b3ta.com qotw
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Question of the Week » Conspiracy theory nutters » Page 5 | Search
This is a question Conspiracy theory nutters

I keep getting collared by a bloke who says that the war in Afghanistan is a cover for our Illuminati Freemason Shapeshifting Lizard masters to corner the market in mind-bending drugs. "It's true," he says, "I heard it on TalkSport". Tell us your stories of encounters with tinfoil hatters.

Thanks to Davros' Granddad

(, Thu 27 Aug 2009, 13:52)
Pages: Popular, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1

This question is now closed.

Catch On, Win It, Milk It...
I myself have been know for starting wild conspiracy theories mainly due to the facts that:
A.) They piss people off.
B.) It makes people think, thus frustrating them
C.) Im a VIth form student...and so am really really bored

My favourite one is the one concocted with my best friend, the Swine Flu conspiracy.

It’s relatively simple:
Swine flu was created just around the same time as the credit crunch, and due to said crunch people were buying less luxury goods and cheaper alternatives to more expensive brands.
Because of this the sales of Kleenex, lemsip, Soothers and paracetemol went down, this got the "corporate bastards" annoyed. And they marched to parliament (secretly of course....)

Meanwhile, parliament was up to their nuts in crisis and anger, people were furious about the crunch and blamed our MPs for it, they needed a distraction, and with the Belligerent racists not going into big brother for a few weeks, no heartbreaking X-factor stories weren’t around and most importantly of all Michael Jackson was still alive. They needed a diversion and quick.
Things all came to a head (snigger.) when the two met and they of course concocted the plan for a fictitious disease, which would:
1.) Drive the sales of brand flu products and tissues back up (ASDA’s own tissue are crap.)
2.) Distract people away from the government...

Insane Ramblings, the results of way too much time on our hands, or the complete surprising truth? You decide...
(, Sat 29 Aug 2009, 0:22, Reply)
The Government Are Stealing Days
OK, this was a friend of mine who came up with this theory after smoking a few joints. Even though I didn't have any myself, I must also have been slightly stoned as I was agreeing with him...

The Government are stealing days off of us. You know those days when you wake up, and you find you're even more awake than usual? And that you're not the only person who feels like that on that particular day? Well, that's one day stolen off us by the government.

This also explains why the seasons are shifting - it's not global warming, oh no - it's these days that are being stolen from us so when we think it's still January, it's in fact March.

It also explains why you have certain generations of kids (particularly girls; I think my mate was a closet paedophile, but then again, who isn't... (erm, did I just say that?)) are maturing much earlier in their lives than they used to. It's nothing to do with hormones or chemicals in the body, it's because when they're 11 they're in fact 14.

Want to know why you go to bed and it's raining, but the next morning all the roads are dry? Well, that's a day stolen. Similarly, the old adage 'red sky at night, shepherd's delight' - when a night shows the red sky, but the weather the next day is awful, that's because of a day stolen.

When somebody is in hospital in a coma and the next day is suddenly better, or suddenly worse? Another day stolen.

And the reason for the government stealing days off of us?

Well, the best we could come up with was to tangle leads under your desk, to move objects around the house to confuse you, to decharge phone and camera batteries, to have a few days when the opposing MPs, other politians and world leaders could actually be the great friends they in fact are, Osama coming out of his cave to have lunch with Obama and so forth.

It also explains the so called 'Leap Second'. It's when it doesn't go quite right.

It was when we were less stoned that we started to realise a few faults in the theory, but then again, that was the next day...
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 23:52, 3 replies)
It's behind you!
On a par with the guy who said that we all see colours differently so is green really green and if you could see it through my eyes it would be red etc....when I was a kid I was convinced that I was in a giant experiment and what happened behind me didn't exist if I wasn't looking at it and if something odd happened I'd imagine lots of weird alien beings running around 'behind the scenes' going "Argh she'll surely guess the truth now!!" I was a strange child.
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 23:20, 2 replies)
I didn't wipe my arse properly this morning. I fear the Bottom Inspectors will soon be visiting. Oh dear.
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 23:07, 1 reply)
Knew someone who was convinced that the whole planet slipped it into a parallel universe every few months for a few days.
And... yeah, thats about it.
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 22:33, Reply)

