Only when the usual/legal means to maintain/extend control does not work (that happens frequently).
--really? i always thought that the threat of unemployment and bankruptcies worked pretty effectively as control mechanisms, which hardly requires a 'conspiracy'. --------------------------------------------- Do U remember the Maine? or the Tonkin gulf? It would be not the first time that a US government simulates to be attacked (even if it costs some American lifes) in order to push its agenda.
-- great, and the likelihood that it was not 'orchestrated" by bush et al? does our critique of the war on terror decrease even a tiny bit as a result? ---------------------------------------------------- I'd contextualize: in the summer 2001 Bush popularity was at an historical low and still falling according the polls, while the economy was in a similar if not worse situation. Then there are the oil issues which U know. A lot of reasons to find a casus belli.
--really? why not do it in fall of 2002 or january of 2003? that way he'd guarantee his reelection? pretty lousy timing on Bush's part it would seem. maybe there are conspirators who conspired to make sure that Bush conspired at the wrong time. -------------------------------------------------------------------- "Conspiracists" seems also to give more importance to internal/political factors, which are quite unconsidered by "anti-conspiracists":
--hardly. the issue at hand is, in the end, what does it matter if there was a 'conspiracy' or not. does it change our critique of, say, health care funding? social security funding? unemployment insurance? right to organize a union?...many of the folks who are key in the conspiracy movement are also anti-union and have a romantic view of the old days... (I think of people like Moorer, Singlaub, buchanan, etc. as prime examples)...How do I know, from conspiracy 'theory', that their views on unions are not the ones I should take? Or their views on funding of welfare are wrong? ------------------------------------------------ Hermann Goering, interviewed by Gustave Gilbert during the Easter recess of the Nuremberg
--you're using a quote from a master conspiracy theorist like this to make your point! wow...we've come full circle... --------------------------- What would happen in the US if it will be discovered that conspiracists are right in saying that 9/11 was a setup?
--the more important question, what will happen if it is not discovered? If it is discovered, I dunno, we'd have a change in leadership maybe? A Ford instead of a Nixon? A Cheney instead of a Bush? A Gephardt instead of a Dean? ----------------------------------------- Should not we be interested in the truth in/for itself?
---sure, we should be interested in truth. but let's face it, there's already plenty of material to use against capitalism that is out there in the open. and it's much more damaging than any of the conspiracies that you can come up with...