• NEW! LOWEST RATES EVER -- SUPPORT THE SHOW AND ENJOY THE VERY BEST PREMIUM PARACAST EXPERIENCE! Welcome to The Paracast+, eight years young! For a low subscription fee, you can download the ad-free version of The Paracast and the exclusive, member-only, After The Paracast bonus podcast, featuring color commentary, exclusive interviews, the continuation of interviews that began on the main episode of The Paracast. We also offer lifetime memberships! Flash! Take advantage of our lowest rates ever! Act now! It's easier than ever to susbcribe! You can sign up right here!

    Subscribe to The Paracast Newsletter!

The target audience of the GCN Radio network in action...

Forums New posts

Free episodes:

it is so amazing that you two know more than the men actually there! wow we are so blessed to have such amazing forum members like you guys.
they should take down videos like these below.. the men who were there obviously were not as intelligent as maudib and lance.
 
Lol selectively edited Youtube videos posted by conspiracy nuts! How will I ever respond to such a well reasoned argument?!?

Nobody is debating that the second attack didn't happen, it most likely did not, what we are debating is your labeling them false flags when they don't fit the definition of what a false flag actually is, and your assertion that the Gulf of Tonkin was solely responsible for the war in Vietnam which according to veterans of the war and the government, started in 1959, not 1965. You can argue until you're blue in the face but you just look silly, it doesn't fit the definition of a false flag attack and it wasn't the cause of the Vietnam War.
 
pixelsmith said:
it was an excuse for us to bomb them.
Click to expand...

Even if that were true, and it isn't since the first attack definitely happened and we didn't really need an excuse after that, it still doesn't make it a false flag by any stretch of the imagination and saying it was the cause of the Vietnam War is completely at odds with the facts.
 
pixelsmith said:
so... again... what conspiracy theories have become a conspiracy fact?
Click to expand...

I'm not really interested in playing that game, you can see a bunch of false flags that were actually false flags in the link I posted. I don't really know how to answer that, if you'd like me to address a specific event by all means post it. Nobody is saying that the government is 100% honest and never lies, just that you happen to be wrong in your statements about Vietnam.
 
lancemoody said:
Hilariously, the conspiracy buff who posted the above videos doesn't even realize that the second video CONFIRMS everything Muadib argued above:

1. No question that the 1st attack occurred.
2. Murky as to whether the second attack occurred.

Nothing is EVER murky for the conspiracy nut. He knows every answer because FALSE FLAG!!!!!

Okay, I am going to give it a rest. This was fun but it seems unfair to pick on someone who is so FALSE FLAG! limited. Go back to your bunker.

Lance
Click to expand...

Wow, that is pretty hilarious, I should've watched it but the crap that gets posted by conspiracy nuts on Youtube makes my skin crawl...
 
lancemoody said:
Yes, yes, as Muadib mentions above, the Gulf of Tonkin incident is murky but tensions were definitely rising. It is unclear that anyone (except for the double nought conspiracy buff) knows knows exactly what happened, I think most historians agree that one of the attacks was real. At any rate, I know subtlety is not your strong point so get to the False Flag claim you made above. Or do you just shout "False Flag" whenever you talk about anything?

Lance
Click to expand...
my reference to "false flag/conspiracy" was in reference to what others have to say about the incident. I consider it a conspiracy to engage in a war without congressional approval.
 
at 3:21 McNamara says "...events afterwards showed our judgment that we had been attacked that day was wrong."
 
pixelsmith said:
at 3:21 McNamara says "...events afterwards showed our judgment that we had been attacked that day was wrong."
Click to expand...

And...? He's talking about the second attack, and he's probably right, they were wrong. This still doesn't dismiss the first attack, it still doesn't make it a false flag and it still doesn't make it the cause of the Vietnam war. C'mon, we've been over this.
 
lancemoody said:
"...events afterwards showed our judgment that we had been attacked that day was wrong."

Yes, well after event there were indications that the second attack may have never occurred. I agree with that. But how stupid does one have to be to not understand the phrase "events afterward" may mean many years after.

Pretty stupid.

McNamara admits (in 2003) that there was confusion, there was no consensus. And there is STILL no consensus.

AND the first attack definitely occurred!

Yet, for the dumb ass conspiracy nut, for Alex Jones, for Jimmy Lee Dykes in Alabama, everything is settled. There is no grey area to anything. They rise to their full 86 IQ and proclaim to understand the world.

Lance
Click to expand...
Your "dumb ass conspiracy nut" comments do not make your views any more valid and just make you look like the 86 IQ people you are referencing.
 
In this case, it's not a matter of views or interpretations, there is what actually happened, and then what conspiracy theorists try to pretend happened, which is completely at odds with basic historical facts.
 
Thankfully we have you two members of the targeted "audience of the GCN Network" to straighten things out for us.
 
Back
Top