Jack Thompson Tells Radio Interviewer He Wants to Kill!
Hates videogames, loves guns?
Jack Thompson ramped up his anti-Bully campaigning again this week, telling an interviewer on OUT-LAW Radio that "...America is becoming the land of the free and the home of the utterly depraved". This of course is great news for SPOnG's news team, as we clearly love writing these eyes-to-the-ceiling, news-that-writes itself updates on any new bits of hilarious nonsense that emanates from Thompson's scrambled mind.
The anti-videogaming campaigner's latest rant relates to last week's tragic school shooting in North Carolina. Thompson believes Alvaro Castillo, the troubled teenager responsible, was brought up in a 'culture' of violent games, having been a regular player of such games since he was eight years old.
"This youth Alvaro Castillo, you can go on the internet and see portions of his video which is a suicide note," said Thompson. "He's killed his father and he goes to his school and shoots up his school and he's talking at length about the violent entertainment he's been obsessed with since he was eight years of age and I now find from speaking with a family friend that some of the entertainment was violent video games.
"It's yet another example, you can add this to Columbine, Paducah, Jonesboro Arkansas, Wellsboro, I could go on for half an hour giving you the names of schools that sound like battlefields in World War II. We have reality being infected with virtual reality," Thompson continued, barely concealing his glee.
He told the interviewer that the situation in the US needs to be remedied by copying the laws surrounding the sale of games with adult content in Europe, noting that: "In the UK, you embody in your laws the notion that there is certain adult entertainment that shouldn't be sold to kids," he said. "No one is trying to ban it outright, but as it stands now, regardless of the rating that the game may get, anyone of any age will be able to buy it and that is just very dangerous. America has become the land of the free and the home of the utterly depraved."
The annoying thing is that SPOnG agrees with Thompson's basic objective - in that violent games should clearly not be sold to minors. However, we disagree with his scandal-mongering approach and his tendency to try to make political capital for himself by making use of these types of tragedies to further his campaign.
Going on to comment about the extensive gun ownership in the state of Florida, Thompson also said: "I live in Miami, I'm not giving up my gun because if somebody comes in my house I want to be able to kill him... Unfortunately, when you have a country that is awash in guns, you have got to do something about the stimuli to use those guns."
Hmm - one mixed up son of a gun? Or the product of a deeply mixed up culture? Let us know what you think in the forums. Check out the full interview over on Outlaw Radio.
The anti-videogaming campaigner's latest rant relates to last week's tragic school shooting in North Carolina. Thompson believes Alvaro Castillo, the troubled teenager responsible, was brought up in a 'culture' of violent games, having been a regular player of such games since he was eight years old.
"This youth Alvaro Castillo, you can go on the internet and see portions of his video which is a suicide note," said Thompson. "He's killed his father and he goes to his school and shoots up his school and he's talking at length about the violent entertainment he's been obsessed with since he was eight years of age and I now find from speaking with a family friend that some of the entertainment was violent video games.
"It's yet another example, you can add this to Columbine, Paducah, Jonesboro Arkansas, Wellsboro, I could go on for half an hour giving you the names of schools that sound like battlefields in World War II. We have reality being infected with virtual reality," Thompson continued, barely concealing his glee.
He told the interviewer that the situation in the US needs to be remedied by copying the laws surrounding the sale of games with adult content in Europe, noting that: "In the UK, you embody in your laws the notion that there is certain adult entertainment that shouldn't be sold to kids," he said. "No one is trying to ban it outright, but as it stands now, regardless of the rating that the game may get, anyone of any age will be able to buy it and that is just very dangerous. America has become the land of the free and the home of the utterly depraved."
The annoying thing is that SPOnG agrees with Thompson's basic objective - in that violent games should clearly not be sold to minors. However, we disagree with his scandal-mongering approach and his tendency to try to make political capital for himself by making use of these types of tragedies to further his campaign.
Going on to comment about the extensive gun ownership in the state of Florida, Thompson also said: "I live in Miami, I'm not giving up my gun because if somebody comes in my house I want to be able to kill him... Unfortunately, when you have a country that is awash in guns, you have got to do something about the stimuli to use those guns."
Hmm - one mixed up son of a gun? Or the product of a deeply mixed up culture? Let us know what you think in the forums. Check out the full interview over on Outlaw Radio.
Read More Like This
Comments
Showing the 20 most recent comments. Read all 58.
LUPOS 13 Sep 2006 13:27
39/58
PreciousRoi wrote:
The New York Times would be so all about this. Hillary Clinton would be holding a three-ring circus on Capitol Hill. Which is really appropriate, since I always thought of the Clintons as carny folk or grifters, writ large.
Well, the reason they wouldnt push such an issue is because they woudl get laughed out of town because most of the country is just like you. they would immediatly dissmiss it as crazy because its to far outside the scope of what your willing to accept reality to be.
