Main Menu

“Truth? You can't handle the truth!”

Started by The Legendary Shark, 18 March, 2011, 06:52:29 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

TordelBack

Quote from: JOE SOAP on 09 July, 2011, 08:13:28 PM
If there's one thing that's 'true' it's that the 'truth movement' can't agree on anything...

This of course being the true nature of truth.  The things people agree on are compromises, and that's not truth at all.

JOE SOAP

#631
Quote from: TordelBack on 09 July, 2011, 08:33:38 PMThis of course being the true nature of truth.  The things people agree on are compromises, and that's not truth at all.

Consensus I believe, a lot better than democracy.


For some reason I'm compelled to post this...fucking...madness...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Hzh1jZPOkU&feature=player_embedded#at=185



Fuckin' 'peak' credibility has been reached.



Trout

Hello, all.

I've had a proper look at this thread for the first time and, boy, what a pile of insane, paranoid shite it is.

It does indeed seem the proper place to object to the excesses of people who don't read comics but are happy to use 2000AD's website as a place to post their ill-informed bile.

However, I do take the point that this site doesn't exist for people to have arguments on, so I'm happy enough to leave it for now. If Peter wants to continue our discussion, that's fine. He can post here. If not, we'll leave it at that.

All the best

- Trout

Matt Timson

Tsk! "I think you're stupid- but let's not fight about it! I'm off now!"

:lol:
Pffft...

Mikey

I feel admonished! Don't judge me-i broke me duck while pissed. In fact i'm 3 sheets to the wind now. Mmmm...sweet tempranillo dulls the pain...

M
To tell the truth, you can all get screwed.

Trout

Hmmm... Having had a proper, proper look now (my favourite point was when another conspiracy theorist, a total stranger, turned up out of the blue to call Peter a liar and a coward), I get the point of this thread.

It's Argue With Scojo Except It's For Peter!

So why is it on this site? Why not delete this sort of content and set up a group where he can sit by himself, spouting his poison in a way that doesn't affect 2000AD, and the rest of us can simply not go there?

I mean: support for the murderer Gaddafi? Why is this site used for that?

- Trout

JOE SOAP


Matt Timson

Quote from: King Trout on 10 July, 2011, 09:15:00 PM
Hmmm... Having had a proper, proper look now (my favourite point was when another conspiracy theorist, a total stranger, turned up out of the blue to call Peter a liar and a coward), I get the point of this thread.

It's Argue With Scojo Except It's For Peter!

So why is it on this site? Why not delete this sort of content and set up a group where he can sit by himself, spouting his poison in a way that doesn't affect 2000AD, and the rest of us can simply not go there?

I mean: support for the murderer Gaddafi? Why is this site used for that?

- Trout

Come on- don't be a cock.  He has opinions that you don't agree with- that you probably find a bit mental.  That's fine.  It's not the same as him spamming up the board, replying to his own witless rants and/or repeating the same message, over and over, in multiple threads- all at the same time.

What's especially annoying is that we've just talked about this on Twitter and you've still wandered back here to effectively join in the pile on.  If I was to do that to some of the people I don't like on this board, you'd be accusing me of bullying.

For the most part, there are two threads that effectively contain this stuff and they're easy enough to avoid.  I'm pretty sure you've championed off-topic threads in the past- so why are these any different?  Apart from the fact that you think they're pish, of course? 
Pffft...

The Legendary Shark

"After about one hundred years of domination, the system of capitalism and the existing world order has proved to be unable to provide appropriate solutions to the problems of societies and thus is coming to an end.

"...One can analyze the current governance of the world by examining three events:

"First, the event of the 11th September 2001 which has affected the whole world for almost a decade. All of a sudden, the news of the attack on the twin towers was broadcast using numerous footages of the incident. Almost all governments and known figures strongly condemned this incident. But then a propaganda machine came into full force; it was implied that the whole world was exposed to a huge danger, namely terrorism, and that the only way to save the world would be to deploy forces into Afghanistan. Eventually Afghanistan, and, shortly thereafter, Iraq were occupied.

"Please take note: it was said that some three thousands people were killed on September 11th, for which we are all very saddened. Yet, up until now, in Afghanistan and Iraq hundreds of thousands of people have been killed, millions wounded and displaced and the conflict is still going on and expanding.

"In identifying those responsible for the attack, there were three viewpoints.

"1- That a very powerful and complex terrorist group, able to successfully cross all layers of the American intelligence and security, carried out the attack. This is the main viewpoint advocated by American statesmen.

"2- That some segments within the U.S. government orchestrated the attack to reverse the declining American economy and its grips on the Middle East in order also to save the Zionist regime. The majority of the American people as well as other nations and politicians agree with this view.

