old europe wrote:okie wrote:As to conspiracy theories in regard to the Clintons, lets take Vince Foster as an example, I don't know about what really happened there, suffice it to say the case still is shrouded in ambiguous evidence and events with conflicting and strange things about it. I realize the official investigations proved nothing sinister, I accept that, but I am still suspicious.
Well, that would be a good example. That's where you sound like Zippo. Let's take a look at what you just said here, "I don't know about what really happened there, suffice it to say the case still is shrouded in ambiguous evidence and events with conflicting and strange things about it. I realize the official investigations proved nothing sinister, I accept that, but I am still suspicious."
Now, let's pretend Zippo had said that. Maybe as in "No steel-reinforced building has ever collapsed from a fire. I don't know about what really happened there, suffice it to say the case still is shrouded in ambiguous evidence and events with conflicting and strange things about it. I realize the official investigations proved nothing sinister, I accept that, but I am still suspicious."
Close, eh?
No, not close at all. We all saw the planes fly into the towers. Zippo's theories are nonsense.
In the case of Vince Foster, we did not all see him shoot himself, if he did, and the case was badly handled and much evidence is conflicting, plus how his suicide note was found. Many many problems surround this case. I am not interested in discussing it in detail, but I don't believe it is whacky to suspect something wrong. I believe it is more suspicous than the JFK assassination, yet while the Warren Commission found nothing more to that, a large body of credible people suspect something more happened there, so that although something sinister cannot be found about Foster, there is still alot of troubling things about the case. I am not saying Hillary shot him, I think that is ridiculous, but I think there is more to the case than meets the eye. This is not a whacky theory, as Zippo engages in, but it is justifiable suspicion.
Quote:Now, discussing that as some kind of conspiracy theory can be fun. But you're not doing that. You're still maintaining that the Clintons are Really Evil People - and most of your opinion is based conspiracy theories.
It is based on observation of their political history. I am sure some of the conspiracy theories are false. But many have alot of evidence. For example, the numerous women that claim to have been harrassed, and or raped, by Bill Clinton. I tend to think there is something very troubling and wrong with the man. Not all of these women are lying, I don't think. I don't see a need to go through all of the "gates," but suffice it to say I do not trust the Clintons, I believe them to be politically ruthless, and they will use any way they can to silence and defeat their poltical enemies. Observation is all you need to figure this out. Perhaps if you lived in the U.S. and endured the news for 8 years up close and personal, you would see it differently.
Quote:
okie wrote:You will have to name an issue where you think this applies, and I don't think you have any.
See above.
As explained patiently to you, the above does not support your argument.
Quote:okie wrote:The difference is that Michael Moore had a prominent seat at the DNC, and he was given credence by numerous prominent Democrats.
And? All conservatives worship Anne Coulter?
Please.
okie wrote:I said "probably," which does not imply proof.
Conspiracy nut jobs never offer proof. They usually make vague allegations, portray the other side as sinister and evil and demand new investigations.
okie wrote:Remember, Howard Dean gave prominence to the sort of theory like what Zippo believes, that Bush knew about 911 before it happened. Moveon has some very extreme ideas, and their ad in the NYT demonstrates that, and Democratic candidates do not disavow moveon, and in fact they are highly indebted to them and get their marching orders from them.
Well, the NRA has some very extreme ideas, too. Same goes for Tom Tancredo. Anne Coulter? Yes, definitely extreme.
If the NRA recommends a presidential candidate and he gets elected, are conservatives "highly endebted" to the NRA? Do they take their "marching orders" from the gun nuts?
okie wrote:Quote:okie wrote:Yep, thats your NYT alright.
Uh-huh.
Uh-huh
Yep.
Well, I will give you a little slack on the fact that not all liberals love Michael Moore and other whackos, however, you cannot deny that some whackos like Moore have gained prominence with the party, and some prominent people in the party give credence to some very whacky ideas.
