Are all skeptics considered mentally unstable now?

[Philosoraptor]

What about us paranoid people who see plots and hoaxes everywhere? Am I unbalanced? Should I seek help?

If I question W, am I automatically given the crazy sign with the finger to the head?

How am I supposed to NOT be suspicious of bush and blair?

I don't care for being dismissed as crazy for being suspicious, but I also don't give a fuck anymore.

[Bill McBlueState]

1. how do you define skeptic?

It sounds like your definition of skeptic might differ from that of people who consider themselves skeptics.

[magellan]

2. I hope I am crazy

It'd be nice to wake up in a nice warm hospital room and discover BushCo and all that they've wrought was nothing but a brain fart.

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[zanne]

11. Well, I've been seeing YOU everywhere...

Telling us we're paranoid. (And with a low message count and lots of disruptors here lately, do you really expect alot of us to believe YOU)?

[Norquist Nemesis]

12. Just woke up and it seems they've really come out of the woodwork

this morning. Mods are doing a great job, thankfully!

[Jacobin]

4. No. Some just ignore facts to jump to illogical conclusion

Why do some think that muslims are not mad enough at US foreign policy to retaliate?

Are there no consequences when we invade and blow up countries to steal their resources?

I don't think that makes a fucking bit of sense to ignore that factor.

[TahitiNut]

5. My skepticism is inversely proportional to the evidence.

:shrug: Others seem to have a different correlation.

[dogday]

6. What is the problem with being suspicious?

I would say the administration has given us just cause to be suspicious of everything they do.... Iraq alone makes me question everything.....

[zanne]

7. Anyone with the capacity to absorb information is paranoid now.

Unless your short-term memory has been damaged by accident or disease, experience tells you to beware any terror info coming from the administration.

[Tandalayo_Scheisskopf]

8. When you consider...

That the root of the word skeptic is the greek word skeptos which means "up in the air", it is sometimes apparent that those who call themselves skeptics are, perhaps, a bit wrong in their self-estimation. Perhaps, in the interest of accuracy, they should call themselves what they are:

Debunkers.

And, in some cases, just full of shit as that and those they attack. ;-)

[bowens43]

9. The fact that we're paranoid

doesn't mean that they aren't out to get us.

As far as this government and it's lapdogs are concerned, in my opinion EVERYTHING they say should be considered to be a lie until proved otherwise.

[Virginia Dare]

10. Yes, you are nuts....

and by the way they did indeed find WMD's in Iraq, 18 crazy terrorists being led by another crazy terrorist hiding out in a cave somewhere in Afghanistan came out of absolutely nowhere, using only boxcutters, took over three American airliners and flew them into the WTC and the Pentagon on 9/11/01 with no challenge at all from NORAD or the U.S. Air Force, oh, and Bush won the elections in 2000 and 2004 fair and square. Carry on.

[Spider Jerusalem]

13. There's a large difference between scepticism and paranoia.

It's perfectly reasonable to ask questions, especially in the absence of convincing evidence; it's quite another to jump to wild and unfounded conclusions born out of fear and loathing.

Illustration of the difference: a sceptic questions the efficacy of fluoridation of drinking water; a paranoid proclaims that flouridation of drinking water is a sinister plot to taint our precious bodily fluids, or increase the rate of mental retardation, or keep the population sedated, or what have you.

Or in this particular instance: a sceptic questions whether such a plot as that described could have been effectively carried out undetected; a paranoid (or as some might have it, a madman) concludes that the plot, its discovery by British intelligence, and its announcement (and the timing thereof), are merely the subtle manouevrings of some Machiavellian chess-master, playing a game of distraction aimed at the American public (and if this were the case, why Britain and not America?).

[The Magistrate]

24. Hear Hear, Sir!

Well said indeed!

[Spider Jerusalem]

25. Thank you, sir.

'Logic is like the sword; those who appeal to it shall perish by it.'

[jobycom]

27. Well said! And I'll add that wild, baseless paranoia

undermines those who are asking legitimate questions. They got lumped together, and the legitimate questions get labeled as crazy.

