Conspiracy Talk Archive September 20 2012

 

Use our posting form to send us conpiracy talk.

20 Sep 2012 22:07:04
Ed with the two police officers being killed recently, why do the government refuse to sufficiently protect and arm our police?
Jman {Ed001's Note - how do you mean? Giving them guns just meant that all the criminals then had to have guns, arming them is not the answer. They have plenty of protection.}

Believable2 Unbelievable1

I'm not saying all police are over-zealous , but some i've come across i wouldn't trust with water-pistols.

JR

Agree5 Disagree1

Agreed i do feel for the families of the policewomen but how many cases of police have actually been shot and killed in say 50 years?i guess not many,it would open a can of worms if the the police were armed.
frankyscouse

Agree3 Disagree0

I have sympathy for the 2 officers who were shot but I would be very concerned if there were any knee jerk reactions.
How many cover ups would there be if the cops were suddenly armed and went round shooting innocent people? terrible terrible idea in my opinion. We already have armed response there is no need for any more cops walking round shooting people. Maybe its time the person in charge who sent 2 unarmed officers round there as a 'routine' call instead of the armed response team should take some responsibilty eh? No doubt in my mind that a major failure had occurd from this decision.

Huws

Agree2 Disagree0

In the recent past, police have proven they can't be armed. The classic case was Jean Charles de Menezes, the innocent Brazilian guy who was shot dead just after 7/7 London bombings. There are reasons police have an armed division.

If the police were to be armed, and that's a big if, the shouldn't have proper rounds. A rubber bullet can be just as effective. Some police are dangerous enough without a gun. I have lost count of the amount of times a copper has cut me up or damn near rammed me on the roads. Some think because they are police that they're above the law and that on its own is the most dangerous thing, it also give genuine police an extremely bad name.

Aaron

Agree3 Disagree0

O come on that shooting was to take away the lime light from the 7/7 bombings. And guess what it worked, to most of the media believers.

Agree0 Disagree1

Even then, the armed division are as dodgy. Thinking back to a story years ago when a guy was shot dead (cant remember where in uk) carrying a table leg in a bag, police thought it was a gun. What happened to the two police women recently was a tragedy, but arming more police ain't the answer. Imagine if they were armed at the riots last year?

Agree0 Disagree0

20 Sep 2012 18:40:43
Quite old now but the Kony 2012 is just ridiculous, he's not been seen since 2006, there's been several Ugandans claiming he's dead and oil was found near Uganda just months before the video was made, opinions?
LP

Believable1 Unbelievable1

20 Sep 2012 11:49:57
Hi folks, I was just wondering about any potential cures for chronic illnesses that were being held back by the pharmaceutical companies. I was diagnosed with diabetes 16 years ago and the Doctor's back then believed a cure would b on the market within 10 years. Was this just a bit of miss guided optimism or is there something more sinister happening to make sure that we stay I'll and they keep the billions rolling in.

Believable1 Unbelievable0

There is a cure although not readily available its a pancreatic beta cell transplant. and its not the pharmaceutical companies its the government who hold things up as they are not willing to pay for expensive cures when reasonably priced treatments are available. its all to do with economics and quality assured life years (qalys) etc. for example oral insulin has been available for a while now but its too expensive.
Gman {Ed001's Note - actually, you have it the wrong way round, they are not willing to provide a cure when expensive drugs can be used for years. Ask the guy who invented the cure for ulcers why it was blocked for so long.}

Agree0 Disagree0

I have to agree with ed, I've been on insulin for the last 16 years, surely if there is a cure then it would b cheaper than keeping me on insulin and the other 2 drugs I'm on, statin and ramapril, for the next 40 years. Andy T

Agree0 Disagree2

They don't expect you to live 40 years.

Agree0 Disagree1

The government are having a laugh when they say its too expensive for this and that! They have shelled out millions bailing out other countries and still they dont look after there own people, corrupt comes to mind! I bet they have had a cure for cancer for years now!

Agree6 Disagree0

If this sounds disrespectful in any way then I apologise profusely. The reason cures aren't handed out, in my opinion, is so that things like diabetes can keep people ticking over until their bodies start to slow down earlier than they should, with the hope the body won't stay strong for too long.

Again if that's offensive to anybody with diabetes I apologise. I don't mean it in an offensive way.

Aaron

Agree2 Disagree0

Ed i think its a bit of both say 60-40 or 70-30 though to the companies, they make millions selling this stuff and the govt is too tight to buy stuff. {Ed001's Note - all down to the corporations, the govt just do as they tell them. It would be far cheaper to just cure people, so to suggest the govt are too tight to pay for it is nonsense, I am afraid.}

Agree0 Disagree0

I agree with you there Aaron. It certainly aids population control.

Agree0 Disagree0

That's exactly my point bud. Whether its diabetes, aids or even the flu, the government want to control the population. Look at David Cameron said (I think it was him anyway) families should limit how many kids they have to 2 or 3. I have 5 kids and if he was to say that to my face I'd of knocked him out cold. My kids mean everything to me and he basically slapped every parent who has 3 or more kids in the face with that statement.

