|
Kit Walker posted:She's an extremely volatile woman when it comes to certain subjects and I have absolutely no doubt that she'd flip on me if I suggested going to a doctor. Even if she did go to a doctor, if they suggested she take psychiatric medication she'd assume it was some attempt at brainwashing or something and refuse to take it. She believes that her only defense against the conspiracy is that they don't know that she knows they're out to get her, so any time she's afraid of some bizarre operation against her, the fact that it never occurs she takes as being due to outsmarting them. Man, that sucks. Do you have any siblings? Maybe if enough of you sat her down and told her to do something then maybe a thing could happen. I had a hard time convincing my siblings my mother was actually mentally ill. It wasn't as bad as your situation, but they felt like admitting she was mentally ill would mean that she was never in control and all the "good times*" were a fluke. *Good times being when she was manic as gently caress and spending us into crazy loving debt that will chase my stepdad for the rest of his life god drat.
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2015 20:46
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 22:23 |
|
|
Michael Jackson posted:i am taking SSRI for social angst and i still think what people might think and simulate what and how they would think and react if i talk to them. It is the Input in Data out Social Theory (co-authored by Data from Star Trek) or IDST for short. I do this too. Of course it's amped up to 11 for anxiety patients, but everybody does this to some extent.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2015 21:48
|
|
|
I've not had a lot of experience or interaction with mental illness or the conspiracy crowd so I'm not always fully understanding the physchology behind it all. Where does one draw the line between just being a conspiracy theorist and being mentally ill? Are mental illness diagnosis always based on something more than symptoms, or could a "normal" person who gets sucked into the world of conspiracy theories become mentally ill? Basically where's the clinical line between "believing stupid poo poo because you're stupid and have awful politics" and "mental illness" or is it even that cut and dry?
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2015 22:05
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I've not had a lot of experience or interaction with mental illness or the conspiracy crowd so I'm not always fully understanding the physchology behind it all. Where does one draw the line between just being a conspiracy theorist and being mentally ill? Are mental illness diagnosis always based on something more than symptoms, or could a "normal" person who gets sucked into the world of conspiracy theories become mentally ill? Basically where's the clinical line between "believing stupid poo poo because you're stupid and have awful politics" and "mental illness" or is it even that cut and dry? Being a conspiracy theorist and being mentally ill aren't necessarily two opposing sides of a line. They're two things that just happen to go hand-in-hand sometimes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2015 22:08
|
|
|
Baronjutter posted:I've not had a lot of experience or interaction with mental illness or the conspiracy crowd so I'm not always fully understanding the physchology behind it all. Where does one draw the line between just being a conspiracy theorist and being mentally ill? Are mental illness diagnosis always based on something more than symptoms, or could a "normal" person who gets sucked into the world of conspiracy theories become mentally ill? Basically where's the clinical line between "believing stupid poo poo because you're stupid and have awful politics" and "mental illness" or is it even that cut and dry? mental illness is a spectrum. many if not all people have some mental issues that could or could not be described as illness, like the difference between being suddenly worried that you left the oven on and full blown flick the switch nine times OCD garden variety conspiratorial thinking is just low grade paranoid schizophrenia or delusional/disordered thinking
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2015 22:11
|
|
|
Michael Jackson posted:i am taking SSRI for social angst and i still think what people might think and simulate what and how they would think and react if i talk to them. It is the Input in Data out Social Theory (co-authored by Data from Star Trek) or IDST for short. Yeah I'm not saying that behavior itself is odd, just that gangstalking/schizophrenia is a brain process for socialization run out of control, producing anxiety/delusions. Mc Do Well fucked around with this message at 02:51 on Aug 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2015 22:59
|
|
|
The definition of mental illness depends on the extent to which it effects your daily life, and is therefore largely a matter of class. The truly wealthy are merely eccentric.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2015 23:14
|
|
|
Dominicius posted:I will reply to the OP here. IF you wish to understand the position that people supporting the 9/11 conspiracy are coming from, watch the documentary called September 11 The New Pearl Harbor. It is pretty extensive so prepare yourself for a long watch. Five hours is longer than anyone can be reasonably expected to watch. Please provide vital segments (max 30 mins total) or at least a summary. Throwing a bunch of poorly edited video together at a length no reasonable person would watch is unreasonable. If you need 5 hours to say it, what you are saying is probably crazy. While "Loose Change" is a flawed documentary, it clocked it at a more reasonable (though still overly long) ~90 minutes (with the "full cut" being a little over 2 hours). That's what was able to grab the pazzazz. No one who isn't already committed is going to sit down and watch a 5 hour documentary. The length basically creates a "barrier for entry" that ensures only people who already believe will actually want it. That said, the end of part 5 and the beginning of part 6 is particularly poor rhetoric. "Can you explain how concrete melted by using only office fires and gravitational collapse?" (already rhetorically heavy handed and alienating to anyone who isn't already on board) by then the next segment is entirely dependent on the concrete having been pulverized. That is normal in this kind of piece, since it assumes the audience is either too fatigued to care, 100% on board and therefore unlikely to be critical or segments are designed to be watched independently from each other. It is a particularly poor piece, there are a lot of arguments by assertion (again and again to fill up that 5 hour runtime) and a lot of sloppy, accusing rhetoric. Studying what happened on 9/11 is science and that video is basically creationism.
