Featured Conspiracy theories

A certain few here can get away with practically anything, name calling, hurling insults around...

making claims they can't back up....

[ladies and gentlemen, it's too easy, it writes itself.]

 

That's true enough . . .

You and TND have backed up all my claims against you two. Several times over now and just in this thread. :smilewinkgrin:

 

Back on topic.

Rejection of Alternate Explanations
The conspiracy theorist will reject all reasonable alternative explanations, only seeking confirmation of what they have already pronounced as being the "true story".

Rejection of all government provided information (unless it's not the U.S. government or its allies)

Belief that suspicious events can't be mere incompetence, it's got to be something sinister.

 

If so, please show me a post in this thread where I've insulted you. As you seem so fond of saying--Prove it.

 

Okay. I have produced several hundred pieces of hard evidence in the form of government documents and policy papers, several hundred pages of historical context, have shown several instance where the government has been caught lying and creating false witnesses among other pieces of evidence that the "coincidence theorists" have felt compelled to dismiss because it doesn't fit their left vs right paradigm.

For instance, I have shown that both Obama and Romney work for Monsanto and Goldman Sachs. There is so much evidence out there that backs this claim the "coincidence theorists" have felt compelled to do what TND and ITL are attempting to do now. I even provided the plan for today's unrest, destabilization and regime changes in the middle east called "Which Path To Persia" that can found on the Brookings Institution's webpage in the form of a PDF. Anyone reading it should be able to see that what we have seen take place over there was planned well in advance by the corporate interests behind Brookings.

Of course this isn't considered "evidence" to those who refuse to provide evidence to back their own claims. matter of fact so far they have refused to read it and offered several lame excuses as to why they won't.

Instead they engage in what's called "shooting the messenger".

This is a trick the government and media uses all the time. Instead of looking at all the evidence and allowing an honest and open discussion to take place they turn to "character assassination", "smear tactics", "shooting the messenger" and generally trying to turn the discussion away from the evidence they don't want people to consider.

Of course the same people who are employing these tactics now will call those who use the same tactics against them, like the democrats all sorts of things.

They don't like it when people do this to them but they sure seem to enjoy doing it to others. In the case of ITL and TND it seems to be their trademark.

There's a word in the English language that describes people like this. Can anyone guess what it is?

Take this thread for example. Who started it? Why was it started? What is the intended outcome?

Okay we all know who started it.

Why was it started? I believe it was started to deflect people's attention away from the fact that none of those I have asked to provide proof to back up their claims and "conspiracy theories" about the "Russian separatists" are able to do so.

What is the intended outcome? Well, if past performance is any indication the outcome is meant to turn the discussion away from their own lack of hard evidence into a "look at Poncho" instead discussion.

They know they cannot back up their claims so they have to try and turn the discussion to something, someone, anything besides the fact they made certain claims they cannot back up with evidence.

TND and ITL demand I prove every word I say to their satisfaction at any other time but when the shoe is on their foot and they find themselves lacking any hard evidence to back up their claims. They do this.

As yet they haven't even attempted to show us the evidence that would back up their claims but they have gone out of their way to engage in this type of behavior aplenty in several threads now.

That should tell you the reader all you need to about these two and their claims of "superior credibility".

If I make a claim it's prove it! Prove it! Prove it! Or you are a . . . If they make a claim and I say prove it! Prove it! Prove it! It's duck, dodge, zig zag and weave, name calling, character assassination, shooting the messenger and attempts to change the subject.

Folks it's all right here on the current pages of Baptist Board in the News and Politics forums. Go read them and see if these guys have provided any evidence to back their claims and all they have done to avoid having to do it.

You all take a look and decide for yourselves. If I stay I'd just be repeating myself so I'm outta here. :wavey:

 

This is one of the most entertaining threads that I have seen on BB for a while. :laugh:

 

OK, show me where I've used smear tactics, character assassination, and shooting the messenger.

I'm undecided on who shot down the Malaysian airliner. If you're demanding me prove the Russian separatists did it, I'm not playing along.

I've used this thread as a showcase of you engaging in the very tactics you condemn.

Sigh...yes, I tend to want someone to show me where I've engaged in character assassination and smear tactics. I suppose if I asked for you to prove it your response would be, "See! They want me to prove it again, but they engage in character assassination!"

I'm pretty sure people have read it and decided.

 

Yes, please vote for me here:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=94533

 

Ladies and gentlemen, the thread about Conspiracy Theories is, in fact, A CONSPIRACY! >gasp<

The OP was about hallmarks of a conspiracy theory. It went off the rails right about here:

http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2131650&postcount=7

 

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?p=2132140#post2132140

 

Hmmm...I'm not in that thread, neither is TND. If this link is meant to prove that I engage in character assassination and smear tactics, it would fall under this point of the OP:

Citing inexistent sources

 

http://www.baptistboard.com/showthread.php?t=94605

 

I'm not in that one either.

Attempt to derail thread noted.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VjNaBxFN__E



http://www.baptistboard.com/showpost.php?p=2130915&postcount=11

 

Hey look everyone this is from the same guy who has still not shown us the proof to back his conspiracy theory that the so called "Russian separatists" are responsible for the shoot down of an airliner even though he has has ample time and chances to do so.

Show us the proof TND. Just show us the proof then you won't have to go on proving yourself to be a . . . . you know what. < --- link

Something at which you have now proven yourself several times over to be an expert at.

Note to mods . . . I haven't come right out and called TND a hypocrite even though he has continually proven himself to be one over the course of several threads now. :smilewinkgrin:

Show us the proof. Or keep digging that hole you're putting yourself in deeper. It's your choice.

Personally I hope you keep right on digging. :laugh:

In the meantime you might want to tend to your it's looking a little tarnished. :laugh:

 

In the battle for control of the narrative shaping the story on MH17 Newsweek has discounted the possibility the CIA might be involved.

It has insinuated the very idea is preposterous and merely another conspiracy theory contrived by Russian state media and Putin’s buddies Yuri Kovalchuk and Roman Abramovich.

“Just one day after the horrific tragedy that left 298 people dead, Russia’s Channel One ran a package telling its audience that the entire incident was orchestrated by the United States, specifically by the CIA,” CNBC reported earlier this week.

“A document purportedly showing that the U.S. was planning to do the same thing during the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis was showing in a full-screen graphic.”

This is a reference to Operation Northwoods. CNBC insists the document is false or some kind of ruse. In fact the proposal by the Pentagon and the CIA to shoot down civilian airliners and blame on Cuba as a pretext to invade that country is real.

CNBC might want to check out the documents declassified by the Joint Chiefs of Staff in 1997.

It should direct its attention to page ten in this document where the Pentagon suggests it might “create an incident which will demonstrate convincingly that a Cuban aircraft has attacked and shot down a chartered civil airliners enroute from the United States to Jamaica, Guatemala, Panama or Venezuela… The passengers could be a group of college students off on a holiday.”

Newsweek, CNBC and the establishment media are known for giving the CIA and the Pentagon a blank check. This is completely natural due to the fact the corporate media was converted into the CIA’s “Mighty Wurlitzer” propaganda machine decades ago. It specialized in sweeping crimes under the rug and brainwashing the American people into thinking they need to support bombing small nations and intervening where they have no business intervening.

As for the peerless record of the CIA, consider the following detailed by Claudia Nelson: http://www.infowars.com/corporate-media-scoffs-at-possibility-cia-had-something-to-do-with-downing-mh17/

Strange, here's infowars.com providing evidence to back up it's questions concerning the downing of the airliner in Ukraine. Evidence in the form of declassified government documents in their historical context no less while those who claim they are all just "kooky conspiracy theories" refuse to provide even one shred of evidence to back their matter of fact claim (AKA a "conspiracy theory" until proven otherwise) of "Russian involvement".

infowars.com isn't afraid to post the evidence they have found so why are those who claim they never do so afraid to show us their own evidence?

Could it be because they are afraid people will see them as . . . you know whats, for accusing others of acting just like they are acting now?

Question: What do you call a person who engages in the same behaviors he condemns others for?

Seeing as you have so far refused to back your matter of fact claim with hard evidence preferring to engage in smear tactics and obfuscation instead would you care to answer this last question for us TND, or are you to busy tending to your own "tin foil hat" to answer it?

Watch this folks if he responds at all it won't be to provide the evidence to back his claim as I have asked him and his two or three buddies (that love to make personal attacks on those who dare to disagree with or question them) to do several times now. It'll probably just be a continuation of their Pee Wee Herman "I know you are but what am I?" routine.

So go ahead and "twist and shout" some more little neocons.

 

Part of the issue I've seen on this board is labeling everything a conspiracy theory if it doesn't come from and/or agree with popular American news sources.

 

In his 1928 book, “Propaganda,” Bernays wrote that, “If we understand the mechanisms and motives of the group mind, it is now possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing it.” Further:

The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society… Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country. . . . In almost every act of our daily lives, whether in the sphere of politics or business, in our social conduct or our ethical thinking, we are dominated by the relatively small number of persons . . . who understand the mental processes and social patterns of the masses. It is they who pull the wires which control the public mind.[14]

http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-global-political-awakening-and-the-new-world-order/19873