The Top Ten Conspiracy Theories [Archive]

SkepticGuy

26th March 2009, 02:58 PM

Could you post them? ATS is blocked at my job. Thanks.

I'll post summaries of the summaries ;)

#5 has been in "conspiracy circles" for a long time, but has recently received a lot of attention for obvious reasons... but will appear as a relatively new conspiracy for most people.

10: The United States Shadow Government

A little-publicised executive order during the Reagan administration created the National Program Office which established a secret national security team outside the traditional branches of the government. This new agency with a reported multi-billion dollar budget was headed up by covert operations loyalist Oliver North, and included then Vice-President George Bush (Sr.), Dick Cheney, and Donald Rumsfeld (who was not part of the administration at the time)...

9: Controlling Hearts & Minds Through Organized Religion

Martin Luther in the 16th century, with his Ninety-Five Theses, may have been the first well-documented conspiracy theory author. The Christian Reform Movement began from concern over widespread commercial corruption in the Catholic Church...

8: The Suppression of Alternative And Free Energy Sources

One need only look at the debacle of the EV-1 Electric Car, and how the oil industry and big-auto (at the time) colluded with the government to kill a superior product to understand how similar alternative energy products and ideas have been systematically buried or outright killed...

7: A Significant Global Catastrophe Will Happen In December, 2012

The ancient Mayans possessed a sophisticated culture with a unique perception of the universe and the role of the planets in cosmic events. Scholars studying the Mayans have found startling accuracy within the Mayan Calendar as it tracked days and weeks in comparison with astronomical data and events, and which is more precise than the Julian calendar. But the disconcerting discovery is that this highly accurate and painstakingly prepared calendar of cosmic events has an end date of 2012, beyond which no data exists...

6: The Cover-Up Of Alien Technology Research at Area 51

Few government installations inspire more speculation and flights of fancy than the most public of secret government facilities, Area 51 in Groom Lake, Nevada. Known to be the testing facility for the ultra-secret "Skunk Works" projects that gave birth to advanced technologies such as the stealth aircraft, this highly-guarded location is the stuff of conspiracy legend...

5: The Collapse of the Global Economy Was A Controlled Demolition

In the first half of the previous century, people's financial savings were almost exclusively tied up in bank savings, pensions, and personal real estate (homes). Since those three simple vehicles for building or sustaining personal prosperity were not easily controlled or manipulated by the "powers that be," new methods were required to shift the finances from those relatively static, uncontrollable sources, to a more fluid and easily manipulated destination, the stock market. As a result, the government created and promoted several methods of "saving for retirement" that were tied to equity markets. Over time, an epic shift of wealth storage occurred that gave rise to huge global "investment banks" and drove equities indexes to unthinkable highs...

4: The Assassination of John F. Kennedy

Many consider the assassination of JFK as a pivotal event that was the catalyst for evolving the culture of the United States from one of optimism to that of skepticism. It's a defining moment as arguably the first time where major segments of the population found reason to reject the "official story." From that moment on, distrust in the government began to fester with measurable impact, and the popularization of the term "conspiracy theorist" began to take root...

3: The Attacks on September 11, 2001

The basic premise behind 9/11-related conspiracy theories are relatively simple: elements within the United States government either made possible the events of the day, or turned a blind eye so as to allow the attacks to happen unhindered. The core notion is very similar to the conspiracy theories surrounding the attacks on Pearl Harbor. But compounding these theories are two disturbing items: 1) The discovery of Project Northwoods which was a 1962 Joint Chiefs of Staff plan to inflict civilian casualties with hijacked aircraft as a pretext to invade Cuba, and 2) Conspiracy theory "chatter" during the spring of 2001 that a "false flag" terrorist attack on American soil was imminent. When conspiracy theorists discover alarming coincidences that include key "Shadow Government" members at action stations the morning of 9/11, previous plans drafted by the government to do exactly what happened on 9/11, and growing rumors of a terrorist attack that will be used as a pretext for war, the speculation begins in earnest....

2: The Cover-Up of Extraterrestrial Visitation and Their Space Craft

Many respected scientists, politicians, and journalists have become convinced of compelling evidence that not only have we been visited by extraterrestrial beings, our government is actively pursuing collaborative projects in exchange for access to advanced technology. Several declassified government documents provide tantalizing clues of active programs designed to retrieve fallen alien space craft, research into extraterrestrial technologies, and cover-stories for various sightings of aerial craft of fantastic operation....

1: The Secret Cabals Working Toward a Global One-World Government

In many ways, this is the core concept from which many other conspiracy theories spring forth. The "New World Order" is the fabled end-game for the power-hungry global elite that many believe are behind the events that have shaped history and current events. The core theory speculates that long-standing bloodlines and banking families have entered secret arrangements to consolidate power and influence via a global one-world government....

Alex Libman

26th March 2009, 03:03 PM

I think the conspiracy theories should be ranked by the number of people they've killed: Reichstag Fire FTW!

Alt+F4

26th March 2009, 03:05 PM

I'll post summaries of the summaries ;)

Thanks. No "Clinton Body Count" I see. I'm disappointed!

Sword_Of_Truth

26th March 2009, 04:35 PM

I think the conspiracy theories should be ranked by the number of people they've killed: Reichstag Fire FTW!

Conspiracy theories about "Zionists" led to the murder of six million jews.

dudalb

26th March 2009, 04:52 PM

I don't see #7 as being a conspiracy theory. The 2012 drivel is batcrap crazy, to be sure, but I am not sure it qualifies as a conspriacy theory. Not all loony toons ideas are CTs.

SkepticGuy

26th March 2009, 05:01 PM

I don't see #7 as being a conspiracy theory

It is what it is. We had quite a few suggestions as the master-list was being compiled, and "2012" appeared often enough to make into the final list of 35 used for voting on the top-10.

Whether there is a "conspiracy" or not, in this case, probably doesn't matter as much as how this indicates "conspiracy-centric people" feel about the subject -- important enough to be in the top ten.

Cl1mh4224rd

26th March 2009, 05:07 PM

I don't see #7 as being a conspiracy theory. The 2012 drivel is batcrap crazy, to be sure, but I am not sure it qualifies as a conspriacy theory. Not all loony toons ideas are CTs.

The brief summary SkepticGuy posted here doesn't really make it sound like a conspiracy theory, true. The full summary over ATS includes this, though: "And as more information becomes apparent, many now believe that 'the government' is fully aware of what will happen and is very carefully suppressing the truth."

Alex Libman

26th March 2009, 05:37 PM

Conspiracy theories about "Zionists" led to the murder of six million jews.

There's a whole list of things wrong with that statement. The punchline is this: the Nazis loved the idea of Jews leaving Germany voluntarily. The millions of Jews died precisely because they were NOT Zionists (http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/antisemitism/nazisupport.cfm)!

LightinDarkness

26th March 2009, 07:25 PM

I think this is excellent - it adds even more evidence that conspiracy theory logic is not based on research and findings of facts but more of a mindset that attunes itself to populist ideology. Notice everything except #8 on the list is an attempt to explain extraordinarily complex processes that are involved in organized religion and the operation of governments. Conspiracy theory provides a easy way to explain away these complex interactions as a simple diabolical scheme for <insert world domination, the apocalypse, etc. here>. In doing so our very hard to understand, grey shaded world becomes a mega battle between good and evil (with the CTer being on the side of good, of course).

This is even further supported by the #1 result being the non-existent NWO. We know that the "new world order" was nothing more than a political rhetoric phrase uttered by politicians occasionally, but it has been transformed by the CTers into a diabolical plot for world domination that helps simplify and explain the world they see around them which they cannot otherwise understand.

Egil

26th March 2009, 07:30 PM

Conspiracy theories about "Zionists" led to the murder of six million jews.

And it was all launched by a book called the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Which is a complete hoax and largely plagarized. That meme started the entire NWO conspiracy, the Jewish World Banker conspiracy and the Zionist Occupation Government conspiracy.

Stacko

26th March 2009, 08:16 PM

No real demo data other than age range, gender, etc.

But there certainly will be some bias in that those electing to vote in the poll (it was optional, only about 6% of all visitors coming to the site during the poll actually voted) were most-certainly interested in conspiracy theories to begin with. So from that vantage point, this is perhaps a slightly more accurate ranking than previous "popular conspiracy" lists compiled by other sources who may look at these topics from a different point of view. ;)

Were they allowed to vote on every conspiracy theory they believed in or just the conspiracy theory they most believed in for this poll?

malcolmxwarrior

26th March 2009, 08:26 PM

Hello folks... it's been a while since I posted here.

I thought many of you might be interested in a recent poll we took that whittled-down the top-ten conspiracy theories from an original list that exceeded about 130 different theories.

Over a six-day period, 29,112 unique people cast 159,620 total votes to rank the Top-Ten conspiracy theories. This is unlike many other "top-ten" conspiracy lists in that this one was organized and compiled by a large group of people who follow and research such speculation... so a few of the items on the list will be different from many similar top-tens you've seen online.

The Top Ten Conspiracy Theories from AboveTopSecret.com (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread449046/pg1)

Enjoy.

Disclaimer: I'm not an "expert" on any one of these theories beyond that which our members discuss. And with that in mind, will answer any questions you have about the ranking or methodology.

Half of those aren't even conspiracy theories! They're facts! Truth!

The powers that be just try really hard to discredit those that bring evidence.

Anybody that challenges the status quo scares the masses and the powers that be, so they crank up the smear machine and that's the end of that.

Stacko

26th March 2009, 08:29 PM

Half of those aren't even conspiracy theories! They're facts! Truth!

Which half?

Drudgewire

26th March 2009, 08:34 PM

six million jews.

Speaking of which, I notice one CT is very conspicuous by its absence. http://www.lethalwrestling.com/upload/raise.gif

Horatius

26th March 2009, 08:38 PM

It is what it is. We had quite a few suggestions as the master-list was being compiled, and "2012" appeared often enough to make into the final list of 35 used for voting on the top-10.

Whether there is a "conspiracy" or not, in this case, probably doesn't matter as much as how this indicates "conspiracy-centric people" feel about the subject -- important enough to be in the top ten.

I tried to post a comment on this earlier today, but my connection screwed it up. Your post touches on what I wanted to say though.

I found it interesting that this list shows the same sort of features as any list of the "top X movies/songs/whatever", which is that the "currently popular" "whatevers" are given disproportionate weight. If this list had been compiled back in September or October, would the Economic Collapse have made it? Or would something like "Bush will cancel the Election" have beat it out? And 2012 probably only made the list because it's been a relatively hot topic lately.

I wonder how those CTists who think they have such a greater insight into how things "really" work reconcile that with such obvious evidence that they behave no differently from movie fans.

malcolmxwarrior

26th March 2009, 08:38 PM

Which half?

Ok, well not exactly half, But the NWO is not a conspiracy theory. It is happening right now as I type this. More and more people are waking up to this reality.

Now this is life. There are gonna be alternative motives to ALL major events in life. You're just gonna have to deal with it.

Rumors, alterior motives, secret societies, conspiracies, alternative stories Etc. Are all a part of life. History is written by the winners right?

What's that old sayin'? Believe half of what you hear and half of what you see, or something like that.

You can't be so gullible to swallow everything they put in front of you.

malcolmxwarrior

26th March 2009, 08:42 PM

I'm gonna make the bold statement that as more of the current events transpire, the more and more the "Protocols of the learned elders of zion" becomes more Prophetic.

Notice how the Jews weren't on the list? You know why? Because it's not a conspiracy! It's the cold hard factual truth!

Sword_Of_Truth

26th March 2009, 08:43 PM

There's a whole list of things wrong with that statement. The punchline is this: the Nazis loved the idea of Jews leaving Germany voluntarily. The millions of Jews died precisely because they were NOT Zionists (http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/antisemitism/nazisupport.cfm)!

That you spewed this gibberish is bad enough. That you backed it up by linking to a Holocaust denial (look who tops their list of sources) website is just... words fail me here.

And ironically, you prove my point.

I just got done watching the final episode of Battlestar Galactica. An episode which focused on the recurring theme of "this has all happened before and it will all happen again" and the choice made by the survivors of one holocaust to try and break the cycle and prevent another holocaust in the future.

Conspiracy theories about "zionists" have been fabricated before, and here you making up theories about "zionists" again.

Any chance you could try to break the cycle before you kill another 6 million jews, Alex?

SkepticGuy

26th March 2009, 08:44 PM

We know that the "new world order" was nothing more than a political rhetoric phrase uttered by politicians occasionally,
The conspiracy theorist's concern for the concept has been around a great deal longer than contemporary political slip-ups, and predates the Korean war.

Were they allowed to vote on every conspiracy theory they believed in or just the conspiracy theory they most believed in for this poll?
The work began in this thread (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread444788/pg1) where dozens of members (over 100) contributed to suggesting theories for the poll.

We worked through the entire thread and recorded each suggesting in a spreadsheet, and tallied the totals for multiple suggestions. The top-35 made it into the final poll for voting -- oddly enough, there was a significant difference in the number of suggestions for theory 35 as compared to 36, so it had natural break-point.

Speaking of which, I notice one CT is very conspicuous by its absence.
Which one is that?

Cl1mh4224rd

26th March 2009, 08:46 PM

What's that old sayin'? Believe half of what you hear and half of what you see, or something like that.

"Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear." I believe this means that the rest of us can safely ignore everything you say.

You can't be so gullible to swallow everything they put in front of you.

Unless "they" happen to be malcolmxwarrior and his crew, then you should unconditionally believe everything he says. He knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men. He knows... The Truth™.

Praise malcolmxwarrior!

Notice how the Jews weren't on the list? You know why? Because it's not a conspiracy! It's the cold hard factual truth!

You just got done whining about how almost half of the items on the list weren't even conspiracies. Why were they on the list, then, if they were facts, yet "the Jews" were left off the list for the same reason? Focus, kid. Focus...

malcolmxwarrior

26th March 2009, 08:47 PM

That you spewed this gibberish is bad enough. That you backed it up by linking to a Holocaust denial (look who tops their list of sources) website is just... words fail me here.

And ironically, you prove my point.

I just got done watching the final episode of Battlestar Galactica. An episode which focused on the recurring theme of "this has all happened before and it will all happen again" and the choice made by the survivors of one holocaust to try and break the cycle and prevent another holocaust in the future.

Conspiracy theories about "zionists" have been fabricated before, and here you making up theories about "zionists" again.

Any chance you could try to break the cycle before you kill another 6 million jews, Alex?

Are these the same zionists that murder innocent women and children in Palestine?

Or is that ALSO a conspiracy?

malcolmxwarrior

26th March 2009, 08:49 PM

"Believe half of what you see and none of what you hear."

Unless "they" happen to be malcolmxwarrior and his crew, then you should unconditionally believe everything he says. He knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men. He knows... The Truth™.

Praise malcolmxwarrior!

Focus, kid. Focus. You just got done whining about how almost half of the items on the list weren't even conspiracies. Why were they on the list, then?

Thank you!

My answer is.... who cares. I think I made myself clear enough.

Drudgewire

26th March 2009, 08:50 PM

Notice how the Jews weren't on the list? You know why? Because it's not a conspiracy! It's the cold hard factual truth!

Yes, you're right. There are Jews. This is indeed the truth.

