Hey!!! If you are LIHOP you are fucking up the cause!!! (Purge????)

[frictionlessO]

I cant believe the rhetoric that is being spewed about anyone who postulates any kind of conspiracy theory!!! Yes I get it about London, I got it from the get go and never posted a theory on that yet (Like many many other CT'ers) because anyones guess is just as good as anyone elses right now (no matter how badly you might wnat to knee jerk this on Islam).

But 9/11 LIHOP?? Yes thats right apparently you can't even do that anymore if some DU'ers have their way. They believe we CT'ers (LIHOP'ers and beyond according to some of these anti CT DUers) should be purged much like dKos did there, (which is fine if thats what Kos wants), I have yet to have ever seen any Admin take the position that all CT'ers should be purged though. Ive seen them come down on certain theories and rightfully so as most of us would have done the same thing in those cases (tsunami weapons and all).

Let me say though that I need some questions answered first about some of these crazy conspiracies about CT'ers. Before I go ahead and leave DU and encourage all other Ct'ers to do so as most of us really dont like to be where we are secretly hated and despised as being bad for a common cause when we work so hard for that common cause.

First. If you are anti CT, then please please PLEASE fuckin define it already!!!! Most of you who have been posting on certain threads have used such broad strokes that I think you mean just about the largest chunk of DU there is, within your ever so vague and caveatless definition.

Second. While you insist on using those BROAD brush strokes you have also tended to associate a large amount of DU'ers with being holocaust deniers and actual freepers and in at least one case being actual government operatives. Do you realize the insult that is to those of us that aren't (which I guarentee is the vast majority of CT'ers)??? If you don't than please stop reading this because you will never get what I'm saying here due to your lack of empathy.

Third who but Skinner and Admin get to the set the rules? It is most assuredly not you, you would just tombstone a lot of the best and most active DU'ers out here. So even after you all reach a definition of Conspiracy Theory that does not mean its going to even necessarily match up with your allies on this endeavor let alone a majority of DU or Admins.

Fourth. Where in the hell can you show me that we are in fact deeply hurting DU?? As so many of you seem to be so up in arms about us and that is your reasoning, please list some facts where CT has been detrimental to DU besides the obvious Tsunami/Vapor Trail stuff??? (thats not meant to offend those CT'ers who do believe in that, I have empathy for how you got to such a place of thought i just think they dont work on DU and Admin doesn't either).

Fifth. Do you not think it is slightly wrong to constantly berate and stab in the back and try to censor your fellow DU'ers during these times?? Especially since so many of them seem to be activist minded and are generally caring people? Who have every bit of a right to not trust anything their government says as well as anything from some anonymous poster that doesn't know the first thing about tact and or their targets personal situation? In short do you ever wonder how come so many have run for the tinfoil and why don't you at least respect the people behind the post instead of labeling them "stupid" "idiot" "holocaust denying" "freepers"?

I just have to say that over the last few days I like many DU'ers have been truly depressed its been one big cry-fest since the bombing, then Andy and I have some serious personal things going on.. so maybe its just me, but this kind of a stab in the back I have witnessed on DU over the last day or so has left me in free fall, so if you agree with me I could really use some positive reinforcement... If you don't then go ahead, I cant be made to feel much worse.

Also if the mods or and Admin would like to step in to say something go ahead even if its that yes the anti-CTers are right and the rest of us should the hell up or get tombstoned. Tell us because I dont want to waste your time and space and as well as my own.

[justinsb]

1. erm...

Could someone define CT and LIHOP for me?

[ginnyinWI]

5. yes and while we're at it,

what is MIHOP???? :freak:

[JimmyJazz]

8. MIHOP - MADE IT HAPPEN ON PURPOSE

The administration made 9/11 happen

[ginnyinWI]

15. thanks! n/t

[Matariki]

14. acronyms

CT - conspiracy theorists
LIHOP - let it happen on purpose
MIHOP - made it happen on purpose

[hfojvt]

17. my favorite is UNA

Use No Abbreviations

but I love acronyms, like For Unlawful Carnal Knowledge, or Keep It Simple, Stupid, or OBAFGKMRN, Scuba, Snafu, etc.

[Bark Bark Bark]

26. My Favorites

STFU = a clear invitation for further discussion, bare-knuckles now
OMFG = I can't believe Li'l Dubbie fell off again

[Tace]

55. TLA

Three-Letter Acronym

[laugle]

95. Peleaseeeee someone start an ACRONYM TABLE, it's making me crazy!!!! n/

[ChiciB1]

158. Did You Ever Get This Info???

New ones are always popping up and I sometimes feel "out of the loop"!

We do need a table, like we have with the Smileys!

[kansasblue]

21. and what is 'n/t' ?

[Bark Bark Bark]

24. n/t = "No Text"--for example, your message, or this. n/t

[Journeyman]

37. n/t = no text . . .

used when someone has nothing to say beyond their subject line.

[MisterLiberal]

117. That's crap

I can't believe we've got this far that this is actually being DISCUSSED!

Since when did we censor OUR OWN PEOPLE????? Isn't this what we complain about when talking about the RWingnuts???

It's happening on Kommercial KOS and now it might rear its chilling head on DU?

I NEVER THOUGHT I'D SEE THE DAY!!!!

FREE SPEECH! FREE THOUGHT!

If you don't like CT's then DON'T READ THEM! I sure as hell ain't reading any of yours!

[JimmyJazz]

7. CT - Conspiracy Theory(ists)

LIHOP - Let it Happen on Purpose - the admin knew about 9/11 and let it happen

MIHOP - Made it Happen on Purpose

[justinsb]

13. Thank you very much

I'll try to remember all those.

[hfojvt]

12. Connecticut, of course, and Live In Hope Of Peace

either that or Conspiracy Theorists and Let It Happen On Purpose ('it' being 9/11 although I often mention that my grandfather believed LIHOP in regard to FDR and Pearl Harbor so LIHOP is a family tradition, if not an American one.)

I gues it could be Liberals Incensed by Heist Of Prosperity or would that have to be LIBHOP?

[kenny blankenship]

34. Connecticut, a state in New England, and...

Lesbian International House of Pancakes. Connecticut is abbreviated CT. And LIHOP according to the menu is "a pancake house for womyn." They don't serve sausage there, that's about all I know.
Also I was asked to leave.

[Garbo 2004]

83. ROFLMAO. Thanks. n/t

[progressoid]

143. Jeepers !! Lesbians and Connecticutians

sure seem to stir up a lot of trouble around here!

I'm so confused.

[Goldmund]

2. Thank you for posting this

Some of these lines of thought are sound, some aren't; but they sure have inherent value as thought.

Besides, of the many kooky theories about 9/11, the kookiest of all is the official story.

[frictionlessO]

10. Yeah I know... my thoughts are very very jumbled up at the moment...

feeling betrayed does that sometimes.

I know Im in a very bad place to be talking about this right now... do you mind taking up the slack here?

Cause I am seriously in need of trying to make myself feel a little bit happy, or facing sevre consequences.

[MelissaB]

66. and one from me, too.

:hug:

I must not have read some of the threads you have, but I don't see how anybody could doubt conspiracies. Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction. Hang in there! :hug:

[Uncle Joe]

163. Other conspiracies

Judas with a kiss, Brutus with a dagger, the religious zealots who forced Galileo to recant, Yellow journalism leading up to Spanish American War, The burning of the Reichstag (German Parliament) by Hitler, The Gulf of Tonkin, Watergate, The genocide committed by the Hutus against the Tutsis, too many more to count. I become alarmed when people say there no such thing as conspiracies, and that people that believe that there may be a conspiracy are automatically discounted and unrealistic to put it mildly. I believe that we should require more history in our schools.

[cally]

101. Hang in here

I didn't quite understand the animosity in the other thread. I respect and want the information and questioning of the CT's (I don't like that term) I may not always agree with the conclusions but we would all lose some very valuable information if the skeptics kicked out or ridiculed the CTs. Too many times, you are correct. Noone should accept the official stories without questioning them. Governments lie and try to hide damaging information.

[Cyndee_Lou_Who]

3. .

:hug:

[PsycheCC]

126. Great name Cyndee Lou Who!

I am called by the same name by a few of my friends.:)

[seemslikeadream]

4. I too am sick and tired of 2 people who have promoted themselves

to unofficial moderators. It's been going on for maybe 2 years now. I will not be silenced by them. And I am tired of their sweeping allegations.

[patdem]

6. I have no CT about the London bombings....they are similar to many other

terrorist attacks all over the world..the 9/11 attacks, however, leave many un answered questions...too many for my taste! I read the 9/11 forum regularly, though I NEVER contribute. I think there are SO MANY smoking guns that no one has put the bullet in the correct one. I just keep going back cause I think someone somewhere will find the right answer! That is my prayer, at least. Keep up the good work.

[Mythsaje]

9. I don't consider myself

much of a conspiracy theorist, though, oddly enough, my first thought on 9/11--after I got over the shock--was "well, isn't THIS convenient?"

I remember enough about the Republicans and the things they've done for the past thirty or so years (since I started paying attention) that I wouldn't put a hell of a lot past them.

Am I willing to state unequivocally that I believe our government had something directly to do with the attacks? Hell, no. I don't know one way or another.

Do I think it's possible? Unfortunately, yes. And that's telling in itself, in my view.

[wli]

147. low opinions

Given the general signs of corruption going around LIHOP/MIHOP is my default assumption. I'm not going to bother trying to get evidence. I'm not a court of law (not that they haven't turned the courts into show trials) or an investigator. Of course, I at least try to phrase these as only being suspicions or beliefs as opposed to claims of fact.

The media is extremely propaganda-heavy these days. I don't trust a word of what's coming out of it.

[Mythsaje]

165. Me neither,

but I generally put most conspiracy theories in the same category as the existence of "God," UFOs, Bigfoot, ghosts, and the Loch Ness Monster. Without evidence of my own, all I can do is shrug my shoulders and say "maybe."

In an infinite universe, all things are possible.

[sendero]

11. There are conspiracy theories..

... and then there are conspiracy theories.

The ones who pull stuff out of thin air with virtually nothing in the way of facts to support them, well I don't wanna hear them.

Personally, LIHOP has plenty of evidence to support it. It's not in the same league as "Rove caused hurricane Dennis".

[opihimoimoi]

16. A fine rant if there ever was one. 1st Amendent time....free speech

LIHOP? there are many who feel this is so

MIHOP?...a few there too.

SO WHAT? Both could be true...at least to a degree or 2.

I happen to feel its LIHOP.....the ratings at the time were awful for Bush. He needed something to happen to make him the answer guy. The LEADER.

But more than likely...its a combo of LIHOP and pure incompetence...Bush being in way over his head...Rove and Cheney too.
These guys are major dufuses when it comes to this stuff. They may be able to make scads of money but that don't give them answers as what the hell to do for a Better Safer America. Look at the evidence...

We are much worse off than when Bill left office. The worry level is up. the coffin count is up, the misery'homeless level is up...everything but the DOW....Gas is WAY up....all because of BUSH.

His excuses/spin just don't cut it anymore. Peeps are tired of the bull shit...but are flummoxed as what to do....

The CT'ers are here to stay and should be welcomed as another voice/option/perspective......

So sez Me the Opi,

Come, we go drink.

[JimmyJazz]

19. 1st Amendment

the 5th amendment is the right to a trial by jury (among other things) :)

[opihimoimoi]

25. Sorry for my error, I only went high school, don't know the list of

ammendments/addendums...

[JimmyJazz]

31. I didn't correct you to be a smartass or to be smug.

:)

http://usinfo.state.gov/usa/infousa/facts/funddocs/billeng.htm

[opihimoimoi]

82. Sorry, was trying humor...smartass/smugness unintended

[wli]

146. if you haven't noticed

No one in the federal government is following those rules anymore.

[JimmyJazz]

18. I don't think anyone should be banned for their theories.

I think there are a lot of things we don't know and if people didn't ask questions or do research, we'd all still believe Lee Harvey Oswald acted alone in killing JFK.

:hug:

[quinnox]

20. depends on the CT

There is a big difference between groundless out-of-thin-air speculation, and solid facts that call for more investigation.