I believe that the moon does not exist. I believe that vampires are the world's greatest golfers but their curse is they never get a chance to prove it. I believe that there are 31 letters in the white alphabet. Wait...what was the question?
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 20:52, Reply)
i hate those fucking feathered rats. have you ever tried to run over one? you think you've hit it, look back, and THERE IT IS! nodding its stupid fucking head happily in the middle of the road.
and why?
because they have artificial intelligence.
i don't know how far it goes, but it all adds up. they recharge their internal batteries from the hidden power points in statues. that's why they shit on them, so other pigeons can tell who's just been freshly juiced up.
and why, when they bob their heads up and down all day like demented feathery metallica fans, don't they get whiplash? it's because of their pneumatic necks.
have you been to trafalgar square lately? that's an army! they're just waiting to pounce! waiting for that signal!
probably the signal will be coming from dolphins. i don't trust those smiley fuckers one bit.
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 20:27, 18 replies)
'family butchers'
On every high street, for all to see... blatant matricide, patricide and god help us all... infanticide. Whole families, my god they even wander into the front of the shop covered in blood.

It’s to condition us for the wars you see.

Yet we see them as harmless smiling portly purveyors of mince

They wear white coats for fucks sake!
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 19:16, 2 replies)
Someone mentioned the Matrix earlier
and I got my mate umming, ahhing and chin-stroking over this one.

At some point in the near future, artificial intelligence will reach the point where a computer could simulate true sentience. Inevitably, scientists will then build a rudimentary version of The Sims. Except it would be most realistic rather than a game whereby you have to struggle to have your character get enough sleep, wake up, carry out their ablutions, cook breakfast and eat it all in time to leave for work.

Anyway, this version of The Sims with true self-awareness will be developed and scaled up until they have a room of supercomputers running a worldwide version, in essence a computer model of the planet Earth and every living thing on it, all interacting in nigh on infinite permutations.

A simulation of people going about their day to day mundanities, finding jobs, relationships, spending time on the internet posting on a website about conspiracy theories, or anecdotes about their workmates or sexual misadventures.

This level of development in computer modelling and AI inevitable. It could have already happened. We could be in that simulation running decades from what we think is the present day. Running in a completely different future to what we are heading towards. We could be in a simulation whereby some men in a lab somewhere have entered the parameters to see what happens if George Bush beats Al Gore in the US elections.

Are there holes in this idea or is it a water-tight theory?
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 19:12, 18 replies)
LaRouche, LaRouche,
LaRouche is on fire.
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 18:53, Reply)
Something that has been occupying my thoughts of late is the endless lunacy of those special people who believe that there is a vast, all-encompassing and all powerful conspiracy of shadowy figures that run the world. I've talked about them before and termed them "conspiracy theorists". Last time out I was rather scathing about that broadly defined group. But a few conversations that I've had recently (that, and the excellent program "the conspiracy files") have got me thinking about conspiracy theorists again. Specifically, do any of them actually have a point? And was I wrong to dismiss them en masse?

I'll explain; someone asked me what conspiracies I actually believed in. And I found myself stating that I didn't believe in the official government line about the current Iraq occupation (which, as near as I can make out, is a mish-mash of "it's part of the War on Terror", "It was to stop Saddam getting weapons of Mass Destruction", and "we're improving the life of the people of Iraq"; depending on what day it is, you'll hear a different answer vomiting from the lips of an uncomfortable looking government spokesman) as evidence that I don't unquestioningly believe whatever the official version of events happens to be. I was a little surprised to be told that this shouldn't count as a conspiracy theory because "everyone knows that the Government version is a lie".

Up until then, I'd defined a conspiracy theory as something that differed from an official governmental version of events, and went on to provide it's own explanation of what "really" happened. So if we take the Iraqi land grab as an example, the most commonly accepted conspiracy theory surrounding that one is that the US used 9/11 as an excuse to invade Iraq in order to secure their oil reserves. However, apparently this is not a conspiracy theory and the only reason given for that is because, apparently, everyone knows it. Does that mean then that a conspiracy theory has to be something known only to a select few? Does it have to be something that is rejected by the mainstream in order to qualify? And if that is the case, doesn't that mean I'm entirely correct in dismissing conspiracy theorists as a bunch of burnt out failures who conjure up elaborate fantasies about the way the world works in order to re-assure themselves that they actually have an important part in it?