|
|
#
?
Aug 26, 2015 23:21
|
|
|
So I have a political Facebook group(two actually)and I asked what people would have done differently after 9/11, expecting responses about foreign policy differences after the attacks, but 3 people came out as truthers. Does the thread have any good resources for debunking the idea that BUILDING 7 was a controlled demolition and that a missile hit the pentagon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 01:23
|
|
|
Pillowpants posted:So I have a political Facebook group(two actually)and I asked what people would have done differently after 9/11, expecting responses about foreign policy differences after the attacks, but 3 people came out as truthers. This page goes into a lot of detail on 9/11 conspiracy theories and the bottom of the page has a ton of their citations.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 01:51
|
|
|
Yea, but those are all from paid shills for the Jewish Lizard Illumanti Obamaists. Ugh gun nuts are coming out saying todays shooting had to be faked because they're experts at guns and none of it looked real, because they have 50 guns and know what happens when someone gets shot. Also, the news team was actually fake, not just the shooting, because no one has ever seen these people before today.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 03:05
|
|
|
We know a plane hit the Pentagon because there is no way the Illuminati (NWO/whatever you choose to call them) is going to risk breaking the seal and releasing the demon they have trapped there. Say what you will about the Satanists running things behind the scenes, but they are effusively on the side of life/generation coupled with man's dominion over the natural and spiritual world. Contrast that with the anti-life philosophies of death cults like Al Qaeda and ISIS. A plane hitting the Pentagon is about the only part of the official narrative that is true. There was some advanced warning (which is why the fake hijacking drill was initially created) but when the Illuminati couldn't stop the plane going into the Pentagon they had to rig up a quick sacrifice to ensure the integrity of the Seal. It gets confusing because there is all sorts of crazy occult imagery around 9/11 in NYC so people want to see it everywhere, but that is missing the point. Having the Twin Towers as an emergency escape value "sacrifice when ready" was part of why they were built. If you look at people who had offices there, it by-and-large wasn't businesses, it was government and "non-profit" (read: crazy side projects funded by billionaires -- in this case satanic billionaires) enterprises. The whole foundation was satanic. Then, when poo poo went off the rails and an anti-life group of Muslim extremists tried to free Baal from the Pentagon, they sacrificed the people therein to slake his thirst for blood and keep him contained.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 03:33
|
|
|
Pillowpants posted:So I have a political Facebook group(two actually)and I asked what people would have done differently after 9/11, expecting responses about foreign policy differences after the attacks, but 3 people came out as truthers. anyone who's still a truther in 2015 isn't going to be convinced by anything short of time travel or holding their mother at gunpoint
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 03:35
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:We know a plane hit the Pentagon because there is no way the Illuminati (NWO/whatever you choose to call them) is going to risk breaking the seal and releasing the demon they have trapped there. Say what you will about the Satanists running things behind the scenes, but they are effusively on the side of life/generation coupled with man's dominion over the natural and spiritual world. Contrast that with the anti-life philosophies of death cults like Al Qaeda and ISIS. source your quotes
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 04:00
|
|
|
QuarkJets posted:source your quotes I don't know dude, it seems like it checks out to me.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 06:23
|
|
|
And so it begins http://gmmuk.com/virginia-journalist-shooting-false-flag-hoax/ https://reverbpress.com/news/wdbj-shooting-false-flag/ https://twitter.com/hashtag/falseflag
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 13:28
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:Quote I agree with you on the length of the video. I did not watch the whole thing in one sitting either. That being said, I know that it will scare some people away but I also don't mind that at all. Also "the next segment is entirely dependent on the concrete having been pulverized" is a complete non-criticism. Of course the concrete was pulverized. The building collapsed, which caused the pulverization. The question is what caused the initial collapse. Dominicius fucked around with this message at 14:16 on Aug 27, 2015 |
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 14:10
|
|
|
Dominicius posted:I agree with you on the length of the video. I did not watch the whole thing in one sitting either. That being said, I know that it will scare some people away but I also don't mind that at all. Two planes crashing into the buildings. That's the answer. Mystery solved. gently caress off.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 15:11
|
|
|
GutBomb posted:Two planes crashing into the buildings. That's the answer. Mystery solved. Seriously people should look at the footage from around the WTC as the fires went out of control for an hour. No one was really that shocked that they fell down (speaking as an eyewitness in person, not on TV or Youtube) because they were like two roaring volcanoes, billowing out a massive cloud of ash that was blanketing the skyline. People just look at footage from mad far away, one second before it collapses and go HEH.. but the fires were incredibly catastrophic, intense, and highly visible in loads of footage. Dozens if not hundreds of people jumped to their deaths to escape the heat, 911 calls have been released in trial as public record of two people on the phone up until the buildings collapsed where you can tell how they are convinced they are going to die just cuz of how hot the place was. It doesn't matter if fire can't melt steel if it fucks up everything else in the building and weakens the steel support beams enough that they start bending, which is what happened.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 17:02
