Favorite Conspiracy Theories

[joshs]

Right now the world is watching while there is a genocide of the people of southern sudan (Darfur). Abouut 400,000 dead civilians over the last couple of years. Everyone should insist that their governments steps in to help these people...

[Rain]

What? Nobody who's posted believes in Aliens?

 

I had no suspicion about giant cover-ups until I read Dan Brown. Now I believe (having never been to Europe) that...

 

-Every bit of France is filled with symbolism. Nothing is what it seems. Every building is actually a secret pointer to something else.

 

-Ditto Rome

 

-Early American leaders were all members of a secret society, but they like to leave clues about themselves in dollar bills, architecture, wordings, etc.

 

-America has lots of top secret agencies with unlimited budgets that the CIA doesn't know about. They already invented the cure for cancer but can't publish because then it'll upset the world's ecology.

 

-NASA can't be trusted.

 

-The top creative talents all think in symbols. Freudian had it right. If a kid draws a perfect circle in math class, he probably is actually alluding to fulfilment that can only be found by moon worship. He may also be hungry and thinking of roti prata, but that's also symbolism for you.

 

The towering building beside the lake was a sexually frustrated architect's vision of life. Or else his secret fraternity's double handshake is 0l and he's trying to reveal to the world that he's a proud member.

[mike777]

"What? Nobody who's posted believes in Aliens?"

 

Of course we believe we have millions of aliens cross our borders every year. Who the heck does not believe in Aliens?

[luke warm]

I believe that there is a large scale bridge conspiracy against me, and it involves the dealer program and several of my partners. How else is it possible that someone with my talents so often makes bids that work out so badly?

That's one of my favorites as well.

You too? So perhaps this is a global conspiracy against Talented Dutch bridge players. They are afraid of us Helene!

 

 

"We blame USA for Vietnam, Chile, Argentina, Haiti, Korea etc.

We blame USA for General Franco, General Pinochet, for Salazar.

We blame USA for Guantanamo, Abu Graibh.

We blame USA death penalties."

 

As a good U.S. liberal, I accept, and indeed, wallow in guilt for these things.

 

Now, what do Europeans blame themselves for?

 

Peter

 

Good post Peter, as usual. I do suggest that you stop feeling guilty for things that other people do who happen to be citizens of the same country. I certainly don't feel guilty for all the bad parts of recent Dutch history.

all the bash america posts make me sad... the last stats i have (ca 2003) show that the u.s. gave an estimated $241 billion in charity to the rest of the world, which equals about 2.3 percent of u.s. gross domestic product.... check out how much other 'developed' countries give, as a % of gdp... anybody close?

 

it's undoubtably true that a lot (though far from most) of that giving was to countries where america had some national interest... so what? are other countries different?

 

america has fought wars for those who now belittle her and who actually hate her... one might debate the pros and cons of freedom, but that freedom has costs associated with it seems self-evident... and thruout history, america has been prepared to pay those costs, quite often for those who feel no gratitude and who even work to undermine the very things that make america (and them) free today

 

some countries hate america because she is free... some hate her because they are now free to do so, despots and dictators having been disposed of by the hated america... it's easy to ignore history, it's easy to look back from relative safety to a less safe time, and it's easy to criticize a country that has done so much for so many for so long

 

there are many posters from many countries voicing the same anti-american litany... but it's especially sad to see americans do it... america is no more right in her policies 100% of the time than any other country... but america is my country, and i would not choose to live anywhere else... furthermore, i would not choose to live in a world in which the things america has done for others had been left undone

[hrothgar]

all the bash america posts make me sad... the last stats i have (ca 2003) show that the u.s. gave an estimated $241 billion in charity to the rest of the world, which equals about 2.3 percent of u.s. gross domestic product.... check out how much other 'developed' countries give, as a % of gdp... anybody close?

