Want to fuck with us Americans?? MK-44 mini-gun test fire

[Radical Plato]

What/who are your mysterious sources that allow you to gain secret knowledge above and beyond the participants, scholars, historians, and so forth? I hope it's more than some dumb internet videos!

Even people espousing pretty interesting (that's as value neutral as I can get) and unconventional political theories like Chomsky would laugh at your conspiracy theories backed by little to no evidence. What makes that smart guy so dumb and you, a message board denizen, an inheritor of the "truth"?

Noam is my hero! - I don't think he would laugh - Noam is a big source of my information - It is only you fools calling it a conspiracy - people like Noam have learned how the world works - that's all - what you call a conspiracy - is just an admission that you have no interest in knowing the truth about the world - Like i said, you fools can believe whatever you want - I truly don't care - Your questioning as to why more people dont know the truth - they simply don't want too - they are fat, comfortable and reasonable happy with the system - they aren't affected in any great way and see no need to question their or others existence.  It is the ones who suffer unjustly that fight for a better world - all the lazy ignorant and uncaring westerners who think suffering is owning a corvette when his neighbour owns a Ferrari wouldn't have the slightest clue to the amount of suffering that really goes on in the world - I would argue that it is suffering that pushes people towards the truth - I didn't inherit the Truth - I went looking for it and found it, It is you who called Chomsky "Dumb" and me a message board denizen (A word I am sure went out of fashion at the end of slavery) both absurd assumptions.  That fact is, I don't need to produce evidence - I am not trying to convince anybody of anything, simply stating things as i see them, I think it would help if you asked yourself why you feel so defensive when somebody questions your world-view!

[Radical Plato]

And this has what to do with E-Kul's "century's of planning by the rich/elite" conspiracy theory?

Your theory that you think that our current society somehow just materialised without planning is intriguing - tell me more - did this current system just naturally evolve as a process of nature, or are there powerful people manipulating and moulding it -the truth is powerful families and groups have been running the show for centuries  Does your family have any significant input into the delivering of the curriculum, legislation, media, infrastructure and government policy!  It is small minded to think that every human being is as weak, powerless and limited in their lives as you - the fact you think their is some conspiracy is evidence of a successful indoctrination - who put that idea there - don't tell me, you thought of it yourself!  This is what propaganda is, the people who control the media and curriculum, reinforce the lie that the truth is a conspiracy and the average idiot who hears this enough will repeat it and carry the lie through society, it is a fantastic tactic - governments don't need to create freedom, safety, democracy or any of that good stuff, they just have to present the illusion of it - as long as the majority believe the lies, and never have access to the truth - then you have a nice controllable population, as they can't make informed decisions as they don't have access to the truth!  Of course a small minority will always work it out (dissenters) , but they can be controlled with dehumanization, force and other nasty tactics.  If the average idiot calls the system in place a conspiracy, they will never threaten the Power that holds their minds in theirs.  You have to ask yourself, who benefits most from you not seeing the truth of how the systems works and that it must be a conspiracy?

[bighead]

the rockefeller SYSTEM of education put into place about 70 years ago is still in place today..lol thats progress.

[Radical Plato]

the rockefeller SYSTEM of education put into place about 70 years ago is still in place today..lol thats progress.

That was there sophisticated answer to the abolishment of slavery - if they couldn't enslave them with force - they did it with clever and sophisticated lies forced into children before they had a chance to work out the truth! all with the support of the recently indoctrinated parents!  Fucking evil geniuses!  They found a way to enslave people and make them believe they are free - a slave will never wish to be freed if he is unaware he is a slave!

[bighead]

I usually keep these discussions online only because people are so fucking brainwashed into thinking anything that seems remotely critical of our governments is a conspiracy theory. That is another deviant and ingenious strategy put out there. why are the people not even allowed to discuss 'tragic events" that the govt is being very secretive about? who killed jfk? aghhh oswald! they reply with a grin....I dont think so. other things you should never talk about that are more recent but that could get you crucified.

[garebear]

Bolded segment one: you are claiming here that anyone who is suspicious of your grand and sweeping declarations isn't interested in the truth. Well, why would I be asking for the evidence -- any whatsoever -- of what you are saying if I wasn't interested in the truth anyways? Your attempt to paint anyone who is suspicious of your claims as unwilling to learn is like an extremist religious group castigating "heathens" for "denying" the obvious truth of their deity. And, thus far, you've produced about as much cogent argumentation for your view as any religious group has for theirs (i.e., none).

