babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » canadian politics   » Conspiracy Kooks and the Terminally Gullible

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Conspiracy Kooks and the Terminally Gullible
Hermann Mudget
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2442

posted 04 April 2002 03:54 PM      Profile for Hermann Mudget        Edit/Delete Post
In another forum, the appropriately named “Wingnut” has made the following claim regarding a conspiracy kook article written by the discredited hoaxer Johnathon Pilger:

quote:
you might dispute Pilger, but his arguments are sourced. So you are attacking the messenger rather than the message. This is hardly adult. Refute his sources. But, of course, you can't.

Is that so? Who is the source for this lunatic claim?

quote:
What Kissinger and Nixon began, Pol Pot completed.

Who is the source for this lunatic claim?

quote:
Direct contact was made between the Reagan White House and the Khmer Rouge when Dr. Ray Cline, a former deputy director of the C.I.A., made a clandestine visit to Pol Pot's operational base inside Cambodia in November 1980. Cline was then a foreign policy adviser to President-elect Reagan. Within a year some fifty C.I.A. and other intelligence agents were running Washington's secret war against Cambodia from the U.S. Embassy in Bangkok and along the Thai-Cambodian border. The aim was to appease China,

Who is the source for this lunatic claim?

quote:
For the truth is that Pol Pot and the Khmer Rouge would be historical nonentities--and a great many people would be alive today--had Washington not helped bring them to power


Who is the source for this lunatic claim?

quote:
If the U.S. bombing was the first phase of Cambodia's holocaust and Pol Pot's Year Zero the second, the third phase was the use of the United Nations by Washington, its allies and China as the instrument of Cambodia's, and Vietnam's, punishment.

In fact, the only alleged sources mentioned in the previous article are Senator Kerry, the Vietnam Veterans of America Foundation, and the Congressional Research Service. Here are their websites, and/or e-mail addresses.

http://www.senate.gov/~kerry/

http://www.vvaf.org/

http://www.cnie.org/NLE/CRS/

So, a lesson for Wingnut. If you are going to try to use lunatic proven hoaxers like Pilger to bolster your nonsensical claims, at least try to find a hoaxer that uses dead people as a “source” so the lunatic claims can’t be checked.


From: At my computer | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 04 April 2002 04:01 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Everthing you quoted is true. So what is your problem?

I appreciate that you have taken a personal interest in me enough to begin your first post with my name. It is quite flattering. Thank you.

But it does not change the fact you are wrong.

Let us break this down a little bit:

Do you agree the US engaged is a secret bombing campaign of Cambodia?

Do you agree that General Lon Nol, staged a coup displacing the legitimate government of Cambodia?

Do you agree the Khmer Rouge fled, following the invasion by Vietnam, to Thia border camps?

Do you agree Thailand provided funding and food to the Khmer Rouge?

Do you agree the primary financial and military sponsor of the Thai government, at the time, was the US?

Do you agree that if the Thais were illegally using the money, as claimed by US apologists, to fund the Khmer Rouge, the US could have suspended funding?

Do you agree the US never suspended funding to the Thai government despite their continued support of the Khmer Rouge?

Which of the above do you disgaree with?


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Hermann Mudget
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2442

posted 04 April 2002 04:05 PM      Profile for Hermann Mudget        Edit/Delete Post
It's all true, is it?

I'm not arguing about it. The "sources" are right there. E-mail Senator Kerry, and let me know when he agrees that the US brought Pol Pot to power, and "supported" Pol Pot.

Can't wait.


From: At my computer | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 04 April 2002 04:06 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
C'mon don't be afraid. Tell me which you disagree with.
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Hermann Mudget
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2442

posted 04 April 2002 04:08 PM      Profile for Hermann Mudget        Edit/Delete Post
Look, you made the claim about the "sources". They are right there. Let me know what Senator Kerry has to say about such lunacy.
From: At my computer | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 04 April 2002 04:16 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I have noted elsewhere how "Hermann" just popped up after Archimedes 2000 got ejected from Babble for holocaust denial. I have also noted the uncanny way in which "Hermann" tracks Archimedes 2000's opinions, fantasies, and modus operandi.

The latter involves calling everyone names who disagrees with him. Imagine my surprise when, apropos of nothing, "Hermann" made the following remark on the other thread:

"BTW, WIngnut, so if a person defends the right of "Holocaust Deniers" to ask the questions they do, and to make their case, then that certainly would be no cause to kick them off these boards, right?"

I wonder why this bugs "Hermann" so much, don't you?


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 04 April 2002 04:19 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh, Herman, maybe he has already told us:

quote:
"As a Vietnam vet, I feel a personal linkage and responsibility for helping to see if we can build a system of justice, and of accountability for the terrible things that happened," he said. "We played a significant role in Cambodia during the war, with the bombings and the overthrow of the government. That is an inheritance of that."

http://www.senate.gov/~kerry/globe-khmerrouge.html


In the same article you will also find the man Kerry and the US chose to lead Cambodia, Hun Sen, was Khmer Rouge. Fascinating, huh?