PreciousRoi wrote:
Bah, this discussion has given far too much attention to this subject already, I certainly don't intend to dignify it with rational debate, in fact I believe my intent was the opposite, to mock it in any way that seemed amusing to me at the time.
And you have swiftly taken a turn from being a sometime disagreable person who i enjoy debateing with to a full on stuborn ass, by beeing condiscending and insulting.
PreciousRoi wrote:
I'll sit here with my "closed mind", if having a "closed mind" means I only have to listen to the paranoid conspiracy theories of my choosing. I don't entertain evidence that the Holocaust never happened, anything about the JFK assasination (I really couldn't care less) or the moon landings taking place anywhere other than Mare Tranquilitas either, what makes your fairy tale any different?
The fact that there is a TON of film and photographic evidence, as well as first hand and news reports. This is not the JFK assaistion or the moon landing. There where several hundred, if nto thousand still and video cameras pointed at the towers when the impacts and eventual colapses happened, you are choosing to ignore it. Spend half an hour and watch even part of the documentary i linked. Find a few points from it that you can contest, then come back here and do so. I'm willing, and woudl be glad to be proven wrong. I would be much happier living in a world where my government wasnt capable of murdering thousands of innocent people for political and monetary gain.
Please, prove me wrong.
____________
PreciousRoi 13 Sep 2006 14:21
40/58
Yes, most people would think they were crazy if they said it. But you say they have a TON of evidence, crazy, backed up by evidence is not so crazy. They still haven't said anything, therefore, THEY, the people with the most to gain (remember them), must have examined the evidence and found it less than credible.
I distrust the Democratic Party and its allies about many things, using any means or information, aside from that they determine to be patently false and ludicrous, against George W. Bush is one of the few things I trust them absolutely to do a thorough job of.
Finally, if you think your, or anyone else's opinion of me in any way affects me, you must not have been paying attention to much I've ever posted. If it makes you feel any better YOU have metamorphosed from somone I considered a reasonable and reasonable intelligent person, to a gullible whackjob. I find you attempts to badger or shame me into watching watching your fakeumentary disgusting, yet faintly amusing. Are you so lonely and desperate in your beliefs that you will stop to anything to gain converts?
As Melvin Udall said, "Sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here."
I distrust the Democratic Party and its allies about many things, using any means or information, aside from that they determine to be patently false and ludicrous, against George W. Bush is one of the few things I trust them absolutely to do a thorough job of.
Finally, if you think your, or anyone else's opinion of me in any way affects me, you must not have been paying attention to much I've ever posted. If it makes you feel any better YOU have metamorphosed from somone I considered a reasonable and reasonable intelligent person, to a gullible whackjob. I find you attempts to badger or shame me into watching watching your fakeumentary disgusting, yet faintly amusing. Are you so lonely and desperate in your beliefs that you will stop to anything to gain converts?
As Melvin Udall said, "Sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here."
more comments below our sponsor's message
LUPOS 13 Sep 2006 15:23
41/58
PreciousRoi wrote:
Yes, most people would think they were crazy if they said it. But you say they have a TON of evidence, crazy, backed up by evidence is not so crazy. They still haven't said anything, therefore, THEY, the people with the most to gain (remember them), must have examined the evidence and found it less than credible
I distrust the Democratic Party and its allies about many things, using any means or information, aside from that they determine to be patently false and ludicrous, against George W. Bush is one of the few things I trust them absolutely to do a thorough job of.
I distrust the Democratic Party and its allies about many things, using any means or information, aside from that they determine to be patently false and ludicrous, against George W. Bush is one of the few things I trust them absolutely to do a thorough job of.
Does it not strike you as the tinyest bit odd that Bill Clinton and George Bush Sr. are best friends now? The hero of liberals everywhere and the man behind the iran contra, golfing together. I dont trust either party to do anythign except publicly disagree and then go back on what they say once they are elected.
PreciousRoi wrote:
Finally, if you think your, or anyone else's opinion of me in any way affects me, you must not have been paying attention to much I've ever posted. If it makes you feel any better YOU have metamorphosed from somone I considered a reasonable and reasonable intelligent person, to a gullible whackjob. I find you attempts to badger or shame me into watching watching your fakeumentary disgusting, yet faintly amusing. Are you so lonely and desperate in your beliefs that you will stop to anything to gain converts?
I'm not lonely, there are many people who believe the same as me. And the only reason for my "desperation" is that i want a proper investigation and justice fo rthose who suffered. Meanwhile, someone i consider to possibly be a mass murderer and a traitor is sitting in the white house and will likely never face any retribution for his crimes.
