10 votes

I'm a Skeptic

You'll have to forgive me if this is the wrong choice in forum to post in. I'm still fairly new to the DP. This is a discussion that is fairly important in my eyes though. Conspiracy is a subject that's often brought up on this website, and I would like to discuss it from my perspective in more in depth.

To start off, as the title of this thread suggests, I'm a skeptic. I don't have huge beef with conspiracy theorists, but I typically object to what they're saying until compelled otherwise. I'm kind of curious if there are any other RP supporting skeptics out there and what they think?

When a conspiracy theorist looks at bad things coming from the government, they claim it's all happening on purpose. That someone is behind it all pulling the strings. They have a tendency to ignore the fact that the failure comes from government being incapable in the first place. As a skeptic I'm not afraid of the government coming to "hurt me", I'm afraid of it coming to "help me." The government can't even run a school lunch program, how do you expect it to pull something off that requires precise timing and coordination? It's the biggest blundering most incompetent institution in the history of mankind. Government programs simply just don't work well most of the time.

As a scientist I cling to Occam's Razor. Conspiracy theorists often blast the media, and the mainstream story because they don't take their explanation of events seriously. The media has huge issues, and I'm not denying those. Thing is often times I find the conspiracy theorists explanation of events more complicated than the main explanation and therefore less useful. Typically an astronomical amount of people would have to be in on things
for the event in question to be executed without any whistle blowing. I'm not saying this isn't possible, just not likely.

The next issue is the lack of empirical evidence. This happens to be one of the most challenging things a conspiracy theorist has to present. Often times a conspiracy theorist has to rest his or her case on speculation. Even when that evidence is available the explanation surrounding it can differ from person to person, and then we end up back with the Occam's Razor issue. What is the most probable or likely?

Finally I ask the question, why don't the conspiracy theorists take any action against the so called conspirators? They'll point finger and complain all day long, but rarely do they actually do ANYTHING. Are the conspirators honestly that far out of "reach"? On the same note does adopting the theory actually do anything to counter the "disinformation"? I think the answer is no to both.

I have a feeling I'm probably going to get blasted right off the DP by the vast majority of you who are conspiracy "believers" here, however I am interested to see what people have to say anyway. It won't be the first time I've been blasted on the DP.




Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

I truly believe that

just as there are those that are overly paranoid, and compulsively latch onto way more conspiracies than might actually exist, there are also those that are overly slow to except and or embrace that there are way too many conspiracies within our nation's recent history. I would even go so far as to consider the non-believers having a sort of disorder. Something is going on in their heads that prevents them from accepting or "getting it". It's as if they believe that evil does not exist ...despite evidence of evil spanning from the dawn of time to present day. If there is evil, how could there not be conspiracies (a word that still remains in the dictionary for good reason)?

Have judges ever been bought off?
Have police officers ever been convicted of abusing their authority?
Have politicians ever violated the constitution?
Did the media generate propaganda leading up to both world wars?
Does the media limit what the tell you?
Have corporate/military/media interests ever lobbied our leaders for business or policy directions?
Have citizens been demonized/censored/ridiculed for asking questions?

Because the obvious answers to the above questions are clearly "duh!" ...and since conspiracies haven't magically ceased to exist, to be incapable of acknowledging their presence really is sad. And to discount or ignore evidence, witness testimony, facts, and motives (and even published policy positions) is very unscientific.

conspiracy theories

Conspiracy: In the criminal law, a conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to break the law at some time in the future, and, in some cases, with at least one overt act in furtherance of that agreement.

Theory: An assumption based on limited information or knowledge; a conjecture.

When one can produce "proof" of conspiracy.. Like Cheney lied about Weapons of Mass Destruction, or Building 7 fell on 9/11 without being hit by a plane, or the Gulf of Tonkin was a False Flag Event that enabled our gov't to go to war with Vietnam... These are documented "proofs" that no longer fall under the the definition of "theory" and are only classified as such to belittle anyone who points to the evidence of a crime being committed.

Once you provide proof of a crime you have the right to a trial by a jury of your piers. To label these documented crimes as "a conspiracy theory" is a crime in its self.