"3- It was carried out by a terrorist group but the American government supported and took advantage of the situation. Apparently, this viewpoint has fewer proponents. The main evidence linking the incident was a few passports found in the huge volume of rubble and a video of an individual whose place of domicile was unknown but it was announced that he had been involved in oil deals with some American officials. It was also covered up and said that due to the explosion and fire no trace of the suicide attackers was found.

"There remain, however, a few questions to be answered:

"1- Would it not have been sensible that first a thorough investigation should have been conducted by independent groups to conclusively identify the elements involved in the attack and then map out a rational plan to take measures against them?

"2- Assuming the viewpoint of the American government, is it rational to launch a classic war through widespread deployment of troops that led to the death of hundreds of thousands of people to counter a terrorist group?

"3- Was it not possible to act the way Iran countered the Riggi terrorist group who killed and wounded 400 innocent people in Iran. In the Iranian operation no innocent person was hurt.

"It is proposed that the United Nations set up an independent fact-finding group for the event of September 11th so that in the future, expressing views about it is not forbidden..."

Excerpts from Mahmoud Ahmadinejad's Speech at the United Nations, Sept. 23, 2010

Sounds reasonable enough to me...

(ducks for cover...)
[move]~~~^~~~~~~~[/move]




Trout

Quote from: Matt Timson on 10 July, 2011, 10:00:29 PM
Quote from: King Trout on 10 July, 2011, 09:15:00 PM
Hmmm... Having had a proper, proper look now (my favourite point was when another conspiracy theorist, a total stranger, turned up out of the blue to call Peter a liar and a coward), I get the point of this thread.

It's Argue With Scojo Except It's For Peter!

So why is it on this site? Why not delete this sort of content and set up a group where he can sit by himself, spouting his poison in a way that doesn't affect 2000AD, and the rest of us can simply not go there?

I mean: support for the murderer Gaddafi? Why is this site used for that?

- Trout

Come on- don't be a cock.  He has opinions that you don't agree with- that you probably find a bit mental.  That's fine.  It's not the same as him spamming up the board, replying to his own witless rants and/or repeating the same message, over and over, in multiple threads- all at the same time.

What's especially annoying is that we've just talked about this on Twitter and you've still wandered back here to effectively join in the pile on.  If I was to do that to some of the people I don't like on this board, you'd be accusing me of bullying.

For the most part, there are two threads that effectively contain this stuff and they're easy enough to avoid.  I'm pretty sure you've championed off-topic threads in the past- so why are these any different?  Apart from the fact that you think they're pish, of course?

I think avoiding it would be the best policy for me, yes. I managed it until now.

I'd rather it didn't exist but what the hell. Life's too short.

- Trout

TordelBack

#640
My liege, your contribution to this forum is immense and has frequently set the tone that makes this such an affable corner of the web, so I'd always approach your opinions with respect.  However, here I think you have the wrong end of the stick. 

This is a thread set up by Shark specifically to allow crazy ideas and conspiracy theories to be discussed without anyone having to read them and get pissed off by them.  It's nothing like Argue With Scojo, except in the specific issue of Libya (and I suppose a couple of earlier instances), where the argument was so wrong-headed that even cooler heads felt they had to pile in.  Yes, supporting Gadaffi is offensively stupid (sorry Peter, it is), but that's why it's being beaten into pulp here.  Peter is a man of strange thoughts and approaches, but Scojo-or-equivalent he ain't.

I think there's a place for it here, when you view here as a community of fans rather than a single-issue discussion forum.  It's no more irrelevant than are the various (and highly popular) "Life..." and  "Last noun verbed..." threads.

EDIT: Oops, our posts crossed.  Yes, ignoring it is best.

The Legendary Shark

"It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it."

Aristotle
[move]~~~^~~~~~~~[/move]




Trout

As Jim Campbell said, I increasingly feel I'm out of step with this board. I don't come round too often anyway. This isn't a flounce off, or a big announcement - I'll still pop back and say hello - but I think it's moved beyond me.

By the way, I do intend to go to the comics event Peter mentioned before, and I am happy to encounter him at it. If he carries out his threat of violence, I'll be sure to post the results here.

- Trout

TordelBack

Quote from: King Trout on 10 July, 2011, 10:29:10 PM
By the way, I do intend to go to the comics event Peter mentioned before, and I am happy to encounter him at it. If he carries out his threat of violence, I'll be sure to post the results here.

See, some good may come of all this yet! 

The Legendary Shark

Quote from: King Trout on 10 July, 2011, 10:29:10 PM
As Jim Campbell said, I increasingly feel I'm out of step with this board. ... I think it's moved beyond me.
- Trout

How so?
[move]~~~^~~~~~~~[/move]