It took a conversation with a fully fledged conspiracy theorist to demonstrate to me that, in fact, I'd been going about this all wrong. What defines a conspiracy theorist isn't so much their theory, but the way they feel about it. For example, I know of people who believe that JFK was not killed by Lee Harvey Oswald (and I count myself among those people). We all have our different theories about how he was killed and who killed him, and we all have differing degrees of evidence to back up our theories. What we don't have is conclusive proof and (most importantly) we acknowledge this. Oh, we can present a case in a convincing manner but the simple fact is that our belief that Oswald didn't kill JFK is just that; a belief. An article of faith. We’ll ask questions of the official version, but we don't try to tell someone that our belief is 100% incontrovertible fact, and it's there that the main difference lies.

In this same conversation, the conspiracy theorist put forward his belief that the world was being run by a group of Occultists who simultaneously had their roots in both the Nazi movement and ancient history. One of the starting points of his rather bizarre belief was that "the Nazis wanted to rule the world and set up a world government". Now this statement rang alarm bells with me (as opposed to his initial belief, which really should have triggered my "this man is a foaming idiot" bell), because being a bit of a History buff, I was under the impression that the Nazis actually opposed any sort of World Government as it was a "Jewish" concept. Basically, a forged document called the Elder Protocols of Zion together with a long-lived conspiracy theory about a mythical group called "The Illuminati" led many anti-Semites to take the view that any world government would be an organisation secretly run by the Jews.

Not only that, but Hitler himself had gone on record as saying that the Reich he wanted to create would be an organisation much like the British Empire. In other words, it would be the dominant influence on global politics, but not the sole influence. Yes, he wanted to dominate Europe, but he and the rest of the Nazi movement saw that European Empire as something to rival the British Empire. So I asked him to provide some evidence for his assertion that the Nazis wanted a world government.

(At this point I should mention that, having read the last 2 paragraphs back to myself, it sounds like I was conversing with someone who is more than a few bricks short of a load. And I would absolutely agree with that assessment.)

He could provide none. And that's fair enough; as I've mentioned, I can't provide huge swathes of evidence for my belief about JFK being killed by someone other than Oswald. So I asked him to confirm that his assertion about Nazis and world government was an article of faith. And he refused. Not in a "I can't do that, and here is some evidence as to why not" way, but in a "I'm going to stamp my feet and hold my breath until I turn blue unless you believe me lalalalalalalalalalaI’mnotlisteninglalalalalalala!" sort of manner.

Obviously, that is just one example from a wide range of conspiracy theorists, and I hope you see the point I'm trying to make. If not, I'll make it explicit; the gentlemen I was talking to was trying to pass off a belief of his as a stone cold, copper-bottomed fact. The only evidence he was able to produce was "because I say so". And it's this feature of conspiracy theory that caused me to view the whole damned lot of them with suspicion.

They claim to be tellers of truth and guardians of the sacred flame of honesty. They claim that they oppose "them", the ones who are lying to you and trying to make you believe lies, and who condemn any who do not swallow their bullshit. Yet when one presses them for evidence, or even simply asks them a question about their pet theory, they will be evasive and dishonest. They will lie to you, try to make you believe their lie, and condemn you if you don't accept it. Worryingly, they don’t seem to see the irony in this.

This is in stark contrast to the type of conspiracy theorist who is actually interested in debate, and who is as honest about the flaws in their theory as they are its strengths. So I've started to differentiate between the two. Those people who will lie to you to try and convince you of their belief, I now term "Conspiraloons". It's a handy term, an accurate one, and it stops me from unfairly lumping in conspiracy theorists with them.

Of course, I say "condemn you". 9 times out of 10, their condemnation takes the form of the kind of insults one heard at school before one actually learned how to debate; "you're so naïve" is a popular retort by the conspiraloon on the back foot. As is "You're one of THEM!", and (for those conspiraloons who are also Bill Hicks fans) "Go back to bed [insert name here]. You just don't know what's really going on". Hardly the scathing wit and rapier-like intellect of someone who has somehow managed to find out the deepest secrets of a pervasive and omnipresent evil conspiracy and share that truth with the world at a risk to his own life and liberty. More the petulance of someone angry that his or her belief isn’t being unquestioningly accepted. And, I would suspect, the bitterness of one who has seen their life turn out rather worse than they were expecting, and wants to blame someone else for it (preferably a worldwide organisation so that they can also feel important) rather than take responsibility for their own poor decisions in life.

I think one of the reasons that I despise these conspiraloons so much is the same one that I abhor organised religion; they claim to be something they're not, and as such they are liars and hypocrites. Actually, conspiraloons share a lot of traits with evangelical Christians; both want everyone to believe what they do, both view their beliefs and faith as something self-evidently factual, both will go to any lengths to avoid honest debate, and both throw monstrous hissy fits whenever one points out a flaw in their statements.