Bolded segment two: why don't you go through my posts and find the part where I said Chomsky was "dumb" (your quotes). Oh, that's right, you cannot, because I never said any such thing. Chomsky is a very important linguist who made contributions to linguistics, philosophy, and cognitive science. It seems rather obvious that he isn't dumb, whether one agrees with his views or not. I'm afraid this is another cult-like aspect of your thinking, putting the words of those who are challenging you into a filter that pops out things they never even said, conveniently making it easier to dismiss them.

Bolded segment three: it's painfully obvious that you won't be producing any evidence in favor of your view, because your are incapable of doing so. Thus, this rationalization is no surprise. I'm not sure how far the conversation can go if you are unwilling to argue about evidence -- bringing up the cult analogy again, there isn't much discussion to be had with a cult member (or religious person) who is settled on their beliefs and will change literally everything about their worldview to accommodate such beliefs -- the sacred beliefs being rationally unrevisable and immune to all evidence or critical inquiry.

Sadly, you demonstrate all of the characteristics of fundamentalist thought, albeit in service of a conspiracy theory rather than a religion: castigating me for daring to disagree and insisting I am brainwashed despite having little to no idea of what I believe, rephrasing what I say into blatantly false statements that are easily attacked rather than understanding what I actually said, and protecting your beliefs about rich/elite societal planning across history by insisting that evidence doesn't really matter anyway, which is awfully convenient since you haven't -- and I'll be bold here and say cannot -- produce any such evidence anyway.

WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOSSSSHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Radical Plato]

Bolded segment one: you are claiming here that anyone who is suspicious of your grand and sweeping declarations isn't interested in the truth. Well, why would I be asking for the evidence -- any whatsoever -- of what you are saying if I wasn't interested in the truth anyways? Your attempt to paint anyone who is suspicious of your claims as unwilling to learn is like an extremist religious group castigating "heathens" for "denying" the obvious truth of their deity. And, thus far, you've produced about as much cogent argumentation for your view as any religious group has for theirs (i.e., none).

Bolded segment two: why don't you go through my posts and find the part where I said Chomsky was "dumb" (your quotes). Oh, that's right, you cannot, because I never said any such thing. Chomsky is a very important linguist who made contributions to linguistics, philosophy, and cognitive science. It seems rather obvious that he isn't dumb, whether one agrees with his views or not. I'm afraid this is another cult-like aspect of your thinking, putting the words of those who are challenging you into a filter that pops out things they never even said, conveniently making it easier to dismiss them.

Bolded segment three: it's painfully obvious that you won't be producing any evidence in favor of your view, because your are incapable of doing so. Thus, this rationalization is no surprise. I'm not sure how far the conversation can go if you are unwilling to argue about evidence -- bringing up the cult analogy again, there isn't much discussion to be had with a cult member (or religious person) who is settled on their beliefs and will change literally everything about their worldview to accommodate such beliefs -- the sacred beliefs being rationally unrevisable and immune to all evidence or critical inquiry.

Sadly, you demonstrate all of the characteristics of fundamentalist thought, albeit in service of a conspiracy theory rather than a religion: castigating me for daring to disagree and insisting I am brainwashed despite having little to no idea of what I believe, rephrasing what I say into blatantly false statements that are easily attacked rather than understanding what I actually said, and protecting your beliefs about rich/elite societal planning across history by insisting that evidence doesn't really matter anyway, which is awfully convenient since you haven't -- and I'll be bold here and say cannot -- produce any such evidence anyway.

Finally, bolded segment four: I am not reacting defensively (I haven't stated what my worldview is so you'd be hard-pressed to know whether you challenged it or not), but rather am asking for clarification/evidence of a set of positive assertions you have made. If I suddenly blurt out "I'm an alien and have been sent here to observe you!" in a room full of people, they won't be acting "defensively" or have had their "worldview questioned" when they ask me what the fuck I'm talking about and demand evidence for my supposed Martian heritage. They'll simply be acting as rational agents attempting to establish the truth of my claims. So too when I ask about your magical, vague, unfalsifiable theory of elite manipulation.