Mathew 5:9 Blessed are the peacemakers: for they shall be called the children of God.

Ends justify the means

Why do people think that those in the most powerful positions of the world, who are conspiring to create a benevolent despotism or world rule, believe they are committing evil acts. The elite rationalize that they are doing this for the benefit of mankind and "The end justifies the means". That is how humanity justifies the wrongs they commit because they see good (in their minds) at the end. It is human nature, if the elite or powerful believe that millions must be die in war or enslaved in serfdom to finally bring harmony to planet Earth and create their utopia, it is worth it to them. I don't believe they are creating utopia, I think they are nuts. We are human and very imperfect, but we do know at all times what is right and what is wrong no matter how we try to justify it later.
Our bureaucracy is inefficient at the government level but don't believe for one second that the top of the pyramid is.

The Biggest Con- -

is also called the "Great Controversy" by the 7-Day Adventist, a Church. thats religion. no more of it . 0

another thread on DP today--

about Ruby Ridge.

Very well planned; where was the 'bumbling' there?

Well planned aggression = conspiracy

it's hard to be awake; it's easier to dream--

911 is agreat event to

911 is a great event to discuss Conspiracy.

This website, AE011truth.org is a dedicated group of Architects and Engineers who believe the twin towers were brought down by explosives- nano thermite to be specific.

http://www2.ae911truth.org

And they use science and have conducted many tests to confirm their findings.

for me, the biggest event that tipped me off- At the time I lived in California and the News Media never mentioned WYC 7 collapsing when I got home from work and never even knew that WTC 7 collapsed until 2007. Why did the media not report this in prime time news on the West Coast? Because WTC was not hit by a plane and it contained safes for the Pentagon, Goldman Sachs and had offices for the FBI, CIA, DoD, and other government agencys which had many things to hide.

And then there is this video:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8YaFGSPErKU&feature=related

There is no Left or Right -- there is only freedom or tyranny. Everything else is an illusion, an obfuscation to keep you confused and silent as the world burns around you." - Philip Brennan

"Invest only in things that you can stand in front of and pr

I would like the OP to watch/respond to your post

Excellent video.

sceptic or not

this section from my website can educate on the subject -
http://www.libertypoet.com/911mix/

please pass to others.

LL on Twitter: http://twitter.com/LibertyPoet
sometimes LL can suck & sometimes LL rocks!
http://www.dailypaul.com/203008/south-carolina-battle-of-cow...
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

Very nice collection you have

Very nice collection you have there, LL.

I'm a skeptic of government and media....

1) The CIA is far more capable than 19 Arab terrorists with box-cutters who hide out in caves in executing any skilled operation. The CIA is even more capable of executing a psyop.

2) Never forget WTC7 was not hit by a plane.

http://www.apfn.org/images/images2/wtc-7-neverforget.gif

Have a good day.

Pysops.. media.. actors.. propagandists... disinfo agents.... fake videos.. fake photos...fake stories... psyops....

9-11 Media Fakery: Did anyone die on 9-11?
http://www.cluesforum.info/

http://www.septemberclues.info/

9-11 Actors:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6aPvJSQtmoE

Pysops.. media.. actors.. propagandists... disinfo agents.. fake videos.. fake photos

Regarding the "no planes" theory

I'm not a believer in the "no planes" theory and I just started a thread (link below) about that w/ my reasoning why. Can you respond to my post there? I think it would make for an interesting discussion and I'm definitely interested to hear opposing viewpoints.

http://www.dailypaul.com/265761/9-11-my-thoughts-on-the-no-p...

Heil Fuhrer....The Ministry of Propaganda.

The Zion-Fascist Ministry of Propaganda runs the Government, which runs the Media.

Two sides to the same ugly face. We are lucky that much of the media got turned against the Federal Reserve, because the Fed runs the TV...they thus caved into the public's wrath. One more checkmate towards the Fed.

