BREAKING NEWS

[C-Mag]

Bjorn, you used words like absurd, conspiracy and ridiculous

[BjornP]

I like Carlus, but he can be really, really gullible when it comes to alot of news stories and articles. You have to be EXTRA critical of the stories that seem to validate whatever you believe and/or expect. In today's media market, there's a market for serving people news tailored specifically to whatever political, social, religious, etc. biases one holds. Everyone simply gets validated all the time, get only presented with news that validate their views on life.

Doesn't phase me.
I haven't come to a conclusion on Notre Dame yet. But what you are saying here I've heard for years on issues like Benghazi and the coup to take down Trump. Both of which I was absolutely accurate in my judgement.
Your response to my statements on Notre Dame is far more fantastic and conspiracy laden than my healthy skepticism.

You don't have a "healthy skepticism", Carlus. You are "skeptical" about things, people and ideas that you disagree with, and gullible about news that validate your beliefs. That's not skepticism. That's just being a different shade of NPC sheep. You're still a nice guy. Just wish you weren't so damned gullible. I don't care about faceless nobodies being gullible, after all. People I even remotely respect... I wish for them to improve.

I mean, goddamn Carlus... just the mental gymnastics required to even believe that the French government, which has had no problem in the past announcing that some terrorist attack was carried out by a Muslim, or that criminals are mostly MENA countries' immigrants...would somehow want to coverup a Muslim arson of the Notre Dame? Are you even aware of how utterly, frigging ignorant that assumption is? So, no...Carlus, you're not "skeptical". Or, if you are, you're really really bad at applying your skepticism. I do hope you take this personally... but understand that I don't criticize you, or "berate" you if think my tone is too angry ( ), because I want to disrespect you. I criticize to improve.

It's reasonable to assume that the French government, too, keeps secrets, does cover-ups, etc. That part translates from the US to France, sure. But the specific theory of "French government is probably doing a cover-up to protect Muslim arsonists", it's that, specific theory that's simply...dumb. Ignorant. Doesn't take local historical facts into account. Doesn't take local politics into account. All in all, too many assumptions, too little application of Occam's Razor, makes for a dumb conspiracy theoy.

[BjornP]

Bjorn, you used words like absurd, conspiracy and ridiculous

And?

[C-Mag]

Bjorn, the topics I've most posted on spanning DCF and MHF were Benghazi and the DOJ/FBI attempted coup of Trump.

I've was absolutely correct in my assessment of those incidents. I was called a conspiracy theorist throughout my research and posting of those issues. I was called crazy when early on I stated Trump was going to win. This is evidence that I have a health skepticism.

What do you have to show you're not just screaming and making false accusations ?

[BjornP]

Bjorn, the topics I've most posted on spanning DCF and MHF were Benghazi and the DOJ/FBI attempted coup of Trump.

I've was absolutely correct in my assessment of those incidents. I was called a conspiracy theorist throughout my research and posting of those issues. I was called crazy when early on I stated Trump was going to win. This is evidence that I have a health skepticism.

What do you have to show you're not just screaming and making false accusations ?

No, it isn't. It may be evidence that you are capable of doubting your own government's up to any good, but it's not being "skeptical" to believe that the French government is engaging in a massive conspiracy with the fire department, cops, local construction workers and whoever else was in the church when the fire started, to cover up a Muslim arson attack.

And my evidence to prove the negative, that there is no pro-Muslim arsonist conspiracy? That we have gotten news for several years now from France of Muslim terrorist attacks and attempts, Muslim criminal immigrants, immigrant problems in Marseille, and Nice. Any of that kept secret? Nope. Now, how about you prove the positive? You're making an assumption that the French government has some interest, some motive in keeping an arson attack secret simply because Muslims (in your theory) did it.

Ok, what evidence - even circumstantial - do you base that on? What motive would the French government have to keep an arson attack secret, simply because it was carried out by Muslims? Why would it care? You realize btw, that France is the first country that banned the wearing of the burka? That they have this thing called laïcite (I'm probably butchering the spelling of that), enforced public secularism. And no, the current French president is not against it before you try factoring that into your theory.

[C-Mag]

I'm crazy for saying the Notre Dame fire deserves investigation. You state people must absolutely agree with the Macron governments declaration on the fire, a decision made within hours.

And you call me crazy and reactionary. You ever seen a government statement you questioned?

[BjornP]

I'm crazy for saying the Notre Dame fire deserves investigation. You state people must absolutely agree with the Macron governments declaration on the fire, a decision made within hours.

And you call me crazy and reactionary. You ever seen a government statement you questioned?

Never called you crazy or reactionary. Especially don't get why I would call you the latter. I know you're a classical liberal, because you've called yourself that many times, and I do trust you to know yourself best, at least. I think I question my own government more than you do yours (now that Trump's in charge of it..., anyway). Never stated people "must agree with" any French government declaration. I'm still only saying that your specific assumption/theory/whatever that there's a French government conspiracy motivated by a desire to cover up a Muslim arsonist(s), is stupid. Because there's neither any evidence, circumstantial evidence, or any other reason, whatsoever to even suspect such a thing. It's like I could make up a theory that Trump is a secret Muslim right now. Declare that that is the real reason he's loosening his anti-immigration policy. You don't think such a theory would warrant just a little...yannow... defending by me? Like some evidence or so?

Speaking of evidence, you still haven't even posted any circumstantial evidence, yet. Instead you're just offended about my... tone, I guess? To the point where you're actually inventing new insults. I mean, I did call your theory stupid and absurd, so if you need to be offended about me not sugar-coating my criticism, you don't actually need to invent insults. Or do a version of "So what you're saying is..." by painting my criticism of your theory as "you're saying that one must trust government absolutely?!".

[Montegriffo]

I'm crazy for saying the Notre Dame fire deserves investigation. You state people must absolutely agree with the Macron governments declaration on the fire, a decision made within hours.

And you call me crazy and reactionary. You ever seen a government statement you questioned?

I don't think anyone is going to say that the fire doesn't need investigating.
There are no absolutes until all the evidence is presented to an enquiry.

You seem to be basing your theory on the early dismissal of arson and nothing else.

I think it's obvious where you are getting these ideas from so if we want to change the subject to gullibility it may not be in your favour.

The media immediately came out and said the fire was most likely an accident due to a renovation project — any discussion of possible terrorism or arson was shut down.

Several hundred churches in France have been vandalized and desecrated by radical secularists and Muslims in the past year, but all speculation of terrorism was totally shut down and dubbed a ‘conspiracy theory.’

Now it may be a “computer glitch” and could take 2 to 3 months to figure out what happened. Weird.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2019/0 ... -happened/

Ps, welcome back

[Speaker to Animals]

This little shit right here:

Construction first began on the Catholic cathedral in 1163. For 850 years, the house of God was a fixture of the Paris skyline and so it also became a house of man, "part of our French destiny," as Macron tweeted Monday.

"House of Man"



Stop electing degenerates, people..

[pineapplemike]

bleh