > ignorant, insane, or both. Interesting "theory"!
>
> That's right Mark! Next thing you'll be blasting Karn Evil 9 like
> described here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karn_Evil_9 with your
> plate full of Brain Salad!
...and a side of "Cole's Law: Thinly sliced cabbage."
> > --
> > Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
> > "On the internet you can be anything you want. It's strange that so
> > many choose to be stupid."
> > -- Unknown
>
> The, internet or not, reality is that the stupidity is not at all by
> choice, IME.
Perhaps most of the time. There are instances where I strongly suspect
that people are being purposefully stupid though. Remember high school?
> -- Mahipal
> "See the show...
> Right before your eyes we pull laughter from the skies
> And he laughs until he cries then he dies then he dies
> Come inside the shows about to start
> Guaranteed to blow your head apart"
>
> EMERSON, LAKE & PALMER - KARN EVIL 9 LYRICS
--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"The hocus-pocus phantasm of a God like another Cerberus, with one body
and three heads, had its birth and growth in the blood of thousands and
thousands of martyrs."
-- Thomas Jefferson
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
May 10, 2013, 12:12:13 AM5/10/13
to
On Wed, 08 May 2013 06:06:03 GMT
benj <be...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 07 May 2013 21:58:53 -0700, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
> atheist goddess wrote:
> > On Mon, 06 May 2013 23:26:34 GMT benj <be...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
>
> >> Of course the catch here is that "plausibility" proves nothing.
> >> That is the conspirators stock in trade. A "plausible" story is
> >> spun to cover up the true facts of a crime, The hope is the lazy
> >> public won't demand actual point by point verification of facts
> >> but merely accept a "plausible" story.
> >
> > I actually clarified that by differentiating plausibility from
> > claims.
> >
> >> The burden of proof is on those spinning the "plausible" stories to
> >> demonstrate that all questions about details of their scenarios are
> >> true.
> >
> > Plausibility isn't a claim, it's a consideration of a possibility
> > that has the potential to be credible.
>
> Quite true. But the deception technique involved here is that people
> tend NOT to examine if the "potential" is even scientifically
> possible, but rather simply blindly accept the "plausible" story is
> the true story.
Then that's their problem. There's only so much one can do, and in the
benj <be...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 07 May 2013 21:58:53 -0700, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent
> atheist goddess wrote:
> > On Mon, 06 May 2013 23:26:34 GMT benj <be...@iwaynet.net> wrote:
>
> >> Of course the catch here is that "plausibility" proves nothing.
> >> That is the conspirators stock in trade. A "plausible" story is
> >> spun to cover up the true facts of a crime, The hope is the lazy
> >> public won't demand actual point by point verification of facts
> >> but merely accept a "plausible" story.
> >
> > I actually clarified that by differentiating plausibility from
> > claims.
> >
> >> The burden of proof is on those spinning the "plausible" stories to
> >> demonstrate that all questions about details of their scenarios are
> >> true.
> >
> > Plausibility isn't a claim, it's a consideration of a possibility
> > that has the potential to be credible.
>
> Quite true. But the deception technique involved here is that people
> tend NOT to examine if the "potential" is even scientifically
> possible, but rather simply blindly accept the "plausible" story is
> the true story.
end "the devil's in the details" (or so the saying goes).
As long as there are people, there will always be some who suffer from a
deficiency in comprehension skills.
> >> To turn that around and do the old "Well if UFOs are real then
> >> show me one in your back yard filled with aliens" is simply a
> >> cover-up plan. The questioners are not the ones suspected of being
> >> guilty.
> >
> > I wouldn't expect you to keep them in your back yard, that would be
> > unreasonable since it's the first place skeptics would look for
> > evidence that you're faking your accounts of a flying saucer.
>
> Makes no difference. It's the old "if my story is wrong then you must
> show proof of a correct explanation". Of course, that is totally
> misleading because the question is not about showing "proof" but
> about questioning the details of the "plausible" story. Hence I can
> question wild assertions that all UFOs are fake and all witnesses
> hoaxers, without having to have one land in my back yard and aliens
> pile out to "prove" that an alternative theory (which I never even
> raised) is correct. There is a purposeful logical disconnect in these
> arguments which raises even more suspicions of official stories.
important for parents not to stifle skepticism in their children, but
to encourage them to question more and to be inspired by what seems
mysterious instead of closing their minds to assumptions.
Plausibility is like an informal rating system that begets devalidation
by way of proof or disproof.
> >> >> is on their side. Hence, "conspiracy theorist" are interested in
> >> >> trying to find the falshoods, prevarications and outright lies
> >> >> generated to cover up crimes. Have you all forgotten that
> >> >> conspiracies are CRIMES?
> >> >
> >> > In which jurisdiction?