Since you asked:

 

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Foreign_...ous_Misers.html

[luke warm]

the article you posted is foreign aid... my post above speaks of charities... most charity giving from the u.s. is from individuals, and when i used "u.s." in the post i meant all donations to charity that came from this country... you are quoting the amount given by the government only, in the form of foreign aid... here's an article showing what i was speaking of

 

http://www.aafrc.org/press_releases/trustr...ricansgive.html

[Rain]

luke warm: all the bash america posts make me sad... the last stats i have (ca 2003) show that the u.s. gave an estimated $241 billion in charity to the rest of the world, which equals about 2.3 percent of u.s. gross domestic product.... check out how much other 'developed' countries give, as a % of gdp... anybody close?

 

You're talking about usa (gov + private sector) aid to international people here.

The article you posted to clarify includes all charitable giving, within usa shores and outside, not just for international aid.

 

My personal opinion is that American charitable giving is generous enough for the most part. Its impossible to help everyone. Help who you can, and the skeptic in me chimes in also about hidden agendas. But its better than not giving aid at all?

[pbleighton]

"america is no more right in her policies 100% of the time than any other country"

 

I agree with this, but the Bush administration would not. Hence Iraq.

 

We go wrong when we believe the "greatest country in the history of the world" nonsense, and do bad things in the name of our national destiny, our entirely fictitious cultural and moral superiority, etc. We aren't the first, nor will we be the last, to fall victim to imperial hubris. It is always sad when a good country (and we can be a VERY good country indeed) commits bad acts.

 

It's especially sad to see Americans who won't abide legitimate criticism of their country, from foreigners or U.S. citizens. This very common attitude perpetuates our mistakes. IMO the main (only?) reason Europe suffers less from national hubris is that the horrible experience of two world wars on their soil made them much humbler.

 

What will we have to experience in order to come to our senses? The Iraq horror will probably slow us down for a bit. However, I fear that we are headed for nuclear catastrophe, possible in any event, but made much more likely by the very policies designed to stop it.

 

I really wish that this was a conspiracy theory.

 

Peter

[hrothgar]

the article you posted is foreign aid... my post above speaks of charities... most charity giving from the u.s. is from individuals, and when i used "u.s." in the post i meant all donations to charity that came from this country... you are quoting the amount given by the government only, in the form of foreign aid...

Jimmy, it almost looks as if you didn't bother to read the article...

Did you get to the second half which explicly deals with contributions from privaye charities and individuals?

 

"While exact figures are impossible to come by, the highest estimates from recent years put individual U.S. donations to overseas aid at 0.16 percent of national income, according to the Center for Global Development's Steven Radelet. (More conservative estimates suggest that this number may actually be as low as 0.03 percent; an OECD estimate put the number at 0.06 percent.) Add the optimistic 0.16 percent estimate to the 0.16 percent of national income in government donations and you reach a combined 0.32 percent of national income-which is still less than the governmental aid alone of roughly half of the world's wealthiest nations."

[luke warm]

Jimmy, it almost looks as if you didn't bother to read the article...

Did you get to the second half which explicly deals with contributions from privaye charities and individuals?

no, i didn't see that... i guess the true facts are dependent upon which authority one appeals to... also, rain is correct that the numbers used in my example were for all charitable giving, not just overseas

 

We go wrong when we believe the "greatest country in the history of the world" nonsense~~It's especially sad to see Americans who won't abide legitimate criticism of their country, from foreigners or U.S. citizens. This very common attitude perpetuates our mistakes. IMO the main (only?) reason Europe suffers less from national hubris is that the horrible experience of two world wars on their soil made them much humbler.

why isn't america the greatest country in the world? pick another country you think is greater and imagine living there in a world in which america has chosen to withdraw all economic, military, and political aid... often, those who complain the loudest have benefitted the most because of america's direct involvement... have you read, say since 1960 forward, anything that suggests another country feels any gratitude at all to america for things she has done? do you agree that some of the worst criticism of this country comes from people living in places that would not even exist but for america's butting into their business?

