Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
All your euros are belong to Greece.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff Foster View Post
 


Look, I really couldn't care less what you want to believe. I've offered you my assessment of the situation. If you don't want to believe it. Fine. That's your business.



But if you do want to verify anything I've said I've given you a link to one of the most widely acclaimed scholars on CIA activities currently in print. Doug Valentine's credentials are impeccable and easily verifiable. He's one of a very small number of people who's been granted access to personnel right on up to the level of Director of Central Intelligence. I can't stop you from attempting to blacken his name and reputation - but you really are making yourself look really silly.



This is a golden opportunity for you to knock my argument out of the ballpark (and maybe learn something in the process)



Contact Doug and ask him whether he thinks the CIA is currently tanking the economies of Ukraine, Greece and other countries in the region, buying up land at knockdown rates as part of a wider geo-political strategy of the "encirclement" of Russia etc.



Have your balls dropped off or something? I assure you, Doug doesn't bite.



For the THIRD & FINAL time - post his response below:



Oh, well if this is the 'FINAL time'.......<img src=" src="http://files.chud.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif" />



Look, you are the one that has made some pretty radical accusations....I can only assume they are based on information that you have gleaned from the gentleman you keep referencing.



Where did you read about these supposed political cabal online? ...in a book? magazine?



If so, why not offer up the source to your claims? Any facts produced could go a long way to supporting this  narrative.



Are they in DV's published works....and if they are in his published works, are they accessible online? AND if they are online, why do you not offer up a link to said information so that all here interested can peruse it at their leisure or did Doug tell you these scandalous stories in private with the knowledge that only you can know about them and that you won't divulge this info to anyone else? 

Maybe you are right....maybe DV is onto something here....but until there is factual evidence to back it up, it is just one more in the long line of ramblings of one more conspiracy theorist.



Hey, I've got an idea...why don't you get DV to create an account here on the CHUD forum so that he can 'get your back'.




Then again...maybe YOU are DV and are just trying to pimp your books to some gullible sci-fi nerds?


How's that for a conspiracy? <img src=" src="http://files.chud.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif" />




FWIW- there is a guy on another forum I frequent who posts all sorts of batshit insane claims....and rarely backs up his claims with links.



Upon seeing his posts/claims, a quick Google on whatever the topic at hand may be, it usually shows his 'sources' to be mostly right-wing news aggregating sites....Infowars, PJMedia, Newsmax, etc.


After pointing out that his 'source' has fabricated much of the outrage he is...well, outraged about, he gets all bent out of shape and gets even more frustrated with those that have debunked his claims. I don't think I've ever 'heard' him admit that he was wrong.

Reply
Quote:

Originally Posted by VTRan View Post
 


Oh, well if this is the 'FINAL time'.......<img src=" src="http://files.chud.com/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif" />



Look, you are the one that has made some pretty radical accusations....I can only assume they are based on information that you have gleaned from the gentleman you keep referencing.



Where did you read about these supposed political cabal online? ...in a book? magazine?



If so, why not offer up the source to your claims? Any facts produced could go a long way to supporting this  narrative.



Are they in DV's published works....and if they are in his published works, are they accessible online? AND if they are online, why do you not offer up a link to said information so that all here interested can peruse it at their leisure or did Doug tell you these scandalous stories in private with the knowledge that only you can know about them and that you won't divulge this info to anyone else? 

Maybe you are right....maybe DV is onto something here....but until there is factual evidence to back it up, it is just one more in the long line of ramblings of one more conspiracy theorist.



Hey, I've got an idea...why don't you get DV to create an account here on the CHUD forum so that he can 'get your back'.




Then again...maybe YOU are DV and are just trying to pimp your books to some gullible sci-fi nerds?


How's that for a conspiracy? <img src=" src="http://files.chud.com/images/smilies/biggrin.gif" />




FWIW- there is a guy on another forum I frequent who posts all sorts of batshit insane claims....and rarely backs up his claims with links.



Upon seeing his posts/claims, a quick Google on whatever the topic at hand may be, it usually shows his 'sources' to be mostly right-wing news aggregating sites....Infowars, PJMedia, Newsmax, etc.


After pointing out that his 'source' has fabricated much of the outrage he is...well, outraged about, he gets all bent out of shape and gets even more frustrated with those that have debunked his claims. I don't think I've ever 'heard' him admit that he was wrong.



I couldn't care less about some "guy" on another forum you've "debunked" with a "quick Google search". Quite frankly I'm ASTONISHED you think it's even possible to prove or disprove ANYTHING beyond entirely uncontested facts over a few seconds or minutes spent on Google. Even my Yr. 7 students would scoff at the idea.



I don't have a lot of free time. It's the reason I post so infrequently these days. On those rare opportunities when I am able to I try to add something to the debate. I'd like to think I've added plenty to the political forum over the years (albeit little of late). But I guess that is for others to decide.