> >>
> >> In all jurisdictions, idiot. The DEFINITION of a conspiracy is two
> >> or more people getting together to commit crimes!
> >
> > Your fallacious ad hominem attack doesn't help your arguments.
>
> Hey, Ad hominem is standard accepted internet etiquette for debate.
fairly common practice, particularly among those who feel that their
argument is too weak to rely just on its own merits.
> Webster's New collegiate Dictionary: Conspire: to join in a secret
> agreement to do an unlawful or wrongful act...
The "wrongful" factor is dependent on moral relativism.
> > Jurisdiction is relevant because what is considered a crime in one
> > jurisdiction isn't necessarily a crime in another. The reason for
> > this is that laws vary from one region to the next.
>
> Why are you beating this dead horse? If the secret agreement isn't
> illegal or wrong it's not a conspiracy so law is only tangentially
> relevant.
your dead horse," then specify the relevant jurisdiction.
> > If you want your claims to be taken seriously, then you'll have to
> > stop resisting the pain of the cuts inflicted with Occam's Razor.
> > So, my question remains applicable: "In which jurisdiction?"
>
> I just showed your question is irrelevant. Occam's razor is no proof
> of anything. Give it up!
jurisdictions" (with a fallacious ad hominem attack). The complexity
comes from applying all jurisdictions which have a wide variety of
different laws (at least on planet Earth, anyway), which also qualifies
as contradictory because laws from different jurisdictions can sometimes
be in direct conflict with one another.
This puts you in the position of having a factually flawed premise,
but Occam's Razor can be your salvation in this matter if you'd be
willing to specify an applicable jurisdiction.
> "Things should be as simple as possible, but not simpler". Einstein.
until you hear them speak."
-- Dr. Albert Einstein
--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"It is far better to grasp the Universe as it really is than to persist
in delusion, however satisfying and reassuring."
-- Carl Sagan
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
May 10, 2013, 12:13:32 AM5/10/13
to
On Wed, 08 May 2013 18:54:09 -0400
HVAC <harlowc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/7/2013 11:28 PM, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
> wrote:
>
> >> There is a great similarity of intellect! Has Harlow ever told you
> >> about his "getting wood is good" theory?
> >
> > I didn't know he a cabin dweller.
> >
> >> *** No, but he's really harmless. He loves fishing ... you can
> >> interpret that as "I love catching my trouser trout" ...
> >
> > I've heard that cat fish are pretty good too, as long as you know
> > how to marinate them.
>
> I always marinate em slowly...
HVAC <harlowc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/7/2013 11:28 PM, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
> wrote:
>
> >> There is a great similarity of intellect! Has Harlow ever told you
> >> about his "getting wood is good" theory?
> >
> > I didn't know he a cabin dweller.
> >
> >> *** No, but he's really harmless. He loves fishing ... you can
> >> interpret that as "I love catching my trouser trout" ...
> >
> > I've heard that cat fish are pretty good too, as long as you know
> > how to marinate them.
>
> I always marinate em slowly...
"Ha ha! Multiple entendre."
-- Phil Ken Sebben
--
-- Phil Ken Sebben
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"It is better to be thought perverse than insincere."
-- Samuel Richardson
HVAC
May 10, 2013, 8:11:10 AM5/10/13
to
On 5/10/2013 12:13 AM, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
wrote:
>
>>>> There is a great similarity of intellect! Has Harlow ever told you
>>>> about his "getting wood is good" theory?
>>>
>>> I didn't know he a cabin dweller.
>>>
>>>> *** No, but he's really harmless. He loves fishing ... you can
>>>> interpret that as "I love catching my trouser trout" ...
>>>
>>> I've heard that cat fish are pretty good too, as long as you know
>>> how to marinate them.
>>
>> I always marinate em slowly...
>
> "Ha ha! Multiple entendre."
> -- Phil Ken Sebben
What? Who? Me?
>
>>>> There is a great similarity of intellect! Has Harlow ever told you
>>>> about his "getting wood is good" theory?
>>>
>>> I didn't know he a cabin dweller.
>>>
>>>> *** No, but he's really harmless. He loves fishing ... you can
>>>> interpret that as "I love catching my trouser trout" ...
>>>
>>> I've heard that cat fish are pretty good too, as long as you know
>>> how to marinate them.
>>
>> I always marinate em slowly...
>
> "Ha ha! Multiple entendre."
> -- Phil Ken Sebben
benj
May 10, 2013, 5:05:25 PM5/10/13
to
On Thu, 09 May 2013 07:17:03 -0400, HVAC wrote:
> On 5/8/2013 7:44 PM, benj wrote:
>>
>>> The definition of conspiracy includes non-criminal activities as well,
>>> so you are wrong just on the face of it.
