[WARNING: this list contains images that may offend] This is a list of secret projects that have since been found to be true in light of released (either officially, or unofficially) documents. Some have long been the source of conspiracy theories while others have been accepted by the mainstream as real. In no particular order:
Sir Winston Churchill, Britain’s wartime Prime Minister, planned to execute Adolf Hitler in the electric chair if the Nazi leader fell into Allied hands.
Declassified documents reveal that Churchill was opposed to Allied plans for war crimes trials and wanted summarily to execute leading Nazi figures including Hitler who he regarded as “the mainspring of evil” and a “gangster”, and was also content to see Indian independence leader Mahatma Gandhi starve to death during a hunger strike in 1943.
They also show that he was willing, against the advice of his Cabinet colleagues, to “wipe out” defenceless German villages in retaliation for Nazi atrocities in Czechoslovakia.
Churchill’s choice of the electric chair was despite the fact that it was never used in Britain before the final abolition of the death penalty in 1965. source.
According to secret and long-hidden documents, the Joint Chiefs of Staff drew up and approved plans for what may be the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government – a fake terrorist attack on citizens.
Code named Operation Northwoods, the plan, which had the written approval of the Chairman and every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, called for innocent people to be shot on American streets; for boats carrying refugees fleeing Cuba to be sunk on the high seas; for a wave of violent terrorism to be launched in Washington, D.C., Miami, and elsewhere. People would be framed for bombings they did not commit; planes would be hijacked. Using phony evidence, all of it would be blamed on Castro, thus giving Lemnitzer and his cabal the excuse, as well as the public and international backing, they needed to launch their war.
One idea seriously considered involved the launch of John Glenn, the first American to orbit the earth. On February 20, 1962, Glenn was to lift off from Cape Canaveral, Florida, on his historic journey. The flight was to carry the banner of America’s virtues of truth, freedom, and democracy into orbit high over the planet. But Lemnitzer and his Chiefs had a different idea. They proposed to Lansdale that, should the rocket explode and kill Glenn, “the objective is to provide irrevocable proof that the fault lies with the Communists et al Cuba. PDF file showing the original documents.
US documents declassified in the 1970’s show that General Giovanni de Lorenzo, the chief of Sifar (Italian Military Intelligence), joined the US in the 1950’s in preparing a plan against a Communist takeover, but did not inform his own government. According to a document released by Mr Andreotti the CIA and Sifar sketched a plan in November 1956, codenamed Gladio, to form a force of 1000 men capable of guerilla warfare and espionage. A training base was set-up in Sardinia and 139 weapons and ammunition dumps were hidden in Northern Italy.
Gladio was controlled by NATO’s Clandestine Planning Committee; attached to Supreme Headquarters of the Allied Powers in Europe. It was appropriate that the documentaries should be made by the BBC, since Britain’s MI6 and SAS were key movers and trainers, along with the CIA, in the Gladio operation.
In 1990 the Italian secret army was exposed by Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti to the Italian Senate, whereupon the press spoke of “The best kept, and most damaging, political-military secret since World War II”.
“On the morning of August 2, 1980, a massive bomb exploded in the waiting room of the central train station in Bologna, killing 81 people and injuring 200 others. General Santorito, the chief of Italy’s military intelligence agency, SISMI testified in the wake of the bombing that it had been planned by the British-Swiss-American ‘Montecarlo Comite’ based in Monaco.”
Google has unfortunatley removed the first two episodes of a three part documentary on Operation Gladio. Part three is shown above.
The My Lai Massacre was the mass murder of 347 to 504 unarmed citizens of the Republic of Vietnam (South Vietnam). They were almost entirely civilians, the majority of them women and children. The massacre was conducted by U.S. Army forces on March 16, 1968. Before being killed some of the victims were raped and sexually molested, beaten, tortured, or maimed. Some of the dead bodies were also mutilated.
Six months later, Tom Glen, a 21-year-old soldier of the 11th Light Infantry Brigade, wrote a letter to General Creighton Abrams, the new overall commander of U.S. forces in Vietnam, accusing the Americal Division (and other entire units of the U.S. military) of routine and pervasive brutality against Vietnamese civilians. The letter was detailed and its contents echoed complaints received from other soldiers.
Colin Powell, then a 31-year-old Army Major, was charged with investigating the letter, which did not specifically reference My Lai (Glen had limited knowledge of the events there). In his report Powell wrote: “In direct refutation of this portrayal is the fact that relations between American soldiers and the Vietnamese people are excellent.” Powell’s handling of the assignment was later characterized by some observers as “whitewashing” the atrocities of My Lai. In May 2004, Powell, then United States Secretary of State, told CNN’s Larry King, “I mean, I was in a unit that was responsible for My Lai. I got there after My Lai happened. So, in war, these sorts of horrible things happen every now and again, but they are still to be deplored.” further info from the BBC in 1988.

Beginning in mid July 2003, according to federal court records, Bush administration officials, including Richard Armitage, Karl Rove, and Lewis Libby, discussed with various reporters the employment of a then-classified, covert, CIA officer, Valerie E. Wilson (also known as Valerie Plame).
On September 16, 2003, the CIA sent a letter to the US Department of Justice asserting that Plame’s status as a CIA undercover operative was classified information and requested a federal investigation. Attorney General John Ashcroft referred the matter to the U.S. Department of Justice Office of Special Counsel, directed by Patrick Fitzgerald, who convened a grand jury. The “CIA leak” grand jury investigation did not result in the indictment or conviction of anyone for any crime in connection with the leak itself. However, I. Lewis Libby, Chief of Staff of Vice President Dick Cheney was indicted on five counts of obstruction of justice, perjury, and false statements to the grand jury and federal investigators on October 28, 2005; Libby resigned hours after the indictment.

Convinced that German scientists could help America’s postwar efforts, President Harry Truman agreed in September 1946 to authorize “Project Paperclip,” a program to bring selected German scientists to work on America’s behalf during the “Cold War”.
The highest proflie of these scientist was Wernher Von Braun the man who masterminded the Moon shots, and a member of numerous Nazi organisations, he also held rank in the SS. His initial intelligence file described him as “a security risk”. The US operation saw von Braun and more than 700 others spirited out of Germany from under the noses of the US’s allies. Interesting side piece: do some snooping and find out what and who links Werner von Braun and L. Ron Hubbard.
The Dunblane killer Thomas Hamilton might have been stripped of his firearms licence had prosecutors heeded police reports about his worrying behaviour towards children, according to secret files.
These include claims that police were tipped off that Hamilton was armed and en route to Dunblane Primary School, that he was a Freemason and received favours from Masons in the police allowing him to avoid prosecution, and that he was part of a paedophile ring that included members of the security forces. Lord Cullen on completing the public inquiry into the murders of 16 children and their teacher, ordered the documents in the case sealed for an extraordinary 100 years. Even the major media in Scotland thought this smelled funny. What was being hidden?
The report banned under the 100-year rule was com piled by Paul Hughes, then a detective sergeant with Central Scotland police, and concerns Thomas Hamilton’s activities at a summer camp in Loch Lomond in 1991, five years before the shootings. Selected extracts published during the Cullen inquiry revealed that it recommended Hamilton should be prosecuted for his activities at the summer camp and that he should have his gun licence revoked. The report, however, was ignored.
In October 2004, former conservative party chairman Lord Tebbit added his voice to the growing outrage at this decision, and in October 2005 half of the files were opened. Press reports suggested that the papers showed Hamilton be a paranoid obsessive, much given to writing letters of complaint to all and sundry; a paedophile ring has not been found.
On June the 8th 1967, during the six day war, Israel deliberately attacked the intelligence collection ship USS Liberty, in full awareness it was a U.S. Navy ship, and did its best to sink it and leave no survivors. The attack killed 34 U.S. servicemen and wounded at least 173.
Scores of intelligence analysts and senior officials have known this for years. That virtually all of them have kept a 40-year frightened silence is testament to the widespread fear of touching this live wire. According to NSA documents – classified top secret – some senior officials in Washington wanted above all, to protect Israel from embarrassment.
this video gives a brief overview of the incident along with a few others of note. Supporting Documents.
Classified documents obtained by a group of former workers at Thule, an Arctic air and radar base built by the United States in 1951-52, suggest that one of four hydrogen bombs on a B-52 bomber that crashed there in 1968 was never found, the daily Jyllands-Posten said “Detective work by a group of former Thule workers indicates that an unexploded nuclear bomb probably still lies on the seabed off Thule”, the mass-circulation daily said.
The crash, on January 21, 1968 led to a crisis in relations between the United States and NATO ally Denmark, which is responsible for Greenland’s foreign, security and defense policy and at the time prohibited nuclear weapons on its territory, including Greenland. Denmark was never informed about the lost bomb, which has serial number 78252, the paper said.
A U.S. state department document dated August 31, 1968 said all weapons onboard the crashed aircraft had been accounted for but did not spell out whether they had been recovered. The United States assured the Danish government in spring 1968 that clean-up work after the B-52 crash had been completed and gave up searching for the lost bomb in August that year.
Home to a ballistic missile early-warning radar station, Thule sits at the midpoint of a chain of similar sites between Alaska and the British Isles — a line along which the United States may build a shield against missiles from what it calls states of concern such as North Korea, Iraq, Iran and Libya.
In October 2007 the vatican published secret documents about the trial of the Knights Templar, including a parchment – long ignored because of a vague catalog entry in 1628 – showing that Pope Clement V initially absolved the medieval order of heresy. The Vatican work reproduces the entire documentation of the papal hearings convened after King Philip IV of France arrested and tortured Templar leaders in 1307 on charges of heresy and immorality.
According to the Vatican archives website, the parchment shows that Clement initially absolved the Templar leaders of heresy, though he did find them guilty of immorality, and that he planned to reform the order. However, pressured by King Philip (who threatened schism), Clement later reversed his decision and suppressed the order in 1312. Jacques de Molay, grand master of the Templars, was burned at the stake in 1314 along with his aides.
Contributor: Tamala



















April 29th, 2008 at 2:21 am
Quite frankly an amazing list, truely fascinating. Very nice job.
When I read the part about Operation Northwoods, I couldn’t help but thinking that, in a few years, there might be a similar list that would include “the most corrupt plan ever created by the U.S. government” : 9/11.
April 29th, 2008 at 2:30 am
Wow this list is awesome. I remember we studied the My Lai massacre at school, so sad. I can tell the comments for this list will be dominated by conspiracy theories.
April 29th, 2008 at 3:04 am
good ‘un, tamala
April 29th, 2008 at 3:18 am
Great list! More!
April 29th, 2008 at 3:41 am
Wow. I am overawed by the power of information and also by the human tendency to forget.
If the My Lai incident could have been openly confirmed and investigated back then, we could have done something about it. And now that its disclosed, is anyone going to do anything about it? Just goes to show, out of sight, out of mind. What a short term memory we have, shame on us.
I can imagine 30 years from now, my grandkids telling me that CIA has just declassified some evidence that shows Bush and Osama were best of friends who got together to play Cops and Robbers. The robber would go hide in oil rich countries and the cop would come looking and use “whatever means necessary” to “capture” the bad guy and in the process partake of any valuable natural resources that just “happened” to be there…
Ugh!
April 29th, 2008 at 3:57 am
Mojorisen thanks for your comment, its a good opportunity to remember that those officials who attempt to cover-up, deny, misinform, misderect the public and create myths on these matters, they are the REAL conspiracy theorists.
April 29th, 2008 at 4:03 am
Great list! I just can’t help think now, “What ELSE might be going on…”
April 29th, 2008 at 4:29 am
incredible fascinating list:) a delight to read.
though northwood should have been lower on number, or were they random?
April 29th, 2008 at 4:30 am
9/11 : Operation Northwood of the 21st Century. With Bush incharge is it too hard to believe!
April 29th, 2008 at 4:43 am
It’s astounding to think that a lot of these things have happened and the general public is still unaware of them.
It’s sad, for as much as we “study” our history and “study” our country, we only absorb the bright. The bitter tends to get left out of the equation.
Great list though.
April 29th, 2008 at 5:10 am
Churchill is still a bad ass…
April 29th, 2008 at 5:17 am
Awesome list.
It’s really sad to think that if people were more aware of how their governments have lied and covered up great secrets in the past, they would be more aware of how they are doing the same today.
April 29th, 2008 at 5:23 am
Great list Tamala! Really interesting to read, and very well written I think.
I can’t beleive they even contemplated blowing up John Glenn’s rocket. It would have put back space travel by decades.
April 29th, 2008 at 5:26 am
This is one of the best lists ever to appear on List Universe. Wonderful job, Tamala.
Readers should note: the “Thule bomb” isn’t the only atomic weapon that the US has “misplaced” over the years. Mother Jones published a list of these several years ago (reprinted in The Book of Lists).
The USS Liberty story has always been a fascinating one; most, over the years, have characterized it as the sadly all-too common “friendly fire” sort of mistake—but facts have never entirely borne this out. There were evidently many calls from the ship to onshore installations, for instance, that were acknowledged—and yet the attack continued.
April 29th, 2008 at 5:33 am
mojo: it will just take a little time til you are proved right that this will turn into conspiracy central.
i’ll pose a question for discussion…
being that, at least it seems to me, most people react negatively to the idea of a governmental cover-up, is it ever necessary and right for the government to conceal information from the general public? is it ever necessary and right to do things that alot of people might disagree with?
April 29th, 2008 at 5:49 am
i just skimmed it it looks awesome, i cant wait to read it after class
April 29th, 2008 at 5:51 am
@DiscHuker:
No. The government is supposed to serve the people. However, a long time ago, this got reversed and people are slaves to their own government. In this view, democracy is a failed ideology as much as people claim socialism and communism are.
But, if you talk to a well informed sociology professor, he or she will most likely defend the ideas of Marxism and communism, but with one problem – the world is not ready for it yet.
Democracy seems to be the same..
April 29th, 2008 at 5:59 am
This is a great list! One of the best here, for sure.
April 29th, 2008 at 6:07 am
a government should keep its people from knowledge that may not be good for them to know, so concealing some truths is fine by me.
but planning to kill some of its own citizens to justify war?
socialism is underrated. the capitalistic state of the U.S. is slowly destroying itself.
April 29th, 2008 at 6:08 am
i particularly liked 3. And people to day feel safe trusting governments, thet they are not being lied to. It seems that govts just cant not lie and cheat and backstab.
April 29th, 2008 at 6:18 am
Iam now living her in Southeast Asia and I am so happy that I can still browse listverse. Tamala, list like you’ve presented to us, made me an avid fan of List Universe
April 29th, 2008 at 6:21 am
TO TOMO:
“If the My Lai incident could have been openly confirmed and investigated back then, we could have done something about it. And now that its disclosed, is anyone going to do anything about it? Just goes to show, out of sight, out of mind. What a short term memory we have, shame on us.”
From the same Wikipedia entry that this list was copied and pasted from:
“The carnage at My Lai might have gone unknown to history if not for another soldier, Ron Ridenhour, a former member of Charlie Company, who, independently of Glen, sent a letter detailing the events at My Lai to President Richard M. Nixon, the Pentagon, the State Department, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, and numerous members of Congress.[25] The copies of this letter were sent in March 1969, a full year after the event. Most recipients of Ridenhour’s letter ignored it, with the notable exception of Congressman Morris Udall (D-Arizona). Ridenhour learned about the events at My Lai secondhand, by talking to members of Charlie Company while he was still enlisted.
Eventually, Calley was charged with several counts of premeditated murder in September 1969, and 25 other officers and enlisted men were later charged with related crimes. It was another two months before the American public learned about the massacre and trials.
Independent investigative journalist Seymour Hersh, after extensive conversations with Calley, broke the My Lai story on 12 November 1969; on 20 November, Time, Life and Newsweek magazines all covered the story, and CBS televised an interview with Paul Meadlo. The Cleveland Plain Dealer published explicit photographs of dead villagers killed at My Lai. As is evident from comments made in a 1969 telephone conversation between United States National Security Advisor Henry Kissinger and Secretary of Defense Melvin Laird, revealed recently[when?] by the National Security Archive, the photos of the war crime were too shocking for senior officials to stage an effective cover-up. Secretary of Defense Laird was heard to say, “There are so many kids just lying there; these pictures are authentic.”[citation needed]
In November 1969, General William R. Peers was appointed to conduct a thorough investigation into the My Lai incident and its subsequent cover-up. Peers’ final report, published in March 1970, was highly critical of top officers for participation in a cover-up and the Charlie Company officers for their actions at My Lai 4.[26] According to Peers’s findings:
[The 1st Battalion] members had killed at least 175-200 Vietnamese men, women, and children. The evidence indicates that only 3 or 4 were confirmed as Viet Cong although there were undoubtedly several unarmed VC (men, women, and children) among them and many more active supporters and sympathizers. One man from the company was reported as wounded from the accidental discharge of his weapon.[2]
However, critics of the Peers Commission pointed out that it sought to place the real blame on four officers who were already dead, foremost among them being the CO of TF Barker, LTC Frank Barker, who was killed in a mid air collision on June 13, 1968.”
It was openly confirmed and investigated back then, and several people were prosecuted, most notably a 2LT William Calley (who ended up effectively being the scapegoat for all of the actions that happened that day).
More information:
“On the eve of the attack, at the Charlie Company briefing, Captain Ernest Medina informed his men that nearly all the civilian residents of the hamlets in Sơn Mỹ village would have left for the market by 07:00 and that any who remained would be NLF or NLF sympathizers.[11] He was also asked whether the order included the killing of women and children; those present at the briefing later gave different accounts of Medina’s response. Some of the company soldiers, including platoon leaders, later testified that the orders as they understood them were to kill all guerrilla and North Vietnamese combatants and “suspects” (including women and children, as well as all animals), to burn the village, and pollute the wells.[12]”
“Hugh Thompson, Jr., a 24-year-old helicopter pilot from an aero-scout team, witnessed a large number of dead and dying civilians as he began flying over the village – all of them infants, children, women and old men, with no signs of draft-age men or weapons anywhere. Thompson and his crew witnessed an unarmed passive woman kicked and shot at point-blank range by Captain Medina (Medina later claimed that he thought she had a grenade).[18] The crew made several attempts to radio for help for the wounded. They landed their helicopter by a ditch, which they noted was full of bodies and in which there was movement. Thompson asked a Sergeant he encountered there (David Mitchell of the 1st Platoon) if he could help get the people out of the ditch, and the Sergeant replied that he would “help them out of their misery”. Thompson, shocked and confused, had then a conversation with Lieutenant Calley, commanding officer of the 1st Platoon, who claimed to be “just following orders”. As the helicopter took off, they saw Mitchell firing into the ditch.
Thompson then saw a group of civilians (again consisting of children, women and old men) at a bunker being approached by ground personnel. Thompson landed and told his crew that if the U.S. soldiers shot at the Vietnamese while he was trying to get them out of the bunker that they were to open fire at these soldiers. Thompson later testified that he spoke with a Lieutenant (identified as Stephen Brooks of the 2nd Platoon) and told him there were women and children in the bunker, and asked if the Lieutenant would help get them out. According to Thompson, “he [the Lieutenant] said the only way to get them out was with a hand grenade”. Thompson testified that he then told Brooks to “just hold your men right where they are, and I’ll get the kids out”. He found 12 to 16 people in the bunker, coaxed them out and led them to the helicopter, standing with them while they were flown out in two groups.
Returning to My Lai, Thompson and other air crew members noticed several large groups of bodies. Spotting some survivors in the ditch Thompson landed again and one of the crew members entered the ditch. The crew member returned with a bloodied but apparently unharmed child who was flown to safety. The child was thought to be a boy, but later investigation found that it was a 4-year-old girl. Thompson then reported what he had seen to his company commander, Major Watke, using terms such as “murder” and “needless and unnecessary killings”. Thompson’s reports were confirmed by other pilots and air crew.[19]
In 1998, three former U.S. servicemen who stopped their comrades from killing a number of villagers, significantly reducing casualties at My Lai, were awarded medals in Washington D.C.[20] The veterans also made contact with the survivors of My Lai.”
April 29th, 2008 at 6:27 am
Great job. Interesting facts. I like that you had old and new in the list.
April 29th, 2008 at 6:30 am
brilliant list!
Operation Northwoods is quite scary
April 29th, 2008 at 6:43 am
#2 has always sparked my interest. I have a time/life book at home (title fails me at the moment) that lists interesting facts and it has a list of lost nuclear bombs, including the one for #2. I ran across a website a while back:
http://www.cdi.org/Issues/NukeAccidents/Accidents.htm
that goes into details about a lot of lost bombs. Always found it interesting so many have been lost.
April 29th, 2008 at 7:08 am
I find it interesting that the people realize how governments can do terrible things and therefore can’t be trusted, yet so many people believe we should trust the government to run our healthcare system? This shows that the less the government has its hands in, the better. Also, 9/11 was not a conspiracy. You say “With Bush incharge is it too hard to believe!” How many people would have to be in on this conpiracy for it to actually work? How many people would the government have to TELL about this conspiracy for it actually to be covered up? The idea that not ONE of those people would ever come forward to say they were approached by anyone with the idea for 9/11 before it happened is ridiculous. I understand that they would be scared for their safety, but plenty of countries would offer them protection.
April 29th, 2008 at 7:11 am
If a government official came to you with the idea of setting off a bomb in LA so they could blame it on Iran so they could justly go into Iran, would you say yes? Obviously not. You may be afraid for your life, but to think that if it actually happened you would never tell anyone is ridiculous. Also, if it actually was a conspiracy, wouldn’t the government stop anything like “Loose Change” from ever being out in the public. All the things in Loose Change have been explained by physicists by the way.
April 29th, 2008 at 7:16 am
This all reinforces my choice to NOT believe anything the White House says to the public. Since the U.S. seems to be the common denominator in this list, anyone who believes everything they are being told in the media is ignorant. What will be released in 40 years regarding the War in Iraq??? Scary thought…
I’m NOT American, and I am truly glad to live in a country where I don’t feel like I’m being lied to all the time.
