Of course, hundreds of people swore that their impotence was cured by Dr. John Brinkley implanting goat glands into their testicles. Those fascists from the federal government tried to shut him down anyway. (Possibly related to the dozens of people who died from post-op infections at his clinic.)
And he got to be medically cruel to children at the same time!
Wrong, wrong, wrong! I’m surprised at you.
It was actually more than 400,000 pounds.
But Andy is still a hero to antivaxers.
Happy to brighten septimus’s day. 
Oh! Don’t forget he had a patent for a competing vaccine as well!
There is no gold in Ft. Knox. They removed it to make room for the alien spacecraft from Roswell.
They had to move the aliens to make enough room at Area 51 to store the plane that didn’t crash into the Pentagon on 9/11.
Lousy typos. (I blame the Federal Reserve.)
We’re taxed so much we have to give away zeros now. Tyranny!!!11one
Hi jrodefeld,
I forgot about this thread for a while, and now I don’t feel like reading 19 pages of posts that probably include any criticisms I would have had. I will give you points for perseverance though. I usually just give up and admit when I’m wrong, but you seem clearly determined to go down with ship. I applaud you and encourage you to continue.
First of all, I KNOW you haven’t actually read any of the material in support of this proposition. I won’t even bother attaching more links to this particular post because I know you won’t make the effort to read them.
But, why do you react to the suggestion that FDR knew about Pearl Harbor, or other ideas about history, with such a closed mind? Why on earth do you consider the idea impossible? Ask yourself this: Do governments benefit from war?
Of course they do. With that said, in the 20th century alone there are numerous documented staged events which built the case for war or and escalation for war. But dispite this, the buildup for war during the early 49s was free from ANY deceit or witheld information, huh? You really believe that?
Putting aside whether or not there is evidence to support such a position (there is plenty) or whether there are mainstream historians who believe it (there are many) the question I am raising is why this seems to be such a preposterous notion?
If you were a nation embattled in a Great Depression, with high unemployment figures and and failing New Deal policies and an increasingly disillusioned electorate, the desire to create a distraction (outside threat), and employ people (in the war effort) would be immense.
You could take the time to look at the information which defends this point of view, but you have to make the effort. The real question I have is why you wouldn’t even entertain the notion that the “official story” of certain major historical events have obscured and rewritten history.
You obviously don’t have to believe every “alternate” version of events that people throw out there, but to close off your mind is irresponsible.
Its funny how so many of you think you are winning this debate. Probably 90% of the replies were in the form of condescending dismissal, attempts at humor or anything short of a reasoned debate.
If you think debates are won by democratic opinion rather than reasoned arguments and intellectual honesty, you may have a point. However in the real world, most of you are clinging to an old ideal of government which is crashing and burning.
Keynesian economics is failing us.
Our entitlement system is completely insolvent.
We don’t audit the Federal Reserve or the gold at Fort Knox.
We have runnaway Corporatism and cronyism
Yet none here will admit the need to significantly cut spending, including “sacred cows” Medicare and Social Security. You will persist with these failing ideas, not reading any of the literature I recommend, and put your heads in the sand.
Now, some of you have made a fair effort to go into the issues with reasonable depth and I respect that, even we disagree. I would put the number of posters who engaged in reasonable discussion at between 10 and 20%. Not a good percentage.
You all have come to this debate with an undeserved condescension as if your ideas are actually working! Its really comical.
I’m not going anywhere. We can continue this, though I don’t know what the point is considering how close minded some of you are.
I have to make a quick point here to all posters. I made the point a few posts back:
We should Audit the gold at Fort Knox. We should have increased transperancy of all economic matters in light of the recent economic problems.
Then I was subject to a bunch of irrational insults about how this is a conspiracy theory and “oh, the jews stole the gold” or “maybe ETs are involved” in a juvenile attempt to mock this incredibly important issue. I don’t know whether the gold is there or not and you don’t either. The crazy thing is you think the notion that the gold is gone is crazy, yet you won’t support an audit. Why is this?
What exactly makes the issue of Auditing the Gold at Fort Knox, or the related proposition from Ron Paul and Alan Greyson to Audit the Federal Reserve so ridiculous and worthy of ridicule?
Even if NOTHING is going on there, the people have a right to know whats going on in the economy. That is supposed to be the people’s gold! We should know what the Federal Reserve is doing!
How about you leave aside the childish name calling and tell me in a serious way what objections you have to providing increased oversight of our financial system?
If things are as bad as I suspect, it may make the case for a total reform of the system and an embrace of Austrian economic principles once more.
Elaborate on your objections.
That question has already been answered upthread; no one believes that any possible audit would satisfy the conspiracy theorists like yourself, so why bother?
Do you consider yourself open minded? Can you understand why most of the people here see you as hopeslessly closed minded?
How the **** would you know that? Huh? Knock off the chest-beating because you could not possibly be more WRONG.
Sounds like a cop-out to me - not very proud of your ‘evidence’ I’d gather.
It is not ‘closed minded’ to have looked at the ‘evidence’ and found it wanting on every level. It is also not ‘closed minded’ to realize the people pushing this theory have an agenda far away from correcting the historical record. It is also not ‘closed minded’ you find the whole logic behind such claims to be laughably illogical and needlessly complicated.
Ask yourself this: why does the primary proponent of Pearl Harbor theories refuse to answer basic questions about why he considers radio intercepts not translated & decoded until 1946 to have been somehow read and understood in 1942? Why does he hide on paleo-conservative websites rather than engage the people who have studied these matters much of their lives?
It is irrelevant what I believe. What matters is what the evidence indicates - and the evidence for FDR knowing about PH is ludicrous or based entirely on lies.