>>
>> Harlow. Again you pretend to know it all like Hanson's Yiddisher street
>> corner act, but in fact just keep proving that you are ready to move in
>> with Treeb.
>>
>> Websters: Conspire: To join in a secret agreement with others do an
>> unlawful or wrongful act...You know Harlow, just like the secret
>> agreement between you and your employers to overthrow the lawful
>> constitution of the United States of America. No wonder, you are trying
>> to say conspiracies are OK because you are in the center of one.
> Conspiracy-
> A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of
> wind and tide that devastated coastal areas.
We admit conspiracy has more than one meaning. Quite frankly I've never
> On 5/8/2013 7:44 PM, benj wrote:
>>
>>> The definition of conspiracy includes non-criminal activities as well,
>>> so you are wrong just on the face of it.
>>
>> Harlow. Again you pretend to know it all like Hanson's Yiddisher street
>> corner act, but in fact just keep proving that you are ready to move in
>> with Treeb.
>>
>> Websters: Conspire: To join in a secret agreement with others do an
>> unlawful or wrongful act...You know Harlow, just like the secret
>> agreement between you and your employers to overthrow the lawful
>> constitution of the United States of America. No wonder, you are trying
>> to say conspiracies are OK because you are in the center of one.
> Conspiracy-
> A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of
> wind and tide that devastated coastal areas.
heard of a "wind and tide conspiracy theorist" but you get around more
than I do. Now you just need some kind of a name to make fun of them, you
know, like "birthers" or "Truthers" or "Teabaggers"... Maybe wet
blowjobbers...
HVAC
May 10, 2013, 5:45:04 PM5/10/13
to
On 5/10/2013 5:05 PM, benj wrote:
>
>>>> The definition of conspiracy includes non-criminal activities as well,
>>>> so you are wrong just on the face of it.
>>>
>>> Harlow. Again you pretend to know it all like Hanson's Yiddisher street
>>> corner act, but in fact just keep proving that you are ready to move in
>>> with Treeb.
Apology accepted....
>
>>>> The definition of conspiracy includes non-criminal activities as well,
>>>> so you are wrong just on the face of it.
>>>
>>> Harlow. Again you pretend to know it all like Hanson's Yiddisher street
>>> corner act, but in fact just keep proving that you are ready to move in
>>> with Treeb.
>>> Websters: Conspire: To join in a secret agreement with others do an
>>> unlawful or wrongful act...You know Harlow, just like the secret
>>> agreement between you and your employers to overthrow the lawful
>>> constitution of the United States of America. No wonder, you are trying
>>> to say conspiracies are OK because you are in the center of one.
>
>> Conspiracy-
>> A joining or acting together, as if by sinister design: a conspiracy of
>> wind and tide that devastated coastal areas.
>
> We admit conspiracy has more than one meaning.
benj
May 10, 2013, 6:10:56 PM5/10/13
to
conspiracy theorists?
HVAC
May 10, 2013, 7:49:11 PM5/10/13
to
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
May 11, 2013, 1:26:15 AM5/11/13
to
--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"Don't take it personally! Some days you're the windshield, some days
you're the bug."
-- J. R. Ewing Sr., Dallas, Texas, USA (1996)
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
May 11, 2013, 1:32:01 AM5/11/13
to
On Wed, 08 May 2013 19:21:09 -0400
HVAC <harlowc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/8/2013 2:06 AM, benj wrote:
> >
> >> If you want your claims to be taken seriously, then you'll have to
> >> stop resisting the pain of the cuts inflicted with Occam's Razor.
> >> So, my question remains applicable: "In which jurisdiction?"
> >
> > I just showed your question is irrelevant. Occam's razor is no
> > proof of anything. Give it up!
>
> Except that she took Occam's razor and sliced you with it like a hog
> at the slaughterhouse.
Thank you. I own a rather large blade that I had the name "Occam"
HVAC <harlowc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/8/2013 2:06 AM, benj wrote:
> >
> >> If you want your claims to be taken seriously, then you'll have to
> >> stop resisting the pain of the cuts inflicted with Occam's Razor.
> >> So, my question remains applicable: "In which jurisdiction?"
> >
> > I just showed your question is irrelevant. Occam's razor is no
> > proof of anything. Give it up!
>
> Except that she took Occam's razor and sliced you with it like a hog
> at the slaughterhouse.
inscribed on in plain view (toward the tip), and I've posed for
pictures with it dangling by a thin decorative leather string from my
left wrist (never the right -- I'm sure you can guess why).
> PS- Pass the bacon~
I like to think that wasn't a subtly implied reference to cannibalism.
--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"A dimension is part of a mathematical model of reality. Reality is
under no obligation to arrange itself to suit our model."