However, the main reason that I have such a problem with them is their effect on honest debate. It's incredibly easy for any government to dismiss any questioning of their official versions, because that questioning is quickly co-opted by conspiraloons and used as part of the basis for their self-important flights of fancy masquerading as fact. Therefore most people, who may have quite reasonable reservations about just how honest their government is, will not take those doubts any further because it will seem to them that the alternative is a belief that the government are actually an secret cult of Sun Worshippers who want to rule in the name of the Elder Gods (a quick side note; every conspiraloon I have ever talked to, without exception, has a belief structure that reads like an HP Lovecraft or Grant Morrison story. Might I suggest these people look up the definitions of "fact" and "fiction"). And who in their right mind wants to believe that?

I think what I'm trying to say (in amongst all the faintly rationalised bile) is that I made a mistake in dismissing any and all people who could be termed "conspiracy theorists", and I would exhort you all to not make that same mistake. Don't dismiss a conspiracy theory out of hand just because of what it is, but treat with disdain those burnouts and failures who want you to accept their beliefs as fact purely to provide some sort of validation for their empty and wasted lives.
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 17:39, 6 replies)
The Wizard of Oz.
There's a few about this.
The Pink Floyd thing. Apparently, the first side of Dark Side of the Moon, is an alternative soundtrack to the beginning of the movie. Try it, there's plenty of demos on Youtube. It sort of works, once or twice, but it's just coincidence. Play any 20 odd minute long bit of music to a visual, and you're bound to get a few correlations.
The dead Munchkins. Two Munchkins were hanged during the filming. You can see the first one, where Dorothy is skipping round the spiral road thingy. A Munchkin is dancing with it's head lopsided. It looks very slightly if it's hanging from a gibbet.
The second one is where Dorothy is dancing off into the sunset away from those small people. A thing is hanging under a tree which is meant to be another sacrificial person of challenged height. God knows what it is, but it ain't no dead extra.
The Wizard of Oz is also meant to condition CIA sex slaves . Now it's getting way too weird!
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 17:10, 4 replies)
Bob marley
Was killed by the CIA.

you see, the theory went, at 3am one Sunday morning, that rather then dying of the big C, as naturally developed by his body as reported, the CIA implanted a prick in his shoe, kinda like a very, very tiny needle, the end of which was covered with a strain of cancer. The US Government deemed him the most influencial Black Man on the planter after Martin Luther King...and well, we all know what happened to him....

The cancer was only discovered after he collapsed whilst out jogging in New York.

So went our 3am ramblings.
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 17:05, 2 replies)
You see them ALL THE TIME
a small group of 'independant' freedom fighters,

you see thier propaganda each week, in fact you may have read it today!!!

it'll go like this...

"this QOTW is shit!!"
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 17:00, Reply)
One in every thousand
Marlborough Reds is actually a jazz cigarette that will get you more stoned than a Rastafarian who's been knocking back bucket bongs all day in the hope of obtaining some kind of spiritual oneness through the fine art of smoking a shitload of drugs...

Or so a mate of mine once told me. "You smoke twenty fags a day, so thats-" I tried to do the maths. "Well, that's a shitload of fags. So you must've had a few of these ganga dragon slayers in your time," I concluded.

My mate stared at me and said woefully: "Nah, not that lucky. All I get is tobacco. I'd change to a cheaper brand, but well, you never know do ya?" And here we were in Camden Town, a place where you could score grass easier than you could in an Afghanistani souk.

I thought about asking my mate where he'd heard this load of old bollocks, but got bored and went off to do something more interesting instead...
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 16:39, 6 replies)
Queen mum
The QM died in 1994. Ever since then she's been animatronic, and has gone through several revisions until the machinery finally gave up in 2002 and was retired. You can chart her progress and development of the animatronics from 1994-2002. The first model, QM01 had the realistic body shell, but the insides were quite rudimentary. Her public appearances were limited to car trips, and upper body displays. Main features included simple side to side head movements, simple waving, realistic blinking and mouth movements.

In 1997 she was conspicuously absent from public life, due to the upgrades. QM02 never made it to release, but QM03 was unveiled in late 1998. The most signficant development was of course the realistic walking action. Only ever appearing in public wearing knee length outfits to cover the complex leg machinery, QM03 was capable of unassisted walking for up to an hour. It took 16 people to remote control the finer facial movements, and the range of waving was drastically improved, with over 17 new hand gestures.

