Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Have the Neocons Systematically Infiltrated the Tea Party Movement?

A great many of these "trip wires" have a life of their own, they are in effect pork, no freakn Kobe beef. Trip wires are relatively cheap. Maintaining 35,000 troops in S Korea for over 50 years indefinitely is not.

I posted a link to an inside video essay of N Korea on my earlier post. These poor people live in a 1950's bubble where the threat of war is constantly presented by the state run media, filtered through one man. There are many in the U.S. that live in this same bubble. In that some profit from their beliefs does not justify them.

You forgot one part.

When one speaks of arming everyone on airplanes and 9-11 was an inside job, I don't think folks care or listen much to one's political ideas or leanings thereafter.

It's a RP clue for those still wallowing in their WTFs after his abyssmal showing in 08!!

Couldn't agree more......

Well if that's the case none of it fits. Hawk had a much more cogent, less emotional and intellectually sound description a while back, but if this is the best you have, I'm glad you cleared that up. jorge

This is a common misconception. It stems from the erroneous conclusion that since large scale conspiracies (e.g., Watergate) have previously been uncovered, therefore all large scale conspiracies will inevitably be uncovered.

The holocaust of the Jews, for example, was a vast state-sponsored conspiracy that likely would have been kept from the German people, and the world, had not Germany lost the war, and their secret exposed. Had they won the war, it would likely have been rumored to have happened, but those who advanced the possibility of that rumor being true would have been dismissed as cranks.

Remember, the bigger the lie, the harder it is to credibly refute.

It's only a common misconception for those who have very little common sense.

I posted a link to video that defined neocons.

There you go.

Yep.

I don't even want to get into this dissussion. I am not a "Truther" and as such, have no desire to defend a position I don't hold. I would like to make two points however.

First, why would Democrats necessarily be privy to information that would convince the general populace that 9/11 was an inside job to the extent that they would do anything? And as an addendum to the question, what could they do if it did? We already know the Federal Government is extremely corrupt yet what is anybody doing? Oh yeah, we vote...

Second, if a Conspiracy is being discussed and is of general enough knowledge to have a widely-known term coined which describes it, how could it be secret in the first place? Going back to point number one, those in power don't have to keep secrets if nobody can do anything about it.

Same here.

I'll still listen but I agree I wouldn't want every hair triggered redneck and gangsta carrying a gun on board a pressurized tin can going 600 mph at 30,000 ft.

Wouldn't be prudent...

Nor do they have to if the secret to be kept seems so outragously preposterous that the vast majority would never believe it even after seeing proof.

That is the essence of the Big Lie theory, originated by Goebbels and further perfected by Stalin.

wrong....in this case, if there was a whiff of evidence beyond the bloviating of loons, the Bush hating press would have swarmed all over it.

troofers should read that popular science issue that utterly debunked the various troofer theories on scientific grounds. Like Rosies "fire can't cut steel" comment....that's about the general level of troofer paranoia and illogic.

I've only been looking into the claims of the "troofers" for a few weeks now (previously placed it all in the category of Big Foot, UFOs, and Nessy), but what I've gathered is not that any of them believe it was a conspiracy limited to one political party, but rather much more vast, presuming that both parties (and the popular press) are mere tools of the same conspirators.That claim, that fire cannot cut through steel, was what made me dismiss the whole "troofer" phenomenon from the beginning. I, like you, believed they were claiming that super heated fire from a crashing jetliner into a skyscraper could not cut steel. My reaction, like yours, was, "Friggen jetliners, filled with jet fuel, crashed into friggen skyscrapers, you nutcase!" What I didn't realize until very recently, however, was that this claim had nothing at all to do with the two towers that were struck by jetliners. It refers to building 7.

Until very recently, I was unaware that there were more than the two buildings that came down on 9/11, and I lived in New York at the time. Building 7 was on fire from burning ash, but had not been struck by anything substantial. It came down directly into it's own foundation, all sides collapsing simultaneously. Fires don't usually cause this in modern steel framed structures. This, at the very least, is suspicious, and should, at the very least, provoke questions.

Good grief...I'm so glad my kids aren't in any of your gym classes.

I was speaking theoretically and not about this specific instance. I was very clear in my post about that. Again, I have no interest in defending a position I do not hold, but saying the Truthers are wrong and saying that such a conspiracy could not be carried out are two different things. I beg to differ on the latter. And again, I am not disputing the facts in this case, nor the science of it, I am just saying that basing your argument on "Troofers" all being "bloviating loons" and a "Bush hating press" isn't the most sound method. For instance, an insane man doesn't make a good witness as he can tell you an absolute truth, yet he is not credible. That doesn't mean he's not telling the truth, just that nobody will believe him due to his past history. Secondly, just stipulating that the press does hate Bush merits stipulation that the same press is owned by the big boys. All such an entity would take in order to silence it is the flow of cash ending. Your stipulation cannot be satisfactorily proven in an objective manner. Mine can.

So while such a conspiracy may not have been carried out, it doesn't mean that it would have been impossible to do so.

Precisely.