Posts by Rich Lock
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
this interesting article looks like good science to me
Without wanting to be too harsh about it, it looks like more of the usual unsubstantiated bullshit to me.
There are a lot of statements in that article that are presented as absolute fact, with no reference to back them up. Here's one:
A video of the South Tower shows molten metal pouring out, glowing a radiant orange-yellow. Some have claimed this is molten aluminum, which melts at a lower temperature, but molten aluminum would be silvery in these conditions. This is molten iron or steel.
So because it's not aluminium, it must be steel? So absolutely no chance it could be something that isn't either of those two things?
Edit: one of the names on that article (Richard Gage) pops up as a prominent name in the 9/11 truth movement.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_Truth_movement#Scholars_for_9.2F11_Truth_.26_Justice
And a quick look at the wiki page on the conspiracy theories is enough to satisfy me that it's more of the same:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Trade_Center_controlled_demolition_conspiracy_theories
But I would say that, being a brainwashed commie-nazi and all...
-
there's the conspiracy to invade Iraq, the conspiracy to overthrow Allende, the conspiracy to overthrow Castro, etc etc.
The difference being that there is hard evidence to support these: minutes of meetings that get unearthed in archives, people prepared to go on the record to state what they saw and heard, etc.
Has anyone credible come forward for the moon landing conspiracy? No. Anyone for the controlled demolition on 9/11? No.
I'm a bit bemused by the vogue for rejecting, en masse, "conspiracy theories" as fringe lunacy. To disbelieve without evidence is no better than to believe without evidence.
When did you stop beating your wife? :)
You didn't? I disbelive your denial unless you can produce evidence.
I wonder if anyone's ever suggested that all the really out-there conspiracy theories are part of huge plot by the international banking cartel to discredit, by association, the accurate conspiracy theories. ;)
I do have my suspicions about the 'loose change' mob. Their media saturating fruitloop wackiness has effectively shut down anyone who asked hard questions about the frankly ropey 9/11 commission report, such as these women.
However, suspicions will remain suspicions until someone produces (if they ever do), hard evidence.
-
a Laws / Downfall video
Yes please.
-
I feel very sorry for all the progressive people I know in southern states. It must be tiring.
Point taken.
Although dismissing someone outright as an idiot because of their accent or geographical location isn't my style.
-
Hitler probably didn't enjoy the "majority support" of Germans until sometime around the reoccupation of the Rhineland, and he probably wasn't even hugely popular until after the victory over the Anglo-French in 1940.
This is an area I really want to get to grips with in detail sometime. I do a lot of WW2 military history reading, and there are many passing mentions of the tensions between the army officer class and nazi party military and officials, tensions between the German civilian population and nazi officialdom, etc. But these are never really mentioned except in passing.
When reading 'Berlin: the downfall', I was quite astonished to learn that there were a small number of German communists in Berlin ready to welcome the Red Army with their party cards (the NKVD had anfairly nasty surprise waiting for them, but....)
-
Yee haw!
-
the POUM militia...the communists purged them towards the end of the war
Oh, great. Thanks for, like, totally spoiling the ending for me. Wanna put a spoiler warning on that next time? :)
-
Lest we forget
I've just started reading Antony Beevor's book on the Spanish civil war. There's a passage in the introduction that really jumped out at me, which I shall type up and post as soon as I can, as it seems to be pretty much on point.
Basically, he outlines an argument that the war was between two loosely united groups - one on 'the right' and one on 'the left'. But the groups on 'the right' had much more in common (or to put it another way much less not in common) than the groups on the left, who were much more prone to cross-group mistrust, in-fighting and so on.
So, when James blurts out some crap like:
People and groups that protested for woman's rights, gay rights social justice etc. find themselves working with or effectively supporting Islamists who have no concept of woman's rights that we would recognize, stone to death woman accused of adultery who are actually victims of rape and think gays should be killed
As if 'we' are all some sort of Communist-Nazi hive mind, he can, frankly, go fuck himself.
-
Obama is simultaneously a fascist and a communist
McCain to base! Under attack by commie-nazi's!
Go, UNICEF pennies! Help zer puny children who need you!
-
You lefties need to...
Why, thankyou for the advice James.
If I may offer some in return, 'you righties' need to stop sacrificing babies and drinking their blood by the light of the new moon.
But then maybe oversimplistic homogenising generalisations of large and diverse groups is not that helpful...?