As for why the Protocols/Holohoax conspiracies aren't on the list, it isn't because they're "fact," it's because even the bulk of the CT loonies know they're crap.

Which one is that?

The "Holocaust never happened" one, but really I guess that's been relegated to the Stormfronters of the world. Damn those Nazis and their meticulous record keeping.

Cl1mh4224rd

26th March 2009, 08:51 PM

My answer is.... who cares.

That's not an answer; it's a question.

LightinDarkness

26th March 2009, 08:54 PM

The conspiracy theorist's concern for the concept has been around a great deal longer than contemporary political slip-ups, and predates the Korean war.

Actually the irrational fear of a global government bent on world domination goes back further than that. But it was not until recent history that it was given the New World Order label.

But you are correct - people have for some time been trying to explain a complex world by creating conspiracies.

malcolmxwarrior

26th March 2009, 08:56 PM

Yes, you're right. There are Jews. This is indeed the truth.

As for why the Protocols/Holohoax conspiracies aren't on the list, it isn't because they're "fact," it's because even the bulk of the CT loonies know they're crap.

Yeah, ok. :rolleyes:

Drudgewire

26th March 2009, 08:57 PM

:rolleyes:

Right back atcha.

malcolmxwarrior

26th March 2009, 08:57 PM

That's not an answer; it's a question.

Or is it an answer?

Think hard!

Sword_Of_Truth

26th March 2009, 08:57 PM

Which one is that?

The one where 6 million jews faked thier own deaths in historys biggest life-insurance scam.

malcolmxwarrior

26th March 2009, 09:00 PM

Right back atcha.

Lead the fight dude. be a hero.

Answer the question. Then why won't it die dude? WHy won't it DIE!!!

It's been the same "CT" For thousands of years!!! why won't it DIE!

And don't give me no nerdy philospohical nuttiness!

malcolmxwarrior

26th March 2009, 09:01 PM

The one where 6 million jews faked thier own deaths in historys biggest life-insurance scam.

Well you gotta remember, we're talking about jews here. They're capable of almost anything!

Egil

26th March 2009, 09:01 PM

I'm gonna make the bold statement that as more of the current events transpire, the more and more the "Protocols of the learned elders of zion" becomes more Prophetic.

The Protocols is a thoroughly debunked piece of rubbish and trash written by the Tsarist Secret Police named the Okhrana that plagarized the work of an earlier Frenchman who was satirizing Napoleon III and a known radical anti-semite.

It amounts to a modern blood libel, similar in vein to Jews using the blood of Christians for medicinal remedies or ritual food, or a Arab popular belief, using the blood of Arab children in Pepsi.

Notice how the Jews weren't on the list? You know why? Because it's not a conspiracy! It's the cold hard factual truth!

Fitting coming from someone named after a member of a group as anti-semetic as the Nazis and Ku Klux Klan. Nation of Islam is a curse upon the Black Community.

The people who sold black-skinned Blacks on the slave market were Muslims.

SkepticGuy

26th March 2009, 09:01 PM

But it was not until recent history that it was given the New World Order label.
That would be incorrect.

I recall several independent "alternative" newspapers out of the west coast using the term in the '60's, and H.G. Wells popularized it as a conspiracy theory concern in 1940.

people have for some time been trying to explain a complex world by creating conspiracies.
Except that, there have been conspiracies. And recent developments such as John Yoo's memos do nothing to dispel fears and only offer up more material for conspiracy theorists to ponder.

Egil

26th March 2009, 09:03 PM

The one where 6 million jews faked thier own deaths in historys biggest life-insurance scam.

I thought those Jews willingly laid their lives down for the dream of a Jewish State.

Or the Holocaust 'victims' were really dead bodies from Allied Strategic Bombing that the Jewish-masters of America used to concoct a genocide to justify the need of a Jewish state.

malcolmxwarrior

26th March 2009, 09:05 PM

The Protocols is a thoroughly debunked piece of rubbish and trash written by the Tsarist Secret Police named the Okhrana that plagarized the work of an earlier Frenchman who was satirizing Napoleon III and a known radical anti-semite.

It amounts to a modern blood libel, similar in vein to Jews using the blood of Christians for medicinal remedies or ritual food, or a Arab popular belief, using the blood of Arab children in Pepsi.

Fitting coming from someone named after a member of a group as anti-semetic as the Nazis and Ku Klux Klan. Nation of Islam is a curse upon the Black Community.

The people who sold black-skinned Blacks on the slave market were Muslims.

Funny how malcolm x later rejected the nastiness of the nation of islam.

They say it is a hoax. I have heard that lie before. But maybe it is not a hoax but the absolute truth? Maybe they're playing a jedhi mind trick on you?

When jews lie they tell the truth. They have never told a lie in their existance

malcolmxwarrior

26th March 2009, 09:06 PM

I thought those Jews willingly laid their lives down for the dream of a Jewish State.

Or the Holocaust 'victims' were really dead bodies from Allied Strategic Bombing that the Jewish-masters of America used to concoct a genocide to justify the need of a Jewish state.

Anything is possible when dealing with these satanic jews.

Drudgewire

26th March 2009, 09:09 PM

Lead the fight dude. be a hero.

Answer the question. Then why won't it die dude? WHy won't it DIE!!!

Ex-CTer here. Took the paranoia out of the mix, started looking at things critically, and realized the "fight" was with phantoms.

Irrational fear and hatred has always existed and isn't going away. Time doesn't legitimize it.

Toke

26th March 2009, 09:12 PM

Yes, money-grubbing jews and the worlds biggest lifeinsurance scams fit like hans in grete.

Drudgewire

26th March 2009, 09:17 PM

They say it is a hoax. I have heard that lie before. But maybe it is not a hoax but the absolute truth? Maybe they're playing a jedhi mind trick on you.

Episode VII: Return of the Jewdi.

Horatius

26th March 2009, 09:25 PM

Lead the fight dude. be a hero.

Answer the question. Then why won't it die dude? WHy won't it DIE!!!

It's been the same "CT" For thousands of years!!! why won't it DIE!

Because irrational anti-Semites are as stupid now as they have ever been?

And don't give me no nerdy philospohical nuttiness!

Sorry, was that "nerdy" "philospohical (sic)" or "nuttiness"?

malcolmxwarrior

26th March 2009, 09:26 PM

Episode VII: Return of the Jewdi.

You're not enlightened bro.

Don't put your head in the sand.

malcolmxwarrior

26th March 2009, 09:29 PM

Because irrational anti-Semites are as stupid now as they have ever been?

Sorry, was that "nerdy" "philospohical (sic)" or "nuttiness"?

lame. You got the same psychosis as those other people. "It's everybody else, not me they're the ones with the problem, not me"

"uh, dude? Alan greenspan caused this economic collapse, and he's a jew"

"oh, well, don't look at that!" or "ANTI-SEMITE!"

Drudgewire

26th March 2009, 09:29 PM

You're not enlightened bro.

Don't put your head in the sand.

I'm trying to think of a polite way to tell you where to pull your head out of. :p

Toke

26th March 2009, 09:30 PM

Episode VII: Return of the Jewdi.

Nominated.

malcolmxwarrior

26th March 2009, 09:31 PM

I'm trying to think of a polite way to tell you where to pull your head out of. :p

Think long and hard.

LightinDarkness

26th March 2009, 09:32 PM

That would be incorrect.

I recall several independent "alternative" newspapers out of the west coast using the term in the '60's, and H.G. Wells popularized is a conspiracy theory concern in 1940.

You would be recalling incorrectly. The term NWO was indeed popularized and elevated to conspiracy level rhetoric due to George Bush Sr's political rhetoric statement. While visions of organizations for global domination are undoubtedly older (as old as the existence of society and human paranoia itself), the NWO madness started at that point.

SOURCE: Raikka, J. (2008). On Political Conspiracy Theories. Journal of Political Philosophy.

Except that, there have been conspiracies. And recent developments such as John Yoo's memos do nothing to dispel fears and only offer up more material for conspiracy theorists to ponder.

This is the classical argument by CTers - that because a conspiracy exists somewhere, that must mean there is some element of truth to the conspiracies they come up with. The reality of course is that real conspiracies are nothing like the ones ATS covers. Real, verified historical conspiracies encompass small groups of people. Real, verified historical theories have a greater chance to be exposed as more players become involved - which is why global conspiracies like the NWO which would involve millions of players are no more possible than rainbow unicorns. Real, verified conspiracies are characterized by events which require players to act fast, those who wait to act get exposed. All of these things go completely against any of the conspiracies on this top ten list. All require a extremely large number of players and have huge time spans (covering hundreds of years in the least).

And unlike conspiracy theorists, I just didn't just make all the above up. It comes from peer reviewed analysis on the matter. A peer reviewed analysis which concludes thus:

...The folly of conspiracy theories highlight the fact that we should not be overly bothered when our theories of social events fail to make sense of all the data. Invariably, not all the data are true. In particular, the irrational and fallible nature of humans should lead us to expect that some of the data generated by us are certainly wrong. Witnesses misremember the past or exhibit unconscious biases. Reporters and government agents will get things wrong in the early moments of crises, and will later be loathe to admit those mistakes. For this reason, a theory that has as one of its main features a unified account of all data in a variety of seemingly unrelated occurrences should be called into question on those grounds alone. We expect our explanations to be good, but we also expect them to be imperfect.

...We should be careful not to over-rationalize the world or the people that live in it...Some people just do things. They assassinate world leaders, act on poorly thought out ideologies, and leave clues at the scene of the crime. Too strong a belief in the rationality of people in general, or of the world, will lead us to seek purposive explanations where none exist.

SOURCE: Keeley, B.L. (1999). Of Conspiracy Theories. Journal of Philosophy, 96(3); 109-126.0

(Emphasis is mine)

malcolmxwarrior

26th March 2009, 09:36 PM

You would be recalling incorrectly. The term NWO was indeed popularized and elevated to conspiracy level rhetoric due to George Bush Sr's political rhetoric statement. While visions of organizations for global domination are undoubtedly older (as old as the existence of society and human paranoia itself), the NWO madness started at that point.

SOURCE: Raikka, J. (2008). On Political Conspiracy Theories. Journal of Political Philosophy.

This is the classical argument by CTers - that because a conspiracy exists somewhere, that must mean there is some element of truth to the conspiracies they come up with. The reality of course is that real conspiracies are nothing like the ones ATS covers. Real, verified historical conspiracies encompass small groups of people. Real, verified historical theories have a greater chance to be exposed as more players become involved - which is why global conspiracies like the NWO which would involve millions of players are no more possible than rainbow unicorns. Real, verified conspiracies are characterized require players to act fast, those who wait to act get exposed. All of these things go completely against any of the conspiracies on this top ten list.

And unlike conspiracy theorists, I just didn't just make all the above up. It comes from peer reviewed analysis on the matter. A peer reviewed analysis which concludes thus:

SOURCE: Keeley, B.L. (1999). Of Conspiracy Theories. Journal of Philosophy, 96(3); 109-126.

Translation: "blah blah blah, I think I know everything even though I don't even know that the United states is bankrupt and a banana republic"

Toke

26th March 2009, 09:39 PM

Translation: "blah blah blah, I think I know everything even though I don't even know that the United states is bankrupt and a banana republic"

:dl:

Did you read it at all?
Can you?

I think you should try, it gives a good basis to evaluate a conspiracy teori.

LightinDarkness

26th March 2009, 09:39 PM

Translation: "blah blah blah, I think I know everything even though I don't even know that the United states is bankrupt and a banana republic"

And this is exactly why conspiracy theorists aren't taken seriously. Confronted with evidence that contradicts them, they are incapable of doing anything but rambling and deflection.

Sounds like a disinformation agent to me.

Drudgewire

26th March 2009, 09:40 PM

You're not enlightened bro.

If you read through some of the gun threads you'll find several JREFers who agree with you there. :cool:

LightinDarkness

26th March 2009, 09:43 PM

:dl:

Did you read it at all?
Can you?

I think you should try, it gives a good basis to evaluate a conspiracy teori.

Silly toke, expecting CTers to act rational.

Although we can hope can't we? Sometimes thats all you can do - provide people the evidence. You can't force them accept reality...as we clearly see in this thread :)

malcolmxwarrior

26th March 2009, 09:45 PM

:dl:

Did you read it at all?
Can you?

I think you should try, it gives a good basis to evaluate a conspiracy teori.

Yeah, for a fourth grader.

Toke

26th March 2009, 09:48 PM

Silly toke, expecting CTers to act rational.

Although we can hope can't we? Sometimes thats all you can do - provide people the evidence. You can't force them accept reality...as we clearly see in this thread :)

Guess I am a hopeless optimist.

Maybe it comes from my first encounter with loose change.
I wondered, some of it did not make sense at first glance, some I could not tell. Then checking it out I realised it was complete BS.

I keep hoping others can see sense if it is pointed out to them.

Egil

26th March 2009, 09:48 PM

They say it is a hoax. I have heard that lie before.

It is not a lie. I can prove it by giving you a text comparison of what they plagarized from: Maurice Jolly's The Dialogue in Hell between Machiavelli and Montesquieu 1-17

Here is Jolly:

Montesquieu: How are loans made? By the issue of bonds entailing on the Government the obligation to pay interest proportionate to the capital it has been paid. Thus, if a loan is at 5%, the State, after 20 years, has paid out a sum equal to the borrowed capital. When 40 years have expired it has paid double, after 60 years triple: yet it remains debtor for the entire capital sum. (Dialogues, p. 209)

Here is the Protocol:

A loan is an issue of Government paper which entails an obligation to pay interest amounting to a percentage of the total sum of the borrowed money. If a loan is at 5%, then in 20 years the Government would have unnecessarily paid out a sum equal to that of the loan in order to cover the percentage. In 40 years it will have paid twice; and in 60 thrice that amount, but the loan will still remain as an unpaid debt. (Protocols, p. 77)

Jolly's Dialogue:

Machiavelli: Like the god Vishnu, my press will have a hundred arms, and these arms will give their hands to all the different shades of opinion throughout the country. (Dialogues, p. 141)

Protocol:

These newspapers, like the Indian god Vishnu, will be possessed of hundreds of hands, each of which will be feeling the pulse of varying public opinion. (Protocols, p. 43)

Jolly's Dialogue:

Montesquieu: Now I understand the figure of the god Vishnu; you have a hundred arms like the Indian idol, and each of your fingers touches a spring. (Dialogues, p. 207)

Protocol:

Our Government will resemble the Hindu god Vishnu. Each of our hundred hands will hold one spring of the social machinery of State. (Protocols, p. 65)

It also plagarized a work by Hermann Goedsche called Biarritz. Hermann Goedsche was a reactionary to the Revolutions of 1848.

Phillip Graves published a series of Articles in The Times that debunks it even more throughly. April 16-18 of 1921 to be exact.

The Berne Trial of 1934 to 1935 proved the Protocols to be inauthentic.

The Russian government in the early 1900s proved them fraudulent thanks to Pyotr Stolypin and attempted to have all copies confiscated.

Toke

26th March 2009, 09:49 PM

Yeah, for a fourth grader.

Yes, that is correct.

LightinDarkness

26th March 2009, 10:10 PM

Yeah, for a fourth grader.