-- Sylvia Else (June 24, 2012)
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
May 11, 2013, 1:33:56 AM5/11/13
to
On Fri, 10 May 2013 08:11:10 -0400
HVAC <harlowc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/10/2013 12:13 AM, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist
> goddess wrote:
> >
> >>>> There is a great similarity of intellect! Has Harlow ever told
> >>>> you about his "getting wood is good" theory?
> >>>
> >>> I didn't know he a cabin dweller.
> >>>
> >>>> *** No, but he's really harmless. He loves fishing ... you can
> >>>> interpret that as "I love catching my trouser trout" ...
> >>>
> >>> I've heard that cat fish are pretty good too, as long as you know
> >>> how to marinate them.
> >>
> >> I always marinate em slowly...
> >
> > "Ha ha! Multiple entendre."
> > -- Phil Ken Sebben
>
> What? Who? Me?
Shouldn't that be "What, me worry?"
HVAC <harlowc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 5/10/2013 12:13 AM, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist
> goddess wrote:
> >
> >>>> There is a great similarity of intellect! Has Harlow ever told
> >>>> you about his "getting wood is good" theory?
> >>>
> >>> I didn't know he a cabin dweller.
> >>>
> >>>> *** No, but he's really harmless. He loves fishing ... you can
> >>>> interpret that as "I love catching my trouser trout" ...
> >>>
> >>> I've heard that cat fish are pretty good too, as long as you know
> >>> how to marinate them.
> >>
> >> I always marinate em slowly...
> >
> > "Ha ha! Multiple entendre."
> > -- Phil Ken Sebben
>
> What? Who? Me?
--
Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
"Everybody makes makes mistakes."
-- Mad Magazine (c. 1983; yellow centrefold)
HVAC
May 11, 2013, 7:27:29 AM5/11/13
to
On 5/11/2013 1:32 AM, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess wrote:
>
>>> I just showed your question is irrelevant. Occam's razor is no
>>> proof of anything. Give it up!
>>
>> Except that she took Occam's razor and sliced you with it like a hog
>> at the slaughterhouse.
>
> Thank you. I own a rather large blade that I had the name "Occam"
> inscribed on in plain view (toward the tip), and I've posed for
> pictures with it dangling by a thin decorative leather string from my
> left wrist (never the right -- I'm sure you can guess why).
Honestly, I have no idea why...
>
>>> I just showed your question is irrelevant. Occam's razor is no
>>> proof of anything. Give it up!
>>
>> Except that she took Occam's razor and sliced you with it like a hog
>> at the slaughterhouse.
>
> Thank you. I own a rather large blade that I had the name "Occam"
> inscribed on in plain view (toward the tip), and I've posed for
> pictures with it dangling by a thin decorative leather string from my
> left wrist (never the right -- I'm sure you can guess why).
>> PS- Pass the bacon~
>
> I like to think that wasn't a subtly implied reference to cannibalism.
benj
May 11, 2013, 2:05:37 PM5/11/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 07:27:29 -0400, HVAC wrote:
> On 5/11/2013 1:32 AM, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
> wrote:
>>
>>>> I just showed your question is irrelevant. Occam's razor is no proof
>>>> of anything. Give it up!
>>>
>>> Except that she took Occam's razor and sliced you with it like a hog
>>> at the slaughterhouse.
>>
>> Thank you. I own a rather large blade that I had the name "Occam"
>> inscribed on in plain view (toward the tip), and I've posed for
>> pictures with it dangling by a thin decorative leather string from my
>> left wrist (never the right -- I'm sure you can guess why).
>
>
> Honestly, I have no idea why...
>
>
>>> PS- Pass the bacon~
>>
>> I like to think that wasn't a subtly implied reference to cannibalism.
>
>
> Correct. It was not subtle.
You libtards kill me (and not with Occam's razor") the way you all live
> On 5/11/2013 1:32 AM, Fidem Turbare, the non-existent atheist goddess
> wrote:
>>
>>>> I just showed your question is irrelevant. Occam's razor is no proof
>>>> of anything. Give it up!
>>>
>>> Except that she took Occam's razor and sliced you with it like a hog
>>> at the slaughterhouse.
>>
>> Thank you. I own a rather large blade that I had the name "Occam"
>> inscribed on in plain view (toward the tip), and I've posed for
>> pictures with it dangling by a thin decorative leather string from my
>> left wrist (never the right -- I'm sure you can guess why).
>
>
> Honestly, I have no idea why...
>
>
>>> PS- Pass the bacon~
>>
>> I like to think that wasn't a subtly implied reference to cannibalism.
>
>
> Correct. It was not subtle.
in your fantasy world thinking that if you can imagine it, therefore it
must all be true. You guys are a hoot!