|
|
|
Smoothrich posted:Seriously people should look at the footage from around the WTC as the fires went out of control for an hour. No one was really that shocked that they fell down (speaking as an eyewitness in person, not on TV or Youtube) because they were like two roaring volcanoes, billowing out a massive cloud of ash that was blanketing the skyline. People just look at footage from mad far away, one second before it collapses and go HEH.. when 9/11 "truthers" start ranting in real life around me (I live in East Texas and have experienced this on multiple occasions) it is really funny to me how many of them instantly shut up and slink out of the room fuming when I say a few simple words: "I'm from New York"
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 17:27
|
|
|
InediblePenguin posted:when 9/11 "truthers" start ranting in real life around me (I live in East Texas and have experienced this on multiple occasions) it is really funny to me how many of them instantly shut up and slink out of the room fuming when I say a few simple words: "I'm from New York" NEW YORK CITY?!?! Do they spit out their salsa?
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 17:40
|
|
|
Dominicius posted:I agree with you on the length of the video. I did not watch the whole thing in one sitting either. That being said, I know that it will scare some people away but I also don't mind that at all. it's not so much scary as a giant waste of time that nobody's willing to endure unless you have literally nothing better to do than watch marathon documentaries about discredited bad ideas from lunatics
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 17:46
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:it's not so much scary as a giant waste of time that nobody's willing to endure unless you have literally nothing better to do than watch marathon documentaries about discredited bad ideas from lunatics
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 17:48
|
|
|
Dominicius posted:I agree with you on the length of the video. I did not watch the whole thing in one sitting either. That being said, I know that it will scare some people away but I also don't mind that at all. But you came here to convince people of something. Why would you post something that you know they're going to ignore because it's a 5-hour waste of time?  Posting that video is a clear and obvious attempt to browbeat your opponents into giving up and agreeing with you, it's a big dumb appeal to authority. quote:Also "the next segment is entirely dependent on the concrete having been pulverized" is a complete non-criticism. Of course the concrete was pulverized. The building collapsed, which caused the pulverization. The question is what caused the initial collapse. Two planes full of jet fuel crashed into the buildings at high speed. Raging fires compromised the integrity of the buildings and they collapsed. All of the evidence points to this, and the alternative theories are pushed by idiots who want you to believe that it was lizard people
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 19:28
|
|
|
What the gently caress do you need half a Shoah's worth of run time to talk about anyway? Is there anything beyond "jet fuel can't melt steel beams?" Just give us a bullet point list of the basic arguments, maybe then we can have a discussion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 19:41
|
|
|
Dominicius posted:Of course the concrete was pulverized. The building collapsed, which caused the pulverization.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 19:43
|
|
|
A weird amount of the 9/11 trutherism seems to come from the idea that structural stability is a binary instead of a scale.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
The contradiction remains. Was the concrete pulverized because of explosives (part 6) or did it melt because of nanothermite (part 5)? This is a big part of what people don't get about 9/11. The Twin Towers were unique because they had no internal steel framing, just an inner core around the elevators. Caption: Notice the cross. Another symbol of sacrifice. Probably not entirely necessary, but since occult forces are still poorly understood, even by the Illuminati, cramming some extra symbols in there "just to be safe" is a pragmatic choice. This is important because the towers were designed to fall and fall catastrophically at a moment's notice. The towers stood as a symbol of America's financial might, for the power of Wall Street. Which is symbolized by the Bull. Both the metaphorical "bull of Wall Street" and the Twin Towers are manifestations of Baal. Plus, the twin towers surrounded the Great Spherical Caryatid perfectly maps with both Solomon's temple and What Baal needs for sacrifice is "a burning place" (topheth) and on 9/11 the Twin Towers did indeed become Topheth, complete with a massive human sacrifice. I mean, think about it. Terrorists opposed to American Imperialism attack America. What do they choose to attack? The Pentagon, not only a symbol of America's military might but also actually a major military headquarters, the White House (the plane crashed but that was the original target) a symbol of the American government and the residence of the President and . . . the Twin Towers in NYC? Al Qaeda is a hardened terrorist organization, it knows how to pick high-value targets. Why attach buildings that ultimately had little to do with their grips? It doesn't make sense. But collapsing them to keep Baal contained in the Pentagon sure does make sense.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 20:23
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:But collapsing them to keep Baal contained in the Pentagon sure does make sense. You realise the stargate program is still top secret, right? 
