Jump to content
A Note on Topic Titles – Be Clear & Descriptive!

Infidel Dog

Senior Member
 View Profile  See their activity

  • Posts

    5,868

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    28

 Content Type 

Everything posted by Infidel Dog

  1. Infidel Dog
    Which dramatic change in climate is that? Do you mean some current heat wave? Probably. I hear about that every summer. Then crickets for the inevitable cold spell in the winter. Some have this weird perception it's climate if it happens in the summer but weather if it happens in the winter. Where does that come from? I know but I wonder if you do?
  2. Infidel Dog
    In fact... Next time, expect Ray Epps to be called to testify. Providing he doesn't get Hillaryed, of course.
  3. Infidel Dog
    Trump claimed his people requested National Guard support for January 6. According to him the capitol police under Nancy Pelosi refused it. Left friendly media behind what they laughingly call "fact checkers" called that false on the grounds they claimed there was no evidence. But the right-wing media outlet, Just the News found this: https://justthenews.com/sites/default/files/2022-06/USCPJan.6Timeline.pdf They state it is an, "official timeline of the Jan. 6 tragedy assembled by Capitol Police shows that a Defense Department official reached out to a Capitol Police deputy chief, Sean Gallagher, on Jan. 2, 2021 to see if a request for troops was forthcoming, but the offer was quickly rejected after a consultation with then-Chief Steve Sund." See, if Pelosi had allowed cross-examination at her sham hearing you would know about that, Mikey. Not to worry. Hang on. When the Republicans take over the House in November you'll be hearing that and other evidence Nancy wouldn't let you know about as the Republicans come out with more balanced hearings.
  4. Infidel Dog
    Who's going to determine that? You mean Pelosi's third world style, witch hunt committee? That meme above is the closest thing we've seen to cross examination concerning anything to do with that fake Jan. 6 committee. Without cross examination such a fake committee determines nothing. It's third world, banana republic, bad imitation, kangaroo court anti-justice.
  5. Infidel Dog
    Buddy you asked me specifically for another example of proposed inciting then accuse me of whataboutism for giving you one. Are you for real? They want to indict Trump for inciting but he never did it. Meanwhile they ignore the guy who actually was inciting as shown on multiple examples of video evidence. I'm not sure what your problem is. That it happened or that I noticed?
  6. Infidel Dog
    For inciting you mean? Isn't that what that phony, Mickey Mouse committee is trying to get Trump for? Stephen Colbert maybe should have been charged for incitement but as you no doubt know but pretend you don't there's a two tier justice system in America during the Biden regime so being one of your fellow Progs he skated: https://www.lawenforcementtoday.com/69-year-old-cancer-patient-given-60-days-colbert-staffs-case-dismissed/ Meanwhile a 69 year old Grandmother went to prison on the same day after being convicted of some trumped up charge they're calling "Parading." https://www.ktvb.com/article/news/local/208/sit-down-with-pam-hemphill-who-was-the-capitol-on-january-6/277-70b9504d-4eb6-4d6d-bf65-b3d334b506d9
  7. Infidel Dog
    Video of Epps repeatedly urging crowds to enter the capitol building tells us there is something to it. Other than over and over repeating 'nothing to see here' and calling the observable filmed fact before your face a conspiracy what have you got to convince us we need to try to unsee what is front of our lying eyes? You've got the usual prog special of nothing, right?
  8. Infidel Dog
    Typical Progressive. An obvious observation of something that doesn't add up is necessarily a "crackpot theory." You couldn't live with the failures of "progressive" thought if you weren't trained to ignore the obvious I guess. The idea it's incongruous that Ray Epps is ignored by the Jan. 6 committee while Cassidy Hutchinson is glorified by it is an obvious observation. It's not the Moon landing's a fake or Holocaust denial. That should be obvious. You know you're dealing with a Prog when it's not.
  9. Infidel Dog
    OK, I checked it out. Sorry, nothing new there. Same old tricks of holocaust denial we've seen for decades. Bits of minutia offered up as proof against the mountains of documentation, video, pictorial, and witness evidence. Casts shade on some segment here and claims this disproves everything. Pseudo science details there where nobody who hasn't gone that deep can know enough to say 'wait a minute' all you've really got there is a 'maybe' with a complimentary 'so what.' It all proves nothing but lets you pretend you know stuff you don't actually have a clue about. No. I'm not going get into the dirt there and muck around with you. What's that old Will Rogers line? It's like wrestling a pig. You just get dirty and the pig likes it. I am curious though. What possesses you guys to want to waste so much time digging so deep into that particular BS minutia pile. I suspect there's a certain amount of confirmation bias. You were flavored to accept the doctrine before you were told about it, I imagine. How did that happen?
  10. Infidel Dog
    " Police identified and applauded the 22-year-old who shot and killed a gunman who opened fire on a Greenwood, Indiana, shopping mall. The gunman, who killed three people before being killed, was identified Monday as 20-year-old Jonathan Sapirman..." https://abcnews.go.com/US/authorities-applaud-armed-citizen-killed-20-year-indiana/story?id=87019202
  11. Infidel Dog
    It bothers me to see you walk around ignorant of something you should know if you want to join a discussion on conspiracy theories so try these two from this morning: How many more times will Adam Schiff claim to have the goods on Trump? and
  12. Infidel Dog
    Ever heard of Adam Schiff? Spoiler, he's not conservative. Never met a Prog flavored conspiracy he didn't want to push though. What about Russiagate? Ever heard of that one? Adam did. Big time. Every day for a year on CNN.
  13. Infidel Dog
    I wouldn't have made the assumption I knew the answer then tried to pretend I didn't do that or didn't have a horse in the race when it was made clear both propositions were false. You did that though.
  14. Infidel Dog
    That might be the biggest turd of BS you've tried pass on here since the one about you being a Conservative. The corporate left favors an expanded government presence. Equity of outcome over equality of opportunity. Power over the people by an expanded government. It doesn't matter that they now believe they can manipulate that government to support their aims. That's still left. Corporatism. Heard of it? It's non partisan. "Corporatism: The influence of large business corporations in politics." There is a corporate left. But go ahead, show us why we shouldn't believe our lying eyes and fall in line with the smarmy claim it isn't there.
  15. Infidel Dog
    No you're not. I'm not even going to read past that. Let's see the title up close to make up our own minds: "Why are Conservatives more susceptible to believing conspiracy theories?" Now let's ask ourselves, is the person asking that question trying to push a point? Doesn't it seem like the person asking that question has already answered it for himself and with a little support would be all over the gloat of what he believes is his cleverness for bringing it up.? Sorry, pardoner. I won't be apologizing for heading you off that pass. BTW, in case you missed it, his title doesn't ask if you believe the claim. It assumes the truth of it then asks why that is. Don't pee on my head and tell me it's raining, Bud.
  16. Infidel Dog
    This is a good one on Paul and Nancy's scamming their way into millions with the help of insider politics knowledge. (The meme of the day on Hunter Biden is pretty hilarious too - speaking of getting rich by being inside the political bubble:)
  17. Infidel Dog
    Go for it. Let's see if you've got anything new.
  18. Infidel Dog
    Oh and cut the crap. I read the title to this thread. I know what you're trying to push.
  19. Infidel Dog
    The category "Conspiracy Theories" is precisely the sort of category Wikipedia's leftist editor managers would take control of to push the idea Conspiracies are property of the right. I have a theory why. I've noticed every time I buy a new car I'm surprised after I bought it to look around on the road and see how many cars like mine are out there. Now those brands of cars didn't all of a sudden become more popular because I bought one. And I didn't buy one because it was popular. I'd never noticed them before the salesman convinced me I needed one. But then I did buy it and was surprised to discover there was so much support for my decision. The leftist managing editors of Wikipedia take control and manage the Conspiracy Theory category to make it look like only Conservatives are interested in conspiracies because of what you said here: "Also, I was very clear to say: IN MY EXPERIENCE, meaning that's what I've encountered in most social media sites I visit. That's how Conservatives come across." There's an agenda to make sure those susceptible notice the bits of conspiracies they want them to notice. And what I notice on social media is it's lefties pushing hard on the idea all or at least most conspiracy theories are property of the right. Doesn't matter that that's false. Once it's in your head Wiki will confirm how smart you think you are for noticing. Even though you noticed nothing. The thought was put there for you. Just like the friendly car salesman did for me. BTW the leftie managing editors of Wiki also have deep affection for the Global Warming Climate Change category.