Here is how I would categorize them: Fruitcake and just plain stupid theories: Tsunamia was started by BFEE, Space Shuttle disaster was done by BFEE, London bombings were done by BFEE, rainy weather last Tuesday was done by BFEE (just a joke but you get the picture) {BFEE = Bush Family Evil Empire}

And on the other hand, there are some serious questions surrounding certain events supported by hard evidence, such as 9/11 and the Kennedy assassination. Does that mean I think 9/11 was MIHOP or LIHOP - no, it means there are reasonable questions that are raised when examining the evidence.

That said, I have always advocated a forum just for conspiracy theorists, because it is very popular on DU.

I can see how it would be a major turn off for some Duers to log into DU and see page after page filled with what they would consider off the wall junk theories. And sometimes DU appears that way, depending on the latest "fad" theory of the moment.

Summing up, it is based on common sense and the facts on whether I think a CT is reasonable or just plain lunatic fringe.

[emcguffie]

32. What if you are wrong about the weather? Do you remember --

-- a report that became public in which the Pentagon -- or because of which the Pentagon, not sure which -- determined that the greatest threat the USA faces is global warming? Not terrorism. And water.

Well, take all those guys in the Pentagon, and imagine what they might want to do with what they view as the greatest single threat to us, that is US, who live in the USA.

What might they do? Might they participate in experiments for climate control? Why not? What might you do, if you could? I think there was a time when an atomic bomb was the stuff of dreams.

I will post some papers about this stuff. Scientists have been thinking about possible ways of dealing with global warming -- besides just the carbon business -- for a couple of decades now. Would it be so ridiculous to think this government might implement some of the ideas those scientists have come up WITHOUT ASKING OUR PERMISSION? Why not? Is * the kind of guy you think comes to the people and requests permission before sending a bunch of airplanes up in the sky to spew out barium salts? I suggest you might want to think again.

There are island/nations that have been completely inundated, under water briefly, already. Global warming is real, it is a huge threat, and we refuse to abide by Kyoto. Don't you think someone, maybe *, would just love to say, okay, let's do it another way, let's create a demand for all these planes, these tankers, whatever you call them, and all this pilot activity? Plus all these chemicals, that someone must pay for! Who do you think is doing it? Could it be the same companies that are doing Iraq? Oh, I'm so out there, so nuts, aren't I?

No, no, no! I cast thee out, Satan! I will not think such terrible thoughts! Those contrails that never go away, they are just new special ice, that will not melt or evaporate!

I suggest that if you had a very mysterious illness, that is completely debilitating, that about 2 million other Americans have, you might indeed be a little bit more suspicous. But then again, it is certainly much easier for you to look at me and say that I'm FAKING IT!

However, I am the ONLY PERSON in my three person family who has a job, who gets up and goes to work every day. Does daddy? Nope. Does mommy? Yep. Too bad she's feeling so lousy. Why would she make it up? So she could stay home all day? Well, if she did that, we would have to move to a homeless shelter, so she doesn't stay home. She goes to work every day. And she feels like something I doubt you can imagine. because I think your imagination is a little bit constrained.

There is something Shakespeare said, it is not coming to mind as it should, because of this ridiculous disease I have.... But YOU know, for sure, that I am just making it up. Just like all those vets who have died from "post traumatic stress disorder". PTSD used not to be fatal. I wonder why it became so? I wonder why the VA confiscated the VA ID cards of vets who filled prescriptions for the one thing that could make them better?

Excuse the rant. I am so afraid the world is ending -- the world as we knew it for so long -- that I tend to get overwrought. I am a parent. I do not see how any parent could not be overwrought, unless in completely denial.

Sorry.

[Jose Diablo]

67. Shakespeare, in Hamlet I think

"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horacio,
Than are dreamt of in your philosophy."

Edit: Thinking about it, I think Hamlet said this right after he had a hallucination of seeing the ghost of his father, the King that had been poisoned by Hamlet's uncle, the new king and husband to Hamlet's mother. I bet Hamlet would be called a CTheorist today.

But in the play, Hamlet was right, his father was murdered by the uncle as it turned-out.

[emcguffie]

137. Thanks. T hat was it.

Sorry I wasn't around anymore. Family. Kid needs computer. All the timke.

[PsycheCC]

114. Wow, emcguffie, YOU MAKE PERFECT SENSE TO ME!

What I don't get is how anyone could read your post and not feel compelled to respond. I will stipulate that I have not read every post in this thread, but yours is RIGHT ON in my opinion.

I don't trust any government that won't allow public dissent, that sets up "protest zones" miles from the event or person on which the protesters want to focus attention.

I don't trust any president who won't allow dissenters to attend GOVERNMENT SPONSORED, TAXPAYER FUNDED, PROPAGANDA FESTIVALS. We couldn't let those with opposing views get close enough to God's leader of America to ask a few pointed questions, could we? I'm sure he justifies this with his own conspiracy theories about how those dissenters might really be terrorists. This policy of having to pass a test to attend a public event really gets to me.

I don't trust any government that REPEATEDLY LIES to it's own people, despite being caught again and again in those lies. It's insulting to see how stupid they think we are.

emcguffie, you closed your post saying, "Excuse the rant. I am so afraid the world is ending -- the world as we knew it for so long -- that I tend to get overwrought. I am a parent. I do not see how any parent could not be overwrought, unless completely in denial. Sorry." Please don't apologize for stating your opinion. It sounds to me like your life is very hard, and this may be due, directly or indirectly, to the acts of your own government. If I were you, I would be LIVID and scared of what tomorrow might bring.

And I agree with you, how could anyone not be overwrought when it does seem our democracy is degenerating into some kind a fascist dictatorship. Some say fascist is too strong a word, but one hears it everywhere on the lips of democrats these days. We can't all be wrong. Hamlet was right to distrust his government, and so are we.

I wish you well as you get up and go to work each day, feeling as you do. You must be very strong, even tough I'm sure many days you think you can't go on. THANK YOU for this post.

[emcguffie]

138. And thank you.

Gee, I usually don't get any response here. That was great.

Yes, I fear I fear quite a bit. But I think other people are in denial, because it's too much to admit. I imagine many Germans felt like that -- that this just cannot be happening. But it was happening. They probably had "conspiracy theorists" too, who were treated like nuts.

The more I look the more I see. And it is terrifying.

[hiley]

154. I am sorry you don't get many responses here, you will eventually

I believe because you are quite brillant.
From now on I will look for you to see what you have to say !
You may like this post here.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4067177

[femrap]

174. Rant all you want!

Ranting is good for soul! May God and Goddess bless you with anger at injustice, oppression, and exploitation of people, so that you may work for justice, freedom and peace!

We need more like you!!!!

Thx for the post!

I am new and don't know who is anti-CT....but I think we are all smart enough to decide for ourselves what we want to believe and what we don't want to believe....I don't want some anti-CT entity telling me what I can read. Geez.

Anyone want to clue me in on this and what happened at Kos?

[PsycheCC]

207. Wow, femrap, that's quite a question!

I can't give all the details because I didn't read the whole, several hundred post thread, but somehow it does seem wrong to "purge" the ranks of anyone who believes in conspiracy theories these days. That appears to be what the moderator over there did. Again, I'm no expert on the subject, and maybe you were looking for more detail. But if you ask me, there's plenty of reason to distrust a government that lies to you! Like you, I want to decide for myself what I think.

By the way, this was lovely: "Ranting is good for soul! May God and Goddess bless you with anger at injustice, oppression, and exploitation of people, so that you may work for justice, freedom and peace!"

Welcome the DU!

:hi:

[PsycheCC]

208. You're Most Welcome.

You said "I imagine many Germans felt like that -- that this just cannot be happening. But it was happening. They probably had "conspiracy theorists" too, who were treated like nuts." And by the time the mainstream began to see what the CT's had seen long before them, it was way too late. Nothing at all wrong with staying awake and alert to the changes in the world around us. I wish you well with your health, emcguffie. :-)

[earth mom]

124. Excellent rant-I'm with you.

I'm a parent...I feel the same...
and I don't trust those bastards...

NOT ONE LITTLE BIT.

:tinfoilhat:

[nashville_brook]

86. i think begs the question, "what is DU?"

we're not a publication.

we're not Slate.

we're not a news site.

we exist for us -- not the reading public who might wander in from time to time.

we're a conversation, basically. we can't legislate what people can and cannot say. or maybe "we" can -- but i wouldn't want to be part of that conversation. you aren't going to get any creative thought if people have to wonder all the time if what they are saying fits everyone's idea of "sensible." that's a lot of pressure.

why can't people just carry on and if you see something you think is silly, well, move on to the next thread. or use the alert button.

[Castilleja]

116. Absolutely!

Love your post! Very sensible.

[IntravenousDemilo]

123. What version of "begs the question" do you mean?

The correct one, or the one that everyone seems to think it means?

[Lefergus70]

198. Excellent Idea

Yes, a special page for conspiracy theories. That way, they wouldn't be distracting from the half-ton of documented evidence that we are struggling to keep in the public eye: fixing intelligence to fit a war plan; lying about WMD and the Iraqi threat; outing a CIA agent in revenge for his telling the truth; morphing Saddam with Al Qaeda; buying journalists... and on and on.

[Bark Bark Bark]

22. Let The Razor Fall

(1) Five years before "election," indeed, five years before "Bush picked them" to be on "his" cabinet, Cheney, Rumsfeld, Perle, Wolfowitz, etc., signed PNAC.
(2) PNAC calls for "the spreading of American values" through incessant warfare. PNAC's number one target is Iraq.
(3) PNAC notes that a "Pearl Harbor-type event" may be "required" to rally the American people behind this war.
(4) A few months after "election," the PNAC Administration is delivered exactly what it requires, from the Taliban, whom Cheney has been in negotiations with by phone for the past few days, presumably over an oil pipeline.
(5) After a brief, incomplete campaign against the Taliban, the PNAC Administration abandons that war to pursue their number one target. Osama bin Laden and the Taliban--who attacked American soil--are forgotten. The Taliban controls much of Afghanistan today, and OBL runs free--basically rewarded for their efforts.
(6) Back on plan, the PNAC Administration bombs Iraq on the basis of 100% horseshit.
(7) Homeland security measures, laughable in their ineffectiveness, are casually used for media manipulation and campaign purposes--as if the PNAC Administration understands there IS NO REAL THREAT. When, during debates, Kerry talked about the gaping, very-real vulnerability in US port security, Bush smirked and asked how Kerry "intends to pay for it."
(8) While reassuring us that we're going to leave--soon--the PNAC Administration has built permanent bases in Iraq, from which they intend to launch the next step in their campaign.

That's not a conspiracy theory--that's the obvious explanation.

I've watched Bush giggle when asked about our casualties in Iraq. And if someone doesn't think Cheney and Company wouldn't gladly sacrifice thousands of American lives to have their way, that person hasn't been paying attention.

[AntiCoup2K4]

150. A good summation, with one exception

The Taliban had nothing to do with 9-11. Granted, the Taliban are repressive extremist assholes, and could be conceivably described as "terrorists" within the context of local operations within Afghanistan. But the words "Taliban" and "Al Qaeda" are not interchangeable.

The Taliban actually had signed a deal with UNOCAL, BP, and other energy companies in Texas in 1997. The energy companies wanted a pipeline to carry oil and natural gas from the Caspian Sea to Pakistan for export. In 2001, 4 years after the deal the pipeline still had not been constructed, and UNOCAL had publically disavowed the project, while another soon to be infamous Texas energy company (Enron) had stepped in.

After giving the Taliban another $43 million in May of 2001, the Bush Fraudministration told them "Either you accept the carpet of gold we have given you, or we'll bury you under a carpet of bombs".

The plans to bomb and invade Afghanistan were on Bush Jr's desk before he took his month long vacation in August of 2001. Though 9-11 and the cover story of Bin Laden hiding in Afghanistan made a logical excuse for an invasion (and one that even sold to most of the world) the fact is that the Taliban (aside from being assholes) were only guilty of standing in the way of oil company profits, not terrorism.