I couldn 't even read to the end of this dribble, so many false quotations it can't be taken seriously, it seems to be an attempt to create conflict where there is none, It just seems as if someone doesn't like people with opposing, non mainstream ideas - I am always amazed at how some people just like to argue - I am not wanting to argue, not wanting to change anyone's world-view - you keep asking for clarification or evidence to support my claims, this is absurd, this is an Internet forum and definitely not a suitable place to throw up the reams of information required to convert the masses towards the truth - if you truly want more information, there is a  new invention called the Internet with a powerful tool called Google, and it's relatively cheap to get access too and they have a large collection of knowledge on there called wikipedia, this may be a good starting point.  Like I said, I don't care what you believe, you can believe in your naive indoctrinated world view, it means nothing to me - I don't wish to convert anybody to my worldview.

[Radical Plato]

What/who are your mysterious sources that allow you to gain secret knowledge above and beyond the participants, scholars, historians, and so forth? I hope it's more than some dumb internet videos!

Chomsky would laugh at your conspiracy theories backed by little to no evidence. What makes that smart guy so dumb and you, a message board denizen, an inheritor of the "truth"?

There it is - you called Chomsky Dumb - even if you used an oxymoron - it appears you asked the question as to why Chomsky (who most consider fairly intellectual and also aware of the elitist stranglehold on society! hence his tireless activism) would be considered dumb compared to my Getbig Posts.  It was an odd question that seems to have no relevance to the discussion we were having, but such is the Internet! But, it was you who called Chomsky Dumb!

[syntaxmachine]

I couldn 't even read to the end of this dribble, so many false quotations it can't be taken seriously, it seems to be an attempt to create conflict where there is none, It just seems as if someone doesn't like people with opposing, non mainstream ideas - I am always amazed at how some people just like to argue - I am not wanting to argue, not wanting to change anyone's world-view - you keep asking for clarification or evidence to support my claims, this is absurd, this is an Internet forum and definitely not a suitable place to throw up the reams of information required to convert the masses towards the truth - if you truly want more information, there is a  new invention called the Internet with a powerful tool called Google, and it's relatively cheap to get access too and they have a large collection of knowledge on there called wikipedia, this may be a good starting point.  Like I said, I don't care what you believe, you can believe in your naive indoctrinated world view, it means nothing to me - I don't wish to convert anybody to my worldview.

CASE FILE #1

Test subject: E-Kul
Objective: See if conspiracy theorist is capable of critical thinking
Experiment: Ask conspiracy theorist to clarify theory/provide any sort of evidence for theory
Hypothesis: I hypothesize that the subject will be unable to think critically, providing no evidence for his conspiracy theory and displaying fundamentalist, cult-like thought patterns in response to basic questions about the theory in question.

STATUS: Hypothesis confirmed. Subject unable to provide (or even hint at, for that matter) a single piece of corroborating information for his conspiracy theory. Instead refers me in a general sense to wikipedia and to google. Suitably unimpressed. Peppers response with extremist thinking, attacking me for having an "indoctrinated worldview" despite his not having any idea what my worldview actually is, pretending to be victimized when all that has happened is that he has been queried about his worldview (see bolded segment for 'acting like a victim' behavior), dissociating himself from all further inquiry by pretending that he has no obligation to provide any hint of justification for his claims despite constantly rubbing those claims in others' faces and calling them "indoctrinated," "sheep," and so forth, and displaying zero ability to critically examine the asserted claims in light of his inability to muster any evidence for them.

Conclusion: Subject has been thoroughly owned. Pet conspiracy theory has had zero argument in its favor and thus until such argument can be provided, must be assumed to be false.

Recommended course of action: Continue owning subject wherever his drivel is spilled, hoping that the accumulated ownings will force him to critically examine his own beliefs for perhaps the first time in his life.

CASE FILE CLOSED

[syntaxmachine]

There it is - you called Chomsky Dumb - even if you used an oxymoron - it appears you asked the question as to why Chomsky (who most consider fairly intellectual and also aware of the elitist stranglehold on society! hence his tireless activism) would be considered dumb compared to my Getbig Posts.  It was an odd question that seems to have no relevance to the discussion we were having, but such is the Internet! But, it was you who called Chomsky Dumb!