QM03 through to QM06 consisted of mainly software upgrades, and public appearances were gradually reduced until until 2001 to allow for maintenance, an increasing burden.

2002 saw the final release QM-NEXGEN1 and was a remarkable overhaul. New exoskeleton, servos, body kit, authentic hair, speech modules, AI, the works, and a fully functional, self aware, independant QM was rolled out in March 3rd in Windsor. Within 3 or 4 hours, the neural cells used to power the model had already started to overload. A frantic 20 days of tuning was unable to revive or repair the failed cells and the project was closed on March 28th. A public 'death' was announced on March 30th and the files were expunged.

All the above was leaked in 2004 by a former palace employee.
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 16:35, 7 replies)
4 words
That Nick Griffin cnut.
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 16:29, 2 replies)
I've only read the first two pages....
.. but has there been posts alluding to the X-Files or The Matrix yet?

It just wouldn't be a conspiracy thread without the above being mentioned at least once.

By the way, some of the stories in the X-Files are true, they just want you to believe they aren't. Tricky these shadowy government types.
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 16:26, 2 replies)
What the bejeezus have they been snorting?
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 16:22, 1 reply)
Here's an unusual one
The guy who used to sit opposite me at work a few years back told me how part of the post-war Marshall Plan dealings with the UK meant that we handed over British sovereignty over to the US in all but in name as collateral on the agreement, essentially mortgaging the entire country.

Part of the agreement was that we help the US in any military conflicts they wish to partake of. However, when we avoided getting involved in Vietnam, they secretly reneged on the agreement and now have permanent ownership of our country. Although we've supposedly paid off the debts finally after 60 years or so, the payments have actually paid for the maintenance of US bases in the UK.
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 16:14, Reply)
A little known truth
Jurassic Park is a true story and happened on the Isle of Wight in 1992.
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 15:45, 5 replies)
my brother
got the idea into the head that there was a contingency of Scandinavian agents infiltrating ex-cons (he'd done some time in the past for robbing copper pipes from a soon to be demolished row of shops). For what purpose I don't know and he didn't say.

He told me of an incident where one came to his house pretending to be friendly and brought a few beers. He said he looked a lot like a viking.

"Is that how you knew it was a Scandinavian society?" I asked.
"Yeah, who else would it be?" he replied in earnest.

After a few more questions, I finally concluded that it was his mate who lived in the flat above. His mate who had a small unkempt beard. A mate who came with beers 10 mins after my brother had dropped a tab of LSD.

Edit: I guessed the 10 mins bit, I haven't a clue how long it takes to kick in. 10 mins, 6 hours, I haven't a foggiest. In fact, it might not have been LSD at all, and the entire thing was true.
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 15:41, 3 replies)
PAUL IS DEAD (and Ben will be too if he doesn't shut the fuck up)...
Apart from his love of porn featuring scanky women receiving cumshot facials from horses with such force and brutality it makes a police watercannon seem like a childs waterpistol, my mate Ben is a pretty normal guy. Except for one thing. Paul-fucking-McCartney. Or, should I say, Paul McCartney’s evil doppleganger who’s been knocking about now for thirty-odd years after the real Macca died in a tragic car accident.

The first time Ben told me about this I was nursing a few tins of Stella and trying my best to ignore the cunt. It was Stella time. A precious time where I can sit and drink and merrily get up every few minutes to point my pecker at the porcelain, listening to metal and just generally chilling out. Its my time. My special time. And this cunt, Ben, was filling it with a load of old bollocks about The Beatles and the great cover up. It was my fault, really. I had a break from my usual Black Sabbath-a-thon and put on Sgt. Pepper’s instead. Ben, who was staying at my gaff for the weekend, then launched into his theory:

On the cover of Abbey Road Macca isn’t wearing any shoes, which obviously meant the annoying Scouse hipster with the droany voice was dead. The car in the background (VW I think), has ‘IF 28’ in the number plate, the age Macca would’ve been IF he was alive during the recording of the record. And then Ben went on about the lyrics. “What – I’d like to be under the sea in an octo-fucking-pussies garden in the cunting shade?” I interjected. But it didn’t slow Ben down. He was like a dog with a bone, or a whore with a nice hard pulsing cock: “He didn’t notice that the lights had changed,” Ben enthused. “And in Lady Madonna it goes: Wednesday morning papers didn’t come; they were withholding the news! And in She’s Leaving Home it goes: Wednesday morning at five o’clock as the day begins; that’s when McCartney had his car crash and died! And in Revolution 9 you can hear car sounds in the background!”

