Report reveals Vietnam War hoaxes, faked attacks - Page 2 - New England Patriots Forums

Real World · 01-09-2008, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wistahpatsfan

No it isn't
Think of it this way: Why would you believe anything the government says (other than to preserve your own sanity knowing that the government controls so much of our lives)? Skepticism is normal and required since Nixon and even before, as Tonkin clearly demonstrates. You think Colin Powell trusts the government anymore? How about the troops in Iraq that are being pressed into longer tours with less time stateside? What about Congressmen who promised "change" to get elected?

You can't be serious when you suggest (I think) that your default reaction is to trust government first and question only when there are obvious doubts. That's dangerous and silly.

Wistah, clearly you need to have an objective mind. I think I've said the phrase "anything is possible" in this forum a million times. I am in no way saying that when the government says jump, we should say how high. My point is incredibly simple. When I hear the story about 15 kidnapped sailors, my first reaction isn't that the US staged it. When I hear reports about an incident with the Iranian navy, I don't say it's BS. Do I think the government tells the truth always and forever, of course not. What I'm talking about is this 911truthmovement, inside job, tinfoil ideology that takes the automatic position that EVERYTHING is BS. The same way some people never doubt the government, these people never believe it. I think sane people would fall somewhere in between. Everything isn't a conspiracy is what I'm saying. Some of these people sound worse than Rosie O'Donnell, or say Rush Limbaugh.

***patsfan13*** · 01-09-2008, 11:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Turk

Originally Posted by Turk
I think what is being suggested is that there is a precedence and that because of it, we should be aware if not skeptical.

Post of the confrontation?

Here are the first few words of the original post:
"My skepticism about all things gov't..."

What exactly is your position here?
That our government / military is Godly, that we have never resorted to this type of thing?
That it is silly to question?
That we should trust and obey, blindly?

I was referring to this thread :

Iranian ships provoke US war ships

I realize you haven't been around but you should at least look around before jumping to conclusions.

As to my attitudes about this incident. Has governments shaded truth, yes. However when it comes to things said by our US Military I give them the benefit of the doubt. IMO they are innocent until proven guilty. Some clearly have a problem with this. Too Bad.

Holy Diver · 01-09-2008, 11:30 AM

Once bitten ......

wistahpatsfan · 01-09-2008, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real World

Wistah, clearly you need to have an objective mind. I think I've said the phrase "anything is possible" in this forum a million times. I am in no way saying that when the government says jump, we should say how high. My point is incredibly simple. When I hear the story about 15 kidnapped sailors, my first reaction isn't that the US staged it. When I hear reports about an incident with the Iranian navy, I don't say it's BS. Do I think the government tells the truth always and forever, of course not. What I'm talking about is this 911truthmovement, inside job, tinfoil ideology that takes the automatic position that EVERYTHING is BS. The same way some people never doubt the government, these people never believe it. I think sane people would fall somewhere in between. Everything isn't a conspiracy is what I'm saying. Some of these people sound worse than Rosie O'Donnell, or say Rush Limbaugh.

I hear ya.
I'm more of the mindset that, when it comes to the affairs of government, I need proof of everything before I accept it as fact. That goes for what the White House says, what Congress says, what political pundits say...everyone! There are so many agendas out there, that lying about opponents is often the preferred route. I doubt the Pentagon's account of everything because I experienced it. I also doubt anyone who says the military is FOS, but moreso the Pentagon. Other stances on things like economic stances and the need for a new law need to be proven to me.
That's what I mean. I suppose I don't have any default mechanism for the government other than to be distru(Please be quiet - edited)l.

Real World · 01-09-2008, 11:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Holy Diver

Once bitten ......

...twice shy babe.

I remember when I was a kid I used to love the blonde chic in this video. IIRC, she was a popular model or actress at the time. I forget.

Turk · 01-09-2008, 11:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patsfan13

I was referring to this thread :

Iranian ships provoke US war ships

I realize you haven't been around but you should at least look around before jumping to conclusions.

As to my attitudes about this incident. Has governments shaded truth, yes. However when it comes to things said by our US Military I give them the benefit of the doubt. IMO they are innocent until proven guilty. Some clearly have a problem with this. Too Bad.

I have been around, read that thread and this one, as well.
By definition, each and every thread is a separate entity and maybe you should stick to that.
Again, what is being suggested is that there is good reason to be skeptical or at least to question and to do due diligence.

Turk · 01-09-2008, 12:03 PM

Originally Posted by Turk
I think what is being suggested is that there is a precedence and that because of it, we should be aware if not skeptical.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real World

Precedence? The Gulf of Tonkin then stands as an absolute in determining that everything the government says is BS first, and the truth only when proven so beyond a reasonable doubt. Hmmm...how'd that work out with the 15 kidnapped sailors? I guess that isn't precedence though. If what's being suggested is that you should always leave room to doubt, then fine. However, what we get in here from too many, is tinfoil hats, gloves, underwear, sweaters, socks, ear muffs, pins, wife beaters, and even pant suits (that one's for you HB!

).

Where exactly did I call the Gulf of Tonkin an absolute?

When exactly did I say that "everything" the govt. said was BS?

My post wasn't even that long, and it was the definition of my understanding of the original, which was "we should be aware if not skeptical" when it comes to reports of events of this magnitude and that we should question, research, as opposed to getting caught up in a campaign of blind, nationalist testosterone raising.

By the way, I have read quite a few foreign newspapers on this recent incident with the Iranians and they all seem to indicate that it was the Iranians that were out of line. Way out of line.

***DarrylS*** · 01-09-2008, 12:35 PM

My skepticism comes for all things government starting with the lies of the 50's and this has pretty much been a constant since then, things are never what they appear to be.. there have been so many loosers from both sides of the aisle in this time frame it is not about partisan politics, but more of an expected response from those in the oval office. How can you tell if anyone of them are lying, they move their lips..