I would love to see your peer reviewed evidence for 1 conspiracy theory that is popularized by CTers. Make it easy and pick from the top 10 list.

I have a feeling I'll be waiting for a while. Its pretty clear that you are going to have to google what peer review means first and then your going to spout back some sort of personal insult.

Because you've got nothing.

SkepticGuy

26th March 2009, 10:11 PM

You would be recalling incorrectly. The term NWO was indeed popularized and elevated to conspiracy level rhetoric due to George Bush Sr's political rhetoric statement. While visions of organizations for global domination are undoubtedly older (as old as the existence of society and human paranoia itself), the NWO madness started at that point.
You must be unfamiliar with the concerns of H.G. Wells. His was a keen apprehension in regards to the disruptive social forces he saw building in the previous two decades, and originally coined the term (as far as we know) "New World Order" in a 1940 (I think) book of the same title.

This is the classical argument by CTers - that because a conspiracy exists somewhere, that must mean there is some element of truth to the conspiracies they come up with.
Your extension is a touch contrived. It's more something of the order, "we know [X] has happened because of [Y] conspiracy born of [Z] motivation... is that motivation reflected elsewhere?"

Don't project the shortcomings of inexperienced "Internet" conspiracy theorists onto the entire genus.

Real, verified historical conspiracies encompass small groups of people.
Agree 100%. My input (as limited as it is with my schedule), has consistently reflected that known fact.

I suspect we may agree more than we disagree.

In any event, given my prior contributions here, I had thought the group would find interest in the top-ten prioritization compiled by those who are concerned with conspiracies. It offers a slightly different insight than similar lists concocted from a more skeptical viewpoint.

Hans

26th March 2009, 11:02 PM

Yes, money-grubbing jews and the worlds biggest lifeinsurance scams fit like hans in grete.

Oh no, "fit like hans in grete"

I say again that "I did not have sexual relations with that woman"!

I deny everything.

TSR

26th March 2009, 11:06 PM

There's a whole list of things wrong with that statement. The punchline is this: the Nazis loved the idea of Jews leaving Germany voluntarily.

Which, of course, is why Jewish emigration from Germany was outlawed in 1941...

And of course, many if not most of those who *did* leave (after being forced to forfeit most of their worldly goods) settled into surrounding countries, from which they were rounded up and shipped off to be killed when those countries were invaded.

The millions of Jews died precisely because they were NOT Zionists (http://www.jewsagainstzionism.com/antisemitism/nazisupport.cfm)!

No, they were killed because of a state policy of Nazi Germany which considered them sub-human and not worthy of life.

Seanette

26th March 2009, 11:06 PM

Conspiracy theories about "Zionists" led to the murder of six million jews.

So how do you account for the millions of Holocaust victims who weren't Jewish? (Gypsies, Poles, etc.)

I have yet to figure out why, in any discussion of Nazi atrocities, only Jewish victims count.

Kthulhut Fhtagn

26th March 2009, 11:10 PM

So how do you account for the millions of Holocaust victims who weren't Jewish? (Gypsies, Poles, etc.)

I have yet to figure out why, in any discussion of Nazi atrocities, only Jewish victims count.

I have yet to figure out why, in any discussion of Nazi atrocities, why people seem to think we're only counting Jewish victims.

Probably because no one is only counting them. But they tend to become the focus when they were killed in the largest numbers and remain at the front of so many inane conspiracy theories.

Seanette

26th March 2009, 11:18 PM

I have yet to figure out why, in any discussion of Nazi atrocities, why people seem to think we're only counting Jewish victims.

Probably because no one is only counting them. But they tend to become the focus when they were killed in the largest numbers and remain at the front of so many inane conspiracy theories.

This might be because the six million figure most commonly cited matches the number of Jewish Holocaust victims, but falls well short of the total of all groups targeted by the Nazi regime, which is between nine and eleven million.

The first two paragraphs of the Wikipedia article on the Holocaust clearly state those numbers. Six million Jews, three to five million in other groups. So explain how only citing the six million of one group does not omit the other three to five million?

Anti-Semitic I am not (I consider anti-Semitism incompatible with my Christian faith, plus being every bit as obnoxious as any other form of racism). I do, however, think it unfair to the Gypsies, Poles, Soviets, disabled, gay men, and political/religious opponents of the Nazis to basically say "Sorry guys, but we only count Jewish victims" by citing only the murder toll from the one group.

TSR

26th March 2009, 11:19 PM

So how do you account for the millions of Holocaust victims who weren't Jewish? (Gypsies, Poles, etc.)

In mostly the same way the Jewish victimes are accounted for -- documention, demographics, witnesses...

I have yet to figure out why, in any discussion of Nazi atrocities, only Jewish victims count.

That would be because Holocaust deniers don't claim Gypsies, Poles, gays etc. are collectively lying about their loses with the cooperation of historians of pretty much every nationality and courts of law, both national and international, of all political stripes.

Seanette

26th March 2009, 11:21 PM

I've also seen this miscitation of numbers in discussions that don't focus on Holocaust denial idiocies, but just talking about how horrible Nazis were/are (which I do agree with).

Kthulhut Fhtagn

26th March 2009, 11:21 PM

This might be because the six million figure most commonly cited matches the number of Jewish Holocaust victims, but falls well short of the total of all groups targeted by the Nazi regime, which is between nine and eleven million.

The first two paragraphs of the Wikipedia article on the Holocaust clearly state those numbers. Six million Jews, three to five million in other groups. So explain how only citing the six million of one group does not omit the other three to five million?

Anti-Semitic I am not (I consider anti-Semitism incompatible with my Christian faith, plus being every bit as obnoxious as any other form of racism). I do, however, think it unfair to the Gypsies, Poles, Soviets, disabled, gay men, and political/religious opponents of the Nazis to basically say "Sorry guys, but we only count Jewish victims" by citing only the murder toll from the one group.

The simple answer is that you're arguing against non-existent trends.

Seanette

26th March 2009, 11:23 PM

Sword_Of_Truth

27th March 2009, 12:33 AM

I think you deliberately misread me about "accounting for" victims. If you'll read the post to which I was replying, I was not referring to record-keeping, but inquiring as to how conspiracy theories about Zionists translated into murder of three to five million non-Jews.

It was whipping people up and pinning the blame for for all Germanys problems on the jews that propelled Hitler into power.

The problem with the kind of thinking practiced by the bigoted racist conspiracy theorists is they they will never stop. There will always be one more person to kill. And when they are done with those on the other side of their abitrarily chosen line, they will erase and redraw the line closer to themselves and start all over again with those on the wrong side of the new line.

I have yet to figure out why, in any discussion of Nazi atrocities, only Jewish victims count.

As Kthulhut pointed out, no one who criticizes Holocaust deniers thinks that. It's just that the Holocaust deniers themselves are most often targetting the jewish victims first and foremost.

Put simply, we defend where the enemy attacks.

Anti-Semitic I am not (I consider anti-Semitism incompatible with my Christian faith, plus being every bit as obnoxious as any other form of racism).

On this, you and I are of one mind. ;)

Yea, and ye need not any longer hiss, nor spurn, nor make game of the Jews, nor any of the remnant of the house of Israel; for behold, the Lord remembereth his covenant unto them, and he will do unto them according to that which he hath sworn.
- Third Nephi, Chapter 29, Verse 8

Disbelief

27th March 2009, 05:12 AM

8: The Suppression of Alternative And Free Energy Sources

One need only look at the debacle of the EV-1 Electric Car, and how the oil industry and big-auto (at the time) colluded with the government to kill a superior product to understand how similar alternative energy products and ideas have been systematically buried or outright killed...

I love this one. Yes, GM developed such superior technology, yet when they are about to crumble they are unable to pull this technology out and save the company. Instead, they would rather go in front of the Senate to ask for loans, get raked over the coals and suffer dramatically in the court of public opinion.

Horatius

27th March 2009, 06:38 AM

"It's everybody else, not me they're the ones with the problem, not me"

I'm not saying it's "everybody else" that has the problem, I'm saying it's you that has the problem.

That's why anti-Semite idiots are such a lonely minority these days.

"uh, dude? Alan greenspan caused this economic collapse, and he's a jew"

See what I mean?

SkepticGuy

27th March 2009, 06:49 AM

That's why anti-Semite idiots are such a lonely minority these days.

So are those who project "holocaust denial" onto conspiracy theorists -- lonely expect in this thread apparently.

I don't know any "conspiracy theorists" (at least those who subscribe to a broad spectrum of speculative propositions) who consider holocaust denial as a valid conspiracy. In fact, the more generally accepted notion is that "holocaust denial" is itself a conspiracy of sorts.

TSR

27th March 2009, 07:01 AM

In fact, the more generally accepted notion is that "holocaust denial" is itself a conspiracy of sorts.

Then you should have no problem presenting evidence substantiating this "fact?"

Horatius

27th March 2009, 07:04 AM

So are those who project "holocaust denial" onto conspiracy theorists -- lonely expect in this thread apparently.

Is there some reason you decided to use my statement that was specifically addressed to one poster, which made note of how they are a lonely minority, and which only referred to Antisemitism rather than Holocaust denial, to raise this issue?

Because, based on what MXW has been posting here, I'm pretty confident in the conclusion that what he's posting is both antisemitic, and idiotic.

Horatius

27th March 2009, 07:05 AM

Then you should have no problem presenting evidence substantiating this "fact?"

I think he means, "More generally accepted amongst CTists".

SkepticGuy

27th March 2009, 07:12 AM

Is there some reason you decided to use my statement...

No reason other than it being a randomly selected snippet that highlights how silly it is to turn a thread that has nothing to do with holocaust denial into a strange debate about holocaust denial based on half-half-half-baked assumptions about conspiracy theorists and holocaust denial.

Praktik

27th March 2009, 07:19 AM

In fact, the more generally accepted notion is that "holocaust denial" is itself a conspiracy of sorts.

Meaning it is propogated by agents of the state to slander "real" conspiracy theorists and dilute the power of their message?

And this would be because the authorities recognize the threat conspiracy theorists represent in terms of "lifting the veil" on their carefully crafted plans?

Do proponents of this viewpoint recognize that there are legitimate holocaust deniers - differentiating between people who genuinely believe them and those "disinfo agents" who only pretend to believe them as part of a psy-op? or is the whole thing a psy-op?

Drudgewire

27th March 2009, 07:23 AM

No reason other than it being a randomly selected snippet that highlights how silly it is to turn a thread that has nothing to do with holocaust denial into a strange debate about holocaust denial based on half-half-half-baked assumptions about conspiracy theorists and holocaust denial.

It warrants an entire chapter in Shermer's book (http://www.amazon.com/People-Believe-Weird-Things-Pseudoscience/dp/0805070893), and more than a couple of the Holocaust deniers are considered leaders in other fields of CT, so I'm still not sure what you're trying to say. :confused:

Dave Rogers

27th March 2009, 07:30 AM

No reason other than it being a randomly selected snippet that highlights how silly it is to turn a thread that has nothing to do with holocaust denial into a strange debate about holocaust denial based on half-half-half-baked assumptions about conspiracy theorists and holocaust denial.

If you actually read the thread, it should become clear that that isn't what happened. You were the first to mention projection of holocaust denial on to conspiracy theorists. The actual discussion was of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a Russian state-sponsored conspiracy theory, and its effects in terms of people killed.

Dave

SkepticGuy

27th March 2009, 07:35 AM

(Like your avatar... being a nihilist must be exhausting.)

Meaning it is propogated by agents of the state to slander "real" conspiracy theorists and dilute the power of their message?
Not from what I've seen.

Do proponents of this viewpoint recognize that there are legitimate holocaust deniers
"Legitimate" in the sense, perhaps, that there are those who have been successfully fooled by the alternative viewpoint, and now truly believe the holocaust did not happen as described.

or is the whole thing a psy-op?
From the ideas and theories I've seen... no. The core idea behind the speculation that the "denial" is a conspiracy is something like this: Somewhere in the mid-sixties (perhaps late fifties), the notion of "the holocaust didn't happen" was injected into southern radical white supremacist groups as a means to track the progression of the meme, thereby having a mechanism to easily find and keep track of an intensely subversive group.

It's not unlike what is known about the FBI's similar involvement in the start of the L.A. gang wars -- in order to track what were thought to be potentially dangerous "community groups," intense rivalries were inspired through injected rhetoric on fliers and other material. As we now know, it got out of hand, and the original plan to devise a easily surveilled phenomena ended up inspiring an unexpected escalation of violence.

SkepticGuy

27th March 2009, 07:38 AM

It warrants an entire chapter in Shermer's book (http://www.amazon.com/People-Believe-Weird-Things-Pseudoscience/dp/0805070893)
Michael Shermer is not a conspiracy theorist.

more than a couple of the Holocaust deniers are considered leaders in other fields of CT
Who would those be?

Drudgewire

27th March 2009, 07:49 AM

Who would those be?

Barrett and Hufschmid spring to mind.

Praktik

27th March 2009, 08:03 AM

From the ideas and theories I've seen... no. The core idea behind the speculation that the "denial" is a conspiracy is something like this: Somewhere in the mid-sixties (perhaps late fifties), the notion of "the holocaust didn't happen" was injected into southern radical white supremacist groups as a means to track the progression of the meme, thereby having a mechanism to easily find and keep track of an intensely subversive group.

It's not unlike what is known about the FBI's similar involvement in the start of the L.A. gang wars -- in order to track what were thought to be potentially dangerous "community groups," intense rivalries were inspired through injected rhetoric on fliers and other material. As we now know, it got out of hand, and the original plan to devise a easily surveilled phenomena ended up inspiring an unexpected escalation of violence.

Yes, actually very familiar with COINTELPRO and like things. However, have never come across this theory that holocaust denial was intentionally "injected" into southern radical white supremacist groups.

Would like to see whatever support is out there for that contention - in my mind its simpler to assign its promulgation through the extremist right to holocaust denial's essential compatibility with their world outlook.

To me its always been an organic, "natural" outgrowth of a certain state of mind.

I guess the proof in the pudding would be some sort of internal documentation from the FBI or CIA that this was indeed a strategy they pursued. And as a "tracking benefit" I wonder if there weren't other superior means to keeping an eye on them..

SkepticGuy

27th March 2009, 08:06 AM

Barrett and Hufschmid spring to mind.

I don't necessarily include 9/11 activists in the "conspiracy theorist" category. No offense to the earnest 9/11 Truth people reading this, but far too many proponents of odd 9/11 theories portray a tendency toward gullibility -- which may explain their possible foray into holocaust denial.

Drudgewire

27th March 2009, 08:08 AM

...far too many proponents of odd 9/11 theories portray a tendency toward gullibility -- which may explain their possible foray into holocaust denial.

Boy are we ever in agreement there. :)

dudalb

27th March 2009, 02:28 PM

The brief summary SkepticGuy posted here doesn't really make it sound like a conspiracy theory, true. The full summary over ATS includes this, though: "And as more information becomes apparent, many now believe that 'the government' is fully aware of what will happen and is very carefully suppressing the truth."

I am not denying that some people are reading a conspiracy angle in the 2012 crapola, I just don't think that is the central driving force behind this particular brand of woo.

dudalb

27th March 2009, 02:30 PM

I don't necessarily include 9/11 activists in the "conspiracy theorist" category. No offense to the earnest 9/11 Truth people reading this, but far too many proponents of odd 9/11 theories portray a tendency toward gullibility -- which may explain their possible foray into holocaust denial.