I've given you my interpretation of the unfortunate situation in Greece. It's based on my knowledge of 20th/20st Century Political History (which is a field I've taken an intense interest in over the past 25 years). And yes, you are correct - Doug Valentine's informed opinion is something I've assimilated into my argument. If I've not provided a link to Doug's thoughts it's because I don't have it to hand. We're talking about an article I read maybe four or five months ago. And I've slept since then.



Which is why I've given you the next best thing.



If people find it hard to accept some of the things I've written - fine. Query them with Doug. Otherwise we are just spinning in circles and I really don't have the time for that.

Reply

Geof you are really coming off as a typical Internet Crank...you make extreme assertions, pre-emptivelly brand anyone who disagrees with them as ignorant or stupid (in very insulting terms), and when pressed for any evidence, you cite the webpage of a guy who writes poetry and "history" books that are criticized as relying on suspect (or fraudulent) sources. NOT impeccable.



I hope you treat your students better than this.

Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff Foster View Post
 


I couldn't care less about some "guy" on another forum you've "debunked" with a "quick Google search". Quite frankly I'm ASTONISHED you think it's even possible to prove or disprove ANYTHING beyond entirely uncontested facts over a few seconds or minutes spent on Google. Even my Yr. 7 students would scoff at the idea.



When it comes to 'debunking' something these days...it's relatively easy these days when the 'source' of said info has been proven to be wrong over and over and over and over.....


These days, when someone posts information that has an irrational/absurd taint to it, I've found that it is more than a safe bet to assume that, Yes it is bullshit....and the internet is drowning in that kind of bullshit these days.



My contention is any story that is offered up without facts and evidence to back itself up should be met with astronomical amounts of skepticism.



Too many individuals think that they are the only ones that "know how the world ACTUALLY works" when the truth of the matter is that they are just living in bubble of cognitive dissonance.




Quote:

I don't have a lot of free time. It's the reason I post so infrequently these days. On those rare opportunities when I am able to I try to add something to the debate. I'd like to think I've added plenty to the political forum over the years (albeit little of late). But I guess that is for others to decide.



I've given you my interpretation of the unfortunate situation in Greece. It's based on my knowledge of 20th/20st Century Political History (which is a field I've taken an intense interest in over the past 25 years). And yes, you are correct - Doug Valentine's informed opinion is something I've assimilated into my argument. If I've not provided a link to Doug's thoughts it's because I don't have it to hand. We're talking about an article I read maybe four or five months ago. And I've slept since then.



Which is why I've given you the next best thing.



If people find it hard to accept some of the things I've written - fine. Query them with Doug. Otherwise we are just spinning in circles and I really don't have the time for that.



OK, to be clear...you have given us your interpretation of what's happening in Greece and who knows, there might be some truth in it...but did you consider that maybe Doug Valentine and others of his ilk are wrong and/or (worse) blatantly lying about what they are asserting?



Sorry, but when it comes to someone online spouting off random and wild claims where the only 'evidence' that is given is the one other person who equally offers up a claim without any factual evidence to back it up, I'm going to have to remain skeptical.



Or should I just assume that everything Glen Beck says is true?

Reply
AInsane EU stuff I only just realised: it's 5 AM and the Euro leaders are STILL quote-unquote negotiating. What the hell is going on?
Reply
AThey lasted 17 hours. Longest ever talks. And the result? MUCH worse than what Greece voted no to, just a week ago. This sums it up:

Take a look at @afneil's Tweet: https://twitter.com/afneil/status/620499...40864?s=09
Reply

A far as I know the 50bn fund will be based in Greece and under Greek management.

Reply

Lol


see you all for the sequel in a few months


if hell doesn't break loose before that

Reply
ATsipras' u-turn. Desperate to avoid Grexit:


The Economist explains
Sponsored by GE Logo
The Economist explains
Alexis Tsipras’s U-turn
Jul 12th 2015, 9:08 by S.N. | ATHENS

"ON JULY 5th Greeks appeared to signal, through an overwhelming referendum result, that the reform demands made by Europe were too onerous to accept. Less than a week later, on July 11th, the Greek parliament passed a bill—with a majority of 251 out of 300 votes—giving the government of prime minister Alexis Tsipras authorisation to negotiate a bail-out deal with creditors, in light of a proposal that includes conditions harsher than those rejected at the referendum. The government did not need parliamentary authorisation for this, but now that it has it, the Greek political leadership appears to present an unusually united front. This extraordinary about face may not end up achieving anything; the European leaders now meeting in Brussels may decide that Greece cannot be trusted and must go. The reversal in the Greek stance is nonetheless remarkable. How did Mr Tsipras go from imploring Greeks to vote down a package of reforms proposed by the creditors, which 62% of voters dutifully did, to begging the Greek parliament to sign up to an even harsher package less than a week later, and what consequences will the U-turn have?