April 29th, 2008 at 7:41 am
mike…you make some valid points about the number of people that would be needed to cover up things like 911, but just one equally ridiculous point among a host of others is, how can a plane strike the pentagon, be vaporised by the heat from the explosion, but the passengers were identified by credit cards and fingerprints? The truth about 911 is that no1 has told the whole truth.
Riley, i hope this list doesnt look like i’m having a pop at the U.S. The fact is, at least the U.S. eventually relases information, it would be very difficult to have a list full of info from china, russia etc, here in Scotland we keep EVERYTHING hidden for as long as possible, hence the reason no4 was included.
April 29th, 2008 at 7:49 am
9/11 conspiracy theories are sometimes more easy to believe than not- I mean, Osama bin Laden, once getting wages off the US to terrorise who the US wants terrorising, part of a family that is friendly with the Bushes? It’s Bay of Pigs stuff.
The official account requires a lot of coincidences on that day, I guess.
Not saying I believe either way, but it’s certainly not something to be discounted.
April 29th, 2008 at 7:52 am
Tamala:
Back up a little bit. You did a good job on this list, but don’t run roughshod over the facts about 9/11.
The plane that struck the Pentagon was NOT “vaporized” by the explosion; this is a common error that conspiracy nuts make so that they can then go on to claim that there WAS no plane. It’s not surprising, however, that the plane *was* almost totally destroyed… an aircraft, even a jetliner, is a relatively fragile object… and as physics will tell us, when such an object strikes a far more hefty and structurally strong object (such as the steel-reinforced concrete of the Pentagon) at speed, the weaker object is going to suffer the worse damage.
And who says the passengers were identified by “credit cards” and fingerprints alone? Perhaps a few were—again, as with the plane itself, it wouldn’t be surprising that some body parts survived the crash, although the effects of the collision and explosion would have negated the idea of *intact* bodies… but it’s not impossible that a few personal items would have survived, as well.
April 29th, 2008 at 7:54 am
“I’m NOT American, and I am truly glad to live in a country where I don’t feel like I’m being lied to all the time.”
haha I guess you’re just as ignorant as you think Americans are, then. Wherever you may be from, rest assured that your government at all levels is constantly lying to you. Naive much?
April 29th, 2008 at 7:56 am
Riley:
You’re naive if you think there’s ANY government currently extant that doesn’t lie to its citizens.
In the US we still stand a better chance of extracting information from our government than in many other nations–at least as long as we have a citizenry that actively believes in its freedoms and dignity, and a media which remembers that its job is to find the truth. (admittedly the latter has suffered over the last few years).
April 29th, 2008 at 7:57 am
Many of the secrets on this list would be completely unknown or considered mere theories if they hadn’t been declassified. Yet for many years they were secret even though many people were involved.
Then why couldn’t this be happening today?
I’m scared of the things that governments kept secret, but I’m even more scared of what they are still hiding. And rest assured that they can manage keeping a conspiracy under wraps no matter how many are involved, because that’s exactly what has been done in the past (as you can see from this list).
The first priority of a conspiracy is to keep itself secret no matter the cost.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:07 am
Anyone hear about those smiley face murders? that sounds like some sort of cover up to me.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:14 am
DiscHuker: The government should be given a longer leash with regard to national security if, and only if, the government is preventing an attack of some sort. To take away the civil liberties of civilians just to provoke an action from someone else should be fully disclosed and prosecuted.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:14 am
Randall thanks for your comments, i totally agree with your points, i hope we can agree that as far as 911 goes, for various reasons, whether we agree with them or not, you and i wont be told the whole truth, not just yet anyway.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:18 am
dr. Hannibal:
Again, we’re getting lectures from a resident of a former totalitarian state on Democracy. You need a dose of humility, Lecter. My hope is that one day you get it. For your own sake. You’d be all the wiser.
Democracy is not a “failed ideology.” Indeed, democracy is NOT an ideology at all–much less a failed one. An ideology is a system; it implies a systematic structure–usually passed down by an elite to the masses, as it were. It usually involves a “master text” as well… such as “Mein Kampf” or “The Communist Manifesto.”
Democracy has none of these. It is simply the rule of the people. Nothing more, nothing less. It implies nothing except freedom and the rule of law… guided by the will, the participation, and the consent of the people. Even our modern day version of democracy—representative democracy, as it were–has no “master text.” The closest thing we have is the codification of its overriding principles in various forms—most notably the Declaration of Independence and the Declaration of the Rights of Man, and in the Constitution of the United States and the Bill of Rights.
Fascism and Communism were ideologies, Lecter. Not Democracy.
Neither is it “failed.” Democracy simply requires constant vigilance and active participation of the people. When the people no longer participate–when they no longer care enough, and no longer play the role they’re supposed to play—then it ceases to BE democracy, and becomes something else.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:22 am
Tamala:
Agreed.
One thing I DO feel… that 9/11 needn’t have happened. And one day we’ll have the truth about that–how through incompetence and poor judgement, as well as greed and slimy associations, the various administrations, since the 1980s and most particularly since the Cold War ended—have totally fucked up our foreign policy and practically *invited* this kind of madness to hit us.
But no… we probably won’t know the whole story of that for a long time to come.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:25 am
The democracy we have, whether that’s actually “Democracy” or not, has failed I guess. It’s just a word we use to justify doing awful things, y’know? Like “liberty” and such. They don’t mean a thing anymore.
Is it democracy when we can’t really change anything? When we can elect a new face for our governments, but that’s all?
Our countries are only moral when it’s convenient I guess
Someone should do a “Top Ten Common Products made by Slaves” or “Top Ten Evil Sources of Developed Countries Wealth”
April 29th, 2008 at 8:25 am
Randall: Well said. I think the democratic checks and balances system is the best possible government. Sure, it gets abused sometimes and things fall through the cracks, but it is better than one group telling its’ citizens what they can and cannot do.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:26 am
I swear, someday, when the technology (and my personal wealth…) is there, I’m moving to the moon. Anyone who wants to tag along is more than welcome to come.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:27 am
superb list!!! Very interesting, yet scary at the same time. Makes me wonder what else they haven’t told us.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:28 am
trojan_man:
Right.
BUT… we ARE in danger of becoming “something else” if we don’t watch it. Now more than ever.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:28 am
Hobolad: this country is a democracy because YOU can represent your ideals and morals (along with others) by holding a political office. As far as I know, you only have to be 35 years old and an American-born citizen to be President (it helps to be rich). Not many countries give that kind of hope.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:33 am
It’d be cool if it was that easy though. It’s the ones that have the backing of the companies and the religious Fundamentalists that get in.
It’s the illusion of choice I guess.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:38 am
Hobolad: hey – nice to see you on the site again – it has been ages!
Phillies: hmm – do I get a special discount?
trojan_man: you can be president if you are born of an American parent who lives in another country – I think the only requirement is something about having BEEN in America within so many years of the election.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:40 am
The USS Liberty was not an intentional attack on a US ship. Us intelligence agreed with Israel that it was probably an Egyptian ship disguised as a US ship and only realized that it wasn’t when it was too late.
http://www.thelibertyincident.com/docs/CIAreports.pdf
Furthermore, what possible motive could ISrael have had to attack a US ship?
April 29th, 2008 at 8:48 am
jfrater: You remembered
I’ve been an avid reader. It’s quite an accomplishment for the site to be as interesting now as ever- congrats!
I guess the problem isn’t with democracy, or communism, or socialism- just with human nature. Selfishness and such. I mean- slavery is horrible! But if it’s tasty chocolate or cheap clothes, we’ll condone slavery (I mean try and boycott Nestle or Coca Cola, it won’t do a thing, people love ‘em)-out of sight out of mind- no one cares, except when someone does a documentary, then people are expected to care. And for a couple of days, they do.
It’s kinda like those animal cruelty types who see animal cruelty everywhere they look. Everywhere you look you can see something that is rotten under the surface. Almost everything, in fact
April 29th, 2008 at 8:50 am
hobolad: why take a pot shot at “religous fundamentalists”? you expose your bias. other than the bush boys, and maybe reagan, what president has benefited from this backing?
April 29th, 2008 at 8:52 am
hobolad: i think you hit the nail on the head noting that the problem with human forms of government is that there are humans involved. our nature is the problem. it is just manifested in whatever we set our minds to.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:54 am
@Randall:
Well, you said it: former. If I ever start feeling like I need a dose of humility, I will call you and we can go to a Humility Workshop together.
So democracy is “the rule of the people”? And “implies nothing except freedom and the rule of law”. Whose laws? Laws of the people? How many laws have you written? How many laws have you voted for? Do you think that your “freedom” consists of choosing one crooked bastard over another? Because I don’t see anything beyond that. Democracy – like socialism and communism – does not exist in practice.
If democracy isn’t a ideology, it certainly is an illusion of freedom. (A very good one apparently)
I know you won’t believe a thing I say, because I am “a resident of a former totalitarian state”; so I suggest going to a sociology college (in a foreign country if possible), you will learn the difference between “old school oppression” and “voluntary oppression” (think “Patriot Act”).
Also, would you mind answering my post on “Top 10 Most Dangerous Places on Earth”? That ought to be interesting.
@Riley:
Yes you are, you are being lied every day of your life. Don’t even think that your country/govt is better than USA in any way.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:56 am
@DiscHuker:
Correct. Ultimately, it doesn’t really matter which form of government are we talking about. There are always going to be a pack of scheming bastards to take care of business.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:57 am
DiscHuker: It wasn’t a pot shot, just an observation. Would a non-Christian have a chance? It’s mainly the Republicans, I guess. Guns and god y’know? Every politician who wants a chance has to at least pay lip service, though.
I mean, over here in the UK- we don’t really do god, Tony Blair coming out as Catholic was very unpopular indeed. Any hint of religion in politics we see in the USA (there’s a lot of it) we kind of…. look down on, I guess. Rightfully or wrongfully. Probably it’s just the cultural difference, but to us any hint of religion is a no-no.
April 29th, 2008 at 9:01 am
And I’m not trying to say our way of politics is any better! It most certainly isn’t, but I don’t like to comment on it, being part of the country- you can’t really understand the big picture unless you’re apart from it, I think. An observer rather than a participant.
April 29th, 2008 at 9:03 am
discHuker: I agree with you and Hobolad. The problem is not just found in politics either – it is also the root of problems in religion I think.
April 29th, 2008 at 9:03 am
jogiff:
There’s more to the story than that.
As I said–it’s been dismissed over the years as an error. And it may have been.
But there are elements of the story that make this highly questionable. You haven’t dug deep enough. The CIA report you cited omits some details and generally whitewashes the matter.
As to WHY an intentional attack would have occurred… good question.
April 29th, 2008 at 9:03 am
I found this when trying to find the link between Werner von Braun and L. Ron Hubbard. Extremely interesting:
http://www.rickross.com/reference/scientology/scien240.html
April 29th, 2008 at 9:13 am
Joss: Ron Hubbard Jr is one of the worst things that could happen to Scientology – he certainly doesn’t hold anything back when discussing the cult! Great link – thanks
April 29th, 2008 at 9:17 am
wd Joss, the whole point of this list was to encourage people to do their own reasearch..Werner von Braun described Jack Parsons as the real father of the american space programme, his involvement with L. Ron Hubbard is described here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Babalon_Working
April 29th, 2008 at 9:18 am
Yeah, he’s actually quite brave, isn’t he?
April 29th, 2008 at 9:21 am
Good list! Although I completely disagree with anyone who says that 9/11 was staged.
April 29th, 2008 at 9:24 am
For those of you debating over whether or not 9/11 was a staged event or not, take a look at this excellent site where the guy goes through a point by point debunking of the “Loose Change” video, and the ideas behind the conspiracy in general. It’s quite good.
http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html
It certainly made me wonder how people can believe in a video with this many concerns.
(and I hope the link works when I post it)
April 29th, 2008 at 9:28 am
Jfrater, you had me watching intently until #3. I heard the voice of Alex Jones. I wouldn’t believe that guy if he told me water was wet.
April 29th, 2008 at 9:29 am
Yes!
I love me some conspiracies!
Hitler is Alive in Antartica!
Thule-Bavarian control of U.S. Intelligence!
Inner Earth Aliens planning Nuclear Holocaust!
April 29th, 2008 at 9:31 am
While reading a lot of posts I was reminded of an article that I read about ungrateful Americans. Just remember what we have in this country, that’s all I’m asking. Read the article:
http://urbanlegends.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?zi=1/XJ&sdn=urbanlegends&cdn=newsissues&tm=105&gps=340_2386_1436_754&f=00&su=p504.1.336.ip_&tt=2&bt=1&bts=1&zu=http%3A//www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp%3FARTICLE_ID%3D53028
April 29th, 2008 at 9:35 am
This is a great article about how Americans are somewhat spoiled when it comes to the things we take for granted, I think some people on this site need to read it.
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp%3FARTICLE_ID%3D53028
April 29th, 2008 at 9:39 am
hobolad: every system of government could conceivably work if it were run in the best interest of the people. However, the beauty (and folly) of the USA is that it has a myriad of types of people. No one will always be truly happy with the decisions of the government. Hence, democracy – the majority rules. Oh yeah, Jimmy Carter didn’t get into the white house with huge corporation financing (I think it was looks and smarts, though).
April 29th, 2008 at 9:42 am
Whats up with all the America Bashing?
Goddamn Commie Liberals, just hate freedom I guess.
Heres to the USA!
(drinks beer)
April 29th, 2008 at 9:44 am
OK, who can read the article about Babalon Working and not be reminded of Eyes Wide Shut? Ya know, the one starring Tom Cruise????
April 29th, 2008 at 9:45 am
NeoLudd: none from me or the list author at least – I have nothing but wonderful memories of my US holidays. I do agree with the beer comment though
April 29th, 2008 at 10:00 am
warrrreagl, a rather lengthy look at eyes wide shut, lots of high wierdness, make of this what you will,
http://kentroversypapers.blogspot.com/2006/03/eyes-wide-shut-occult-symbolism.html
April 29th, 2008 at 10:13 am
@22. Kyle–keep your copy and pastes to a paragraph or two amigo. Or just sum up an idea succinctly in your own words. No need to copy and paste War and Peace as a follow up either.
April 29th, 2008 at 10:27 am
Tamala:
Excelent Contribution! Thank you.
Though I wouldn’t put the MyLai in the same category as Operation Northwoods. MyLai was not based on an official policy of the US government, and there were court marshals against the perps. Northwoods was a plan of official policy.
(aside to NeoLudd & jfrader: I second that beer comment)
April 29th, 2008 at 10:30 am
I would like to take this time to remind everybody that:
The U.S. is not a DEMOCRACY! It is a REPUBLIC!
Some of you think you’re so smart, and you don’t even know the difference.
April 29th, 2008 at 10:38 am
Hey Tamala. Do me a favor. Look up the temperature in which jet fuel burns, and look up the temperature in which steel melts.
Do that will you?
Some people pretend to be educated.
April 29th, 2008 at 10:44 am
For those of you who think America is bad: I guess you are the lucky ones when I get off work today and I go home to my 2200 sq ft home on my five acres. I’m only middle class, and wish I could afford more, but I guess if I lived in some other country, I could have more.
April 29th, 2008 at 10:49 am
CFAustin i know all about the temps and the thermite
April 29th, 2008 at 10:56 am
CFAustin: Are you drinking beer? Thats the only way to celebrate.
April 29th, 2008 at 11:27 am
The U.S. is not a DEMOCRACY! It is a REPUBLIC!
And not JUST a republic, but a REPRESENTATIVE republic. Remember, China is a ‘republic’ too – but a COMMUNIST one
April 29th, 2008 at 11:29 am
#7 makes me want to bawl. I can’t believe there are some people capable of doing that to defenseless women and CHILDREN. The picture breaks my heart into a million pieces. Seeing the babies laying near their Moms is awful. I’m a Mommy to 2 girls, and I just have to push this image out of my mind.
April 29th, 2008 at 11:31 am
lol, well, done see canada doing this shit, go figure….
April 29th, 2008 at 11:32 am
amazing list, best one in a long time. Keep up the good work. And for all of y’all debating 9/11 being a conspiracy, zeitgeist.com.
April 29th, 2008 at 11:51 am
Oh! And I love it how people use wikipedia like it’s the god of all sources.
April 29th, 2008 at 12:03 pm
Gawd another list
I love you for this jfrater, I’ve told my friends about this site. and they’ve become junkies like me
! thanks
April 29th, 2008 at 12:12 pm
Very nice. Good research, Tamala. Interesting! Thanks!
April 29th, 2008 at 12:16 pm
Great list, but many of these are choppy, and don’t flow well.
April 29th, 2008 at 12:46 pm
One of the best lists in a while. Excellent job Tamala!
Almost makes you want to cozy up to the conspiracy weirdo’s out there. Almost, but not quite.
April 29th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
Tamala, you seem to be someone who actually believes that 9/11 was a conspiracy. I’m curious what drove you to that belief, because from what I’ve seen the vast majority of the evidence is against it.
April 29th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Wow, amazing list tamala, one of the best in a while, its amazing what is kept secret.
April 29th, 2008 at 1:39 pm
As I read this, I wondered, “How long before someone claims 9/11 should have been on this list?” And there it was in the very first comment!
April 29th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Canuck, there are many theories surrounding 911 and i was hoping not to be bogged down by them on this list, it isnt my job to tell you what to believe or what to think, we have enough people doing that to us already. I would merely suggest that you watch something like “loose change” if you think its valid then encourage others to watch it, if you think its nonsense then discard it and leave it at that. One thing i think is 100% fact is that neither you or i or the producers of loose change and other docu’s concerning 911 and indeed even the 911 commision were never going to be told the whole truth about that tragic day when lets not forget almost 3.000 people from 80 different countries lost their lives in a way that none of us could ever imagine if our worst and wildest nightmnares were all rolled into 1. In tribute to their memory im not going to get into a name calling and accusitory game of grammatical ping pong. I realise this answer doesnt fully satisfy your question, but i trust you will understand the reasons for it.
April 29th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Mom424 – If you really need a conspiracy nut to cuddle with, I am that nut.
April 29th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
There is an age, citizenship and residency requirement for president.
Article II, Section 1 of the Constitution:
No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
April 29th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
Lol…Plame.
The Special Prosecuter found that there was no crime committed insofar as revealing her secret identity…that wasn’t so secret. Libby was caught in a technical violation during this waste of a political fishing trip.
Plame was a nobody until she was ‘outed’. Then the poor people who just wanted to be left alone were all over the news and had a giant spread in Vanity Fair.
Please…try to be a little more objective in your list selection. There’s no way this tempest in a tea kettle belongs on the same list as My Lai. You trivialize what was truly tragic by including this nonsense.
April 29th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Well said, northerner. And the fact that Plame is a higher rank than My Lai. whats up with that? set aside your opinions and use a little objectivism.
April 29th, 2008 at 3:31 pm
Great list, but there are always more ideas to add. Since 911 has already been mentioned (and there’s no definitive evidence) let’s mention a couple where the truth is pretty well known:
Three words: Gulf of Tonkin. 58,256 American dead.
Three letters: WMD. some as-yet-unknown trillions of dollars, some s-yet-unknown thousands of lives.
Do we detect a pattern here?
April 29th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Yeah, heres a pattern for ya….
Back-seat listing.
April 29th, 2008 at 3:41 pm
Interesting list. Good job, Tamala!
April 29th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
Funny how W’s supposed be such a douchebag idiot moron, can’t talk to save his life, has screwed up everything in our country, but he’s smart enough to pull off one of the greatest conspiracies ever. Interesting. . .
April 29th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Tamala: I have seen Loose Change, but I have also read many articles that debunk everything that is in it. Popular Mechanics has run a lot of articles that debunk everything in it. If people are really interested they should look at both sides and decide for themselves. My opinion is that Loose Change makes a lot of points that make you think, but the other side easily debunks what is in it. I haven’t heard the creators of Loose Change shoot back to defend themselves and I believe they can’t.
April 29th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
good point mike, “If people are really interested they should look at both sides and decide for themselves”, i totally agree
April 29th, 2008 at 4:14 pm
For as horrible as everything every country on earth has done i just continue to say that there is no goverment that is victimless and innocent. it is not about the goverments! its about the countries! in this country we reshuffle our goverment out every 20 years. that beats the hell out of dictators for life or unopposable rulers. Bush is out in a few months and in a few years no remnants of his cabinet will exist. goverments will always be dishonest, but you have to look at whether a country gives its people the right to change that goverment over time. America can and its something that i love about it.
I love America!
I have little love for our current goverment!
I am patriotic!
I am against the war!
But i love our soldiers and support them!
People who think those comments are hypocritcal or somehow make no sense to exist in one person should really take a look at the way they feel towards their own countries, not just America but all the countries on earth.
April 29th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
bucslim: have you ever heard of figureheads?
April 29th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
47. jfrater
)
Sure. I’ll give you…20% off. But I get to ride shotgun since it’s my idea (I certainly can’t fly the shuttle. I have no idea how
April 29th, 2008 at 5:13 pm
Tamala, you completely missed my point, and my question. I for one believe that 9/11 wasn’t a conspiracy theory, and pretty much everyone I know believes that as well. Which is why I want to hear your side of it. I can’t get it anywhere else. You say later that we should look at both sides and then make our decision, so I’m trying to get that other side. I saw Loose Change, and it was horribly put together. I want to hear the side from someone who isn’t looking to make sensationalist claims, and who can make reasonable and imformed comments. I don’t want to engage in “grammatical ping pong” as you put it, I don’t do that on here. This is a place where people can learn, so try and teach me.
April 29th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
Great list Tamala, great site JFrater.