[wyldwolf]

23. I probably shouldn't even post this reply, but what the hell...

There a A LOT of people on DU who just aren't grounded in reality.

From the "very out there" rantings of the holocaust deniers to the people who accuse others of being on the payroll of the DNC, DLC, RNC, and individual candidates simply because they disagree with a given point of contention.

To be sure, it isn't the conspiracy theory itself that is the problem, it's how such theories are presented.

There is a big difference between "speculations" and "claims," don't you agree?

We can speculate all day long on a conspiracy theory but to actually claim it to be true void of any reputable sources is where the problems begin.

Yes, I know that many things we know to be true today began as conspiracy theories, but the road to the truth wasn't arrived at publically where enemies could pile on ridicule and effectively broad brush the entire left based on the "wacky" theory.

On an internet message forum, especially one with "Democratic" in it's name, it is very easy (as it happens often) for the Right to cherry pick posts here and present them as representative of the Democratic Party mindset. The politically naive and the fencesitters can, in my opinion, be swayed away from us based on this practice.

There is no doubt in my mind that the following passage was added to DU's Rules page to distance DU, the DNC, candidates, and Democrats in general from some of the general wackiness put fourth on DU:

Democratic Underground is a completely independent organization. Democratic Underground is not affiliated with the Democratic Party in any way, and comments posted here are not representative of the Democratic Party or its candidates.

So I'll call for it again: Post all the conspiracy theories ya want. But if you present them as factual, I think one should be prepared to prove it or have the post removed.

[opihimoimoi]

27. Ya got it right. sending beer and ribs

[Pepperbelly]

28. ok, then ...

since this started over CTs regarding London, you apparently accept the official version of the incidents. What exactly is the evidence that proves that cluster of notions true?

What is the evidence that proves 9/11 occurred just as painted by Bushie and his pirates?

Take your time and marshall the facts carefully. Outline it for us. A link or two would be cool as well.

[wyldwolf]

30. see, Pepperbelly, you entire reply is predicated on an assumption

since this started over CTs regarding London, you apparently accept the official version of the incidents.

Two different points here. This CULMINATED over CTs regarding London. It was apparently the final straw for some. Whether I accept the official version or not is irrelevant to this discussion.

My post was about holding those who profess CTs to some standard of proof, not to debate the worthiness of individual conspiracy theories.

I consider that changing the subject which I'm not going to do.

Perhaps someone else will engage you in yet another round or two of LIHOP, MIHOP, etc.

[Pepperbelly]

36. Did you dodge that because you ...

cannot meet the challenge?

I have had your back on many things but not on this. That is because I believe that you are dead wrong. Your position would culminate in such narrowing of the fields of discussion that dots could not be connected, data could not be accumulated in a cooperative fashion as we are so good at doing here, and the place would be far poorer as a result.

Frankly, I have seen far more detailed evidence on MIHOP than on the official story. I have seen better and more detailed evidence regarding controlled detonations than I have of burning jet fuel bringing down a building.

LIHOP is beyond question. Whether it was incompetence, stupidity or malice, the end result was the same.

[wyldwolf]

39. the only dodge was from you

You dodged my entire post, set up a false assumption, then tried to veer the discussion in another direction.

If you think I'm wrong, fine. The reasons you gave were sound. But don't try to take the discussion in another direction.

I gave MIHOP as an example. It could just as well have been the Holocaust deniers.

[Pepperbelly]

40. not at all ...

if you do not think those theories are plausible, what is it that you do thinhk is plausible?

[wyldwolf]

43. most definitely

...because my post wasn't on the plausibility of the theories but rather in holding people to some standard of proof.

As for LIHOP, I was one of the first on the net with a website that explored it. In that theory, we had the mainstream media reporting the Ashcroft was warned to stay off planes, that the bin Laden family was flown out, and that John O'Neill warned us all.

And, no, I don't feel the Holocaust denial theories are plausible.

[Pepperbelly]

45. what standard of proof might that be?

If you advocate holding one theory to a standard, then you should hold all theories to the same standard. And that is the point because the accepted versions of 9/11, election 2K, election 2004, Iraq, etc. do not meet a very high standard of proof at all.

[wyldwolf]

48. again, I must say

You're zeroing in on one of the theories I gave as examples and dodging the entire point.

As I said above, mainstream media reported on events in the LIHOP theory.

But they didn't on Holocaust deniers.

Now, do Holocaust deniers have the same sway?

Should we not hold them to some standard of truth?

[Pepperbelly]

49. no ...

you brought up standards of proof. What exactly are those standards and do they apply to all theories?

And why are you bringing up WWII? I never addressed it or brought it up. This isn't about the concentration camps.

What standards of proof should apply and should they apply equally across the board?

[wyldwolf]

53. but I did

...the second line of my first post in this thread. I addressed it. And you replied to it.

You're right. This isn't about the concentration camps. It isn't about MIHOP, LIHOP, and the London Bombings. It isn't about election 2000, or voting machines, Tsunami weapons, Skull and Bones, Wesley Clark manbreasts, or if someone is on the payroll of someone else.

It's about a standard of proof. Of truth. And as I've said several times (and you seem to ignore), the only standard of proof is if it is being legitimately investigated and reported.

If I say, "Bush planned for 911" I'd better have some proof.

[Pepperbelly]

57. ok ...

but if you say, "Osama did 9/11", do you not have to meet the same standard?

That is my point. And your standard, if I read it correctly, is no standard at all. You wrote: "And as I've said several times (and you seem to ignore), the only standard of proof is if it is being legitimately investigated and reported."

Is that really the standard you want to rely upon?

[wyldwolf]

69. no, the point you want to argue is LIHOP or MIHOP

Not standard of proof.

But, yeah, I want to rely on legitimately reported instances, not internet speculation.

Now, we've settled that.

[Pepperbelly]

74. I put it to you very succinctly and still you won't define it.

How can we know what posts might piss you off if we do not know your definition of what this standard of proof might be. And none of us want to anger you.

So ... without regard to any particular event, what constitutes your standard of proof and does it apply to equally to all theories?

[wyldwolf]

77. it should be of no concern to anyone what "pisses me off."

since I have not called for the purging or banning of anyone or any topic.

put it to you very succinctly and still you won't define it. So ... without regard to any particular event, what constitutes your standard of proof and does it apply to equally to all theories?

Apparently I'm just not giving you the answer you want. So I'll review the instances where I have defined it:

Post 45: mainstream media reported on events in the LIHOP theory

Post 53: the only standard of proof is if it is being legitimately investigated and reported.

Post 69: I want to rely on legitimately reported instances, not internet speculation.

of course, since I gave no indication otherwise, it applies equally to all theories.

[Pepperbelly]

79. so that's it?

So if no one in the media or government is investigating it, it should not be discussed here?

[wyldwolf]

80. have I said it shouldn't be discussed here?

I mean, gosh, I JUST said "I have not called for the purging or banning of anyone or any topic."

... and I haven't once called for "government" as a legitimate source.

[Pepperbelly]

85. isin't that what ...

this means:

"So I'll call for it again: Post all the conspiracy theories ya want. But if you present them as factual, I think one should be prepared to prove it or have the post removed."

Or have the post removed.

So, at what point do they pull posts? What standard is used?

IOW, with your standard that if it isn't from a media outlet or government agency of some sort, it isnt plausible ... if a notion was not being covered or investigated in that way, the posts should be removed?

[wyldwolf]

89. actually, no

"So I'll call for it again: Post all the conspiracy theories ya want. But if you present them as factual, I think one should be prepared to prove it or have the post removed."

This means exactly what it says. If you present something as factual that isn't, be prepared to to prove it or lose the post.

So, at what point do they pull posts? What standard is used?

IOW, with your standard that if it isn't from a media outlet or government agency of some sort, it isnt plausible ... if a notion was not being covered or investigated in that way, the posts should be removed?

let's get one thing clear for all reading this: I've not said "government agency." You've twice tried to attribute that to me but those are your words.

Also, we're not discussing plausibility. I've continuously said that my beliefs on this are aimed at those who put forth the theories as factual.

Pepperbelly, you're grasping for replies now. Using different words to ask me the same question that I've already answered won't garner you a different response.

As I've continuously said, if no legitimate investigative reporting on the topic has yielded the conclusions being put forth as factual, then the poster should be given the opportunity to either say he/she made it up or to put facts on the table to back it up. Void of facts, I believe it should be removed.

[Pepperbelly]

92. then answer this one question ...

Why do you hate America?

:D

[starroute]

106. You remind me of Copernicus and the Catholic Church

When Copernicus's theory was published, he had to claim that he wasn't really contradicting the notion that the sun went around the earth -- he was simply presenting a novel method for making the calculations of planetary movements simpler. If he'd tried to assert that his heliocentric system was factually true, he would have been in big trouble for heresy.

You seem very much like the Catholic Church of 500 years ago. We can say anything we like as long as we don't claim it's true. If we did, of course, we'd be heretics.

Or let me put things another way. I think we can all agree the London bombings were a conspiracy, right? I mean, you can't readily have a bunch of bombs going off simultaneously in several different locations unless a group of people conspired together to make it happen. So the only question is who the conspirators were.

Now you don't want to be too quick to jump to conclusions on that. You want to consider the usual criteria -- things like means, motive, and opportunity. You want to wait for solid evidence and not be carried away by an implausibly phrased announcement by an unknown group on a dubious website. And if you've watched enough old detective movies, you probably have an idealistic belief that you should follow the truth wherever it leads, no matter now unpalatable.

So who here is following those standards and who isn't? Who is jumping to conspiracy theories on the basis of no evidence? Who is on the side of truth and who is on the side of convenience?

And who would you have sided with in 1500 -- Copernicus or the forces of the Inquisition?

[wyldwolf]

131. the one flaw in your analogy

You seem very much like the Catholic Church of 500 years ago. We can say anything we like as long as we don't claim it's true. If we did, of course, we'd be heretics.

Copernicus wasn't just sitting around going, "ya know, I think maybe the earth moves around the sun. Don't know why! It just seems that way when I look up." No, Copernicus had some data the church wouldn't listen to.

See, in my belief, we need that data to better access if the CT has any merit. If someone is saying "A did B because I said so," or "because it seems like what they would do," well, those (IMHO)aren't good enough reasons to present something as factual.

So, in 1550, I would have sided with Copernicus. I would have listened to his research.

However, I can easily turn the analogy around. In early times, probably in 1550 as well, people though diseases were caused by evil spirits. No data to prove. No facts to suggest it. They just believed it because "it fit," and "how else would someone explain it?"

Some of the CTs are like that.

[starroute]

136. Copernicus had no data the Church didn't also have

Everybody was using the same numbers. The only difference was in interpretation. The Church had a geocentric system with epicycles and epicycles-within-epicycles to make the math work out. Copernicus had a heliocentric system (which still needed a few epicycles, because he was working in terms of circular orbits instead of ellipses), and it was a whole lot simpler.

It wasn't until Tycho Brahe's improved observations in the late 1500's, and the appearance of two supernovas around the same time, and Galileo's discovery of the moons of Jupiter that the debate started to turn on hard data.

Until then, the only real difference was a philosophic one. Copernicus had picked up a line of Renaissance mysticism -- illuminism, if you will -- that said the center of the universe must be the divine light of the Sun. The Church still believed that the center of the universe was the Earth -- low, fallen, corrupt, and sinful -- with Satan's asshole at the very center, just as it is in Dante.

So the parallel is quite exact.

[wyldwolf]

159. Sure he did

He developed the heliocentric (Sun-centered) theory of the solar system in a form detailed enough to make it scientifically useful.

Before that, it was just theory with scant little to back it up.

In fact, his findings actually disproved the geocentric theory (that placed Earth at the center of the Universe).

See, he wasn't a raving theorist. He had scientific evidence to back his claims.

So the parallel is not quite exact.

[femrap]

175. Wesley Clark?

After reading some of your posts, I am wondering if I should NOT like Wesley Clark?

Why do you support him? And just how do you go about proving that he is the best person to be our Prez?

[wyldwolf]

210. your choice on Clark

Can't imagine the posts you are referring to.

but please don't change the topic of the thread.

