@Metal-Brain saidLike you, I don't give a damn what Blumenthal has to say.
So you are calling Max Blumenthal a liar?
Just admit you didn't read it.
@Nanomaster saidThere is no proof the Pyramids in Egypt were tombs for the dead. No mummies were found in any of them.
My ideas were presented above.
I suggest that there is nothing wrong with discussing conspiracy theories or presenting them as hypotheses.
I also suggest that it is incorrect to present an unproven theory as proven. That applies to the conspiracy theories as well.
I also suggest using more rational terminology, which enables one to distinguish between justified an ...[text shortened]... defending it.
Besides, you are not a lord, as you name yourself.
I shall not say who you are.
Does that mean that anybody who asserts the Pyramids were tombs for Egyptian Pharaohs is incorrect to present that unproven theory as proven? Because people have been doing that for a long time. Some would say that it is a good assumption, but that is what you are taking issue with.
I proved intent from both Trump and John Bolton. They both made statements that they wanted regime change for the oil. Shamelessly boasted about it really. If I am taboo for assuming they are trying the same thing again then you must think it is taboo to assume the Pyramids were tombs for the Pharaohs. You have no evidence.
@Metal-Brain saidYou're a liar, and so is Mr. Blumenthal.
No. Neither does María Corina Machado.
https://x.com/MaxBlumenthal/status/1976645608699044046
@Metal-Brain saidYou really are off your nut, aren't you?
There is no proof the Pyramids in Egypt were tombs for the dead. No mummies were found in any of them.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D6xoSFKYVv0
Does that mean that anybody who asserts the Pyramids were tombs for Egyptian Pharaohs is incorrect to present that unproven theory as proven? Because people have been doing that for a long time. Some would say that it is ...[text shortened]... you must think it is taboo to assume the Pyramids were tombs for the Pharaohs. You have no evidence.
@Metal-Brain saidNon sequitur.
And you have proof? Of course not. You never do because you are the liar.
You never took any courses in logic, did you?
@Metal-Brain saidWhat a moron. I'm not explaining this to you over and over again.
Again, using words you do not know the meaning of.
Using that term will only make you seem smart if you use it correctly.
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/non%20sequitur
@Metal-Brain saidHere we go.
And you have proof? Of course not. You never do because you are the liar.
Your statements literally 'do not follow'.
I don't need 'proof' to support my opinion, and not needing proof does not make me a liar.
Take a class in logic, for God's sake.
The post that was quoted here has been removedI think the valley of the kings. None were found in the pyramids. I didn't know that until recently. It was just assumed mummies were there at some point and were removed. I guess it is the grave robber theory. Problem is there is no evidence to support it. It is just a theory.
You can find videos on youtube about it. Some are fairly professional and some wacky. You know how it is.
@AThousandYoung saidFrom the link below:
China-Taiwan is the next big war and yes it’s being prepared for
"The Trump administration has authorized the CIA to take covert action inside Venezuela, including lethal operations, The New York Times reported on Wednesday, as the administration’s push toward regime change heats up.
President Trump later confirmed that he authorized the covert action and said the US was considering attacks on Venezuelan territory. “We are certainly looking at land now, because we’ve got the sea very well under control,” he said."
https://news.antiwar.com/2025/10/15/president-trump-authorizes-cia-to-conduct-lethal-covert-action-in-venezuela/
@Nanomaster saidOn Sunday, Vice President Delcy Rodríguez announced the alleged capture of “mercenaries” linked to the CIA, describing the arrests as part of a “false-flag operation” intended to provoke a military confrontation with Venezuela.
No real debate can originate from such a comment.
Webster's definition of "conspire" as an everyday word is not conclusive concerning the rational definition of "conspiracy theory".
It leads to the dubious definition that conspiracy theory is a theory about unlawful conspiracy. Such a definition is not prevailing among the definitions of "conspiracy theory". R ...[text shortened]... n conspiracy theory.
However, if you wish, you can continue using your flat-earthers terminology.
https://www.zerohedge.com/political/venezuela-alleges-it-detained-cia-group-accuses-us-orchestrating-false-flag-attack
Richard Haass said it was about regime change. It is no longer disputed rationally.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2025/09/03/trump-usa-venezuela-regime-change-maduro-cartels/
You can say Trump denied it was about regime change.
https://time.com/7315126/trump-maduro-venezuela-regime-change/
But he denied bombing Iran was about regime change too and later the same day admitted he wanted regime change in Iran on Truth Social.
https://www.newsweek.com/trump-iran-regime-change-truth-social-post-2089099
It is about regime change. Can you accept that now? You can continue to believe it is regime change to fight drugs if you are that determined to believe that ridiculous claim if you want. We all know Mexico is where most drugs come into the US though.