*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7363
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Did Rowbotham use Conspiracy Theories?
« Reply #20 on: June 06, 2020, 02:37:46 AM »
Not really. Notice that most of those source tip-toe around their words and only "condemn racism" and "condemn the killing by police" in very vague terms. I don't see any of them condemning the United States. Iran seems to be the only one trying to attack the US as a country in that, while everyone else is more reluctant.

Also, those sources are talking about and reacting to world news articles. This would be somewhat different than a country trying to expose the USA's human rights violations in a war zone. They rarely try to expose each other. At most you ever see them talking about news articles and current events.
« Last Edit: June 06, 2020, 02:46:17 AM by Tom Bishop »
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

Re: Did Rowbotham use Conspiracy Theories?
« Reply #21 on: June 06, 2020, 02:55:55 AM »
Not really. Notice that most of those source tip-toe around their words and only "condemn racism" and "condemn the killing by police" in very vague terms. I don't see any of them condemning the United States. Iran seems to be the only one trying to attack the US as a country in that, while everyone else is more reluctant.

Also, those sources are talking about and reacting to world news articles. This would be somewhat different than a country trying to expose the USA's human rights violations in a war zone. They rarely try to expose each other. At most you ever see them talking about news articles and current events.

I think you have an unreasonably narrow interpretation of what it means for governments to "call out the US for human rights abuses."  Is it only "calling the US out" if it's a formal censure at the UN or something?  These are widely reported direct quotes from dozens of government officials from around the world saying that what is happening in the US that started the protests is bad and shouldn't happen.

I suspect you don't read much about actual international relations - countries call each other out all the time for things that happen in war zones, it's just not front page on NYT WashPost or the AP, etc.

Pop quiz - what has so far been the deadliest conflict (in terms of numbers dead) in the 21st century so far?  It's not even close - the number one conflict has led to more deaths than all other conflicts in the 21st century combined. Hint: the US is not a part of this war.

And guess what? If you didn't even know about this conflict, my guess is that you also don't know what's been said about it by government officials around the world. A huge amount of human rights abuses occurred in it, and were of course condemned by reasonable governments around the world.

The problem is that there's too much news to read. If it doesn't concern our own countries, we hear about it far less, as a rule.








« Last Edit: June 06, 2020, 02:58:21 AM by existoid »

*

Offline Tom Bishop

  • Zetetic Council Member
  • **
  • Posts: 7363
  • Flat Earth Believer
    • View Profile
Re: Did Rowbotham use Conspiracy Theories?
« Reply #22 on: June 06, 2020, 03:24:15 AM »
Quote
I suspect you don't read much about actual international relations - countries call each other out all the time for things that happen in war zones, it's just not front page on NYT WashPost or the AP, etc.

Can you post a source? I want to see two NATO allies exposing each other on a serious criminal military matter.
"The biggest problem in astronomy is that when we look at something in the sky, we don’t know how far away it is" — Pauline Barmby, Ph.D., Professor of Astronomy

Re: Did Rowbotham use Conspiracy Theories?
« Reply #23 on: June 06, 2020, 02:26:05 PM »
Quote
I suspect you don't read much about actual international relations - countries call each other out all the time for things that happen in war zones, it's just not front page on NYT WashPost or the AP, etc.

Can you post a source? I want to see two NATO allies exposing each other on a serious criminal military matter.

Why does it have to be Nato allies?  I would not argue that they have no incentive to cover any atrocities up, being you know, allies.

For minor things I’ve already posted a number of them thanks to JSS.

And the answer to my pop quiz is the Second Congo Civil War in which something like 4 million people have died between 1998 and 2008. Lots of atrocities in both sides and lots of governments around the world condemned them.

But before I post anything, explain to me why it must be NATO allies? (i’m guessing I can find some even for that but it will definitely take more digging for sure).

EDIT: scratch that I’ll mention just one off the top of my head:

Many government officials from many European countries condemned certain targeted drone killings in the Middle East during the Obama administration.  They framed it as due process and human rights violations.

