T Nation

Welcome, Kooks!

I’d like to start a thread welcoming the new generation of weak-minded conspiracy fools to the Poli forum here at T-Nation.

It seems like in the past few weeks we’ve seen a resurgence (an insurgency?) of pathetic goofballs who believe in worldwide conspiracies, secret government plots, Elvis and aliens controlling the UN, etc.

Maybe it’s the fact that we are coming up on the Fifth Anniversary of 9/11… I don’t know. But, on behalf of the sane people here at T-Nation:

Welcome Kooks!

PS Keep those silly posts coming, folks! It’s not like the T-Nation server’s bandwidth is going to use itself! Let’s hear some more Illuminati/Neo-con/New World Order/Freemason/Space Alien insanity!

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
I’d like to start a thread welcoming the new generation of weak-minded conspiracy fools to the Poli forum here at T-Nation.

It seems like in the past few weeks we’ve seen a resurgence (an insurgency?) of pathetic goofballs who believe in worldwide conspiracies, secret government plots, Elvis and aliens controlling the UN, etc.

Maybe it’s the fact that we are coming up on the Fifth Anniversary of 9/11… I don’t know. But, on behalf of the sane people here at T-Nation:

Welcome Kooks!

PS Keep those silly posts coming, folks! It’s not like the T-Nation server’s bandwidth is going to use itself! Let’s hear some more Illuminati/Neo-con/New World Order/Freemason/Space Alien insanity! [/quote]

Neocons are a real threat, as opposed to all the other things you listed.

I don’t believe any of that bullshit, but let’s not pretend that the current batch of Republicans are anywhere near the definition of “republican”.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Neocons are a real threat, as opposed to all the other things you listed.

I don’t believe any of that bullshit, but let’s not pretend that the current batch of Republicans are anywhere near the definition of “republican”.[/quote]

There is a huge difference between republican and conservative. The two are no longer interchangeable.

This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.

[quote]FightinIrish26 wrote:
Neocons are a real threat, as opposed to all the other things you listed.
[/quote]

Ummm… hmmm.

A question: So neo-con “conspiracies” are a real threat, then? So we should classify these publications:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/publicationsreports.htm

… as a matter of common sense, as more than political ideology on par with environmentalism, feminism, or any other kind of political leaning?

I mean, is there a qualifying difference between what a neocon believes and the results of his beliefs vs. say, what a feminist holds in her heart to be an ideal political agenda?

Neocons are out to destroy lives, then?

I’m sorry, Irish, I like you as a fellow liberal, but just because you and I find ourselves at odds with most of the neocon movement doesn’t mean that they are any more “dangerous” than we are.

It’s just folks trying to get votes, man! They aren’t planning the next 9/11 are they? To listen to some of these “conspiridiots”, that’s what the neocons are doing… sabotage and mass executions… all in the name of the New World Order.

I know you better than that, bro. Please tell me that I misunderstand you and you don’t think that the neocons had anything to do with any underhanded evil conspiracy-nut kind of stuff. :slight_smile:

There is a marginal difference between chasing wild conspiracy ‘theories’ and considering one as potentially being true due to a substantial amount of evidence provided. Would it not be overtly simplistic to get away with a conspiracy simply because those such as yourself dispel any possiblity of a conspiracy? There’s no comparison whatsoever on this.

[quote]MisterAmazing wrote:
There is a marginal difference between chasing wild conspiracy ‘theories’ and considering one as potentially being true due to a substantial amount of evidence provided. Would it not be overtly simplistic to get away with a conspiracy simply because those such as yourself dispel any possiblity of a conspiracy? There’s no comparison whatsoever on this.[/quote]

MisterAmazing: Welcome. I really mean that, btw. It’s folks like you… the folks who occasionally surf the fringe parts of reason… who make the Poli forum not only diverse intellectually, but fun as well.

And I must concede your point in that we should not rule out investigating certain unlikely causes of significant occurrences simply on the grounds that the chances of a complicit international conspiracy being responsible are next to nothing.

HOWEVER

The difference I would like to point out, with the semi-vain hope of it maybe sinking in, is that there are WORLDS of difference between looking at a complex and significant event such as 9/11 with an eye towards fact and looking at the very same event with a prepared agenda.

Sane people don’t go around cherry-picking facts to fit a psychotic ideation of ubiquitous villainous boogeymen who just happen to be in charge of all media, industry, government, et al, whatever “establishment” sector you have some kind of personal beef with. That just doesn’t make sense. It’s bad reasoning. Honest. (this is my honest face)

And before we get off to a bad start here, I would like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that, yes, believing that some elite secret society pulls the strings of all business and military endeavors is MOST DEFINITELY paranoid, delusional, and retarded. We are not bees. Humans are necessarily self-interested and complex animals. We are not some hive-mind which cooperates with 100% efficiency and 100% loyalty to any kind of direction. This is scientific fact: borne out by simple observation, behavioral science experiments, social science experiments, game theory… jeez I could go on all day about how humans are not evolved into beings who simply comply. All damn day.

Just knowing this one simple truth about human nature will, as a matter of course, throw up what I like to call a gigantic bullshit flag on ANY theory which depends entirely upon 100% large-scale human complicity in anything. Why start at the most unlikely thing in the world to explain stuff? Why don’t we start at the most likely stuff and go from there?