It must be nice knowing everything about everything. Though i have to wonder what one does with his time when he realises he no longer has anythign left to learn form the world around him. I know you don't give a s**t what i think of you, but if you dont care what anyone thinks of you then you certainly wont be able to do a good job spreading your opinions about. You really must not have much to live for. Thank goodness for video games.
PreciousRoi wrote:
As Melvin Udall said, "Sell crazy someplace else, we're all stocked up here."
I wouldn't call you crazy so much as sad. Good movie though.
__________
Joji 13 Sep 2006 17:18
42/58
Well here my slice of pie on this one. First back on topic, I understand Jack Thompson wanting to stop kids getting hold of adult games. We once had this problem in the u.k, and it was nipped in the bud from back in the days of SF2 with a rating system (problems still arise though). I think the U.S would be better with the same kind of thing, because it would help shut a lot of people up who give videogames bad press for no reason.
It would also help developers too, who at the moment can get in a sticky mess if their game is like GTA and ends up in a kids console. The Hot Coffee scandal might have never happened in the u.s. There will always be loopholes like mail order though.
What I don't agree with is Jack Thompson's major hate for videogames. His contempt for them is beyond reasoning it seems, when games have a lot of positive aspects he misses, through his staunch religious zealotism. And their I was thinking christian were supposed to encourage an open mind and heart to ideas, views and such. Jack Thompson has made up his mind up videogames are bad, instead of looking at the broad spectrum of games and then assessing.
I guess he's one of these people who thinks a game still has to educate you, when in truth learning all the time is not always fun. Kids and adults gamers know this fact.
Driving games and sport games teach competition, rpgs teach team work towards a common goal. And if you want edutainment Mr Thompson, look no further than Nintendo's Brain Training and Big Brain Academy. While they have been a runaway success he totally fail in even realising there existence.
Best way to solve it I think, is for when any game with a high adult rating is due to be sold, the seller has the right to request age identification (same as with cigs and boozein the u.k, where stores are secretly tested frequently and can be fined or loose their license if they fail), otherwise no sale. Perhaps disclaimers or clear warnings on till receipts for such ganes might also cover stores backs too.
As for 9/11 if it hadn't of happened something else would have eventually in the u.s. They have made a lot of enemies with all their meddling in other nations affairs for a long time (they helped create and train Al Queda but were silly to think things would end once the russians were beaten). What goes around comes around as they say. 9/11 wasn't the first time attacks were made on u.s either.
Try to stay on topic people.
It would also help developers too, who at the moment can get in a sticky mess if their game is like GTA and ends up in a kids console. The Hot Coffee scandal might have never happened in the u.s. There will always be loopholes like mail order though.
What I don't agree with is Jack Thompson's major hate for videogames. His contempt for them is beyond reasoning it seems, when games have a lot of positive aspects he misses, through his staunch religious zealotism. And their I was thinking christian were supposed to encourage an open mind and heart to ideas, views and such. Jack Thompson has made up his mind up videogames are bad, instead of looking at the broad spectrum of games and then assessing.
I guess he's one of these people who thinks a game still has to educate you, when in truth learning all the time is not always fun. Kids and adults gamers know this fact.
Driving games and sport games teach competition, rpgs teach team work towards a common goal. And if you want edutainment Mr Thompson, look no further than Nintendo's Brain Training and Big Brain Academy. While they have been a runaway success he totally fail in even realising there existence.
Best way to solve it I think, is for when any game with a high adult rating is due to be sold, the seller has the right to request age identification (same as with cigs and boozein the u.k, where stores are secretly tested frequently and can be fined or loose their license if they fail), otherwise no sale. Perhaps disclaimers or clear warnings on till receipts for such ganes might also cover stores backs too.
As for 9/11 if it hadn't of happened something else would have eventually in the u.s. They have made a lot of enemies with all their meddling in other nations affairs for a long time (they helped create and train Al Queda but were silly to think things would end once the russians were beaten). What goes around comes around as they say. 9/11 wasn't the first time attacks were made on u.s either.
Try to stay on topic people.
PreciousRoi 14 Sep 2006 00:41
43/58
thanks for bringing us back on topic, then dragging 9-11 back into it at the end.
As if, as an American I want to be lectured about interfering in other countries affairs by a Brit...you lot have forgotten more than we'll ever know about the subject, and have probably fairly earned more violent reprisals against you than we ever will.
As if, as an American I want to be lectured about interfering in other countries affairs by a Brit...you lot have forgotten more than we'll ever know about the subject, and have probably fairly earned more violent reprisals against you than we ever will.
PreciousRoi 14 Sep 2006 03:02
44/58
also, you are fairly ignorant on the subject of Afghanistan, American involvement in the region and al Qaeda.
