Boston Marathon Explosion(s) — Page 8

It's more like yelling "fire!" in a room with fire but nobody knows for sure where it is or how many fires there are and who started it (I blame Billy Joel the lady doth protest too much).

The hilarious thing about that statement is that many on the left are angry at Obama for deporting so many people.

America is an immigrant state all states are.

As for people trying to find anything of any value from interpreting symbolism in Kubrick films we are on a planet where people have been doing this with scripture for centuries.

It's the a human reflex to see patterns in chaos and attribute importance to the shapes one sees.

It's no less insane than studying past lottery numbers to determine what your future ones will be.

However we know that governments do things like pretend to treat diseases when they are merely studying the course of the disease.

We know they deliberately expose their own citizens to radiation to find out  what the effects are.

We know they plan to blow up civilian aircraft to foster sentiment against other states.

These are real documented conspiracies, governments have always done this sort of thing it's part of what they do.

To assume anyone proposing other conspiracies have happened is nuts is nuts but to assume they are right is nuts too.

CP3S said:

Warbler said:

they need to put a straight jacket on Alex Jones and lock him up in a padded cell.

No thanks. I'd rather have my freedom of speech, and the security of being able to say and believe what I want without fear of being put in a straight jacket and thrown in a padded cell just because someone disagrees with me, or thinks the things I say are crazy.

Love it, or hate it, Alex Jones is a great example of what makes America kind of awesome. America misses more than she hits, she needs all the awesome she can get her hands on.

free speech doesn't seem to stop laws suits for slander. 

CP3S, did you look at this video?

You Can't Make This Up. Oh Wait, YOU CAN!

Alex Jones is completely nuts.   If he seriously believes the stuff is he is spewing, he is truly insane.    Even though we have free speech, we institutionalize the extremely insane for their own protection.  

thejediknighthusezni said:

Obama is 100% responsible for every crime commited by an immigrant who has come in here under his watch.

its one of two things,  either you are completely nuts or you are a troll.   In either case, please go away.

xhonzi said:

 

We're both parents, Frink.

As far as you know, but all you saw was a picture.  Come to think of it, you could have rented your kids, so...I THINK YOU'RE PART OF THE CONSPIRACY.

Busted.

xhonzi said:

TV's Frink said:

xhonzi said:

Warbler said:

xhonzi said:

...I think more are saying, "What if this isn't what it appears to be?  If it's not, then it's probably someone trying to manipulte my actions.  What reaction are they looking for?  That's the one I don't want to give."

not really sure what any of that has to do with the Boston bombing or conspiracy theories of it and other things like it.  

If the intended reaction is that people get mad (or scared, or whatever), and pass all sorts of new freedom-limiting laws (or whatever)... then that's the reaction we must not give.  If we do, then we have been manipulated to give these sickos just what they want.

So, we should not pass stricter anti-gun legislation on the small chance that someone who wants stricter anti-gun legislation is the one who let these lions loose in our village?

That's quite a stretch.

 Not quite.  I am saying:

There is a chance the events were designed to elicit an emotion to pass otherwise unfavourable laws(unfavourable in Xhonzi's opinion).

fixed.

xhonzi said:

If the intended manipulation is that we withdraw troops:

   Let's not do that.

but what if withdrawing troops was otherwise a good idea?

xhonzi said:

If the intended manipulation is that we change gun laws:

   Let's not do that.

but what if changing guns laws is otherwise a good idea?

xhonzi said:

Warbler said:

xhonzi said:

Warbler said:

It is possible in the future that some nut might it into his head to do one of these shootings in an effort to get gun control legislation passed?  It is.   But was that the motivation for the people that did the shootings I mentioned?  I haven't heard that it was. 

Honestly, I don't suppose any of these shooters were anti-gun-nuts.  I believe there is something wrong with them... but not that.

However, I am willing to suppose that someone set them up that was.  Someone that let the proverbial lion run wild in the proverbial village because it met their own agenda.

set them up?  how?    prove this. 