As regards the 9/11 conspiracy and specifically the rebuke that “9/11 couldn’t be true, too many people would have to keep it quiet and surely at least ONE person would talk… etc..”
I’d just like to say, (I might be reafirming a point already made earlier but i’ve not seen a good retort to it yet) but if all these previous coverups were sucessful and no one blew the whistle on them and it was kept quiet long enough for the public in general to forget, then why can’t it be going on now?
Well it is going on now and i’m fairly sure 9/11 is a coverup. Its not too hard to believe that what happened 9/11 happened as per the official reports, the suicide bombers WERE Saudi, the planes weren’t radio controlled, the pentagon wasn’t hit by a missle, but was in fact hit by a passenger plane flown by ‘terrorists’. People just dont think that the terrorists were in cahoots with certain elements of the US government who are set to become very rich as a result. It’s not that hard to believe this whole idea could be cooked up and spoken about when the guilty Americans and all too happy to comply Bin Ladens (and their contacts) were in regular contact before during and after the incident. I dunno it just smells very fishy to me and money, especially vast sums of money can make people do some very terrible things.
April 30th, 2008 at 1:19 am
Great list, thanks for posting.
Re: 9/11 & whether it was a ‘conspiracy’ or not–it’s simple:
Everyone believes it was a conspiracy. Unless you imagine that a single person pulled off the entire event.
So it’s a matter of competing theories, complicated by the fact there were 4 synchronized events, followed by additional events: the near-freefall collapses of 3 buildings that fell in NYC, including Building 7 (aka, WTC7).
Ask the same questions of Al Qaeda that you would of any possible U.S. connection: how could all those cave-dwellers plan such a huge & hugely successful series of events without ever spilling the beans? -They can keep big secrets for years, but we/Americans can’t?
How did all those Islamic conspirators manage to keep a vast conspiracy quiet? Especially given all the CIA, FBI, NSA, DIA, etc intel–not to mention Israeli Saudi, Paki & British intel, among many others?
How has Osama Bin Laden managed to continue evading all the massive efforts to get him for 6.5 yrs?
Here’s a shocker: check out the FBI’s official ‘Most Wanted Terrorist’ poster (fbi.gov) and see if 9/11 is even mentioned..
Also, check out the Architects & Engineers website:
http://www.ae911truth.org
The numbers are growing steadily, but at the moment, they have 355 Architectural & Engineering Professionals signed up demanding a new & independent investigation–especially as relates to the 3 towers that all fell in a manner consistent with some form of controlled demolition. That 355 number is hugely significant–for several reasons, but just one is how many hoops you have to go through to be added to the list–it’s an extremely well-qualified list of professionals.
There are many silly theories floating around re: 9/11–including many aspects of the ‘official’ conspiracy theory. Btw, there is no official/sanctioned theory re: how the 47-story WTC7 collapsed in 6.5 seconds on 9/11. N.I.S.T continues to delay it’s report after all these years. And they never bothered to explain the actual collapse sequence of WTC1 & 2, only up to the initiation of collapse.
They also don’t acknowledge the pools of molten metal found/noted by numerous firefighters at the bases of all 3 towers. No good explanation for temps far, far exceeding what jet-fuel can produce–even under ideal conditions (perfect mix of air/fuel).
My suggestion is to remain skeptical of all theories–but especially of the hugely self-serving official versions which have been leveraged to start two wars, reduce freedoms, and torture human beings. Not to mention all the direct profit-connections to Haliburton & various Big Oil interests.
April 30th, 2008 at 2:02 am
canuck? or canuch? not sure what your name is now. Lack of attention to detail is what lets everything on this list happen. Governments since the beginning of civilisation have lied, we can debate the rights and wrongs of that all day long, but its a fact. Regarding your post @ 89. Where is your evidence that i believe 911 was a conspiracy? You seem to make assumption based on very little or no evidence at all. Maybe seperate lists about 911 myths and truths is whats needed to allow people to see all sides of the issue.
Personally i think the bush administration completely screwed up and ignored warnings from amongst others Bill Clinton, they dug a huge hole for themselves, that they had to cover up so much in the aftermath of the tragedy. This makes it very easy for people to accuse them of all sorts.
My absolute LAST word on 911, i direct you here http://thewebfairy.com/killtown/oddities/911.html
see what you think.
I also note that you dont make any comments on the contents of this list. I’d be interested to read your comments.
April 30th, 2008 at 2:04 am
Frank..excellent post
April 30th, 2008 at 2:41 am
Tamala, thank you–and my apologies for not commenting on the list you posted.. meant to, but got carried away with 9/11 stuff.
Most on your list were familiar (Gladio, Northwoods, Plame, etc), but some were new to me, so great to learn about them and also to get concise & incisive descripts of all 10.. My Lai was one I’d been meaning to learn more about–especially re: Colin Powell’s involvement. An excellent intro/refresher all round.
btw, that killtown ‘oddities’ site you ref’d is incredible.. saw it a year or 2 ago, but looks like it’s been updated since.
April 30th, 2008 at 3:07 am
To you seriously deluded nuts that think the U.S. Govt was responsible for 911, I assume you also beleive the earth to be flat and that man also never landed on the moon.
Seriously…how utterly uneducated and ignorant can people be??
Islamic terrorists have been threatening the West and East for decades if not for centuries….Islam has been on a blitzkrieg since its inception…it is fighting from the Phillipines to Nigeria and Western Europe and Eastern Europe and Africa and so on and so forth..
People that are so liberally blinded by thier hatred of America choose to look the other way…they HATE truth….
Wait till Sharia starts being established in England and France…then many of you illiterate no nothings will awaked to the real battle that we are in!!
http://www.faithfreedom.org
April 30th, 2008 at 5:17 am
i don’t know if i would call my lai a conspiracy or not. it was a military action that had terrible results. the reason it made the news, was that a life magazine photographer published photos for the american public that caused an uproar.
when the backlash began, the shit began rolling downhill from the top brass and landed on lt. william calley, the man in charge at the scene. he said he was given an order. the men at headquarters said no we didn’t. the jury said you shouldn’t have listened to such an order.
it never really was covered up. just a terrible handling of a terrible situation.
April 30th, 2008 at 5:18 am
Here here, Devon!
April 30th, 2008 at 5:33 am
Frank, WTC7 collapsed in 6.5 seconds from when? From the time the creaking and shaking started? I notice that every time I see a video of this collapse they are showing only one side of the building. Why not show the other side with the huge hole in it and the fact that black smoke is spewing out the back. The building was on FIRE and it was evacuated because firemen figured it would collapse.
As for the pools of molten metal: http://911myths.com/html/wtc_molten_steel.html
That explains it all.
I’m not sure what you mean by the N.I.S.T. has delayed its report all these years. It was released over 2 and a half years ago. http://wtc.nist.gov/reports_october05.htm
Unlike conspiracy theorists like the producers of Loose Change, N.I.S.T. actually INVESTIGATES and that takes time.
April 30th, 2008 at 5:44 am
Frank:
The last I checked, most of the “professionals” who were calling for more investigations about how the WTC buildings came down were NOT building engineers. Many ARE professionals in other fields, some are architects… but very few of them have the unique knowledge and experience that structural and building engineers have with this sort of problem–and I would be willing to be that many of them don’t have all their facts straight.
I’ve spoken to this issue of the towers coming down as though from a “controlled demolition” before–and as I’ve said, appearances DON’T equal facts. Now, anyone who reads this site knows that I have an academic background and work in academia. As it happens, I have a good friend who is a former Dean in Engineering, and who is also a Physicist. We once talked about this question. I asked him what he thought, and he said that it *did* look like the towers were brought down deliberately (i.e., in a “controlled demolition.”) I then asked him if he really felt that’s what happened, and he said, “no, of course not,” and we went on to talk about how appearances are deceiving, and how the construction of the WTC towers, along with the unique circumstances of the incident–the deliberate collision of airliners with the towers–caused what happened.
Structural engineers who know anything about the towers will tell you that the mode of their construction practically guaranteed that they would fall just as they did; the core of those buildings was strong, but the intersecting members holding up each floor were not. Not strong enough, that is, to stand up to the punishment of ultra-high temperature flames—something that was NOT planned for in the buildings’ construction. The relative weakness of the extending members (which were without cross-current reinforcement–done in the 70s to save money) also explains why the towers fell like a stack of pancakes.
As with whacko theories about Pearl Harbor, conspiracy nuts fail to realize the simple fact that, EVEN IF such a plan could be–i.e., the government secretly sanctioning or being behind the attacks–it would NOT require the total demolition of the buildings to accomplish what they would have wanted. THE ATTACK is what matters—if the government wanted some excuse to go to war, then all it needed was an attack and some casualties. The outrage would have been the same.
As for Al Qaeda managing a conspiracy—there’s a difference. A) it didn’t take “years” for this conspiracy to go from start to finish–that’s an overstatement. The less time, the easier it is for a conspiracy to reach fruition. B) at the time our society and our law enforcement agencies were woefully unprepared to accept that such an attack could take place. Now, I’d argue that this makes for incompetence on the part of the government, but not complicity.
April 30th, 2008 at 6:19 am
This has got to be on my top ten favorite list of lists.
It may be sadistic, but, I always love rifling through dirty laundry.
It is amazing that all of these, with the exception to #6, have coasted under the radar for all these years.
April 30th, 2008 at 7:34 am
re; 9/11
The only conspiracy theory that I subscribe too, happened after the fact. The conspiracy by Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, etc. and the scum-bucket lawyer Yu (I think thats his name-he provided legal justification for all sorts of questionable actions) that used the WTC tragedy to misdirect the fears of The American Public in order to begin a war that was unnecessary, at least for the reasons given. (IMHO unnecessary for the real reasons too!) The wham-bam into war also deflected much inquiry into why the USA was woefully unprepared; they had warnings.
April 30th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
Devon- learn your history. Islam hasn’t threatened the West for centuries at all. Islamic Fundamentalists have only even sprung up in the last couple of decades- the last of the major religions to do so, with Christianity the first. A hundred years or so ago Islamic states were attempting to emulate us and saw Europes burgeoning socialism as the ideal for Islamic society, until we started invading and installing puppet Fascist governments in Islamic countries and suddenly didn’t seem so cool anymore.
And I for one hope Sharia does get into Britain. Learn what Sharia is, it’s not cutting off hands and things- it’s the equivalent of a small claims court. It’s Judge Judy, except not even official, just an impartial person who tries to make both parties in small claims happy, and if they’re not they can go through the courts if they want, which is a lot more expensive.
April 30th, 2008 at 1:48 pm
And I for one hope Sharia does get into Britain.
Hobolad – then you are either an Islamic fanaticist or seriously deluded. There were even a number of Muslim “leaders” in Britain who stated that they did not want sharia law here after that bearded twat Archbishop Williams mad his usual wimpering noises on the topic recently.
Learn what Sharia is, it’s not cutting off hands and things- it’s the equivalent of a small claims court.
ROFLMAO !! Remind me…when was the last time a small claims court ordered a woman to be stoned to death for adultery; or a rape victim to be sentenced to a lashing ?
Because this happens under sharia.
April 30th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
*mad = made (typo)
April 30th, 2008 at 2:02 pm
Note that I wouldn’t support Sharia as the sole legal system, or any system based in religion as the sole system(like the UKs and the USAs for example)- but I think it should be there as an alternative for those who wish it.
April 30th, 2008 at 2:21 pm
Just trying a new nickname- can’t see any of my posts
I’m trying to reply to you kiwiboi it just won’t let me
“I made a comment before 122- but can’t seem to see it? Aw well- here’s the gist-
kiwiboi- that’s tabloid myth. Lashings and stonings are from a different time or rarely carried out by Fundamentalists. That’s not Sharia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia“
April 30th, 2008 at 2:39 pm
Hobolad;
The UK justice system is based on English common law. Not any particular religion. Sorry – Wrong. Canada’s legal system is the same. Judges making decisions based on legal precedent and common sense.
Are you maybe confusing tribal/community policing with Sharia law? We have that here in Canada; in some of our native communities offenders can go before a tribunal where punishment is meted out within the community instead of the courts. Some of our youth offenders (1st time, non-violent) are offered a similar program through The Elizabeth Fry Society; victims (property crime) have a large say in the punishment. Generally it involves community service/education (projects on drug abuse, cost of shop-lifting etc)restitution and shame as they must meet with the victims. I know it has had some success in Native Communities, with Youth I’m not so sure, but it does free-up the courts and it is way less expensive (many of the participants are volunteers).
April 30th, 2008 at 2:45 pm
My posts aren’t showing up, I’ve made a few- they just ain’t appearing
Anyway, can’t be bother retyping. Sharia law- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharia
Lashings/stonings/behandings (whatever you call it
) a thing of the past (back in the days when we hung, draw and quartered people…) or by extremists. We only think it representative of Sharia because we have this whole “If it’s Muslim- it’s bad!” zeitgeist going on.
Our legal systems of course have their basis in religion. Divorce/Adultery etc. Marriage even. There are a few et ceteras but I don’t want to make too large a post only to find it not appearing
April 30th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Hobolad; I don’t give a shit what wikipedia says, Kiwiboi is correct, a woman was lashed this year for being a victim of rape. Wrong again.
April 30th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Ooh, that one appeared! Yay!
Anyway- while it’s working- Sharia law isn’t official. It’s an option. It’s very cheap. It deals with day to day things, like disputes with neighbours and such, rather than murders and the like. It’s not enforced, it’s merely for people to have disputes settled by an independant, and if people aren’t happy they can choose to go through the legal system, with all the expense and time and such that costs.
April 30th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
Mom424- Well, I’m afraid that’s the tabloid labelling extremist acts as Sharia when it’s not.
April 30th, 2008 at 2:56 pm
Hobolad;
But it was a Sharia council who decided the punishment. How do you differentiate the good sharia from the bad? Only when you agree with the punishment? Un uh, can’t have it both ways. And what is the recourse? Is there an appeal process in say Afghanistan?
April 30th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Mom424- That’s not Sharia law though, that’s the laws of that country represented by Sharia. Sharia law implemented in whatever country still has to follow the laws of that country.
April 30th, 2008 at 3:20 pm
Hobolad; Here is a quote taken from the article you provided. You should have read the whole thing.
“Many, including the European Court of Human Rights, consider the punishments prescribed by Sharia as being barbaric and cruel. Islamic scholars argue that, if implemented properly, the punishments serve as a deterrent to crime.[68] In international media, practices by countries applying Islamic law have fallen under considerable criticism at times. This is particularly the case when the sentence carried out is seen to greatly tilt away from established standards of international human rights. This is true for the application of the death penalty for the crimes of adultery and homosexuality, amputations for the crime of theft, and flogging for fornication or public intoxication”
Source; wikipedia
April 30th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Mom424- And? Law in Islamic countries =/= Sharia law. People just confuse the two often, because admittedly where there’s one there’s usually the other. Sharia isn’t the law, it’s just a way of implementing whatever the law is.
Sharia law in, say, Britain, as the Archbishop guy suggested (Was it an Archbishop? Can’t remember) would merely be a cheap way to settle small disputes that isn’t legally binding. It’s the ultimate Post-Modern legal system.
April 30th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Hobolad, small claims court??
Amina Lawal, 30, has been sentenced to death by stoning – a fate which would involve being buried up to her neck in sand and have rocks thrown at her head. However, the Islamic court has ruled that the penalty cannot be carried out until Lawal has finished breastfeeding her baby daughter, Wasila, which the judge said would not be before January 2004
full article here … http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/aug/20/qanda.islam
April 30th, 2008 at 6:01 pm
I wonder how John Glenn feels about Operation Northwoods.
April 30th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
Although it is not “declassified” yet, 9/11 was definitely operated by the US Government. There is so much proof that that is the case…it’s quite sickening. For any of you who have not seen the “911 Loose Change (full version) video on youtube.com I suggest to take an 80 minutes of your time and watch it…Operation Northwoods pretty much sums it up…
April 30th, 2008 at 8:02 pm
Hobolad-
some links will kick a comment into moderation. ..no matter how many times you post the same link. if a comment containing a link doesn’t show, chances are its in moderation. please do not keep re entering the same comment and/or link. just enter a new comment w/ the link as text not code. sorry but i don’t have any way of knowing which links will work and which won’t. cuz some do. some don’t. if yours doesn’t…the first time…it won’t no matter how many times you enter it. so if you have any doubts if a link will post or not…just use the text not the code. and no, i’m not a coder …so for more technical information about posting links in comments…ask J.
May 1st, 2008 at 1:15 am
So what’s the deal with von Braun and L. Ron Hubbard? How are they connected? My Google skills aren’t that good.
May 1st, 2008 at 1:48 am
Revolver see post no 60 and follow the link, for some extra info see here http://www.reason.com/news/show/32190.html
May 1st, 2008 at 4:01 am
Tamala- That’s not Sharia, that’s just the law as represented by Sharia. It’s like… the jury system in the USA can have people killed. In the UK it can’t. That’s not the jury system, that’s the laws of that country.
Cyn- Sorry! I thought something had gone wrong and that’s why the posts weren’t showing
Thanks for the info.
May 1st, 2008 at 5:15 am
Thanks, Tamala. Interesting read. BTW, 9/11? Inside job. People, start with Loose Change then do your own research. Peace.
May 1st, 2008 at 5:39 am
Hobolad;
You are mistaken. You are trying to separate the mechanism from the religion. You can’t do that. Sharia law enforces Islamic law. There are a few countries that allow clerics to rule on some things but not others – this is not the norm. Sharia law as practiced is barbaric almost uniformly.
By the way your goofy statement about UK law being based on Christianity is crap. UK common-law actually borrowed/stole/adapted their legal system from Sharia law. You should read some of the history of British jurisprudence.
Re-read my post #124. That is what you want – NOT sharia law.
May 1st, 2008 at 5:53 am
I hate to sound jingoistic here, but this is very simple…
There is absolutely no earthly reason why sharia should be enacted in ANY Western country… or for that matter any country in the world, but that’s another argument.
The West has an overall tradition of law based on tenets that are WESTERN in nature. It should stay that way.
IF people of another persuasion want their OWN form of rule of law, then let them STAY or return to those countries where sharia (or what have you) prevails. It’s as simple as that.
If you choose to live in a western nation, then you should be prepared to accept western culture as your own, with all the good AND bad that entails. Otherwise, why the hell come in the first place?
May 1st, 2008 at 5:55 am
And Hobolad… you need to do some serious re-reading and deeper research before making these comments… Mom and the others have it right, and you, I’m sorry to say, have it wrong. You’re off-base and deeply naive about sharia.
May 1st, 2008 at 6:01 am
jenna_bug: please don’t take the word of a documentary film maker and then accuse our government of high treason, murder and down right bastardness. check your facts. there is tons of information out there debunking “loose change”.
May 1st, 2008 at 6:12 am
jenna_bug; To expand upon DiscHuker’s statement – go read Popular Mechanics – they debunk loose change step by step, each and every point. Loose change is an apt name; they play quick and loose with physics, thermodynamics, and common-sense.
May 1st, 2008 at 7:11 am
Seriously? People are still watching Loose Change? I thought that was a fad, along with that godawful Zeitgeist movie. *sigh* I hate these kinds of movies specifically for this reason. Uninformed/undereducated people watch this drivel and take it at face value. These types of films do nothing except sow divisiveness and ignorance. I think the most personally annoying thing about them is how smart the people who believe this crap think they are. They always act like they have this secret inside information that nobody knows, that somehow they, of all people, are privy to some vast conspiracy that the “average” person is completely and willfully ignorant of. And of course, they like to cap their statements with “do your own research and decide for yourselves!” which I think is particularly laughable, since most of them haven’t bothered to do the research themselves. (Unless you count watching one movie hellbent on twisting the facts to support its convoluted logic and reach preordained conclusions.)
May 1st, 2008 at 7:18 am
Again, I’m not the one who’s mistaken about Sharia law. It’s not what people think it is. If someone makes a list about forms of law, I’ll argue the point.
May 1st, 2008 at 7:30 am
#146 Slicky,
I dont think there’s anything wrong with people making movies like Loose Change. If anyone is naive enough to take it at face value its their fault.
but people should not be discouraged from making such movies just because it challenges a commonly held belief. if a “loose change” type movie was made about operation northwoods (albeit with better evidence) it would probably have met a similar reaction as it sounds like such an impossibility.
i for one thought some of the claims made in loose change were laughable (especially the part about specific placing of bombs in the towers to ease its collapse) but there was just one thing that was interesting. the part about passengers taking their full names when calling loved ones. I dont remember whether it was just one person or more but that was probably the most odd occurence because it generally does not happen.
however that one point was obviously not enough to make me wonder if any of the other junk in the movie was true. certainly a treat for conspiracy theorists though.
May 1st, 2008 at 7:51 am
#135 Jenna_Bug
If you are going to watch Loose Change, have this website up as well while you are watching it.
http://www.loosechangeguide.com/LooseChangeGuide.html
It’s a guide to people who hear things that sound smart and automatically think it’s true. The producers of Loose Change forgot to do some research…
May 1st, 2008 at 7:54 am
Hobolad; Coward.
How are we mistaken? Sharia law enforces and uses punishments written how many years ago? You are naive to believe that all Sharia law deals with is property disputes. You seem to think that it is all rosy, peachy-keen. Sounds good, group of community leaders getting together to find a fair and common-sense solution to community problems. You neglect to consider what the Quran considers community problems and the proscribed punishments for same.
Again – You cannot separate the process from the Religion.
I’m getting pissed off – read post 124.
Either concede defeat or defend yourself.
May 1st, 2008 at 8:23 am
losty(yomarbles):
I have no problem with movies that challenge the status quo. I have a problem with movies that attempt to challenge the status quo based on false and misleading information, selective research, failing to provide proper context, and do so in a way that appears to the layman that they are factual. Specifically because I then have to put up with people like some on these forums who assert that this crap is true with the same arrogance and simultaneously ignorance of the movie.