Sorry, but the 9/11 Truth Movement is a text book example of a Conspiracy theorist movement.

SkepticGuy

27th March 2009, 03:46 PM

Sorry, but the 9/11 Truth Movement is a text book example of a Conspiracy theorist movement.

Please explain how you believe that to be the case.

And what other "conspiracy theorist movements" are you comparing it to where there have been "text book" examples established?

malcolmxwarrior

27th March 2009, 04:06 PM

It is not a lie. I can prove it by giving you a text comparison of what they plagarized from: Maurice Jolly's The Dialogue in Hell between Machiavelli and Montesquieu 1-17

Here is Jolly:

Here is the Protocol:

Jolly's Dialogue:

Protocol:

Jolly's Dialogue:

Protocol:

It also plagarized a work by Hermann Goedsche called Biarritz. Hermann Goedsche was a reactionary to the Revolutions of 1848.

Phillip Graves published a series of Articles in The Times that debunks it even more throughly. April 16-18 of 1921 to be exact.

The Berne Trial of 1934 to 1935 proved the Protocols to be inauthentic.

The Russian government in the early 1900s proved them fraudulent thanks to Pyotr Stolypin and attempted to have all copies confiscated.

Yeah I'm sure they did;)

I wouldn't want the masses to know the truth either. It's dangerous for them to know too much. It's better that they live in their bubbles. Ignorance is bliss for the goys.

""The only statement I care to make about the PROTOCOLS is that they fit in with what is going on. They are sixteen years old, and they have fitted the world situation up to this time. THEY FIT IT NOW." - Henry Ford

I agree

dudalb

27th March 2009, 04:07 PM

dudalb

27th March 2009, 04:11 PM

Yeah I'm sure they did;)

I wouldn't want the masses to know the truth either. It's dangerous for them to know too much. It's better that they live in their bubbles. Ignorance is bliss for the goys.

""The only statement I care to make about the PROTOCOLS is that they fit in with what is going on. They are sixteen years old, and they have fitted the world situation up to this time. THEY FIT IT NOW." - Henry Ford

I agree

:woo

:covereyes

:jaw-dropp

In the face of such bigotry and idiocy I am sort of speechless.

SkepticGuy

27th March 2009, 04:16 PM

Uh ..belief in a massive conspiracy without much in the way of evidence to back it up?

You referred to "9/11 Truth" as a "text book" example of a "conspiracy theory movement." You've expressed your dissatisfaction with attributes of the 9/11 truth activism, but have not provided what other "movements" you would compare it to.

I see 9/11 Truth as politically-motivated activism... with cherry-picked conspiratorial conjecture used as inspiration for pre-existing anti-establishment angst.

malcolmxwarrior

27th March 2009, 04:21 PM

I would love to see your peer reviewed evidence for 1 conspiracy theory that is popularized by CTers. Make it easy and pick from the top 10 list.

I have a feeling I'll be waiting for a while. Its pretty clear that you are going to have to google what peer review means first and then your going to spout back some sort of personal insult.

Because you've got nothing.

Israel was behind 9/11?

What? You doubt that? I don't do peer review studies, they will have one that comes to ONE conclusion and then three weeks later another peer review study will come out that contradicts the previous. You see it all the time with various topics ranging from the dangers of marijuana to whether or not circumcision is necessary. At the end of the day you have to come up with your OWN conclusions.

YOUTUBE!!!!!!! TO THE RESCUE!!!!!

JWpWc_suPWo KhAEjSQghj8&feature=related

ENwze5owq4w&feature=related

JwckJoP7-wg&feature=related

ISrael let it happen or made it happen. End of story. good bye!

malcolmxwarrior

27th March 2009, 04:28 PM

Uh ..belief in a massive conspiracy without much in the way of evidence to back it up?
Obvious Political motivation behind it?
Playing fast and loose with the evidence?
Writing off all evidence they cannot plain ignore contray to thisr beleifs as being part of the conpiracy?

And I have just started.

There is No....repeat....No evidence that 9/11 was an inside job.

That is a lie. Plain straight lie.

Osama bin laden did it? Then WHY did he deny it on 3 occasions?

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/16/inv.binladen.denial/index.html

There is no evidence linking Osama to the attacks is there?

Just the fake videos of 2004 AFTER osama was killed in the tora bora campaign of 2001.

Osama didn't do it, the jews have their fingerprints all over it, al quaeda is just a CIA front, and you merely want to believe the fairy tale because you are like mulder. You want to believe. I want to believe scully. I want to believe that the government tells me the truth and doesn't put sex hormones in my meat.

Toke

27th March 2009, 04:40 PM

Do you understand the difference between spying on another country and perpetrating terrorist acts in that country?

Drudgewire

27th March 2009, 04:46 PM

Have fun in the matrix.

Maybe they're playing a jedhi[sic] mind trick on you?

I want to believe scully.

Considering your understanding of the world seems to come from movies and television, I'm curious to hear your take on who runs Hollywood. :p

dudalb

27th March 2009, 05:05 PM

You referred to "9/11 Truth" as a "text book" example of a "conspiracy theory movement." You've expressed your dissatisfaction with attributes of the 9/11 truth activism, but have not provided what other "movements" you would compare it to.

I see 9/11 Truth as politically-motivated activism... with cherry-picked conspiratorial conjecture used as inspiration for pre-existing anti-establishment angst.

I don't have lot of respect for a political movement which bases it's case on a bunch of kooky theories.
You can make a case that Bush was a bad president without going into the wonderful world of 9/11 woo.

dudalb

27th March 2009, 05:07 PM

Do you understand the difference between spying on another country and perpetrating terrorist acts in that country?

Hey ,we are dealing with somebody who thinks the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion are for real. What can you expect?

Stacko

27th March 2009, 05:21 PM

Hey ,we are dealing with somebody who thinks the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion are for real. What can you expect?

The Holocaust: Redux?

Toke

27th March 2009, 05:40 PM

Hey ,we are dealing with somebody who thinks the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion are for real. What can you expect?

It just seems so unreal.:confused:

As you may know I have no trouble finding real reasons for criticising Bush, or Israel*.

Why does he have to make up any?

*and for the record, palestinians.

Egil

27th March 2009, 05:55 PM

Hey ,we are dealing with somebody who thinks the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion are for real. What can you expect?

The Protocols is a hoax from plagarism, bigger than Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code. Though perhaps not as big as the Illuminati-Free Mason Conspiracy Theory.

It all goes back a work written by John Robison. He wrote, Proofs of a Conspiracy against all the Religions and Governments of Europe, carried on in the secret meetings of Freemasons, Illuminati and Reading Societies, way back in 1797.

I wonder if people are as insane now as they were back then or have people gotten more delusional.

Safe-Keeper

28th March 2009, 06:23 AM

The Protocols is a hoax from plagarism, bigger than Dan Brown's Da Vinci Code. Though perhaps not as big as the Illuminati-Free Mason Conspiracy Theory.They don't let that get to them. The Flood myth in the OT is obviously plagiarized, too, yet has significant support.

What? You doubt that? I don't do peer review studies, they will have one that comes to ONE conclusion and then three weeks later another peer review study will come out that contradicts the previous. You see it all the time with various topics ranging from the dangers of marijuana to whether or not circumcision is necessary. At the end of the day you have to come up with your OWN conclusions.

YOUTUBE!!!!!!! TO THE RESCUE!!!!!Two pages of pretty much only personal attacks and one-liners, I get. This is pretty typical of CT-ers. But this?

OK, so scientists publishing items subject to peer-review by other scientists shouldn't be listened to because the different studies might contradict themselves, but YouTube movies made by teens can be taken as gospel, even though they, too, contradict each other (in your words, 'they will have one that comes to ONE conclusion and then three weeks later another peer review study will come out that contradicts the previous. You see it all the time with various topics ranging from the dangers of marijuana to whether or not circumcision is necessary.')?

You are either a troll, or very good at unintentionally playing one.

It just seems so unreal.:confused:

As you may know I have no trouble finding real reasons for criticising Bush, or Israel*.

Why does he have to make up any?
I wonder about the same thing with anti-Americans. There are real issues with the US, as with any country - why do they need to make stuff up?

Alex Libman

28th March 2009, 07:54 AM

[...] Any chance you could try to break the cycle before you kill another 6 million jews, Alex?

You have it backwards, you're the apologists for the nationalist socialist government, and I am a freedom fighter. I'll probably be on the very bottom of the next pile of bodies your government will produce.

And you should stop using the alias "Sword Of Truth". Someone might think that you've actually read the Terry Goodkind fantasy series and understood its libertarian political subtext...

TSR

28th March 2009, 11:39 AM

Then you should have no problem presenting evidence substantiating this "fact?"

And still waiting....

dudalb

30th March 2009, 11:40 AM

Am I the only one who suspects that the whole purpose of this thread is to try to prove that the 9/11 Truth Movement is 'different" then all those other Conspriacy groups?

malcolmxwarrior

30th March 2009, 12:54 PM

OK, so scientists publishing items subject to peer-review by other scientists shouldn't be listened to because the different studies might contradict themselves, but YouTube movies made by teens can be taken as gospel, even though they, too, contradict each other (in your words, 'they will have one that comes to ONE conclusion and then three weeks later another peer review study will come out that contradicts the previous. You see it all the time with various topics ranging from the dangers of marijuana to whether or not circumcision is necessary.')?

I stand by what I said. Nothing is gospel. You have to come to your own conclusions.

JohnG

30th March 2009, 01:02 PM

You must be unfamiliar with the concerns of H.G. Wells. His was a keen apprehension in regards to the disruptive social forces he saw building in the previous two decades, and originally coined the term (as far as we know) "New World Order" in a 1940 (I think) book of the same title.

Just to be clear: Wells' point in The New World Order was that he was in favor of a New World Order as a corrective to the sorts of problems (Nationalism, Marxism, Fascism) he saw that would inevitably destroy the world. That of course takes nothing away from your claim that he probably coined the term.

malcolmxwarrior

30th March 2009, 01:19 PM

The original source has been clearly identified as an 1864 book by Maurice Joly entitled The Dialogue in Hell Between Machiavelli and Montesquieu, which was written as a satirical attack against the ambitions and methods of French Emperor Napoleon III.[10] In the book, Machiavelli represented Napoleon III, and described a series of steps that he intended to take to become ruler of the world. The Joly book was in turn based on material borrowed from a popular novel of the time by Eugène Sue entitled The Mysteries of the People, in which those plotting to rule the world were the Jesuits instead of Napoleon III. Neither the Joly book nor the Sue book mentioned either Jews or Masons.

But of course. Not many people have the testicular fortitude to reveal the true power... The Jews.

Praktik

30th March 2009, 01:19 PM

I stand by what I said. Nothing is gospel. You have to come to your own conclusions.

Nothing is gospel - except that jews run the world and 9/11 was an inside job.

So everything aside from that can be deemed "not gospel", right?

malcolmxwarrior

30th March 2009, 01:20 PM

Nothing is gospel - except that jews run the world and 9/11 was an inside job.

So everything aside from that can be deemed "not gospel", right?

No.

I thought I was very clear. You have to come to your OWN conclusions!

Nothing is gospel.

And you have it wrong. If you're gonna mock someone do it right!

Jews run the world and 9/11 was done by THE JEWS IN ISRAEL AND SOME IN THE U.S.

Praktik

30th March 2009, 01:39 PM

No.

I thought I was very clear. You have to come to your OWN conclusions!

Nothing is gospel.

And you have it wrong. If you're gonna mock someone do it right!

Jews run the world and 9/11 was done by THE JEWS IN ISRAEL AND SOME IN THE U.S.

So then, hypothetically speaking, you could be wrong, since after all -> 9/11 being done by the jews, and jews running the world aren't gospel, correct?

Toke

30th March 2009, 01:46 PM

Am I the only one who suspects that the whole purpose of this thread is to try to prove that the 9/11 Truth Movement is 'different" then all those other Conspriacy groups?

No, it does look like it.
It could also be SG who honestly think there is a difference, and find all the others amusing enough to start a tread on.

malcolmxwarrior

30th March 2009, 02:21 PM

So then, hypothetically speaking, you could be wrong, since after all -> 9/11 being done by the jews, and jews running the world aren't gospel, correct?

Are you that dense? Come to your own conclusion.

You can read all the P2P review studies, newpaper articles, books Etc. But it's what YOU get out of it.

For example, when I first stumbled upon the jewish question I ran into this article. I concluded that the Israelis LET 9/11 happen, or they were the Orchestrators.

http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=2011

and this one. http://www.antiwar.com/justin/?articleid=2014

Praktik

30th March 2009, 02:27 PM

I usually find opening a post with an insult during a conversation works wonders. Typically people I'm trying to convince of something really open up and respond positively when I do that.

Maybe that explains why things havent gone that well here? Maybe I should have started with "malcomxwarrior - why do you have a jerkface?"

Oh well, next time!

Simon39759

30th March 2009, 02:29 PM

Which, of course, is why Jewish emigration from Germany was outlawed in 1941...

And of course, many if not most of those who *did* leave (after being forced to forfeit most of their worldly goods) settled into surrounding countries, from which they were rounded up and shipped off to be killed when those countries were invaded.

No, they were killed because of a state policy of Nazi Germany which considered them sub-human and not worthy of life.

Actually, initially Hitler tried to encourage the emigration of Jews outside of Germany. But it was a slow process, even the Nuremberg laws, when many Jews realized what was coming, the immigration quotas other countries accorded were very low, and decreased even more after the British blocked Jewish immigration toward Palestine.

At this point, it seems like Hitler decided that emigration would never work and that another solution, a final one, would be needed.

But they started by trying to get rid of the Jews pacifically enough, not because they were considered worthy of life, more because they were little point in going through all the troubles and risking the political backlash of the Holocaust if emigration could do the trick.

In fact, it is actually not untrue to say that Jews that emigrated earlier, for example the few Zionists, were indeed saved by their Zionism...

malcolmxwarrior

30th March 2009, 02:31 PM

dudalb

30th March 2009, 04:29 PM

Thunder

30th March 2009, 05:03 PM

But of course. Not many people have the testicular fortitude to reveal the true power... The Jews.

If the Jews are soooo powerful....why do they allow people like you to reveal their crimes?

TSR

30th March 2009, 05:52 PM

Actually, initially Hitler tried to encourage the emigration of Jews outside of Germany.

.
... by confiscating most of their worldly goods as they left....
.
.
< snip Nazi apologia>
.
.

In fact, it is actually not untrue to say that Jews that emigrated earlier, for example the few Zionists, were indeed saved by their Zionism...

.
.. unless they happened to have emigrated to a country later overrun by the Nazis.
.

.

dudalb

30th March 2009, 08:16 PM

.
... by confiscating most of their worldly goods as they left....
.
.
< snip Nazi apologia>
.
.

.
.. unless they happened to have emigrated to a country later overrun by the Nazis.
.

.

I will give Simon the benefit of the doubt and say he worded some stuff poorly rather then accuse him of being a Nazi Apologists. I agree the word "Hitler taking care of the Jewish problem through Pacifistic means" was a horrid choice of words to describe Hitler's treatment of Jews iN Germany before the War started.
But if does show himself to be a Nazi Apologists, I will be the first to leap on him, and hard.

