EPT
What are some debatable accounts of history? - Page 15
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
HackBenjamin
Canada1094 Posts
| ||
|
GypsyBeast
Canada630 Posts
| ||
|
Dugrok
Canada377 Posts
Not worth going into detail here because there isn't really a ''right'' answer either, only conflicting point of views and arguments to support both. I suppose the ''reality'' would be consolidation of both. | ||
|
DorF
Sweden961 Posts
User was temp banned for this post. | ||
|
Alexhandr
United States218 Posts
Obama was born in Kenya... /whistles | ||
|
Redunzl
862 Posts
On February 10 2011 13:54 Silidons wrote: If I say it, I'll probably get banned. yea, i stopped posting in OPs like this ages ago. I think the OP is Manifesto7 in disguise. | ||
|
Torte de Lini
Germany38463 Posts
On February 11 2011 01:09 Alexhandr wrote: I want to bring this up to see peoples' responses. Note that I do not believe this. Obama was born in Kenya... /whistles I already tried that one ); Also tried the "Obama is a muslim". I think an admin said it was easily refutable lies, thus it doesn't count | ||
|
nitram
Canada5412 Posts
| ||
|
AssiRoyal
Germany216 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + 9/11+ Show Spoiler + if you want to say something about the video, watch the whole goddamn thing (runtime 14:09)+ Show Spoiler + | ||
|
Piy
Scotland3152 Posts
Things are constantly getting revised. In about 20 years people are going to have a revisionist view of the Iraq War that would be very unpopular today. One of the most interesting things is that it usually takes a period of time before it anything like genocide/huge scale wars/war crimes can be openly discussed, because it's a long time before people can divorce emotion from facts. Like we can talk a lot more openly about the extermination of Native American's now than we could have done at the time. Some other interesting things being revised/re-examined: - the crusades went badly for the west because the Islamic world was dramatically ahead in military technology - The Spanish Inquisition was fairer than secular trials at the time - The Romans were militarily outclassed by the eastern empires (look up roman-parthian wars) - The Boer War can be classed as Genocide of the Boer people by the British. | ||
|
Owompa
United States85 Posts
On February 10 2011 12:14 travito wrote: Here is another interesting account: + Show Spoiler + It has been suggested that Merriweather Lewis (Lewis & Clark) was actually murdered instead of committing suicide in Tennessee while en route to Washington DC. Lewis was Thomas Jefferson's right hand man for years. He could be considered the first Presidential Aide. The General that had been appointed Gov over the Louisiana Territory by Jefferson was very corrupt. Jefferson wanted to replace the General and appoint Lewis. Lewis was traveling to Washington to collect money that the US owed him. He was staying the night at a lodge in Tennessee when the owners of the lodge found him dead with a bullet wound to the head. There were no witnesses. Jefferson was notified of Lewis's death by apparent suicide and was told that Lewis had been depressed before he killed himself. That is all it took for this to become the historical account. The President of the United States thought that Lewis had committed suicide. The body was attended to and buried in Tennessee. There is documentation by a doctor and others who saw the wound to Lewis's head before burial which suggest that the bullet entered the back of the head and exited in the front. The facts go on and on in this story, but there is an attempt at this moment to exhume the body to find out. Because the grave is considered of historical importance the US gov has the last word and the request for exhumation has been denied once. The Meriwether Lewis one is totally false and your facts are largely incorrect. Read Undaunted Courage if you want a fair look at Captain Lewis' life. Captain Lewis suffered from depression his whole life and he was actually traveling to Washington because he had incorrectly spent the US govt's money and thought that he was losing his job. Lewis was the corrupt governor of Louisiana (idk what General you are talking about) in this case who tried to use his authority to make money in the fur business. He was also addicted to opium and drinking heavily at that point in his life. Furthermore his investments in the fur business of upper Louisiana had fallen through and he was largely destitute and borrowing money from friends. He was also still best friends with Jefferson and Clark who readily accepted his suicide as being the truth. Neither questioned or investigated the matter whatsoever. If there was the tiniest shred of evidence Jefferson would have certainly investigated the slaying of his wonder boy. With all this said it makes Meriwether Lewis look pretty bad, but if you read Undaunted Courage you will see he was actually pretty fucking awesome earlier in his life and just suffered from some mental disorders later in life. Glad I could help! | ||
|
woowoo
France164 Posts
No one was able to explain the "vaporization" of the pentagon plane after behind sucked in a 2 m wide hole, where are the tons of metal of the plane? We are told they just vaporized in the atmosphere due to the fire high temperature, a better explanation would be a protoss mothership passing by and casting vortex on the pentagon, the results are the same. | ||
|
Alexhandr
United States218 Posts
On February 11 2011 01:28 Torte de Lini wrote: I already tried that one ); Also tried the "Obama is a muslim". I think an admin said it was easily refutable lies, thus it doesn't count Easily refutable lies? So is the 9/11 conspiracy theory, the Holocaust deniers, and loads of other crappy conspiracy theories that are made up solely for attention. But for some reason the two theories about Obama are not up for discussion? That makes me lawl so hard. Bias. God... man, I love not having any political affiliations. <3 | ||
|
Owompa
United States85 Posts
