PDA

View Full Version : Where's The Line Between Idiocy And Insanity?


Red3
9th July 2009, 04:54 AM
Where's the line between people who're easily led, can't think things through, accept untruths on face value, want to believe something so they do and mental illness? There are some really crazy sounding theories knocking around. Are these people nuts or just morons?

Example from the woo factory:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=71691

Monketey Ghost
9th July 2009, 04:55 AM
Where's the line between idiocy and insanity?

Right here on this forum, BYEEEAHHHHHH!!!!

Trojan_Jockey
9th July 2009, 05:49 AM
Where's the line between people who're easily led, can't think things through, accept untruths on face value, want to believe something so they do and mental illness? There are some really crazy sounding theories knocking around. Are these people nuts or just morons?

Example from the woo factory:

http://www.davidicke.com/forum/showthread.php?t=71691

I think its mental illness rather than stupidity. I've read a few threads on the Icke forum where folk discuss times they have been sectioned or diagnosed as schizophrenic, (of course this is all part of the conspiarcy as doctors and psychiatrists are working for the government and trying to stop their 'awakening'). When they mentioned the names of some of the medication they were taking it was obvious they were seriously ill. An influx of rational voices would be good for everyone, obviously it won't change the mind of someone who is ill, but its clear that some posters see that forum as support for the idea that their delusions are real.

I've made some posts on the Icke forum suggesting that the last thing a delusional schizophrenic needs is to have his or her delusions reinforced by other paranoid individuals. What happened? The moderators removed them, traced my IP address, found out who I worked for, and made me feel pretty uncomfortable. I guess if you think its a dark world where people are snooping on you then you are pretty happy to act the same way yourself.

LightinDarkness
9th July 2009, 06:42 AM
I've made some posts on the Icke forum suggesting that the last thing a delusional schizophrenic needs is to have his or her delusions reinforced by other paranoid individuals. What happened? The moderators removed them, traced my IP address, found out who I worked for, and made me feel pretty uncomfortable. I guess if you think its a dark world where people are snooping on you then you are pretty happy to act the same way yourself.

Are you serious? Wow, the moderators on the DI forum are more paranoid and insane than even I thought.

The example the OP mentioned amazes me with its stupidity. Because the queen took the crown in 1952 and had a jubilee in 1977, she planned an attack on 7/7 to kill 52 people EXACTLY? HOW IN THE WORLD can you guarantee you'll kill exactly 52 people with BOMBS? And why ignore the 19 in 1952 and 1977?

But sure enough, the Icke loons went nuts over this. The one single guy who pointed out this was a retarded theory got shot down immediately.

Björn Toulouse
9th July 2009, 06:48 AM
Where's The Line Between Idiocy And Insanity?


It's found between the butt cheeks.

David Rothscum
9th July 2009, 06:50 AM
I don't know, it's hard to determine sometimes. I've talked to police agents who say they would rather have a microchip implanted (without me bringing it up) because the national ID system we use in our country is so inconvenient, and I have heard people defend the fact that Western "charities" controlled by Billionaires that donate money to factories used in China's one child policy, because according to them the planet is overpopulated so these Billionaires and the Chinese government are doing a good thing.

You see, people who think we invaded Afghanistan to fight Al Qaeda and the Taliban are silly. It becomes sad when those same people start defending the invasion of Iraq. It becomes scary when they support China's one child policy and the implantation of microchips in their body.

LightinDarkness
9th July 2009, 07:04 AM
I am not sure what any of this has to do with the topic, but...

I've talked to police agents who say they would rather have a microchip implanted (without me bringing it up) because the national ID system we use in our country is so inconvenient,

There is nothing wrong with microchips or implanting microchips. Its a CT fear mongering tactic to make you scared of it.


and I have heard people defend the fact that Western "charities" controlled by Billionaires that donate money to factories used in China's one child policy, because according to them the planet is overpopulated so these Billionaires and the Chinese government are doing a good thing.

And these charities would be...what?


You see, people who think we invaded Afghanistan to fight Al Qaeda and the Taliban are silly.

Silly them, using facts and all that!



It becomes sad when those same people start defending the invasion of Iraq. It becomes scary when they support China's one child policy and the implantation of microchips in their body.