I can link stuff about that if you would like, but it was pretty big news 12 or 10 years ago.

As I think of some more I’ll be happy to mention them.

But I still think you need to explain why it must be NATO allies because my argument does not hinge on that....
« Last Edit: June 06, 2020, 02:29:31 PM by existoid »

*

Offline GreatATuin

  • *
  • Posts: 239
  • It's turtles all the way down
    • View Profile
Re: Did Rowbotham use Conspiracy Theories?
« Reply #24 on: June 06, 2020, 02:56:18 PM »
OK then what about this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp#Criticism_and_condemnation

Quote
European leaders have also voiced their opposition to the internment center. On 13 January 2006, German Chancellor Angela Merkel criticized the U.S. detention of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay: "An institution like Guantánamo, in its present form, cannot and must not exist in the long term. We must find different ways of dealing with prisoners. As far as I'm concerned, there's no question about that," she declared in a 9 January interview to Der Spiegel. Meanwhile, in the UK, Peter Hain, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, stated during a live broadcast of Question Time (16 February 2006) that: "I would prefer that it wasn't there and I would prefer it was closed." His cabinet colleague and Former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Tony Blair, declared the following day that the center was "an anomaly and sooner or later it's got to be dealt with."

Germany and the UK are NATO allies, right?
Nearly all flat earthers agree the earth is not a globe.

you guys just read what you want to read

Re: Did Rowbotham use Conspiracy Theories?
« Reply #25 on: June 06, 2020, 03:02:11 PM »
OK then what about this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Guantanamo_Bay_detention_camp#Criticism_and_condemnation

Quote
European leaders have also voiced their opposition to the internment center. On 13 January 2006, German Chancellor Angela Merkel criticized the U.S. detention of prisoners at Guantánamo Bay: "An institution like Guantánamo, in its present form, cannot and must not exist in the long term. We must find different ways of dealing with prisoners. As far as I'm concerned, there's no question about that," she declared in a 9 January interview to Der Spiegel. Meanwhile, in the UK, Peter Hain, the Secretary of State for Northern Ireland, stated during a live broadcast of Question Time (16 February 2006) that: "I would prefer that it wasn't there and I would prefer it was closed." His cabinet colleague and Former Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, Tony Blair, declared the following day that the center was "an anomaly and sooner or later it's got to be dealt with."

Germany and the UK are NATO allies, right?

They absolutely are.

And here's some more:

Germany condemns a Nato attack in Pakistan which killed civilians:
https://www.thenewstribe.io/2011/11/28/germany-condemns-nato-attack-on-pakistan-sovereignty/#.TtUAnrIk6so

Denmark, a founding member of Nato, called for an investigation into that same attack:
https://archive.vn/20120717031927/http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/11074699-denmark-calls-on-pakistani-foreign-minister-for-condolences-on-the-nato-strike-on-pakistani-military-personnel

As did France, also part of Nato:
https://www.dawn.com/news/724665/un-wants-investigation-into-drone-attacks-in-pakistan

The designation that it must be NATO is highly arbitrary.  Here's condemnation of US military actions by the UN:
http://www.cnn.com/2009/WORLD/asiapcf/06/04/drone.attacks/



*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11777
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Did Rowbotham use Conspiracy Theories?
« Reply #26 on: June 06, 2020, 05:10:43 PM »
Out of curiosity, what is the ratio of incidents in which such a condemnation was issued to military/human rights crises in general? After all, the assertion was that this is "the norm".

Naturally, I'm not asking for you to actually compute the exact number. Think of it as a thought experiment.
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice

Re: Did Rowbotham use Conspiracy Theories?
« Reply #27 on: June 07, 2020, 10:57:47 AM »
Regarding the OP, since Rowbotham gave many public lectures I don't think he could have blamed a conspiracy against free speech, but I do wonder how many times he was asked how could he explain that in the previous centuries sailors and in general everyone with some interest was believing in a round earth.
Quote from: Pete Svarrior
these waves of smug RE'ers are temporary. Every now and then they flood us for a year or two in response to some media attention, and eventually they peter out. In my view, it's a case of "if it ain't broke, don't fix it".

