Hard News: Where the crazy comes from
183 Responses
First ←Older Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 … 8 Newer→ Last
-
If people want to read about blatant non-tenuous conspiracies, read Judge Rocker's decision from this week.
Basically, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), along with Bank of America Corp (BOA), went along to he Court -- a la Kang and Kodos -- and wanted his Honour to rubber stamp a little settlement deal (the joint application) deal they'd written on the back of an envelope.
What was the deal?
Well, when BOA bought Merrill Lynch it told its shareholders, don't worry, none of the money you approve for the purchase will go toward bonuses for Merrill Lynch people.
What was the reality?
They paid $5.8 billion of those funds the shareholders approved in bonuses to those people.
HOWEVER, the SEC and BOA, in the joint application, wanted the Court to endorse a settlement whereby the BOA would pay $33 million as a fine without having to admit or deny that they lied to their shareholders.
Where was that $33 million going to come from? THE SHAREHOLDERS!
As the District Court Judge says on page 2
In other words, the parties were proposing that the management of Bank of America -- having allegedly hidden from the Bank's shareholders that as much as $5.8 billion of their money would be given as bonuses to the executives of Merrill who had run that company nearly into bankruptcy -- would now settle the legal consequences of their lying by paying the SEC $33 million more of their shareholders' money.
This proposal to have the victims of the violation pay an additional penalty for their own victimization was enough
to give the Court pause.Rocker, er, rejected the joint application.
His Honour draws attention to the other obvious piece of shit on the carpet: where's your bailout money, you fucktards?
I'll be sure to think about this case the next time I file my GST return...
What was it Steinbeck said about banks? What's the definition of chutzpah?
-
Got an email from Tivo today - and it sure reads like you have to be on Telecom to use the product;
We know that many of you have been patiently waiting for TiVo to arrive in New Zealand, having registered with us as early as March this year.
One of the main reasons we have not revealed our retail plan is because we understand how important it is for you to be able to download our movies and TV content through your broadband connection without it impacting your monthly download allowance.
So we're delighted to tell you that Telecom have agreed to give everyone with a Telecom Broadband connection the freedom to download our movies and TV content through their broadband, without it impacting their monthly data allowance.
When you registered, you told us that you aren't currently a Telecom Broadband customer. Please be aware that TiVo will be available only through Telecom when it goes on sale in November and the whole TiVo service will only be available to Telecom broadband customers.
To ensure you're ready when TiVo goes on sale in November, why not take up Telecom's current broadband offer of a free wireless modem plus one month's free broadband plan charges? See here for all the details www.telecom.co.nz/broadband/offer.
Thanks again you for your interest, we'll keep sending you all the latest information and updates on all things TiVo
If by 'whole service only on telecom' they mean that partial service (ie. the EPG) is still available via other ISPs they've done a lousy job of communicating it.
-
If by 'whole service only on telecom' they mean that partial service (ie. the EPG) is still available via other ISPs they've done a lousy job of communicating it.
That is what they mean, and yes they have.
-
any conspiracy theory
You mean, even the one about the network of Islamic fundamentalists spanning from a cave in the Hindu Kush to Hamburg to a flight school in Florida?
'cause I thought that was a pretty far-fetched conspiracy, were it not for the actually happening part.
(Also, the Bush admin was involved in all sorts of dodgy conspiracies --- invading Iraq torturing people etc. Which rather makes thinking they were up to all sorts of other dodgy shit understandable, even if not right.)
-
'cause I thought that was a pretty far-fetched conspiracy, were it not for the actually happening part.
Yes, I believe HORansome could confirm that theorising a conspiracy doesn't mean being necessarily wrong. And of course Occam's razor doesn't apply to human affairs - sometimes the most far fetched explanation is indeed correct.
Was there a conspiracy behind JFK's assasination and did Roosevelt know about Pearl Harbour seem two issues worth pursuing, much as they are infested with crackpottery.
-
Yes, I concur with Giovanni; to posit an explanation of an event cited a Conspiracy as its salient cause, to whit to engage in conspiracy theorising, is not, by definition, a species of fallacious reasoning, and there are lots of examples of extraordinary cases of such explanations which are warranted; the best example, I think, is what Stalin and his cronies did to manufacture the testimony of the Moscow Show Trials of the 1930s. Extraordinary story but historically verified.
