Dr. Morgan Reynolds; nutcase or brilliant?

ProudCapitalist:

How can you pretend to NOT understand that a conspiracy demonstrating that bushmen from inner Nowhere is totally non-productive for the purpose of Bush to kill Saddam Hussein?

This is a strawman.

ProudCapitalist:

According to Rothbards definition of what could be a conspiracy, the 911 cannot be a conspiracy, no more than hurricane Katarina was a conspiracy.

I don't recognize Rothbard as an expert on every topic he had an opinion about.  This is another strawman.

ProudCapitalist:

Spend another $1000 on books written in mad fever by lunies who claim that the secret key to all truth lies in a careful analysis of every brick stone in building B9.

3 strawmen must be the charm.

Perhaps when you are calm and rational we can have a discussion.  In the meantime, you're acting like Alex Jones, constructing fake boogeymen, making baseless assertions, avoiding honest questioning and playing fast and loose with facts.

Capitalist, you keep on talking about Iraq, but Iraq is not the point. The 911 attacks provided an excuse to further totalitarianism in the US - think "homeland security".

ProudCapitalist:

Well, because many many many airplanes have been hijacked throughout history.

Any sources for that ? According to wikipedia there's been some 50 hijackings...in 50 years. Doesn't sound like a lot. Now, I really don't trust wikipedia, so if you have better information I'll appreciate your providing a link...

Since the 1970s this occurance has decreased alot, though.

So, what's your premise ? Hijacking planes is 'very common' or not ? It's either or...

Also, four planes were hijacked simultaneously and that was treated as an 'ordinary' hijacking ? So your argument is that the military are incredibly stupid ?

It's threads like this which depress me very much....

 

I come to Mises for an amazing perspective on free market economics....but am blindsided by such idiocy when it comes to topics such as this, that it makes me question whether or not the people who hold such obviously false and uninformed ideas on 9/11  could even be right about economics....

 

And then I go to sites where -thankfully- people have systematically debunked frauds such as the official story of 9/11 (much like the people here have debunked keynsianism) .....but am surounded by socialists. 

MrKawaii:

I come to Mises for an amazing perspective on free market economics....but am blindsided by such idiocy when it comes to topics such as this, that it makes me question whether or not the people who hold such obviously false and uninformed ideas on 9/11  could even be right about economics....

That's a fantastic post.  All first posts should lump everyone at Mises.org into the category of idiots, then question the collective acumen of our economic knowledge.

Welcome to Mises.org!

Actually, I was just lumping the majority of the previously posters in this thread. Much better, right? 

MrKawaii:

Actually, I was just lumping the majority of the previously posters in this thread. Much better, right? 

Not really.  If people disagree with you, make your case.  Calling folks idiots doesn't advance the discussion at all.

You and I might agree, but there is a reason people who are into truth are marginalized, and a lot of that has to do with the fact they can't communicate effectively and have poor socialization skills.

 

Juan:

The 911 attacks provided an excuse to further totalitarianism in the US - think "homeland security".

Therefore it was an inside jarb

And on Iraq. The Neocons invaded Iraq for the reasons they gave, their straussian views, their incompetence.  911 truthers think PNAC somehow verifies their NWO theories. But really PNAC just shows how insane and muttled policy makers are.

Anyone who is remotely aware of history, policy and current events on more than a superficial level understands that the NWO is a very real movement to create government above government which is unelected and rules completely by bureaucratic fiat.

fezwhatley:

Juan:

The 911 attacks provided an excuse to further totalitarianism in the US - think "homeland security".

Therefore it was an inside jarb.

Maybe. Why not ? Do you have any compelling reason that would totally invalidate the possibility of an inside job ?

At any rate, I didn't say that the usefulness of 911 logically proves that it was inside job. Your remark sounds like a misrepresentation...

And on Iraq. The Neocons invaded Iraq for the reasons they gave, their straussian views, their incompetence. 911 truthers think PNAC somehow verifies their NWO theories. But really PNAC just shows how insane and muttled policy makers are.

Are you talking to me ? I said nothing about a NWO. But now that you mention it, I seem to recall the existence of international bureaucracies such as the imf, who, world bank, un, etc...

liberty student:

Anyone who is remotely aware of history, policy and current events on more than a superficial level understands that the NWO is a very real movement to create government above government which is unelected and rules completely by bureaucratic fiat.

 Which differs from the status quo how much?

scineram:

Which differs from the status quo how much?

The illusion that people have a democratic voice, or that their country is sovereign.

So, the lunies who are obsessed with analysing bricks at ground zero, argue that 911 was a conspiracy, because it gave Bush a pretext for invading Afghanistan. That is a "country" so utterly unimportant and useless, that the only motive anyone even can come to think of, is that it might be possible to some time in the future build a pipeline across it to transport the insignificant oil and gas reserves in Central Asian countries just north of Afghanistan (none of them has proven reserves above that of famous oil gigant Italy!), to the Indian Ocean (which in turn is anything but the center of the world market for oil and gas). Maybe that could be just slightly cheaper than if pipelines instead were connected to established systems through Iran or westwards towards the Caspian Sea (and further through established pipelines to Black Sea and/or the Mediteranean), or even a pipeline built eastwards to the growimg oil market #1: China.

Why would the most elaborate and strange and most bloody "fake invasion" EVER, have been designed by the Bush administration for the one and only purpose to maybe slightly make the construction of a pipeline a little cheaper???

If the administration had designed a 911 in order to maximally constrain freedom of American citizens, then of course the designed perpetrators would've been Americans, even libertarians. NOT a bunch of Saudis lead from Afghanistan. The official 911 problem could be totally controlled by harsher immigration laws toward islamic countries, and no other measures at all. The starting point of a true conspiracy theory is the MOTIVE, and that is totally absent with respect to 911.