Re: Did Rowbotham use Conspiracy Theories?
« Reply #28 on: June 09, 2020, 02:59:52 PM »
Out of curiosity, what is the ratio of incidents in which such a condemnation was issued to military/human rights crises in general? After all, the assertion was that this is "the norm".

Naturally, I'm not asking for you to actually compute the exact number. Think of it as a thought experiment.

I think this is actually a great point.

I would say that it is not necessarily the “norm” that countries that consider each other allies call each other out on bad behavior (unless the leadership has constituents which cause them to do so).  EDIT: I totally contradict myself below, as I've thought through these things in the past few days.   ???  :-X


And so it’s natural that the instances in which you find government leaders calling out an allied country are hot button Political issues like targeted drone killings and torturing prisoners.

Edit:
On the other hand, it can be argued that there are very few human rights violations and war crimes committed by these allied democracies, and every single time One is committed allies call them out on it.

If so, then it would not only be the norm but it would occur at a close to 100% rate.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2020, 04:52:04 PM by existoid »

Offline ChrisTP

  • *
  • Posts: 926
    • View Profile
Re: Did Rowbotham use Conspiracy Theories?
« Reply #29 on: June 09, 2020, 05:03:52 PM »
I think it's unfair to assume allies won't call each other out on stuff. There is turmoil in almost every small or large organization, country or whatever else. individual people trying to one up each other, various agendas that motivate people to 'grass' on others. It would be naive to think that just because two people are in Nato or the UN that they would always defend and cover up each others wrong doings.
Tom is wrong most of the time. Hardly big news, don't you think?

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11777
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Did Rowbotham use Conspiracy Theories?
« Reply #30 on: June 10, 2020, 02:46:32 PM »
On the other hand, it can be argued that there are very few human rights violations and war crimes committed by these allied democracies, and every single time One is committed allies call them out on it.
This is patently not the case on both fronts. Human rights violations are outrageously common among Western-style democracies, and these receive very little attention unless people take to the streets and start setting shit on fire over the issue.

Australia's treatment of surrounding nations and refugees comes to mind as an obvious one, and one that's regularly swept under the rug. How many governments have condemned Australia over its handling of Timor-Leste? Have you heard of the issue before I mentioned it just now?

I think it's unfair to assume allies won't call each other out on stuff.
Don't assume. Observe and conclude. Bring meaningful data to the table. "Thinking" about "assumptions" and what you do and don't personally find credulous is a useless waste of time.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2020, 02:50:57 PM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice

Re: Did Rowbotham use Conspiracy Theories?
« Reply #31 on: June 10, 2020, 04:08:14 PM »
On the other hand, it can be argued that there are very few human rights violations and war crimes committed by these allied democracies, and every single time One is committed allies call them out on it.
This is patently not the case on both fronts. Human rights violations are outrageously common among Western-style democracies, and these receive very little attention unless people take to the streets and start setting shit on fire over the issue.

Australia's treatment of surrounding nations and refugees comes to mind as an obvious one, and one that's regularly swept under the rug. How many governments have condemned Australia over its handling of Timor-Leste? Have you heard of the issue before I mentioned it just now?


Well, yes, I don't think I disagree with you so much. Let me break it down:

The discussion turned to a question from Tom about NATO allies calling each other out for rights violations in a war, specifically.  And that's the context I was writing under (just look at my posts in the thread about cop brutality in the US - I've stated like four times that all such cops should be condemned and stand trial).  And in that context of warcrimes, this was going to mostly be about unjust killings, which actually are fairly rare, and when they happen, those in charge ARE called out on it, generally speaking.

Now, you rightly say that human rights violations are outrageously common in Western democracies. Yes, sadly.  And we know this due to many reasons - from social media, to lawyers who witness them in court cases (I subscribe to this podcast, which routinely has stories of government malpractice:  https://ij.org/center-for-judicial-engagement/sc/weekly-podcast/
, to organizations like Amnesty International, and others.