Glossing over Mr. Walkers concern about 9/11, I do think its interesting just how much goalpost shifting goes on in mere Conspiracy Theorising (the kind of conspiracy theorising which makes bad inferences to the existence of Conspiracies); you posit a grand Conspiracy, your grand Conspiracy gets shown to be unlikely or even impossible, so you focus on some related matter, hoping to claw back the debate. You see this in the Intelligent Design debate; Intelligent Design advocates used to cite the eye as something too complex to evolve through the process of Natural Selection, then they used the flagellum, and so forth.
-
I really recommend David Aaronovich's Voodoo Histories: The Role of the Conspiracy Theory in Shaping Modern History as a good journalistic investigation and analysis of conspiracy theories. It liberally quotes from a damned good bit of fiction too - Eco's Foucault's Pendulum of course.
-
Also, I meant to endorse Giovanni's point about Occam's Razor; whoever killed Alexander Litvinenko was not thinking about the Principle of Parsimony.
-
I wasn't too impressed by Voodoo Histories; I think Mark Fenster's book, Conspiracy Theories: Secrecy and Power in American Culture is a much better text because it actually offers and defends a central thesis. Aaronvitch tells a good story (I like his stuff on the Show Trials and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion) but he doesn't add anything new to the debate about Conspiracy Theories.
-
The problem with conspiracy theories is that they necessarily require that people keep their mouths shut about what went on. In the case of the moon landings, thousands of NASA employees would've had to be in on it, and remain silent over the intervening decades. Nobody has ever come out and said "I worked at NASA in 1969, and we didn't go to the moon." To my mind, that is quite sufficient proof that it happened as planned. Oh, that and the fact that the USSR was totally capable of tracking spacecraft and would've happily blown the whistle on any fuckery that might've been tried by the Americans.
With the WTC conspiracy, controlled demolitions are very precise, planned events. They require a lot of time to setup, and they're not something that can easily be done in secret for buildings the size of the WTC towers. Somehow this was all done by people from a very small group (the demolitions community is not large, especially when you get to ones competent for a project necessarily of the scale of trying to blow up the WTC) without anybody else noticing, and then have them practice their craft over a period of months in an occupied complex, complete with real cops and real fire fighters going in and out on a daily basis (FDNY used to respond to at least one fire alarm activation at the WTC complex every day), and nobody noticed a fucking thing?! There's this beer that has a great saying for situations like that. How does it go again? Oh, that's it, Yeah, right!
I know that Russell doesn't want this discussion going any further, so I'll finish my one contribution by saying that the talk I attended by three FDNY officers (Lieutenant, Captain and Deputy Chief), one of whom survived the collapses of both main towers , was quite clear that the "official" story is totally plausible.
-
you posit a grand Conspiracy, your grand Conspiracy gets shown to be unlikely or even impossible, so you focus on some related matter, hoping to claw back the debate
One definition of a conspiracy theorist is some who claims that it will rain because of an insidious conspiracy and when it doesn't rain, they take it as proof of an ingenious insidious conspiracy.
I'd admit that there are real conspiracies, but the fact that conspiracy A exists is not in any way proof that Conspiracy B exists. A causal link has to be demonstrated, otherwise it remains only a non sequitur.
The sign of a flake, going by the example of the rain, is endless persistent elaboration of a theory in the face of inconvenient evidence. Most genuine conspiracies have been simple, complicated only by their botch-ups. A basic engineering principle is that the more bits there are, the more bits there are to go wrong and any real conspirator abides by this. Grand visions of all-encompassing plots relying on too many variables and risks in a fantastic Heath Robinson-like mechanism are almost by definition incredible.
-
I do think its interesting just how much goalpost shifting goes on in mere Conspiracy Theorising
It's very hard to be in a debate where the automatic response to any evidence contrary to the opposition's position is "That's what they want you to think." If counter evidence is simply evidence of conspiracy, you're doomed right from the get-go.
-
Thanks, HORansome. I'll look that up. I just reached for the nearest text on my desk (well, bedroom floor, which is more or less the same thing). Norman Cohn is quite interesting, but I'd better leave it at that...