TSR

30th March 2009, 10:04 PM

I will give Simon the benefit of the doubt and say he worded some stuff poorly rather then accuse him of being a Nazi Apologists. I agree the word "Hitler taking care of the Jewish problem through Pacifistic means" was a horrid choice of words to describe Hitler's treatment of Jews iN Germany before the War started.
But if does show himself to be a Nazi Apologists, I will be the first to leap on him, and hard.

/
If Simon cares to make a case that what zie wrote was *not* an attempt at Nazi apologia, I'm all ears. But zie is going to have to start by explaining how "making things so awful here that leaving everything behind except what you could carry is the lesser of evils and not being allowed to shift assets out of the country such that you are guaranteed to arrive where you are going stone broke" can reasonably be characterized as "encouraging emigration".
/

Donal

30th March 2009, 10:37 PM

Late to the party

No moon landings, no global warming, and no pot conspiracies made the list. I am shocked.

SkepticGuy

31st March 2009, 07:40 AM

Late to the party
No moon landings, no global warming, and no pot conspiracies made the list. I am shocked.
Perhaps because it is a list compiled by people who are genuinely concerned about possible conspiracies, rather than a list compiled by people seeking to deride conspiracy theories?

Just a guess. ;)

Dave Rogers

31st March 2009, 07:54 AM

Donal

31st March 2009, 08:20 AM

Perhaps because it is a list compiled by people who are genuinely concerned about possible conspiracies, rather than a list compiled by people seeking to deride conspiracy theories?

Just a guess. ;)

So, only site approved conspiracies made the list?

Because I know people who take each one of those topics very seriously. There has been a lot of time, money, and energy spent on all of them.

SkepticGuy

31st March 2009, 08:28 AM

And yet, the 9/11 truth movement's still in it.
No, it's not... well, not as you jerking-knee assumes. Did you read the 9/11 conspiracy description?

So, only site approved conspiracies made the list?
Did you read the methodology of the survey? Hundreds of members picked the final 35 conspiracies, and we received over 150,000 votes from members and visitors on those.

Dave Rogers

31st March 2009, 09:06 AM

No, it's not... well, not as you jerking-knee assumes. Did you read the 9/11 conspiracy description?

Yes, I did. I note that there is a large amount of editorial comment added to the simple poll result, which seems to have the aim of distancing ATS from any specific 9/11 theory, almost as if you were embarrassed to have it there; but the actual poll choice is not "The diversity of proposed explanations of the attacks on September 11th, 2001".

ETA: It's actually your own editorial comment that gives the impression that the focus on 9/11 is a deliberate attempt to discredit conspiracy theories.

Dave

SkepticGuy

31st March 2009, 10:04 AM

It's actually your own editorial comment that gives the impression that the focus on 9/11 is a deliberate attempt to discredit conspiracy theories.

Odd that.

Could you elaborate? The editorialization was based on what I know of the 9/11-related discussions on ATS... not necessarily my personal opinion.

Dave Rogers

31st March 2009, 10:12 AM

To elaborate: Your original comment was that the list was compiled by "people who are genuinely concerned about possible conspiracies", rather than "people seeking to deride conspiracy theories". It just struck me as rather ironic that your editorial focus on 9/11 conspiracy theories appears to be the hypothetical use of deliberately outlandish theories to discredit genuine investigation, which would suggest that many voting for 9/11 conspiracy theories in general might be expected to be "people seeking to deride conspiracy theories".

Dave

SkepticGuy

31st March 2009, 10:39 AM

appears to be the hypothetical use of deliberately outlandish theories to discredit genuine investigation
Correct.

That has been the dominant "feeling" of the majority of ATS members for several years. Few long-term members accept the extreme theories promoted by various factions of the "Truth Movement."

which would suggest that many voting for 9/11 conspiracy theories in general might be expected to be "people seeking to deride conspiracy theories".
I'm unclear as to how you may have arrived that such an assumption.

I was comparing the list that ATS members compiled to other "lists" which were pure editorial opinion about conspiracy theories (such as put for by MSNBC/Encarta) which tend to be focused more on making fun of conspiracy theories, rather than any attempt at serious examination.

I'm certain the majority of those selecting the "9/11 Conspiracy" in our poll were most-certainly concerned about the potential conspiracies that may come into play. However, a reoccurring theme in the 9/11-related discussion on ATS has been the overall negative influence of the "Truth Movement."

Dave Rogers

31st March 2009, 10:49 AM

That has been the dominant "feeling" of the majority of ATS members for several years. Few long-term members accept the extreme theories promoted by various factions of the "Truth Movement."

I'm well aware of that, in fact it seems that the same is true of the truth movement's self-image. It just seemed ironic that one of the theories that made the top ten appears to be seen as a meta-conspiracy theory to discredit conspiracy theories in general, yet is being voted for by people who nonetheless believe there is a conspiracy behind the theories.

Dave

SkepticGuy

31st March 2009, 11:02 AM

...yet is being voted for by people who nonetheless believe there is a conspiracy behind the theories.

You do realize it's possible for one to consider there are important conspiracies behind the events of 9/11/2001 without subscribing to the popularized sensationalism of the "Truth Movement," don't you?

dudalb

31st March 2009, 11:11 AM

You do realize it's possible for one to consider there are important conspiracies behind the events of 9/11/2001 without subscribing to the popularized sensationalism of the "Truth Movement," don't you?

I don't care if it's in the language the National Enquirer or a Academic Paper, garbage is garbage and all the "evidence" for a vast conspiracy behind 9/11 is garbage.

Dog Town

31st March 2009, 02:11 PM

Perhaps because it is a list compiled by people who...

have genuinely fallen for conspiracies,

If this is want you meant I agree. I do think it's funny you think ATS the real decider.

dudalb

31st March 2009, 02:26 PM

I am now convinced Skeptic Guy is A Truther who is trying to win some cred by pretending to be a skeptic about all those other Conspiracy Theories. Problem is he is way too obvious, dude.

Bobert

31st March 2009, 05:42 PM

Perhaps because it is a list compiled by people who are genuinely concerned about possible conspiracies, rather than a list compiled by people seeking to deride conspiracy theories?

Just a guess. ;)

hmmmm
SkepticGuy speaking of, "deriding conspiracy theories" what do you think of no-planers and the like who claim no planes hit the towers and Flight 77 flew over the pentagon instead of into it?
Dont you think that these fringe groups, "deride conspiracy theories"?
On a side not its ssems ironic that your thread got OT by a Nazi and ATS seems to be ok with JEW HATE.

Cl1mh4224rd

31st March 2009, 07:56 PM

I am now convinced Skeptic Guy is A Truther who is trying to win some cred by pretending to be a skeptic about all those other Conspiracy Theories. Problem is he is way too obvious, dude.

Actually, if I remember correctly... AboveTopSecret.com is SkepticGuy's website? And that site's been around for years before 9/11. His posts here seem to me to be a lot less wooish than I would expect from even a closet Truther. I don't know what he's like elsewhere, though.

ETA: I think it's also important to keep in mind that this poll is only a sample of the ATS community, not necessarily the conspiracy theorist community at large. I will say, however, SkepticGuy, that I think it's a bit short-sighted to dismiss what you call the "popularized sensationalism" of the Truth™ Movement. You can't possibly deny that there are plenty of folks out there (that are quite vocal around various parts of the Internet) that believe in controlled demolition of the Towers and other weirdness, just because they've been kicked off of your site. "Too crazy to post here" doesn't necessarily mean "popularized sensationalism".

malcolmxwarrior

31st March 2009, 08:26 PM

Coming from Justin Raimondo, who is an apologist for Hitler and Imperial Japan, and whose "Antiwar.com" is boycotted by many peace activists because of some of the Anti Semitic material it has promoted, no wonder you like it.

Oh he's anti-semitic?

He's jewish dude.

I prefer if you use the word jew-hater. At least THAT word makes sense. I am not against arabs. That canard fails every time.

malcolmxwarrior

31st March 2009, 08:30 PM

I don't care if it's in the language the National Enquirer or a Academic Paper, garbage is garbage and all the "evidence" for a vast conspiracy behind 9/11 is garbage.

Keep telling yourself that. Whatever makes you sleep at night. Never mind the evidence points to the same crowd that was behind the lavon affair and the USS liberty. Anybody that has been in the military should ask questions about those events. Ex-miltary should not be so un-american.

SkepticGuy

31st March 2009, 08:30 PM

hmmmm
what do you think of no-planers and the like who claim no planes hit the towers and Flight 77
they krazy

The no-plane idiocy began with Nico "Konspiracy Fakery" Haupt as just more of his attention-seeking nonsense... and got worse from there.

ATS seems to be ok with JEW HATE.
Really? What makes you say that?

Thunder

31st March 2009, 08:32 PM

K Never mind the evidence points to the same crowd that was behind the lavon affair and the USS liberty. .

those darn Juden. someone should do something about der Juden.

malcolmxwarrior

31st March 2009, 08:34 PM

If the Jews are soooo powerful....why do they allow people like you to reveal their crimes?

They have the powerful canard of calling someone like jimmy carter an anti-semite and then everybody goes "oh, well there you go, we can't listen to him, even though he was the freakin' president" "hey, let's listen to the ADL on CNN they're more credible than anyone" "hey david frum and daniel pipes are on tv, lets listen!"

Oh well. Maybe when the goys are in their FEMA camps their masters will keep them well-fed.

SkepticGuy

31st March 2009, 08:37 PM

I will say, however, SkepticGuy, that I think it's a bit short-sighted to dismiss what you call the "popularized sensationalism" of the Truth™ Movement.
It's difficult for me to take the "Truth Movement" seriously... and for a time, really really tried my best to offer the benefit of the doubt. But in the end, I can't lend blanket credibility to a "movement" that evolved from anti-anything-government activism. That subset of activists have long been known for making up whatever is needed to rally the troops into the feverish black-shirted frenzies they're known for. Truth takes a distant back seat to visibility, shock, and emotion.

"Too crazy to post here" doesn't necessarily mean "popularized sensationalism".
No one has ever been kicked off ATS for their viewpoints. Sometimes the angry truthers who are unable to behave with civility in mixed company assume we're censoring them... but it always comes down to attitude, not ideas.

malcolmxwarrior

31st March 2009, 08:41 PM

The truther movement is another organization, like women's lib, that started out with good intentions but the jews got their hands on it and corrupted it. 9/11 truth is a front for the jewish mafia.

TSR

31st March 2009, 08:58 PM

Oh he's anti-semitic?

He's jewish dude.

.
Cite?
.

I prefer if you use the word jew-hater.

.
And just what do you think the term anti-semite was coined to mean?
.

At least THAT word makes sense. I am not against arabs. That canard fails every time.

.
The canard that anti-semite has ever meant anything but Jew hater? You're right, it does.
.

malcolmxwarrior

31st March 2009, 09:01 PM

.
Cite?
.

.
And just what do you think the term anti-semite was coined to mean?
.

.
The canard that anti-semite has ever meant anything but Jew hater? You're right, it does.
.

I don't care what it was coined to mean. It makes no sense. It is a meaningless word. Things change bro.get a dictionary from 1985 and you won't see the word bling-bling, so, things change and that word should be removed, it won't, but I don't care.

TSR

31st March 2009, 09:01 PM

They have the powerful canard of calling someone like jimmy carter an anti-semite and then everybody goes "oh, well there you go, we can't listen to him, even though he was the freakin' president"

.
You can actually quote anyone in the media saying this, right? Or even suggesting this as a general rule?

I'll wait right here.
.

TSR

31st March 2009, 09:07 PM

I don't care what it was coined to mean.

.
Well, *that's* a surprize...
.

It makes no sense. It is a meaningless word.

.
No, it makes perfect sense and has a very specific meaning, determined by the person who coined it -- a Jew hater trying to make his hatred seem more rational.
.

Things change bro.get a dictionary from 1985 and you won't see the word bling-bling, so, things change and that word should be removed, it won't, but I don't care.

.
Other than the fact that you don't like it, why should it be removed?
.

malcolmxwarrior

31st March 2009, 09:08 PM

.
You can actually quote anyone in the media saying this, right? Or even suggesting this as a general rule?

I'll wait right here.
.

I used the quotes to explain, this is hard to explain for the super dense, I was trying to do like "oh, hey my name is TSR I love men" type of thing.

get it?

Probably not.

malcolmxwarrior

31st March 2009, 09:10 PM

.
Well, *that's* a surprize...
.

.
No, it makes perfect sense and has a very specific meaning, determined by the person who coined it -- a Jew hater trying to make his hatred seem more rational.
.

.
Other than the fact that you don't like it, why should it be removed?
.

because it is a meaningless word.

I am not "against" The semitic peoples. Semites are NOT just the hebrews.

Akkadians
Eblaites
Aramaeans
Amorites
Ammonites
Edomites
Hebrews/Israelites
Knanaya
Moabites
Phoenicians Aksumites
Lihyanites
Thamud people
Ghassanids
Nabataeans

SkepticGuy

31st March 2009, 09:10 PM

You guys havin' fun with this? Isn't there a stormfront you can go chase?

TSR

31st March 2009, 09:18 PM

I used the quotes to explain,

.
Your quotes explained nothing, nor did your quote marks.
.

this is hard to explain for the super dense,

.
"Hello, Kettle? This is Pot. I just phoned to say 'You're black.'"
.

I was trying to do like "oh, hey my name is TSR I love men" type of thing.

get it?

Probably not.

.
Sure, I get it: just like your quote above, you were shooting off your keyboard on matters you have not the first clue about.

Free hint: You have no idea of my gender.
Free hint #2: You have no idea of my sexual orientation
Free hint #3: You only make yourself look more foolish when you pretend to knowledge you obviously do not have.

So, we can completely discount your whines about Jimmy Carter, then.
.

TSR

31st March 2009, 09:21 PM

because it is a meaningless word.

/
Repeating a lie doesn't make it any less a lie.

"Anti-semite" was coined to mean, does mean, has since that coinage meant and will always mean "Jew hater."

Deal with it.
/

I am not "against" The semitic peoples. Semites are NOT just the hebrews.
/
No, and strawberries are not made of straw. Sometimes a word is more than the sum of its parts.
/

malcolmxwarrior

31st March 2009, 09:25 PM

.
Your quotes explained nothing, nor did your quote marks.
.

.
"Hello, Kettle? This is Pot. I just phoned to say 'You're black.'"
.

.
Sure, I get it: just like your quote above, you were shooting off your keyboard on matters you have not the first clue about.

Free hint: You have no idea of my gender.
Free hint #2: You have no idea of my sexual orientation
Free hint #3: You only make yourself look more foolish when you pretend to knowledge you obviously do not have.

So, we can completely discount your whines about Jimmy Carter, then.
.

Don't you read the newspapers? You haven't heard about what the zionist groups tried to do with Jimmy Carter after he merely wrote the truth about what's going on in Palestine in his book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid"?

I recommend that book to you. It paints an ugly picture on what jews do when they have their own state. They are some of the most racist people on earth.

http://www.amazon.com/Palestine-Peace-Apartheid-Jimmy-Carter/dp/B001SARCHA/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1238556233&sr=1-3

malcolmxwarrior

31st March 2009, 09:27 PM

"Anti-semite" was coined to mean, does mean, has since that coinage meant and will always mean "Jew hater."