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 20:44
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
Shbobdb posted:The towers stood as a symbol of America's financial might, for the power of Wall Street. Which is symbolized by the Bull. Both the metaphorical "bull of Wall Street" and the Twin Towers are manifestations of Baal
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 20:44
|
|
|
InediblePenguin posted:I demand to know how bears fit into this. They poop in the woods.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 20:56
|
|
|
I've never heard an occult explanation for "bear market". While occult symbols infiltrate many aspects of our lives, not everything is an occult symbol. Being able to distinguish between the two is really important, otherwise you can get lost in the signal/noise ratio and basically induce schizophrenia.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 20:59
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:I've never heard an occult explanation for "bear market". While occult symbols infiltrate many aspects of our lives, not everything is an occult symbol. Being able to distinguish between the two is really important, otherwise you can get lost in the signal/noise ratio and basically induce schizophrenia. I disagree. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wdOBX2QjdGo
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 21:01
|
|
|
I don't get how a market performing poorly would correlate to scapulimancy (what the Shriners were killing the bears for). Satanists should be all about scapulimancy since it led to the creation of the only human writing system (Chinese) as opposed to the more advanced (and easier to use) mesopotamian system gifted by the Anunnaki. Scapulimancy represents a primitive but powerful path towards human godhood.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
Here's an excellent 9/11 documentary about the reality of being there and its only 30 minutes long. I imagine conspiracy theorists watch 4 hour long droneathons that make no point and contain zero actual eyewitnesses or experiences of the event yet don't spend 30 minutes understanding what it was like to actually go through this massive terrorist attack that killed thousands and wrecked downtown Manhattan. The idea that our own government would blow up a city block of its main financial hub and center for international commerce, while killing thousands of innocent people and destroying billions of dollars of infrastructure is so loving retarded I can't even begin to engage with the conspiratorial thinking without becoming irate and wanting to slap someone. Was Hiroshima and Nagasaki also a false flag? makes u think.. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2LxmESkV0Q
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
. . . . Kinda? It's been pretty well established that Japan was ready to surrender. Dropping the bombs halted Russian advances in China and showed the Ruskies that we've got The Bomb. It wasn't a "false flag" per se, but the real reasons why we did it are at odds with the official reasons why we did it. Things like that happen all the time, we just don't call them "conspiracy theories" because they are an accepted part of the official historical narrative.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 21:41
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:. . . . Kinda? A false flag would be if Japan nuked themselves dude. Or if the Jews nuked Japan, I guess. It's not about motives but about the organization behind an attack or operation.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 22:00
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:It's been pretty well established that Japan was ready to surrender. Shbobdb posted:Dropping the bombs halted Russian advances in China and showed the Ruskies that we've got The Bomb.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 22:10
|
|
|
Shbobdb posted:But collapsing them to keep Baal contained in the Pentagon sure does make sense. I honestly wish we lived in this reality. Anything to keep the Old Ones sleeping for another millennia.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 22:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 22:23 |
|
|
Shbobdb posted:. . . . Kinda? laffo Japan was ready to surrender in the sense that they wanted to keep whatever was left of their me-too colonial empire (quite a substantial bit) instead of losing all of it after covering it in dead GIs, which luckily didn't happen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 27, 2015 22:38
|
|