On Government Orchestration

First of all, we must recognise that the United States government is under great infuence if not partnership or even in conspiracy with gargantuan corporate oligarchy leaders, and so when we speak of government conspiracy, it can in all likelihood entail co-conspiracy involving both government officials and corporate leaders.

It is under this framework that I do not find it so difficult to identify the existance of government involvement in conspiracies. And even further analysis suggests the ties may even be wider - see VATICAN OFFICIAL TIED TO BP, GOLDMAN-SACHS, AND MEDIA CENSORSHIP IN THE OIL FIASCO INCREASING EVIDENCE OF FOUL PLAY by Sherri Kane and Dr. Leonard Horowitz
- http://www.seopressreleases.com/vatican-official-tied-bp-gol...

... Three weeks before the "natural gas leak," the George Bush/Dick Cheney 9-11-linked Halliburton company negotiated the purchase of the world's largest oil-spill cleanup firm (Boots & Coots) at the exact time keen observers on Wall Street– financial intelligence agents at Goldman Sachs (often called "Government Sachs")–unloaded 44% of their stock in BP.

Also, CEO of BP Tony Hayworth dumped 35% of his stock a week before the oil rig explosion, and as further evidence of the known risks, no joke, Goldman Sachs even shorted the Gulf of Mexico!
- http://pesn.com/2010/05/05/9501645_No_joke--Goldman_Sachs_sh...

Incidentally, the above facts parallel the shorting of airline stocks by those in the know prior to the World Trade Center (WTC) 9-11 attacks.

According to Wayne Madsen, the US Government was pressuring BP to reach that huge oil deposit at 35,000 feet because it would fuel the US war machine for the 8 months the invasion of Iran is supposed to take, during which oil traffic through the gulf is expected to be disrupted. However, the Gulf is one of the oldest and most studied drilling areas in the world. Any legitimate attempt to tap into that deep oil system would have called for better-than- usual safety measures, not systematically shoddy safety measures. Executives were told that this well was leaking several months before...and they did not heed the advice from their own enginers and workers on site on how to stop the leaking and fix it previous to the explosion...but told engineers and workers what to do....after they were told this @#*%! thing is gonna blow!

So what we have here is a co-conspiracy to grossly risk widespread destruction of environment and life in the name of war and profit. But it didn't stop there. After the explosion they conspired to make the environmental disaster much worse by dumping tons and tons of the extraordinarily toxic chemical Corexit over the gusher and elsewhere in an effort to save face by hiding the oil beneath the water surface.

There is no room here for the word "theory" or the concept that government cannot pull off conspiracy. Between this ACTUAL conspiracy and the Goldman Sachs "too big to fail" government sponsored ACTUAL conspiracy, the American people (in part through the tea parties) are waking up to the fact that our government has been and still is involved quite successfully in the carrying out of REAL conspiracies, and furthermore, many of the same players are involved again and again from one conspiracy to the next.

I suppose next the skeptics are going to say Halliburton, via it's subsidiary Kellogg, Brown and Root (KBR), never was given a contract to build the so called "detention centers" even though proof of Detention Centers' construction/existance comes from Haliburton's own website -
http://www.halliburton.com/public/news/pubsdata/press_releas... (from page 5 of this January 26, 2006 document):

KBR [a subsidiary of Halliburton] has been awarded a contract announced by the Department of Homeland Security’s United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) component. The Indefinite Delivery/Indefinite Quantity contingency contract is to support ICE facilities and has a maximum total value of $385 million over a five-year term. The contract provides for establishing temporary detention and processing capabilities in the event of an emergency influx of immigrants into the United States, or to support the rapid development of new programs.

For what it is worth I have also read with my own eyes previously from this website that these facilities have been completed (though I suspect they may have since retracted this information).

Upvoted

Great post! Have you read "Family Of Secrets" by any chance?

Ancapaaron, If you believe....

....that Enron's executives made off with billions, you believe in conspiracy. If you believe that 19 evil Islamic extremist hijackers worked together in the 911 attack, you believe in conspiracy. If you believe in the Watergate break-in, you believe in conspiracy. If you believe that Boothe, Mudd, Surrat, and others worked together to assassinate Lincoln, you believe in conspiracies. If you believe that Judas worked together with the Pharisees to hand Jesus over, you believe in conspiracies. And if you value the line, "Ed tu, Brute?", you believe in conspiracies.