  20. Infidel Dog
    Some time before even Gore there was this Progressive think tank called the 'Club of Rome.' Every prog elitist from the Bushes to the Clintons to Queen Beatrix of the Netherlands were members. Still are possibly. It was big on influencing policies in the UN. They held a conference where they decided they needed a major threat to bring governments together in a kind of Global Governance. They decided their best bet was to invent an environmental emergency. That isn't even theory. I'd invite deniers to look it up. It's documented fact.
  21. Infidel Dog
    I was watching the cable TV station Rush used to call MSLSD this morning. They're really upset on MSLSD. Apparently they have some new bill they're Democrat masters are trying to pass, supposedly to create more green energy or something. I'll call it the "Let's make gas even more expensive bill." They're very upset though because outlier Democrat won't vote the party line. One of the things they're pouting about is apparently Senator Joe has fossil fuel connections in his portfolio. So they're whimpering and whining pretty hard about this but what doesn't seem to bother them is... https://nypost.com/2022/07/16/paul-pelosi-buys-tech-chip-stocks-before-big-subsidy-vote/
  22. Infidel Dog
    But hey... I did notice something I connected with on the little Wikipedia scan you had me do. There used to be a forum for conspiracy theories. I believe it was called Above Top Secret. Is it still around? I'm not sure. But I remember there was a category for "Global Warming." That one started out pushing the idea there was a conspiracy pushed by what they call " global warming deniers." However as the category began to fill with posts they pretty much had to notice the real conspiracy was the idea the world was coming to an inevitable end as a result of too much nice weather. When you point out what they're actually proposing this whole alleged "consensus" pushed in the original proposal goes poof. There is no "97% consensus" of what they began calling "Climate Change" once you get them to admit what they're really pushing is a proposed, inevitable, calamitous catastrophe of human caused global warming. There is no convincing science of that. Don't forget the word "inevitable" if you choose to respond to that. This supposed 97 % consensus of such pushed by "Progressive" ideologues like Barrack Obama and Wikipedia is the actual conspiracy theory. A 97% consensus of a catastrophe of anthropogenic global warming is a bogus "consensus." It doesn't exist. It's false, fake, a hoax, a conspiracy theory. But don't think you'll ever get that fact past the leftist editors at Wikipedia.
  23. Infidel Dog
    I scanned through that article. It seems to be more just evidence of the well known leftist bias of Wikipedia editors. They'll pick a little bit from here and make sure nobody is able to post anything that might cast shade on the larger left favoring idea they're trying to push in the article. However, I couldn't find anything on this "Trump as Godsend" thing you were claiming. I don't see how it would be a conspiracy theory even if I could find it. Satanism wouldn't be a conspiracy theory. Satanism is a fact. It exists. Satanist rituals or icons however might be attached to a conspiracy theory. I believe such things are connected to that College cult the Bushes were supposedly connected to. I believe it was called Blood and Bones or something like that. But that would be a conspiracy theory leftists would be more connected to so I'd be surprised if it would make it past the leftist editors at Wikipedia. Hey there's a conspiracy theory I'll be proud to stand behind. Leftist editors push Wikipedia left. Me and one of the original creators of Wikipedia support that conspiracy theory fact. Wikipedia has been propagandized by leftist ideologues that have taken control of the editing process. Now as to you wanting me to recognize something you feel as factual evidence of something thanks for the chuckle.
  24. Infidel Dog
    Explain this to us then, O wise one. Why would the Pelosi committee on Jan. 6 call on an obvious fraud like Cassidy Hutchinson to testify in front of this Jan. 6 committee spewing stories of "heard it from a friend who heard it from a friend" concerning the Jan. 6 riot but Epps - who we have video evidence of him rallying crowds to storm the capitol building - was not? Surely you're not suggesting that Nancy's supposed investigation of the Jan. 6 Fedserection is fake and only about hopefully stirring up problems for her political opposition.
  25. Infidel Dog
    Just in case you're wondering what I'm talking about. Watch the one below starting at the 2 minute mark. It will show you how fast the "freedom over one's body" thing falls apart when an adult applies a little critical thinking.
×
×
  • Create New...