Answer: Because the truth is mundane, unromantic, and doesn’t support our childish ideas of monsters hiding under the bed.

Thus we have the “Illuminatards” and the “Freemasonerds” who have seen too much TV, and find real life to be too darn vanilla for them. Give 'em a website, and poof! Instant conspiracy theory. And you guys post links to their websites as if that lends your foolishness any kind of credibility.

Obi-Wan Kenobi once said:
“Who’s more the fool? The fool, or the fool who follows him?”

[quote]rainjack wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Neocons are a real threat, as opposed to all the other things you listed.

I don’t believe any of that bullshit, but let’s not pretend that the current batch of Republicans are anywhere near the definition of “republican”.

There is a huge difference between republican and conservative. The two are no longer interchangeable. [/quote]

…but you still defend Republicans for not being conservative?

[quote]rainjack wrote:
There is a huge difference between republican and conservative. The two are no longer interchangeable. [/quote]

Once every coupla months or so, you say something that I can actually agree with.

I don’t think there are many kooks here at T-Nation. But kooks who do post the nutty conspiracy theories are adamant for sure.

I’ve read posts where various conspiracy theories posted were disproved. But instead of quietly going away the kooks in question become insolent and even more brazen.

They want to be heard…they want equal time with sane people.

Well…this is America.

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:

Sane people don’t go around cherry-picking facts to fit a psychotic ideation of ubiquitous villainous boogeymen …

Hey, There’s no need to drag Bush into this discussion.

[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
rainjack wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Neocons are a real threat, as opposed to all the other things you listed.

I don’t believe any of that bullshit, but let’s not pretend that the current batch of Republicans are anywhere near the definition of “republican”.

There is a huge difference between republican and conservative. The two are no longer interchangeable.

…but you still defend Republicans for not being conservative?[/quote]

It’s kinda like when Jerry Jones bought the Cowboys. I gotta go with my team even though the way they are being managed sucks.

[quote]rainjack wrote:
It’s kinda like when Jerry Jones bought the Cowboys. I gotta go with my team even though the way they are being managed sucks. [/quote]

Brand loyalty?

On a different note…

Apparently, belief in wild Internet driven conspiracy theories is one of the points in common between the disaffected “homegrown” terrorist element.

Given all the hatred and propaganda that is pushed in some areas of the world, I can see how people would want to believe in such things - fueling an ability to think in fanatic terms and somehow imagine that the ends justify the means.

For those that want to reverse my statement towards the west, please don’t try to equate warfare (certainly a bad thing) with terrorism.

[quote]vroom wrote:
rainjack wrote:
It’s kinda like when Jerry Jones bought the Cowboys. I gotta go with my team even though the way they are being managed sucks.

Brand loyalty?[/quote]

Brain damage?

[quote]pookie wrote:
vroom wrote:
rainjack wrote:
It’s kinda like when Jerry Jones bought the Cowboys. I gotta go with my team even though the way they are being managed sucks.

Brand loyalty?

Brain damage?
[/quote]

Not brain damage - more like the lesser of two evils.

No…wait…in the spirit of healthy debate debate, let me be first to say - “I know you are but what am I?”

[quote]lothario1132 wrote:
FightinIrish26 wrote:
Neocons are a real threat, as opposed to all the other things you listed.

Ummm… hmmm.

A question: So neo-con “conspiracies” are a real threat, then? So we should classify these publications:

http://www.newamericancentury.org/publicationsreports.htm

… as a matter of common sense, as more than political ideology on par with environmentalism, feminism, or any other kind of political leaning?

I mean, is there a qualifying difference between what a neocon believes and the results of his beliefs vs. say, what a feminist holds in her heart to be an ideal political agenda?

Neocons are out to destroy lives, then?

I’m sorry, Irish, I like you as a fellow liberal, but just because you and I find ourselves at odds with most of the neocon movement doesn’t mean that they are any more “dangerous” than we are.

It’s just folks trying to get votes, man! They aren’t planning the next 9/11 are they? To listen to some of these “conspiridiots”, that’s what the neocons are doing… sabotage and mass executions… all in the name of the New World Order.

I know you better than that, bro. Please tell me that I misunderstand you and you don’t think that the neocons had anything to do with any underhanded evil conspiracy-nut kind of stuff. :)[/quote]

How many utterly pointless wars that make the world a far more dangerous place have the environmentalists or feminiasts started?

[quote]rainjack wrote:
No…wait…in the spirit of healthy debate debate, let me be first to say - “I know you are but what am I?”[/quote]

Well, dear astute debating opponent; must I point out, yet again, that my dad is stronger than your dad and that my mom’s strawberry muffins are simply divine; even more so by the comparison to the misshapen lumps of coal your mom tries to pass off as “food.”

If I was not so humble and modest, I’d also point out that I received more Tonkas at Christmas than you did and that they’re bigger and yellower than yours; but I am, so I won’t.

For be it from me to toot my own horn, but I do believe that I win this debate. Hands down. No contest. Over before it even started. The mother of all beatdowns. Smack in the teeth. You never had a chance. Never was even remotely fair. I’m Kirk and you’re Picard. Medieval on your ass and other assorted bodyparts. Made you my female canine companion, etc, etc.

Don’t you agree?