Yes, the word "dumb" and a reference to Chomsky are in the same sentence. I think it's relatively clear, however, that my point is that since Chomsky would disagree with your pet theory, he must be dumb compared to you, the enlightened one. Hence, the implication is that you ought to think he is dumb for not accepting what you think is obvious. It therefore ought to be clear that I'm not actually declaring that he's dumb; rather, I'm denying it, along with your theory.

[daddy8ball]

Cliff notes for E-Kul: Syntaxmachine is logically crushing you. It's not even close.

[Radical Plato]

Yes, the word "dumb" and a reference to Chomsky are in the same sentence. I think it's relatively clear, however, that my point is that since Chomsky would disagree with your pet theory, he must be dumb compared to you, the enlightened one. Hence, the implication is that you ought to think he is dumb for not accepting what you think is obvious. It therefore ought to be clear that I'm not actually declaring that he's dumb; rather, I'm denying it, along with your theory.

Man, your a tripper - you seem to be having a one man argument creating all types of fiction - I truly do not not what you are banging on about!  You are trying to argue with someone who doesn't care about what it is you are trying to prove!  I honestly have no idea why you think that if someone doesn't do as you demand and offer up explanations for casual comments on an Internet forum then you have owned them, it just leaves me shaking my head in wonder at who would get any sense of satisfaction for ranting on at some anonymous person about something that only they seem to care about!  All I suggested was that the Elites are running the show! No Conspiracy, No Grand Plots, just pointing out the facts!  And how poor old Chomsky got dragged into this, he is more than well aware of the Elites and talks about them regularly!  You can continue on with your ridiculous monolithic responses demanding scientific evidence for casual comments but it just seems absurd and pointless - you are the only one who cares!

[Radical Plato]

Uh-oh, the victimization syndrome continues. Look, you made a statement about the elites being in control, and the second somebody asked you about it -- just asking for clarification about the nature of this control, mind you -- you went off, using your conspiracy theory as a base to launch verbal attacks on Americans, calling them "peasants," "freaks," "fools," "small minded," "lazy," "ignorant," and asserting that their minds were under external control, and just because they might not agree with your pet theory (I checked and this is the list of names you came up with; feel free to tell me if I missed something).

The second I call you on your shit, asking what makes you so confident about your conspiracy theory that generates these attacks, you retreat, referring me to wikipedia (lol) and saying it is unreasonable to ask for any evidence. It is unreasonable because ... we are on a message board, which means we can't have rational discussions where evidence might come up? I didn't ask for a thesis or a book on your part, nor for "scientific" evidence, but just literally anything that might point to the truth of your theory. The fact that you continue to evade this task confirms CASE STUDY #1's findings. That is all.

It is unreasonable to ask for evidence when the person you are conversing with isn't arguing with you - like I said, you are the only one here arguing and getting your knickers in a twist!  If you don't agree with my comments, fine - I WASN'T TRYING TO CONVINCE ANYBODY OF ANYTHING! It is you who mentioned Conspiracy! It is you who obviously believes in Conspiracies! Not me I don't believe in Conspiracies - I just find it odd that someone would jump online and start demanding EVIDENCE about Elitist Control on a Body-building Forum and make a big deal about it, you must be very self centred if you believe others owe you a research paper because you took an exception to their opinion, I honestly don't know what you are fighting about and what you are trying to achieve.

[Shockwave]

It is unreasonable to ask for evidence when the person you are conversing with isn't arguing with you - like I said, you are the only one here arguing and getting your knickers in a twist!  If you don't agree with my comments, fine -I WASN'T TRYING TO CONVINCE ANYBODY OF ANYTHING!

WHAT?!
Holy failed logic batman.

[Radical Plato]

Hey Shockwave, the world is ending this year.

Man, your friends must love you, do you realise you are just making stuff up as you go along that has no direct relevance to the initial comments - None of what you post is true, it is all made up by you, you gather up bits and pieces of multiple posts and twist them into some sick story that is only true in your mind, if you care so much, maybe you would like to offer up your research disproving Elitist Global Domination! Your the one who seems to be so unsure of your beliefs.  I am very comfortable with my convictions, I am sorry you haven't made the same peace with your own inner world. 