Whats scarier that none of this has to do with the topic that I can see...

Klimax
9th July 2009, 07:43 AM
I am not sure what any of this has to do with the topic, but...

I think it is demonstration for topic...

Trojan_Jockey
9th July 2009, 07:55 AM
Are you serious? Wow, the moderators on the DI forum are more paranoid and insane than even I thought.

The example the OP mentioned amazes me with its stupidity. Because the queen took the crown in 1952 and had a jubilee in 1977, she planned an attack on 7/7 to kill 52 people EXACTLY? HOW IN THE WORLD can you guarantee you'll kill exactly 52 people with BOMBS? And why ignore the 19 in 1952 and 1977?

But sure enough, the Icke loons went nuts over this. The one single guy who pointed out this was a retarded theory got shot down immediately.

Yup, absolutely serious. They found out the name of the organisation I worked for and they told me, I presume its through the domain name. Must take a fair degree of effort to find out though, and these were the mods, not the members, which is what makes it even more freaky.

I was accused of trying to silence people and to stop them from telling the truth, and that naturally I was a government shill. What annoys me most is the fact that these people who are clearly ill also have families and carers who have to cope with the nightmare of mental illness while forum members take no responsibility for what they say or what consequences their indulgence of these people's fantasies have. On a forum where the existence of mental illness is not even accepted its very difficult for anyone to benefit.

This is a very new phenomena however, in the past there have never been public forums where the symptoms of psychosis are universally celebrated as an 'awakening'. Where paranoid fantasies are continually reinforced and where obsessive irrational thoughts are praised and supported. mental illness led to social isolation, now the net breaks down the barriers of isolation, but has replaced them with reinforcement. I've often though of writing a paper about this as I don't think its been addressed yet.

David Rothscum
9th July 2009, 07:57 AM
Whats scarier that none of this has to do with the topic that I can see...
I think you should reread the topic:

Where's the line between people who're easily led, can't think things through, accept untruths on face value, want to believe something so they do and mental illness? There are some really crazy sounding theories knocking around. Are these people nuts or just morons?

People are so invested in believing their government is benevolent that they will believe any ridiculous lie it tells them. For example there are plenty of people who still believe the lies the Bush administration told us when it conspired to invade Iraq. In a way that could be seen as just stupid, but I'd say it's a dangerous form of stupidity because it endangers the lives of those of us who live in countries that could be the next target of US imperialism. Therefore you may say it's closer to insanity.

And these charities would be...what?

I'm glad you asked. Here you have the Ford Foundation:
http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2002/2/6/141038.shtml
The State Family Planning Commission of the People's Republic of China, responsible for enforcing China's controversial one-child policy, received a $215,000 grant from the Ford Foundation in 2000 and $640,000 in grants from them in 2001.

Stellafane
9th July 2009, 08:26 AM
Where's The Line Between Idiocy And Insanity?...


It's not really a line, it's more a Venn diagram. And within the overlapping region lies the realm of all CTers.

LightinDarkness
9th July 2009, 08:39 AM
I think you should reread the topic:

Yes, you really should. This isn't the place for spreading your political propaganda, so I'm going to ignore the talking points.


I'm glad you asked. Here you have the Ford Foundation:

Which doesn't at all prove that the Ford Foundation supported China's one child policy. The Ford Foundation is huge and donates to numerous causes, how do you know this didn't go for all the other things family planning agencies do?

David Rothscum
9th July 2009, 09:14 AM
Yes, you really should. This isn't the place for spreading your political propaganda, so I'm going to ignore the DNC talking points.



Which doesn't at all prove that the Ford Foundation supported China's one child policy. The Ford Foundation is huge and donates to numerous causes, how do you know this didn't go for all the other things family planning agencies do?
Because the Ford Foundation is specifically interested in Population Control. They will bribe poor 3rd world people into getting sterilized:

http://www.claremont.org/publications/pubid.767/pub_detail.asp
Also by the 1960s, population workers spoke of "targets" who must be made to become "acceptors" of birth control. Urged on by the Ford Foundation, U.N. agencies, and the IPPF, clinics in India began paying people who submitted to IUD insertion or sterilization as well as "motivators" who convinced others to be sterilized. The movement had transformed from a catch-all group of activists into a "jet set of population experts"—with all of the attendant entitlements. Activists like Alan Guttmacher traveled first class at the IPPF's expense. He was known to write breezy letters with opening salutations such as, "This is written 31,000 feet aloft as I fly from Rio to New York."