I was impressed: “You’ve actually listened to Revolution 9? You must be the only person in the world to do that, mate.” I said. And this went on for fucking hours until I eventually threatened to kill Ben so he could have a word with Paul McCartney firsthand and find out what really happened.

And ever since then, on the odd occasion Ben comes down to London from the Midlands to crash at my place, nick my food and piss on my bathroom floor, if he ever catches wind of Macca’s voice on the radio or playing on a pub jukebox, he’ll go into his amazing Paul Is Dead rant, the annoying little shit that he is. The last time he came down he met up with my best mate Steve (the tattooist) for the first time. Steve proceeded to sit there and spill the beans on my latest fuck ups and embarrassments – gave my mate Ben enough ammo to mean it’ll be a long time til I can show my face in Coventry again. I sat and fumed while Ben and Steve had a good old giggle at my expense, the utter wankers. Later, Steve, being a bit of a gent and having his own motor, offered to drive Ben back up the M1 the following morning. Save a bit of cash on the trains. Fastforward to the following morning, just as Steve's putting his jacket on to leave I pass him something: “There you go, mate – bit of a heavy night last night so here's some easy listening for your drive up,” I said. Steve takes the cd, looks at it, grins: “Cheers, Spanky – reminds me of my dad, this does!” And he fucked off out the door with a copy of Wings Greatest Hits.

Steve was not a very happy chappy when he telephoned me two hours later after he’d finally dropped Ben off. Steve was not very happy at all.
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 15:41, 4 replies)
GCSEs are getting easier
So are A levels.
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 15:23, 20 replies)
I once rode a train with David Icke
he was eating a packet of cheese and onion crisps. mental.
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 15:10, Reply)
According to somebody I used to know, the British secret service are able to access files on your computer via your internet connection, even if the computer is turned off and unplugged from the mains.

I tried to point out that there was no way of powering up a PC remotely if it wasn't plugged in, but despite working in the computer biz for twenty years, I knew 'fuck all'.

Of course, he's dead now, so maybe MI5 were after him after all...
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 15:10, 1 reply)
David Bowie
My ex-boss isn't much of a nutter. But has the most RIDICULOUS theories.

The stupidest one he told me was:

"Oi, Curly" (on account of my hair)

"*sigh* yes Ron?"

"Do you know who was responsible for the Credit CrunchTM?"

"No, Ron... Gordon Brown? The Clangers?"

"David Bowie"

Apparently, Mr Bowie sold on the rights and royalties to his songs for instant cash (lots of instant cash) to various companies. The banks decided to adopt this policy. Which is why we're in the Credit CrunchTM.

He then promptly called me and my dad "Vultures" for investing in RBS shares when they were dirt cheap. Cunt.

Length? Well the hinges I was supposed to be pricing were about 8".
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 14:42, 4 replies)
too much to go into in detail but I am fortunate enough to share a mailing list with this fruitbat. You will note, I trust, that even his URL is mental. His far-ranging yet curiously self-centred conspiracy theories include a mysterious obsession with non-specific 'pervs' in the upper echelons of society; the notion that so-called Deep Vein Thrombosis is actually a side-effect of a previously unknown physical force which he has discovered, as a result of which he is the subject of a conspiracy to silence him; and that the BBC is in the habit of 'stealing' ideas mentioned in passing in phone calls to consumer programmes by making Radio 4 documentaries on vaguely related subjects five or six years later...

Of course if you dare to point out the massive logical and factual errors in his 'reasoning' you get a rant about how you're part of some sort of sinister cabal yourself.
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 14:39, Reply)
Well I'm certainly convinced.
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 14:36, 1 reply)
I might make him a tin foil hat
I have just come out of a meeting with a business contact who mentioned to me that he had had some serious health problems a few years ago. The problems sounded appalling. He blames the government for them so I asked him why he hadn't sued. He explained that whenever the government was on the receiving end of litigation like that "MI5 break in to your house, put child pron on your computer and use that to ruin your life".
All I could think of was this QoTW as he said this & found it extremely painful to bite my lip sufficiently hard enough so I didn't laugh my testicles off.

The scary bit for me is that this bloke is extremely (top 2%) intelligent - I can understand the less gifted believing such bollocks but someone intelligent?
(, Fri 28 Aug 2009, 14:18, 2 replies)

This question is now closed.

Pages: Popular, 9, 8, 7, 6, 5, 4, 3, 2, 1