One explanation is that Mr Tsipras has an extraordinary gift for persuasion; the fact that Athens isn’t currently being razed by betrayed "Oxi" (No) voters suggests as much. But the more compelling reason is that the Greeks have realised they cannot have their cake and eat it. The referendum promised the impossible: a less-harsh package of reforms and continued membership in the euro zone. But once it became clear that the euro zone creditors were in no mood to negotiate, Greek parliamentarians (and, it would seem, many Oxi voters) did not need long to determine that a Grexit would be more catastrophic than more austerity. “At least we had a go,” seems to be a common attitude.

Mr Tsipras's conciliatory performance has surprised Mr Tsipras's critics and, perhaps, given them hope for the future. “He finally chose country over party,” says one relieved member of the opposition. But it has cost him. Fifteen of his own MPs, including two ministers, revolted by voting against the bill, abstaining or staying at home, and another 15 signed a letter saying they only voted for the bill in order to protect the government’s majority. Yanis Varoufakis, until last week Mr Tsipras's finance minister, skipped the vote entirely. Without the support of these defectors, Mr Tsipras in effect no longer holds a parliamentary majority. To regain it he has a few options. He could reshuffle his cabinet and demand that the defectors resign and hand over their votes. He could call for a new election, which he may do anyway later in the year. Or he could form a new coalition to make the numbers add up, most obviously with Potami and Pasok: two centre-left parties. Or European creditors may force his hand, calling for a technocratic government. They would certainly find a new, broader coalition more assuring of the Greek commitment to implementing reforms.
The show of support by opposition parties in the authorisation vote was a matter of pragmatism, rather than enthusiasm for the reform package. “Now is the time to do everything possible to keep Greece within the euro zone," said opposition MP Niki Kerameus. "Now is not the time to discuss why Syriza went from promising 12 billion euros in grants to proposing 12 billion euros in austerity measures.” But such discussions will surely be had behind closed doors. The bill's passage will probably lead to what many moderates had hoped all along: a split within Syriza that forces Mr Tsipras to rid the party of its extreme-left flank. As long as the current armistice amongst Greek politicians lasts, Mr Tsipras can enjoy wide support from outside his party. All this, together with the lack of popular unrest for now, presents an impressive show of Greek unity. But once a deal is signed—or rejected—the knives will surely come out again before long."


http://www.economist.com/blogs/economist...iprasuturn
Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff Foster View Post

...

Am I making myself clear? I'd flesh this out a bit more but I'm pushed for time.

Well, yes and no (and if you can churn all that out when pushed for time, then I say well done Wink


But the problem is not that secret tomfoolery goes on or not.  It does.  I never have any doubt there's wheels within wheels turning and trying to work every situation for some advantage, or (perhaps more importantly) perceived advantage.  But Russia, half the Middle East, most of South America, slabs of Africa and a few choice places in Asia virtually run on a semi informed myth that the reason their country isn't doing as well as it should is because of US/CIA meddling.  This has been the platform for power of many a dictatorship and totalitarian regime.  That's their 'narrative'.  By your standards this is a more sophisticated narrative than that of the average Westerner.  In most cases it's based somewhat in fact too, if only solidly confirmed decades later.  It doesn't make it any less of an ironic sort of comforting myth.  Something that forgives all kinds of bad behaviour and poor management as well as a strong persecution complex that serves the aforementioned just as well.  But the CIA is a human institution, staffed by people, which does human things to other humans.  In many systems where people are trying to actively oppose these actions too (including the government that gives it its money).  And then it tries to do them without anyone knowing about it.  Those facts alone mean we know its effectiveness is diffuse and limited most of the time.


That's what my knowledge and experience of people, especially organised into institutions, tells me.



So to me, even a base assumption that "the CIA is involved", as reasonable as that might be given the record, with no detail as to how or what they actually did or are doing, is of little practical use and at worst merely fosters that sort of paranoid mysticism about secret services and geopolitics. Something which I think has genuinely negative consequences.  I expect it is unwitting, but without hard information that's what happens.  As a fallback assumption, even at its most reasonable, it renders knowledge itself on any situation effectively unknowable (yet often posits this as the intellectually superior option.  I'm pretty sure this is not your intent but I'm sure we've all met enough people whose startling clarity of not knowing what's really going on is somehow knowing what's really going on).



