Thread Graveyard

Re: What problem do you guys have with consipracy theories?

liberty student — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 02:58:22 GMT

Poptech:
Is this definition accepted by any dictionary? If not, it is meaningless ...

Not at LvMI. You are at LvMI.

Poptech:
So now you are threatening me, typical of those in power. What would I be banned for? Disagreeing with you? Fascinating.

We're here to advance liberty in the tradition of the Austrian school. If that is not your interest, then perhaps you should visit one of the million other niche communities out there. It's likely there is a better match out there for you.

Poptech:
I know what private property is and do not call myself a conservative but what I actually am, a limited government libertarian.

I've already explained, limited government is a Utopian fallacy. There is no such thing as a limited government. If you had spent the last couple months learning any Austrian political theory, you would understand why.

And yes, you're not a conservative, because you don't understand private property.

Poptech:
You stated no WMDs were found, this is false and I have proven it so.

All you have done is play semantic games. Bush lied.

Poptech:
Ron Paul does not support embassies?

Ron Paul does not support the embassy in Iraq. He does not support the war in Iraq or Afghanistan. He doesn't believe the Iraq war was legal. Have you done any research on Ron Paul? Read "The Revolution"? Read his articles on LRC?

Poptech:
I am here because I support Mises and Hayek non-anarchist limited government ideology.

But you don't support limited government. War is not a limited government position. Bush was not a limited government President. Your pal Mitt Romney was not a limited government candidate. Mises and Hayek would have never supported the Iraq war. They would have never supported American bases around the world. Please, don't try to conflate Mises and Hayek with your American exceptionalism and imperialism. It's disgusting and dishonest.

Poptech:
The fact that I "agitate" non limited government libertarians is something I would expect from the PC police not so called libertarians. Did I hurt someone's "Feelings"? If I agree with you will I now not be an "agitator"? Should I report to the politbureau for reducation?

Again, we're here to further liberty in the tradition of the Austrian school. If you're not, then you're probably on the wrong site.

And if you complain about the moderating or forum rules one more time, its over. I've had nearly enough of that since I asked you to pull your signature advertising.

Re: What problem do you guys have with consipracy theories?

Andrew Cain — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 02:55:29 GMT

laminustacitus:
He bases all of his facts on observation, and physical evidence; he is definately an empiricist.

Yet he deduces why and how people do crimes through rationalization.

Re: What problem do you guys have with consipracy theories?

laminustacitus — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 02:54:10 GMT

wilderness:

Laughing Man:

I'm trying to discover if Sherlock Holmes is a rationalist or a empiricist. He seems to keep on bouncing back and forth.

If you know how to use Utorrent then I can send you the link to download the whole series.

i don't know how to use torrent. that's ok.

According to what I'm reading, I think he's a rationalist. I don't know the complete difference, but as I pointed out he observes and notes subtle evidence, the data in the field, but then deduces from these facts using a logic he states has developed over time. He reviews old cases of his often and likes to think quite often. He sits and contemplates by his fireplace while smoking his pipe or playing the violin. Is that a rationalist? Cause they induct and deduct, correct? And that's what he does.

He bases all of his facts on observation, and physical evidence; he is definately an empiricist.

Re: What problem do you guys have with consipracy theories?

Juan — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 02:32:51 GMT

LM:

Poptech:
Is this with the concession of the new Iraqi government.
Do you think the Iraqi government really has a choice in the matter?

Not to mention that the iraqi government is just a bunch of thieves and murderers like its counterpart the amerikan government - they have as much authority as the amerikan gov't - that is - ZERO .

Poptech has repeatedly asserted the beyond-stupid claim that the crimes of the amerikan government are legitimized when/if the local governments of the countries attacked by the amerikan military somehow lick the boots of the amerikan military. .

Well, I guess that in the neocon world Poptech lives in, his 'arguments' make sense...

Re: What problem do you guys have with consipracy theories?

wilderness — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 02:28:37 GMT

Laughing Man:

I'm trying to discover if Sherlock Holmes is a rationalist or a empiricist. He seems to keep on bouncing back and forth.

If you know how to use Utorrent then I can send you the link to download the whole series.

i don't know how to use torrent. that's ok.