Because the evidence falls far short of even a basic consideration. If you put this quality of evidence towards any other aspect of history - conspiracy based or not - it would be laughed out of the room by anyone who knows better.
Laughably wrong assessment of the situation. It is full of false assumptions.
Already done. It failed, miserably.
Because it is not a matter of my attitude - it is a matter of what the evidence is. That has failed to prove the point and much of it was based on lies. It was not the historians working on the ‘official story’ who lied here - it was those proposing a conspiracy.
This is just pure, unfiltered sour grapes. You cannot stand the idea that people, many of whom have much better knowledge about these matters than you, have looked at what convinced you and found it severely wanting. So rather than face the fact that you are actually very poor at evaluating evidence, and subscribe to a host of nonsense with nothing tangible to support it, you come up with the ‘close minded’ comments over and over and over as a smokescreen for the fact that you believe in untenable lies.
Probably because it seems that those who have rejectred your assertion have probably read MORE history than you have.
The Republicans in Congress held investigations into these accusations in 1942 and again in 1946. Since that time, it has become a cottage industry with cranks of all sorts producing the same tired claims, (periodically enhanced with the occasional forgery or evidence-free assertion), for nearly seventy years. Those of us who have read not only the cranks but the serious debunkings of the cranks realize that the accusation is spurious.
The idea is not impossible–it is simply not true and is not supported by any honest evidence.
You are speaking about something you know nothing about. If you have ANY integrity whatsovery, you will read the following books and resources and make an attempt to debunk them. These are only a few of the links that I have about this event:
Day of Deceit by Robert B Stinnett:
Pearl Harbor: Final Judgment by Henry C Clausen
Pearl Harbor: The Seeds and Fruits of Infamy
The Pearl Harbor Myth: Rethinking the Unthinkable
Websites:
http://www.nypress.com/article-4183-fdr-knew-pearl-harbor-was-coming.html
http://rationalrevolution.net/war/fdr_provoked_the_japanese_attack.htm
http://www.unc.edu/depts/diplomat/archives_roll/2004_07-09/book/book_young_stinnett.html
http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2003/tle250-20031207-04.html
http://www.winstonchurchill.org/learn/myths/myths/he-knew-of-pearl-harbour-attack
http://www.thetruthseeker.co.uk/article.asp?ID=179
http://richardlangworth.com/2009/06/pearl-harbor-did-churchill-know/
There is SO much more information I could provide, but this should provide enough reading material for a while. Before you open your mouth again you should read the full history of the event and absorb the overwhelming information that implicates Roosevelt, his Administration and members of the military in the attack on Pearl Harbor. Try to actually pay attention to the facts for once.
Look, the facts are the facts. This may not have been what you were told in school, but it is in fact accurate history. There are MANY historians and writers who believe this, not just some fringe group of “cranks” and “conspiracy nuts”.
I want you to respond in detail to these links and this information.
In my mind I don’t care if Nullification was ever used in our history or if it was simply a philosophical argument or suggestion batted around. I think its a good tool to oppose an out of control federal government. Why not? For your main argument to be “well, we never really used it before…”, that is pretty weak.
The point is, the States should be able to interpret the Constitution as well as the Supreme Court. The founders understood Nullification as a much more moderate step in relation to secession. It was supposed to prevent secession.
Lets say we were started a new nation from the ground up and we wanted to preserve liberty for our citizens, wouldn’t we want to make sure that all voluntary groups had the tools of secession and nullification?
That doesn’t mean they are used frivilously, but as a last resort to protect the people from an overreaching and tyrannical federal government, they provided a counterbalance of power.
Nothing you have said explains why this is a bad idea. You may think it is radical, but I think it is a necessary step to preserving liberty. Even the threat of secession or nullification would put the Federal Government on notice and keep them in check.
I read this and couldn’t wait to get to the end of the thread, so I could reply. See, way back herein post 406 I had refuted this contention, with citations. Ever since, you’ve done nothing except hand wave them away, preferring your own “open mind” over the vast preponderance of evidence.
Then I read **Mr. Miskatonic’s **post which says everything necessary. Everything except what **tomndebb **adds.
Oh, I see that you’vee now made yet another attempt to replace fact with fiction. I clicked a single link of your “references” at random and find that, like so many of your links, it does nothing to support the thesis for which you provide it. Scroll down the ‘rationalrevolution’ link and you find this gem of counter-support:
I just love so much the way your chosen evidence supports the thesis that you don’t know what you are talking about.
ETA- oh, and it would be nicer if you didn’t constantly deride other poster’s integrity. Just a hint. 'Cause I like you so very much.
Jesus Christ. That is the WORST possible reason. How do you know what would satisfy me? I’m NOT a conspiracy theorist. The effort should be made to have a fair audit and make sure there are no shenanigans afoot, but you think because they could possibly try to hid some of the information, we shouldn’t even try to gain more transperancy?
I never said the gold is missing. I said we should audit the gold and make sure it is there.
But you won’t agree to that. Never mind what would satisfy ME, what about you? Don’t you want transperancy at the Fed and throughout the financial system? Don’t YOU care whether there actually is any gold at Fort Knox?
You are one the reasons this country is in the shape its in. You are like a trained dog. Your masters tell you to sit, you sit. Your masters tell you what the truth is and what you should care about and you listen obediantly. You couldn’t stand to think for yourself and go against the will of your superiors, right?
If we don’t start asking tough questions about the Federal Reserve, the Gold at Fort Knox, and opening up our financial system and branches of government to public scrutiny we may not be able to fix this system.