No people should not be discouraged from making movies that challenge popularly held beliefs. But people should be discouraged from making movies like Loose Change that challenge popularly held beliefs by taking a foregone conclusion and intentionally twisting the facts to support their erroneous assumptions.
And for god’s sakes, don’t call me Slicky. Slick, Willy, or SlickWilly will be just fine, thanks.
May 1st, 2008 at 8:37 am
I have done research and yes there are things that are debunked, however, you mean to say that you can read this list of things that have been declassified, things that people had no idea about and you don’t believe there is just a chance that 9/11 was just a scheme built by our own government? I’m not saying I believe everything the video depicts, I’m not that stupid, but it just makes too much sense that this really could have happened. I love living in America and having all the opportunities I have, but I believe there are MANY MANY secrets kept from us…regardless, 9/11 was a terrible day, innocent people died..it was something that should have never happened.
May 1st, 2008 at 9:06 am
Slick, Willy, SlickWilly (Choose the name you love the most)
Firstly the “y” was a typo. I didnt know people take such offence at having their internet alias spelt wrong. My Bad. Have to be extra careful from now on.
regarding the movie itself, you will find it extremely difficult to ever come up with a movie like Loose Change without first having a generalised idea of the conclusion you want to get to. that is obviously a wrong way to start
Most of the time such movies come up with rubbish evidence using as you said selectuve research and incorrect context. Even so, if even 1% of these movies come up with the right conclusion from the start, it is much easier to prove your case without having to use any inappropriate techniques.
I always wonder why people who are so sure of themselves, even when rightly so, cannot let go of other people’s ignorance. Most sane people would look at Loose Change for what it is – an extremely biased movie which cannot be taken at face value. but the few that believe every single point are hardly going to change their view based on something they read on an internet forum.
Yes, they are ignorant and have a twisted view of the world but why does it get on your nerve. I tend to enjoy such ignorance.
May 1st, 2008 at 9:23 am
jenna_bug: just because there have been other conspiracies does not mean that big brother is hiding behind every evil that happens.
for all of the 9-11 conspiracy people…it seems that the main point of all of this is to point out “interesting” or “weird” facts or “discrepancies”. not one person has offered a conclusion, a motivation (other than saying there is money involved) or the supposed results of publicly killing 1000’s of your citizens.
May 1st, 2008 at 9:24 am
whoops, forgot to add the final point…
give me a detailed reason why the government, or whomever you suppose, did what you suggest they did.
May 1st, 2008 at 10:06 am
lost: Why does my letting ignorance bother me bother you? I know you don’t care one way or the other, but why bring it up at all then? I certainly am not trying to dissuade anyone from believing in a 9/11 conspiracy, as I have tangled quite often with conspiracy theorists in the past (much more so than you probably realize) and know firsthand how strong their convictions are. I’m simply trying to expose to these people how silly they seem to the rest of us, and how they tend to isolate and ostracize themselves from the rest of society, perhaps unintentionally. That’s another big reason why conspiracy theories gain so much weight among a certain type of people: the only ones they find don’t ridicule them for their beliefs are like-minded conspiracy theorists. It’s a self-reinforcing behavior, and one of the reasons we see movies like Loose Change, or people like David Icke, or the hundreds of thousands of conspiracy-themed websites.
All I’m saying is that while you may enjoy watching the individuals in the general population descend into ignorance, I don’t see it that way. I see what may have been an intelligent, sophisticated population degenerate into superstition, paranoia, and arrogance.
And again, please be sure to spell my name correctly. I find it incredibly annoying, it throws off my groove, and my day, and subsequently my week, month, and thus, my year have been ruined. After that comes a slippery slope of mental degeneration and before you know it, my whole life has been reduced to anxious, depressive tatters. Don’t ruin my life, lost. Spell my screenname right. Thank you.
Jenna_bug: Yes, there is a chance that our government orchestrated and carried out one of the deadliest and most prolific terrorist attacks in history on it’s own people in order to garner support for a war in the middle east. (Not that…you know, other *real* terrorist attacks could have also been cited.) There is also a chance that tomorrow, monkeys will fly out of my butt and start killing people with lightning guns. It’s a very, very small chance, most likely will not happen, and science can prove how it is extremely unlikely that the signs associated with monkeys flying out of my butt are in actuallity the signs of severe constipation, or how difficult it would be for said monkeys to obtain lightning guns, which have yet to be invented. But dammnit, there is still a chance, and if that chance is enough to make you believe that tomorrow monkeys will fly out of my butt and start killing people with lightning guns, then stock up on bananas, because such peace offerings are the only thing standing between you and extra-crispy you.
May 1st, 2008 at 10:31 am
Jenna_Bug, this is what you first said “9/11 was definitely operated by the US Government”. Based on what? Because you believe it makes sense that the government would do this? How does it make any sense? They would not need to take down two buildings, crash into the Pentagon, and crash another plane into a field in order to gain support for a war. They could stage one terrorist attack on a bus in the United States and kill 12 people and gain enough support for a war.
May 1st, 2008 at 10:42 am
Slick.
If I had any idea that my typo would have such consequences, I would had proof read it 4-5 times. I would never want the guilt of having “ruined” your life hanging over me.
you are right that i dont care one way or the other. and no your defence does not bother me at all. i do not agree with you on the self-reinforcing point though. i feel that deep down these people do know the stupidity of their beliefs and at times what they are looking for is precisely the argument put forward by rational human beings. but hey thats what i think. i believe im right and im quite certain that you dont think you’re wrong so no point trading blows on that one.
i can almost picture someone saying the exact thing that you said to Jenna_bug regarding Operation Northwood (obviously when it was still classified).
May 1st, 2008 at 10:49 am
Wow… First off, this was a great list! I agree with the sentiments that this is one of the better lists in a while! So kudos to you, Tamala, good job!
But about all the 9/11 talk, and thinking we did it to ourselves? Just way too creepy. I was leaning toward that way of thinking for a short while after I read some websites and stuff, but have since ruled it out, at least in my own mind. I mean, I’m sure part of it happening was our fault, but rather on a part of being complacent, not because we were involved. It was more of an indirect assistance, by not trying to stop them. . . Am I making sense? I hope so.
Re: Randall #142 – I agree with you wholeheartedly. Well said.
May 1st, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Mom424: Coward xD
I’m sorry, but I’m just not interested in arguing for the sake of arguing. If it’s a subject you actually want to know more about, there’s plenty of stuff on google. If you want to try and start an argument over the internet over something you can easily just learn for yourself, then I’m afraid it’s impossible to be anything other than a loser of that argument.
You’re taking specific instances in specific countries and acting as if it’s representative, when it isn’t. Sharia as implemented in Britain, as suggested by the Archbishop chap, would be all the things I’m saying- because Sharia law is no strict code, it varies between societies.
And I don’t know what you want me to reply to in 124? The bit about UK law? UK is quite obviously based heavily on Christianity/Church of England. All law is based in religion, even today. Hell, we even have CoE bishops in the House of Lords- no other religions are represented- that’s why we have things like compulsary RE.
May 1st, 2008 at 1:53 pm
lost: Somehow I feel the concept of ass-dwelling, winged primates with advanced electrical weapons would be lost on the people of the early 1960’s. I could be wrong. That being said, I do find the existence of the Northwood documents disturbing, but also find it interesting that the plan was never carried out, and would be interested to know the reasons for that. (Other than the obvious; I doubt human rights or morality matter much to the people who drafted those documents.)
The most I’m willing to believe about supposed US-gov’t involvement in 9/11 was the incredible failure to act on imminent information and not responding to the situation faster. (Which I’m willing to believe could have been intentional, but in lieu of anything but circumstantial evidence I will reserve my judgement.) However, it’s been going on 7 years since the attacks, and the pre-9/11 U.S. is becoming a distant memory. It’s hard to understand how such a thing could happen as they said it did *now*, but very easy to imagine how it could’ve happened *then*. Security was lax and gov’t coordination was (and is still) woefully inept.
Look at is this way: It’s hard enough for the gov’t to coordinate and execute a plan to fix the nation’s crumbling bridges, crumbling economy, or crumbling foreign policy. It’s hard enough for politicians to hide their various sordid affairs and blatant corruptions from the American public. I can’t in good faith accept the fact that somehow the gov’t managed to pull their shit together long enough to plan and successfully pull off one of the most massive terrorist attacks in history against their own nation, and indeed, even themselves, without the public finding out about it (other than through a few crackpots’ erroneous assertions). And if, somehow, they *did* orchestrate it…why did they not make better plans for what was supposed to happen afterwards? Why did the government rush off to war so rashly and end up killing the economy and our relationship with otherwise friendly nations? What was the point? Oil? If it were oil, why is China absolutely *slaughtering* us in the oil industry right now? No, I just can’t accept that.
South Park said it best:
“Who’s responsible for 9/11?”
“What do you mean? A bunch of pissed off Muslims.”
May 1st, 2008 at 2:05 pm
Sharia as implemented in Britain, as suggested by the Archbishop chap, would be all the things I’m saying
Hobolad – the Archbishop of Canterbury is, IMHO, a muesli-eating, sandal-wearing, long-haired, long-bearded, tree-hugging, ultra-liberal loon. And those are the more charitable attributes I can think of.
This is the fool who apologised to those nations that were converted to Christianity by British explorers/missionaries, apologised to British descendants of those who were slaves generations ago etc. etc.
Give this ‘tard a reason to apologise or appease and he’ll be there in his hair shirt and on his knees.
And, as I mentioned in an earlier post, even British Muslims thought he was talking out of his arse about sharia law; in fact, many of them rejected his call for sharia to be legimitised in Britain. Note, too, his own church made him backtrack on most of the crap he was spouting.
And, Hobo, you made the following comment about sharia law earlier :
It’s Judge Judy, except not even official, just an impartial person who tries to make both parties in small claims happy, and if they’re not they can go through the courts if they want
Ignoring the Judge Judy bit…there is absolutely nothing – repeat, nothing – that stands in the way of citizens resolving disputes in this manner in the UK (and most anywhere else) today. You don’t need sharia law for this.
So what difference would sharia make if that is the benefit it brings.
Moreover, sharia law possesses brutal, oppressive and draconian “remedies”. It should be banned universally. But, of course, it won’t be, so long as Islamic extremists continue to abuse their own societies.
Finally, you say you don’t want to argue over this on the internet. Well, it was a topic you, yourself, raised.
May 1st, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Kiwiboi:
I find the Archbishop to be a genuine chap. None of those things you listed are really insults- the people in question are still being affected by the injustices of the past. It’s easy enough to say forgive and forget when you’re one who either isn’t affected or has benefited.
There is nothing to stop people starting something similar to Sharia law, correct. But there’s nothing in place. So why not implement it, or at least something similar? It doesn’t hurt a soul.
And Sharia law =/= Extremist examples. No one’s condoning Extremism in certain factions or in certain countries.
And I didn’t raise it, I was replying to comment 112. And I don’t want to argue, I want to discuss. The second it turns into two sides arguing solely to try and win, then there’s no use in continuing that argument.
May 1st, 2008 at 2:41 pm
I’ll put my nose in on the 11/9 stuff, while I’m here
What do people think of the theory that the attack happened pretty much as the official report said, but with Bin Laden still under orders from the USA? I mean, he at least used to be our Best Friend Forever when he was blowing people up for us, and his family are personal friends of the Bushes etc.
Not saying that I believe it, it just seems that when people think of the conspiracy theories to discredit, they just think of the most wild and easy to pick apart ones y’know? This one seems quite plausible. There’s no doubt that the government would be willing to commit atrocities, there’s no doubt that the people who had the opportunity to cause this to happen have benefited from it, there’s no doubt lies were told along the way at least to some degree (Like in the UK Tony Blair made up out of thin air that Hussein could WMD us at 45 mins notice after his experts reported no evidence of WMDs whatsoever, etc.)
May 1st, 2008 at 2:54 pm
And I didn’t raise it, I was replying to comment 112
Hobo – actually, I was referring to your comment below :
Learn what Sharia is, it’s not cutting off hands and things- it’s the equivalent of a small claims court.
But, it is of no consequence.
I agree with you, though; it is pointless banging our heads together. Given that sharia law is responsible for outrageous acts of retribution, brutality and oppression, I can see absolutely no redeeming features to offset this. There is also the direct religious linkage which – despite what you say – is a universe removed from mainstream Western jurisdictions and legal frameworks.
I also accept that you hold a different view, which is fair enough; my words aren’t going to change this (ditto on the Archbishop / apologetics etc.)
I don’t want to argue, I want to discuss
Sorry, my friend, this is the interweb; I don’t need to tell you that this is being a little idealistic.
But, I will say, that at least it is possible to have a “discussion” with you that doesn’t immediately evolve into a food-fight – which is refreshing
May 1st, 2008 at 3:00 pm
We’ll have to agree to disagree :cheers: Maybe it is idealistic, but if there’s gonna be a place where discussions are possible, it’s this site and this community. A toast to Listverse!
May 1st, 2008 at 5:15 pm
To me, somebody who doesn’t believe it was Muslim goons who masterminded and carried out the 9/11 attacks is equivelant to somebody who believed Hitler was a good man during WW2.
You’re blind and duped by Islamic Fascists. End of story.
May 1st, 2008 at 8:38 pm
As for 9/11 being something that could have been prevented, I totally agree. Bin Laden had been threatening to attack the U.S. since 1997 and should have immediately been found.
Hobolad: What would be the point of letting Bin Laden commit the atrocities on 9/11? Also, do you really think that the people in the U.S. government is full of such terrible people that would let something like that happen?
May 2nd, 2008 at 3:46 am
One reason, or excuse, that the American Government keeps secrets is that the news media is a free agency, and they report on anything they get their hands on. The U.S. government doesn’t want the [insert latest enemy here] to find out plans ahead of time by reading a U.S. newspaper or news website.
May 2nd, 2008 at 5:36 am
Mike: I fully believe the government is full of such terrible people
With Northwoods it was only Kennedy (so it hints at in Wikipedia, not certain though) that stopped it- all the staff chaps signed for it to go ahead. Do we really believe Bush is moral enough to do that? Or, to put it another way, do we really believe that even if he was, that he has enough power in his own government to do that?
May 2nd, 2008 at 6:16 am
Hobolad, listen to yourself. Your only mention for a source for information (on sharia law) is GOOGLE. Yet you shamelessly pretend some superior knowledge of the subject.
The internet is NOT a proper source for valid knowledge.
You’re wrong on sharia also in part because you’re wrong on the law of Britain (and by extension the US). The law codes and legal traditions of the West HAVE been *partly* influenced by the Judeo-Christian tradition (and in fact more by the Jewish law traditions than Christian ones–the true root there is Hebraic law) BUT they have also been influenced–and just as much–by other and older legal traditions, going back to Babylon. The major influence was in fact classical Rome, whose legal traditions were only *partly* related to their religious traditions–the Romans being eminently practical people. In the long meantime since, our western legal traditions have evolved–NOT on a straight line course from these ancient (and yes, often religious roots) but on a *far* more meandering line which has led its way through *secular* society and tradition–again, influenced chiefly by Graeco-Roman traditions, where religion played a small, if even noticeable role. This tradition continued through to today.
Tell me WHY you think sharia is such a hot idea for Britain, or anywhere else for that matter? Why should an immigrant people have their OWN legal system within the traditional background of a western nation, separate from it and unbeholding to it? Why? This is exactly the kind of thing that is antithetical to civilization. Our traditions in the west amount to who and what we are. If, as you say, sharia is nothing more than small claims court (ludicrous, but it’s what you keep maintaining) then WHY does any immigrant living in a western nation NEED it? What’s wrong with the small claims system in the UK or the US, that muslim people can’t operate within it? OUR tradition has become the separation of church and state, and church and law. If they feel some need to reintroduce the two, then why do they choose to live in Britain?
No. This is pandering to a minority who believes religion must play a central role in ALL aspects of life. This, however, is not what the west has EVER been about–going back to our very beginnings. It’s not for us to change to suit them—they can rather stay in a part of the world where they have the miasma they desire, with their lives ruled by religious creed–or they can conform to western ideals and traditions, if they choose to live in western nations.
For us to compromise on this VERY BASIC principle behind our western, democratic tradition is absurd, and a slippery slope to throwing those principles out the door.
And knock it off with this pretending that you know better than anyone here about sharia law. You don’t. Some research on the internet didn’t make you an expert.
May 2nd, 2008 at 7:45 am
Hobolad: What would be the point of letting Bin Laden commit the atrocities on 9/11?
.
Umm… similar reason as to why Operation Northwood was planned ?
.
And I thought everyone read all points in the list …
May 2nd, 2008 at 7:48 am
9/11 would have been prevented if Clinton would have taken the Sudanese offer of Osama Bin Laden on a platter, but he said no thanks.
May 2nd, 2008 at 7:52 am
Furthermore, what possible motive could ISrael have had to attack a US ship?
False flag operation ?
Example: blame it on Arabs — and see USA attack arabs (read: their enemies) and have USA give them even more “aid”.
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/ARTICLE5/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag
May 2nd, 2008 at 9:57 am
Has anyone read about the DC madam who recently committed “suicide”?
Conviently before she was scheduled to testify and expose her clients?
Shady shit, man
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7378654.stm
May 2nd, 2008 at 10:16 am
Randall- I won’t be arguing because it’s something people can easily find out for themselves through, for example, google. You ask me why it should be introduced- I ask, why not? It’s cheaper for all parties involved and it’s not law as such, it’s just guidelines. It’s about settling it for both parties (not including extreme examples of course, which aren’t in line at all with modern Sharia law) and it’s not legally binding, so if people aren’t satisfied they can go through normal more expensive courts if they want. It would affect no one who didn’t want to be affected by it (well, except the taxpayer of course- who’d have to pay less than now, where small incidents go through the courts at relatively great expense.)
If the archbishop had suggested something exactly the same but with a Western sounding name it would be heralded, but as it is he made the mistake of thinking people might give something they know nothing of but think they do a chance.
Also- calm down! I don’t pretend I know it all. But knowing something is better than wading in knowing nothing more than assumptions.
May 2nd, 2008 at 10:40 am
Neoludd on the same kind of subject, what happened to the youngsters involved here is truely shocking
http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=866739408240639313&q=conspiracy+of+silence&ei=KFEbSNu-F4LmiQLNmvDEAQ
..the quality isnt great but the story is awesome
May 2nd, 2008 at 11:36 am
I can’t help but think that all the conspiracy theorists who think the 9/11 tragedy was rigged by the US government are pinching their nipples and laughing with glee while reading about Operation Northwoods.
And you have to admit; it makes you wonder just a little bit, doesn’t it? If the government could even think about carrying something like that out, then how corrupt are they?
May 2nd, 2008 at 11:38 am
Hobolad:
You keep repeating this mantra that you “won’t argue because it’s something people can easily find out for themselves” (on the internet). This continually makes the assumption, on YOUR part, that you know better than other people–which is illogical and silly–and moreover that YOU know more because you “googled” it. Come off it, Hobolad… as Mom said, concede defeat already. Put up or shut up.
Where do you get off assuming that others on this site know less than you, and they are merely “wading in knowing nothing more than assumptions”? What an offensively close-minded and self-superior attitude to take.
You dismiss the horrors of sharia law as mere individual aberrations, when in fact they are ALL TOO common and represent the basic way of conducing business in Saudi Arabia, Iran, and many other fundamentalist Islamic regimes. And the atrocities are NUMEROUS, not little specks here and there blighting an otherwise sane system. Your response to this is to try to get us to believe that there’s a warm and fuzzy version of sharia; but this is naive and disingenuous of you in the extreme, and no one will listen to you, I guarantee, as long as you continue to pooh-pooh the great number of evils that have been wrought upon women (as just one for instance) in the name of that law system.
MOREOVER you offer not ONE decent or logical reason why any western country SHOULD allow sharia law—your only point is to offer that it’s “cheaper.” I’ll take a cheap shot here and point out that it’s “cheaper” to just drag suspects of crimes out into the street and shoot them, also, rather than give them a fair trial… but we don’t take all expediencies with justice on account of cost, thank god. At any rate, you keep harping on the “small claims court” nature of sharia law as its prime advantage–well I don’t know about Britain in this regard, but in the US small claims court is largely free. Whatever fees may apply are nowhere near the costs of higher civil and criminal courts. Lawyers are rarely engaged. So what “cost” are we trying to save here?
And then you accuse all of us of thinly disguised racism with the remark about the archbishop…..oh, if only he’d called it something “western,” we’d all be behind it.
No, Hobolad, not me. Religion has NO PLACE in the legal system of our secular traditions. I don’t care if it’s Christianity, Islam, or Druidism. Our law system is based on a long tradition of secular values about justice. There is no earthly reason to go and introduce (and legitimize) a parallel religious law in our western societies. It is, as I said, antithetical to our notion of western civilization. It wouldn’t be right if a bunch of fundamentalist Christians wanted to create their OWN legal system on these grounds, and it isn’t right for muslims to do that either. If they want it, they can stay pat in their home countries or go back to them.
I have no idea why you’re so behind this ridiculous and dangerous idea; but I do note that we live in times when more and more people seem to lose sight of what should be the obvious.
May 2nd, 2008 at 12:06 pm
Randall: First and second paragraph:What I mean to say is- I’m not here to win or “concede defeat”- that’s just childish. If it’s something you actually want to know about, it’s easy enough to research- Google can explain it better than me. If you just want to win an argument, congrats! You’ve won! Hope you feel better! But you’re still wrong.
Is it close minded to dislike false assumptions? Is it close minded to look into something before making one’s mind up either way rather than relying on the tabloids and the zeitgeist?
Third paragraph- Yes, fundamentalist regimes. Not in non-fundamentalist regimes, which aren’t as often subjects of films or in newspapers but they’re there. Is the UK a fundamentalist regime? Why should their abuse of an otherwise efficient system affect our use of it?