 

i'll abide legitimate criticism... i'll even level criticism at this gov't, on occasion... i personally wish we weren't in iraq at this moment, for example.. there are a lot of policies implemented by both the president and the congress with which i disagree... but imo there's a big difference between disagreement and outright hatred... you might think 'hatred' is too strong a word, but i don't

 

a country *is* a country based on common language and culture... the u.s., despite your saying the opposite, has a common culture... however, if this country does fall it's my opinion it will come from within... the dilution of this culture, starting with the disavowal of a common language

 

sometimes i do wish america would just withdraw from the world stage and take care of all our problems at home... make all points of entry safer (including space), strengthen our education and health systems, ignore the rest of the world until we figure out how to make this country better than it is... but if we did that, there would be those who still hate us, who still criticize us, from without - and from within

[sceptic]

america has fought wars for those who now belittle her and who actually hate her...

 

I actually believe that America has not fought a war it did not want to, I believe, that our relationship with America has benefits, but I do not believe America is out for anyone else but it self, and I am convinced if all that came out of Northern Afirica was camels dung, they would never fight a war there

[sceptic]

Can some one explain to me why no one has ever gone to war to help the Tibetans?

[luke warm]

america has fought wars for those who now belittle her and who actually hate her...

 

I actually believe that America has not fought a war it did not want to, I believe, that our relationship with America has benefits, but I do not believe America is out for anyone else but it self, and I am convinced if all that came out of Northern Afirica was camels dung, they would never fight a war there

it's true that national interest must play a role (or should play such a role) in major involvements such as war... sometimes not (our civil war for example, though even that could be argued), but usually so... are we so different from england in this regard? however, if america was only out for herself, i can think of much better ways to show that...

 

i take exception to peter's earlier remarks concerning america's imperialistic motives... if that was true, it would be manifestly so... also, it would be relatively easy to carve out an empire, given the will to take the necessary empire-building steps... some of the very things we are criticized for came about because of the imperialistic bents of countries such as england and france... they both have empires in their histories... we don't

 

Can some one explain to me why no one has ever gone to war to help the Tibetans?

because the will doesn't exist to end such a war before it really started... and yeah, national interest does enter into it

[sceptic]

I am not anti American at all, but, I do not belive this statement is valid

 

they both have empires in their histories... we don't

 

 

we got our empire by taking what we wanted colonising or what ever words you wish to describe taking something by force.

 

Take India, well killed loads of people (Indians) and took over their country, hundreds of years later we gave it back, so no longer are we the mighty British empire we may once have been. I am not sure exactly as I was not there and books sometimes have a way of distorting things but we helped them in some areas and now they will one day be a great power themselves (depending on your view I suppose)

 

 

When will America give the Indians back their country?

[hrothgar]

i take exception to peter's earlier remarks concerning america's imperialistic motives... if that was true, it would be manifestly so... also, it would be relatively easy to carve out an empire, given the will to take the necessary empire-building steps... some of the very things we are criticized for came about because of the imperialistic bents of countries such as england and france... they both have empires in their histories... we don't

Grow up...

 

The difference between the US and the France/British boils down to genocide...

 

Post 1800, the British / French colonial attempts took place in either Eurasia or Africa. In Eurasia, the native populations had resistence to the same set of germs as the Europeans. In Africa, the situation was level. The African's had little resistance against the Europeans but the Europeans also fell vicitim to a wide variety of VERY nasty local diseases.

 

If we turn to North America, the native inhabitant had virtually no resistence to small pox or influenza. Equally significant the lack of large scale animal husbandry meant that they didn't have their own "stores" of lethal pathogens. Disease wiped enormous numbers of native Americans. Of course, when these diseases didn't spread on their own, the US was more than happy to deliberately supply smallpox laden blankets to be on the safe side.

 

Our behaviour was no better. We just made sure that there were no witnesses.

[pbleighton]

"why isn't america the greatest country in the world?"

 

Why is there necessarily a "greatest country in the world"? I don't think there is one.

 

"but imo there's a big difference between disagreement and outright hatred... you might think 'hatred' is too strong a word, but i don't"

 

I am unclear - you seem to be saying that I hate my own country. If you are, you are dead wrong.

 

"the u.s., despite your saying the opposite, has a common culture"

 

I said no such thing. The U.S. does have a common culture. What I said is that it is not superior to all other cultures, contrary to the opinion of many in this country.