How is it, then, that you seem to generally shun the notion of conspiracy arising from GOVERNMENT? Is government somehow exempt from the evils that plague mankind in general?

Yes, there is a GREAT deal of total garbage on the Internet regarding this or that conspiracy theory. Others, however, are quite compelling.

As to Occam's Razor, it is so often applied contrary to its own precepts. For instance, when public opinion holds that it was a 125-foot-wingspanned 757 that crashed into the Pentagon, even though the hole was only 16 feet across, this is only the "simplest" explanation for the cowardly and the insanely stupid. This is by no means "simple" to explain from the viewpoint of science.

Similarly, since 1963, we have been watching video of a man clearly being shot in the head from the FRONT, but telling ourselves that the "simplest" answer is that he was shot from behind, even though that model clearly defies our direct observation.

And on and on it goes. From the Lusitania to Pearl Harbor to the Gulf of Tonkin to the "Global Warming" scare, evidence of governmental conspiracy is overwhelming. But far too many citizens prefer to take not the simplest interpretation of the facts, but the simplest WAY OUT of having to deal with the facts. And that way is simply to believe the lies, even in the face of compelling facts to the contrary.

Occam's Razor, therefore, deserves a bit more care.

Is evil Islamic extremism the ONLY motive for killing 3,000 Americans? Hardly not. We did it at Pearl Harbor just to get into a war for the benefit of the banks. Yet when someone floats the idea that our own government was involved in 911, it is often dismissed out of hand as being "impossible" that the government would stoop so low. And this, even in light of the long track record of similar shenanigans from the government.

Which is more likely?:

1. That government, though filled with normal people, many of whom serve for long periods, will
tend toward evil deeds and conspiracy, or;
2. That government, though filled with normal people, will be amazingly impervious to the temptations that normal people face when given great amounts of power for extended periods of time?

See, when we speak GENERALLY, Occam steers us toward EXPECTING conspiracy, does it not?

And indeed, we can witness conspiracy hard at work for ourselves anytime we turn on CSPAN and watch the Congress deliberating whether to violate the Constitution in this way or that.

Just because a conspiracy theory exists is no reason to assume it true. Conversely, however, it is also no reason to assume it false. Each case must be weighed on its own merits.

I submit, therefore, that it is unscientific and illogical to assume as a rule that conspiracy theories lack merit. It is a fallacy of generalization in the worst way.

Now, as to your question:

Finally I ask the question, why don't the conspiracy theorists take any action against the so called conspirators?

Just what type of "action" did you have in mind? Many have invested a great deal in making video after video for the Internet in order to inform millions of their evidences. And perhaps you remember the whole "impeach Bush" campaign? Or what about petitioning the government to open various investigations? Or gathering a large number of architects and engineers to lend their professional reputations to a scientific disproof of the official account of 911? These things are reasonable "actions", are they not?

Or did you have something more like assassination in mind?

You seem to be suggesting that if the theorists were REALLY sincere, they'd be taking some sort of "action" that they are not now taking. Let's consider assassination for a moment, for example. If it is true that all SINCERE conspiracy theorists would assassinate those they hold responsible for the conspiracies, then should we also expect all those who believe that evil Islamic extremists perpetrated 911 to be "taking action" against those responsible for that?

Indeed, the majority of the nation has a disfavorable opinion of the President and the Congress. Do we see them "taking action" against the President and Congress?

Your suggestion is invalid.

And finally, I will address this:

The next issue is the lack of empirical evidence. This happens to be one of the most challenging things a conspiracy theorist has to present. Often times a conspiracy theorist has to rest his or her case on speculation.

You know, in Poker, the players don't show their cards. So you have to work on incomplete data to draw conclusions as to what the other players are up to. When you have one certain player with a LONG track record of bluffing and cheating, which is more reasonable---to suspect his every move and statement, or to wipe the slate clean of all suspicion with each new hand that is dealt?