On February 11 2011 01:46 Piy wrote: Everything gets continuously revised, usually in a generation or two after things happen. The holocaust is undergoing a revisionist period right now, instead of it being a from the top down operation (where the only people that had knowledge of the camps was the top ranking Nazi's, which was a popular view about 40 years ago) its become more of a grass roots thing, with people looking all the way back to Martin Luther's anti-semitic writings to explain it. So the blame is getting shifted more towards German and Polish civilians, who would rise up and kill their Jewish population without SS provocation, as well as cultural values, and is moving away from a view that states that the SS and high ranking Nazi's were the only major perpetrator's of it. Things are constantly getting revised. In about 20 years people are going to have a revisionist view of the Iraq War that would be very unpopular today. One of the most interesting things is that it usually takes a period of time before it anything like genocide/huge scale wars/war crimes can be openly discussed, because it's a long time before people can divorce emotion from facts. Like we can talk a lot more openly about the extermination of Native American's now than we could have done at the time. Some other interesting things being revised/re-examined: - the crusades went badly for the west because the Islamic world was dramatically ahead in military technology - The Spanish Inquisition was fairer than secular trials at the time - The Romans were militarily outclassed by the eastern empires (look up roman-parthian wars) - The Boer War can be classed as Genocide of the Boer people by the British. Very true about revisionist history, but I tend to think that a conservative look at history is still more accurate. In terms of the crusades and the roman-parthian wars there were a lot more important factors acting against western Europe and Rome. (1000 miles from home, .long supplies line, incompetent generals, not used to the terrain, not defending your homeland.) Back then technology was a lot less important than other factors | ||
|
Haemonculus
United States6980 Posts
On February 11 2011 02:03 Alexhandr wrote: Easily refutable lies? So is the 9/11 conspiracy theory, the Holocaust deniers, and loads of other crappy conspiracy theories that are made up solely for attention. But for some reason the two theories about Obama are not up for discussion? That makes me lawl so hard. Bias. God... man, I love not having any political affiliations. <3 No political affiliation? I don't think I've seen a single post from you that isn't a hilarious parody of a right wing nutter. "As an AMERICAN, with my BIBLE and GUN in hand, I love my COUNTRYYYY" etc etc On topic, I've always been torn on the whole 9/11 thing. I find it impossible to think that it could have been an inside job... But the whole building 7 thing has never made sense to me, t.t; | ||
|
AssiRoyal
Germany216 Posts
On February 11 2011 02:03 Alexhandr wrote: Easily refutable lies? So is the 9/11 conspiracy theory, the Holocaust deniers, and loads of other crappy conspiracy theories that are made up solely for attention. But for some reason the two theories about Obama are not up for discussion? That makes me lawl so hard. Bias. God... man, I love not having any political affiliations. <3 "9/11 conspiracy theory" watch the video i posted above On February 11 2011 01:43 AssiRoyal wrote: this: + Show Spoiler + 9/11+ Show Spoiler + if you want to say something about the video, watch the whole goddamn thing (runtime 14:09)+ Show Spoiler + http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9QWvkAgyIY4 think again | ||
|
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 11 2011 01:46 Piy wrote: - the crusades went badly for the west because the Islamic world was dramatically ahead in military technology - The Romans were militarily outclassed by the eastern empires (look up roman-parthian wars) These two were actually ever considered true as the mainstream view ? | ||
|
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 11 2011 02:03 Owompa wrote: Very true about revisionist history, but I tend to think that a conservative look at history is still more accurate. In terms of the crusades and the roman-parthian wars there were a lot more important factors acting against western Europe and Rome. (1000 miles from home, .long supplies line, incompetent generals, not used to the terrain, not defending your homeland.) Back then technology was a lot less important than other factors Actually reasons for the failure of crusades were mostly political. And as for Rome, basically for all the time that Rome has been present in the east Rome has been much stronger side. Sure they lost some wars but never anything really major, often Rome was focused somewhere else when that happened, but it was much stronger state. Just comparing the number of people living in Roman Empire and in Parthia/Persia is strong indicator. And technology was still very important factor, definitely not much overshadowed by other factors. | ||
|
yellowmoe
Canada59 Posts
+ Show Spoiler + http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2008/04/080428-ancient-tomb.html Some people, not me personally, think that Confucius is of korean descent. + Show Spoiler + | ||
|
mcc
Czech Republic4646 Posts
On February 11 2011 02:10 Haemonculus wrote: No political affiliation? I don't think I've seen a single post from you that isn't a hilarious parody of a right wing nutter. "As an AMERICAN, with my BIBLE and GUN in hand, I love my COUNTRYYYY" etc etc On topic, I've always been torn on the whole 9/11 thing. I find it impossible to think that it could have been an inside job... But the whole building 7 thing has never made sense to me, t.t; Well maybe he just does not like any political party, but you're right his view even just from this thread seem to indicate somewhat right-wing bend All technical things aside I would say that conspiracy this big is basically impossible, as even banalities that people try to cover up get out pretty quickly. As for the building 7, I think the : "do not blame on malice what you can blame on incompetence" thing is still a good rule to use when evidence is scarce. Fall of such a mass of concrete and steel is bound to have consequences for structural integrity of the building and even if the building on paper should have withstood this, someone might have saved some money on it and do not adhere to the plans when building it. | ||
| ||