Can I borrow your crystal ball?

malcolmxwarrior

31st March 2009, 09:30 PM

Old English strēawberiġe, corresponding to straw + berry (perhaps from the straw put beneath the berry bushes during the cultivation process).

You see that still makes sense. Good word. Appropriate. Anti-semite on the other hand, no. It doesn't work. I am not against arabs so I am not an anti-semite. If you wanna call me a jew-hater, fine. At least that makes sense. Don't hide behind fake meaningless words.

TSR

31st March 2009, 09:32 PM

Don't you read the newspapers? You haven't heard about what the zionist groups tried to do with Jimmy Carter after he merely wrote the truth about what's going on in Palestine in his book "Palestine: Peace Not Apartheid"?

/
But you didn't claim "zionist groups tried" to do anything: you flatly stated that President Carter's opinion was <universally, since you did not qualify your statement> discounted soley because of the statements he made re: the Palestinians.

You are now backing down from that when challenged.

Might I recommend you put more thought into your posts so that you don't have to move the goalposts quite so much?
/

TSR

31st March 2009, 09:41 PM

Old English strēawberiġe, corresponding to straw + berry (perhaps from the straw put beneath the berry bushes during the cultivation process).

.
Sigh.

http://www.snopes.com/language/notthink/strawberry.asp

"The word 'strawberry' has been part of the English language for at least a thousand years, well before strawberries were cultivated as garden or farm edibles. They grew in the wild of their own accord, their berries gathered by folks who happened across strawberry patches. Therefore, although the word's precise origin cannot be determined, we can certainly throw out any etymology dependent upon the plant's being bedded in straw to protect it from the cold or keep its berries clean. Even if such practices had been used, they would have begun long after the fruit had been given its current name.

There are two theories as to the true origin of the word, both deriving from its first syllable. One explanation hinges on a particular meaning of "straw" — a particle of straw, chaff, or mote — describing the appearance of the achenes (tiny yellow seeds) scattered over the surface of the berry. Another view says it comes from "stray" or "strew," designating the spread of the plant's runners (slender tendrils), in that in an unchecked field of strawberries the plants appear to have been strewn across the ground with their runners straying everywhere. This second explanation is the more popular."
.

You see that still makes sense. Good word. Appropriate.

.
Actually, not.
.

Anti-semite on the other hand, no. It doesn't work.

.
For you, maybe. The rest of the world uses it as it was meant to be used.
.

I am not against arabs so I am not an anti-semite. If you wanna call me a jew-hater, fine. At least that makes sense. Don't hide behind fake meaningless words.

.
Neither fake, nor meaningless -- but do keep digging the hole deeper.
.

TSR

31st March 2009, 09:43 PM

Can I borrow your crystal ball?

.
You don't need a crystal ball, you need a good dictionary which gives etymology.

Where do you think the term "anti-semite" came from and what meaning was it intended to convey?
.

Bobert

31st March 2009, 10:16 PM

Malcolm,
Dont you have a hitler youth rally to attend so you can stop derailing this thread?

Cl1mh4224rd

31st March 2009, 11:14 PM

dudalb

1st April 2009, 01:55 PM

Hey, people... If you can't tell by now that malcolmxwarrior is just trolling, I'm telling you now: he's trolling. He knows we don't like anti-semites, so he's playing one. It's just a suggestion, but put him on ignore. The signal to noise ratio will go waaay up for you and the rest of us. Let him talk to himself. Thanks.

I can't agree. Malcolmxwarrior has all the signs of a real crackpot bigot. Or if not he is doing the best job of faking it I have ever seen.

dudalb

1st April 2009, 01:56 PM

I wondered how long it would be until malcolm pulled the out "I am not an Anti Semite because I do not hate Arabs" routine on us.

malcolmxwarrior

1st April 2009, 02:36 PM

I wondered how long it would be until malcolm pulled the out "I am not an Anti Semite because I do not hate Arabs" routine on us.

I am not against arabs. So I am not an anti-semite. I will stand by that.

You come across as a wannabe patriot who just defends the status quo.

Just because you were in the military doesn't make you a patriot. What do you think of the fact that Israel deliberately killed 35 Americans on the USS liberty? Are you gonna do the Patriotic thing and stand up against that and say that it is atrocious? or are you gonna spin it and do what traitors like dean rusk and LBJ did cover it up/defend the evil-doers?

malcolmxwarrior

1st April 2009, 02:40 PM

/
But you didn't claim "zionist groups tried" to do anything: you flatly stated that President Carter's opinion was <universally, since you did not qualify your statement> discounted soley because of the statements he made re: the Palestinians.

You are now backing down from that when challenged.

Might I recommend you put more thought into your posts so that you don't have to move the goalposts quite so much?
/

What? Read the news. They're doing the same old thing they do with everybody. (louis farrakhaan, malcolm x etc.)

Read the news. Stay up on current events. THis is common knowledge. I'm sorry you're in the dark, or playing games or whatever.

TriskettheKid

1st April 2009, 02:41 PM

What? Read the news. They're doing the same old thing they do with everybody. (louis farrakhaan, malcolm x etc.)

Read the news. Stay up on current events. THis is common knowledge. I'm sorry you're in the dark, or playing games or whatever.

I thought you thought we evil Jews controlled all that stuff.

Make up your mind on what I do and do not have a part controlling.

It's getting confusing.

malcolmxwarrior

1st April 2009, 02:43 PM

.
Sigh.

http://www.snopes.com/language/notthink/strawberry.asp

.

.
Actually, not.
.

.
For you, maybe. The rest of the world uses it as it was meant to be used.
.

.
Neither fake, nor meaningless -- but do keep digging the hole deeper.
.

So snopes beats wiktionary? Maybe for you. BUt not for me.

I don't go to snopes, snopes is a waste of time. Snopes wrong. WIktionary right.

Keep playin' your lawyer games.

The word is meaningless and fake. You have not proven your case. You have not convinced me.

I am not against the semitic peoples. I am not agains the phoenecians or the hebrews. Sorry.

malcolmxwarrior

1st April 2009, 02:45 PM

I thought you thought we evil Jews controlled all that stuff.

Make up your mind on what I do and do not have a part controlling.

It's getting confusing.

I still the read the news youo guys dish out. But I in turn come up with my own conclusions.

Just because I read the NY times doesn't mean I believe every story as gospel. Sometimes (rarely) the NY times has a good story=)

TriskettheKid

1st April 2009, 03:02 PM

I still the read the news youo guys dish out. But I in turn come up with my own conclusions.

Just because I read the NY times doesn't mean I believe every story as gospel. Sometimes (rarely) the NY times has a good story=)

You're contradicting yourself.

Either we're in control, and a good story coming out means that we're not dishing out our own made up stories (which would be a contradiction), or we actually don't control everything which means that most of what's in the NYTimes is crap and the occasional good story comes out.

So, we're back to my question:

Just what do we control and how much control do we have? I'd like to know what I have control over, and just how much control I have.

malcolmxwarrior

1st April 2009, 03:13 PM

You're contradicting yourself.

Either we're in control, and a good story coming out means that we're not dishing out our own made up stories (which would be a contradiction), or we actually don't control everything which means that most of what's in the NYTimes is crap and the occasional good story comes out.

So, we're back to my question:

Just what do we control and how much control do we have? I'd like to know what I have control over, and just how much control I have.

No I don't think I am contradicting myself.

You guys control the NY times, however, sometimes, you guys have a good story=)

that old saying even a squirrel finds a nut or something like that. How does that one go?

TriskettheKid

1st April 2009, 03:16 PM

No I don't think I am contradicting myself.

You guys control the NY times, however, sometimes, you guys have a good story=)

that old saying even a squirrel finds a nut or something like that. How does that one go?

Just the NYTimes?

I thought we controlled the Media?

malcolmxwarrior

1st April 2009, 03:33 PM

Just the NYTimes?

I thought we controlled the Media?

You control MOST of the media.

Not ALL the media.

I imagine you control CNN, FOXnews, HLN, MSNBC, the NY times, the LA times and it's sub-factions.

Also you guys control hollywood, the federal reserve(so that basically means the economy)the pentagon and congress.

That's a lot of power.

Can't you just leave us goys alone? You have all the money in the world, you have your own country, you have all the power. Can't you just live peacefully amongst the rest of society or do you HAVE to be like vampires?

abenja1

1st April 2009, 03:43 PM

You control MOST of the media.

Not ALL the media.

I imagine you control CNN, FOXnews, HLN, MSNBC, the NY times, the LA times and it's sub-factions.

Also you guys control hollywood, the federal reserve(so that basically means the economy)the pentagon and congress.

That's a lot of power.

Can't you just leave us goys alone? You have all the money in the world, you have your own country, you have all the power. Can't you just live peacefully amongst the rest of society or do you HAVE to be like vampires?

Ah so we control the media. Then tell me why do you regurgitate what we say? I mean we are printing stories about the doom and gloom of the economy, and you regurgitate that. It was you who said you don't drink the MSM kool-aid.

Ah yes FoxNews. I would've never thought that Rupert Murdoch is Jewish. Wow. Enlightening. MxW do you even know the names of the people who run the organizations you named? I ask that you name them all.

You say we are vampires? And whose religion is it that pretends to be drinking the blood of Jesus?

malcolmxwarrior

1st April 2009, 03:55 PM

Ah so we control the media. Then tell me why do you regurgitate what we say? I mean we are printing stories about the doom and gloom of the economy, and you regurgitate that. It was you who said you don't drink the MSM kool-aid.

Ah yes FoxNews. I would've never thought that Rupert Murdoch is Jewish. Wow. Enlightening. MxW do you even know the names of the people who run the organizations you named? I ask that you name them all.

You say we are vampires? And whose religion is it that pretends to be drinking the blood of Jesus?

I meant it as a figure of speech, a metaphor.

Edited for Rule 2 violation
I mean we are printing stories about the doom and gloom of the economy, and you regurgitate that. It was you who said you don't drink the MSM kool-aid.

WHy do you keep bringing up that lie? Is that what you professor tells you to do in class? Is that what the colleges are teaching these days? Is that journalism 101? I'll pass if that is. Playing some kind of gotcha game? that's not the college I remember.

Donal

1st April 2009, 03:59 PM

Did you read the methodology of the survey? Hundreds of members picked the final 35 conspiracies, and we received over 150,000 votes from members and visitors on those.

I've also read your comments and have noticed that certain conspiracies are off limits because yourself and certain other influential people don't like them.

Kind of sways the voting, don't you think?

Thunder

1st April 2009, 04:05 PM

Edited for Rule 2 violation

Ever heard of the Catholic Priest pedophile scandal?

Sword_Of_Truth

1st April 2009, 04:06 PM

You say we are vampires? And whose religion is it that pretends to be drinking the blood of Jesus?

malcomxwarrior is muslim, FYI.

malcolmxwarrior

1st April 2009, 04:06 PM

Ever heard of the Catholic Priest pedophile scandal?

Yeah.

Can you show me that passage in the bible where it infers that Jesus was a pedophile? I would like to see/read it.

Thunder

1st April 2009, 04:07 PM

because it is a meaningless word.

I am not "against" The semitic peoples. Semites are NOT just the hebrews.

You just....don't...get it. And you probably never will.

malcolmxwarrior

1st April 2009, 04:11 PM

You just....don't...get it. And you probably never will.

I'm not gonna conform to that BS.

I can read a dictionary just like all of you. I know where it's at.

But that word is meaningless to me. I don't care what anybody thinks. If I had things my way I would not have it in the dictionary.

Call me a jew-hater. Don't hide behind made-up words, with made-up definitons.

SkepticGuy

1st April 2009, 04:24 PM

I've also read your comments and have noticed that certain conspiracies are off limits because yourself and certain other influential people don't like them.
There's only one that I know of (drug-related topics).

I think you're mistaken.

Sword_Of_Truth

1st April 2009, 06:20 PM

I don't necessarily include 9/11 activists in the "conspiracy theorist" category. No offense to the earnest 9/11 Truth people reading this, but far too many proponents of odd 9/11 theories portray a tendency toward gullibility -- which may explain their possible foray into holocaust denial.

Except that anti-semitism and Holocaust denial were common place among the conspiracy theory crowd well before 9/11.

eirik

1st April 2009, 07:25 PM

I'm not gonna conform to that BS.

I can read a dictionary just like all of you. I know where it's at.

But that word is meaningless to me. I don't care what anybody thinks. If I had things my way I would not have it in the dictionary.

Call me a jew-hater. Don't hide behind made-up words, with made-up definitons.

But ALL words are made up. Didn't you learn that in "college"? *giggle*
Naah, this comes from the early years at Jew Haters High.

You sir, are a racist inconsiderate idiot. I reserve this language strictly to self proclaimed jew haters and racists of all sorts.

TSR

1st April 2009, 08:38 PM

So snopes beats wiktionary? Maybe for you. But not for me.

.
No, the Oxford English Dictionary, which Snopes cites, does. One also notes that you did not actually offer a citation to begin with.
.

I don't go to snopes, snopes is a waste of time. Snopes wrong. WIktionary right.

.
And how does wiktionary explain how the plant was named for a method of cultivation which is not universal nor even existed at the time it was named?
.

The word is meaningless and fake. You have not proven your case.

.
Well, let's use your source: Anti-semitism (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/anti-Semitism)

Though Semitic refers in a broader sense to those who speak Semitic languages (e.g. Arabs or Assyrians), the term anti-semitism has historically referred to prejudice against Jews alone.
.
Hrmmmm. Why do the words "hoist" and "petard" occur to me just now?
.

You have not convinced me.

.
You refuse to acknowledge reality. I am content to keep pointing that out.
.

I am not against the semitic peoples. I am not agains the phoenecians or the hebrews. Sorry.

.
Irrelevant, according to your own source.
.

TSR

1st April 2009, 08:40 PM

THis is common knowledge.

.
So common, in fact, that you cannot offer a single citation in support of your lies about the reaction to President Carter's comments.
.

Cl1mh4224rd

1st April 2009, 09:30 PM

I can't agree. Malcolmxwarrior has all the signs of a real crackpot bigot. Or if not he is doing the best job of faking it I have ever seen.

Well, whether the anti-semitism is part of the act or not, he's quite clearly a troll judging by his post in the "Alex Jones apologizes" April Fool's Day thread: http://forums.randi.org/showthread.php?p=4575158#post4575158

...or he's something that would constitute a direct attack on a forum member if I were to type it out...

malcolmxwarrior

1st April 2009, 10:24 PM

.
So common, in fact, that you cannot offer a single citation in support of your lies about the reaction to President Carter's comments.
.

It's not a lie. But nice try. I don't know what kind of game you're trying to play but it's a waste of time.

Look it up yourself. I don't have to look up all the interviews of people criticizing jimmy carter for writing a book.

Here's one example of many. fzqwvaMj0QU

It's common knowledge and I am not against arabs.

If it's good enough for farrakhan it's good enough for me. bl13wd70ZSg

malcolmxwarrior

1st April 2009, 10:30 PM

wBJgaBe5NgM&feature=related

This is a good vid. The first caller sums it up pretty well.