US helped train Afghan resistance to Russian occupation of Afganistan, not al Qaeda. Al Qaeda is composed of almost exclusively non-Afghans. It was our failure to aid them post-Russian withdrawal which allowed the Taliban to take power, and angered many Afghans who were previously better disposed toward us. Our failure to aid them being motivated by a desire NOT to be seen interfering in the affairs of a Muslim country, and pressure from existing Muslim allies, which backfired, obviously. I will note that Afghanistan used to be a favorite target of British meddling, I believe Kipling called it The Great Game.
Bin Laden's grudge against us arising chiefly from our troops presence in holy Muslim lands (at their invitation) prior to and during the first Gulf War. I suppose you could call that meddling, though if you did, then both World Wars can easily be said to be the product of British meddling. I certainly lay the direct blame for Hitler and the Nazi Party's existence and and rise to power (and the Holocaust, and everything else dependant on such)directly at the feet of Versailles. The similarities between Afghanistan and Taliban are striking, except British were even more to blame, as we merely failed to aid them, while you actively crippled the German economy, with "reparations" for a war that wasn't even fought on your soil, and you were one of the most eager to engage in. Though I suppose I can blame US for allowing our Anglophile President to involve us at all, and him for allowing your extortionist treaty.
Don't even make me run down the litany of British "greatest hits" they read like a who's who of trouble spots around the world. In fact, one of the few troubled areas you haven't mucked about with (that I know of) is North Korea, oh and I suppose Vietnam, that was the French.
US helped train Afghan resistance to Russian occupation of Afganistan, not al Qaeda. Al Qaeda is composed of almost exclusively non-Afghans. It was our failure to aid them post-Russian withdrawal which allowed the Taliban to take power, and angered many Afghans who were previously better disposed toward us. Our failure to aid them being motivated by a desire NOT to be seen interfering in the affairs of a Muslim country, and pressure from existing Muslim allies, which backfired, obviously. I will note that Afghanistan used to be a favorite target of British meddling, I believe Kipling called it The Great Game.
Bin Laden's grudge against us arising chiefly from our troops presence in holy Muslim lands (at their invitation) prior to and during the first Gulf War. I suppose you could call that meddling, though if you did, then both World Wars can easily be said to be the product of British meddling. I certainly lay the direct blame for Hitler and the Nazi Party's existence and and rise to power (and the Holocaust, and everything else dependant on such)directly at the feet of Versailles. The similarities between Afghanistan and Taliban are striking, except British were even more to blame, as we merely failed to aid them, while you actively crippled the German economy, with "reparations" for a war that wasn't even fought on your soil, and you were one of the most eager to engage in. Though I suppose I can blame US for allowing our Anglophile President to involve us at all, and him for allowing your extortionist treaty.
Don't even make me run down the litany of British "greatest hits" they read like a who's who of trouble spots around the world. In fact, one of the few troubled areas you haven't mucked about with (that I know of) is North Korea, oh and I suppose Vietnam, that was the French.
Joji 14 Sep 2006 11:09
45/58
Yeah whatever, every country has its sticky fingers in and out of pies. Agree or disagree or whatever.
Now can we get back on topic, I did attempt to. What do you think of what I said about Jack Thompson?
Now can we get back on topic, I did attempt to. What do you think of what I said about Jack Thompson?
PreciousRoi 14 Sep 2006 16:09
46/58
errr, not much, since we HAVE a rating system and have done for a while...and they's still bitchin'
LUPOS 14 Sep 2006 19:12
47/58
Ok, so, being the rational, reasonable person i "sometimes" am, i went looking for further info about the whole 9/11 thing. Specifically in regards to the video i linked you. A great deal of info is available detailing some fo the BS in said "documentary". I would say i am now not a subscribber to the whole "orchastrated by bush" train of thought.
That said prior to ever seeing loose change i, from my own reading, was ofthe feeling that not enough was done to prevent it.
For example, the proximity of air bases with properly equiped jets to the attacks sites was very close. there was well over an hour from the first impact to the last, yet we where unable to scramble jets in enough time to prevent the crashes even though based on the speed of the plans and the location of our air bases we coudl technicly get planes to any point in the continental US in less than 20 min(roughly) from the time an order is issued.
There was a recording of the conversation between the air traffic control tower and the people in the gub'ment in charge of that, that "supposedly" told them specifically not to send out fighters. Said tape was then taken by the manager of the control tower (airport? i dunno what the chain fo command is), who then cut it into hundreds of tiny pieaces and dispearsed it multiple garbage cans throughout the building.
That is not hearsay, that was news. News that was widely ignored.
I suppose i was a bit to suseptible to the loose change vid because of my preconcieved notions, but i still stand by my belief that some people within that administration didn't do as much as they could to prevent it. Possibly intentionaly.
Mind you i always thought the "Stolen gold" bit in LC was really rediculous.
Anywho, I just thought i woudl come on here and let you know that i'm the bigger man ;)
Booo, insulting ass hole. Hooray openmindedness!