Real World · 01-09-2008, 12:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by wistahpatsfan

I hear ya.
I'm more of the mindset that, when it comes to the affairs of government, I need proof of everything before I accept it as fact. That goes for what the White House says, what Congress says, what political pundits say...everyone! There are so many agendas out there, that lying about opponents is often the preferred route. I doubt the Pentagon's account of everything because I experienced it. I also doubt anyone who says the military is FOS, but moreso the Pentagon. Other stances on things like economic stances and the need for a new law need to be proven to me.
That's what I mean. I suppose I don't have any default mechanism for the government other than to be distru(Please be quiet - edited)l.

We're on the same page Wistah. I'm not saying anyone should always trust, or always doubt, 100% of the time. I'm merely saying that you need to trust with the possibility of doubt, or doubt with the possibility of trust. My disdain is for anyone who is absolute in either direction. For some reason, in this forum, there is a growing tinfoil movement. Tinfoil, as I refer to it, represents those people who have pretty much certified in their minds that a conspiracy, or a complete fabrication has taken place, and shun all other possibilities inspite of sanity or facts. When someone tells me that I'm nuts for not believing that 9/11 was an inside job, or someone else states that this most recent Iranian issue is a Gulf of Tonkin redux, I can't help but roll my eyes. Is it possible that 9/11 was an inside job, or that the the Iranian deal was set up, sure. Is it certifiable, or close to it, not at all.

***PressCoverage*** · 01-09-2008, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Real World

We're on the same page Wistah. I'm not saying anyone should always trust, or always doubt, 100% of the time. I'm merely saying that you need to trust with the possibility of doubt, or doubt with the possibility of trust. My disdain is for anyone who is absolute in either direction. For some reason, in this forum, there is a growing tinfoil movement. Tinfoil, as I refer to it, represents those people who have pretty much certified in their minds that a conspiracy, or a complete fabrication has taken place, and shun all other possibilities inspite of sanity or facts. When someone tells me that I'm nuts for not believing that 9/11 was an inside job, or someone else states that this most recent Iranian issue is a Gulf of Tonkin redux, I can't help but roll my eyes. Is it possible that 9/11 was an inside job, or that the the Iranian deal was set up, sure. Is it certifiable, or close to it, not at all.

no, what you're nuts for is ostricizing and labelling anyone who demands answers that the convenient 9/11 Commission and fraudulent Kean Report NEVER addressed.... that's the difference... heck, why don't you just stand behind the cops, thumb your nose and squeal "Nah Nah!"?... it's almost as annoying, the position you take... one that avoids getting to the bottom of the truth like a Barry Sanders run avoids defenders in the open field... run Barry, run!!

people like you are the ones who avoid subpeonas, claim executive priveledge and "state secrets", who turn their back, and keep marching into the safety net beyond security check points when real journalists throw microphones in their face and ask legit questions that never, ever get answered... all on the "grounds" that there's somehow, "no basis" for even asking the question in the first place, and that "someone would have tattled by now"

... nevermind, of course, that several people have come forward, and had their careers ruined, or worse, killed...

so then you get sanctimonious and label truth diggers as part of some "tinfoil hat" crowd... how Nixonian it all is... deny, deny, deny, ignore, ignore, ignore, ridicule, ridicule, ridicule... when that all fails, make them disappear...

disingenuous to the bitter end are Bush Leaguers around here and everywhere... i swear, they're all desperately clinging to the same template -- no matter where you engage one -- regarding the corrupt nature of the globalists who pull our strings... as long as they're buoyant in their own upper-middle class decadence (or better), then to them, their "virtuous" government has all of our interests at heart, and no questions dare EVER be asked. ... and if enough people who voted for the frat boy squawk that 9/11 Truth has no basis, and enough skeptical people fear being labelled and remain silent, then wallah!!!... it conveniently goes unasked and goes away altogether.... doesn't it?... how self-sustaining...

yeah, as if Tonkin was an isolated incident, and our government deserves the "benefit of the doubt" at this point... shall we review?

how about Operation Northwoods? a fairly transparent bit of US government evil right there... documented and archived... fortunately, a rational, sane president shot that idea down ... yes, the president who was murdered by gunshots from multiple angles, and the covered up investigation at every turn that followed...

how about Albert B. Hall and the Teapot Dome? ... how about the foreknowledge of Pearl Harbor?...

how about the CIA assisted coup in Iran in 1953? an incident we're still feeling blowback for some 50 years later... or Chile? or Iran-Contra? Savings & Loan, that cost US taxpayers hundreds of billions? or Watergate?... the illegal recount blockage of the 2000 election? Diebold?... Gary Webb's disappearance? Michael Ruppert's mysterious illness?

or my personal favorite, one that has led to the unimaginable suffering of MILLIONS of Americans: how about the CIA's prolonged importation of heroin and cocaine in this country, so as to launder the money on wall street and secretly fund illegal operations like Iran Contra, the main culprits of which have played starring roles in the fraud of the Iraq Invasion?... documented fact, although conveniently supressed by the alledged "mainstream liberal media" ...

so yeah, you guys can pretend that there's no basis for skepticism, and whine about "first reaction"

, all while ignoring "final logical reaction"... and you can pretend that anyone brave enough to demand answers are merely "crazy"... if that's the self-rationalization that helps ease your mind -- we all know it's difficult to get one's head around... but one things for absolute, undeniable certainty regarding your negotiable set of principles: if any of these acts were perpetrated by a guy named Clinton or Kennedy, you'd all damned sure band together and help pump millions into the demand for an INDEPENDENT COUNSEL, and make sure that liberal bastard is strung up by his skin, wouldn't you?

different when your guys do it... we understand...