Fourth paragraph- You think small claims courts don’t cost a thing? If you’re not paying for lawyers and fees then you’re paying with your taxes. Sharia law doesn’t need a trial- it’s not that kind of legal system. It’s two parties who argue their case to an impartial community leader who then finds a common ground, a judgement that’ll hopefully please both. This is only accepted if both parties agree, if not they can choose to go through the courts. How barbaric!
It’s not a system to take the place of the current legal system, it’s an additional option for small disputes better settled within the community.
Fifth paragraph- Come on, Islamaphobia is raging (wrongfully). Ignoring it won’t help a thing.
Sixth paragraph- I don’t believe it should, but if you think religion doesn’t come into western law, I’m afraid it’s my turn to call you naive.
The “first paragraph” stuff isn’t in reference to my own paragraphs- my replies to Randall’s paragraphs
Just in case anyone didn’t get that…
May 2nd, 2008 at 6:59 pm
And you have to admit; it makes you wonder just a little bit, doesn’t it? If the government could even think about carrying something like that out, then how corrupt are they?
There are governments who have massacred thousands of their own people in the open.
So I guess killing a few hundred secretly and blaming it on the others may not sound so bad to them….
May 2nd, 2008 at 7:05 pm
If you’re not paying for lawyers and fees then you’re paying with your taxes. Sharia law doesn’t need a trial- it’s not that kind of legal system. It’s two parties who argue their case to an impartial community leader who then finds a common ground, a judgement that’ll hopefully please both.
OK, that is a good point.
But it will only work when the judges are fair.
That’s why I think there are verses in Quran where it’s stated that fair judges can expect the highest reward in afterlife (and bad judges can expect to rot in hell)
May 2nd, 2008 at 7:17 pm
You dismiss the horrors of sharia law as mere individual aberrations, when in fact they are ALL TOO common and represent the basic way of conducing business in Saudi Arabia, Iran, and many other fundamentalist Islamic regimes
That’s the wrong sharia being implemented over there :
1. The elite / royal family can expect to be safe from the (so-called) sharia law.
While the true sharia law treats everyone equally – there was a statement from Muhammad saying that if his daughter is caught stealing, she will have his hand cut.
2. It’s currently implemented without compassion.
The real sharia law has compassion as its foundation.
There was a thief caught at the time of Khilafah. When the judge found out that he stole because he’s hungry and need to feed his family as well, the thief was freed and given supplies, and the governor of the province was punished (for letting his people hungry)
Also, you heard about the woman that Muhammad stoned? Well, the complete story is something like this – she asked Muhammad to stone her, because she said she has committed adultery. Muhammad said, no. She insisted (*), so Muhammad said said, ok, we’ll wait until after your baby is born.
So when the baby was born, she came back and ask Muhammad to deliver the punishment. Muhammad refused, but she insisted again, so Muhammad said, ok we’ll wait until you finished breastfeeding your baby.
After her baby is done breastfeeding (about 2 years old), she came back and ask Muhammad again to deliver her punishment. Finally Muhammad agreed, and they deliver as she asked.
On her burial, Muhammad praises her bravery & repentance, declaring that it’s such a great repentance that if it’s spread among the whole town it will suffice them.
(*) the reason of her insistance is because muslims believe that a punishment help clean your sin, and she hopes to have a clean record in the afterlife.
May 2nd, 2008 at 10:07 pm
The internet is NOT a proper source for valid knowledge.
And your information source is ? The media ? The ones owned by a single guy, and has clearly demonstrated its bias ?
Quoted from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rupert_Murdoch :
During the buildup to the 2003 invasion of Iraq, all 175 Murdoch-owned newspapers worldwide editorialized in favor of the war
Here in my country, the media can even (character) assassinate a minister.
The story goes like this – the minister is implementing various new policies, which will benefit the people. However, turned out it goes against several businesses interests – which happen to have ownership in several major media.
The minister became confused when the media attacked him viciously, even to the point of lying on its points.
We digged this, and found out the reasons.
He then organized a press conference, to clarify all the false accusations.
Guess what ? His press release didn’t show up the next day. It’s as if he hasn’t said anything. Effectively silenced by the media.
Nowadays he blogs, and he’s happy that he can have a voice again, and people can communicate with him easily.
Crazy, but that can and does happen.
Anyway — ideally, we humans should be able to pick up truth from any sources, as long as he/she use their head to filter it (crosschecks, being critical, etc).
Takes time & loads of efforts, but there’s no other way as reliable and as foolproof.
May 3rd, 2008 at 12:47 am
The real sharia law has compassion as its foundation.
harry – where do you get this utter nonsense from. Sharia is “law” founded on Islamic beliefs; that is to say, it propounds violence, oppression, homophobia, sexism and Draconian “legal” penalties.
As for that example of Mohammad’s “compassion”; the tearjerking about the pregnant woman is white-noise; when you cut through the crap, what happened to the woman ? what was the penalty for her adultery ? Stoning !
On her burial, Muhammad praises her bravery & repentance
Well, gee…that makes it allright then… Silly me for focusing on her “sin” (adultery) and her “punishment” (stoning).
the true sharia law treats everyone equally
But some more equal than others : if you are a male heterosexual I’m sure sharia is just peachy
May 3rd, 2008 at 1:27 am
Islamaphobia is raging (wrongfully).
Hobolad – so, lemme see.
We have 9/11; we have the London bus bombings; we have the Glasgow Airport incident; we have the Theo van Gogh murder; we have the Danish cartoons farce; we have Muslim leaders exhorting violence against the “Crusaders”; we have imams in many mosques that spout their filth without challenge; we have demonstrations in London with Muslims carrying placards with messages such as “Behead those who insult Islam”. The list goes on and on and on…and all in the name of Islam.
And hobo, the term “phobia” means fear and implies irrationality or baselessness. I have no fear of Islam. In fact, I do not care if you are black, white or brindle. I don’t care if you are a Christian, an atheist, a Muslim or a wiccan. But threaten or perpetrate any of that vicious and violent activity towards me, my family or my society and – yes – I reserve the right to despise you and to reject you.
Don’t try and denigrate people’s justifiable beliefs or feelings by categorising/grouping them as a class or a faction.
May 3rd, 2008 at 1:44 am
We have 9/11; we have the London bus bombings; we have the Glasgow Airport incident; we have the Theo van Gogh murder; we have the Danish cartoons farce; we have Muslim leaders exhorting violence against the “Crusaders”; we have imams in many mosques that spout their filth without challenge; we have demonstrations in London with Muslims carrying placards with messages such as “Behead those who insult Islam”.
All are faults of Muslims, not Islam.
This is the main fallacy with your kind of thinking – failure to realize that Muslim & Islam are 2 different things. You just generalize everything.
Here’s an analogy – if an Aussie was caught killing a Brits, will you happy to have all media in the world suddenly carrying headline “AUSSIES ARE PSYCHOPATH MURDERERS” ?
(and the media do have this penchant to sensationalize everything)
This is what we have had to suffer from for quite some time now. Even when we criticize the 9/11, London bombings, etc – the media did not print that; creating perception as if we silently approves those attrocities. Really crazy times we’re living in now.
In fact, I do not care if you are black, white or brindle. I don’t care if you are a Christian, an atheist, a Muslim or a wiccan. But threaten or perpetrate any of that vicious and violent activity towards me, my family or my society and – yes – I reserve the right to despise you and to reject you.
I fully agree with you on the point.
May 3rd, 2008 at 2:11 am
harry – where do you get this utter nonsense from. Sharia is “law” founded on Islamic beliefs; that is to say, it propounds violence, oppression, homophobia, sexism and Draconian “legal” penalties.
That’s the propaganda. I hope you’re not complacent enough to continously feed on it & believe it.
I’m sure you’re smart, but various propaganda around us are at really crazy levels, I’ve fallen into it myself.
For example; we just found out that our former president was set up by CIA, and ousted by its successor based on that. This is according to CIA’s own documents which just been declassified.
If you have seen Mel Gibson’s “Year of living dangerously”, that’s kinda like it. That’s the setting.
The successor turned out to be US gov’t puppet and a real tyrant. He took our money for himself, making him to show up even into to Fortune’s richest list – and that’s just from his known assets. (the position (presidency) pays him about US$ 2500 / month)
We suffer his role for about 33 years, before finally the people have had enough, and overthrow him.
Anyway, you can free yourself from these propaganda via various methods – critical thinking, crosschecking, etc.
A good start on the topic (Islam) is by realizing that Muslims & Islam are 2 different thing. Then it’ll be easier to progress from there.
when you cut through the crap, what happened to the woman ? what was the penalty for her adultery ? Stoning !
You say it’s crap, I say that’s the whole truth usually thrown away by Islamophobics; making the event gruesome.
Remember: it’s a penalty that Muhammad refused to carry.
A proof that there IS compassion built in the system.
btw; Have you done this (adultery) yourself ? If yes, your bias is understandable. But remember that just not too long ago, your society also didn’t accept it, and its punishment can be quite damning as well.
May 3rd, 2008 at 2:45 am
All are faults of Muslims, not Islam.
Oh really ? A Muslim is a follower of Islam. And despite your resorting to semantics, the terms Islam and Muslim are used interchangeably even by Muslims/Islamicists.
However, I am always willing to lean something new; could you explain the difference to me, please?
Here’s an analogy – if an Aussie was caught killing a Brits, will you happy to have all media in the world suddenly carrying headline AUSSIES ARE PSYCHOPATH MURDERERS ?
Try again; your analogy is flawed. Islamic fundamentalists are following an accepted ideology that is shared with some 1.5 billion others. And their acts are carried out in the name of that ideology.
Recent events are most certainly not one isolated event by one individual, per your Aussie example.
This is what we have had to suffer from for quite some time now. Even when we criticize the 9/11, London bombings, etc – the media did not print that; creating perception as if we silently approves those attrocities.
harry – on this point you have my sympathy. But your words kind of support my point; if (for whatever reason) the general non-Muslim world does not get a clear and universal message from the Islamic nations/leaders/followers that events such as 9/11 are condemnable atrocities…what can you expect them to think ?
And do not think for one moment that any right-thinking person deems every Muslim as a secret supporter of these atrocities. Like many who read Listverse, I work and live alongside Muslims; and, to be frank, most of them are no different to me. We share the same interests, laugh at the same jokes, watch the same movies, mow our lawns on the weekend and worry about our kids in the same way.
More to the point, remember that my posting was in response to hobolad stating that Islamaphobia is raging wrongfully. He is wrong on two points; far from raging, here in the UK everybody seems to (bizarrely) adopted a policy of appeasement towards Muslims (I forget how many times we have heard “we can’t offend the Muslim community”). Secondly, I think that any negativity or bad feeling towards Muslims is totally understandable.
May 3rd, 2008 at 3:03 am
That’s the propaganda. I hope you’re not complacent enough to continously feed on it & believe it.
harry – no. I don’t pretend to have read enough (or discussed enough) about Islam to pretend to have any special knowledge. But I did take the trouble to buy a copy of the Koran with commentary in order to at least try and review the source ideologies. And, I have to say that I found it difficult to reconcile the often-heard statement tha “Islam is the religion of peace” with what I read.
You say it’s crap, I say that’s the whole truth usually thrown away by Islamophobics; making the event gruesome.
The “facts” speak for themselves.
btw; Have you done this (adultery) yourself ? If yes, your bias is understandable. But remember that just not too long ago, your society also didn’t accept it, and its punishment can be quite damning as well.
I have no recollection of a thief having his hand cut off; or an adulterer being buried to her waist and stoned to death; or a rape victim receiving a lashing. All of these are, of course, still happening today in Islamic nations and are the result of legitimate judicial processes.
May 3rd, 2008 at 8:52 am
kiwiboi: I think the “that’s the fault of Muslims, not Islam” bit is about how it’s the fault of individuals, not Islam in general.
And of course Islamophobia is raging! Do you think “policies of appeasement” actually help any? We’re a society consitently alienating Muslims- the only images of Islam we get in Western media are negative, focussed on the tiny minority of people who follow Islam politically rather than religiously- using it as a uniting force for rebellion and dissent. We turn on the TV and see soldiers praised for killing terrorists, and the innocent Muslims they kill mere sidenotes of no importance. It’s hypocrisy.
We alienate Muslims, and we’re wary when they stick to their own communities and values, we have our political parties who are openly hostile towards them, we praise their killing in the media. I’m not condoning any form of terrorism, by anyone- but we gotta understand why they do it. It’s not because Islam says so or anything like that, it’s not because they’re insane, it’s a societal thing.
Yes, Islamophobia is obviously raging. And yes, it is wrong. It’s understandable, but it’s still wrong.
May 3rd, 2008 at 8:54 am
And the “them” that “do it” I referred to in my previous post means the tiny minority of radicals. Just to clarify!
May 3rd, 2008 at 11:40 am
i was thinking the same thing “HIMSELF” was thinking after reading #2. the government is full of some dirty sadistic motha*******……for those of you who think its american bashing, it’s the same everywhere. But the U.S likes to potray others as terrorists when they are the biggest terrorists of them all. To the blind: open your eyes people…We’re behind enemy lines and we don’t even know it.
May 3rd, 2008 at 2:02 pm
We’re a society consitently alienating Muslims- the only images of Islam we get in Western media are negative, focussed on the tiny minority of people who follow Islam politically rather than religiously
Hobolad – not only do we not alienate Muslims, we appease them, which is actually bizarre given the series of atrocities that have been carried out in the name of their religion.
The images in the media ? Perhaps it might be something to do with the fact that we are at war with a Muslim nation ? Or under constant threat of further Islamic atrocities.
And your statement about following Islam “politically rather then religiously” is, quite frankly, retarded. Atrocities carried out against the west have been in the name of Islamic jihad; any political element is ancillary and irrelevant.
we gotta understand why they do it. It’s not because Islam says so or anything like that
You clearly know nothing of Islam. Read the Koran and then come back and tell us what it says about jihad.
This fact, coupled with your silly comments about “raging” Islamaphobia unmask your ignorance.
May 3rd, 2008 at 2:55 pm
We appease them? Well I’ve never heard that one before! How can you say that our society and our media treats Islam without thinly covered hostility? We certainly do not “appease” them- “policies of appeasement” only further alienate.
It’s not “Islamic atrocities”- it’s atrocities committed by people, not by a religion. Like I said, it’s obviously political. Religious fundamentalism is about politics and identity more than religion.
The second bit- I clearly know nothing about about Islam? Is that joke? You’re insinuating that Islam tells it’s followers to attack the west or suicide bomb or something?
Come on, you must be blind. We’re obviously a society in the grip of Islamophobia. It’s not silly, it’s deadly serious.
Let me explain using yourself as an example-
You say we “appease” them, right? That we’re effectively pandering to them? You say it’s bizarre that we apparently do this (we do no such thing). You blame the religion for the atrocities of individuals? You talk about jihad when you obviously don’t know what it is- how can this not alienate people?
You asked what Jihad is and I’ll tell you, not that it’s at all relevant- it’s about conserving a culture against an oppressive culture. It’s misslabeled and misused by extremists and the people looking to point the finger at the Islamic religion, but that’s not the fault of the religion.
You say politics is irrelevant? I usually try not to insult over the internet- but seriously, you’re stretching me. My fingers are hovering over the i-d-i-o and t keys. But I won’t do that.
You make it sound like we’re at war with Islam or something? You simultaneously dismiss that Islamophobia exists and then try to justify it- providing a prime example yourself. If you wanna know why a tiny tiny minority of young Muslims have suddenly started strapping themselves to bombs don’t look to an old book- look at the society they’ve grown up in, look at society as it is, look at the media.
You seem to think it’s as simple as “Koran -> Terrorism”, which is ridiculous. Of course it’s political!
May 3rd, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Sorry for getting so worked up and incoherant, I have a feeling it won’t matter anyway. You’re not gonna give up your silly silly views, and I’m not gonna give up mine.
May 3rd, 2008 at 3:18 pm
Also- again not condoning any terrorism. But to fix a problem you have to understand why the problem is there.
May 3rd, 2008 at 8:25 pm
#170 Hobolad: Lyman Lemintzer presented the proposal of Operation Northwoods to Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara and he and Kennedy both threw it out. Then Lemintzer was immediately removed from his position.
“all the staff chaps signed for it to go ahead” The only person who signed for this to go ahead was Lemintzer and he was known for being the most anticommunist person with any high position in the government and he was removed shortly.
So no, this does not show that the government is full of terrible people, it shows that one high-powered person signed off on a military idea and then it was rejected by everyone else. You think there is actually a possibility that an idea somewhat close to this one could get through so many people in the White House? Because in order for something like this to be signed off on, it would take complete support because there could not be ONE person that was against it.
May 4th, 2008 at 5:33 am
Ah, cheers Mike. It said on Wikipedia that it was signed by the “Joint Chiefs of Staff”- which I don’t know what they are, so I just said the “staff chaps”
It says that it carried on being planned even after Lemnitzer got fired right through 1963, so it couldn’t just have been him.
“Operation Northwoods, which had the written approval of the Chairman and every member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff…”
But still, I’d better learn what Joint Chiefs of Staff actually means before commenting more
May 4th, 2008 at 6:34 am
We appease them? Well I’ve never heard that one before!
Then your head is clearly buried up your own arse; or, given some of your earlier comments, buried beneath the folds of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s clerical garb.
So, let me give you a small number of simple examples that spring easily to mind :
- after 9/11 Tony Blair stated, after a meeting with British Muslim clerics : “This is not the work of Muslim or Islamic terrorists; it is the work of terrorists”
- the UK Government set up an official taskforce for the purpose of attacking Islamic extremism “head on”. One of the first appointments was Inayat Bunglawa, who had published papers supporting Bin Laden as a “freedom fighter”, praised Muslim bombers as “courageous” and denounced various British citizens as being members of the “Tribe of Judah”.
- a five-year-old girl had her passport form rejected when an official said the bare shoulders on her photograph could offend Muslims.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=400528&in_page_id=1770&in_page_id=1770&expand=true
- in the immediate aftermath of the London bombings both politicians and senior police were spouting the mantra that Islam is a “religion of peace”, when it was already established that the events were carried out in the name of Islam.
- the British Government launched an official programme to provide “help and support” to Muslims undertaking the annual Haj pilgrimage to Saudi (the only non-Muslim nation to do this); and they do it for no other minority.
http://www.fco.gov.uk/resources/en/press-release/2006/12/fco_hp_npr_281106_becketthajj
- in commercial life, I am sure you recall the British Airways employee who was fired for refusing to stop wearing a necklace with a Christian cross on it; at yet BA had no problem with Muslims wearing headscarves, Sikhs wearing turbans, Hindus wearing bangles etc. etc.
- the BBC decided not to publish the Danish cartoons of Mohammed; maybe this is why (in London) :
http://img.dailymail.co.uk/i/pix/2006/08/muslim220806_600×400.jpg
Note, too that Omar Bakri Mohammed, the radical Muslim cleric, explicitly stated that the cartoonist behind those cartoons should be executed under Islamic law.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/migrationtemp/1509782/Cleric-calls-on-Mohammed-cartoonist-to-be-executed.html
- planning permission has been given to build Europe’s largest Mosque in East London (Stratford). Seems fine until you are the informed that the fundraising and planning brains behind this “house of religion” is th Tablighi Jamat organisation – Al Quaeda’s most prominent recruiters in Europe.
I clearly know nothing about about Islam? Is that joke?
It is no joke. It is patently obvious that you have no understanding of Islam. But this does not surprise me; I note that your earlier response to people wanting you to support your views was to tell them to “google”, LOL.
Also, I mentioned a Muslim colleague of mine in an earlier post. He is not particularly devout at all, but he told me that (like many Muslims) he is able to quote numerous verses from the Koran, in Arabic; a language that he has only the very vaguest understanding!! I did a little research for myself, and it seems that anything up to 70% of Muslims are in the same boat. So, if a large proportion of the Muslim religion do not properly understand what it is they are being taught…why should I assume that you – who have exhibited absolutely no knowledge – know any better.
And don’t insult me by saying that I have no knowledge; as I said in an earlier post, I took the trouble to get a copy of the Koran and have read it (in English translation) alongside commentaries. I’m no expert, but I have, at least, done some research.
Moreover, you have already shown that you have zero understanding of sharia law. Remember your totally inane comment about sharia ? Let me remind you : It’s Judge Judy …’nuff said, I think
You blame the religion for the atrocities of individuals?
Hobo – you continue to masquerade as a fool. All of the atrocities we are talking about have been explicitly committed in the name of Islam. And if you took the trouble to do some research, you would see that the Islamic ideology to support these claims does, indeed, exist.
You say politics is irrelevant? I usually try not to insult over the internet- but seriously, you’re stretching me. My fingers are hovering over the i-d-i-o and t keys. But I won’t do that.
Feel free. You are only making yourself look more ridiculous. And note that I take this comment as implicit reciprocal permission to freely remind you of your demonstrable lack of mental faculty from now on; and I have been fairly subdued thus far.
You simultaneously dismiss that Islamophobia exists and then try to justify it
Please quote me where I said that Islamaphobia doesn’t exist.
I made two distinct points :
1. it is not raging (I responded to your use of the word “raging”); and
2. any negativity against Islam is understandable (for the reasons I listed).
So, please provide me with examples of how Islamaphobia is “raging”; and I am not talking about general statements such as “every time I turn on the tv…” or “google” etc. etc. I am looking for specifics.
You seem to think it’s as simple as Koran -> Terrorism, which is ridiculous. Of course it’s political!
Hobolad – if you have managed to reach that simplistic conclusion from the comments I have made, then you have the intellect and attention-span of a goldfish.
May 4th, 2008 at 7:01 am
None of that really sounds like “appeasement”. Half of it is just common sense, half of it is insulting- small things so that it can look like things are being done when it makes no difference to anything.