That said prior to ever seeing loose change i, from my own reading, was ofthe feeling that not enough was done to prevent it.
For example, the proximity of air bases with properly equiped jets to the attacks sites was very close. there was well over an hour from the first impact to the last, yet we where unable to scramble jets in enough time to prevent the crashes even though based on the speed of the plans and the location of our air bases we coudl technicly get planes to any point in the continental US in less than 20 min(roughly) from the time an order is issued.
There was a recording of the conversation between the air traffic control tower and the people in the gub'ment in charge of that, that "supposedly" told them specifically not to send out fighters. Said tape was then taken by the manager of the control tower (airport? i dunno what the chain fo command is), who then cut it into hundreds of tiny pieaces and dispearsed it multiple garbage cans throughout the building.
That is not hearsay, that was news. News that was widely ignored.
I suppose i was a bit to suseptible to the loose change vid because of my preconcieved notions, but i still stand by my belief that some people within that administration didn't do as much as they could to prevent it. Possibly intentionaly.
Mind you i always thought the "Stolen gold" bit in LC was really rediculous.
Anywho, I just thought i woudl come on here and let you know that i'm the bigger man ;)
Booo, insulting ass hole. Hooray openmindedness!
PreciousRoi 14 Sep 2006 19:49
48/58
Hindsight being 20/20, I'll agree that obviously not enough was done to prevent it, by the Clinton administration, who were in charge for 8 of the 10 years leading up to the attacks, and by the incoming Bush administration.
As to the Monday morning quarterbacking about the realtime responses to the attacks themselves, once again hindsight being 20/20, I feel it is unfair to judge too harshly. The men and women involved did as they were trained, the nature of the attacks making traditional respones to what could have appeared to be a "skyjacking" exactly the wrong things to do. As to fighter planes "stopping" the crash, I don't see how they could have done. Without knowing for certain what was happening inside the plane or foreknowlege of their intent, I can't see them shooting them down over the densely populated areas, even if they had, the carnage would have been massive.
I also prefer to consider my refusal to watch "LC" as a result of an intuitive knowlege that it is bullshit. That movie would have been an hour and a half of my life I'd never get back, and probably not a particularly enjoyable one either... Does it matter how I came to this conclusion when you have apparently arrived at the same place, albeit fashionably late?
Reminds me of High School algebra, I used to look at an equation and know the answer, but the bitch teaching the class refused to give me credit if I didn't "show my work"...what work? my subconscious just told me x is 5, you silly trull, if you want me to write it all out, ask me something my subconscious can't do in my head... Then, because her grading system, which she gave out at the beginning of the year, would have given me a passing grade, she changed it so she could fail me despite my having aced the final.
Well, at any rate congratualtions on coming to your senses...however you got there. The "9-11 Conspiracy" can take its rightful place alongside Nessie, Roswell, Sasquatch, and crop circles...
As to the Monday morning quarterbacking about the realtime responses to the attacks themselves, once again hindsight being 20/20, I feel it is unfair to judge too harshly. The men and women involved did as they were trained, the nature of the attacks making traditional respones to what could have appeared to be a "skyjacking" exactly the wrong things to do. As to fighter planes "stopping" the crash, I don't see how they could have done. Without knowing for certain what was happening inside the plane or foreknowlege of their intent, I can't see them shooting them down over the densely populated areas, even if they had, the carnage would have been massive.
I also prefer to consider my refusal to watch "LC" as a result of an intuitive knowlege that it is bullshit. That movie would have been an hour and a half of my life I'd never get back, and probably not a particularly enjoyable one either... Does it matter how I came to this conclusion when you have apparently arrived at the same place, albeit fashionably late?
Reminds me of High School algebra, I used to look at an equation and know the answer, but the bitch teaching the class refused to give me credit if I didn't "show my work"...what work? my subconscious just told me x is 5, you silly trull, if you want me to write it all out, ask me something my subconscious can't do in my head... Then, because her grading system, which she gave out at the beginning of the year, would have given me a passing grade, she changed it so she could fail me despite my having aced the final.
Well, at any rate congratualtions on coming to your senses...however you got there. The "9-11 Conspiracy" can take its rightful place alongside Nessie, Roswell, Sasquatch, and crop circles...
LUPOS 14 Sep 2006 20:55
49/58
PreciousRoi wrote:
Hindsight being 20/20, I'll agree that obviously not enough was done to prevent it, by the Clinton administration, who were in charge for 8 of the 10 years leading up to the attacks, and by the incoming Bush administration.
WOO, now some more fun discussin'!
The clinton administration did a great deal to prevent such attacks. there are actually multiple recorded events that where prevented. Not the least of which beign the millenium bomb plot (google it if you missed the paper that day). Infact, during his incredibly BS impeachment trials he was still issue bombing raids on terrorist camps/traing grounds. I recal all the spiners at the time saying some s**t like "no war for monica!" as if he was trying to missdirect.