Use your imagination.  I'm not sure what you want me to prove... 

that the shooters at Comlumbine, VT, Fort Hood, Tucson, The Colorado movie theater, and Sandy Hook were set up by anti-gun-nuts.    As far as I have heard, there has been no evidence that that is case.   Take Sandy Hook for example,  the nut's mother bought him the guns,  has there been any evidence that she was and anti-gun-nut and she set her son up in order to get gun laws changed? 

xhonzi said:

That it's possible?  That's all I'm claiming here.  We've already both agreed that it's possible.

we've agreed that the it is possible that some anti-gun nut could get it into his/her head to pull off one of these shootings in order to get gun control laws passed,  but again in the shootings that I have listed there has been no evidence to suggest that any anti-gun-nuts were involved.  

xhonzi said:

On the other hand I could argue that maybe gun nuts set up the guys that did the bombings in order show that nuts will still kill people even if they do not have guns. 

I think that's way sillier than anything I said.  For the record.

why?  why would only anti-gun-nuts be crazy enough to pull off an attack in order to change the law to their liking or to keep the law from being changed to something they don't like?

xhonzi said:

xhonzi said:

If the intended reaction is that people get mad (or scared, or whatever), and pass all sorts of new freedom-limiting laws (or whatever)... then that's the reaction we must not give.  If we do, then we have been manipulated to give these sickos just what they want.

whether or not gun control legislation is a good idea has nothing to do with what these sickos what.  

See my comments in reply to Frink- about giving in to temper tantrums.

If it was a good idea before the "temper tantrum", I fail to see why it would be a bad idea after the "temper tantrum".  And it has nothing to do with being manipulated.   A good idea, is a good idea regardless if someone is trying to manipulate you to do it. 

xhonzi said:

Lets say for the sake of argument that gun control could save lives and prevent massacres, are you telling me we shouldn't pass it merely because it is what the sickos want?   

Don't negotiate with terrorists.  Don't let people manipulate your actions. 

A good idea, is a good idea regardless if someone is trying to manipulate you to do it. 

I think we both agree that ending slavery was a good idea,  but if some one attacked and killed all the white people on a slave plantation, does that mean we shouldn't end slavery, just because we'd be doing what the attacker wanted?   

Warbler said:

free speech doesn't seem to stop laws suits for slander. 

CP3S, did you look at this video?

You Can't Make This Up. Oh Wait, YOU CAN!

Alex Jones is completely nuts.   If he seriously believes the stuff is he is spewing, he is truly insane.    Even though we have free speech, we institutionalize the extremely insane for their own protection.  

I listen to Alex Jones sometimes when I am road tripping and bored, I find it entertaining and amusing. So yes, I know what he is all about and how ridiculous he is, and that some people take him completely seriously.

But don't you realize how dangerous your line of thinking is here? You disagree with what he is saying, so you say he is "truly insane" and needs to be locked up for his own safety. You could apply that in so many cases to snuff out freedom.

Sometimes radicalism can be revolutionary in a positive way. Imagine if prior to the civil war you had someone in the south hammering on to people about how black people should be free, allowed to vote, own property, and have every single right that any other person in the United States has. You can imagine a lot of people back then would have been saying that he is truly insane and needs to be locked up for his own safety and those around him.

I'm more than content to have guys like Alex Jones on the air, he is harmless. Yes, some nutjobs will cling to him and hang on his words, but the majority of people know it is nuts. That would really suck if every time someone didn't meet the status quo in their teachings, beliefs, ramblings, whatever, they were at risk of being tossed in a padded room with a straight jacket. This has happened plenty throughout history, let's not even entertain that kind of thinking on this soil.

Don't worry, Warb, I am pretty sure Alex Jones will be okay and doesn't need us to protect him from himself by having him institutionalized.

I'm for the compulsory serving of asparagus at breakfast, free corsets for the under-5s and I find Alex Jones' voice sexually stimulating.

I envision scenarios where he growls in the room during naughty situations.

Am I a slut?