According to what I'm reading, I think he's a rationalist. I don't know the complete difference, but as I pointed out he observes and notes subtle evidence, the data in the field, but then deduces from these facts using a logic he states has developed over time. He reviews old cases of his often and likes to think quite often. He sits and contemplates by his fireplace while smoking his pipe or playing the violin. Is that a rationalist? Cause they induct and deduct, correct? And that's what he does.

Re: What problem do you guys have with consipracy theories?

Andrew Cain — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 02:19:22 GMT

wilderness:
full of Holmes deductive logic. It's interesting that the police and some others argue against his deductive logic, but it's all strawmen from their lack of understanding. They want facts and evidence, but his deductions come from inductive facts and evidence. He corrects them on these points and dazzles them with his intellectual and sensory keenness. But more importantly for the moment - it's a fun read

I'm trying to discover if Sherlock Holmes is a rationalist or a empiricist. He seems to keep on bouncing back and forth.

Re: What problem do you guys have with consipracy theories?

BioTube — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 02:07:49 GMT

Poptech, if you think "nation building" is different than imperialism, then you must believe that the Japanese Empire didn't Manchuria, which was governed by an "independant" bunch.

Re: What problem do you guys have with consipracy theories?

wilderness — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 02:07:32 GMT

Laughing Man:

wilderness:
They are, don't take offense , more beautiful and inspirational than trying to communicate with somebody that thinks War is Peace.

Or you could be watching the Adventures of Sherlock Holmes with Jeremy Brett who is the greatest Sherlock Holmes in the history of Sherlock Holmes actors.

Is that on TV? My TV isn't hooked up with the outside world. That's funny you bring this up. I'm currently reading all the original Sherlock stories by Doyle from the Strand Magazine. Complete with originally reproduced illustrations. After I got the book at the library I went on-line to check out it's history to get some background, and discovered there is a Sherlock Holmes hollywood movie coming out in December but I don't know if I'll see it or not. Maybe I'll rent it. I'm not that big on movies.

I like justice and wanted a break from reading Aristotle and Aquinas. Something to break up the mood. The stories are really an excellent, intriguing read, full of Holmes deductive logic. It's interesting that the police and some others argue against his deductive logic, but it's all strawmen from their lack of understanding. They want facts and evidence, but his deductions come from inductive facts and evidence. He corrects them on these points and dazzles them with his intellectual and sensory keenness. But more importantly for the moment - it's a fun read.

Re: What problem do you guys have with consipracy theories?

Andrew Cain — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 02:03:35 GMT

Poptech:

Is this with the concession of the new Iraqi government.

Do you think the Iraqi government really has a choice in the matter?

Poptech:

But we are not doing this, the current governments have the authority.

Simple question: How did the current government get into power?

Poptech:
Like I said this is nation building not imperialism

They are one in the same. You need authority/rule to deconstruct an old regime and recreate a new one.

Poptech:

They also found sarin shells and enriched uranium, Bush talked about many things including WMDs.

He talked about nuclear bombs. Not 10 year old weapons buried in the ground.

Poptech:

Al-Qaeda would appear to buy everything on the black market and I doubt they would demand brand new WMDs if offered.

Well that is moronic. You are saying if offered a nuclear suitcase, Al-Qaeda would say 'no thanks'?

Poptech:
Friendly, yes, one of my other points.

That is ridiculous. Let's be friendly with people we are diametrically opposed

Poptech:
..and hundreds of highly radioactive items that could have been used in a so-called dirty bomb

Oh yes, they are going to convert medical radioactive items into dirty bombs. Stop the presses, we need to confiscate all x-ray machines so Al-Qaeda doesn't take up an engineering class and discover this untapped resource.

Poptech:
...some of the other radioactive material - including cesium-137, colbalt-60 and strontium - could have been valuable to a terrorist seeking to fashion a terror weapon.

You are likely to find these elements throughout the world. So you deduce that Al-Qaeda, a group that doesn't want to attract overt attention, sulks into one of the heaviest sanctioned countries in the middle east to buy rare elements, this of course coming from an organization that has a supposed global presence.

Poptech:

The low-enriched uranium taken from Iraq, if it is of the 3 percent to 5 percent level of enrichment common in fuel for commercial power reactors, could have been of value to a country developing enrichment technology.

Do I see an implied demand for global trade regulation?