HVAC
May 11, 2013, 3:03:23 PM5/11/13
to
On
But don't be a hater, BJ.
>>> Thank you. I own a rather large blade that I had the name "Occam"
>>> inscribed on in plain view (toward the tip), and I've posed for
>>> pictures with it dangling by a thin decorative leather string from my
>>> left wrist (never the right -- I'm sure you can guess why).
>>
>>
>> Honestly, I have no idea why...
>>
>>
>>>> PS- Pass the bacon~
>>>
>>> I like to think that wasn't a subtly implied reference to cannibalism.
>>
>>
>> Correct. It was not subtle.
>
> You libtards kill me (and not with Occam's razor") the way you all live
> in your fantasy world thinking that if you can imagine it, therefore it
> must all be true. You guys are a hoot!
Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
>>> inscribed on in plain view (toward the tip), and I've posed for
>>> pictures with it dangling by a thin decorative leather string from my
>>> left wrist (never the right -- I'm sure you can guess why).
>>
>>
>> Honestly, I have no idea why...
>>
>>
>>>> PS- Pass the bacon~
>>>
>>> I like to think that wasn't a subtly implied reference to cannibalism.
>>
>>
>> Correct. It was not subtle.
>
> You libtards kill me (and not with Occam's razor") the way you all live
> in your fantasy world thinking that if you can imagine it, therefore it
> must all be true. You guys are a hoot!
But don't be a hater, BJ.
linuxgal
May 11, 2013, 4:09:09 PM5/11/13
to
HVAC wrote:
> Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
Me too, but you'll get plonked by the lefties for being pro-business and
> Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
plonked by the righties for being pro-choice.
--
Halftime at Circvs Maximvs, and the Lions lead the Christians 326-0
%
May 11, 2013, 3:25:05 PM5/11/13
to
linuxgal wrote:
> HVAC wrote:
>> Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
>
> Me too, but you'll get plonked by the lefties for being pro-business
> and plonked by the righties for being pro-choice.
you can even get plonked for being plonked
> HVAC wrote:
>> Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
>
> Me too, but you'll get plonked by the lefties for being pro-business
> and plonked by the righties for being pro-choice.
benj
May 11, 2013, 4:00:28 PM5/11/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 15:03:23 -0400, HVAC wrote:
>> You libtards kill me (and not with Occam's razor") the way you all live
>> in your fantasy world thinking that if you can imagine it, therefore it
>> must all be true. You guys are a hoot!
>
> Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
>
> But don't be a hater, BJ.
Lessee. Libertarians all believe in total freedom and no control by those
>> You libtards kill me (and not with Occam's razor") the way you all live
>> in your fantasy world thinking that if you can imagine it, therefore it
>> must all be true. You guys are a hoot!
>
> Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
>
> But don't be a hater, BJ.
in power. No gun laws, no drug laws, no any kind of laws on Rights.
Which is CLEARLY the opposite of you, Harlow, who believes in monarchy
whose WORD is LAW.
So as usual, everything you say is a lie.
Plus you say I'm a "hater" because I just laughed at you clowns.
Everything is upside down for you, Harlow, isn't it? You simply MUST lie
whether you need to or not!
HVAC
May 11, 2013, 4:03:52 PM5/11/13
to
On 5/11/2013 4:09 PM, linuxgal wrote:
> HVAC wrote:
>> Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
>
> Me too, but you'll get plonked by the lefties for being pro-business and
> plonked by the righties for being pro-choice.
Oh well, fuck em if they can't take a joke.
> HVAC wrote:
>> Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
>
> Me too, but you'll get plonked by the lefties for being pro-business and
> plonked by the righties for being pro-choice.
I am even hated by hard core libertarians because I don't think it's OK
to drive down Main Street at 100 miles an hour and I don't favor the
unlimited possession of weapons.
I had a libertarian arguing with me that ALL weapons should be allowed..
Rocket launchers, artillery..Even nukes.
I told him that it was because of dogmatic idiots like him that the
libertarian party would never rise above a pathetic joke in America.
I find that extremists on any end of the spectrum tend to be people
without kids. Read into that what you will.
benj
May 11, 2013, 4:08:27 PM5/11/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 12:09:09 -0800, linuxgal wrote:
> HVAC wrote:
>> Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
>
> Me too, but you'll get plonked by the lefties for being pro-business and
> plonked by the righties for being pro-choice.
Hey, Linuxgal I'm pro-business, I'm pro-gun, and I'm even pro-abortion
> HVAC wrote:
>> Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
>
> Me too, but you'll get plonked by the lefties for being pro-business and
> plonked by the righties for being pro-choice.
(Lets not pussy-foot around the bush here, OK?)
The problem with abortion isn't with abortion itself, but rather with the
question of when life begins. The law pretty much has life beginning at
birth though there are some exceptions such as when murdering a pregnant
woman. Some of the more religious view life as starting at conception.