From the DU forum rules: Stay on topic. Do not jump into an unrelated discussion and introduce a barely-relevant tangent.

[starroute]

176. I don't think you understand the difference between data and theory

Everybody in the early 1500's was using the same tables of planetary movements. There was no difference in data. And Copernicus wasn't an observational astronomer. He didn't bring anything new to the discussion in that area.

The only difference between his system and the Ptolemaic system was in the interpretation of the data -- the mathematic framework that was applied to make sense of it.

Copernicus didn't "find" anything, and he didn't disprove the geocentric model. As I said above, because he still used circular orbits, his model wasn't even all that superior -- it just needed a few less epicycles.

A hundred years after Copernicus, there was still no hard evidence to support the heliocentric model, and Galileo could still get in trouble for endorsing it. Galileo's discovery of the moons of Jupiter helped undermine the philosophical assumption that everything orbited the Earth -- but it didn't constitute positive evidence that the planets all orbited the Sun.

Even though the Copernican system came to be generally accepted in the course of the 17th century, it wasn't until Newton's Law of Gravitation in the 1680's condensed the entire theory to one absurdly simple mathematical formulation that the new model came to seem ironclad.

It isn't always easy to tell when one theory is superior to another. One key might be that it accounts for more of the available data. Another might be that it's simpler and requires fewer arbitrary assumptions -- or fewer unlikely coincidences. A third (although less reliable) is that it follows the same philosophical assumptions as other theories which we have come to trust.

But demanding that someone who comes up with a new theory to explain existing data also produce additional data of their own to prove their theory beyond doubt just isn't reasonable. Things don't work that way in science, and they certainly don't work that way in politics.

[wyldwolf]

209. of course I do

Perhaps you don't understand the difference between what passes on DU as "conspiracy theory" and REAL theory?

See, the conspiracy theories here (which this thread is all about) are little more than people presenting their "feelings" on something based on their imagination and maybe what they've heard someone else say. No evidence. No facts on the tabble.

We can spar back and fourth all day long on history and Copernicus but that fact remains he had observable data and facts on the table to back his claims.

Conspiracy theorists like MIHOP and Holocaust Deniers and Tsunami weopons and Wes Clark manbreasts and Skull and Bones world domination do not.

[stickdog]

197. Some see elite elipses revolving around power, money and resources.

Other prefer to see cave dwelling Islamic epicircles wildly circumspiring against our freedoms.

Both are currently "raving theorists" as far as the British bombings are concerned.

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

170. The Standard of Truth.

...the only standard of proof is if it is being legitimately investigated and reported.

By whom?

[Old and In the Way]

56. I'm a HOPper and I believe the Holocaust occured.

Why do you and others make the 2 events associated? If you don't believe in LIHOP/MIHOP does that make you anti-arab?

[wyldwolf]

70. Have I associated the two events? No.

I just gave them as examples of conspiracy theories.

[TankLV]

60. FIrst you're dodging, now you're changing the subject.

[wyldwolf]

71. how so?

Based on the OP, then my reply to the OP, then Pepperbelly's replies to me... how so?

[TankLV]

59. You're dodging his simple request.

[wyldwolf]

72. his request is irrelevant

This thread isn't about the legitimacy or non-legitimacy of specific conspiracy theories but rather whether they should be tolerated. If you'd read the OP, you'd know that.

[Frederik]

35. Is there an "official version" yet?

From what I've read, the police are still investigating all sorts of leads, including white mercenaries.

[Pepperbelly]

38. give msnbc a few minutes and ...

see what emerges.

[Frederik]

41. Yes, there's certainly a very strong assumption

in the media that this was "al-Qaida", which is baseless so far.

[TheGoodCitizen]

100. What evidence does the media or the 9/11 commission have...

...that proves Bin was behind 9/11? They still have not proved that one to me yet, it's a conspiracy theory!

If anyone talks about it their post should be removed! :sarcasm:

[stickdog]

200. So far all official versions lead to Muslim terra'ists.

Wihout a shread of evidence. Whatta surprise!

[welshTerrier2]

47. just great, Pepperbelly ...

you've really highlighted the essential flaw in the anti-CT argument ...

shouldn't all discourse and opinion be worth considering? should we concern ourselves that certain "way out there opinions, theories, or facts" might cast a negative light on DU, the Democratic Party, or other causes many of us believe in???

to demand a detailed accounting from, say, 9/11 CT'ers seems like a perfectly reasonable request ... put up or shut up ... but shouldn't the exact same accountability be demanded of those with more "traditional" views? who gave those going along with "the company line" a free pass?

personally, i address all issues of "things we all know" with a very strong skepticism ... i believe that those with media access have an agenda that is not always public knowledge ... i believe that even the MSM rarely are able to present more information than the information they are "allowed to see" ... governments, and those able to buy them, own the presses and the TV stations and the radio stations ... when the vehicles of public communication are not truly of and by the people, why would anyone believe they are for the people??

it's unfortunate that we label so many of those who "think outside the box" as fringe groups ... it's unfortunate that so many of us are too closed to hear fresh ideas and ideas that are not broadcast to us through the vehicles of propaganda ...

the research of the CT'ers, like any other research, should be subject to question and rigorous evaluation and analysis ... but to dismiss it out of hand makes us nothing more than hypnotized consumers of the master's voice ...

[Old and In the Way]

52. It's just as likely that people gravitate here because we are open

and willing to discuss non Bush administration-approved topics. I've heard a few people say that we've lost posters because of the 9/11 forum. Maybe. We've also probably gained a few to offset the losses too. When I started posting here, there were less than 20,000 registered members...that's grown to 70,000 in 3 years. It's not just the Lounge and LBN that's driven those numbers. It's also because that want to know more about BBV (another conspiracy?) and 9/11 and the ME. Because where else can people get educated on these issues?

DU has astrology and religious forums, I have no interest in them. I don't see those grounded in any science. But I don't go insulting people who post there as "nutballs" or "wackos". Frankly, there are many forums that are subjective and unscientific and based on particular poster preferences...so why pick on those who are interested in learning more about 9/11? Should we purge all of those other forums as well? Couldn't they also put Democrats in a bad light?

Seems to me we are allowing Republicans to define us when we react to their talking points. Are we afraid to say we don't believe their version of what happened on 9/11? I hope that's not the case.

[frictionlessO]

68. Thank you for the reasonable reply.

You really didn't answer my questions jumbled as they are however that might be more my fault.

There are a few problems I do have here... I made it expressly clear about London, Tsunamis and theories along those lines and I've come down hard on the Iraq War death toll theories. I understand the need to remove such posts and it is also not up to me, I happen to believe that DU works pretty damn good for the freedom of expression it allows.

It is however in the very nature of the beast that we will get disruptor's and people steadfastly adamant about such theories. I wish the disruptors tombstones, and the believers to stay and maybe just not post such inflammatory material that obviously will be used to damage DUs reputation at the peak of an "incident", or used to illustrate our more kooky and postulating side on a slow news day.

We as a community have many many triumphs that we can point to that sort of put the more inane theories to rest especially when accompanied by the other posts in a thread that had a negatively featured post. In fact if you can show me any large set of forums like this one on any site that has this many people of various backgrounds and with the kind of intensity we have here that doesn't have any kooky theories put forth, Ill be darn sure to tell ya that that site is censored beyond anybody but a small group of individuals opinions being echoed.

You say you know that some theories lead to truth... but do you really expect every DU'er to copy over everything they know that proves (albeit to themselves) something like LIHOP re 9/11 every time they want to say LIHOP in a post or only every time certain DU'ers make them present their "facts" over and over like passports?

I agree with you 100% about speculation versus claims ,without a doubt. I also think that DU'ers should be able speculate without getting hassled to the point of being called freepers and holocaust deniers and idiots and stupid and all the other bullshit that has been hurled across the bow. I believe they should be able to do that because I believe the system here at DU is not broken and is in fact very vital and getting more and more vital all the time. Have a problem with what a post says then alert on it. Have a problem with a certain thread that the mods wont seem to delete because you want them to, then hide it.

Otherwise everyone is free to debate the merits and the cons of any theory they like, unless it has been made clear by Admin or Mods not to discuss. the rightwing is always going to cherrypick our posts much the same way DU cherry picks theirs. Its a part of the internet wars as sure as online polls and LTTEs. They can't broad brush the left if you don't let them. Why not instead of agreeing that all us CT'ers on the left are just as bad as their psychos on the right and just as detrimental to the cause stick up for us and say that we have been traumatized to the point where we just don't believe anything these people who some of you in the middle still trust say anymore. Thats is the truth, not us being out to hurt DU not us being out to just be attention getters and flame starters, not freeping double agent holocaust deniers and most assuredly not stupid or idiots. Gullible in our grief at times, maybe... and thats about it.

That is what has been going on here though, is fellow DU'ers libeling broadly other DUers, just because a few CT'ers haven't caught on that TBRNews sucks ass and is an anti-semite site set up just to catch a sympathetic ear from liberals and hopefully a convert (yeesh that makes me sick just saying it). To label us all as such so broadly is without defense especially in regard to believing 9/11 was LIHOP. Since that seems to be the baseline and all. Funny enough though I had to figure that out on my own. Since none of the purgers seem to be able to define what they mean when they act like they want to purge the CT'ers here at DU.

I agree with your last line wholeheartedly but also the same holds true for those trying to debunk, expressly when they go into attack mode without caveat and with regards to only provoking confrontation.

So do you think all CT'ers should be purged?

...and finally when you say "A LOT" od DU'ers are not grounded in reality it almost seems to imply that you mean most... did you? How many is a lot? How many holocaust denier threads are there open right now on DU? Why do you keep on insisting upon using this as talking point when you have to have the common sense to realize that if there are holocaust deniers in the CT's ranks they are vastly outnumbered but good trustworthy activist DU'ers? Why even bother to associate that label with us... and why "A LOT" do you have fact some where to back up that claim. See because I'm jewish though I do not practice and keep kosher mostly because I'm sort of a JuBu taoist pagan thing nowadays, I do not take kindly at all to being called a holocaust denier or even associated with them by inference just because I believe in LIHOP.

Does that make sense, can you feel where I am coming from because I think I most certainly made clear that I know and empathize from where you are coming from.

[BamaBecky]

162. Don't Leave

Try to picture this entire DU community as a vast group, with different levels of intellect. All levels of intellect, I should say. I have seen some very wise posters....very wise....and obviously brilliant. Then there are the common folks from around the country like me....who are just trying to figure out what's going on.

Look at this whole thing as an exposure problem. Some of us have been exposed to countless 911 DVDs, radio interviews, over 100 911 truth movement web sites and several books. I was LIHOP initially, but became a MIHOP after watching the video's of the explosions in slow motion and WTC 7 coming down. Then discovering that the Bush's were in charge of security....just sealed it for me. I read all the PNAC information. I feel qualified to discuss this because I have devoted countless hours of study to it. Now I give away DVD video's to others so that they can see. Obviously I have spent a lot of money on many DVD,s and books.

I wish every DU person would invest in the truth. Study, Study, Study the facts. Opinions are like assholes...everybody has one. Ultimately the bombing episodes will fall down on the facts.
Bama

:toast: to your good posts!

[Debs]

78. You make a good point

AND, I think those who post CTs ought to be able to bring some good arguments and FACTS to the table. On the other hand PROOF might be to high a threshold to ask for. I mean can we PROVE that Kennedy was killed by someone other than Lee Harvey Oswald? Yet how many people here believe that to be true.

Another good point is that the right not only can cherry pick posts, they do and relish doing so, we have seen that. Should we allow that to dampen a vigorous debate and spit balling to bring fresh ideas to the table, do we want to in any way squelch the sort of boisterous give and take that can really stimulate creative expressions even when some of us think they are a bit out there. This seems to me another of those questions that doesn't have a hard and fast rule to be the best guide, rather a walking the razors edge, case by case judgment. I for one wouldn't be offended if one of my CT posts (though I don't often make them) were deleted for the reasons stated.

[iconoclastic cat]

29. While I agree that Kos can do whatever he wants as far as purges go,

I don't think that DUers should try to run out anyone whose theory seems unlikely. Besides, many people here donate money and time to this site, and for someone to try to kick them out for believe in MIHOP or LIHOP+Incompetence or whatever is just plain ignorant.