PR wrote:
As to the Monday morning quarterbacking about the realtime responses to the attacks themselves, once again hindsight being 20/20, I feel it is unfair to judge too harshly. The men and women involved did as they were trained, the nature of the attacks making traditional respones to what could have appeared to be a "skyjacking" exactly the wrong things to do.
As with all such things (support our troops!) i dont hodl the men and women who where just doign there jobs responsible. I hold the order givers responsible. We have plans in place for dealign with hijackings. Once a plane stops responding or turns of its com equipment a call is placed to the organization in charge of that (whose acronym escapes me at the moment) and someone in charge there (secretary of defense i think maybe?) gives the order to "Scramble fighters". The jets pull up to the ji jacked flight and try to convince it to land.
Once the first tower was struck, they had more than enough evidence to assume that the 3 other planes that had gone silent woudl do similar things. It took like an hour from the time the first tower was hit till the last plane crashed. While this whole thing couldnt have been stoped completley, there is a great deal of evidence that supports a stand down order beign given. Essentially letting the rest of the planes find their targets.
lovelyRoi wrote:
I also prefer to consider my refusal to watch "LC" as a result of an intuitive knowlege that it is bullshit. That movie would have been an hour and a half of my life I'd never get back, and probably not a particularly enjoyable one either... Does it matter how I came to this conclusion when you have apparently arrived at the same place, albeit fashionably late?
well yes it does. While your "obviously" impecable intuition is a usefull tool for split second decision making, all things of importance require investigation and deliberation. Scientific method and all.
stubbornRoi wrote:
Reminds me of High School algebra, I used to look at an equation and know the answer, but the bitch teaching the class refused to give me credit if I didn't "show my work"...what work? my subconscious just told me x is 5, you silly trull, if you want me to write it all out, ask me something my subconscious can't do in my head... Then, because her grading system, which she gave out at the beginning of the year, would have given me a passing grade, she changed it so she could fail me despite my having aced the final.
been there. Never unfairly failed, but being forced to explain in details things i grasp more easily was always anoying.
smugRoi wrote:
Well, at any rate congratualtions on coming to your senses...however you got there. The "9-11 Conspiracy" can take its rightful place alongside Nessie, Roswell, Sasquatch, and crop circles...
now now... i still believe there are soem very shady things about it. And also, while i doubt roswell happened, you do believe that aliens exist right? Like, not visiting us per say, but that there is other life in the universe?
____________________
tyrion 15 Sep 2006 08:03
50/58
Gentlemen, if I could interrupt your suddenly conciliatory discussion that has hijacked this thread and stick my own oar in.
People have always feared the unknown. First it was the creatures outside the camp-fire, then it was the things in the woods, then it was aliens. The scope has spread as we have seen more of the world and its surrounds. Currently the fear has turned inward and is focused on closed institutions such as corporations, the military and governments.
Now I'm not saying that this fear is totally irrational, healthy scepticism is what democracy is all about, but some of this fear is misplaced.
In the case of 9/11, some people find it easier to believe that "the man" is working against them for his own reasons than to believe that their country is despised by foreign organisations. Mostly these people are the same ones who don't have a passport, can't name their neighbouring countries and have never been outside of their home state or county. This phenomenon is not exclusive to the USA.
Couple this fear with a genuine misunderstanding of the way, in this case, physics works and you will see enough inconsistencies to question what happened. There are so many inconsistencies that some huge conspiracy must be behind it, "the man" is doing this for his own ends!
And hence we get Roswell and UFOs, the Moon landings being faked and the conspiracy of 9/11 being organised by the government.
Everybody has questions about what happened on that day, especially those closest to the people who were killed. If someone presents you with a reasonable explanation for a question you have had yourself, you will be more likely to believe the answers for questions you didn't have. All of a sudden you are caught up in the whole thing and people who don't see your point of view are blinkered.
I'm not having a go at LUPOS here for believing this stuff, PreciousRoi's disinterest in seeing another point of view is just as strange to me. I love to see both sides and pit them against each other and make up my own mind based on as much evidence as I can gather.
The guiding principle I use in all of this is good old Ockham's Razor. The simplest solution is most often the correct one.
1) Government conspiracy with hundreds of people involved who all manage to keep silent and perform their tasks alongside non-conspiracy members without detection?
2) Small group of disaffected men who hijack planes and fly them into buildings?
I know which one seems simplest to me. That's not to say I don't still have questions myself.
People have always feared the unknown. First it was the creatures outside the camp-fire, then it was the things in the woods, then it was aliens. The scope has spread as we have seen more of the world and its surrounds. Currently the fear has turned inward and is focused on closed institutions such as corporations, the military and governments.