If I’m so unknowledgeable why don’t you say why that is? At least then it’s something I can reply to- don’t turn this into a mere pissing match about who can say what about whoever. You’re just being childish. My commments about google- what’s wrong with that? I’m not interested in trying to make anyone look like a fool- if it’s a topic people want to educate themselves about there are plenty of easily accessible sources through, for example, google. It’s not a competition, despite your efforts to turn it into one.
If you want specifics, go on wikipedia and type in Islamophobia. Or google! Or pick up a newspaper. Or, yes, turn on the TV. It’s all there. But I’m guessing you won’t do that- this is just about scoring points isn’t it?
How can I take an intelligent conclusion from your comments? All you have is that you’ve supposedly read the Koran, and apparently political elements are irrelevent, and a whole lot of other ignorance.
And this is why I don’t like discussions on the internet. It shouldn’t be picking a side and then doing all you can to just insult the other side.
If you want to reply to this in the similar points-scoring typical internet argument I will, just this once, kick your ass at points scoring- but I won’t be happy about it. If you want to act like an adult- I’ll be glad to discuss it.
May 4th, 2008 at 7:46 am
If I’m so unknowledgeable why don’t you say why that is?
Erm, try reading my responses to your silly postings. Better still, re-read your own postings – the evidence is there.
At least then it’s something I can reply to
Ok, here’s one question for starters : Did you state about sharia law that “It’s Judge Judy” ?
That is up there with the most inane comments I have ever read on the internet (or anywhere else, for that matter).
Also, feel free to answer explicit questions I have already asked :
Please quote me where I said that Islamaphobia doesn’t exist.
Please provide me with examples of how Islamaphobia is “raging”; and I am not talking about general statements such as “every time I turn on the tv” or “google” etc. etc. I am looking for specifics (though I note that you have already responded in this manner); or, at the very least, some justification to support your argument.
It’s not a competition, despite your efforts to turn it into one.
I am not seeking a competition. I have challenged comments you have made and your responses have been shallow, imprecise, and not to the point.
How can I take an intelligent conclusion from your comments?
Clearly you can’t; because you have demonstrated no intellect at all.
And you find it acceptable, when questioned about statememts you make, to refer questioners to Google or wikipedia, instead of making your own reasoned response to support your views.
And this is why I don’t like discussions on the internet.
So don’t get involved then. To paraphrase the old adage : if you look around your Village and you don’t recognise the Village Idiot then it is probably you.
If you want to reply to this in the similar points-scoring typical internet argument I will, just this once, kick your ass at points scoring
Go ahead; be my guest. So far you haven’t been able to make or backup a single substantive point.
May 4th, 2008 at 7:57 am
Childish point-scoring it is. Not got time right now, looks like this is gonna be one of those needlessly long comment after needlessly long comment arguments. Don’t think I won’t get round to it though.
May 4th, 2008 at 8:30 am
“Erm, try reading my responses to your silly postings. Better still, re-read your own postings – the evidence is there.”
This is nothing to reply to. Just trying to be smartass?
“Ok, here’s one question for starters : Did you state about sharia law that “It’s Judge Judy” ?
That is up there with the most inane comments I have ever read on the internet (or anywhere else, for that matter).”
Someone who did the research. We were talking about Sharia being adopted in the UK, right? Sharia law, if you’ll actually do your research, is unofficially settling disputes according to Islamic teachings as ruled by a community leader or council of leaders. Sharia law doesn’t overrule actual law- so you wouldn’t be able to judge any “the people versus whoever” trials through Sharia law, only “whoever versus whoever”. So only minor disputes that would otherwise go through small claims. The rulings aren’t even legally binding- it’s small disputes where both sides give their side of the story and then an impartial community leader then tries to please both. If either party isn’t happy, they can then go through the courts if they wish.
I really didn’t want to have to spell it out when even the most superficial of research dispels any of the myths associated with Sharia. They may happen, but that’s not Sharia, and it’s certainly not any kind of Sharia like would be seen in the UK.
“Please quote me where I said that Islamaphobia doesn’t exist.”
Comments like “This fact, coupled with your silly comments about “raging” Islamaphobia unmask your ignorance.” at least hint that you don’t believe it. If not, I don’t know what the hell you’re even trying to say.
“Please provide me with examples of how Islamaphobia is “raging””
http://www.islamophobia-watch.com/
http://www.islamophobia.org/news.php
There’s a couple of sites that have done it for me! I don’t expect you to read through it all, afterall there are thousands of instances there. Some major, some not so major- all serving to alienate the Islamic community, and in particular Islamic youth caught between the two cultures.
“I am not seeking a competition. I have challenged comments you have made and your responses have been shallow, imprecise, and not to the point.”
Nothing to reply to there. Again, insults and point scoring.
“Clearly you can’t; because you have demonstrated no intellect at all.”
One internet point to you! I’m afraid that comes with one real-life-loser point.
“And you find it acceptable, when questioned about statememts you make, to refer questioners to Google or wikipedia, instead of making your own reasoned response to support your views.”
And why not? This kind of childish tit-for-tat argument is precisely what I wanted to avoid. If it’s something people are interested in, it’s easy enough to find out about- but you just want an argument for the sake of an argument.
“So don’t get involved then. To paraphrase the old adage : if you look around your Village and you don’t recognise the Village Idiot then it is probably you.”
I don’t like them when they devolve into this- it’s possible to have grown up talks on the internet, if only certain point-seeking wanna win for the sake of winning an argument parties would themselves not get involved.
What I suggest is this-
We stop with the name calling and the point scoring. It’s needless, no one thinks you’re an “ebadass” for doing so.
I will list my points. Underneath each point I will explain that point. Underneath that I will give proof. You will then counter that point in the same way.
Or we can continue to bicker like children. It’s up to you.
May 4th, 2008 at 8:52 am
#199 Hobolad: The Joint Chiefs of Staff is simply a group of men who are high-ranked in every military branch. They have no power to issue any attack as great as Northwoods. That would have to go to the President and then to the Secretary of Defense. Since the President AND Secretary of Defense (Kennedy and McNamara) both said no, it was thrown out.
May 4th, 2008 at 9:29 am
Cheers, Mike!
May 4th, 2008 at 9:49 am
Hobolad – don’t paint yourself to be an innocent/injured party here. Though I made remarks about some of your comments being retarded or silly, the first instance of a direct insult in our series of postings was in #195, where you say to me :
I usually try not to insult over the internet- but seriously, you’re stretching me. My fingers are hovering over the i-d-i-o and t keys. But I won’t do that.
And when I respond in kind you say :
If you want to reply to this in the similar points-scoring typical internet argument I will, just this once, kick your ass at points scoring
Frankly, if you play with fire you can expect to get burnt.
And when I ask for specifics you give me 2 links that – by looking at the URL – are hardly going to be unbiased and balanced :
http://www.islamophobia-watch.com/
http://www.islamophobia.org/news.php
Hint : they both contain the phrase islamophoboa ?!
More to the point, did you read the second article in the first link you provided ? It is titled “Stop Pandering to Muslims Says Silent Majority”
Here’s the first few paragraphs,quoting an article from the Guardian :
The government’s attempts to placate Muslims will cause long-term damage to communities, a charity said yesterday.
The warning came from Yasmin Alibhai-Brown, chair and co-founder of the British Muslims for Secular Democracy, a new organisation claiming to represent the “silent majority who feel no conflict between their faith and democracy”.
Speaking before the launch, attended by Baroness Kishwer Faulkner and former Islamist Ed Husain, the journalist said the government was pandering to Muslims by granting too many concessions, fuelling their separation from the rest of society.
…which entirely supports my point that the UK operates a policy of appeasement towards Muslims. It’s there in black-and-white from the mouth of a Muslim “leader”.
This kind of childish tit-for-tat argument is precisely what I wanted to avoid.
Read above; the first sentences of this posting.
no one thinks you’re an ebadass for doing so.
I care not a jot what anybody on the internet thinks of me – least of all you. Like me or loathe me, my arguments or debates are always honest from my perspective; I will back up what I say or I will concede that the other guy has convinced me…or not. Also, if I hear pro and con views on a topic, if I am interested I will go to the source and investigate for myself (which is why I took the trouble to read the Koran, for example; not word-for-word, of course).
Or we can continue to bicker like children. It’s up to you.
Quite frankly, judging by what I have seen so far, I have absolutely no appetite to waste any more time “discussing” this with you.
May 4th, 2008 at 10:20 am
“Hobolad – don’t paint yourself to be an innocent/injured party here. Though I made remarks about some of your comments being retarded or silly, the first instance of a direct insult in our series of postings was in #195, where you say to me :”
I know I’m no such thing- but I also know I didn’t start it. You act like a cock and I’m gonna respond in kind.
“And when I ask for specifics you give me 2 links that – by looking at the URL – are hardly going to be unbiased and balanced :”
They’re collections of other articles. They’re gonna be whatever those articles and news sources are.
“…which entirely supports my point that the UK operates a policy of appeasement towards Muslims. It’s there in black-and-white from the mouth of a Muslim “leader”.”
I’m afraid you’re missing the point- “Policies of appeasement” do much to contribute to the divide and the alienation- that’s what it’s saying. They’re policies that don’t mean a thing to the average person, except as tabloid fodder for “we’ve given them this policy, what more do they want?” and blaming Muslims for the government appearing to give them special treatment. It doesn’t help at all.
“I care not a jot what anybody on the internet thinks of me – least of all you. Like me or loathe me, my arguments or debates are always honest from my perspective; I will back up what I say or I will concede that the other guy has convinced me…or not. Also, if I hear pro and con views on a topic, if I am interested I will go to the source and investigate for myself (which is why I took the trouble to read the Koran, for example; not word-for-word, of course).”
So what if you’ve read the Koran? Why do you keep bringing that up? Islamic fundamentalism is nothing to do with the Koran- it’s in response to politics and society. Nothing’s changed in the Koran, so why have Islamic fundamentalists suddenly come on the scene? Like I said, and like you dismissed as irrelevent, politics and society.
“Quite frankly, judging by what I have seen so far, I have absolutely no appetite to waste any more time “discussing” this with you.”
Go back and see who started calling who ignorant and such. I don’t want this to be personal, but when someone else starts with those kinds of comments, that’s inevitably where it’s headed.
Seeing as this chap wants to quit the argument- does anyone else want to discuss it? Like adults- no name calling or whatever- right from the beginning.
May 4th, 2008 at 10:31 am
And you’re one post out about when the first insults were typed- look at 194, yours. Retarded? Ignorant? Clearly know nothing?
May 4th, 2008 at 10:39 am
Go back and see who started calling who ignorant and such
Talking of ignorant, let me thank you for the unbridled mirth you gave me with your statement that sharia law is just like Judge Judy.
Aside from the solace your words will give Muslim amputee-thieves, lashed rape victims and stoned adulterers, I have to say that I haven’t laughed at such a retarded statement for a long time. And, I’m sure you’ll understand if I bring it up from time to time
So what if you’ve read the Koran?
To show that I have at least done some background reading and research on a complex topic; which is obviously beyond you.
Seeing as this chap wants to quit the argument- does anyone else want to discuss it? Like adults- no name calling or whatever- right from the beginning.
LOL. To those who take up Hobolad’s offer, have a browser open on google – you’ll need it, because he is unable to support his own arguments in his own words. Just read his comments in this thread.
Islamic fundamentalism is nothing to do with the Koran
Hobolad – another statement clearly demonstrating that you are a low intelligence fucktard; and with fucktards I prefer not to correspond.
Actually, I wonder how you managed to get through NetNanny
May 4th, 2008 at 10:44 am
And you’re one post out about when the first insults were typed- look at 194, yours. Retarded? Ignorant? Clearly know nothing?
Hobolad – you surpass even yourself. Read the opening sentences in #207. I already admitted this. And, bizarrely, you quote me saying it in your own post #208.
But, given your inability to concentrate on the obvious, let me re-quote myself. Read the first words very carefully :
Though I made remarks about some of your comments being retarded or silly, the first instance of a direct insult in our series of postings was in #195, where you say to me…
May 4th, 2008 at 11:04 am
“Talking of ignorant, let me thank you for the unbridled mirth you gave me with your statement that sharia law is just like Judge Judy.
Aside from the solace your words will give Muslim amputee-thieves, lashed rape victims and stoned adulterers, I have to say that I haven’t laughed at such a retarded statement for a long time. And, I’m sure you’ll understand if I bring it up from time to time
”
Again, you misunderstand Sharia law- which I’ve explained. I shouldn’t even need to explain it, it being easy to find out- but I have. But you won’t let that get in the way of using it to insult me right?
“To show that I have at least done some background reading and research on a complex topic; which is obviously beyond you.”
You keep saying that you’ve read it- and then don’t post anything about it. I’m gonna go ahead and say that I’m right because I’ve watched The Godfather. I’m not gonna say why this makes me right.
“LOL. To those who take up Hobolad’s offer, have a browser open on google – you’ll need it, because he is unable to support his own arguments in his own words. Just read his comments in this thread.
Islamic fundamentalism is nothing to do with the Koran
Hobolad – another statement clearly demonstrating that you are a low intelligence fucktard; and with fucktards I prefer not to correspond.”
Come on- comments like these- how is it even possible to avoid it getting personal?
I originally said the google thing because I didn’t expect to have to argue with some obsessive. I thought it an interesting point that if people cared enough they could research and decide what they thought. You started an argument, so I did provide some links. Again, just personal attacks.
The “f*cktard” bit (Which, sadly I see- you have responded
). If the Koran is the reason for extremists- and lucky us you’ve read it!- why don’t you say why that is? Because as the Koran has been around for a very long time, and Islamic Fundamentalism is a new thing, how can the two be linked? I reckon the religion is just a tool for the political when it comes to extremism. If assuming that the book suddenly didn’t start turning people Extremist, and if assuming that Extremists are affected by politics and society rather than the teachings of the religion, then I guess I am a ****tard. They twist religion to suit their political ideas, like all Extremists.
“Hobolad – you surpass even yourself. Read the opening sentences in #207. I already admitted this. And, bizarrely, you quote me saying it in your own post #208.
But, given your inability to concentrate on the obvious, let me re-quote myself. Read the first words very carefully :”
You admit it and then say that my post was the first instance of a direct insult? So you just completely contradict yourself. Again, I don’t know what you’re trying to say.
May 4th, 2008 at 11:07 am
“and if assuming that Extremists are affected by politics and society rather than the teachings of the religion”
I made a typo-instead of “rather than the teachings of the religion” I mean “as well as”. Sorry for any confusion.
May 4th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Hobolad – you really do like exhibiting your profound ignorance don’t you
Because as the Koran has been around for a very long time, and Islamic Fundamentalism is a new thing, how can the two be linked?
About Islamic Fundamentalism being a “new thing”. Well, if the year 630 AD can be classed as “new” in this context, then you are correct.
Sadly for you, though, most people would think that a timeline spanning some 1,400 years is inconsistent with your view that Islamic Fundamentalism being a new thing.
Feel free to find a totally unbiased source for yourself, but you can start here if you wish (warning, though the timeline facts are there the site is hardly unbiased) :
http://arabracismislamofascism.wordpress.com/2007/08/05/history-time-line-some-important-dates-in-radical-islam-vs-world/
If assuming that the book [Koran] suddenly didn’t start turning people Extremist, and if assuming that Extremists are affected by politics and society rather than the teachings of the religion, then I guess I am a ****tard
Your words, my friend
And, Hobo, if I were you I wouldn’t keep banging on about your “views” on sharia law; no…seriously I wouldn’t – Judge Judy, remember
May 4th, 2008 at 12:28 pm
hobo – I just noticed that you made an error in the fucktard bit of my last posting. My apologies I didn’t see it.
I guess that just leaves the minor matter of your unique take on the historical timeline (Koran vs extremism) to deal with
May 4th, 2008 at 1:25 pm
Kiwiboi;
I am impressed with your tenacity and patience. There is nothing so frustrating as willful ignorance. I gave up. I don’t have the patience for an argument of internet links. I prefer to reason with my brain, not my google.
Adopting Sharia law would be the same as adopting Old Testament rules and punishments. (I actually think they do some of that at the Warren Jeffs compound). Going backward 1000 years.
Good Job.
May 4th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
tenacity and patience
My middle names, Mom. And thanks
Sharia ? I guess you know my views; they are the same as yours.
May 5th, 2008 at 2:24 am
Your link that gives the origins of Fundamentalism is a bit wrong- 680 is just the start of the Shi’ites, not fundamentalism. And the Shi’ite versus Sunni dispute is politics.
Fundamentalism was invented in 1910- when Bible Belters wrote books called “The Fundamentals”- it didn’t spread to Islam until later.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalism
And if people wanted an Old Testament style Sharia court in the UK- why not? Remember that it wouldn’t supercede actual law and any rulings it gives would only come into effect if both sides agree to it and it doesn’t break any laws. And as by law serious crimes have to be judged through the courts it would only legally be able to deal with minor disputes.
So we have-
Two people argue about the size of a hedge.
They can’t settle it between themselves.
Go to community leader who gives an impartial solution that cannot contradict law without all the fuss and cost of taking legal action.
If either side disagrees they can then take legal action if they wish.
What’s not to like?
May 5th, 2008 at 2:26 am
Just noticed that the link doesn’t specifically mention the origins of Islamic Fundamentalism-
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_fundamentalism
There we go.
May 5th, 2008 at 6:57 am
Hobolad – Firstly, Islamic fundamentslism is the movement propounding literal adherence to the Koran (and various other bodies of Islamic ideology). This can be traced back to the 600’s. But even relating the history of modern extremism, the roots of the modern Al Quaeda, for example, are clearly identifiable in Wahabism (1700’s).
I am also mystified why, when discussing Islamic fundamentalism, you post a link to a book on Christian fundamentalism ?
As for sharia? We have beaten this to death. You started by saying you hoped sharia law “gets into Britain”; you then misrepresent it by trying to play down the less savoury aspects (lashings, amputations, oppression of women etc), you compare it to Judge Judy, and now you are continuing to dilute it by trying to wedge it into a Christian framework (references to the Old Testament). However you try to dress up sharia law, it is Islamic and it is inherently oppressive and draconian.
Your comments about people avoiding the courts and resolving disputes has already been addressed; you can already do this – and you do not need sharia as the underlying ideology.
Now, truly, I am getting bored with this and bored with you.
Whilst reserving the right to correct any future stupidity from you, I am inclined to merely ignore you from now on.
May 5th, 2008 at 3:09 pm
Because Fundamentalism was invented with the Christian books- “The Fundamentals”- in 1910. Fundamentalism and extremism is a political reaction to, for example, modernisation and the prevalence of science- like Christian fundamentalism. Other fundamentalists have sprung up for other political reasons, so it’s quite a silly thing to say that politics is irrelevant and ancillary to Islamic fundamentalism.
“As for sharia? We have beaten this to death. You started by saying you hoped sharia law “gets into Britain” you then misrepresent it by trying to play down the less savoury aspects (lashings, amputations, oppression of women etc),”
I do no such thing, that aspect is despicable. That’s hardly representative of modern Sharia law, however- especially of a sharia law in the UK.
“you compare it to Judge Judy, and now you are continuing to dilute it by trying to wedge it into a Christian framework (references to the Old Testament).”
I didn’t bring up the Old Testament thing- I was replying to Mom424. And why shouldn’t any religion have the right to have a service similar to the UK sharia law as suggested by the archbishop? Like I said, it can’t contradict any existing laws. If you’ll go back and read my comments you’ll see that, yes, it has been done to death, but you’re conveniently ignoring the parts that don’t play into this “Sharia law is beheadings!” thing you’ve got going on.
“However you try to dress up sharia law, it is Islamic and it is inherently oppressive and draconian.”"
And…. there we go.
“Your comments about people avoiding the courts and resolving disputes has already been addressed; you can already do this – and you do not need sharia as the underlying ideology.”
You could already do this, yes- if such a service was set up- which one isn’t. And as it’s a choice people should be able to use whichever underlying ideology they want as long as it stays within the bounds of the law.
“Now, truly, I am getting bored with this and bored with you.
Whilst reserving the right to correct any future stupidity from you, I am inclined to merely ignore you from now on.”
You keep saying it, but you still haven’t
If this clown actually does fulfil the promise does anyone want to talk, minus insults, plus open-mind- with whatever opinion you wish, I don’t care, as long as we can talk calmly and without insults right from the start.
May 5th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
Holobad; You are arguing semantics. You want the Sharia law without the Quran or Islam. They are not separable.
In the UK, according to you, it would be used like Judge Judy. Amicable settlement of disputes. If you don’t like the outcome you can go to court. Okay, fine so far. So what happens when the neighbour complains to the Imam about the female next-door, also Muslim, who wears short skirts and fucks around? We’re in the UK so no stoning, no lashing. That would not be the end of it would it? As soon as you let the foot in the door, the whole body follows. She would be ostracized, her family too probably, maybe some graffiti on her house. Rocks through the windows. It would happen. And it would be condoned by the Sharia council. They must or they would be in contradiction of the Quran.
Holobad, how old are you? Do you not know that if you give an inch, people always take a yard.
Keep the law secular, leave religion for church or mosque.
Have community policing, have community justice councils, avail yourself of The Elizabeth Fry Society. Just don’t throw any religion into the mix. It’s one of the reasons we are a progressive society. It doesn’t matter the Religion, the law remains constant.
May 5th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
Werner von Braun was required, like any other scientist in Nazi Germany, to be part of SS. SS was dispatched to Pennemunde in the last days of war to find and kill all scientists to prevent exactly what is now known as Operation Paperclip.
May 6th, 2008 at 3:04 am
“Holobad; You are arguing semantics. You want the Sharia law without the Quran or Islam. They are not separable.”
No I don’t. Let it have Islam as long as it breaks no laws.