Some even regard celibacy as killing POTENTIAL life, hence viewing life
as starting before conception!
As for me, I totally agree with this view that before life begins killing
the organism is just getting rid of unwanted tissue, and after life
begins it's murder. My personal view is that life begins somewhere around
38 years old. Many (especially in government) share my viewpoint.
benj
May 11, 2013, 4:08:46 PM5/11/13
to
HVAC
May 11, 2013, 4:26:56 PM5/11/13
to
On 5/11/2013 4:00 PM, benj wrote:
>
>> Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
>>
>> But don't be a hater, BJ.
>
> Lessee. Libertarians all believe in total freedom and no control by those
> in power. No gun laws, no drug laws, no any kind of laws on Rights.
And of course, I disagree with that agenda. It doesn't pass the test of
>
>> Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
>>
>> But don't be a hater, BJ.
>
> Lessee. Libertarians all believe in total freedom and no control by those
> in power. No gun laws, no drug laws, no any kind of laws on Rights.
common fucking sense.
> Which is CLEARLY the opposite of you, Harlow, who believes in monarchy
> whose WORD is LAW.
> So as usual, everything you say is a lie.
Free Lunch
May 11, 2013, 4:34:55 PM5/11/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 16:26:56 -0400, HVAC <harlowc...@gmail.com>
wrote in alt.atheism:
>On 5/11/2013 4:00 PM, benj wrote:
>>
>>> Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
>>>
>>> But don't be a hater, BJ.
>>
>> Lessee. Libertarians all believe in total freedom and no control by those
>> in power. No gun laws, no drug laws, no any kind of laws on Rights.
>
>
>And of course, I disagree with that agenda. It doesn't pass the test of
>common fucking sense.
>
>
>> Which is CLEARLY the opposite of you, Harlow, who believes in monarchy
>> whose WORD is LAW.
>
>
>Are you drunk again, or hitting the Buddha?
>
>
>> So as usual, everything you say is a lie.
>
>
>I tell as much truth as possible.
The folks who fund libertarianism are not libertarian in any meaningful
sense. They still want the government to help them keep their ill-gotten
billions.
wrote in alt.atheism:
>On 5/11/2013 4:00 PM, benj wrote:
>>
>>> Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
>>>
>>> But don't be a hater, BJ.
>>
>> Lessee. Libertarians all believe in total freedom and no control by those
>> in power. No gun laws, no drug laws, no any kind of laws on Rights.
>
>
>And of course, I disagree with that agenda. It doesn't pass the test of
>common fucking sense.
>
>
>> Which is CLEARLY the opposite of you, Harlow, who believes in monarchy
>> whose WORD is LAW.
>
>
>Are you drunk again, or hitting the Buddha?
>
>
>> So as usual, everything you say is a lie.
>
>
>I tell as much truth as possible.
sense. They still want the government to help them keep their ill-gotten
billions.
linuxgal
May 11, 2013, 5:42:39 PM5/11/13
to
benj wrote:
> As for me, I totally agree with this view that before life begins killing
> the organism is just getting rid of unwanted tissue, and after life
> begins it's murder. My personal view is that life begins somewhere around
> 38 years old. Many (especially in government) share my viewpoint.
The Bible itself says when God breathed the breath of life into his
> As for me, I totally agree with this view that before life begins killing
> the organism is just getting rid of unwanted tissue, and after life
> begins it's murder. My personal view is that life begins somewhere around
> 38 years old. Many (especially in government) share my viewpoint.
little mudpie it became a living soul named Adam. But all that is
academic. It doesn't matter where some male asshole draws the line,
it's still a woman's prerogative since she carries all the risk.
Libertarian says mind your own business, in every definition of the
words "mind" and "own" and "business".
Free Lunch
May 11, 2013, 5:58:40 PM5/11/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 13:42:39 -0800, linuxgal <linu...@cleanposts.com>
wrote in alt.atheism:
Except for fake libertarians like Ron Paul.
wrote in alt.atheism:
benj
May 11, 2013, 9:18:31 PM5/11/13
to
On Sat, 11 May 2013 16:03:52 -0400, HVAC wrote:
> On 5/11/2013 4:09 PM, linuxgal wrote:
>> HVAC wrote:
>>> Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
> On 5/11/2013 4:09 PM, linuxgal wrote:
>> HVAC wrote:
>>> Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
> Oh well, fuck em if they can't take a joke.
> I am even hated by hard core libertarians because I don't think it's OK
> to drive down Main Street at 100 miles an hour and I don't favor the
> unlimited possession of weapons.