 

"sometimes i do wish america would just withdraw from the world stage and take care of all our problems at home... make all points of entry safer (including space), strengthen our education and health systems, ignore the rest of the world until we figure out how to make this country better than it is"

 

There is a middle ground between isolationism and imperialism - engage peacefully and respectfully with those countries who wish to (almost all countries), and ignore those who don't. Continue to increase international trade - it benefits all countries.

 

"but if we did that, there would be those who still hate us, who still criticize us, from without - and from within"

 

Yes, of course, this is true of any country - but if we minded our own business there would, over time, be far fewer. There is a reason the terrible 9/11 attacks were directed at us, and not at Canada, Germany, or France.

 

"i take exception to peter's earlier remarks concerning america's imperialistic motives... if that was true, it would be manifestly so... also, it would be relatively easy to carve out an empire, given the will to take the necessary empire-building steps... "

 

We are finding out in Iraq that is very, very difficult to do traditional imperialism - which is much tougher when the natives have Uzis and explosives instead of bows and arrows - we learned this in Vietnam (and the Russians learned it in Afghanistan, the French were expelled from Algeria, etc.), but we seem to need a refresher course in reality.

 

"some of the very things we are criticized for came about because of the imperialistic bents of countries such as england and france... they both have empires in their histories... we don't"

 

Utter nonsense. In addition to the armed robbery and genocide of Native Americans, there are the Phillipines, plus the more than 100 "interventions" in Latin America, not to mention the instllation and support of corrupt dictatorships in the Middle East.

 

Peter

[csdenmark]

sometimes i do wish america would just withdraw from the world stage and take care of all our problems at home... make all points of entry safer (including space), strengthen our education and health systems, ignore the rest of the world until we figure out how to make this country better than it is

This wish I certainly share

 

but if we did that, there would be those who still hate us, who still criticize us, from without - and from within

But the critic would be less justified because you would then have cleaned up your own house

 

 

John F. Kennedy: Don't ask what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country!

[AceOfHeart]

Can some one explain to me why no one has ever gone to war to help the Tibetans?

china have nuclear weapons

[AceOfHeart]

all the bash america posts make me sad... the last stats i have (ca 2003) show that the u.s. gave an estimated $241 billion in charity to the rest of the world, which equals about 2.3 percent of u.s. gross domestic product.... check out how much other 'developed' countries give, as a % of gdp... anybody close?

They will do well to return the 45 trillion++ in debt it owned first. Heck they even have China as their creditor

[mike777]

To borrow from Jonathan Swift here is a Modest Proposal.

 

Speaking of China why does our Navy protect a province of China. They are still in a Civil War. Why are we involved or in Korea or Darfur or Bosnia. Sure 1 million or more are dying or may but we did not stop Pol Pot in Cambodia and Europe did nothing but were able to help their own. No one hates them for doing nothing.

 

All of them Civil Wars. Do we really need Tanks in Germany or Planes in Japan or Navy ships in the Phillipines ( another civil war there).

 

As for the Culture issue is not one culture as good as another? Why do so many in the USA seem to want to impress some version of ours on other countries? We may disagree or not with the Culture of the Taliban or Saudia Arabia or the Red Army but what right do we have to claim any superiority with genocide in our history? Cannot Afghansistan and other countries have a death penalty and pass laws against Apostasy, we have the death penalty.

 

Why do we protect Kuwait when Iraq makes a claim of ownership? Are we suppose to protect France or England if Rome ever demands its old provinces back as it did in WWII? Why not Spain retaking the Netherlands are we suppose to get involved in that Civil War? Do we really want to get involved if Russia has a Civil War with its old states? Pakistan was part of India why should we get involved in that Civil War over Kashmir? What happens if Scotland, Ireland or Wales rebels against the Iron English fist or Germany wants part of Poland or Austria back in a Civil War?

 

Everyone hates us and attacks us for poking our nose in why not just stay home and give everyone free homes and health care?