Obviously, the Government makes the rules on information. And it can, in the name of "national security" declare ANYTHING WHATSOEVER to be a secret, regardless of FOIA. Similarly, the government declares the rules on evidence, and will not let the public examine it freely. So your argument about speculation becomes immediately suspect when we realize that the playing field is not leveled. Add to this the observable trend of the mainstream media to repeat ad infinitum certain messages that appear to have originated with a single, unknown source, and you have an even greater disadvantage for those who do not believe the "official" version of a story.

And your argument is further weakened when the behavior of the government comes into consideration. For instance, the official 911 report does not address the details of the collapse of WTC Building 7. If only the government may investigate, and only the government may report---and if they choose NOT to report on something that begs for investigation---then how can you set the lowly conspiracy theorist at fault for "speculating" without also faulting the government for ignoring? And I would note that there is indeed evidence that would support certain speculative theories on #7.

Now, I find it very interesting that you would be compelled to write a GENERAL post about the lack of evidence, in which you cite ZERO examples thereof. Is this consistent with scientific method, to generalize in one's conclusion with no supporting evidence?

No, this is an opinion piece, meant to influence others WITHOUT evidence, and on the basis of fine-sounding arguments that appeal to "Occam's Razor" contrary to Occam's own doctrine. Whether you intended to or not, you have basically suggested that, since you are a scientist, your general OPINION in this matter should be valued. But your opinion is no more supported here than is the garbage man's opinion that "the government is behind everything".

But we, the gullible public, are supposed to defer when we see "scientist" in your credentials?

Indeed, I know people in many professions who are idiots, scoundrels, tyrants, fools, and even conspirators. They are doctors, lawyers, politicians, preachers, teachers, managers, etc. If we can observe that the distribution of such people in these fields is so high, it's a wonder that we would ever assume---as so many do---that a "scientist" need not be vetted before we accept his opinion.

Indeed, we have been trained to seek a "second opinion" with the doctor. Why not, then, with the scientist?

Jack

Well Done

The simplest explanation for me is that most people will avoid any evidence that suggests that the world is not what they believe it to be.

If even half of 'conspiracy theories' are true then the world becomes a much scarier place. Some folks simply cannot handle that, mentally.

This is the same rebuttal. It

This is the same rebuttal. It doesn't matter how many times I've said it before in the thread below, you people are persistent on posting the same thing.

I never, EVER said, "I don't believe conspiracy is possible" In fact in my initial post, I even used the words "compelled otherwise". Of course this has been ignored in favor of a full on fallacious attack.

Why am I being greeted with a response that's contrary to what I've said? I have some idea's as to why, but I don't even feel like wasting my time with it anymore. Besides I don't want to come off like I'm prejudging people here because not EVERYONE is the same.

On opinion pieces, just take a look around. The DP contains quite a few of them. This place wouldn't be what it is without them. Of course I'm second guessing the idea that people want opinions here other than their own based on the hostility I've received here. Thing is I don't have to participate in any capacity, despite the FACT that I support RP, and have done so for quite some time.

Ancapaaron.

You seem to be searching for a handle on what's happening in this conversation.

Here's where it started:

(Your words) "I don't have huge beef with conspiracy theorists, but I typically object to what they're saying until compelled otherwise."

No matter how you may try to backpedal at this point, you betrayed yourself with this initial comment. In it, you show that you are prejudiced against conspiracy as a rule. If you were truly open-minded, as you seem to think you are, this sentence would have been something more like: "When I hear someone's conspiracy theory, I always try to understand just what they're saying so that I can go look into it carefully later to determine whether it has any merit." Or even: "When I hear someone's conspiracy theory, I ask them a few questions to see if it even sounds plausible, and if it does, I look into it more later."

But this, of course, is not what you wrote. Therefore, it should come as no surprise to you that some of the respondents in this thread see you as non-objective.

Similarly, it should not come as any surprise to you if statements such as this one (following) tend to alienate you from Internet discussion groups:

(emphasis added)It doesn't matter how many times I've said it before in the thread below, you people are persistent on posting the same thing.