Of course you are Harlow, because you obviously aren't one of them! You
> I am even hated by hard core libertarians because I don't think it's OK
> to drive down Main Street at 100 miles an hour and I don't favor the
> unlimited possession of weapons.
can't figure out that to be free is to be free to commit crimes. That
doesn't make the crimes OK, or free from punishment, but you are still
free to do it.
You on the other hand want a police state where everybody watches
everybody else and the possibility of committing a crime is banned in an
attempt to stop crimes before they are committed. Just listens to your
pals (bosses) in government. They'll bomb shit out of a country not for
actually DOING something, but for just being a "threat" (whatever that
means). Same goes for all citizens, right Harlow?
> I had a libertarian arguing with me that ALL weapons should be allowed..
> Rocket launchers, artillery..Even nukes.
trust you or Obama! But the constitution doesn't specify arms. The courts
have determined that protected (to own and carry) arms are ONLY those
that are of military or (and recently added) of self-defense
significance.
The general interpretation has been this means the standard equipment of
a soldier of the day. Which I'd point out includes machine guns, assault
weapons, grenades and even rocket launchers (mortars and RPGs). Thus your
Feinstein assault on the constitution is clearly treason and an attempt
to pass a law null and void on the face of it. Now the constitution
forbids states from keeping a navy and nukes are not a soldiers standard
gear (yet), but there are those who believe "keep and bear arms" means
anything that fits the trailer hitch on the rear of your 4WD pickup.
> I told him that it was because of dogmatic idiots like him that the
> libertarian party would never rise above a pathetic joke in America.
wrong but because they have zero ability in politics (probably encouraged
by a secret take-over of their leadership to constantly promote idiot
candidates). If they started with libertarian dog catchers and moved up
from there they might have a chance, instead of the wishful running of
"Pat Paulsen" each year for president
> I find that extremists on any end of the spectrum tend to be people
> without kids. Read into that what you will.
the bills the kids generate to have time to ponder theoretical anything.
(unless they neglect and abuse them, of course) ;-)
benj
May 11, 2013, 9:25:17 PM5/11/13
to
bitch. Otherwise, what would the world be like with everyone going on the
"feelings"? Women don't get pregnant all by themselves. And I hate to
break it to you but they don't bear all the responsibilities either. (In
spite of the liberal celebration of "single motherhood") Say, are you
under 38 years old? ;)
benj
May 11, 2013, 9:29:50 PM5/11/13
to
for president, but not nearly enough Americans are aware of what liars
and propagandist the major media are for him to have ever had a chance
against their full onslaught of lies and innuendo. But it was a fun run!
HVAC
May 12, 2013, 6:41:51 AM5/12/13
to
On 5/11/2013 9:18 PM, benj wrote:
>
>>>> Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
>
>> Oh well, fuck em if they can't take a joke.
>> I am even hated by hard core libertarians because I don't think it's OK
>> to drive down Main Street at 100 miles an hour and I don't favor the
>> unlimited possession of weapons.
>
> Of course you are Harlow, because you obviously aren't one of them! You
> can't figure out that to be free is to be free to commit crimes. That
> doesn't make the crimes OK, or free from punishment, but you are still
> free to do it.
>
> You on the other hand want a police state where everybody watches
> everybody else and the possibility of committing a crime is banned in an
> attempt to stop crimes before they are committed. Just listens to your
> pals (bosses) in government. They'll bomb shit out of a country not for
> actually DOING something, but for just being a "threat" (whatever that
> means). Same goes for all citizens, right Harlow?
I favor freedom. But freedom doesn't mean throwing common fucking sense
>
>>>> Yes I am a lib. A Libertarian. A pragmatic libertarian to be precise.
>
>> Oh well, fuck em if they can't take a joke.
>> I am even hated by hard core libertarians because I don't think it's OK
>> to drive down Main Street at 100 miles an hour and I don't favor the
>> unlimited possession of weapons.
>
> Of course you are Harlow, because you obviously aren't one of them! You
> can't figure out that to be free is to be free to commit crimes. That
> doesn't make the crimes OK, or free from punishment, but you are still
> free to do it.
>
> You on the other hand want a police state where everybody watches
> everybody else and the possibility of committing a crime is banned in an
> attempt to stop crimes before they are committed. Just listens to your
> pals (bosses) in government. They'll bomb shit out of a country not for
> actually DOING something, but for just being a "threat" (whatever that
> means). Same goes for all citizens, right Harlow?
out the window. All our freedoms come with restrictions. Like it or not.
>> I had a libertarian arguing with me that ALL weapons should be allowed..
>> Rocket launchers, artillery..Even nukes.
>
> And why not? I'd trust my neighbors with the button far more than I'd
> trust you or Obama! But the constitution doesn't specify arms. The courts
> have determined that protected (to own and carry) arms are ONLY those
> that are of military or (and recently added) of self-defense
> significance.