[Old and In the Way]

33. Pretty odd isn't it?

You have to go looking for the 9/11 forum. It doesn't get greatest post status, yet for some their sensibilities require the vapors whenever that forum is even mentioned. But it is not enough that they avoid it...they demand that everyone do so. Because if you wish to discuss it, you're a "nutball" or "kooky conspiracy theorist" or "moonbat". The same terms that I've heard Rush and Sean use to describe those that search for the truth about 9/11. Hmmmm.

I've always been proud that DU has allowed people to post information and viewpoints concerning what happened on 9/11/01. This is the most important event of my lifetime. Does that mean every thread has the same value? No. Most of us are educated adults here. We can weigh the theory and evidence and determine whether it makes sense, needs refinement, or should be disgarded. There is no "one size fits all" for what happened on 9/11. Why? Because we have not had an objective, independent investigation into all issues relating to that day. The fact that this administration stonewalled, slow walked, underfunded, then stacked the deck on the chairpersons is far more telling than the half baked story that was eventually published.

So why do some want to shut it down? Perhaps they are ones that have ulterior motives. I'm sure this administration would like this to "go away".

[Jose Diablo]

111. Exactly so

You wrote:

"The fact that this administration stonewalled, slow walked, underfunded, then stacked the deck on the chairpersons is far more telling than the half baked story that was eventually published."

I don't know if this has been brought-up, but in the art form known as 'disinformation', part of that art is sowing false information that has a kernel of truth, that can be thoroughly discredited when the rest of the explanation of an event is discredited.

Some of those 'kooky' conspiracy theories are plants, IMO. For the purpose of covering a known fact that cannot be explained away. I think stories of UFO abductions and stuff like that were plants to cover stories of of eyewitness accounts secret aircraft tests, like stealth bombers for example, and when the off the wall abduction stories came out, the eye witness accounts of strange aircrafts flying was also discounted by the general public.

Now as you say, when the government makes everything top secret, well I have to say what are you hiding? Is is really to protect the state, or is it to protect those in power acting on supposedly behalf of the government. I would say with Bu$h, much of the stuff he denies to make public is because he and his administration are screwing the American people. What else can I believe when they, "The fact that this administration stonewalled, slow walked, underfunded, then stacked the deck on the chairpersons is far more telling than the half baked story that was eventually published.", as you say.

[Junkdrawer]

42. Here's the deal..

The one thing this administration cannot survive is for the General Public to allow as possible election rigging, false flag attacks, etc. Luckily, as we've seen with 9/11 and the last election, the Public is willing to believe just about anything OTHER than the above so that their fundamental world-view remains intact.

In addition, if there ever were cracks in the facade, the disinformation experts will flood this or any other site with a HUGE influx of the most ridiculous conspiracy theories possible. Frankly, I don't see how a site that would discuss "reasonable" theories would be possible.

The fact is that some time between 9/11 and now, the disinfo guys have become EXTREMELY skilled at stopping online discussion of anything deemed a 'conspiracy theory'.

Here's saluting you guys - you're good. Hope you enjoy the Brave New World you're building. :toast:

[stickdog]

203. They are REALLY good, but there's a funny thing about the truth.

It has a way of getting out.

If 9/11 questioning ever were to go mainstream (even with all the ready limited hangouts), we'd have the equivalent of a political nuclear explosion. Reaching critical mass won't be easy, but it's not completely impossible.

[stickdog]

205. They are REALLY good, but there's a funny thing about the truth.

It has a way of getting out.

If 9/11 questioning ever were to go mainstream (even with all the ready limited hangouts), we'd have the equivalent of a political nuclear explosion. Reaching critical mass won't be easy, but it's not completely impossible.

[peacetalksforall]

44. The right wing has unending think tanks funded by people who want

to rule. That is not a conspiracy theory.

DU is like a think tank. Throwing things out there is like brain storming. The value of collective ideas, knowledge, insight, intuition, and other talents help people think and link.

There is nothing wrong with thinking out loud and presenting possibilities, even gut feelings.

There is something wrong in cutting people off and and declaring that people are wrong. That's where the problem lies on DU. "Since you aren't a meat and potatoes like me, I can't talk to a noodles and vegetable person like you." Both types can thrive. Those who cut people off are the spoilers in a brain storming session. To cut them off by deriding them and setting themselves up as ultra-wise is wrong.

But, what is really a waste of time is when someone speculates in a trite and gossipy way by guessing what is in someone else's head without presenting a case for it or not prefacing that the statement is a joke or a serious gut feeling.

Speculation about personal things in people's head is what the 90's was all about when the right wing media battalions descended on us through the tv screen and mouthed the trite stuff about Clinton must be thinking. We're not on the screen by face, but we are by words.

Speculating about what is going wrong with our country and exploring possible motivations and reciting strange happenings should never be outlawed.

Consider those who deride as spoilers and ignore them.

[Pepperbelly]

46. well put ...

:toast:

[snot]

50. I think speech should be as free here as in a public forum under . . .

the U.S. Constitution. I.e., subject to reasonable restrictions, e.g., you shouldn't be allowed to knowingly lie in ways you know will harm others.

This is really very important. I understand the fear that DU'ers might be broadly written off as wacko. But I think we NEED this "freemarketplace of ideas". E.g., personally, I'm somewhat agnostic or skeptical re- LIHOP & MIHOP, but I'm GLAD someone is looking at that evidence and asking those questions.

The "wisdom of crowds" doesn't work as well if you muzzle half the people.

If people here want to discuss alien probes, it's ok with me; I just ask that, as a courtesy, they do it in an appropriate forum.

[wyldwolf]

84. I have a deep respect for the first amendment as well, but...

..this isn't a public forum. First Amendment doesn't apply.

[snot]

99. I realize that and agree there should be some limits; but

I believe that a First-Amendment-type approach affords many benefits that are valuable here just as they are in a public forum; so I think we should err on the side of allowing as much freedom as possible.

[earth mom]

125. But it isn't YOUR decision to make is it?

I question WHY you don't want people here on DU discussing everything and anything openly...why must we be in lockstep? That is what * & Co and the freepers want and demand of each other-DU should be the exact opposite and welcome all thoughts and ideas.

Sounds like KOS is more your cup of tea to be honest.

[wyldwolf]

132. have I said it was?

question WHY you don't want people here on DU discussing everything and anything openly

This again? OK, like I asked someone else, SHOW ME where I've said that.

And with that, the rest of your reply becomes meaningless.

[fujiyama]

51. It's one thing

to believe that Blair and Bush (or the governments) had enough intelligence to stop the bombings but didn't. That can be attributed to several reasons - incompetance being among the possible causes.

It's quite another to believe that the governments actually set up the bombs themselves. That's where things get nutty. Either way, these accusations require a lot of evidence. Just postulating, "Oh how convenient, who benefits" is not evidence.

[Pepperbelly]

62. ok ...

but then there is the testimony of the building 4 custodian who was in the sub-sub basement when the crashes occurred and when he went topside, he found the sub-basement above him in shambles with a 50 ton piece of gear gone. This was far before the buildings collapsed.

That sort of info fragment is what makes people wonder what exactly happened and I cannot, for the life of me, figure out why anyone here would want to suppress the discussion or investigation of these issues.

[TheGoodCitizen]

102. I could give you a few reasons why someone would want to...

suppress that type of discussion and investigation, but I'm not going to... I feel you already know!

[Walt Starr]

54. considering all of the evidence, LIHTI is the most logical explanation

The administration Let It Happen Through Incompetence.

[Pepperbelly]

58. What makes ...

that theory superior to others? Specifically, upon what evidence do you rely that supports that notion and causes you to cast aside all others?

[Walt Starr]

61. #1, there is not a shred of evidence to support LIHOP or MIHOP

#2 They were informed that the single greatest threat to American security was bin Laden and Al Queda by the outgoing administration.

#3 They ignored that advice and chose to pursue Star Wars and covering up statues.

#4 Occam's Razor

[Pepperbelly]

65. those are all arguments for incompetence (except 1 & 4)

#1 is merely your assertion. I have read evidence of both of those, MIHOP and LIHOP, more evidence than the assumption of mere incompetence.

Occam's Razor will apply only when the levels of evidence for the propositions are equal.

[Walt Starr]

134. If you have evidence

present it. I've seen nothing but rantings on unreliable web sites and whacko inferences made from the facts that do exist, which is typical of all conspiracy theories.

All things being equal, the simplest explanation is usually correct. The simplest explanation is the Bush administration was simply too incompetent to stop the attacks of 9/11. Adding layers of conspiracies on top of that complicates things.

[EVDebs]

75. Unless you read the evidence submitted in

www.madcowprod.com and www.fromthewilderness.com and David Ray Griffin's work and Mike Ruppert's work...

Also, what got left out of the 9-11 Commission Report (the wargames, the 'standdown' of NORAD) issues, and the ongoing gagging of Sibel Edmonds (www.justacitizen.com) and fellow whistleblower Indira Singh ...

[hiley]

87. EVDebs

exactly !

[Mnemosyne]

90. The buying of "Put Options" the week before 9/11 also. n/t

[peacetalksforall]

93. The thing that got to me were the put options and the Harrisburg and

transponder theory.

The put options were real and for Ashcroft to announce that the investigation was closed with nothing found is one great American travesty that will never be excused.

The theory about the aircraft numbers being swirched and transponder tricks with the Harrisburg hangar timeline in relation to the Flt 93 keeps me a MIHOP for now.

[EVDebs]

94. Oilempire.us has some interesting stuff on wargames too at

http://www.oilempire.us/wargames.html

[TheGoodCitizen]

103. I would suggest taking a peek see at this...

I have found several factual shreds of "evidence" while reading this.

THE NEW PEARL HARBOR

Disturbing Questions about the Bush Administration and 9/11

(FREE online book)
http://vancouver.indymedia.org/news/2004/06/141355.php

[Walt Starr]

133. Sorry, you have presented no evidence

just two unreliable web sites.

Anybody can start a web site and post up any conspiracy theory they choose.

And as far as what's "missing" from the 911 commission report, HOOEY! Present the evidence.

[EVDebs]

151. Yes, where IS the media's presentation of Vigilant Warrior , Walt ?

http://www.911citizenswatch.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=484

Clarke mentioned them...but not the 9-11 Report or MSM. Why, Walt, why ?

Walt's mention that it's the public's responsibility to put forward the evidence is ludicrous on its face. The evidence has been covered up but traces of it, like Clarke's mention of wargames in his book, is conveniently missing from the media's record. Fortunately bloggers like oilempire.us and fromthewilderness.com and others are keeping these inconvenient facts in the webworld's eye.

BTW, the Ptech scandal, an investigation that the FBI appears to be intent on blowing is something we all should be looking at. And watch Indira Singh, the Ptech whistleblower. She, like Rowley and Edmonds, need all the protection we can give them.

Good work Walt Starr ! You're catching up with us.

[Tace]

63. Cheer Up -- Hard-Core 9/11 MIHOP Here -- So Purge Me

[sadiesworld]

64. I tend to lurk quite a bit in the 9/11 forum so this came as no surprise.

But I'm sorry you had to see/learn about the anti-CT tactics during such a difficult time period.

Be well. :hug:

[theearthisround]

73. "Let us never tolerate outrageous conspiracy theories" - George W Bush

Didn't you get the memo?

[TheGoodCitizen]

104. SORRY....

The mainstream media has not proved that "memo" for us yet, only Rush has told us it was "typed up" and is a lie, so your post will be removed immediately!


:nuke:

[Aussie_expat]

76. Google this .............

vapor trail lihop

all at once.

[hiley]

81. frictionlessO

I love Du but I REALLY get pissed when Censured and have been insulted by some not being so kind to me before because as everybody knows I am labeled a Conspiracy NUT.
From Wrinkles with Andy and others.

firmly believe MIHOP on 9/11,
still believe Jeff is Johnny,
should I go on ?