Red3
9th July 2009, 09:30 AM
What's wrong with population control?

Trojan_Jockey
9th July 2009, 09:48 AM
What's wrong with population control?

Don't know. Most people seem to agree that the one-child policy was the only humane way China could prevent over-population and mass starvation.

Maybe David Rothscum has a better idea?

aggle-rithm
9th July 2009, 09:51 AM
Because the Ford Foundation is specifically interested in Population Control. They will bribe poor 3rd world people into getting sterilized:

You're putting on quite a show! Thank you for illustrating the issues raised in the opening post.

You may go now.

David Rothscum
9th July 2009, 10:13 AM
Don't know. Most people seem to agree that the one-child policy was the only humane way China could prevent over-population and mass starvation.

Maybe David Rothscum has a better idea?
See, this is what I mean. When you people can't deny certain things, you proclaim that they are actually good. It's as if you seem to think that injustice committed against someone else can somehow not happen to you. This is a pattern I have noticed before. It wouldn't surprise me if you will eventually proclaim that 9/11 was a good thing because it allowed us to destroy Al Qaeda before they could detonate a suitcase nuke or something. I mean, we're almost there. The former CIA man Michael Scheuer went on Fox news and said that the only thing that can save America is another terrorist attack.

Red3
9th July 2009, 10:16 AM
See, this is what I mean. When you people can't deny certain things, you proclaim that they are actually good.

What's wrong with population control?

David Rothscum
9th July 2009, 10:26 AM
What's wrong with population control?
It's immoral.

Red3
9th July 2009, 10:34 AM
Says who? And why is it?

Immoral wouldn't have been my first word to describe it... I'd have gone with sensible.

Trojan_Jockey
9th July 2009, 10:49 AM
It's immoral.

So what's overpopulation and mass starvation?

LightinDarkness
9th July 2009, 11:18 AM
Because the Ford Foundation is specifically interested in Population Control. They will bribe poor 3rd world people into getting sterilized:

Your link does not prove that all. In fact, the only thing you've proven is that the Ford Foundation gave a VERY small grant to a planned parenting government unit in China.

This does not equal Ford Foundation = Wants Population Control

Your little idea of "omg when you can't deny it you say its good" is also insane. The truth of the matter is that much of what the CT movement has conditioned you to fear and hate is irrational. These things include microchips, FEMA, and apparently population control.

dudalb
9th July 2009, 01:40 PM
See, this is what I mean. When you people can't deny certain things, you proclaim that they are actually good. It's as if you seem to think that injustice committed against someone else can somehow not happen to you. This is a pattern I have noticed before. It wouldn't surprise me if you will eventually proclaim that 9/11 was a good thing because it allowed us to destroy Al Qaeda before they could detonate a suitcase nuke or something. I mean, we're almost there. The former CIA man Michael Scheuer went on Fox news and said that the only thing that can save America is another terrorist attack.

I think we have a good example of the topic of this thread here.

Cl1mh4224rd
9th July 2009, 06:14 PM
It's as if you seem to think that injustice committed against someone else can somehow not happen to you.


What kind of injustice is being committed by China's one-child law? Now, I have no doubt that there are quite a few couples in China that would like to have more than one child, but at what point should a government give up it's responsibility to the long-term well-being of it's citizens as a whole in favor of the short-term desires of the individual? Should it ever? Is overpopulation, mass starvation, and the civil unrest that would surely ensue as a result of the first two problems worth letting couples have more than one child?

You're belief that China's one-child law is an injustice is disturbingly narrow- and short-sighted.

The former CIA man Michael Scheuer went on Fox news and said that the only thing that can save America is another terrorist attack.


Save America from what? You forgot that part. (Not that I'm agreeing with it, but I'm sure you'd agree that deliberate omissions are a sign of dishonesty.)