>
> The general interpretation has been this means the standard equipment of
> a soldier of the day. Which I'd point out includes machine guns, assault
> weapons, grenades and even rocket launchers (mortars and RPGs). Thus your
> Feinstein assault on the constitution is clearly treason and an attempt
> to pass a law null and void on the face of it.
> Now the constitution
> forbids states from keeping a navy and nukes are not a soldiers standard
> gear (yet), but there are those who believe "keep and bear arms" means
> anything that fits the trailer hitch on the rear of your 4WD pickup.
libertarian party
>> I find that extremists on any end of the spectrum tend to be people
>> without kids. Read into that what you will.
>
> People with kids have to spend too much time earning money to pay for all
> the bills the kids generate to have time to ponder theoretical anything.
> (unless they neglect and abuse them, of course) ;-)
view of the world. People without children have nothing to lose,
biologically speaking.
benj
May 12, 2013, 12:47:36 PM5/12/13
to
On Sun, 12 May 2013 06:41:51 -0400, HVAC wrote:
> On 5/11/2013 9:18 PM, benj wrote:
>> The general interpretation has been this means the standard equipment
>> of a soldier of the day. Which I'd point out includes machine guns,
>> assault weapons, grenades and even rocket launchers (mortars and RPGs).
>> Thus your Feinstein assault on the constitution is clearly treason and
>> an attempt to pass a law null and void on the face of it.
>> Now the constitution forbids states from keeping a navy and nukes are
>> not a soldiers standard gear (yet), but there are those who believe
>> "keep and bear arms" means anything that fits the trailer hitch on the
>> rear of your 4WD pickup.
> It's dogmatic positions such as your that push people away from the
> libertarian party
You call precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court "dogma"? You are one
> On 5/11/2013 9:18 PM, benj wrote:
>> The general interpretation has been this means the standard equipment
>> of a soldier of the day. Which I'd point out includes machine guns,
>> assault weapons, grenades and even rocket launchers (mortars and RPGs).
>> Thus your Feinstein assault on the constitution is clearly treason and
>> an attempt to pass a law null and void on the face of it.
>> Now the constitution forbids states from keeping a navy and nukes are
>> not a soldiers standard gear (yet), but there are those who believe
>> "keep and bear arms" means anything that fits the trailer hitch on the
>> rear of your 4WD pickup.
> It's dogmatic positions such as your that push people away from the
> libertarian party
incredibly stupid son of a bitch, Harlow, or have bigger balls than
brains. No offense.
It has nothing to do with the libertarian party of which You (bwahahaha)
claim to be a member and of which I am not a member.
>>> I find that extremists on any end of the spectrum tend to be people
>>> without kids. Read into that what you will.
>> People with kids have to spend too much time earning money to pay for
>> all the bills the kids generate to have time to ponder theoretical
>> anything. (unless they neglect and abuse them, of course) ;-)
>
> People with children tend to take a longer and more common sense view of
> the world. People without children have nothing to lose, biologically
> speaking.
Like you Harlow I can be bought.
HVAC
May 12, 2013, 2:06:01 PM5/12/13
to
On 5/12/2013 12:47 PM, benj wrote:
>
>> It's dogmatic positions such as your that push people away from the
>> libertarian party
>
> You call precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court "dogma"? You are one
> incredibly stupid son of a bitch, Harlow, or have bigger balls than
> brains. No offense.
What the fuck are you babbling on about?
>
>> It's dogmatic positions such as your that push people away from the
>> libertarian party
>
> You call precedent of the U.S. Supreme Court "dogma"? You are one
> incredibly stupid son of a bitch, Harlow, or have bigger balls than
> brains. No offense.
> It has nothing to do with the libertarian party of which You (bwahahaha)
> claim to be a member and of which I am not a member.
>> People with children tend to take a longer and more common sense view of
>> the world. People without children have nothing to lose, biologically
>> speaking.
>
> Personally I very much value my own ass and I'm sure you do as well.
> Like you Harlow I can be bought.
Jeff-Relf.Me
May 12, 2013, 9:24:24 PM5/12/13
to
Raising kids should be done by a few select professionals,
not by horny kids looking for some fun.
Those who breed like silly rabbits, die like silly rabbits.
It's NOT a good idea.
not by horny kids looking for some fun.
Those who breed like silly rabbits, die like silly rabbits.
It's NOT a good idea.
Brad Guth
May 12, 2013, 9:28:33 PM5/12/13
to
silly Mormon rabbits?
Brad Guth
May 12, 2013, 9:33:16 PM5/12/13
to
On May 12, 6:24 pm, Jeff-Relf.Me <@.> wrote:
each kid through a basic university.
How many kids did your parents manage to produce, and when did your
parents run out of money?
0 new messages