Posts by Stephen Judd
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Bad English aside, if that were true, France would be a complete wasteland; clearly it isn't, so there's more to it than simply the age of availability.
I think the phenomenon the commission were thinking of isn't so much being introduced to alcohol, the substance, as being introduced to binge drinking in the Anglo-Celtic style.
I don't know what the answer is. Maybe we should just adjust immigration quotas from France...
-
Any chance (Nick) of a link between that delayed-fingerprint-burglary you're complaining about and someone's drug habit?
Drugs are expensive enough to motivate burglary precisely because of prohibition. Drinkers sometimes do burgle or rob to fund their alcohol habits, but it's not very common, because booze is legal and therefore not that expensive. I think this is a particularly poor example of drug use creating third-party victims.
-
Has the recession had much impact on brewery profits? Just wondering.
-
it seemed remarkable- that a smallish paper in NZ was reporting this in June 2001.
Oh. My. God.
FAIRFAX.
That explains everything.
-
Steve, your judgement is badly defective if you think that there is anything to be gleaned from those haters.
And please, try not to be so defensive. It doesn't become you. Peace.
I will never, ever be restrained in criticising people who spread this toxic shit. There can be no peace with anyone who advocates it. Take your pusillanimous peace and stick it up your arse.
-
Your so-called explanation is self-contradictory. Let me quote it to you:
"Whether or not Israeli spies had detailed foreknowledge of the 9/11 attacks, the Israeli authorities knew enough to warn the U.S. government in the summer of 2001 that an attack was on the horizon."
Right, so is it a conspiracy, or not?
I see they note Pollard's arrest as "an exception". Yeah right. How about "it doesn't fit with our theory, so we'll ignore it."
What happens when we check the only direct references? Why, we find selective quoting. Eg, your pals link to Yehdit America. When I click through, I find in the very first paragraph:
"Note to those being referred to this article by one of several antisemitic, conspiracy-theory web sites: Please notice that these sites have left out the following important passage: "The five denied dancing. I presume the neighbor was not near them and does not understand Hebrew. Furthermore, the neighbor complained that the cheerful gang on the roof spoke Arabic. As far as I understand it, that neighbor has had previous problems with the company, and she could have been waiting for an opportunity to avenge the owners." In other words, the one "witness" was not telling the truth. "
So why should I find any of the rest credible when even less then 5 minutes without even looking for debunking cribs elsewhere, just using the material provided itself, starts to turn up problems? (I got home 10 minutes ago and I'm still sweating).
Oh yeah, your mates are mates with Holocaust deniers. I'm going to assume that you're just gullible. Have you checked out the rest of the site? Do you find it all equally credible? If not, why is this one bit you linked to credible? If yes, then... fuck you.
-
I am fully persuaded that bin Laden blindsided the Taliban and that in any case the war in Afghanistan is a dreadful, futile waste of life. I am fully persuaded that the war in Iraq is most likely a combination of Bush's daddy issues and imperial oil needs. Those are truths that aren't hidden but are out there in plain sight. The victims of those wars have every sympathy from me and I don't need Truther fantasies to feel it.
The Truthers are in a way the people who can't handle the truth -- they apparently don't believe there would have been a war in Iraq without 9/11 (ignoring the bizarre illogic of faking an attack by Saudis to launch a war in Iraq), whereas I have no problem in believing that at all. They believe that airlines and the military and the fragile technological systems and the trust that underpin the modern world are too strong to be vulnerable to anything except state-sanctioned meddling, whereas I have no problem believing that a clever barbarian who's willing to die for the cause can easily disrupt them.
What I'm not persuaded by are, as you put it, "nutty" theories that actually have the propaganda effect of putting critics of both wars on the side of loons. I guess we differ on what we consider a more likely direction. Believing everything, believing nothing, it's just abdicating your common sense for the joy of wallowing in your powerlessness.
Frankly, if I were a real conspiracy theorist, I would expect malicious intelligence agencies to be behind Truthers. Truther theories exaggerate the power of the establishment and demoralise left-wing opposition. I guess this is why I find them more infuriating than, say, creationism.
-
But Steve, assuming one can rely on any statement in that "report", which frankly I don't, it doesn't present any evidence in support of the claimed conspiracy at all. It boils down to saying "this event was convenient for Israel." Every geopolitical event is convenient for someone, but it doesn't follow that therefore that someone conspired to make it happen.
The dancing Israelis story seems to boil down to one person claiming she saw some young men acting inappropriately (as of course many people do when shocked). If that's not complete debunking, what would count?
I simply cannot see how you would find these credible evidence that Israel is behind 9/11 (or even peripherally involved, for that matter) unless you are predisposed to believe that anyway. If this is the best you can muster for disbelieving the standard account of what happened it is a pretty poor showing.
(By the way, what kind of double think does it take to cite Colin "evidence of WMD" Powell here? Is it ok to believe his public statements as long as they support your theories?)
The Ron Paul thing I note is quick to distinguish how they're not anti-Semitic and how some of the people they cite have Jewish ancestry. They do protest too much.
-
it seems like bikes are the chief means of threadjacking.
I believe that the twin towers were brought down by thermite-packed bicycles in the basement, left by public transport activists disguised as couriers.
-
It would help me a lot l if you made your points less obliquely, because I'm still struggling to see what they are. I've asked you directly whether you believe the claims made in the link you posted, or alternatively to explain why you posted it, and you just respond with evasiveness. I feel trolled, and I don't like it.