 

The otherside says better to fight them there than here but why? At best everyone will love us and leave us alone at worst we fight them here in our streets, backyards with dirty bombs going off in our unprotected ports, small pox in the subways or nukes falling on us from afar but at least the dying will be in the USA and not somewhere else where they hate us. Is that not better? ?Why not give Peace a chance?

 

With a much smaller army and no fancy expensive weapons we can afford so much more for the poor, free education for those that want to go to College or free homes if they want to raise kids with a mom and dad at home to care for them.

[luke warm]

Grow up...

ouch

 

The difference between the US and the France/British boils down to genocide...

 

Post 1800, the British / French colonial attempts took place in either Eurasia or Africa.  In Eurasia, the native populations had resistence to the same set of germs as the Europeans.  In Africa, the situation was level.  The African's had little resistance against the Europeans but the Europeans also fell vicitim to a wide variety of VERY nasty local diseases.

 

If we turn to North America, the native inhabitant had virtually no resistence to small pox or influenza.  Equally significant the lack of large scale animal husbandry meant that they didn't have their own "stores" of lethal pathogens.  Disease wiped enormous numbers of native Americans.  Of course, when these diseases didn't spread on their own, the US was more than happy to deliberately supply smallpox laden blankets to be on the safe side.

 

Our behaviour was no better.  We just made sure that there were no witnesses.

i stand by my remark that america is not an imperialistic nation... with very little effort, cuba could be the 51st state, and at least as many cubans would be for such a state of affairs as would be against one... given the will to do what would be necessary, the oil fields in the middle east would be in the middle of giant exxon and chevron refineries, built no doubt by haliburton... an empire could be carved out, if america took that turn

 

in any case, i would not have thought that the native resistence to diseases was the determining factor when comparing one imperialistic country to another

 

I said no such thing. The U.S. does have a common culture. What I said is that it is not superior to all other cultures, contrary to the opinion of many in this country.

my apologies

 

There is a middle ground between isolationism and imperialism

maybe we have different views as to what makes a country imperailistic... was the roman empire such because it established a 'sphere of influence' in conquered lands? or did it bring those lands under roman rule, answerable to caesar? under whose laws did countries conquered by the british empire live? are you basing your assertion strictly on america's borders, and those people conquered during their establishment? what makes america an empire, in your opinion?

 

i agree there are middle grounds.. i disagree that america is imperialistic.. i do think that those who seem to criticize us the harshest are the ones who have benefitted the most from our "intervention" into their affairs (though i think "please help" would be a better description than "intervention")

 

When will America give the Indians back their country?

the usa exists between the canadian border on the north, the mexican border on the south, the atlantic and pacific oceans, and other lands that have asked to join... the borders of all countries are what they are because of internal and/or external struggles... i do not grant that america is imperialistic based upon its present borders

 

now if we invaded, for example, mexico with the aim of annexing that country and making it a possession, then i'd agree with you... but we've done that (invaded mexico, that is) and conquered it ... and left it as we found it - a soverign nation with its own laws and customs ... minus a few tiny areas such as texas and colorado :)

 

QUOTE (luke warm @ Apr 1 2006, 04:09 PM)

sometimes i do wish america would just withdraw from the world stage and take care of all our problems at home... make all points of entry safer (including space), strengthen our education and health systems, ignore the rest of the world until we figure out how to make this country better than it is

 

This wish I certainly share

no you don't... you might think you do, but it wouldn't take long for you to see your error (imo)

 

To borrow from Jonothan Swift here is a Modest Proposal.

:)

 

even so, sometimes i wish we'd do those things... if america did withdraw as in the picture you painted, it wouldn't take very long for other nations to change their minds... some would do so immediately (taiwan, south korea, kuwait, even japan)

 

i know (or at least i hope) that most of the people posting don't actually *hate* america (though there are those who do)... it's just that people seem to forget all the good america has done for so many people for so long... and when people even go so far as to blame the usa for what happened 9/11, it makes me want to puke

[jikl]

This thread should probably be shut down as it could get very vicious. There are things I want to say, but my manners preclude me from doing so. I am sure this is so for many others. Let's leave this alone.