Now I'm not saying that this fear is totally irrational, healthy scepticism is what democracy is all about, but some of this fear is misplaced.
In the case of 9/11, some people find it easier to believe that "the man" is working against them for his own reasons than to believe that their country is despised by foreign organisations. Mostly these people are the same ones who don't have a passport, can't name their neighbouring countries and have never been outside of their home state or county. This phenomenon is not exclusive to the USA.
Couple this fear with a genuine misunderstanding of the way, in this case, physics works and you will see enough inconsistencies to question what happened. There are so many inconsistencies that some huge conspiracy must be behind it, "the man" is doing this for his own ends!
And hence we get Roswell and UFOs, the Moon landings being faked and the conspiracy of 9/11 being organised by the government.
Everybody has questions about what happened on that day, especially those closest to the people who were killed. If someone presents you with a reasonable explanation for a question you have had yourself, you will be more likely to believe the answers for questions you didn't have. All of a sudden you are caught up in the whole thing and people who don't see your point of view are blinkered.
I'm not having a go at LUPOS here for believing this stuff, PreciousRoi's disinterest in seeing another point of view is just as strange to me. I love to see both sides and pit them against each other and make up my own mind based on as much evidence as I can gather.
The guiding principle I use in all of this is good old Ockham's Razor. The simplest solution is most often the correct one.
1) Government conspiracy with hundreds of people involved who all manage to keep silent and perform their tasks alongside non-conspiracy members without detection?
2) Small group of disaffected men who hijack planes and fly them into buildings?
I know which one seems simplest to me. That's not to say I don't still have questions myself.
LUPOS 15 Sep 2006 13:39
51/58
tyrion wrote:
In the case of 9/11, some people find it easier to believe that "the man" is working against them for his own reasons than to believe that their country is despised by foreign organisations. Mostly these people are the same ones who don't have a passport, can't name their neighbouring countries and have never been outside of their home state or county. This phenomenon is not exclusive to the USA.
Now now, i have no delusions about other peopel hatign my country. As i'm sure you've noticed from some of my posting I'm not always terribly fond of it myself. ;)
That said our governmen has a strong history of being caught doing things rather secretivley and lieing to the public about them, bad things. "it was for their own good, what they dont know wont hurt them".
Nixon, the contras, mysterious prisons in other countries where we detain peopel without charge, etc...
The simplest reason for anything is generaly what the government/media tells us. But I'd be a full on sucker if I believed everything they told me. Tis a bit of "boy who cried wolf" thing, cause now i don't know when to trust them :/
_______________
RiseFromYourGrave 15 Sep 2006 15:45
52/58
what about dick cheney taking control of NORAD from the generals just a few months prior and then failing to act, marvin bush being head of security there, all the evidence ie. rubble being discarded by mayor Giuliani despite numerous calls for an inspection of the rubble only for him to claim - falsely and ridiculously - 'he didnt know anyone wanted to keep it', what about larry silverstein's admission on tv that they 'pulled' building 7, what about the fact that no modern reinforced steel supported building has ever collapsed despite burning for upwards of 24 hours, what about all the chemical hallmarks of thermate, a supercharged version of thermite for cutting through steel, were found in a piece of the molten metal found at the bottom of the WTC and actually salvaged, what about the fire fighters reporting hearing bombs and explosions bringing down the building, and also the reports from the fire fighter that the fires were almost out? these same fires that were meant to have weakened the building drastically from head to toe, what about the muzzle orders placed on firefighters and the such, to stop them from talking about what happened?
just a few points, i apologise for being highly skeptical of the official story.
and 'usually the simplest answer is the right one' is a foolish one. the right answer is the right answer, be it complex or not.
just a few points, i apologise for being highly skeptical of the official story.
and 'usually the simplest answer is the right one' is a foolish one. the right answer is the right answer, be it complex or not.
LUPOS 15 Sep 2006 16:05
53/58
NORAD! thank you, was buggign the hell out of me... and i was to lazy to look it up ;)
Yea, not to mention colin powel saying on the news that a missle hit the pentagon, then retracting it.
ALso all the video of the tiny explosiosn just below the collapse, as well as the insurance policy change by the guy who owned the bulding just before, and the put options.
I still think its a mess and probably very shady, but Loose change is also a s**t source due to how shady the story of its making is.
Meh, its terribel that i cant question somethign without beign lumped in with Roswell beliievers. Course i suppose its also terribel that i assume roswell believers ot be nuts :/
Curse you life and all your subtelties!!
__________
Yea, not to mention colin powel saying on the news that a missle hit the pentagon, then retracting it.
ALso all the video of the tiny explosiosn just below the collapse, as well as the insurance policy change by the guy who owned the bulding just before, and the put options.