There was a time when I politely believed what society and the media and my little church told me but that was when I was a very young child and had not quite formed my own self yet !!!!
When someone does not agree with me that is fine but there is no reason to try to argue with me about it.
no need in arguing or picking on people...

I will stand up for what I believe and will not back down but refuse to play word games.
Usually at kos the other posters eat you alive if they think you are a nut which is rude and I have seen hateful too, but what kos did was censorship and personally I find it appalling.

Watch Loose Change..

[emcguffie]

139. Just to add some more conspiracies ....

... It's Population Day, or it was yesterday, not sure.

And they are "warning" us about the serious consequences of continued rapid population growth, and we are due to swell from 6.1 billion now to 9.1 billion in 2050.

AIDS, anyone?

I can't help it. Look into Gulf War Illness and the way the VA and the NIH behaved over that. Look at chronic fatigue, which is so much like GWI, and the way they behave over that.

Goodness, we KNOW they've experimented on us with what they thought was "harmless" but which has made people sick. They DID turn all those mosquitoes loose, to see how far that little virus or whatever would spread. They have dumped chemicals over Winnipeg, and seen how many people got the sniffles.

And there is really good evidence that the Mycoplasma fermentans incognitas that seems to be causing over half of Gulf War Illness was bioengineered with 40% of the HIV capcid. In Texas. And tested on prisoners in Huntsville prison. And they took it home to their families, because it is contagious.

And the scientist who figured this out has lost his job and been forced to move his lab twice. Now, this is a high-end, well published
microbiologist, who used to head the MD Anderson Cancer Research Institute, if I have the name right. He's no slouch and no nut.

So, where did that Mycoplasma come from? We could have sold it to Saddam, which is what the gov is saying might have happened -- now that they have finally recognized that that is what is killing so many vets from the first Gulf War -- but it COULD have been in the vaccines that the soldiers were forced to submit to. It could have been accidental that way, or on purpose that way. Either way, lots of people have been made very ill, and the VA refused to let them have the antibiotics that would make them better.

What the hell is that about?

Just think for a minute, how many NEW diseases do we have to deal with all of a sudden? Lyme disease, came from Connecticut, just across the water from Plum Island. Doctors are also getting in trouble for prescribing long-term antibiotics to people with chronic Lyme disease. Legionnaires. Hanta virus. And all those bleeding viruses from Africa -- you know, where they are so worried about rapid population growth.

Nobody had those 50 years ago. Why not?

[hiley]

153. emcguffie

kudos to you.. I really should have posted on your earlier post way above
What if you are wrong about the weather? Do you remember --

excellent work and you are an outstanding human being.

another health problem, fibromyalgia which I have, can't see it on an X-Ray or blood test must not be real huh ?
Thank you for being such a patriot and caring woman.
Your child is blessed to have you for a Mother and I mean this from the bottom of my heart.

Solidarity in truth and peace,
Hiley

[OffWithTheirHeads]

88. well, I might have read your post if you had gotten to the point

But I don't have time to read war and peace from someone who thinks mihop couldn't happen. Happens all the time.

[I Have A Dream]

96. Unless you're being facetious, I think you misunderstood him/her.

This person was being sarcastic. They're saying just the opposite.

[Mnemosyne]

91. Thank you frictionless.

Great post!

MIHOP/LIHOP.

[I Have A Dream]

97. I agree with you, frictionless0.

I think that you should have the right to speak your mind here. If not here, where?

Sorry that things are tough for you right now. :hug:

[Pooka Fey]

98. Checking in with MIHOP. n/t

[Geek_Girl]

105. Today's CT could be tomorrows Truth

The Bush administration lied and fixed the facts around a policy to invade Iraq was a CT and for many Americans it's still just a CT. But most DU er's now can point to the DSM as the smoking gun and proof that the admin lied to the American public.

[Independent_Liberal]

107. I consider myself to be an MIHOPer...

Yep, I believe they made it happen on purpose.

[zann725]

119. Me too.

n/t

[orleans]

108. my impression of so many of us

is that we're just trying to figure out what the truth really is, we discuss topics on this board with humor, intellect, skepticism, and passion.

we put ideas out there--like a good brainstorming session--toss them around, try to piece the puzzle together, try to read between the lines.

i admit i get a bit careful sometimes because i don't want to get into a fight with someone--on some threads that i read i don't respond at all.

but if DU started banning people based on the perception that they might be a CT it would break my heart. i love this place in part because of the diversity of thought and opinion (even when it goes against my own opinion--it still makes me think--even when it goes against my own opinion i don't think the other person doesn't have the right to their opinion).

to question "facts", to question "authority" is a positive characteristic. to accept all "facts" as ultimate truths is brainwashing. i do not feel that brainwashing is something DU would prefer.

we're suppose to be the "big tent" people, the accepting and tolerant ones. we're the folks who celebrate diversity rather than trying to squelch it. at least, that is my perception & opinion.

as for me--i'm not certain where i am on this: LIHOP or MIHOP? but either way i truly believe that things were not what they seem, that things were not the way we were told, and there is so much more than meets the eye at first glance.

and, therefore, i'm still looking for the truth--still trying to piece it together--still trying to wrap my brain around it.

[dajoki]

115. well said

i came here for open discussion and ideas on how to rid ourselves of the tyranny we are now subject to. i am basically not a CTer, but i'm willing to listen to all sides. isn't that the only way to get to the truth? i have not been around here that long (maybe 4 months), and i have been made to feel welcome, so i plan on sticking around. i have already read some arguments that have made me rethink some of my positions, things you will not see hear on MSM or many other places for that matter. bottom line, don't we all basically have the same goal.:hi:

[leesa]

109. I prefer the White House sanctioned conspiracy theories, like 19 Muslim

terrorist doing 9-11 under the leadership of OBL....right. Even though most of the evidence points to US government complicity.

[WePurrsevere]

110. CT or MIHOP or LIHOP - Don't they all boil down to BUSH KNEW...

that 911 was going to happen?

Whether he "let it" "made it" or he was somehow involved in some conspiracy theory it seems to me that it basically boils down to BUSH KNEW and nothing was done to stop it right? That in itself is a crime isn't it? Perhaps it would be more constructive to concentrate on common ground as the "cause"?

[starroute]

112. I've got one simple criterion for judging most CT's

I think we can all agree that after World War II, the CIA got into the business of manipulating other countries' governments and policies. The nominal rationale was to hold back the spread of communism. The effective reason was, more and more, simply to advance American economic and strategic interests.

Much of this manipulation was carried out in a conspiratorial manner and involved activities that would be illegal within the US -- fixing elections, eliminating inconvenient politicians through any means from blackmail to assassination, faking terrorist attacks, overthrowing democratically elected governments.

We all knew about these things even when I was a little kid, but for a long time we believed there was an unbreachable wall between foreign and domestic activities. The Kennedy assassination was the first event that put doubts in our minds, but it wasn't until Sy Hersh exposed the CIA's "family jewels" in the Nixon years that we understood it really could happen here.

Since then, we've seen an increasing number of CIA-style operations within the US -- most of them seemingly carried out not by any official intelligence organization, but by right-wingers and Republican activists picking up on CIA methodology. Political dirty tricks. Stolen elections. Politicians mysteriously dying or retiring or pulling back from expressing strong opinions. Terrorist activities with no clear-cut political motivation.

I have finally, and rather unhappily, concluded that there is nothing the CIA has done in other countries that has not been or could not be applied here as well.

This is really my only criterion for making an initial judgment as to the plausibility of a conspiracy theory: If we were told the CIA had done this in some other country in 1964, would it be instantly believable? It isn't the ultimate criterion of course -- a scientific decision about which theories are worth pursuing has to be followed by experiments and the analysis of data. But it's a handy rule of thumb to use as a starting point.

And by that rule of thumb, the London bombings seem to be entirely in the stolen election/anthrax letters category and nothing at all like tsunami-bombs or chemtrails. Can anyone tell me why I should think differently?

[leesa]

113. They were playing terror games in London just like the government did

on 9-11. A mock terrorist strike on the transit lines. On 9-11 Cheney was running a mock terrorists strike including planes flying into buildings. What gall, huh?

http://www.terrorize.dk/misc/london/london.terror.games.wmv

[lala_rawraw]

118. Look, once and for all

Let me clear this up for everyone... There is no "let it happen" concept, there is only the "made it happen" concept. Consider it this way, Let= passive and Make = active. Passive would imply that you simply watched, listened, smelled, etc. and in no way contributed to the event.

Okay, now let us take an example:

If you simply take the only real passive action, for example, ignoring the warnings, then on its own it would be "let it happen."

However, we know that NOT to be the case. For example, giving directives to the FBI to back off looking into the Bin Laden family (prior to the attacks, specifically in this example) is not "passive". It is an active role, that put together with other small roles lead to one place only, whether this is intentional or not and no matter what you call it (negligence, gross criminal negligence, incompetence, or treason), the only way this could have happened is "made it happen".

Hope that makes sense.

[frictionlessO]

120. So much so that you may have just made me MIHOP.

Far and away the most logical input I've seen in this regards to 9/11.

Yet that is only a portion of what I was ranting about. There was very nearly a public push for a purge here on DU earlier regarding Conspiracy Theorists with a rather wide brush at times and it seems to have calmed down a bit since then.

But yep I definitely got your point and would have to say that you fall well within their purge bubble limited or otherwise.

[lala_rawraw]

121. another term that bothers me

Everything begins with theory/hypothesis in absence of empirical evidence or "enough" empirical evidence. Conspiracy takes at least two people. So, a guy robbing a bank and the guy waiting outside in the car are conspiring.

Now, let's put the two words together: a crime has been committed, we don't know all of the empirical evidence, but we know that several people broke into a building to do something there. We know several of those people to be CIA assets. That strikes us as odd, we begin to formulate different theories to explain this act of conspiracy. So we have a conspiracy theory. In the end, Watergate turned out to be a conspiracy fact, or crime rather... conspiracy to commit the crime and conspiracy after the fact to cover it up.

So, this fear of language needs to stop. We need to call things by their proper names, no matter what the PC and/or cultural mores are.

Some examples: The Department of Defense is a joke, because it is used to cause war, not to defend. It is the department of war. The Secret Serivce is silly, firstly because they are not a secret and secondly because "service" is nebulous. The best way to describe the SS is to call them the Executive's police.

This is why I hate acronyms as well. This MIHOP construct takes away from the actual meaning of what it is that needs to be said, takes away from the actual honesty that needs to be there in saying it, and imposes a fear of language that is manipulative. Made it happen (on purpose or otherwise), period.

[frictionlessO]

122. Ouch! ok, ok, I give... Im guilty of all that and more.

I for the time being agree with you and promise to spell it out... but acronyms are addictive, thats gonna be tough.

Department of Defense is still the mission of some there... but yeah for the most part these days with how the National Guard has become the International Guard, Id have to sort of agree with that as well.

I am PUI at the moment though so please... ermm have mercy?











...squeak...

[hiley]

156. la la thank you for one of the best explanations of LIHOP is

ridiculous and MIHOP is reality ever......
Hiley

[NoSheep]

127. I don't consider myself a ct, just paying attention. Dammit! I'm in your

corner here. Amen! and amen.

[Al-CIAda]

128. Election Fraud, Embezzelment, Global warming, etc are all banned?

This censorship talk is pretty fucked up. Who the hell put a stick up this place's ass? Unreal. The thought/text police are about, beware!

Get over yourself. You aren't that important that you need to be worried about what topic is 'seen' here. Ir you feel your 'reputation' may suffer, perhaps a more sheltered, 'approved for consumption' forum is for you.

[Beam Me Up]

129. None are so blind as those who will not see.

The excuse of ignorance allowed the deaths of over 1700 soldiers and uncounted Iraqi civilians. That is a fact. It is also a fact that much of this mayhem was predicated on the deaths of 3,000 mostly American citizens on 9/11. This is a fact. It is also a fact that for the most part this crime against American citizens and, by extension, humanity, has not been thoroughly and rigorously examined by impartial parties with the full backing of the law.

Why not?

"National Security."