Aaron

Agree1 Disagree0

I agree with what you are saying aaron , but you can have as many kids as you want so long as YOU can afford to pay for them i have 1 and he is now into everything , i went to school with a lad who has now got 7 kids and the council have given him two 3 bed semis knocked into 1 , why should he have two houses ? they could give me 1 so i can rent it out ? its the same story you and your 5 kids will be getting alot of money from my taxs !!..............andy.

Agree1 Disagree0

Andy I don't rely on yours or anyone else's taxes. I work my balls off every single day for my wages. We do struggle sometimes but we manage most of the time. It's a typical stereotype that people assume, just because I have 5 kids doesn't make me a Jeremy Kyle watching, dole scrounging person who fleeces the state. Making assumptions like that can get you into a lot of trouble. Next time you make an assumption, get your facts straight. That has seriously pissed me off. So take your taxes an shove up your arse, I have paid my way since I was 16 and I'm now 30 and ill continue to do so until circumstances tell me otherwise. I do agree with you tho. If you can't afford to have kids then wait until a time when you can. We lived in a 3 bedroom house and had my 2 daughters in one room, my 3 boys in another and me and the mrs in the other. I would never dream of asking for two houses knocked into one. That is just taking the mick.

Aaron {Ed001's Note - do you get child benefit or whatever it is called these days though?}

Agree0 Disagree1

Yea we get child benefit ed, I know what you're going to say about it too. My point is I'm not claiming stupid amounts of money in rent and council tax and every other benefit under the sun. We live together and the only benefit we get is child benefit. Everything is paid for from my wages and the child benefit ie rent, council tax, electric, gas, tv licence, shopping. The way Andy put it across was we was claiming for everything and I done naff all else. And my point is, not everybody with large families are benefit reliant. That stereotype makes my blood boil. I get it when I'm out with my wife and kids, the looks people give and comments they make is enough to turn anybody insane. If the saw how hard I graft for the wage I get they would certainly sing a different tune.
I have been to job interviews and told the interviewer I have 5 kids and they have laughed and said "I wouldn't bother working". That is not the example I want to set for my kids, they will know you get nothing for free in this world. Yes we get child benefit, yes it's more than your "normal sized" family but that makes no difference due to food bills, clothing bills and other such things. Sorry about the rant, as I said, I'm not being stereotyped by somebody who knows jack sh*t about me.

Aaron {Ed001's Note - I was just pointing out that he might have been referring to your child benefit, which I know a lot of people that don't have kids are unhappy about.}

Agree0 Disagree0

Ed I can understand that people who don't have kids will not be happy about it. There is a lot about the benefit system I'm not happy with, like foreigners coming here claiming benefits for kids who live in their home country and sending the money back. People who sit on their arses all their lives claiming everything and more and what happens? An interview at a job centre every 3 months and still on benefits 20 years down the road. People who genuinely can't work thru genuine disability I fully understand and support.This country and its insane government and benefit system is joke and we are the laughing stock of the EU.

Aaron {Ed001's Note - I wasn't having a go mate, just making an observation. In my opinion the benefits system is set up to make people feel like they owe the government. It makes it much easier to recruit people to fight your wars if they feel they owe you.}

Agree0 Disagree0

Spot on Ed. that's exactly how it feels. Then on the other hand they make people think the government owe them, with stupid taxes ie the pasty tax, I know it got scrapped, ridiculous amount of tax on fuel and the like. But others feel like the whole world owes them and claim anything and everything under the sun. I didn't mean to gallop thru on my high horse, I get so frustrated with misguided assumptions and scrounging fuc*ers that its like keyboard vomit. I start tapping away and can't stop.
Again apologies for the rant.

Aaron {Ed001's Note - no worries mate, we all need rants at times, hence the MMT site!}

Agree0 Disagree0

Yea I think I should check that out

Aaron

Agree0 Disagree0

19 Sep 2012 23:31:25
just watched the premier on the animal channel off mermaids being discovered not sure what to believe to be honest,2004 a load of whales were washed up on the beaches all over the world, whales being washed up is not strange as it has happened before but in 2004 it was a regular occurrence and it was following were the whales were migrating to ,everywhere were they were washed up were navel/fbi officers cordoned off the beach and taking something like bodybags,one thing is for sure the navy were using sonic bursts that scared or killed the wales,a lot of the stuff was hard to believe , will let everyone make there own minds up,
frankyscouse

Believable0 Unbelievable0

Program was complete fiction mate, along the lines of that dragon program a few years back where they made it as a documentary and a 'what if they existed' type work of fiction.

I quite like those programs though, something different!

RED_SKY

Agree1 Disagree0

Yeh mate it seemed a bit ott the thing that got me thinking thou was the presence of the us navy every time the whales beached .
frankyscouse

Agree0 Disagree0

Sorry franky, I didn't read properly, thought you were asking about mermaids, haha! The sonar/dead whales thing is interesting,have you ever heard of the 'Bloop'?

If not, look it up, I'm in work so can't refresh my memory but if I remember rightly, scientists in some vast ocean detected the bloop/sonar of some gigantic creature way bigger than any whale.

Could it have been unknown weaponry being tested?

RED_SKY

Agree0 Disagree0

Deffo testing something red,the whales internal organs were according to scientist smashed to pieces as they tried to get away from the new type of sonar they were testing,the thing was it was killing something else hence which the authorities cordoned off areas and interrogated a few people on what they saw.
frankyscouse

Agree0 Disagree0