“In the UK, according to you, it would be used like Judge Judy. Amicable settlement of disputes. If you don’t like the outcome you can go to court. Okay, fine so far. So what happens when the neighbour complains to the Imam about the female next-door, also Muslim, who wears short skirts and fucks around? We’re in the UK so no stoning, no lashing. That would not be the end of it would it? As soon as you let the foot in the door, the whole body follows. She would be ostracized, her family too probably, maybe some graffiti on her house. Rocks through the windows. It would happen. And it would be condoned by the Sharia council. They must or they would be in contradiction of the Quran.”
Doesn’t that happen anyway- honour killings and such? Except if a council is unlawfully condoning it it’s more easily identified and easier to do something about it? As long as the councils keep to the law, this shouldn’t be an issue- and if they don’t keep to the law then it’s more public than it is at the moment- behind closed doors.
“Keep the law secular, leave religion for church or mosque.
Have community policing, have community justice councils, avail yourself of The Elizabeth Fry Society. Just don’t throw any religion into the mix. It’s one of the reasons we are a progressive society. It doesn’t matter the Religion, the law remains constant.”
But people have their own rules that they choose to follow. I wouldn’t suggest religion to go into actual law anymore than it already is, I’d like less religion in law if anything- but if people choose to follow religious rules and if councils help those people follow those rules (or even just settle disputes for the non-religious if they wish) as long as it doesn’t break the law- I say why not?
May 6th, 2008 at 4:20 am
All are faults of Muslims, not Islam.
Oh really ? A Muslim is a follower of Islam. And despite your resorting to semantics, the terms Islam and Muslim are used interchangeably even by Muslims/Islamicists.
However, I am always willing to lean something new; could you explain the difference to me, please?
Right… let’s see… ok, say a Buddhist massacre others (this happens in for example south thailand).
Would you blame Buddhism instead ?
May 6th, 2008 at 5:28 am
And, I have to say that I found it difficult to reconcile the often-heard statement tha “Islam is the religion of peace” with what I read.
Interpreting verses literally like that makes you no different than those Muslim fundamentalists that you criticizes.
The problem with these Muslim fundamentalists (I prefer to call them extremists) is that they take the verses at face value.
They neglect to find out the context, how it actually implemented, how it’s translated (tafseer) by experts, and so on.
They just take it as it is.
Well, not really, since they’re human, they will still be biased.
With their extremism nature, the bias tend to be rather ugly (that’s saying it politely).
May 6th, 2008 at 5:29 am
And, I have to say that I found it difficult to reconcile the often-heard statement tha “Islam is the religion of peace” with what I read.
Interpreting verses literally like that makes you no different than those Muslim fundamentalists that you criticizes.
The problem with these Muslim fundamentalists (I prefer to call them extremists) is that they take the verses at face value.
They do not try to fully understand it. They neglect to find out the context, how it actually implemented, how it’s translated (tafseer) by experts, and so on.
They just take it as it is.
Well, not really, since they’re human, they will still be biased.
With their extremism nature, the bias tend to be rather ugly (that’s saying it politely).
May 6th, 2008 at 5:34 am
Hobolad; Why not? Because by institutionalizing it you condone it. You provide a legal frame-work for fundamentalists; give them a government approved voice.
“but if people choose to follow religious rules and if councils help those people follow those rules”
The problem isn’t for those who choose to follow those rules, its the ones who don’t. Moderate Muslim’s would end up quieter than they already are. Fear of public ridicule & ostracism, legally sanctioned ridicule to boot.
You approve of things according to how they SHOULD work. I disapprove because I know how things WILL work. Its not the majority that end up with the voice, its the loudest, most forceful. The fundamentalists. And you want to legally entrench their power.
Big Mistake.
May 6th, 2008 at 6:17 am
But your words kind of support my point; if (for whatever reason) the general non-Muslim world does not get a clear and universal message from the Islamic nations/leaders/followers that events such as 9/11 are condemnable atrocities…what can you expect them to think ?
I can only expect them to think like you and some others. It’s understandable.
It’s the only reason I can stand the hate so far.
And do not think for one moment that any right-thinking person deems every Muslim as a secret supporter of these atrocities. Like many who read Listverse, I work and live alongside Muslims; and, to be frank, most of them are no different to me. We share the same interests, laugh at the same jokes, watch the same movies, mow our lawns on the weekend and worry about our kids in the same way.
Good to hear that you understood that we’re just humans like you. Some of us are good, and some are bad too.
More to the point, remember that my posting was in response to hobolad stating that Islamaphobia is raging wrongfully. He is wrong on two points; far from raging, here in the UK everybody seems to (bizarrely) adopted a policy of appeasement towards Muslims (I forget how many times we have heard “we can’t offend the Muslim community”).
Just as they try to appease the Jews, or other minorities.
But these are the “politically correct” level.
On the grassroot, the hate & xenophobia is still there.
Unfortunately, the hate goes the other way around as well
I’ve heard muslims spewing insults such as “white trash” or worse. Disgusting.
I can understand Brits spewing hate speech to immigrants, because it happens here in Indonesia as well – we tend to hate the immigrants too (chinese, etc) because they’re aliens to us.
But the other way around ? That’s just plain stupid & arrogant.
Some people I know have left Islam because they’re disgusted with all those. But just like you, they confuses muslim with Islam (or whatever trash labeled as “islam” by the media).
If you willing to try to be impartial and willing wade through all those crap propaganda, you’ll find goodness which can be truly beneficial to anyone.
Secondly, I think that any negativity or bad feeling towards Muslims is totally understandable.
I agree, understandable.
But, of course, it doesn’t automatically means that it is right.
May 6th, 2008 at 7:16 am
“Hobolad; Why not? Because by institutionalizing it you condone it. You provide a legal frame-work for fundamentalists; give them a government approved voice.”
Islam =/= Fundamentalism. And by denying anything that goes against the law doesn’t that lead to a more unified community by giving unlawful acts the Sharia council seal of disapproval?
“The problem isn’t for those who choose to follow those rules, its the ones who don’t. Moderate Muslim’s would end up quieter than they already are. Fear of public ridicule & ostracism, legally sanctioned ridicule to boot.”
Why would UK Sharia courts make any difference to this issue? Why would it be sanctioned ridicule?
“You approve of things according to how they SHOULD work. I disapprove because I know how things WILL work. Its not the majority that end up with the voice, its the loudest, most forceful. The fundamentalists. And you want to legally entrench their power.”
But if it isn’t allowed to supercede the law- which there’s no reason why it should, the actual law comes first always- wouldn’t that actually harm the Fundamentalist cause? I mean, the court wouldn’t be able to legally even dole out punishments or force it’s decisions on people in the UK- so the only function it can legally fulfil is on a “small claims” level where the law doesn’t automatically have to get involved, unlike with crimes and things- as a mediator between disputing parties, which is where my much criticised “Judge Judy” comment came from.
And there’s no reason why the council should be made up of Hook-handed Fundamentalists in any case.
May 6th, 2008 at 7:18 am
Also, Mom424- Thanks for at least humouring me
I may be right, may be wrong- I just wanted a discussion. Which we’ve got
May 6th, 2008 at 7:53 am
Churchill offered to unite Ireland during world war 2.
http://www.jstor.org/sici?sici=0020-5850(198521)61%3A2%3C308%3AITOWIU%3E2.0.CO%3B2-C
Things would be … different … now.
May 6th, 2008 at 10:26 am
Hobolad, you are one disingenuous and evasive dude.
The last I checked, you had responded to me with precisely the same tone and meaning which I had originally chastised you for, and it looks to me like you’ve continued it.
How do YOU know that I don’t know as much (if not more) than you about sharia law? Where do you get off taking that stance with ANY of us, with no support for it? As far as I can tell you’ve offered no substantiation of your implied claim that you have some special knowledge of the topic that allows you to pontificate on it as you have.
And unless I’m mistaken you have YET to offer ANY logical or rational reason why it should be allowed in a western country other than your repeated statements that it could “save money.” I answered you that in the US small claims courts cost little or nothing. You failed to respond to that point, and only continued to parrot your earlier claims—which seems to be your pattern.
Give us REASONS why sharia law should be instituted or allowed. What is the advantage? What’s WRONG with the system in the UK and other western nations as it currently exists?
May 6th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Right. let’s see. ok, say a Buddhist massacre others (this happens in for example south thailand). Would you blame Buddhism instead ?
sufehmi – actually, I was questioning (genuinely, I hasten to add) the comment that “All are faults of Muslims, not Islam”; I took the sentence literally, given that a follower of Islam is (at least, as I understand it) by definition a Muslim.
But, I guess the guy was making the point “blame the individuals, not the religion”.
Fair enough, but I still have problems with this due to the fact that after 9/11 and the London bus bombings, UK Muslim leaders were either reticent in their condemnation of the atrocities or, in some memorable instances, supportive of them.
However, a Muslim work colleague has explained to me that many mosque leaders tend to be strong/extroverted characters, often fundamentalist in their views, and that they do not necessarily represent the average guy (ie. the majority of the congregation) who do not want to get involved in the fundamentalism or to be the imam, but just to say their prayers and get on with their day.
..which, of course, also makes perfect sense. It is also unfortunate.
Interpreting verses literally like that makes you no different than those Muslim fundamentalists that you criticizes.
But the words are there. And the commentaries I have read seem to support the fundamentalist views. But I guess you can only take my word for it that I did my reading with an open mind. I will, I am sure, read more…so maybe my current view will change ?
Good to hear that you understood that we’re just humans like you. Some of us are good, and some are bad too.
Well, of course, and I will take people as I find them. Actually, I think most people are prepared to do this…British people, in particular, in my experience (I live in the UK but am not British myself).
Just as they try to appease the Jews, or other minorities. But these are the “politically correct” level
To an extent perhaps. But the Jews aren’t suicide bombing London buses/airports etc.
. On the grassroot, the hate & xenophobia is still there.
For sure this explains some of it. But I think that there is more fear than there is hate or xenophobia.
I agree, understandable [bad feeling towards Muslims]. But, of course, it doesn’t automatically means that it is right.
I totally agree.
May 7th, 2008 at 4:54 am
hobolad: It is very humorus that you think that Fundamentalist starts in 1910 because of a WESTERN book written in ENGLISH. There are many other languages besides English. another example of western arrogance.
The history is many hundreds of years…to the time of the Prophet even.
kiwiboy: read more Qu’uran. even your bible can seem extreme. But it is good that you at least try to understansd.
And do not wish for Sharia law; you have no understanding of it (holobad). it is not for non Islamic countries.
Farzana
May 7th, 2008 at 5:22 am
I’m calling bullshit.
Especially on the Churchill, Liberty and My Lai incidents.
Straight up BS.
May 7th, 2008 at 5:35 am
How the hell we get into a discussion about islam in a list of declassified secrets.
All fundamentalism is no good, be it christian or muslim or whatever. And all wrong anyway because as everyone knows god is a woman
May 7th, 2008 at 6:20 am
No marvel the Unholy trinity has been here for 5,000 years..
May 7th, 2008 at 8:17 am
Did you even read the documents you linked with Operation Northwoods? THey don’t support what you wrote (or took from a book, actually).
You did a good job making it sound much worse for your list. The only thing I could find where people’s lives would be in danger was the sinking of a boat of Cuban refugees on their way to the U.S., and it says “real or simulated.” And even if it was real, it doesn’t indicate that they would be allowed to drown.
The rest of it was all a bunch of fake stuff made to look real so it could be blamed Cuba.
May 7th, 2008 at 8:21 am
Northwoods is Bull-sh!T, and the first poster is a moron.
May 7th, 2008 at 8:40 am
Hat to tell you. but hte USS Liberty incident is not a secrect, there was no cover up, and as a widely known event, the Isreali govermnet both aknowledged and apologized. Hit peice, this article.
May 7th, 2008 at 8:40 am
I don’t think you know what “et al” means.
May 7th, 2008 at 9:10 am
“The last I checked, you had responded to me with precisely the same tone and meaning which I had originally chastised you for, and it looks to me like you’ve continued it.”
You start talking like that and I’m not just gonna humour you. Act like a dick get treated like a dick.
“How do YOU know that I don’t know as much (if not more) than you about sharia law? Where do you get off taking that stance with ANY of us, with no support for it? As far as I can tell you’ve offered no substantiation of your implied claim that you have some special knowledge of the topic that allows you to pontificate on it as you have.”
What special knowledge have I claimed? I provided the link explaining what it is, explained how it could fit into UK society… so… what are you talking about?
“And unless I’m mistaken you have YET to offer ANY logical or rational reason why it should be allowed in a western country other than your repeated statements that it could “save money.” I answered you that in the US small claims courts cost little or nothing. You failed to respond to that point, and only continued to parrot your earlier claims—which seems to be your pattern.”
You mustn’t be reading my comments- it saves money and provides community solidarity, plus undermining extremism by it’s obligation to stay within the law. And you said it costs little or nothing- I said that what you don’t pay for at the time you pay for in taxes. You think courts run on hugs and kisses?
“Give us REASONS why sharia law should be instituted or allowed. What is the advantage? What’s WRONG with the system in the UK and other western nations as it currently exists?”
Read and you’ll find them. And there’s nothing particularly wrong with the system as it is that would be fixed by Sharia law- it would just enhances the system that’s there.
“hobolad: It is very humorus that you think that Fundamentalist starts in 1910 because of a WESTERN book written in ENGLISH. There are many other languages besides English. another example of western arrogance.
The history is many hundreds of years…to the time of the Prophet even.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamentalism
Fundamentalism is a reaction to post-modernism and globalisation. The instances given as fundamentalist earlier are in no way fundamentalist- they’re two denominations at war who have different interpretations. Not fundamentalist.
“And do not wish for Sharia law; you have no understanding of it (holobad). it is not for non Islamic countries.”
In the UK there are, if I remember right, 1.5 million Muslims? About the same as for the Church of England. It shouldn’t be an “us versus them” situation- we’rea community of many prominent ideologies- why not cater for them and whoever else, within the law.
May 7th, 2008 at 9:10 am
This list is lame. Geez not even one single UFO/government coverup. How about the attempted coup in the US by GE execs and the execs from some other big companies? The Plame incident?!?! She was outted by Richard Armitage (an avid Bush hater btw). I wonder if Spooky Mulder is lurking around here?
May 7th, 2008 at 9:24 am
Randall: About my previous “dick” comment- I’ve just realised how many different people there are commenting. I can’t remember who said what, so if it’s actually someone else who was all insulting and such then I apologise. If not, then I don’t
May 7th, 2008 at 11:47 am
aleister crowley!!!
May 7th, 2008 at 11:51 am
…What about Aleister Crowley?
May 7th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
Obviously it is cool to hate America right now. I only do it because I hate the people in it. The BS hearsay you put up is enough to make every liberal douchebag come out of their holes and explain how much they hate Bush. Well I hope these internet losers are ready for 4 more years of republicanism. Way to destroy a party from the inside democrats!
May 7th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
Wasn’t Aleister Crowley just a bored rich kid? Like all those kids who buy incense and call themselves Wiccan. Is this in the wrong list though?
May 7th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
Wow, crazy argumentation going on about Sharia law and such.
Here’s the deal: No one is stopping anyone from mutually agreeing to participate in Sharia law (at least in the US). Anyone can go to anyone else and say, “I (you) did X, can we settle it in this way.” (I’m assuming everyone has some concept of the differences between small claims and felonies.) We are free to create mutual agreements/contracts with each other.
Of course, the government *will* step in situations where mutilation or murder/killings take place (because the government reserves the right to say who can be killed in the name of justice, etc.; it’s part of the social contract).
So, really, Sharia law does not need to be passed through the government to become legitimized. There is no need for the government to either sanction it or deplore its use as a small claims scenario and as long as it does not break federal and state laws. (As for the laws in UK and the US, there are reasons they are sanctioned, pertaining a lot to do with history, tradition, and purposeful secularization of law from religion while still maintaining an ethical standard that most, if not all, can accept.) For the government to sanction Sharia law would be in direct opposition to the Bill of Rights guaranteeing that there will be no preference given to any religion. (Of course, the government could then sanction all religious law equally, Levitical, Druidic, Scientologist, etc., but then would be held responsible for the correct implementation of these laws, as well, because the government has sanctioned its use. Big headache for all involved and best just left out of the picture entirely.)
As for the Anglican church present within the UK government, there’s precedence for that due to the history of the Anglican church and its direct association with the British monarchy. Although I, as a US citizen, find it odd, I’m guessing it’s probably more like the monarchy, itself, rather than a fully functional and power-holding position within the government. A nod to history and tradition, but virtually a nice figurehead to maintain a certain continuity with history.
May 7th, 2008 at 2:06 pm
In the UK there are, if I remember right, 1.5 million Muslims? About the same as for the Church of England.
Interesting…particularly given the number of people in the UK claiming to be Christians is 42 million (71% of population)
May 7th, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Bon John Jovi: Rest assured…we hate you too.
May 7th, 2008 at 2:19 pm
Anyone can go to anyone else and say, “I (you) did X, can we settle it in this way.” (I’m assuming everyone has some concept of the differences between small claims and felonies.) We are free to create mutual agreements/contracts with each other.
MadHoona – you are, of course, absolutely correct. This point has been made a couple of times already.
May 7th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
It is very humorus that you think that Fundamentalist starts in 1910 because of a WESTERN book written in ENGLISH. There are many other languages besides English. another example of western arrogance. The history is many hundreds of years…to the time of the Prophet even.
Farzana – yes. Fundamentalism refers to the interpretation of scripture as a literal truth. It didn’t start on the day someone chose to use the term as a label.
May 7th, 2008 at 4:06 pm
What a shock! The tinfoil hats are out with their 9/11 theories. Bozos…
May 7th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Also, Sharia can suck it. Burn, heathen, burn…
May 7th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
Great list-there are very nasty people at work-remember the anthrax, and the Coup of 2000 in the USA, and the “reasons” for Iraq invasion,etc.etc. You’re NOT paranoid if it really is happening! Remember!
May 8th, 2008 at 2:15 am
Hobolad..why dont you write a list on the top 10 similarities between sharia law and Judge Judy? then we can all debate the points you raise.
kiwiboi.. i have always found it very strange the here in the UK we refer to ourselves as a “christian” country, when less than 4% of people regularly attend church, we have the highest divorce rate in europe, highest teenage pregnancies, highest abortion rate, etc, etc, etc. if thats christianity, then along with judaism and islam, the sooner they are destroyed the better.
Jeff… whats the basis of of your bullshit claim?
Chris… A ufo cover up list sounds good, i look forward to reading your contribution.
May 8th, 2008 at 5:32 am
Hobolad:
You said: “Fundamentalism is a reaction to post-modernism and globalisation.”
HA HA HA… HA HA HA…. heh… heheh heh…. oh god… what a corker! Wheeee…. lemme catch my breath here.
From what crummy Freshman text written by some self-important ass did you dig THAT gem out of, HL?
Goodness, you are utterly BLIND to your own behavior here–which is, namely, that you blather around on this topic with the attitude that you KNOW a great deal, when in fact your information is scanty, incomplete, and/or faulty.
Fundamentalism… is a reaction to POST-MODERNISM? Yeah. Okay. I urge you to go look up the definition (such as it may be, there ain’t much of a good one) for “post-modernism.” You may (I’m not certain of this) see the error of your ways.
Perhaps what you meant is that fundamentalism is a reaction against MODERNISM…. but this would still be partly wrong. What you really mean, I think, is that it’s a reaction against MODERNITY… i.e., the modern world. Yesssssss…. to which I must say… uh… duh.
And globalization? Hmmm? Excuse me?
No no no, Hobo… fundamentalism has different catalysts the world over. Islamic fundamentalism is ROOTED, however, in Islamic tradition. It has an unbroken chain of existence going back to the beginnings of the faith. As a contemporary “doctrine,” of course, it has some contemporary causes… a reaction against secularism, primarily. A reaction against the breaking down of cultural “binding chains.” But whereas Christian fundamentalism is simply factional, Islamic fundamentalism is rooted, to varying degrees, in the culture of Islam itself. Which is not to say that all muslims are fundamentalists–of course they’re not. But as a doctrinal “force” within Islam, fundamentalism is far less “factional” and far more related to the traditions of Islam itself. In other words it’s much less of a “reaction” to ANYTHING and simply *exists* within the overall context of Islam. It can conveniently USE issues to react *against,* but it doesn’t NEED them as much as, say, Christian fundamentalism needs certain issues to galvanize the flock.
Yes, it makes it easier for extremists to court and win over followers when they feel disenfranchised and oppressed and victimized… but that’s true of any extremist movement. If that’s all Islamic Fundamentalism was, then it would be as factional and divided in its aims and methods as the various forms that fascism has taken on over the last 70 years or so.
May 8th, 2008 at 5:53 am
The German Scientist thing is not unknown or a secret……nor was it evil. Spoils of war helped advance our technologic capabilities.
May 8th, 2008 at 6:13 am
Hobolad:
To continue:
“What special knowledge have I claimed? I provided the link explaining what it is, explained how it could fit into UK society… so… what are you talking about?”
Okay… let’s see if I can explain this to you, since you don’t seem to be getting it.
You have read somewhere on the net (I couldn’t find your original link in the posts above–my eyes aren’t what they used to be) a supposed definition of sharia law. You found nothing odious in it. So you say, “why not have it in the west if people want it?” Others, on this site, then point out to you the blind error you have made. Sharia law isn’t just what ONE internet link says it is. We have but to look around in the Islamic world to see with open eyes how it is often applied. You may say these examples are perversions of sharia law–perhaps so, but they are LEGION in their number and impact. Moreover, it’s well known and generally accepted that sharia IS used in many Islamic countries in what in the west would consider barbaric and draconian ways. This is no matter of mythmaking, it’s simple fact. In Saudi Arabia ALONE there are endless examples of horrible penalties being applied for low-grade crimes, and examples of what we would consider great injustice.
Nevertheless, you continue to pontificate on how great it would be to bring sharia law as an “alternative” to Britain…. and your answer to those of us who call you to task for this idea is that WE don’t know sharia the way YOU know it… AND YET you have never said (as far as I can tell) that you have any knowledge of it beyond a WEB LINK that you offered for us to read.