I ask you, how can a society be made safer by not thoroughly examining and investigating the crimes that are perpetrated against it? What security can there possibly be in ignorance of the facts? And yet ignorant is what we are and what we are told we must remain. God forbid any of us should ever question the "official" conspiracy theory, that the most heinous crime ever committed against our nation was the work of a small group of terrorists who "got lucky" and completely circumvented our trillion dollar National Security apparatus.

I say any who do not advocate investigating the many anomalies surrounding the events of 9/11 are themselves party to the crime, even if after the fact. Worse, they lay the groundwork for far more devastating crimes against our nation to come.

[Al-CIAda]

130. 'to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all'

'Most people prefer to believe that their leaders are just and fair, even in the face of evidence to the contrary, because once a citizen acknowledges that the government under which he lives is lying and corrupt, the citizen has to choose what he or she will do about it. To take action in the face of corrupt government entails risks of harm to life and loved ones. To choose to do nothing is to surrender one's self-image of standing for principles. Most people do not have the courage to face that choice. Hence, most propaganda is not designed to fool the critical thinker but only to give moral cowards an excuse not to think at all.'

-Michael Rivero

[Zodiak]

140. Wow....that's concise...thank you for posting that

[Beam Me Up]

144. Great quote. Thanks n/t

[Pooka Fey]

157. This is a great quote. Thanks for posting.

[Enraged_Ape]

135. LIHOP does not require a "conspiracy theory"

All it requires is for the Bush administration to do what they did: Jack Shit.

[leftofthedial]

141. the official explanations are also conspiracy theories

[starroute]

142. Right-wing conspiracy theories are used to discredit all CTs

There's a major difference between right-wing and left-wing conspiracy theories.

The right-wing goes for vast, shadowy organizations, like the Bavarian Illuminati, that have no apparent existence except in the minds of the conspiracy theorists. It claims that these organizations have maintained a consistent agenda over hundreds or even thousands of years to undermine civilization and destroy all that is true and holy. And it suggests that any movement or philosophy which might empower ordinary people -- civil rights, gay rights, evolution -- is part of this diabolical assault.

The left doesn't invent conspiracies out of whole cloth. It doesn't fantasize cosmic wars between good and evil. It merely suggests that rich, powerful people all tend to know each other, have common interests, and are likely to get together behind the scenes to do anything from fixing prices to overthrowing governments. And it believes that most people in positions of power are looking out for the interests of this elite class rather than those of the general public.

I don't think there are many people here at DU who would doubt these general assertions. The only differences among us are over how far it goes. Do leaders like Bush and Blair feel any responsibility at all to the people they govern, or would they willingly kill some of their own citizens to benefit the class to which they owe their primary allegiance? Is there anyone in Congress who is really looking out for our interests, or are they all bought out, intimidated, or marginalized?

These are certainly questions that can be debated -- but there is nothing loony about simply raising them. And the fact that a very occasional left-winger might get sucked into a bit of right-wing nuttiness like Holocaust denial should not be used to discredit the general left-wing posture of maintaining a healthy skepticism toward the motives and methods of the elite.

[Zodiak]

145. Here's the deal

If someone goes around DU calling people "nutjobs" or "conspiracy theorists" simply to deride them, I put them on ignore. You would be surprised at how few people you need to put on ignore before the belittling and derision is removed from a thread.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

148. How many times...

over the years have we had certain folks beg us to "think about how it looks" when something provocative is posted?

How many times over the years have we had certain folks attempt to shut down discussions deemed too hot -- and been successful too many time?

Over the years here too much that was deemed "conspiracy talk" has later turned out to be 100% true.

PNAC was once called "conspiracy talk" here -- now it is standard thought.

In the lead-up to the Iraqi invasion there were the Bush "evidence" investigators here who called "bullshit" while others here said "nonsense", you're talking crazy talk. We all know how that ended.

Terror alerts used as a political weapon against the American people? Nah, you're making w-a-y too much of that. Oops, now that Ridge has all but admitted it, maybe you were right.


I am 100% for free and open discussion on all topics, regardless of where the discussion leads or how it "makes us look".

If we don't ask the questions -- even the most out-there, tinfoil hat variety -- can we ever find our way to the truth?

There are many CT threads here that I have looked at and later dismissed -- but I want to see them and want the chance to evaluate them myself, not have that opportunity subverted by someone's need to feel more comfortable about DU.

If I wanted to be made more comfortable and have my information edited for me I'd fucking watch CNN!.

[Vincardog]

149. Galileo was the first CT. Discussion can never be suppressed

If you don't like it

DON'T READ IT.

I know the 9/11 official story is crap. MIHOP is my best estimate.

Does any one dispute the fact that the evil forces that stole our country would have any qualms about killing civilians? look at IRAQ how many hundred thousand dead civilians is enough?

[il_lilac]

152. The only difference

these days between theories and truth are time. Not sure it will be in our lifetime, but the truth will come out someday.

[Generator]

155. Well I for one, welcome the skeptics

Hell, I live with one..my husband.

What I don't welcome is people that belittle your ideas or call you crazy, scream oh bullshit..without even really listening to what you have to say. What I don't welcome is the fact that some of them aren't really true skeptics..and tend to believe the party line-whatever that party may be-also known as consenual reality-without taking the time to investigate it further.

To say "Isreal is behind everything" is clearly massively anti-semtitic. And plain wrong. To point out they have the best intelligence services in the world and they clearly were warning the US before 9/11 (and maybe Britain this time too) is not.You can't even say the word Israel. It's verbotten. To have threads disappear is fucking creepy. I understand the not-linking to anti-semitic sites and I agree with that wholeheartedly. To point out that a mainstream AP story had it's principals that changed their story is not the same thing.

The London bombings are really too new to speculate..but we did because some stuff is so eerily similiar to 9/11 that we are shocked and don't know what to say but want to discuss it. That simiulation terror drill in London-I don't know if that story is valid. That the Finance manager of Israel changed his story-maybe he misspoke the first time. I don't know. But when threads disappear..well that does seem like a conspiracy. HA! Beacuase the BEST THING is for the skeptics to come and have their true say. Isn't the point the discussion? But when discussion is overruled-that sends other chills up our spines.

[SteppingRazor]

160. You know... all these people trying to silence CTers...it...it MUST BE...

A CONSPIRACY!!!!


:tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat: :tinfoilhat:


Sincerely,
A Skeptic.



And now for a bit of seriousness. Yes, I am a skeptic. I don't believe in anything I can't see or touch. I don't believe some force controls my life. I don't believe that just because I was born at a certain time, massive balls of burning hydrogen gas will somehow affect my life differently than if I was born at another time. I also don't believe in any poltical theory that stands on the same shaky ground as such notions as the aforementioned astrology.
However, I am a huge believer in free speech and, were this my Web site, I'd let anyone espouse whatever theory they decided to, no matter how hare-brained I may think it is -- as long as it's in keeping with the site rules, of course.
But then, this is not my Web site. This is a site privately owned by the DU administrators. If they decide to curb MIHOP speech, it's their right. I won't like it, but there's not much one can do about it.

[emcguffie]

161. so is this thread closed?

I keep reading they're being closed if they talk about conspiracy theories.

Not true? true?

[frictionlessO]

166. I dont know why, but they let this stand. Perhaps its because no one is

really pushing any theory or speculation or claim. We are only pushing to get people to knock off this crap about CT'ers all being unworthy of posting on DU. It seems to have worked as well since many of the original ones on other now locked threads have backtracked a bit.

Im wiser for it now though and if i ever see them try a concerted effort to cross associate my name with linking bad sites I intend on making myself quite well heard about it.

[hiley]

169. well some get deleted pretty fast, some locked,

sometimes locked but moved to a forum, etc.

[wli]

164. the purge that worries me

I'm far more concerned about purges from the government than any in DU.

[lala_rawraw]

167. Solution...

Stop using Conspiracy Theory. Use real language, e.g:

1). Suspected criminal activity
2). Questionable (as reference to official story of 9/11)
3). Factualist
4). Philosophical paradigm
and so forth.

If the word has become this stigmatized, then replace it with something that still explains what you mean but does not come with baggage assigned to it.

So, I am a factualist working with a philosophical paradigm that challenges the questionable conclusions of the official story. I suspect criminal activity, although the particulars are not yet empirically know, I speculate that any reasonable person would want to conclude fact, not agenda. In short, I am a philosopher and a factualist. Anyone who finds that crazy is either disillusioned, insane, on the take, or criminal. Pick a genre, sometimes they are all of them.

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

171. I really agree

Those words have become their words, and they use them to imply if not state outright that anyone who even speculates regarding the apparent discrepancies in the facts is crazy.

So conspiracy theory has become their word, and a lot of us use it to silence ourselves or one another.

The true reality based community doesn't dismiss out of hand considerations just because someone who doesn't want them nosing around in the facts chooses to call them a CT.

Define the debate ourselves, frame it.

Unless we're all too scared to really pursue the truth, which I admit is pretty scary and overwhelming stuff.

At first, I also wondered about the London attacks, but since then I tend to believe there is no reason to doubt their authenticity vs a LIHOP or MIHOP theory.

Now 9/11, that is another story. Too many questions unanswered.

[zulchzulu]

168. Truthseekers reduced to a convenient acronym

Fixed News should grab onto this. It's almost like they made it up all by themselves. What really is a "conspiracy theory" when you can connect the dots and see that your country is being fucked up the ass by these PNAC neocons...and you're just supposed to listen to Peabody Award-winning Bill O' Liely and "shut up".

Stalin would be proud.

Ignore the facts and come up with some acronym. How convenient.

[hiley]

172. Stalin would be proud is right..

x( and that is a crying shame that this country has come to that.

[Hippo_Tron]

173. Either prove LIHOP to me or disprove LIHOP to me...

Otherwise I keep asking questions and don't accept anything.

[pox americana]

177. Have you ever seen a highrise fire?

I have, up close and personal. You hear glass falling in the street. You do not hear explosions. Their foundations do not suddenly disintegrate, and they do not slide into their basements like butter on hot corn.

[Hippo_Tron]

178. Okay I'm no expert in the physiology of buildings

Let's assume there were explosives in the towers. Maybe they were planted by people who worked for Bush. Maybe they were planted by terrorists. I'm a skeptic and in matters like this I accept NOTHING until I have solid proof.

[frictionlessO]

183. and hey good on ya! seriously in this day and age thats not a bad way to

be about information.

However thats not what I running off about.

I want people who think its true to be able to talk on this board and ref whatever theopry they like in general conversation without fear opf getting attacked and having their name maligned or worrying about a purge.

When Kos purged anyone who had a theory on London despite the extraordinary coincidences to some, others decided that this need to be done here at DU as well. They have since backtracked over what their words implied, which is good, but they never should have tried to start the idea of a purge in the first place if they didn't want a fight with us who wear some tinfoil from time to time....

[Moderator]

179. Moderator Comment:

We are discussing how to keep our lively debates available to all who care to participate. We are not discussing "purges" or any other drastic actions, but we do want to be sure the debate is based on reliable sources that are not flagrant hate sites or filled with false assumptions.

Your concerns and comments are important to us which is why we are letting a few threads hash out a "community consensus."

Stay tuned...........

[frictionlessO]

180. Ok, my concern is that you are indeed going to purge us.

Here is why, on several previous threads Ct'ers and anti Cters have thrown many accusations. The anti-CTers arent being asked to censor their debate, they aren't being asked to stifle the slurs and racist holocaust denier attacks.

They launched what looked very much like a coordinated attack against us here at DU because of what cause Kos did.

I personally saw several attacks by longtimers that bordered on the ludicrous. I had them try to link me into being a holoccaust denier for petes sake!!!! You had another who purposefully tried to use Skinners words disingenously to make it seem like Skinner doesnt want any CT on this site... and the list goes on and on.

The CT'ers are the ones being attackled here, not the anti-CTers (and to be clear it was not all anti-CTers just a handful of them and Im sure you all know who I mean). They insinuated repeatedly that all CT'ers ( implied by refusing to put in a caveat to limit their broad brush strokes) were somehow linked to facsist, holocaust denying sites, that they were "stupid" "idiots", that they might in fact be freepers here just to disrupt for the benefit of what is most CTers sworn enemy.