Indeed, that sort of language would tend to betray you as one who doesn't consider himself an equal player in a free exchange. Further, why are you faulting me for what others are writing to you? Did it occur to you that I didn't read anybody else's responses, but that I'm replying directly to you as a sovereign individual?

Now to your present argument:

I never, EVER said, "I don't believe conspiracy is possible"

This is a "straw man" tactic, for I never said or suggested that you said such a thing. To negate that you said it, therefore, is no negation of what I wrote, though you put it forth as if it does indeed negate me.

You contined:

In fact in my initial post, I even used the words "compelled otherwise". Of course this has been ignored in favor of a full on fallacious attack.

1. "compelled otherwise" was not ignored as much as the sentence in which you used the phrase was flagged as indicative of your unreasonable position.
2. Fallacious attack? Where is the fallacy? So far, you have suggested fault in my post because it is similar to what others have said, and because it ostensibly negates something you did not say. But if there is a real fallacy, I'd sure like to hear it, as I typically invest a good amount of time and energy into each post in hopes of keeping my arguments on solid logical ground.

You continued:

Why am I being greeted with a response that's contrary to what I've said?

If "compelled otherwise" was supposed to be your "trump card" on being judged as unreasonable, you shouldn't have included it in the very sentence in which you made your prejudice clear. Remember, you said that you (emphasis added) "...typically object to what they're saying until compelled otherwise." This means that you tend toward the non-conspiracy explanation, which shows a very clear prejudice in the matter.

So perhaps you should ask yourself why YOU wrote contrary to the image you are trying to portray here.

Why did you have such a burr under your saddle about posting this thread if you are truly so open-minded? Indeed, you didn't mention one iota of how the average consumer has all sorts of inaccurate perceptions about what's going on in the world. No, you only wrote about the conspiracy theorists. This again shows your prejudice.

Indeed, even when I point out the problems with your own logic and argumentation, you do not seem thankful for the opportunity to improve your position. Instead, you seem to use the opportunity to take offense as if you are being unjustly treated.

To "object" (your word) to a new theory as a rule (your word was "typically") is just plain foolish. It is the quintessential habit of closed-minded people. You might as well say something like, "I typically object to candidates with anything other than an R after their names, unless I am compelled otherwise". Or, "I typically believe anything I hear on CNN, unless I am compelled otherwise."

If you will change your paradigm to one of curiosity and investigation, you will likely come to be "compelled" far more often than you do with your current paradigm.

Jack

ecorob's picture

excellent response to this "scientist", jack...

i have a very funny feeling that this skeptic is NOT a scientist and is more of an idiot than anything else but, hey, that's just one man's opinion

i thought your response was far greater (and much more positive) than anything i could offer...thanks!

its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
9/11 Truth.

Re: Ancapaaron, If you believe.....

Re: ......you believe in conspiracies. If you believe that Judas worked together with the Pharisees to hand Jesus over, you believe in conspiracies. And if you value the line, "Ed tu, Brute?", you believe in conspiracies.

How is it, then, that you seem to generally shun the notion of conspiracy arising from GOVERNMENT?

***************

Good points Jack. The interesting thing is, what you are pointing out here is how most Americans act reguarding 911. I believe the number one reason why it is this way is because most Americans never studied 911 but never the less believe they are as up to speed as the next guy by what they've heard on the MSM and because of that, who are you (i.e we) to educate them?

Because: Some animals are more equal than other animals. -Animal Farm-

What the? > http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6MTIwY3_-ks

DailyPauler,

You are right about how Americans handle 911. How tragic it is to see a Republic full of adults who find it easier to believe whatever is put forth for them (like good little consumers) than to get to the bottom of it for themselves.

Just yesterday I got one of these emails about some terrible computer virus going around, and in the email it said that Snopes.com had confirmed the report. So naturally, the first thing I did was to go to Snopes to see if that was true. To my amusement, I found that Snopes had called it a HOAX. And in that one instant, my life was made easier. No need to forward the email to all my friends. No need to apologize later for having forwarded something untrue. No smudge on my reputation.