Personally I think that's at least one reason simpler narratives hold sway; not because people are too dumb or who never heard of this stuff (although those things play a part).  But because an almost predictive history based set of assumptions like that leaves you with very little besides great lurking behind the scenes forces of unknowable influence and motivation.  Some people love that stuff and can't get enough, of course.  But I think by and large our culture prefers to stick to stuff that is pinned down, or at least seems pinned down (The grandest secret histories and conspiracy theories are enourmously detailed.  None of it, or very little, has any factual basis.  It's the detail that sells it).  So where outright lies and excessive vagaries will still potentially get you into trouble, we have a press and public that likes a good solid angle.  And if Hersh wants to tell us it was all the CIAs doing five years later, well that's fine too.

Reply

There's a thread dedicated for conspiracy theories on these boards, maybe this discussion should happen there? I fail to see this CIA angle as anything more than a derail, especially with so thin arguments relating it to Greece' situation. I'm reminded of this quote by Paul Greengrass. Instead of asking you to contact him, let me post it here. And yes, I was being sarcastic and a bit childish, forgive me:



Quote:
Originally said by Paul Greengrass:


I have a lot of sympathy for conspiratorial people. What it is is engagement. Its’ a really passionate engagement and curiosity about the world. And it’s a really healthy skepticism about power and who has it and how it’s used. It’s basically asking why, what if, and says who, all of which are fantastically important questions that don’t get asked enough.


But one of the problems with conspiracy theories is that at some point conspiracies are cozy. They are comfort blankets. They say to us you don’t have to really worry about the world because at the end of the day there are a bunch of bad guys with black hats on controlling it all. We’re all being duped. Issues of complexity don’t arise.


But the truth is that doesn’t wash. That isn’t the world we live in.
Reply

The thing that strikes me about most conspiracy theorists is that they turn everyone into the all-powerful and omnicompetent incompetents around.



"We can destroy/freely manipulate the economy of anyone we choose at will but can't fix our own!"



"I can engineer a bipartisan, nationwide (if not worldwide) conspiracy from the day of my birth to get myself elected President even though I'm not an American citizen!  And then I'll...uh...get really frustrated with my Congress?"



"We can run our false flag operation against the World Trade Center and the Pentagon to convince the American People to go to war, all so we can tank our economy and I can leave office with a terrible reputation that helps get the Kenyan quoted above elected!"



"We can hide evidence of the Roswell Aliens, JFK's real murderers, and the fake moon landings indefinitely, but can't stop on Army enlisted guy from blowing the lid off a ton of stuff by sending it to Wikileaks!"

Reply
AHas the IMF just lobbed a hand grenade into this clusterfuck?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/econo...ef.htmlust
Reply

Link no good, or story gone!

Reply
Quote:

Originally Posted by Cylon Baby View Post
 

Link no good, or story gone!


It was just a click away....



http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/econo...elief.html

Reply

Tspiras has called an election. He's now framing himself as a centrist and trying to shed the left wing elements of his party. At least he's honest enough to recognize what he has actually become.



Still, the Greek people tend to have favoured the left in every referendum and election so far. Can't see why this one is going to be any different...

Reply

It's the final step in transforming Syriza into a social democrat party. And the final realization that the Left is not compatible with ruling a 21st century Western democracy.

Reply

Stelios. Do you think there is any real danger you'll go far right? Felt like Golden Dawn was neutered a few years back, but people tend to cling to one wing or the other when the chips are down.

Reply

That's the real danger. The Left failed spectacularly so some of the same idiots may very well swing to the other side.

Reply
AThousands of refugees from Syria and Iraq are entering Greece every month. I can see right wing dipshits gaining votes by blaming them for everything, much like what happened in Sweden and here.
Reply
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virtanen View Post

 I can see right wing dipshits gaining votes by blaming them for everything, much like what happened in Sweden and here.


On the other hand, blaming them for "everything" would be 80% fair.

Reply

Come again?



Sidenote, I find it pretty hilarious that the nationalist True Finns -party's primary concern is our raging refugee problem. Which, at the time of writing this, consists of roughly 4000 people who are trying to get into a country with a population of five million, of which 350'000 are unemployed. How about starting to get worried about that, assholes?

Reply
AGreece is nearly insovent but the Migrants keep coming. To blame Greece for this is ridiculous. It's not like they chose to be a few miles from Turkey.


http://www.economist.com/news/europe/216...no-way-out
Reply

I guess Austria and their fuckboys would like us to set up our navy along the Turkish borders and start lighting up every boat that tries to cross. Because right now that's pretty much the only way to stop the flow.

Reply
AExactly. And Golden Dawn has probably suggested something along those lines.

Are there many refugees in your region, or are you to far from the route to Europe?
Reply
Quote:

Originally Posted by Bluelouboyle View Post

Exactly. And Golden Dawn has probably suggested something along those lines.

Are there many refugees in your region, or are you to far from the route to Europe?


I'm along the way. There will be some camps in my city and you see a bunch of refugees here and there but so far it hasn't been really disruptive.

Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)