In countries of millions upon millions of people, of course there will be plenty of instances of criminals who also happen to be government agents, because there are, well, a ton of government agents.  This doesn't excuse any of it. But it explains why it feels so commonplace. But that's sort of an artifact of the size of our samples and societies. If you're going to go down a road that Western democracies are worse, when it comes to human rights violations as non-democracies and authoritarian places like modern day China and Russia, or Kazakhstan or Saudi Arabia, etc.  Good luck.  It's just a banal way of saying that all human societies contain bad actors, including among their leaders and police.

Seeing this in the context of the whole population, this also leads to the obvious conclusion that the government agents and leaders who ARE honest and good cannot be expected to call out every single instance of human rights violations - no one can do that. Which is why we deal with data and databases for such things.

But when a particularly famous event is news around the world, you find other governments calling each other out routinely.

In this thread are links that cumulatively contain dozens and dozens of government officials from US allies condemning the police brutality, because this is big news. But some random violation of rights that happened in West Virginia, unknown to most except in the local area it happened?  Why would you expect a European leader to even know about that?

And as far as warzones, I also posted several links to condemnation of US military actions that were deemed bad. This is the norm - if a military event is publicized, and it is shown that the US acted poorly, other countries will absolutely call the US out on it.  I read widely about international relations, this is very much the norm.




























Offline ChrisTP

  • *
  • Posts: 926
    • View Profile
Re: Did Rowbotham use Conspiracy Theories?
« Reply #32 on: June 10, 2020, 04:37:26 PM »
Quote
Don't assume. Observe and conclude. Bring meaningful data to the table. "Thinking" about "assumptions" and what you do and don't personally find credulous is a useless waste of time.
It seems we're saying near enough the same thing? ??? It would be assuming to suggest that allies hide and cover up illegal activities for each other, because by definition you'd have to assume they were doing that.
Tom is wrong most of the time. Hardly big news, don't you think?

*

Offline Pete Svarrior

  • e
  • Planar Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11777
  • (>^_^)> it's propaganda time (◕‿◕✿)
    • View Profile
    • The Flat Earth Society
Re: Did Rowbotham use Conspiracy Theories?
« Reply #33 on: June 10, 2020, 08:15:13 PM »
It seems we're saying near enough the same thing? ???
We're saying the exact opposite of one another. I say, that based on data available to us, we can safely conclude that cover-ups are common.

You say, based on what you do and don't find likely, and in spite of data presented to you, that it would be naive to assume that cover-ups are taking place.

That's quite a far cry from "near enough the same thing".

It would be assuming to suggest that allies hide and cover up illegal activities for each other, because by definition you'd have to assume they were doing that.
Not at all - not all cover-ups are successful. There is nothing in the definition that forces you to assume.

Here's another example for you: the British government covering up for America during their completely illegal war in Iraq.

You're the one making assumptions with no data to back it up. I suggest that you stop doing that and instead of "thinking" very hard about whether or not cover-ups may have been taking place, you actually look for some data. You really don't have to look very far. Just, you know, a bit farther than going "uhm I think that's unlikely because that's what I think".

But when a particularly famous event is news around the world, you find other governments calling each other out routinely.
Yes, I'm inclined to agree that when an event goes public, then governments stop trying to cover it up. However, this strikes me as a tautology - if something goes sufficiently public, then any cover-up is guaranteed to fail. Of course it wouldn't be attempted then.

Regardless, I think we can agree that the original proposal I'm addressing here, that governments never cover up for each other (and that it would be ludicrous to even suggest such a possibility), is a complete non-starter.
« Last Edit: June 10, 2020, 08:22:19 PM by Pete Svarrior »
Read the FAQ before asking your question - chances are we've already addressed it.
Follow the Flat Earth Society on Twitter and Facebook!

<Parsifal> I like looking at Chinese Wikipedia with Noto installed
<Parsifal> I don't understand any of it but the symbols look nice