CLEARLY, Hobo, you’re in the dark on this. Sure, anything can be defined in ways so it sounds neutral and harmless. But to IGNORE the *implications* of a system that has WIDE and systemic abuses in MANY countries is just silly, and is lazy thinking.
You HAVE, in essence, claimed “special knowledge.” But it’s baseless. You now say you haven’t claimed any special knowledge—but continue to act like the rest of us are simply ignorant of the facts. But again–based on WHAT?
If there is nothing wrong with the western system as it is, as you admit—then why do we need this? What is the purpose? There is none. Consolidation of community? More mealy-mouthed meaningless talk.
May 8th, 2008 at 7:30 am
Randall; Mealy-mouthed meaningless talk is the entire point I think. We’ve definitely responded. If even a Muslim tells you it would be a mistake, I would say it’s time to abandon your premise. (Farazan, #235)
May 12th, 2008 at 5:16 pm
I was stunned to see a reference to the USS Liberty. This has been ignored and put to rest by so many in our govenment to keep the Jewish state happy. I is absolutlely disgusting to what they did to the innocent American Navy men and then to get away with it. Thank you for putting this in your list, to me it should be number 1. Damn those people that did this to us….
May 14th, 2008 at 7:06 pm
Thanks for nothing. If you think there is somewhere in the world better to live, go there. WE ARE THE GOOD GUYS….
May 18th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
The Plame “Affiar”? Are you kidding me?
She was outed by Armitage you douchebag.
You leftists are hysterical morons…
May 18th, 2008 at 9:03 pm
Sorry should have typed “Affair”
May 21st, 2008 at 5:49 pm
Hello there I am a 15 year old girl in 9th grade and when my mom showed me this website I was appalled at what our own government is doing. Do we even have a say any more? I mean what happened to being able to throw out our government when we see that they are unfit? this is so idiotic why don’t we do something when things like this happens! I guess they are right about America being lazy but this is just ridiculous seriously! well just goes to show how much self preservation we have.
Sincerely concerned
May 22nd, 2008 at 12:40 am
Trinity thanks for your comment, when i wrote this list i hoped people would do some research into these subjects as it was very difficult to put them down in a few lines, its brilliant that people of your age can access information like this, as the next generation of voters you have a chance to make a difference, use this information, pass it on to your friends etc, over here in Scotland people are slowly waking up to the fact that the governments will lie to achieve their means and impose their will, they are supposed to serve us, not the other way round.
your right to be concerned but please do not be afraid, share information with people, ask awkward questions, and forget about paris hilton, american idol, big brother and all the other nonsense that distracts people, and allows politicians to literally get away with murder…….
peace best wishes Thomas
May 29th, 2008 at 2:31 pm
About the Plame Affair?
Hardly undercover. As her “top secret” name was……
*drum roll please*
VALERIE PLAME.
Democrat witchhunters have had some fun trying to poor mouth things regarding Plame and have her “secret” identity on Vanity Fair in a nice car, but this is all hooey. And hardly for revenge. Wilson, the dear husband, has shown himself to be a habitual liar regarding Britain’s secret service belief (to this day) that in point of fact Hussein DID try and obtain uranium from Niger. The fact that WIlson was incompetent and could never connect the dots does not, in itself, mean the White House “retaliated” using Armitage or Novak to “out” Plame.
June 10th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
Very cool list, Tamala. I really did think it was interesting. Hitler and Chuchill, a lost nuke, Freemasons, a secret army, Templars and Valerie Plame. Really? Valerie Plame. How did she get in here? Not really worthy of a Top 10 Declassified Secret. Maybe Top 10 Declassified Secrets That Everyone Knows About and Is Tired of Seeing on Television.
Shouldn’t she be in trouble for divulging her identity to that tool, Joseph Wilson?
June 10th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
your right to be concerned but please do not be afraid, share information with people, ask awkward questions, and forget about paris hilton, american idol, big brother and all the other nonsense that distracts people, and allows politicians to literally get away with murder…….
100% spot on … very well said tamala.
We’re nowadays way too distracted to focus on things that really matters.
The politicians ended up having it easy, and we suffer more by everyday.
June 10th, 2008 at 7:52 pm
Hat to tell you. but hte USS Liberty incident is not a secrect, there was no cover up, and as a widely known event, the Isreali govermnet both aknowledged and apologized. Hit peice, this article.
Then try explain comments such as #236
People are still being misled on this issue.
So again props to Tamala for again bringing it into the spotlight.
June 10th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
However, a Muslim work colleague has explained to me that many mosque leaders tend to be strong/extroverted characters, often fundamentalist in their views, and that they do not necessarily represent the average guy (ie. the majority of the congregation) who do not want to get involved in the fundamentalism or to be the imam, but just to say their prayers and get on with their day.
That is absolutely true. I’m personally pissed off by this situation, to the point that I’m no longer aligned with any muslim movement. None (so far) had the leadership good enough to bear the name of “Islam” in their movement.
I’m very strongly against all extremism, be it on liberalism or literalism in Islam. I’ve seen both in concept and in action; and both are stupid & dangerous to all (not just muslims)
I’m actively advocating the moderate stance on Islam to muslims.
There are some resistance, however since I tried to keep the language civil, most people were able to receive the message.
But the words are there. And the commentaries I have read seem to support the fundamentalist views.
Yes, seems like by nature humans are attracted to extremism. Also some extremists are very well supported – the extremist wahabis were financed by Saudi government to spread their views to the world.
And we buy them on face value. Stupid us.
But I guess you can only take my word for it that I did my reading with an open mind. I will, I am sure, read more…so maybe my current view will change ?
Not necessarily with the current amount of noise (as opposed to signal) and crap everywhere nowadays, but that doesn’t matter.
What truly matters is to keep looking for the truth.
The journey itself is the rewards.
To an extent perhaps. But the Jews aren’t suicide bombing London buses/airports etc.
Yes, they’re just kill Palestinians in bulk and treat them like slaves; and cover it up as “self-defense”. Cheeky bastards.
Note that there are good jewish. One is told in here :
http://mulia.nurhasan.net/2008/04/10/when-i-hugged-the-jew-a-confession/
That article touches deep to the core everytime I read it, and gives me hope again on humanity.
When there’s hope, there would be a way.
Thanks,
Harry
June 17th, 2008 at 9:35 pm
I think the Scooter Libby item is garbage and should be replaced by the fact that Irwin Rommel’s ability to outsmart the Brits in North Africa was due in part to an Italian spy he had in place in Egypt. The spy was discovered before the battle of El Alamein, and we all know how that turned out.
While I’ve met former Ambassador Wilson and he seems like a nice enough man, Richard Armitage is the one who revealed Valarie Plame’s identity to the press. This is common knowledge for anyone who gets their news from outlets that aren’t in the tank for Obama and a socialist United States.
And if the leftists are so concerned about securing classified information, I’d ask why the New York Times routinely publishes leaked info that actually endangers us (reference NSA “spying” non-story). I’d recommend that everyone read “The Terrorist Watch” by Ron Kessler.
One last thing, communist and socialist governments (to include the national socialists i.e. nazis) have killed far more people than all wars started with any sense of a religious pretext at all, period, end of story. I’m sick of ignorant anti christian bigots always claiming that religion has started all these terrible wars. In the tenth century, yes, but read a damn newspaper from this century and between the Soviets, nazis (who were primarily pagans) and the communist Chinese, communist Romanians, quasi-communist Kmer Rouge, you’ve had the most violent 100 years in the history of the world.
Have a nice day.
June 19th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
you say “the nazis (who were primarily pagans)”……… isnt paganism a religion?
Where do you think a large number of christian rituals came from? could it be pagan mithraic worship? in the same way as jewish ritual and beliefs came from cannanite religion?
Hitler was very much on a religious crusade, believing that the germanic (as opposed the german) people were the descendants of the gods and had a divine right to rule.
George Bush, Tony Blair, Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussain, to name just a few, all people who have declared war because they believe god wants them to do it. And we will all pay the price for that kind of deluded belief.
From nobel prize winning physicist Steven Weinberg “With or without [religion] you’d have good people doing good things and evil people doing evil things. But for good people to do evil things, it takes religion.”
July 3rd, 2008 at 8:52 pm
Interesting list, some historically significant, some silly and exaggerated. I personally would have added the Tuskegee syphilis experiment.
To all those 911 conspiracy theorists, there are enough reasons to dislike Bush without making yourself sound silly thus discrediting anything else you have to say. Also, wasn’t it planned during the Clinton administration? I dunno, maybe Bush knew he would be elected and got the ball rolling early.
Personally, I think a big conspiracy thing will come to light out of the 911 attack and Iraq war. I think it has less to do with the oil in Iraq and more to do with keeping the royals in power in Saudi Arabia.
Many fundamentalist were very angry over what they saw as a western occupation of their holy land and blamed the royal family for allowing it. Get rid of the threat of invasion from Iraq and there is no longer any reason for western infidels to protect the border. This has the added benefit of removing a recruitment talking point from al qaeda. “There are American whores with guns driving and fornicating in your holy land!!”
Though the Iraq war was very poorly implemented and the stated reasons for going are dubious, I believe we do need to stay out of Saudi Arabia and if building a new government in Iraq is what it takes then, hey, do it and do it correctly. As someone stated before, Saudi is one of the main financiers for the spread of extremist islam and their record on human rights (particularly for women) should be condemned. I read recently how they are buying up contracts of performers and stations in Egypt to try and make sure the fundamentalist message is the only one heard there. They are not an ally of any western country.
July 3rd, 2008 at 11:55 pm
If we (the “silly conspiracy theorists”) are right, Iran is next. I guess we’ll just have to wait and see, right?
July 5th, 2008 at 4:49 am
Amazing. But dont forget to mention some other “dirty” secrets, such as Roswell, E.Ts working for the U.S government, secret bases in Arizone, black ships, etc..
Congratulations for the page.
July 15th, 2008 at 7:49 am
Hobolad, you are a pig-ignorant islamic freak who should leave Britain wqhile you can. The only person who needs to learn their history is YOU!
Quote:
Devon- learn your history. Islam hasn’t threatened the West for centuries at all. Islamic Fundamentalists have only even sprung up in the last couple of decades- the last of the major religions to do so, with Christianity the first.
First of all, Muslims have been threatening the West since the creation of that lying, hypocritical religion. Many people were taken from Britain by Islamic pirates, from North Africa, in the eighteenth Century.
Try reading something simple to start with. For example:
White Gold by Giles Milton. It’s the account of Thomas Pellow, a Cornish cabin boy and North Africa’s ONE MILLION EUROPEAN SLAVES.
The slave trade was around long before African’s were made slaves by Europeans byt he way, long before. The biggest slave trader in history was a muslim!
Once you have read that, you could try going back through history. Try getting you information from various sources, you’ll find you may learn something nearer the truth.
As for that bull about Christians being the first to threaten anyone (your post isn’t clear), you’ll find that the Crusades started because of the Jihaders. Islamists started their Jihad 32 years after the death of their (supposed) prophet!
By the way, I’m NOT a Christian.
So you see moron, before you start supporting the Jihaders take over of our country, try getting an education. At least one to do with historical FACTS!
I won’t go into any more of your rubbishy posts as the are a joke.
August 11th, 2008 at 10:52 am
What’s the Plame affair doing on this list? The special prosecutor found that no one had revealed any confidential information, and Plame’s identity was not revealed by the Bush administration. It was revealed by Robert Novack, a journalist.
So 1) your recitation of the facts of this incident are incorrect; 2) there was no confidential information revealed; 3) the non-confidential information was not revealed by the government; and 4) even if your recitation was accurate, the fact that you put it on this list (higher than Mai Lai?) trivializes the other entries and makes them look like political stunts.
August 11th, 2008 at 11:20 am
Christ, I’d forgotten about this topic!
People seem to be misunderstanding- I don’t think we should follow the *laws* of any religion- so no stonings and no rapings (I’m looking at you, Christianity!). The *system* though, is a different matter, which I think would be effective used as local courts and things (which I’m sure I’ve said before- but people just want to attack, I guess)
Also, I’m not saying that muslims have only attacked others in the last hundred years- every religion has attacked others as long as they’ve been going pretty much, I’m not that naive. Fundamentalists, however, are a recent development. Fundamentalism is reverting back to the core values of religion and taking them to extremes in an effort to combat secularisation and post-modernism, both recent. There were no “fundamentalists” before this. There were extremists, but if you think extremism = fundamentalism you’d be dead wrong.
Fundamentalism- the reverting back to the fundamentals of a religion in response to science’s refutation of religion and society’s increasing abandonment started in the US with the publication of “The Fundamentals”- texts reaffirming religion for Christians by, well, just saying everything else is wrong with it’s evidence being the bible. “What about evolution? Bzzt, wrong- bible says so.” “But a person can’t survive in a whale! Bzzt wrong, bible says so.” etc etc. Islam didn’t get fundamentalists until their religions came under threat of secularisation, which is as I said the last few decades. They had extremists, but extremism isn’t fundamentalism.
Now I can’t even remember what the argument was about, other than Sharia law, not sure what started off the fundamentalism aside so I may not have answered whatever it was. I’m not even sure if anyone is interested in continuing whatever the argument was- I’d guess many like myself forget about arguments once they slip off the front page.
August 13th, 2008 at 4:59 pm
While all of you wrangle over who did what and who said this or that – far worse things than any of you could ever imagine are being done right under your noses. It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see that this world’s systems are a house of cards. It’ll all be over soon enough, but not before all know that it doesn’t belong to man to direct even his own step. The evidence is clear enough – just look at the atrocities promoted by man against man throughout the centuries.
Something much of the world has unknowingly prayed about will soon come to be and there isn’t anything anyone can do to stop it. Before writing me off as a nut, think about the fall of any civilzation and what preceeded it, then compare it to our day; there are striking similarities. This time, however mankind is in for a positive change, once and for all.
September 12th, 2008 at 10:51 pm
What, no Roswell crash?
September 13th, 2008 at 5:55 pm
1 Support Worker says “we’ve got to do something to do you” and then a Copper says “you won’t tell anyone about this” that to me sounds like their threatening us to keep us quiet for what they’ve done to us individually first.
That goes to show that there in it together as cover up agenda to hurt the individual whether he tells truth or not.
Then them doing that to him is a crime in it’s self they would get away with murder cause they stick together all Support Workers Social Services and the Police if the truth comes out about them doing that to you first with a laugh.
They use words such as “could it be paranoia” then you have to agree to that when you say when you know there’s something going round at you all the time.
Their call us criminals for saying that cause what we individuals that are innocent from the start really say is true of course they’ll say cause he’s done this and that and THEY say he’s paranoid deluded lost on medication you’ve taken your medication we’ll take you back.
All of them in those work places that’s not in the high street shops do that. They get others to join in with their nasty little plans for the individual those they chose to help them in it don’t know what it’s exactly doing to the individual really cause they get told something else.
That is them with the clever desguises and nasty tricks up their sleves that they use against us.
They have devices that can put you into a locked position and make you believe that your movements on someone is your own when it’s actually controlled by a device in the operator’s hand a few yards away.
Then they make it sound like you’ve done a crime when haven’t and that is all the folks that seem to be in their 40’s and older that are doing that to the individual.
Those that think they have control over through their own size and intelligence and mainstream better than you at it cause you don’t know much and he doesn’t know what he’s talking about cause they go by your disabilities according to reports.
Your family member becomes confused cause of them they don’t even know the truth when you tell the truth.
All this seems to have started in 1945 100 hundred years of War and 100 years is almost up another 37 years to go will take us to 2045.
Things should change around by then with none of that anymore free from Politics and War and bombs and guns and that kind of thing instigated by Support Workers Teachers and the Police.
Then it’s true.
September 17th, 2008 at 9:34 am
The Vietnam one really got me.
September 21st, 2008 at 8:02 pm
But did we really land on the moon? Who killed Kennedy and MLK? Where do all the missing socks go?
September 30th, 2008 at 3:07 am
re: “If the My Lai incident could have been openly confirmed and investigated back then, we could have done something about it. And now that its disclosed, is anyone going to do anything about it?”
I doubt if Tomo will actually come back and check this, but the answer is, there was something done, a court martial. Lt. William Calley was court-martialed and found guilty of murder. His sentence was life in prison. He was parolled in 1974, he served about three years. Justice gone awry yes, but there was something done, just not enough. They should have kept him in jail.
The My Lai massacre is taught today to every officer in the U.S. military as an example of war crimes.
October 2nd, 2008 at 6:48 am
Great list, but I think the USS Scorpion incdent should have been included, even though it technically isn’t declassified. In 1968, A nuclear submarine called the Scorpion sank near the Azores due to “unknown causes”, and to this day the US Navy’s official statement says that the official cause has never been determined.
It wasn’t until the 1980’s that information started to leak out indicating that the Scorpion was sank by a torpedo from a Soviet submarine that the Scorpion was attempting to spy on. A massive FAKE search for the sub was launched in June of 1968 lasting 5 months when in reality, it was found just weeks after it sank in May of 1968. Not only was it found within weeks, the US Military knew the Scorpion was under attack by the Soviet sub BEFORE IT EVEN SANK!!!
Read “Scorpion Down”, it’s a great book + explains how this was one of the US Military’s biggest cover-ups ever.
November 13th, 2008 at 5:03 am
Truthful America! Ever-loving ever-peaceful America! Always right America…funny ain’t it?
November 25th, 2008 at 8:26 pm
its better to suicide “hitler” than to execute in the electric chair..
Suicide is the honor and glory of the country while execute in the electric chair cowardness and betrayed in the country.
November 25th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
289. sugen
I would like to hear you views on any of these lists. Every time I see you as a poster it is to cut down Americans. If that is your agenda, then good luck and have fun. ( That is probably not the intention of most intelligent people reading these lists)
November 29th, 2008 at 7:37 pm
awesome list
January 12th, 2009 at 12:57 pm
One big problem: the Plame incident is a “straw man” – a media hoax from the beginning with no real significance.
January 12th, 2009 at 1:03 pm
Ty:
“One big problem: the Plame incident is a “straw man” – a media hoax from the beginning with no real significance.”
SURE it was. Okay. You keep telling yourself that. What other silly theories are we believing in today, Ty?
January 22nd, 2009 at 1:04 pm
I remember hearing from some cousins from Britain about Churchill and his nasty intentions toward Hitler, and Gandhi…
Of course, Churchill was almost as bad as Hitler in those days…
It’s strange the things you hear about long after the facts transpire and then you find out there was more to it…
January 23rd, 2009 at 7:33 am
KryptoTSD, (295),
“I remember hearing from some cousins from Britain about Churchill and his nasty intentions toward Hitler, and Gandhi…
Of course, Churchill was almost as bad as Hitler in those days…”
Yes, well only ALMOST though. Phew!
In fact most British, French, Russian, Dutch, Belgian, Greek Norwegian and Yugoslav people living at the time, which includes myself, would have considered the electric chair far too humane and easy an ending for Hitler. The worst of the most repulsive of lingering medieval disembowelling deaths would have seemed far more suitable.
Fortunately for India, Churchill was too busy to torture Ghandi and string him up by piano wire, which was one of Hitler’s standard methods of disposing of troublesome opposition. Nor did he have time to pick an Indian village at random (as the Nazi’s did Lidice in Czechslovakia), slaughter all its men, women and children and raze every building to the ground. That was another Hitlerian method of keeping stroppy occupied lands under control.
After all, Hitler was adored by Nazi Germany and Churchill was adored by the free world, so perhaps that does make him almost as bad.
Oh, and don’t forget that Britain invented concentration camps.
And did the Holocaust really happen?
February 22nd, 2009 at 4:26 pm
ya’ll are all fucking idiots.
churchill was the most inspiring man of the twentieth century, rallying the british people to keep up their morale over a year of bombing and raids. and he never said that he would put hitler into an electric chair. ever. seriously, you people who decide to post shit on blogs, stating your opinions as facts, have seriously got to do some backgound research.
and whatever you decide to bash about churchill next, i’d just like to say that he’s a better person, a better leader, a stronger soul than ANY of you will EVER be.
February 25th, 2009 at 3:53 am
Interesting theory of Churchill wanting to shock Hitler. In reality there wasn’t much chance as the only troops who had any chance of capturing Hitler were the Russians. Does anyone with a brain think they would have passed him to the British! Which bring me niceley to my next point. Operation Paperclip was a disgrace to the whole war effort in general and to everyone who fought or suffered in particular.
My father was enlisted into Military Intelligence (MI) after the war and spent years looking for Nazi’s, their hidden assets and secret organisations they had set up to evade capture. Before he died he once told me that he and many more MI agents had wasted their time. He was convinced that the Americans (and others) had genuine knowledge as to where SOME of these people were and kept it hidden from their so called Allies. My father was also convinced that it was not just scientists the Americans had hidden away but HIGH ranking Nazi officials. Makes me wonder now if he right. One other thing, Churchill was a great leader and one of Britains greatest ever leaders.
April 13th, 2009 at 2:50 pm
I think Libby is the most amazing man. though i have never met him i know he is inocent. Bush should have fully pardoned him just like the VP said! Mr Libby was innocent from the start. The press wanted something to talk about and the juge just wanted publicity. That woman was not a secreat CIA officer in anyway. So many people knew about this CIA woman so why Libby? I’ll tell you why. Because they couldn’t hit the VP or President so get the next best MR LIBBY! All in all I Lewis Libby’s case was compleat rubish! He is more innosent than a puppy and is an amazing person over all.
April 13th, 2009 at 2:56 pm
Libby is innocent
June 14th, 2009 at 7:11 am
mk ultra deserves a place on this list
June 30th, 2009 at 1:13 pm
I’m not sure it qualifies as a declassified secret, but the recent expenses scandal in Britain is very interesting (and also quite funny) and worth looking up.