The offical story of 911 in no way relates to the actions taken by the administration after 911 (except the hopelessly lost war against wayside bombs in the wasteland which is Afghanistan), that's why the very concept of conspiracy theory is totally inapplicable. What is instead applicable, is the fact that most people are totally uneducated and totally uninterested and that therefor ANY story which hits massmedia big, no matter at all what its actual content is, can be exploited by a US government in order to do whatever it wants. Be the pretext any random crime (like 911 was) or a natural disaster, or even a demographic trend. Gov't will use it. And it has no motive whatsoever to "design"any such an event. They arrive automatically.

 

I think that the same brick-heads who are obsessed by CONSPIRACY are also obsessed by GOLD and WAR (and probably cancer curing triangles and the phases of the Moon). This improductive Anhang notice that libertarianism relates to gold, and therefor they do their best to infiltrate libertarian organizations with their madness and jackass stories.

ProudCapitalist:

And it has no motive whatsoever to "design"any such an event.

Operation Northwoods refutes this.  The sinking of the Lusitania refutes this.  The Gulf of Tonkin refutes this.

ProudCapitalist:

The starting point of a true conspiracy theory is the MOTIVE

This is categorically false.  The starting point for any true conspiracy theory is action.  We can never determine motive with 100% assurance, and we assuredly cannot determine motive for something that is secret.

ProudCapitalist:

I think that the same brick-heads who are obsessed by CONSPIRACY are also obsessed by GOLD and WAR

You're the only person displaying obsessive behaviour in this thread.

ProudCapitalist, I've waited patiently for you to post something intelligent and well founded.  How much longer do you intend to keep me waiting?

Or was it your plan all along to post strawmen and make assertions, then point the finger at others and claim lunacy?

 

You totally refuse to relate to anything which I write! So you DO actually realize that you have nothing at all going for you, don't you?

The ACTIONS of the adminstration after 911 related to DOMESTIC SECURITY, WMD and IRAQ.

The *official* 911 story relates in no way at all to any of that. Why would the administration design a conspiracy focused on SAUDI, AFGHANISTAN and TOTAL ABSENCE OF ANY WMD OR WEAPONS USE AT ALL???

Lucitania was an example of the many times repeated traditional multi-century conspiracy pretext-for-war model: "Germany's sunk one of our ships, so let's wage war againt Germany!" Same thing with Northwind proposal: "The Cubans attacked us, so let's attack them!" Nothing of that bears any resemblence at all to the 911 event (no American citizens, nor any Iraqis, were involved in 911 so no action against any of them were motivated by the 911 events), unless you extremely cleverly constructs some phantastic rationale for why an invasion of the wasteland which is Afghanistan would be so extremely attractive to the Bush administration!

 

liberty student:

ProudCapitalist:

And it has no motive whatsoever to "design"any such an event.

Operation Northwoods refutes this.  The sinking of the Lusitania refutes this.  The Gulf of Tonkin refutes this.

ProudCapitalist:

The starting point of a true conspiracy theory is the MOTIVE

This is categorically false.  The starting point for any true conspiracy theory is action.  We can never determine motive with 100% assurance, and we assuredly cannot determine motive for something that is secret.

ProudCapitalist:

I think that the same brick-heads who are obsessed by CONSPIRACY are also obsessed by GOLD and WAR

You're the only person displaying obsessive behaviour in this thread.

ProudCapitalist, I've waited patiently for you to post something intelligent and well founded.  How much longer do you intend to keep me waiting?

Or was it your plan all along to post strawmen and make assertions, then point the finger at others and claim lunacy?

 

Some people just want to watch the world burn argue, methinks.  

Since the inception of the internet, idle arguments & semantics transferred from the pastime of the Men of Letters to the Men of Keyboards :D  

On a more serious note, I think the basic assumption that all of this (what could attributed to the NWO) is due to incompetence & negligence fundamentally betrays the argument against The State in the first place, since it gives a soft-pass @ the argument of different people in different positions pulling just the right levers this time, as opposed to there being no levers of power, or means of putting people in power, whatsoever.  

It assumes far too much humanism on the part of humans who have essentially become vampires on the rest of the human race, all to justify their masturbatory views on what the course of history should look like.

Also, spend a few minutes reading up on Memetics, & one can easily see how there is an obvious motivation for oligarchies & lobbies to perpetuate disinfo over legitimate questioning, & how effective it can be to essentially launder the motivations & strategic, Machiavellian moves away into the noise of society.  

Thankfully, we have Wikileaks (for now), so if anyone wants to argue the ACTA is some sort of nuttish conspiracy, hop on to wikileaks & see for yourself.  For the mean time, we also have a relatively free internet to help us seek out whether or not conspiracies are true or not, at least until George H. Obama regulates it into the 3rd circle of hell with people getting fined for posting an offensive comment on a message board vis-a-vis the authority of the Grand Ol' Internets Czar, bravley defending & unclogging the internet, because the internet, after all, isn't a big truck, it's a series of tubes.     

It's just a shame actual evidence to prove so called conspiracy theories come so long after the fact (for the most part, purposely, good luck with a FOIA request), or are buried beneath time & the discourse of history, that many just assume it's never true, just like how many would & will assume there was no motivation for agents of the state (perhaps specifically the administration, or the oligarchies in power) to make a strategic & tactically smart move of a perfectly timed false flag operation (i.e. 9/11).

Of course, these tactics are only for ancient empires, nowadays, we are much more evolved human beings </sarcasm>