TSR

1st April 2009, 11:40 PM

Look it up yourself. I don't have to look up all the interviews of people criticizing jimmy carter for writing a book.

.
But "criticizing" President Carter was not your claim.

And in addition, you seem to now be stating that President Carter should be immune from any criticism at all -- why is that?

Meanwhile, care to try and find a cite that actually supports your lie that anyone stated that his opinions should be universally discarded because of his comments re: the Palestinians?

ETA: can we assume you realize your whines about the word "antisemite" are without basis, given that your own source contradicts your claims about it being meaningless?
.

SkepticGuy

2nd April 2009, 10:35 AM

Except that anti-semitism and Holocaust denial were common place among the conspiracy theory crowd well before 9/11.

Many people often confuse harsh criticism of the apparent goals and policies of "Zionism" to that of intolerance of Jewish people. And indeed, there are groups that seek to foster the believe that criticism of zionism and intolerance of Jews are the same thing. It's not.

Generally speaking, conspiracy theorists do not deny the Holocaust, nor do they seek to diminish the possibilities of what happened. However, there are Holocaust deniers who fancy themselves conspiracy theorists in an effort to repackage their twisted message.

garethdjb

2nd April 2009, 10:59 AM

Why not do a follow-up poll to see what percentage of ATS believes each theory in the top 10? Personally, I can see no connection between JFK, fake moon landings, UFOs and 911, yet my experience of CTers is that they tend to believe all or most of them. Obviously I only know a few CTers so this may not be universal, but I, for one, would be very interested to see the results and the correlations between beliefs in each theory. I guess you could add holocaust denial to the poll to get a clearer idea of the CT community's thoughts

SkepticGuy

2nd April 2009, 11:12 AM

Why not do a follow-up poll...

We are working on a series of follow-ups that are somewhat similar to what you suggested.

However, there are some anecdotal observations obtained over the years of running ATS... you may find them a bit interesting...

1) 9/11 Truthers tend to think UFO-believers are bat-turd crazy

2) UFO/ET proponents tend to think 9/11 Truthers are bat-turd crazy

3) Most 9/11 Truthers still on ATS are very angry when they see all the threads critical of Obama

4) JFK conspiracy proponents tend to side with 9/11 conspiracy theories... but rarely go all the way to the extreme theories of 9/11 truth

5) Few long-term conspiracy theorists subscribe to "faked moon landing" conspiracies... and instead are more into potential cover-ups of what was found (other than rocks) on the moon

Nick Terry

2nd April 2009, 02:28 PM

(Like your avatar... being a nihilist must be exhausting.)

Not from what I've seen.

"Legitimate" in the sense, perhaps, that there are those who have been successfully fooled by the alternative viewpoint, and now truly believe the holocaust did not happen as described.

From the ideas and theories I've seen... no. The core idea behind the speculation that the "denial" is a conspiracy is something like this: Somewhere in the mid-sixties (perhaps late fifties), the notion of "the holocaust didn't happen" was injected into southern radical white supremacist groups as a means to track the progression of the meme, thereby having a mechanism to easily find and keep track of an intensely subversive group.

It's not unlike what is known about the FBI's similar involvement in the start of the L.A. gang wars -- in order to track what were thought to be potentially dangerous "community groups," intense rivalries were inspired through injected rhetoric on fliers and other material. As we now know, it got out of hand, and the original plan to devise a easily surveilled phenomena ended up inspiring an unexpected escalation of violence.

An intriguing CT within a CT, but like so many CTs it suffers from a horrendously parochial perspective. Holocaust denial was and is an international phenomenon. American and European antisemites were exchanging denier memes already in the 1950s.

Holocaust denial is de facto a conspiracy theory, but in practice Holocaust deniers tend not to be very good conspiracists. They are primarily naysayers who are out to deny evidence, not to search for any to put in its place. When pressed, HDers will improvise a conspiracist explanation for the inconvenient evidence but they absolutely hate it when they have to consider more than a couple of pieces of evidence at the same time. By contrast, a good CTist can indeed believe six impossible things before breakfast and then draw up a complex organigram proving (at least in their own mind) that 'it's all connected'.

The difference is subtle, and is certainly lost when comparing the different varieties of common-or-garden internet troll who wash up on these shores, but it's pretty clear when reading the different genres' literature.

malcolmxwarrior

2nd April 2009, 02:30 PM

.
But "criticizing" President Carter was not your claim.

And in addition, you seem to now be stating that President Carter should be immune from any criticism at all -- why is that?

Meanwhile, care to try and find a cite that actually supports your lie that anyone stated that his opinions should be universally discarded because of his comments re: the Palestinians?

ETA: can we assume you realize your whines about the word "antisemite" are without basis, given that your own source contradicts your claims about it being meaningless?
.

I made myself pretty clear. If you're too dense to see my point then that's your problem. You're too busy playin' gotcha lawyer games that you fail to see my point or where I am coming from.

jimmy carter, wrote a book, Palestine: peace not apartheid, he was labeled an anti-semite by various talking heads and media personalities. End of story.

malcolmxwarrior

2nd April 2009, 02:33 PM

I don't have a hidden agenda. I have seen/read it with my own two eyes and anybody that is savvy with current events will concur.

I don't know what kind of game you are trying to play supporting/defending racism and apartheid, but I don't like it. I am not a lawyer. I don't play gotcha games.

malcolmxwarrior

2nd April 2009, 02:36 PM

Also I like how you put "his opinions". They're not opinions they are facts. He was there and he was merely speaking the truth and he was flamed for it! Usually those that speak the truth ARE flamed.

You must be a lawyer for the ZOA or something

abenja1

2nd April 2009, 02:40 PM

jimmy carter, wrote a book, Palestine: peace not apartheid, he was labeled an anti-semite by various talking heads and media personalities. End of story.

Ah so Mr. Don't pay attention to the Jewish-run media is watching the media. Would you care to say which talking heads and media personalities of the MSM that you love called Carter an anti-semite?

Sword_Of_Truth

2nd April 2009, 02:40 PM

Many people often confuse harsh criticism of the apparent goals and policies of "Zionism" to that of intolerance of Jewish people. And indeed, there are groups that seek to foster the believe that criticism of zionism and intolerance of Jews are the same thing. It's not.

I met these people face to face back when I ran with that crowd. I confused nothing.

Generally speaking, conspiracy theorists do not deny the Holocaust, nor do they seek to diminish the possibilities of what happened. However, there are Holocaust deniers who fancy themselves conspiracy theorists in an effort to repackage their twisted message.

Holocaust denial is a conspiracy theory. So yes, conspiracy theorists do deny the holocaust.

Your argument is a "no true scotsman" fallacy.

SkepticGuy

2nd April 2009, 03:37 PM

I met these people face to face back when I ran with that crowd.
Clearly, you were "running" with the wrong crowd.

Holocaust denial is a conspiracy theory
You say that with such conviction, you must be right.

No, Holocaust denial is delusional behavior. One can argue that many people that subscribe to conspiracy theories are delusional, and you'd not be wrong. Many are. But speculating on conspiracies does not automatically make one delusional, refusing evidence does.

Bobert

2nd April 2009, 04:46 PM

Clearly, you were "running" with the wrong crowd.

You say that with such conviction, you must be right.

No, Holocaust denial is delusional behavior. One can argue that many people that subscribe to conspiracy theories are delusional, and you'd not be wrong. Many are. But speculating on conspiracies does not automatically make one delusional, refusing evidence does.
You reallly do need to check out YOUR OWN BOARD because Jew hate is very evident over at ATS.

TSR

2nd April 2009, 07:37 PM

I made myself pretty clear. If you're too dense to see my point then that's your problem. You're too busy playin' gotcha lawyer games that you fail to see my point or where I am coming from.

.
I see very clearly where you are coming from: "make a claim, and when challenged to support it, change the claim to something else". See below.
.

jimmy carter, wrote a book, Palestine: peace not apartheid, he was labeled an anti-semite by various talking heads and media personalities. End of story.

.
Yes, that is the end of the story. However, you seem to have forgotten that "labeled an anti-semite" was not what you claimed. Nor did you simply claim he was criticized (I'm still waiting to for you to explain why President Carter should be immune from criticism, BTW.) You claimed that solely because of this label, it was a general rule that everything he ever said / says should be forever ignored.

Can we assume that you have now withdrawn that claim, just like you were made to withdraw your whines about antisemitism being a meaningless term which refers to all semitic peoples?
.

SkepticGuy

2nd April 2009, 07:52 PM

Jew hate is very evident over at ATS.
Do you have a link as an example?

We get lots of posts every day, and it's possible that some get missed by staff.

Sword_Of_Truth

2nd April 2009, 08:12 PM

Clearly, you were "running" with the wrong crowd.

Yes, I was. Then I grew up.

What's your excuse?

No, Holocaust denial is delusional behavior. One can argue that many people that subscribe to conspiracy theories are delusional, and you'd not be wrong. Many are. But speculating on conspiracies does not automatically make one delusional, refusing evidence does.

You are trying to create a special definition for a particular conspiracy theory in order to avoid the consequences of having a connection to it. This is disingenuous to say the least.

The only way to remove the designation of "conspiracy theory" from Holocaust denial would be to prove it true.

Either way, conspiracism and racism and bigotry all thrive on the same state of mind, paranoia and ignorance. It's no coincidence nor even a surprise that the two walk hand-in-hand together.

malcolmxwarrior

2nd April 2009, 08:37 PM

Ah so Mr. Don't pay attention to the Jewish-run media is watching the media. Would you care to say which talking heads and media personalities of the MSM that you love called Carter an anti-semite?

You should stay out of the conversation because you bring nothing to the conversation. You're a one trick pony show with your MSM canard that you probably got from your professor feeding you garbage.

SkepticGuy

2nd April 2009, 08:41 PM

You are trying to create a special definition for a particular conspiracy theory in order to avoid the consequences of having a connection to it.
You're the one imagining the hypothetical consequences of a fictional connection, not I. If you're going to make the claim, perhaps it might be to your advantage to provide some substantiation?

malcolmxwarrior

2nd April 2009, 08:41 PM

.
I see very clearly where you are coming from: "make a claim, and when challenged to support it, change the claim to something else". See below.
.

.
Yes, that is the end of the story. However, you seem to have forgotten that "labeled an anti-semite" was not what you claimed. Nor did you simply claim he was criticized (I'm still waiting to for you to explain why President Carter should be immune from criticism, BTW.) You claimed that solely because of this label, it was a general rule that everything he ever said / says should be forever ignored.

Can we assume that you have now withdrawn that claim, just like you were made to withdraw your whines about antisemitism being a meaningless term which refers to all semitic peoples?
.

No, I withdraw nothing. Anti-semitism is a smokescreen used on people that are critical of zionist jews. That is just plain common knowledge. I am sorry that you are not keen to current events or history.

WHy don't YOU tell me in your crazy mind what I claimed?

Because I cannot be more clear. Don't split hairs.

SkepticGuy

2nd April 2009, 08:44 PM

You should stay out of the conversation...
Keep that thought in mind. Got it? Now, may I introduce you to a mirror?

Not sure how you felt your churlishness was needed in a thread about a survey of top-ten conspiracies, but perhaps the pot should meet the kettle?

KellyG

2nd April 2009, 08:56 PM

I'm out of my mind over a former liberal friend of mine that has turned into a right-wing libertarian internet radio show host and "movement" leader. She subscribes to all of the common conspiracy theories (NWO, 9/11 Truth, anti-global warming, etc) while being self-righteous and telling me that I don't really care about peace or human rights.

I've tried to get through to her by showing her countless links but it just fuels her on. It's sad when you see a friend give in to these lies and completely abandon common sense and a desire for evidence.

:covereyes

malcolmxwarrior

2nd April 2009, 09:01 PM

Keep that thought in mind. Got it? Now, may I introduce you to a mirror?

Not sure how you felt your churlishness was needed in a thread about a survey of top-ten conspiracies, but perhaps the pot should meet the kettle?

Come on man.

Don't do that. I left you alone.

What are YOU babbling about? Holocaust denial being a CT?

Well, lemme answer that for you. IT could be taken as a conspiracy theory. BUt I believe that you at least need to LISTEN to what they have to say. The prez of Iran seems like a bright fellow give him a chance to speak. I know it sounds ludicrous, I was shown pictures of the Concentration camps and I saw the starving jews and I have read that hitler killed queers and gypsies and retards. Not just jews. I believe their point is that there were no gas chambers. I was taught in America so they will say that I was brain-washed by the jew ran education system(all the goys go to public school while jews go to private hebrew school)

SkepticGuy

2nd April 2009, 10:03 PM

What are YOU babbling about? Holocaust denial being a CT?

I never said any such thing. No conspiracy theorist proud to wear the name denies the Holocaust. Period.

ktesibios

2nd April 2009, 10:14 PM

Funny, when I was attending public school in New Jersey back in the Jurassic Period, my Jewish classmates attended Hebrew school one or two days a week outside of normal school time. What they received was education in the Hebrew language, Jewish history and culture and religious instruction.

This is a not uncommon phenomenon among immigrant communities as well, particularly those originating in countries where the dominant religion is Eastern Orthodox Christianity. My Ukrainian-American and Armenian-American classmates also attended church-run outside classes where they received religious instruction and also studied the language of the "old country". This is also a common practice among Greek-Americans.

Why language instruction? It's kind of hard to take part in religious services if you don't know the language in which the service is conducted.

So, once again malcolmxwarrior loses the battle with reality.

SkepticGuy

2nd April 2009, 10:22 PM

So, once again malcolmxwarrior loses the battle with reality.

By all appearances, it's a daily struggle.

TSR

2nd April 2009, 10:36 PM

No, I withdraw nothing. Anti-semitism is a smokescreen used on people that are critical of zionist jews. That is just plain common knowledge. I am sorry that you are not keen to current events or history.

.
Once again, so common that you cannot cite a single instance of it happening.
.

WHy don't YOU tell me in your crazy mind what I claimed?

.
Why certainly:
.

They have the powerful canard of calling someone like jimmy carter an anti-semite and then everybody goes "oh, well there you go, we can't listen to him, even though he was the freakin' president"

.
Note that your claim goes well beyond labeling to include "oh, well there you go, we can't listen to him, even though he was the freakin' president" and no mention of criticism at all.

*Still* waiting for you to explain why President Carter should be immune from such criticism.

Does this extend to all ex-Presidents? Are both Bush and Clinton automatically correct in every last one of their utterances?
.

Because I cannot be more clear. Don't split hairs.

.
Pointing out your obvious lies isn't "splitting hairs". You should review your posts to be certain the claims you make can be supported by fact so that you don't have to move the goalposts as you have attempted to do with President Carter or be demonstrated to be willfully ignorant as you were with the origin of the word "strawberry" or lying like you tried with "antisemitism"
.

malcolmxwarrior

3rd April 2009, 12:07 AM

I never said any such thing. No conspiracy theorist proud to wear the name denies the Holocaust. Period.

I agree with you though.

Everybody shouts "conspiracy theorist" and then they're supposed to look like wackos.

I don't think that should be the norm anymore.

What's so bad being called a conspiracy theorist? Just because you have an alternate conclusion to the mainstream account doesn't make you wrong or crazy. Right?