 

Sean

[Badmonster]

I was also thinking that this thread made me feel kind of sad. I felt like there were things I wanted to say, but that no matter how carefully I worded my post people wouldn't think about what I meant, but would attack it, until I was no longer saying what I meant but was simply entrenched in a position. It's nice when discussions are discussions and not debates.

[the saint]

The world's civilisations have matured at different rates. All the conflicts we continue to see all over the world are because people allow greed and hatred of all kinds to rule their lives and not be mature enough to see that this isn't the answer. Europe had two world wars on its soil and said that enough was enough - we have to get along. What has to happen for the rest of the world to learn this lesson?

 

The difficulty is that intervening is often as bad as doing nothing. In Iraq, thousands were killed and persecuted before the invasion. Now it gets in the papers. In Iran, the same is happening along religious and tribal lines, but it doesn't get reported.

 

I see America as a nation that wants to do the right thing but makes a horrible mess of it. I see Europe as a wiser alternative, but moribund by lethargy, beauracracy and a certain amount of self-righteousness. A balance is required between the two.

 

What sickens me more is how nations with aspirations of influence and greatness do nothing because it is in their interests not to. China has blocked all manner of resolutions on Iran,Iraq, North Korea and Darfur. Certainly in the case of Darfur and Iran, that was oil motivated. In the case of NK it is doing so to tie one hand behind the back of the US, South Korea and Japan. How many people has Kim killed in the name of his populist cult? Why hasn't he been hauled up in front of every humanitarian court going? Not in China's interest. By anyone's definition that counts as accessory to murder.

 

At least the US has tried to make an effort - however misguided and misjudged it has been. I would argue that doing nothing is a greater sin.

 

In the end though, you can only help people if they want to be helped. I do think the US would leave Iraq tomorrow if it was functioning. But fueled by Sectarian clashes and a few ego driven politicians grasping for as much control as possible in the vacuum there, its not going to happen soon. And in the mean time, the tribal culture ensures that revenge, avenge and a bit more revenge continues in an ever increasing spiral of madness.

 

I believe in peace. I just also believe there is an awful lot of self-serving evil out there and that someone has to do the dirty work to make it a better place for all. Just because you don't have the stomach for it, don't criticise those that do.

[mike777]

"Europe had two world wars on its soil and said that enough was enough - we have to get along. What has to happen for the rest of the world to learn this"

 

 

"believe in peace. I just also believe there is an awful lot of self-serving evil out there" Wow great post...you can make a whole blog out of this one line, thanks.

 

Let's not forget the genocide that happened in Europe last decade, not 70 years ago in WWII. Just ten years ago and they did almost nothing to stop it month after month, year after year. Mass graves, mass murder concentration camps and that was just in the last decade. I hope that is not the lesson you are talking about. At least you guys had the sense to stay out of the civil war or most of it even if it meant 102,000 killed, 1,8 million displaced and 20,000 raped. At least they do not hate you. I think there are some wars going in Eastern Europe now but maybe that does not count? Spain is still having a civil war but there seems to be a truce now does that count? Basque http://www.flashpoints.info/countries-conf...e_briefing.html

 

Greece and Turkey (both europe) I think are at war but at least have a truce over Cyprus.

 

Just give Peace a chance. I agree we need a more balanced approach in Bosnia and in Eastern Europe, just because Moscow(Europe) is being bombed is no excuse for more violence and less balance. At worst we just have more Bosnian Wars.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_War

 

 

btw as a side note for those nonamericans who may not be aware. The USA had a Civil War in the 1860's. From a small population base 662,000 were killed at least.

The Southern states voted, I repeat, voted to leave the Union. This means that most of the voting public in the South voted for leaving the Union voluntarily. The North, Abraham Lincoln (a Republican) said no your votes do not count and we disregard the wishes of the Majority of the voters in the South and went to War. The North being richer and bigger won the war. After the war the occupation of the South by the North was called the "Reconstruction Period" and many of the cultural values and morals of the North were forced on the South.

Does any of this ring a bell in 2006?