CP3S said:

I'm more than content to have guys like Alex Jones on the air, he is harmless.

Not necessarily.

http://deadspin.com/the-tsarnaev-brothers-allegedly-followed-9-11-conspirac-476607277

CP3S said:

But don't you realize how dangerous your line of thinking is here? You disagree with what he is saying, so you say he is "truly insane" and needs to be locked up for his own safety.

incorrect there are many people whom I disagree whom I wouldn't say are truly insane and needs to be locked up.    

How about we have trained mental experts examine Alex Jones and let them decide if he is completely crazy?   

I don't know how someone can claim to think what he thinks and not be completely nuts.  

How about having the government sue him for slander?   If Alex Jones hasn't slandered the US. Government, there can be no such thing as slander.

I think what Frink brought up is very interesting.    What if because of Alex Jones and the other conspiracy nuts spreading their lies, some guy bought into the idea that the government actually did 911, Columbine, VT, Fort Hood, Tucson, the Colorado movie theater,  Sandy Hook, and the Boston Bombing(maybe in the explosion in Texas?), then decided to get revenge for it?   What if some guy got it into his head to blow up government building or murder government workers or try to assassinate the President or some other sort of attack?  

I don't think we should lock people up for what they say.  Just wanted to say that it's not necessarily true to say those people are harmless.

thejediknighthusezni said:

I have no doubt that these incremental totalitarian "Progressives" are all CERTIFIABLY and VICIOUSLY insane.

TV's Frink said:

CP3S said:

I'm more than content to have guys like Alex Jones on the air, he is harmless.

Not necessarily.

http://deadspin.com/the-tsarnaev-brothers-allegedly-followed-9-11-conspirac-476607277

That "article" is little more than some wild speculation. But this is what I think it is trying to say:

There is a blog post from a former customer of the Boston Bombers' mother. In this blog post the blogger explains how the family was very religious, followed the Koran (a book which was written as a recruitment tool, and ultimately teaches that Muslims are at war with all non-Muslims), and were pretty strict in following doctrine.

BUT the mother also mentioned that she believes 9/11 was a conspiracy done to make Muslims look bad, and that she learned this from her boys who learned about it and showed it to her on the internet. So, haha, clearly it is Alex Jones who is responsible for the Boston Marathon Bombing!!! HAHAHA, take that you evil conspiracy assholenuts! Your ramblings about Muslims not killing people (because the government did it) are causing Muslims to really kill people!

WTF? So yeah, Alex Jones AND the person who wrote that article Fink linked to are absolute nutters, but totally harmless. And I am happy I live in a country where they can wildly speculate to their hearts content.

Warbler said:

CP3S said:

But don't you realize how dangerous your line of thinking is here? You disagree with what he is saying, so you say he is "truly insane" and needs to be locked up for his own safety.

incorrect there are many people whom I disagree whom I wouldn't say are truly insane and needs to be locked up.    

How about we have trained mental experts examine Alex Jones and let them decide if he is completely crazy?   

Because I wouldn't trust these trained mental experts. Maybe these same trained mental experts would decide I too am certifiable and lock me up if someone found something I say distasteful. How about we just support the freedom of speech in our country?  

perhaps I should have said "quality, nonbiased, trained mental experts, like psychologists and Psychiatrists?    

and again, what about slander? 

CP3S said:

So, haha, clearly it is Alex Jones who is responsible for the Boston Marathon Bombing!!!

That's clearly not what I was saying.  All I was saying is you can't automatically assume he's harmless.

TV's Frink said:

CP3S said:

So, haha, clearly it is Alex Jones who is responsible for the Boston Marathon Bombing!!!

That's clearly not what I was saying.  All I was saying is you can't automatically assume he's harmless.

It wasn't clearly not what you were saying, it is exactly what your link was suggesting (which is what I was commenting on), with you making no more comment on the whole thing than a simple, "not necessarily". Just saying, it is hard to know exactly what you were trying to say, but the link you linked to was as ungrounded, and speculative as any crazy conspiracy theory.