I still think its a mess and probably very shady, but Loose change is also a s**t source due to how shady the story of its making is.
Meh, its terribel that i cant question somethign without beign lumped in with Roswell beliievers. Course i suppose its also terribel that i assume roswell believers ot be nuts :/
Curse you life and all your subtelties!!
__________
tyrion 15 Sep 2006 16:26
54/58
RiseFromYourGrave wrote:
just a few points, i apologise for being highly skeptical of the official story.
I actually found this a couple of days ago and found it quite informative. Answers a lot of questions regarding the collapse of the towers and WTC7 and other aspects of the attacks.
Popular Mechanics - 9/11: Debunking The Myths
RiseFromYourGrave wrote:
and 'usually the simplest answer is the right one' is a foolish one. the right answer is the right answer, be it complex or not.
That's why the phrase is "most often" or "usually" and not "always" - Ockham's Razor is a reasonably respected thought tool for deciding on an answer that is most likely to be the correct one, not an absolute rule.
tyrion 15 Sep 2006 16:31
55/58
LUPOS wrote:
Now now, i have no delusions about other peopel hatign my country. As i'm sure you've noticed from some of my posting I'm not always terribly fond of it myself. ;)
As I said LUPOS, I'm not having a go at you for believing these things. It's easy to believe this sort of stuff, until you dig in to it. As you have done and have come out the other side discounting them.
It's part of the scientific process, take a theory, test it, come up with a new theory. Usually, this process tends towards simple explanations, hence Ockham's Razor.
RiseFromYourGrave 15 Sep 2006 16:43
56/58
im going out soon tyrion, but ill read that article later or tomorrow, thanks. but i must say, it may debunk some things but i heavily imagine i will still think its an inside job afterwards due to things that have irrefutably happened. thanks again though
i still say theres no place for that 'usually the simple one' in investigations though.
if it is the simple answer, then investigators will arrive at that conclusion through evidence, they dont need to be speculating based on mere level of convolution. that gets nobody nowhere
i still say theres no place for that 'usually the simple one' in investigations though.
if it is the simple answer, then investigators will arrive at that conclusion through evidence, they dont need to be speculating based on mere level of convolution. that gets nobody nowhere
LUPOS 15 Sep 2006 16:48
57/58
As I said LUPOS, I'm not having a go at you for believing these things. It's easy to believe this sort of stuff, until you dig in to it. As you have done and have come out the other side discounting them.
Fear not, i wasn't taking it personaly, notice my clever use of ";)". ;)
see what i did there?
___________
PreciousRoi 16 Sep 2006 05:26
58/58
I actually considered invoking Occam and his trusty blade at one point, I think I did, in a lenghty post that got deleted by an inadvertent "back" button press or somesuch...
As to my refusal to forcibly expose myself to the propaganda film in question, I was already familiar with it by reputation. I have a friend who loves that kind of crap, and is constanly trying to get me to watch similar material. If I ain't gonna do it for a friend, who knows where I live and drops it in my mailbox or on the seat of my truck, why would I do it for a relative stranger from some internet forum? That and my layman's understanding of physics and engineering was satisfied by explanations given on the Learning Channel, or Discovery or whoever it was that I saw 5 different documentiaries about 9-11 on. To wit, the combination of the impact, followed by fire, led to cascading structural failures. Impact destroyed the effectiveness of the fireproofing which would normally have protected the structural members from the subsequesnt fires, which coupled with the visibly extensive damage the the exterior, which, in contrast to a normal, glass-clad skyscraper, is more important structurally, to produce the horrific results I saw that tragic morning. I just did not then and do not now see any point in wasting my time with what amounts to wanking material for Bush-haters. There are undoubtedly truths and half-truths woven in amongst the manure, but sifting though it would be unpleasant work for too little gain.
As to my refusal to forcibly expose myself to the propaganda film in question, I was already familiar with it by reputation. I have a friend who loves that kind of crap, and is constanly trying to get me to watch similar material. If I ain't gonna do it for a friend, who knows where I live and drops it in my mailbox or on the seat of my truck, why would I do it for a relative stranger from some internet forum? That and my layman's understanding of physics and engineering was satisfied by explanations given on the Learning Channel, or Discovery or whoever it was that I saw 5 different documentiaries about 9-11 on. To wit, the combination of the impact, followed by fire, led to cascading structural failures. Impact destroyed the effectiveness of the fireproofing which would normally have protected the structural members from the subsequesnt fires, which coupled with the visibly extensive damage the the exterior, which, in contrast to a normal, glass-clad skyscraper, is more important structurally, to produce the horrific results I saw that tragic morning. I just did not then and do not now see any point in wasting my time with what amounts to wanking material for Bush-haters. There are undoubtedly truths and half-truths woven in amongst the manure, but sifting though it would be unpleasant work for too little gain.