It's a matter of one's paradigm about truth....whether one insists on it or not.

But what's really scary is how many people willingly believe the lie even after it has been proved false. This is indicative of mental disorder. And our Republic is awash in it.

Even on the most benign issues---such as, say, putting a stop to deficit spending---won't most voters tell you that this is highly important? Yet when they vote, they may well have NO idea the candidates' stance on deficit spending. There is a disconnect between their knowledge and their actions.

It's like an in-the-know cow standing in line at the slaughter house, telling his friends, "Yep, we really shouldn't be in this line, but what are you gonna do--turn around and run?" And so it is that we plod boldly "forward" in America, with any other choice of direction having been pre-judged as out of the question.

Jack

Snopes?

Hopefully that was extremely dry humor.

We are dealing with psychopaths not bumbling idiots.

I have no doubt politicians are just as capable of conspiring to commit acts of treason, terror, murder, rape, and theft as any other person in society who is a capable of committing these types of crimes. What make you think a politician is any different? Why do they get a pass?

I hear people say the government can't do anything right. Well what if they are "doing it wrong" on purpose to make us feel like they are incompetent, thus pacifying us into a state of skepticism and cynicism.

I don't buy into that notion, simply because I see my government killing in mass and blatantly violating their oaths to us and our Constitution. Is it incompetence or is it deliberate? I say it's deliberate most of the time.

Here is an interesting article which brings to light what these people (typical politicians) are...

"Politicians share personality traits with serial killers: Study" - http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2009/06/politicia...

=====================================

"The greatest mystery of all is truth." - Me, 2009

actually, i think they're psychopaths *and* bumbling idiots

but psychopaths 1st

Bingo

Half a million dead Middle East children in a decade of conspired war, and people cannot believe that their government would work against them? You have no more value to a politician than any one of those children.

Cold
Hard
Fact

I'm also a

skeptic and do not jump to conclusions and believe conspiracy tales very easily. The only conspiracy theory having to do with 911 is the one that our Government has been pushing targeting 19 arabs as responsible from about the 20 minute mark on 911. For a Government that can't run a school lunch program they were able to point blame and solve this crime 20 minutes into the operation, nothing to see here folks just 19 bad guys. The truth about 911 will be sooner uncovered than most people think. Do the American people on a whole believe that The Bush Administration was not capable of 911?? Where do 19 Arabs get 10 tons of Super Nano Thermite and then how are they able to access WTC 1 2 & 7 to plant these explosives. Where the hell are the supposed planes that crashed in PA. and at The Pentagon. Why were these questions not being asked by MSM from the getgo or even today?
911 3000 Dead 3 Million Questions

9/11 was an inside job .....time to get some answers..RP 2012

ecorob's picture

agreed!

...and to anyone who disagrees, debate me!

its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
9/11 Truth.

I see where you're coming

I see where you're coming from. Personally, I don't believe that politicians are responsible for committing acts of terror/crisis however I do have my doubts about the world's intelligence communities...

After reading all the released government documents revealing their respective intelligence agencies' missions, I have every reason to be concerned about them.

From operation Northwoods, project Mockingbird, downing street memos, the overthrow of the Iranian Shah etc... All of these crazy "missions" have authentic government documents to prove their existence.

Heck you could go to the Library of Congress and read them there!

Bottom line: I think there are elements within the world's intelligence agencies that have the capability and funding to create a crisis that both private interests and governments take advantage of.

The CIA, MI5, ISI, Mossad, KGB etc... Those are the crisis generators.

Good point

on the Intellegence agencies.

I think you have confused Hanlon's razor...

For Occam's (sorry!)

Hanlon's razor: Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance.

Occam's razor: Do not make more assumptions than the minimum needed.

But that man should play the tyrant over God, and find Him a better man than himself, is astonishing drama indeed!~~D. Sayers
Love won! Deliverance from Tyranny is on the way! Col. 2:13-15

www.dailypaul.com/280083/jesus-christ-vic