Poptech:
It speeds up the process," Oelrich said, adding that 1.95 tons of low-enriched uranium could be used to produce enough highly enriched uranium to make a single nuclear bomb.

Of course it could the question is was it?

Poptech:
Did Saddam kick out the inspectors?

Doesn't he always?

Re: What problem do you guys have with consipracy theories?

Poptech — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 02:01:04 GMT

wilderness:
At least it can't try to argue with me that a light bulb isn't a light bulb.

If light bulbs did not exist and your invented it but just went around declaring it so would people believe you or would you have convince them. My again is not denying the existence of light bulbs but trying to explain to you why you need to prove and convince people of your position.

Re: What problem do you guys have with consipracy theories?

Juan — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 01:57:44 GMT

Do you deny that the ameriKKKan government is still occupying japan and germany (after having used WMDs AGAINST HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF CIVILIANS ? )

Re: What problem do you guys have with consipracy theories?

Poptech — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 01:54:32 GMT

Juan:
Are you saying that all the amerikkkan military bases in germany and japan are just an 'embassy' ?

I never said they were an embassy, they are clearly military bases but with the the concession of the government of those countries. Do you deny this?

Re: What problem do you guys have with consipracy theories?

Poptech — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 01:52:35 GMT

Laughing Man:
US troops right now and there is talk of leaving a base or two behind. You cannot deny this.

Is this with the concession of the new Iraqi government.

Laughing Man:
Basically exactly what we are doing to Iraq and Afghanistan, we are 'extending our authority' into their land.

"the policy of extending the rule or authority of an empire or nation over foreign countries, or of acquiring and holding colonies and dependencies."

But we are not doing this, the current governments have the authority.

Laughing Man:
So there was no transitory period from law under Saddam to law under the current de facto government? They are both the same series of legislation and rules?

Like I said this is nation building not imperialism.

Laughing Man:
Ah yes, I clearly remember George Bush talking about all that horrible mustard gas Iraq was possibly making

They also found sarin shells and enriched uranium, Bush talked about many things including WMDs.

Laughing Man:
Ten year old mustard gas...into America...what is Al-Qaeda shopping at the clearance section of the international black market of weapons?

Al-Qaeda would appear to buy everything on the black market and I doubt they would demand brand new WMDs if offered.

Laughing Man:
This is moronic and I will give an example why. Postulate I hate Socialists. Conservatives too hate socialists. So apparently I should be friends with Conservatives...

Friendly, yes, one of my other points.

Laughing Man:
Hey look what I discovered. Apparently they couldn't make a dirty bomb out of low-enriched uranium.

Look what your article says.

"...and hundreds of highly radioactive items that could have been used in a so-called dirty bomb. ...some of the other radioactive material - including cesium-137, colbalt-60 and strontium - could have been valuable to a terrorist seeking to fashion a terror weapon. The low-enriched uranium taken from Iraq, if it is of the 3 percent to 5 percent level of enrichment common in fuel for commercial power reactors, could have been of value to a country developing enrichment technology. It speeds up the process," Oelrich said, adding that 1.95 tons of low-enriched uranium could be used to produce enough highly enriched uranium to make a single nuclear bomb."

Laughing Man:
And where was the Iraq government going to enrich it? In all of those IAEA observed nuclear facilities?

Did Saddam kick out the inspectors?

Re: What problem do you guys have with consipracy theories?

Andrew Cain — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 01:52:03 GMT

wilderness:
They are, don't take offense , more beautiful and inspirational than trying to communicate with somebody that thinks War is Peace.

Or you could be watching the Adventures of Sherlock Holmes with Jeremy Brett who is the greatest Sherlock Holmes in the history of Sherlock Holmes actors.

Re: What problem do you guys have with consipracy theories?

Juan — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 01:48:45 GMT

Poptech:
but what I actually am, a limited government libertarian.

Your category is rather nonsensical. All governments are limited. Even the soviet government (allies of the amerikkkan military you know) was a limited government.

A libertarian either supports a minimal government, NOT just a 'limited' government, or if he's a real libertarian he supports no government at all.

Poptech, you are a neocon and amerikkkan imperialist who pretends to have some sympathy for libertarianism - that's all - and, in case you didn't notice, you are fooling no one.