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Hermann Mudget
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2442

posted 04 April 2002 04:20 PM      Profile for Hermann Mudget        Edit/Delete Post
It wasn't "apropos of nothing", Mr House. You started talking about Holocaust Denial. I pointed out that Noam Chomsky would certainly qualify as a Holocaust Denier, according to you.

Are you upset with Chomsky for this?


From: At my computer | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Hermann Mudget
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2442

posted 04 April 2002 04:23 PM      Profile for Hermann Mudget        Edit/Delete Post
And what of it, Wingnut? More conspiracy kookery? You take a statement of known fact, that America bombed in Cambodia, and pretend it has something to do with US "support" for Pol Pot?
From: At my computer | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 04 April 2002 04:32 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Just because there is an indirect link does not mean there is no link.
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 04 April 2002 04:45 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh, dear, poor Herman.
You did not dispute the list I put before you.
And then I give you a direct quote from Kerry linked to an article that clearly states the Hun Sen was formerly Khmer Rouge.
Pol Pot? Maybe the US did not support him personally. But they certainly did support his movement and guerilla fighters against the Vietnamese backed government. They certainly did support a former member of that movement in becoming leader of that nation.
It was certainly their actions which brought about civil war and the rise of Pol Pot. Support him? They made him.

From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Hermann Mudget
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2442

posted 04 April 2002 04:47 PM      Profile for Hermann Mudget        Edit/Delete Post
DrConway, there is a difference between an "indirect link" and "support" for Pol Pot.

If you want to make an argument that the bombing of the NVA in Cambodia was partly responsible for the chaos that the KR communists used to create their version of socialist Utopia after the Americans withdrew from Vietnam, it has some validity. If you want to claim that the US "supported" Pol Pot, ala conspiracy kookery, it has no validity.


From: At my computer | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Hermann Mudget
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2442

posted 04 April 2002 04:50 PM      Profile for Hermann Mudget        Edit/Delete Post
"Pol Pot? Maybe the US did not support him personally. But they certainly did support his movement and guerilla fighters against the Vietnamese backed government. They certainly did support a former member of that movement in becoming leader of that nation.
It was certainly their actions which brought about civil war and the rise of Pol Pot. Support him? They made him. "


From: At my computer | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 04 April 2002 04:54 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post

From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
judym
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 29

posted 04 April 2002 05:01 PM      Profile for judym   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Jeff House, if you believe a banned babbler is on the board, please inform the moderator at [email protected]. This is the second time I've asked you personally, the fourth time today this issue has been raised. Speculating about folks' identities is really cheesy, and a good way to alienate new babblers who have identities all their own, whatever more established babblers might think.
From: earth | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
jeff house
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 518

posted 04 April 2002 10:12 PM      Profile for jeff house     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Okay, okay.

I notice no one is denying it though.

And maybe new Babblers should have a right to know who they are dealing with.


From: toronto | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
clersal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 370

posted 04 April 2002 10:33 PM      Profile for clersal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ya know Jeff it really isn't very important. Banned once ya can be banned twice.
From: Canton Marchand, Québec | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
pogge
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2440

posted 04 April 2002 11:06 PM      Profile for pogge   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And maybe new Babblers should have a right to know who they are dealing with.

I knew who I was dealing with from his first post. It's pretty easy to figure out where he's coming from.

Edit: And I've only been around here a week or so. I should have said that in the first place.

[ April 04, 2002: Message edited by: Slim ]


From: Why is this a required field? | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
nonsuch
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1402

posted 05 April 2002 02:42 AM      Profile for nonsuch     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It's not so much a question of 'who' as 'what'.
The mouthpiece may have an individual name, may even have a separate identity in walking life; the rhetoric is surely all of a piece.
Ask not for whom the bell tolls - just so it does.

Hermann - there are conspiracies far, far more Byzantine, sophisticated and malevolent than are dreamed of in your simplehood.

[ April 05, 2002: Message edited by: nonesuch ]


From: coming and going | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
goodgoditsnottrue
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2401

posted 05 April 2002 02:58 AM      Profile for goodgoditsnottrue   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
In the same article you will also find the man Kerry and the US chose to lead Cambodia, Hun Sen, was Khmer Rouge. Fascinating, huh?

Hey Wingnut, I am not sure you are making exactly the right assessment of the Hun Sen Situation. Hun Sen was KR at the begining of his career, and then deserted (78?) and helped the Vietnamese to build the insurgent army that worked with the vietnamese army to overthrow the KR.

So, his contact with the USA, Kerry and anybody else would have happened after he had abandoned the KR.

My assesment of that would be that Hun Sen was a compromise canditdate acceptable to all parties, including the USA and the Vietnamese. You should read a great book called "Brother Enemy" by Noradum Chanda (Sp?).

It was written a long time ago, in the mid-eighties, but it is a fascinating account of all of the conflicts in South Asia. Interesting partly because it is written from an Indian perspective, so it is not 'contaminated' too much by the political thinking of the 'East/West' conflict.

It would be hard to find now, I expect, but keep your eyes open.


From: Tarana | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 06 April 2002 12:18 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You're trolling all over this thread, Hermann. A thread you started specifically to talk smack about another babbler. So you're gone.
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Open Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca