quote:

Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov So now wiretapping = murder of former officials.

Do you mean like Vince Foster, whose death was ruled a suicide even though, among other major discrepancies, it was someone else's fingerprints which were found on the gun?

Doesn't the name Fred Hampton ring any bells? The FBI's COINTELPRO was much more than wiretapping as it also took the form of physical violence against political dissidents. That was something the late environmentalist Judi Bari learned the hard way.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN i dont see how postulating unproven and thoroughly unsupported hypotheses counts as having an "open mind".

Meh, I'm probably done with this forum... there's not much left to stick around for.

Maybe I'll pop in from time to time, but I won't be posting any more articles or opinions on articles.

Peace out.

I take the same stance as Krypton...same as I do with god

"I will not say there is not a god"--doesn't mean you beleive in god neccesarily,could be in that middle ground of uncertainty of agnosticism.

Honestly, if you take the certainty that all conspiracy theories are debunked by default, you are mirroring the certainty of they die hard conspiracy theorists.

and a question to those on the forum: What kinds of sources do you trust in order, and what are your reasons for doing so.

and no, I dont think 9/11 was an inside job

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Damerchi Honestly, if you take the certainty that all conspiracy theories are debunked by default, you are mirroring the certainty of they die hard conspiracy theorists.

we don't mirror anything, what we demand is proof or evidence or rational deduction. all of which are missing in the typical CT nonsense.

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Damerchi and a question to those on the forum: What kinds of sources do you trust in order, and what are your reasons for doing so.

i trust any source that strives to provide honest research, and contains a plausible explanation/argument/hypothesis for whatever it is they're researching.

i am fine for using your every day news services for basic information, normally they're ok at "what" but less so at "why" or "how".

for "why" or "how", i like textbooks because they provide a lot of material, sources, justification and logic. many of which must go through the rigours of review and editing before being suitable to be published. this is especially important in the internet age when any moron can make up a website and call it prisonplanet.

i won't trust any source that has previously shown to engage in blatant dishonest when presenting the "facts".

___________________