Is Obama geen wettige president? Of is hij het juist wel? #2

quote:

Op zondag 13 juni 2010 09:47 schreef Ali_Kannibali het volgende:
Obama's adviseur Sunstein wil 'conspiracy theorists' het zwijgen opleggen. Dit zijn enkele mogelijke maatregelen uit zijn werk hierover. Het is een artikel van een 9/11 truth site en wordt hier dus in verband gebracht met die truth movement, maar geldt uiteraard voor alles waarbij men de verhalen van de overheid in twijfel trekt.

Page 14: “What can government do about conspiracy theories?”
Note: The authors from Harvard seem unaware that the 911 Commission Report is itself a conspiracy theory. Completely omitted is that the facts that have been uncovered by scientists, architects, engineers, pilots etc. linked on the left side of this blog question the conclusions of the official 911 report based on an overwhelming body of evidence. Wesley Clark is a member of Patriots Question 911 Truth – do the Harvard Professors intend to ‘cognitively infiltrate’ Wes Clark’s conspiracy group? Which of the following actions they forward would they recommend for a former head of NATO?

Page 14: “ We can readily imagine a series of possible responses.

1. Government might ban conspiracy theorizing.”
Note: OK so although the geniuses from Harvard know an open society is the best protection against misguided government secrecy they make this proposal banning free speech – which is an inalienable right. A Harvard Law Professor? Send this clown back to school – somewhere else!

Page 14:
“2. Government might impose some kind of tax, financial or otherwise, on those who disseminate such theories.”
Note: By “such theories” Sunstein means those that he and others blessed with special DNA can instinctively tell are “false conspiracy theories” - such as the one he imagines is held by the 911 Truth movement. See above videos where Gage distinctly states that he doesn’t have a complete theory. Gage uses an analogy describing the 911 Truth movement as that of a detective who after walking into a room, finds a body and several shell casings. The detective doesn’t need a complete theory to perform a thorough investigation. The detective, in order to find perpetrator/s must consider ALL hypotheses, not just the hypothesis Harvard Law Pontiffs anoint, and letting the scientific method and good police work lead to the truth.

Page 14:
” 3. Government might itself engage in counterspeech, marshaling arguments to discredit conspiracy theories.”
Note: Methinks Sunstein protests too much. Counterspeech as he describes is already impemented. But the government agents will lose this battle because when one argues against the truth one ultimately must rely on logical fallacies which are self-defeating.

Page 14:
“ 4. Government might formally hire credible private parties to engage in counterspeech”
Note: They already are but they are running into the same problems stated in paragraph above. Radio and TV personalities are backing away from these tactics because they backfire when the truth comes out – ratings drop – TV and Radio shills lose credibility.

Page 14:
” 5. Government might engage in informal communication with such parties, encouraging them to help. … our main policy idea is that government should engage in cognitive infiltration of the groups that produce conspiracy theories, which involves a mix of 3, 4, and 5.

Page 22:
” Government agents (and their allies) might enter chat rooms, online social networks, or even real-space groups and attempt to undermine percolating conspiracy theories by raising doubts about their factual premises, causal logic or implications for political action. “
Note: The Harvard Law Professor’s 29 page paper “Conspiracy Theory” defines a conspiracy theory as:
“an effort to explain some event or practice by reference to the machinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role.”
So let me get this straight: Harvard Law Professor is proposing government sanctioned conspiratorial acts directed at the 911 Truth Movement while simultaneously proposing that people who know that their government commits conspiratorial acts are “dangerous” and must be pre-emptively silenced.

Page 16:
“According to an anonymous State Department official in charge of anti-disinformation, “a great deal of harm can result ‘when people believe these lies and then act on the basis of their mistaken beliefs.’ ”
Note: This is great information from Sunstein – and I wish to add that I have information from an anonymous State Department official too! I was told by these anonymous top secret source that there are some Harvard Law Professors with absolutely no respect for the United States Constitution committed to the employment of scare tactics to trample on the Bill of Rights.

Page 29:
” Some conspiracy theories create serious risks. They do not merely undermine democratic debate; in extreme cases, they create or fuel violence. If government can dispel such theories, it should do so.”
Note: I wonder how having a debate about a conspiracy or not is a bigger risk to democratic debate than the proposals this goof from Harvard is proposing?

http://waronyou.com/topic(...)-911-truth-movement/

quote:

Op vrijdag 25 juni 2010 09:37 schreef arie_bc het volgende:

[..]

Mediacurator is te druk om alle topic vol te spammen met linkdumps. Stoor hem nou niet want hij doet het voor the greater good.

Senator LeMieux on BP spill.wmv

quote:

Op zaterdag 26 juni 2010 11:48 schreef Verburg_K het volgende:

[..]

jawel erg dom

Obama gaat beter met de crisis om dan de EU, en de vernieuwde GM gaat ook alweer naar de beurs

quote:

Op zaterdag 26 juni 2010 16:22 schreef Verburg_K het volgende:

[..]

miljoenen chinezen en in China is Audi nog nooit geweest
http://www.volkskrant.nl/(...)rt_productie_fors_op

http://www.autoweek.nl/au(...)ors-maakt-weer-winst