[Radical Plato]

Man, I just went back to see when SyntaxSucks had the meltdown, it appears he got upset when I suggested the Chinese would love to find a way to get what's owed to them by the Americans without destabilising there own economy (a fact that has been known for many years - who doesn't want there money back) and then SyntaxSucks started accusations of conspiracy theories, asking for detailed evidence and posting many argumentative posts about nothing - you projected your own Conspiracy Theory Idea onto me and then preceded to ask for evidence for something you indeed made up.  How can I produce evidence for something you are projecting onto me - I was merely talking about the way the world works and current affairs - your the only one banging on about conspiracy theories!  It is normal for immature individuals to react as you do when you hear something alien to your world view, rather than question or explore alternative ideas, you reject them and attack those who are comfortable to believe as they do.  This is a very normal and successful part of indoctrination (what some countries call education) but the whole idea of Western education is not to teach the individual, but to teach him to obey without question, to learn to obey authority and to be suspicious of people who don't hold the same world-view or beliefs that they do, the system teaches those in the mainstream to attack any dissenting views and use the popularity of mainstream opinion to back up there argument.  I am sorry you feel so hurt by my comments, but the truth will rip you open more than the greatest lie!

[garebear]

To Synatxmachine and E-Kul.

Hey, you two, I was once like you and I liked to the wild thang.

[bighead]

I dont believe syntex has anything invested in the arguement but intellectual capabilities, american education at an elite level, and a penchant for proving both. first two are compliments.

[BIG AL MCKECHNIE]

When we fought Germany we didn't care about civilians. They were all our enemies. We reduced the entire city of Dresden Germany to ruins in one night. The only inherent limitation is what we don't do. This country is a sleeping giant that other countries like to kick and laugh that we don't do anything. Watch out when we wake up.

Oh yeah, the americans won the war. Where were you for the first two years?  Britain declaired war on the Germans immediately they started invading the european countries. We didn't have to, we could even have joined the germans (seeing as Britain had a German royal family) but we got stuck right in.  Meanwhile the big brave Americans sat it out. Then when the Japanese kicked off you decided to drop the atomic bomb so you didn't have to face the nasty Japanese man to man.
Bunch of cowards and bullies.

And for your information,  the bombing of Dresden was a british decision and started by 773 british Lancaster bombers with america then sending in b17's the next day.
The whole exhibition was to show the Russians that UK and USA was not to be fucked with.

[Shockwave]

Oh yeah, the americans won the war. Where were you for the first two years?  Britain declaired war on the Germans immediately they started invading the european countries. We didn't have to, we could even have joined the germans (seeing as Britain had a German royal family) but we got stuck right in.  Meanwhile the big brave Americans sat it out. Then when the Japanese kicked off you decided to drop the atomic bomb so you didn't have to face the nasty Japanese man to man.
Bunch of cowards and bullies.

And for your information,  the bombing of Dresden was a british decision and started by 773 british Lancaster bombers with america then sending in b17's the next day.
The whole exhibition was to show the Russians that UK and USA was not to be fucked with.

For fucks sake.
Damn right we dropped the bomb. Saved lives on both sides. And ended the war.
Boom.
Done.

[Oly15]

So true. The problem with both of those wars are they are in effect civil wars.  The same country is divided and you have to worry about civilians and collateral damage. You also have infiltrators that are agents for the other side. We could have crushed both those countries easily. When we fought Germany we didn't care about civilians. They were all our enemies. We reduced the entire city of Dresden Germany to ruins in one night. The only inherent limitation is what we don't do. This country is a sleeping giant that other countries like to kick and laugh that we don't do anything. Watch out when we wake up.

True. And epic to think about.

[polychronopolous]

The United States could bury the rest of the world in time for lunch if it REALLY every came to that degree.

All these whiny little anti-american fags crying in this thread are kidding themselves.

[Jaime]

Hard to fight wars when your politicians make you fight with one hand tied around your nuts.
If they ever let the US military off the chain (read: without rediculous rules of engagement), they would mop the floor with pretty much any nation on earth.

History says otherwise. You don't adhere to any conventions anyway. Your country is very bad at fighting wars.

[Shockwave]

History says otherwise. You don't adhere to any conventions anyway. Your country is very bad at fighting wars.

History says otherwise? When has the US gone into a full blown country vs country conventional war since Korea?
Dont adhere to convention? Enlighten me.

[Shockwave]

The United States could bury the rest of the world in time for lunch if it REALLY every came to that degree.

All these whiny little anti-american fags crying in this thread are kidding themselves.

People dont like to admit this, for whatever reason.