It is not necessary to postulate a conspiracy when simple incompetence and ideological blindness serve so well. Was Katrina a conspiracy? Was the handling of Iraq and Afghanistan a conspiracy? How about the vaccines needed for the yearly flu prevention effort?
Just go away... Policies not Politics ---- Daily Landscape
Otherwise, comparing Katrina (a natural disaster) and Iraq (which was a consequence of the political climate after 9-11) isn't really relevant and doesn't refute anything that was said.
It's unfortunate to see that you think efforts at an accurate historical account are futile and you would just as soon see credible historians disappear instead of broadening your perspectives. If you have any valuable assertions or counterpoints they would be most welcomed.
Monsieur le Prof has given you a 2, I think for that reason (he might have explained why).
However, marek has given you a totally inappropriate troll-rating.
Once again, down-rating is not to be used to express disagreement. When locusts move on, they leave nothing behind
The rating has been wiped. Please avoid this kind of ratings abuse in future. When locusts move on, they leave nothing behind
Otherwise, rdf's comment is not trollish. He didn't call your (or anyone else's) research work "conspiracy". It seems hard to see how one can discuss this topic without reference to "conspiracy" or without using the word.
I don't know where you have used troll ratings or seen them used, but they are rarely handed out on ET. A discussion can easily degenerate into an exchange of retaliatory ratings, a situation it's better to avoid. When locusts move on, they leave nothing behind