I think the consensus is fairly well spoken by now. Do not purge DU, do not censor DU anymore than you do. At least thats how Im seeing it. About 2-1 in favor of keeping things like they are. The anti-CT'ers can just alert if its is in fact a post that indicates a disruptor or something that will actually harm DU to an effectual degree. Its simple...

DU works, dont try to Fix us.

When an issue arises that you have to play by ear than do it that way, London is a great example of that. Despite the arrogance that some of our posters display on espousing how right they are about something, we collectively just do not and can not know some things.

This leads to speculation. Speculation is not a claim, there is no real prooof or evidence needed for saying such things as long as they are within the already stated DU rules. When postulating a theory one still does not need evidence or proof onbe need only a series of coincidences that begs questioning. When one puts forth a theory stated as fact (according to the poster to be sure) then thats when they need facts, evidence (circumstantial or otherwise), proofs and our sources.

I think thats fairly easy for any reasonable DU'er to agree to.

As far as flagrant hate sites go... yeah fuck 'em. Then again who is going to decide when a source is filled with false assumptions or may have gotten one or two things wrong. Look at how often the MSM is wrong... Look at how often the government has lied to us and how often the MSM has played a part in that. If people are going to quote MSM like Fox and CNN with all their unnamed sources I want them looked at the same way you'll be looking at blogs and online articles, anything else would be less than fair. Don't you think?

Other than that, I want to thank you very very very much for taking the time to post this here. I am also extremely grateful that you chose this thread to let stand. As the ones that had the really nasty stuff that was being said about CT'ers (of almost any stripe!) needed to be shut down, to debate is one thing, to constantly try and tie your fellow DU'ers in with sites of such a horrid nature when they have nothing at all ever to do with them is reprehensible. Good riddance. Thank you for your graciousness in consideration.

Peace.

[NMDemDist2]

186. Please hit the alert key when you see such things, we can't watch

every post on every thread in every forum 24/7

We are only human after all and vastly outnumbered by our fellow DUers.

If you see something that upsets you, let us know.

[frictionlessO]

196. LOL, I know I know! I have been screaming my head off for the

anti-CT'ers to do just the same... but if you want the truth from why I only alerted once, it is because the one that I alerted on was aloud to stand so I figured there was no point in bothering as Im sure that you realize some mods have a serious problem with people like me posting speculatively.

My entire DU world has been rocked by this. I dont know who to trust here at DU at all anymore and while I would've alerted on the 15 or so posts that I found so horrid I still wanted those people in the end to have their say. Honestly though I am not at all sure it would have done any good as this persons posts I am sure were seen by different mods.

We went through this come kind of crap in ER&D people trying to get us to stop whatever we were working on. We got wet blanketed, eeyored and whats worse is we were constantly berated fro being the reason why Dems lose elections and for hurting the cause because we were so "wacky". Funny how some of the most activist oriented people on DU came from or were a large part of ER&D. A large percentage of them could be called CT'ers, if for no other reason than LIHOP (sorry La La!).

So what do you think? Are they right? Are we hurting DU? Should we take our efforts elsewhere? I mean I dont know you at all but right now you're the first Mod to come and say something, so I'll trust you for the moment. Will you tell me how you feel honestly about all this? Can we have a real conversation about it, without splitting hairs and legal terminology? Is that even possible?

[NMDemDist2]

201. if it was allowed to stand it was an oversight. occasionally when we

have servers go down (as they did last week) the emails don't get to us in a timely fashion until the mail server gets rebooted.

also since all action is done by consensus, it can take a while to get agreement. Also you have to take into account there may be no mods online at the immediate time. Just because it stands for minutes and even hours does not mean we ignore them. We don't. We are volunteers who do this out of love of DU and because we believe in DU.

as for CTers... I am firmly in the LIHOP camp and lean MIHOP strongly.

:tinfoilhat:

:hide:

[frictionlessO]

204. Thank you very much....

You just restored my faith, and I hope it doesnt seem like it is easily shaken because I've been cheerleading DU since I got here in the election exodus.

That was really all I wanted to hear that there was at least one Mod who wasn't laughing at me or scorning my views. Its a relief to be able to trust again... really.

you made me :cry:

the last four or five days has just been a killer on my nerves.. oh and I do understand that the Mods have the hardest job at DU and I thank you sincerely from the bottom of my heart for doing it. I hope to some day be able to mod, if they would ever have me after this weekend! lol...


Thanks for your honesty and your dedication to DU. I love this place and dont want to leave and that is why I have been so mouthy lately, hope everyone understands that.

peace and thanks one last time.
:hug:

[NMDemDist2]

211. you are welcome

Skinner chooses mods with an eye to the widest possible range of ages, locations and political views so that the broad spectrum of our membership is represented. He's a pretty smart guy, that Skinner!

:hug:

[applegrove]

181. Do they know that it is the radical Islamists in London who agree with

them. They claim it had to be someone other than a muslim who did the bombing. They even deny Osama bin Laden's statement that he was responsible for 9/11.

Happy company.

[frictionlessO]

182. Who is they.. and please be very weary of using a broad brush stroke right

now Apple, things are just a wee bit tense in here ya know?

[applegrove]

185. The people who refuse to listen to any news report on facts. There

is terrorism. The radical Islamist group in Britain refuses to believe it. So do some DUers.

For sure we have had our MSM stolen from us. I used to like how they interpreted the news and gave context. But facts are facts. They still report on that. The radical Islamist groups in England want to take no responsibility for any of this that has gone on for years. So they deny there is Islamist terrorism.

My guess is that some DUers would rather think that much of the terrorism could be stopped if the Bushes just got voted out. The problems that cause terrorism and the West's responsibility in that (faulty Western policies towards the middle east and supporting ME elites instead of democracy) is the easy way out. That doesn't mean the Iraq war was not just a big huge mess from start to finish. It means that the ME is mucked up enough that they are now a danger and a wealthy one at that. And we are vulnerable in the long term. Of course neocons bully tactics just make it worse. But terrorism happens. No sense in pretending it will go away if we just to 'one thing' happens (like get rid of Bush). It is much more endemic and complex than that. Pure evil always is.


It may be as big as Islam doesn't have a culture of not scapegoating. While the West has one of not scapegoating (unless Oil interests and money can be made in which case you follow no human code because you are a corporation). So we as Western humans have a culture of not blaming innocents. And the Koran can be interpreted to allow for blaming innocents for some slight. And American corporations act like amoral predators. And the ME sees that. And the two play off each other. And encourage each other. And the victims of such predatory attacks (by corporations or terrorists) spread the poison around the world.

I would hate to see the far left join in the game. Much smarter to accept that things are as bad as they are. So you can figure out how to make it better. Terrorism will go on. Pretending it isn't happening has nothing to do with Iraq. That was something else. That was Israel. It was also part of it (Oil). Iraq was also Saddam Hussein humiliating neocons in the early 1990s. Getting rid of Bush and the neocons will not change much of the problem. You will still have a culture of young men being taught that they are men and they have a right to marriage on the spot and absolute control over others. The elites in the USA feel the same way. They support the elites in the ME which then go and support the Islamists to have some form of control over the poor. The extremes are just a big pile of snakes ****ing. Denying any responsibility for each of our parts in the game or by denying there is a problem - plays into it all.

We are all guilty. We all have work to do. And the Bush WH has aggravated the whole situation with its policies. Instead of building consensus with people in the ME who had also been victims of Islamist bombs - they rolled over on them. And instead of looking to the heart of American Myths and seeing that they need to be 'updated' and fighting for that - you can relax and say to yourself it will all be over when * is gone.

And the Bush WH takes this opportunity to create mistrust among the left so that the DU far left becomes marginalized. Now who benefits from that? They separate us from each other. While they create a big tent based on hatred of gays.

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

188. I would think that non radical Islam would not

wish to believe it was done by radical Islamists.

Radical Islamist terrorists, any terrorists strive for maximum impact, which includes taking credit for terrorist acts.

I don't believe anyone is denying that terrorism exists, or that a single action would make it all go away.

At least I'm not aware of anyone who totally doesn't believe that any terrorism is a reality.

[applegrove]

190. It was on the news. The radical Islamists in London deny it was Islamists.

They are right with the deniers on the DU. "We don't know - we don't trust the investigation - it could be American operatives or British ones - or some other operatives. It was not al Qaeda".

That is what their leader said after a meeting.

The truth is much worse if you accept that there is terrorism. It means there will not be a quick fix. Sure the neocons are a bunch of dangerous windbags. Sure they took advantage of 9/11. Sure they belong out on their asses and a few in jail for playing with intell.

But the terrorism is still there. And the situation that results in more Islamist terrorists is still there.

Your world has been rocked and it is big and complex. We need to adjust our thinking and not think that the problems will just go away if if if just the neocons could be gotten rid of.

You don't think big oil is always going to be saying "okay - so maybe 100,000 people will die in the west because of our policies that encourage growth of Islamist radicals - I'll pay that price for huge profits". You don't think they have always done that in the ME. Now it is you who are under attack. They don't care. That is your problem. That and radical Islam.

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

193. Can you provide a link to that story about

the radical Islamists in London denying it was Islamists?

I'd like to read it to get a clearer idea of what is going on.

[applegrove]

195. Was on Aaron Brown. I would imagine it will be replayed all day

tomorrow.

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

199. There's a transcript on their web site

too.

I just read it.

They were described as "hard line" Islamists.

I don't believe it means a lot to say who may agree with someone else's beliefs. That in and of itself doesn't say much.

But I get that you are concerned about what some people at DU believe.

I believe in being open to all possibilities, especially when there is some reason, ie unexplained facts.

Going to sign off for now.

[applegrove]

202. I think people who are extreme should look at other extremists. At times.

You don't just go up against one group and not look at all the others. There are truths that can be shown to us in many ways and in many places.

[frictionlessO]

191. Yes I sorta agree with you are saying here...

But really thats not what Im going off the deep end about here on this thread.

I do not want DU to purge those members who wear a bit more tinfoil than others and that was what was being discuseed in a few threads over the last few days.

But yeah you're right whats going on is much more than just Bushco but honestly here in the states his administration is problem number one, because nothing is going to get any better at all under their corrupt and vile wing.

[applegrove]

194. I'll agree with you in return. But people who keep it so simple do

that so they don't have to deal with the much harder truth. I've been there. I've been in shock & denial for a year. My body was preparing itself to accept the horror in my life. A horror that would force me to have to understand & live things one would never want to have to understand or live. Our safe little worlds. Gone! Most of the things we know and love - under attack. Our strengths made into weaknesses. Our heroes diminished. Terrible. The final cost to us perhaps much smaller lives than we ever imagined.

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

184. Why would "radical" Islamists say that?

[applegrove]

187. Cause they believe they are all right. And all white light. And their

way is the only way. So they ignore the facts that add up. So they don't have to change. Just like neocons. Or sociopaths. They take no responsibility for anything. Don't be like them. Keep your integrity. Accept that there are many evil people in the world who have lots of power. And it will take a long time to cut them out. And while you try and make things better they will try and undo you. And they will try and push in on your world and attack everything you hold dear. And it will hurt. Because your liberal heart and tolerance means nothing to them. All they want is absolute power. And you are in the way with the freedoms and standards you want to see instituted around the world.

They (both neocons & the Jihadists) follow their own myths. Keeping yourself together and not falling into their traps is the only way. That means you need to be compassionate (not deny Brits what is happening or take over) and discerning (keep up with the facts as they are commonly known and don't deny obvious terrorism).

[Humor_In_Cuneiform]

189. See post 188 above

[applegrove]

192. Think how the world looks to the radical Islamists in London. Bin

Laden didn't touch the USA. The USA is in Iraq and Afghanistan. That is what they are taught.

They just drop one big HONKING Fact from the whole mix and go merrily on their way.

[stickdog]

206. Well, the neocons, the neolibs, the freepers and all corporate media

whores agree with YOU.

Happier company still, huh?

[applegrove]

212. And the moderates, most of the DU, everyone in London except the

a few moderate muslims and radical ones. I don't agree with he neocons on anything thank you very much.

[NMDemDist2]

213. Locking, Please see Skinner's post

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=104x4081298