-
You mean, even the one about the network of Islamic fundamentalists spanning from a cave in the Hindu Kush to Hamburg to a flight school in Florida?
'cause I thought that was a pretty far-fetched conspiracy, were it not for the actually happening part.
Man, I skim-read that and instantly assumed you were talking about a world-wide network of underground caverns leading from Agartha and Shambhala to flight schools in Florida. And then I was, like, "what? That's actually happening?"
I really have to lay off the conspiracy theory literature.
-
If you want to understand the US right, you have to first understand the Civil war and the failure of reconstruction IMHO. White supremacy, fundamentalist Christianity, parochialism and states rights were what brought about civil war and if you think about it, are very much back on the agenda now. Even a lot of seperatist rhetoric from the US right echo the separatist talk of the 1850's and 1860's.
The decline of the northern industrial powerhouse and the paralell rise of the military-industrial complex in the South has reinvigorated the Confederacy. These "crazies" don't just spring fully armed from the head Athena - they have a tradition and a context. I get the feeling they are are now seeking a re-litigation of the political outcome of the civil war. In Obama, these new Confederates see their worst nightmare coming true - after all, isn't a Negro president the fufillment of every dire prophecy Nathan Bedford Forrest ever made?
-
Most genuine conspiracies have been simple, complicated only by their botch-ups.
Simplicity is, well, simple. Complexity is not. Complexity tends to involve increasing numbers of people, and I think it was Benjamin Franklin who observed that "Two people can keep a secret. If one of them is dead." Eventually you involve somebody who can't keep their mouth shut, or who is sufficiently inept that they bring down the veil of secrecy.
-
Kracklite:
I'd admit that there are real conspiracies, but the fact that conspiracy A exists is not in any way proof that Conspiracy B exists. A causal link has to be demonstrated, otherwise it remains only a non sequitur.
Welcome to the world of my PhD thesis. That's actually one of the central issues I'm looking into; how could you phrase and argue for such a link and what, in the end, does that actually mean for the seemingly prima facie warranted suspicion we have of Conspiracy Theories.
-
reinvigorated the Confederacy
This is where I note that the recent survey in which 18% of conservatives believed Obama to actually *be the Antichrist* was taken in... New Jersey. This is not solely a 'Confederacy' problem (although they certainly have some great background context to work with).
-
I'm partial to Michael Barkun's Culture of Conspiracy: Apocalyptic Visions in Contemporary America myself.
-
Yee haw!
-
Yee haw!
I feel very sorry for all the progressive people I know in southern states. It must be tiring.
ETA: I mean, tiring to be outnumbered by idiots two to one where they live, and then dismissed outright *as* idiots by people who live anywhere else.
-
Welcome to the world of my PhD thesis.
Looks fascinating.
As an aside, I was surprised - and then not surprised - to find that Joscelyn Godwin, who had translated the intricate mannerist allegory, the Hypnerotomachia , also wrote a study of fringe science/conspiracies, Arktos: The Polar Myth in Science, Symbolism, and Nazi Survival .
The all-encompassing fringe science and conspiracy theory is a kind of mythology that is cognitively empowering in a way. I suspect that we have an irrepressible instinct to make such cognitive maps and scepticism is a useful brake on its excessive. Without that mapping, we wouldn't be able to function or plan ahead, but too much of it...
Well, there's a nice quote from Richard Feynman on the role of the scientific method as a brake on paranoia: "Science is the art of not fooling oneself".
-
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.
-
Joscelyn Godwin
Goodness - any relation of Mike?
-
As an aside, I was surprised - and then not surprised - to find that Joscelyn Godwin, who had translated the intricate mannerist allegory, the Hypnerotomachia , also wrote a study of fringe science/conspiracies, Arktos: The Polar Myth in Science, Symbolism, and Nazi Survival .
Gawd. I just finished reading that last week! I don't especially recommend it. Godwin's a classic "rogue professor," and he has a certain gift, both here and in the Theosophical Enlightenment ,for making the esoteric seem really, really dull.
Actually, I'm on the look-out for a really good book on Western Esotericism at the moment ...
Post your response…
This topic is closed.