[originalpckelly]

14. Quite frankly, I think Skinner is a GOP operative...

why else would he post this:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=1872231&mesg_id=1872231

:sarcasm:

Not everything is about us.
Think about the 1950s:
There really were communist spies in the US government. There were also innocent people who were persecuted by HUAC and in the Senate Joe McCarthy, and were not communists at all.

There really are terrorists who want to kill Americans.
There are also innocent people (or at least harmless people) who have been persecuted by this government.

The world is not clear, and sometimes it is hard to see through the BS politicians spew. The fact that some politicians have decided to use terrorism as a political tool does not remove the original terrorists who were there. (If anything, the abuse of our fear is making us less secure.)

[bryant69]

15. Hmmm would you rather be trated that way?

If those of us who disagreed with you just coddled you and said "Yes that's right, your right?"

Or if we disagree with you would you like to hear that disagreement?

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[muriel_volestrangler]

16. Anyone who connects the arrests in London to the Lamont primary

needs a long vacation, or something else to stop an unhealthy obsession. They need to learn about world affairs, such as the fact that there are wars going on in the Middle East, with far more important happenings than Democratic nominees. There are ready made happenings in the world that could 'distract from Lamont' any time they wanted. Only DU went crazy over Lamont beating Lieberman.

[sgxnk]

18. it's really an amazing me me me hubris

i agree.

we are talking a frigging democratic primary in connecticut (sp?)

the idea that the (yet another) latest terrorist plot is just a distraction in that respect is just so patently absurd

conspiracies are notoriously difficult to promote, and keep under wraps

you have dozens of british leo's involved in this longterm investigation and its all a plot to make up for lamont? yup, there all in on it. they get free fish and chips for lifetime, and usa quality dental work in exchange for keeping mum. (in the usa, leo's keep quiet, but in england they keep mum. or something)

it really is amazing how some people are their own worst enemy

by being completely self absorbed paranoid dorks

[treestar]

19. I don't think that's the point

It is the publicity given this particular plot.

At any time some lame plot can be found.

Though it requires thinking the MSM is in lockstep with the admnistration. Though that is probably not true, they are easily manipulated by the current administration.

[Name removed]

23. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Swamp Rat]

17. I may be a 'nutty' skeptic but at least I am not a psycho killer

:D

[treestar]

20. It's the black and white thinking

To raise an issue gets equated with believing in it. If I say MIHOP is a possibility the responses will get as if I believe MIHOP absolutely. It's the black and white thinker's inability to deal with unresolved issues. If you raise the issue, they immediately resort to equating that with a thorough belief in the conspiracy theory.

Sort of like raising the issue that maybe the Israelis are wrong to bomb Lebanon. That kind of mind can only assume you are a "supporter of Hezbollah." Same thing with raising an issue that maybe it is not a good idea for the US to attack Iraq. That kind of mind can only see even raising that issue as by a "supporter of Al Qaeda."

[Beelzebud]

21. When the media says something you MUST believe it!!!!

The media would NEVER lie about anything!

The U.K. would NEVER help the Bushies lie about anything!

The timing of this is just one HUGE coincidence.

Just like the coincidence that we were having a military drill on 9/11, in which fake airplanes were being flown into fake buildings.

Just like it was a coincidence that there was a terror drill in London in the subway the day they were hit.

It's all just a coincidence. Don't mistrust your media. They have done NOTHING to make you suspect them.

[Odin2005]

22. There is a difference between a Sceptic and a Conspiracy Theorist.

Sceptics don't beleive what the powers that be tell them without data. Conspiracy Theorists try to tie everying into some shady HIDDEN organization pulling strings (PNAC isn't hidden so it doesn't count). I am the first, not the second.

[Philosoraptor]

26. ?

[earth mom]

28. Don't let the naysayers get you down.

While I don't buy the Lamont/Lieberman tie in that's being flung around today, I also don't believe one word outta of the reTHUGS or the corporate media whores.

Today is S.S.D.D: just hyping more terra terra terra to control the masses. :puke: