You genuinely believe the President of the United States wanted a terrorist attack? You do realize that few (if any) liberals share your opinion, and that it puts you squarely in the fringe category?
As a conservative-libertarian, I am certainly no fan of Obama. But even I do not believe Obama wants the economy to collapse. (I also believe he is a Christian and was born in Hawaii.)
This is a great list. Most I have no qualms about dismissing as 99.999% bullshit, but the global warming one makes me pause. I don’t dispute that climates change – it has changed many times in the past and will continue to do so – but the direction, amount, validity of detection and proportion of human contribution is quite open to question.
That said, the fact that I feel this way doesn’t lend any credence to a conspiracy theory, just that there are an immense number of variables and too many conclusions that can be drawn from them to be 99.999% certain at this time which ones are right. The idea that the Illuminati or any other person or body is deliberately, evilly, with wanton abandon, trying to cover up what they know to be the truth isn’t a credible theory.
I voted for the “ET has visited Earth” because you didn’t include a time-frame. If you had added “since WW2”, I would’ve chosen the Horseshit category.
It’s hardly a new suspicion or one original to me. He certainly surrounded himself with PNAC types who explicitly wanted a “new Pearl Harbor”. And he notoriously waved away multiple warnings from other people. And morally speaking he’s a monster; I’m sure he’d have been perfectly happy to see New York nuked, much less “only” a few thousand people dying.
I think it’s mildly possible that Shakespeare’s plays were written by someone else. It’s far enough back in history that we’ll never have definitive proof or disproof. As for the others:
Oswald was most definitely the lone gunman.
FDR definitely knew an attack was imminent, but not where.
No rational human can believe that Obama was not born in Hawaii.
If you believe Obama is Muslim, you’re an idiot. If it makes a difference to you, you’re an asshole.
Global warming denyers are not to be taken seriously.
Diana was killed because her driver was careless and that the tunnel did not have filler walls between the columns or guard rail in front of the columns to prevent a vehicle from catching a column like it did.
Interstellar travel is probably not practical for any alien civilization, intergalactic travel infinitely more so.
I am far, far away from being a Bush fan. But this is rancid crap.
PNAC’s ‘New Pearl Harbor’ is CT claptrap. Read the actual document it comes from and they are discussing an entirely different type of warfare from what we ended up with in Iraq.
I doubt Bush, no matter his Texas boy leanings, would be ‘perfectly happy’ with Nuking New York City. That is CT’er demonization.
Bush was warned that an attack was coming and that the attack involved planes. What if anything he tried to do about it, I don’t know. There is no way that he would have not acted to stop it had the exact plan had been discovered. Nobody passes up a chance to be a hero. Once it happened, he callously used it to gin up fervor and get that war with Iraq that he wanted even before taking office.
The Shakespeare was done by someone else might have some validity if it had a scrap of evidence. What the anti-Stratfordians give us instead is vague hints, silly claims that Shakespeare 'couldn’t have known ‘X’" numerology, outright insanity, and much worse.
The Shakespeare controversy was born out the 19th century desire to make all poets into Lord Byron-types: tragic, noble and flawed. The son of glovemaker did not fill that role, so let’s change history
And let is not forget that Shakespeare was often stealing ideas himself, usually from the ancient Greeks.
For fun, find all of the play reviews Peyps wrote in his diary. Every Shakespeare play he sees is utter worthless rubbish in his mind, wheras plays that never made it out of their century are ‘stories for the ages’.
Ah OK! That was far too subtle for me!
But yes, there are quite a few things in history that actually happened that sound like something from a fiction novel.
Leaving conspiracy theories aside 9/11 if you didn’t know it was real sounds like something from an action movie…in fact my very first thought on turning on the TV and seeing the second plane hit (I can’t recall if I saw this live or if it was a replay, in any event I had no context for what I was seeing) was, “Those are pretty good special effects, what movie is that from?”
:Sigh:
Even agreeing that Bush was a monster does not make it real that he let 911 happen.
I will let one of the best debunking sites of the 911 CTs to explain what was more likely:
One could make the point that the administration was criminally negligent, but there is no good evidence that they looked away on purpose, as the debunking site noted, in the Pearl Harbor conspiracy, there was no need to let the fleet battle ships be destroyed, just exposing the Japanese fleet and being prepared on the air would had made the point that the Japanese were the ones that did attack us.
Speaking a little bit more on that CT, I have seen evidence that one of the reason why a 3rd wave of planes from the Japanese did not came to be was that after the 2nd wave the air defenses in Pearl harbor were then fully manned and it looked a disturbed horned wasp nest of flack in the air. If the air force and those defenses had been prepared most of the fleet would had been spared so if FDR knew ahead of time it was nonsense to not be prepared just on that area because the point of the CT after all was that the USA people needed to be convinced to go to war, in reality just a few shots against the Japanese fleet out of Hawaii would had been enough to do the trick. (There would be only one explanation why the Imperial fleet was so far away from their usual placement, an attack on Pearl harbor or Midway.)
I don’t think Bill Clinton had anybody murdered, but Hillary might have.
Interesting that there’s zero votes for AIDS being man made, and 14 for alien visitation.
As Mr. Miskatonic would say, this is also rancid crap.
I will let Barry Bickmore, Republican and Conservative scientist at BYU to reply:
I would go into it but this is a really shitty week and I don’t know if I will have time to sustain a conversation about it; it would also be something of a hijack. It has to do with consumer economics and popular perception. I am working on a huge related project that I have alluded to too many times already and been unable to yet unveil; all I can say is “RSN.” RRSN. If I live through this fuckin’ week.
As for Oswald, I think it takes determined lunacy to believe anything but that he was a lone nut who got lucky. Believing in conspiracy is wishful thinking by those who don’t want to believe how fragile our world can be (or at least could be, in that naive era). One warped mind, three bullets, a chance combination of circumstances and the world changes. Deal with it.
I despise Bush & Cheney and would personally sign the order to condemn them to the hottest spots in any sort of hell there happen to be, were I filling in for Saint Peter on a slow afternoon, and I just don’t see it.
As I said in the current GQ thread on FDR and Pearl Harbor, the simplest excuse is incompetence. I’ll add hubris to that as well. People who may have been able to put the dots together weren’t trying to. AQ hadn’t been able to mount an attack like that before and people just weren’t taking it seriously.
According to Boris Yeltsin’s book, the official KGB explanation of the assassination involved a conspiracy by US oil interests.
Doesn’t really amount to proof, it’s more of an anecdote. But completely plausible, imho.
IIRC most of that was explained by even more revelations made years after the fall of the Soviet Union. In essence the reports explained that most of those anecdotes were created in the USSR or were already made in the USA, they were then expanded and made bigger or important by KGB agents as part of what any spy agency is also set to do: to seed Fear Uncertainty and Doubt in the land of the enemy.
The main problem with that idea is that nobody in their right mind would have picked Oswald as the gunman. If you accept that Oswald fired the shots, you have to discount any conspiracy theory. If you’re hiring guns, you need to look for someone fairly stable.
Didn’t notice the “I give credence to another conspiracy theory” option.
I think something other than a balloon crashed at Roswell but I don’t know what. I also think the government has been covering it up for so long that they don’t know what anymore, either.
So the conspiracy theory about the conspiracy theory was created by yet another conspiracy?
The seems somewhat less likely than the original conspiracy does. We need some sort of Conspiracy Calculus. 
What is the strongest piece of evidence you have to come to that conclusion?