Redtail

3rd April 2009, 12:11 AM

No love for the "KFC was designed to make Black guys impotent/sterile?:(

malcolmxwarrior

3rd April 2009, 12:11 AM

malcolmxwarrior

3rd April 2009, 12:22 AM

.
Once again, so common that you cannot cite a single instance of it happening.
.

.
Why certainly:
.

.
Note that your claim goes well beyond labeling to include "oh, well there you go, we can't listen to him, even though he was the freakin' president" and no mention of criticism at all.

*Still* waiting for you to explain why President Carter should be immune from such criticism.

Does this extend to all ex-Presidents? Are both Bush and Clinton automatically correct in every last one of their utterances?
.

.
Pointing out your obvious lies isn't "splitting hairs". You should review your posts to be certain the claims you make can be supported by fact so that you don't have to move the goalposts as you have attempted to do with President Carter or be demonstrated to be willfully ignorant as you were with the origin of the word "strawberry" or lying like you tried with "antisemitism"
.

I never lied and I don't have to be super specific with dense people that need everything spelled out for them.

If anybody is a liar it is you. Plain and simple calling what jimmy carter said "opinions" That is a LIE! My posts are fact. IF you don't think so then bring evidence to the contrary.

The origin of the word strawberry according to wiktionary. Not my origin. Everything I have said has been said throughout history over a span of 60 years. This is not new stuff. It may be new to you because you're not that bright but that's your problem. Why don't you read the book Palestine: Peace not apartheid and THEN get back to me. I watched it with my own two eyes in the last year or so where JC was criticized for speaking the truth. Just like Farrakhaan and wright. I find your sympathy or support or whatever you wanna call it for the zionist regime and their racist ways atrocious.

You say "why is he immune"

I will answer that right now the best way I can. Because it is defamation of character. He is not anti-semitic. He is not immune. It's that he is not the aforementioned term.

Take it to the streets and if somebody calls you a fag they'll get killed. IF I called you a derogatory name and you were not that derogatory name wouldn't that be juvenile and wrong?

You don't have to answer that. Go back to your lawyer style gotcha game.

Sword_Of_Truth

3rd April 2009, 04:43 AM

I never said any such thing. No conspiracy theorist proud to wear the name denies the Holocaust. Period.

Great... a Holocaust denier-denier.

abenja1

3rd April 2009, 05:38 AM

You should stay out of the conversation because you bring nothing to the conversation. You're a one trick pony show with your MSM canard that you probably got from your professor feeding you garbage.

My one trick pony showed you the hypocrite and blowhard that you are. I know you believe Jews shouldn't have rights like free speech, the right to live peacefully, and other inalienable rights. But that's what America is about.

So sayeth the great man, thou hast Failed

abenja1

3rd April 2009, 05:40 AM

Yes exactly my point. You proved my point.

Christians and muslims are taught how to live peacefully with your brothers and sisters of god. While jewish children are taught that they are the chosen people and that they have a god given right to the land of Israel and it's ok to kill goys and mutilate your children etc. etc. etc.

I'll stop now before I get in trouble.

So much for that one trick pony.

And where does is say it's okay to kill non-Jews. Evidence, evidence, evidence.

SkepticGuy

3rd April 2009, 05:51 AM

What's so bad being called a conspiracy theorist?
Not a single thing. I wear the title proudly. There are many who seek to denigrate the connotation, but the reality is, our contemporary culture has a soft-spot for conspiracy theories -- they're interesting. There are dozens of popular movies and thousands of well-selling books with conspiracy themes as a core sub-plot.

Just because you have an alternate conclusion to the mainstream account doesn't make you wrong or crazy. Right?
There are times, many times in fact, where the "mainstream account" is generally correct.

It's one thing to be skeptical of a one-sided record of history or major events, and quite another to ignore factual evidence or make up your own. One is analytical, the other is delusional.

dudalb

3rd April 2009, 10:50 AM

No love for the "KFC was designed to make Black guys impotent/sterile?:(

Not as much fun as the "Kentucky Fried Rat" urban legend.

dudalb

3rd April 2009, 10:52 AM

Christians and muslims are taught how to live peacefully with your brothers and sisters of god. While jewish children are taught that they are the chosen people and that they have a god given right to the land of Israel and it's ok to kill goys and mutilate your children etc. etc. etc.

I am amazed this did not strike me before, but This crap sounds an awful lot like our old buddy Sunniman come back to life.

TSR

3rd April 2009, 11:53 AM

While jewish children are taught that they are the chosen people and that they have a god given right to the land of Israel and it's ok to kill goys and mutilate your children etc. etc. etc.

.
You have personally attended these classes, and so speak from first-hand knowledge?
.

I'll stop now before I get in trouble.

.
*Way* too late for that...
.

TSR

3rd April 2009, 12:19 PM

I never lied and I don't have to be super specific with dense people that need everything spelled out for them.

.
You've spelled out your claims clearly enough. The problem is that many of those claims have been shown to be without basis in reality.
.

If anybody is a liar it is you. Plain and simple calling what jimmy carter said "opinions" That is a LIE! My posts are fact. IF you don't think so then bring evidence to the contrary.

.
The fact that you cannot cite a single instance where anyone said anything even *close* to "oh, well there you go, we can't listen to him, even though he was the freakin' president" suffices to demonstrate your propensity for lying.
.

The origin of the word strawberry according to wiktionary. Not my origin.

.
Which, of course, trumps the Oxford English dictionary, even though it ignores the fact that strawberries were named quite a bit before they were cultivated in that manner -- why do you keep running from this fact? Not to mention that your own source puts the lie to your whines about the term "antisemitism"?
.

Everything I have said has been said throughout history over a span of 60 years.

.
So all of history is only the last 60 years? Fascinating. And 60 years ago they were lying about the reaction to future President Carter's opinions?
.

This is not new stuff. It may be new to you because you're not that bright but that's your problem. Why don't you read the book Palestine: Peace not apartheid and THEN get back to me. I watched it with my own two eyes in the last year or so where JC was criticized for speaking the truth.

.
Which, again, was not what you claimed. Making this another lie.
.

Just like Farrakhaan and wright. I find your sympathy or support or whatever you wanna call it for the zionist regime and their racist ways atrocious.

.
Where have I expressed any such sympathy or support or whatever for the Zionist regime?

Free hint: Opposing your lies indicates opposition to your lies, nothing more.
.

You say "why is he immune"

I will answer that right now the best way I can. Because it is defamation of character. He is not anti-semitic. He is not immune. It's that he is not the aforementioned term.

.
Criticism is defamation of character?

Not even wiktionary supports you there.
.

Take it to the streets and if somebody calls you a fag they'll get killed. IF I called you a derogatory name and you were not that derogatory name wouldn't that be juvenile and wrong?

.
Yes, it was when you tried that tactic. Too bad I had to point out that 1) you have no idea what my gender is 2) you have no idea what my orientation is which made your jibe just another example of you shooting off your keyboard in complete ignorace.

Now, why do you claim that someone calling me "fag" would be killed? Who is going to do that killing and why?
.

You don't have to answer that. Go back to your lawyer style gotcha game.
.
You know, I couldn't "gotcha" if you weren't so prone to overblown rhetoric which can easily be demonstrated to be false...
.

Cl1mh4224rd

3rd April 2009, 05:28 PM

Great... a Holocaust denier-denier.

I don't think SkepticGuy is denying that there are people who deny that the Holocaust happened. He's just enjoying a little No True Scotsman fallacy.

Sword_Of_Truth

3rd April 2009, 05:53 PM

I don't think SkepticGuy is denying that there are people who deny that the Holocaust happened. He's just enjoying a little No True Scotsman fallacy.

He's definitely in denial about something.

JohnG

3rd April 2009, 06:17 PM

Not a single thing. I wear the title proudly. There are many who seek to denigrate the connotation, but the reality is, our contemporary culture has a soft-spot for conspiracy theories -- they're interesting. There are dozens of popular movies and thousands of well-selling books with conspiracy themes as a core sub-plot.

Argumentum ad populum???

Millions of people love The X-Files, Men In Black, Doctor Who, etc. It doesn't necessarily follow though that that is any sort of evidence of a real life impending alien invasion.

Rogue1stclass

3rd April 2009, 06:57 PM

Cl1mh4224rd

3rd April 2009, 07:13 PM

It takes a special kind of crazy to deny the Holocaust. A crazy that most traditional CTers don't want to associate with.

But how do you define "traditional CTer"...? Is this sort of like the whole "conservative" and "neo-conservative" thing?

malcolmxwarrior

3rd April 2009, 07:25 PM

My one trick pony showed you the hypocrite and blowhard that you are. I know you believe Jews shouldn't have rights like free speech, the right to live peacefully, and other inalienable rights. But that's what America is about.

So sayeth the great man, thou hast Failed

I am not a hypocrite and I don't know why I am the only one being warned when I have not attacked anyone. Except maybe joeydonuts.

You should be suspended for 3 days. You're trolling.

Everybody is out to get me because I speak the truth.

malcolmxwarrior

3rd April 2009, 07:47 PM

.
You've spelled out your claims clearly enough. The problem is that many of those claims have been shown to be without basis in reality.

Without basis in reality? How so? Maybe you should brush up on your current events?

The fact that you cannot cite a single instance where anyone said anything even *close* to "oh, well there you go, we can't listen to him, even though he was the freakin' president" suffices to demonstrate your propensity for lying.

I was expressing myself. Since it appears that you don't know much about the topic. You don't understand. Here's a book I recommend that will shed the light on the situation. http://www.amazon.com/Israel-Lobby-U-S-Foreign-Policy/dp/0374531501/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1238809512&sr=1-1

Which, of course, trumps the Oxford English dictionary, even though it ignores the fact that strawberries were named quite a bit before they were cultivated in that manner -- why do you keep running from this fact? Not to mention that your own source puts the lie to your whines about the term "antisemitism"?

I'm not running from anything . You have proved nothing. Absolutely nothing I have presented you with videos. It is not my fault that you are not keen to current events. You're not making any sense.

So all of history is only the last 60 years? Fascinating. And 60 years ago they were lying about the reaction to future President Carter's opinions?

I never said all of history was 60 years. You're insinuating and lying. You really don't understand what I am saying do you? You are committed in trying to "get" me in this lawyer game of yours. You're trolling. And they are not his opinions. He was reporting the facts. Why don't you read the book? Look, if you know nothing of the Israeli-palestine conflict why don't you just admit instead of wasting my time. If you indeed know nothing about the Israeli-palestine conflict then don't reply. You can't bring anything to the table.

Which, again, was not what you claimed. Making this another lie.

I have not lied about anything.

Where have I expressed any such sympathy or support or whatever for the Zionist regime?

Free hint: Opposing your lies indicates opposition to your lies, nothing more.

I have never lied and it is obvious. You keep calling me a liar and I will have you reported. I have seen with my own two eyes they way people are treated for speaking the truth about palestine. Speak like a human. Not some robot with no personality. You refuse to submit to the fact that people like jimmy carter are flamed for speaking about the atrocities that are occurring in palestine. If you take anything down in your dim brain, take that down. That is the part that you should get through your head. Jimmy carter wrote a book about what was going on and was called an "anti-semite" for speaking the truth. Those are just the facts. I witnessed myself. For many years this has been taking place. It isn't just jimmy carter. THis has been occurring for a while now. Forget everything else. Hear this!

malcolmxwarrior

3rd April 2009, 07:58 PM

I see his point.

Holocaust denial just doesn't lend itself well to the mindset of traditional CTers. It wasn't a flash in the pan event that with a lot of vagueness or unanswered questions. It went on for years, was well documented, and was witnessed/participated in by millions of people. The average CTer who delves into the minutea of the JFK assassination, for instance, just isn't going to be satisfied by denying a story that a) is already pretty complete and b) is CT validation in itself.

It takes a special kind of crazy to deny the Holocaust. A crazy that most traditional CTers don't want to associate with.

Have you ever heard a holocaust deniers argument?

I grew up in the USA and the Idea of someone denying the holocaust sounds asinine but I don't think it is like that.

This reminds me of the whole president of Iran saying Israel should be wiped off the map. The Zionists in Israel used it as propaganda to show the US that Iran was a threat Etc. Much like their whole super scary nuclear program lol. When in reality. The president of Iran made himself clear saying that he wanted the political state to be wiped off a la the USSR.

If you don't believe me you can watch the interview of him on larry king on youtube and listen to this rabbi say the same thing.

6RjnvQHWyLE&feature=related

Now, why are these somewhat intelligent people deny the holocaust?

Well That bishop from germany was saying that there were no gas chambers. He wasn't denying the holocaust.

So, let them speak. Let's hear their argument all the way through. Don't shut them up. Don't cover it up. If they are truly out of their mind bat-s*it crazy, let US decide. Let me make my OWN decision.

Can someone post some of the holocaust deniers arguments so I can see if they have any validity?

malcolmxwarrior

3rd April 2009, 08:03 PM

I am amazed this did not strike me before, but This crap sounds an awful lot like our old buddy Sunniman come back to life.

Crap?

So, wait?

Jews don't cut their child's penises? That is straight up mutilation and child abuse. Sometimes they suck the blood! That is a FACT. I am NOT making that up! Did you watch that Penn & teller episode on Circumcision?

I'll get back to you on the torah stuff.

I could be wrong but I believe it says in the torah that you are not allowed to commit usury on another jew but it's ok to commit it on a gentile.

You see, unlike most of you, I read all the time. I'm constantly reading. I'm reading books, internet articles Etc.

Rogue1stclass

3rd April 2009, 08:12 PM

But how do you define "traditional CTer"...? Is this sort of like the whole "conservative" and "neo-conservative" thing?

You know, the X-Files type CTer, who spends his time looking for holes in the veil set forth by Them. To those guys, the Holocaust fits better into their worldview than denying it would, because it's an example of what They can do. Plus, many of them wouldn't be interested because there is no veil to pierce. There just aren't the vaguaries and inconsistancies there that are the life's blood of CTers.

Rogue1stclass

3rd April 2009, 08:19 PM

Have you ever heard a holocaust deniers argument?

I grew up in the USA and the Idea of someone denying the holocaust sounds asinine but I don't think it is like that.

This reminds me of the whole president of Iran saying Israel should be wiped off the map. The Zionists in Israel used it as propaganda to show the US that Iran was a threat Etc. Much like their whole super scary nuclear program lol. When in reality. The president of Iran made himself clear saying that he wanted the political state to be wiped off a la the USSR.

If you don't believe me you can watch the interview of him on larry king on youtube and listen to this rabbi say the same thing.

6RjnvQHWyLE&feature=related

Now, why are these somewhat intelligent people deny the holocaust?

Well That bishop from germany was saying that there were no gas chambers. He wasn't denying the holocaust.

So, let them speak. Let's hear their argument all the way through. Don't shut them up. Don't cover it up. If they are truly out of their mind bat-s*it crazy, let US decide. Let me make my OWN decision.

Can someone post some of the holocaust deniers arguments so I can see if they have any validity?

My grandfather liberated a Concentration Camp.

I'll take his word for, thanks much.

See, that's the problem with Holocaust denial. You don't need conjecture and guesswork to find out about the Holocaust. There are probably still thousands of people with first hand knowledge you could just ask.