How real conspiracies are exposed

[idiom]

Hello BlackTerrel. Let me see if I understand you. Do you only care about unimportant conspiracies (such as the girlfriend of some football player I've never heard of because I don't think college football or even pro football is important in the grand scheme of things)? Is that what makes a conspiracy "real"?

Frankly I haven't gotten deep into Sandy Hook or the Aurora shooting beyond the fact that the Aurora shooter was definitely hopped up on drugs and the Sandy Hook shooter may have been as well. But what about the death of Osama Bin Laden? Does that not count as a "real conspiracy" just because it hasn't gotten the MSM rubber stamp of approval? Let's look at the facts:

1) At first the government said they were watching it on live TV. We even have the "picture" to prove that. Then later we were told there all of the helmet cams failed and there was no video feed. So what were they looking at?

2) At first Pakistan released a picture of the dead OBL. Then they said the picture was a fake.

3) At first a congressman said he saw pictures of a dead OBL. Then he said he was "mistaken".

4) At first the Pentagon said they did DNA tests to prove it was really OBL. Now they say they don't have OBL's DNA records.

5) OBL's alleged "burial at sea" which was supposedly done "in accordance with Islamic custom" actually violates Islam.

6) Members of the SEAL team that supposedly killed OBL were killed a couple of weeks later....only we learn it was supposedly a different SEAL team 6.

But hey, if you care more about football players' imaginary girlfriends more power to you.

The above are questions, not answers. You need speculation free answers, preferably with documentation or witnesses.

Otherwise you end up in the group that sees blurry footage of the strike on the Pentagon and decides it was definitely a SCUD missile even though Scuds are ballistic and not surface skimming then claim its declassified proof.

[idiom]

You can nest QUOTE's

edit: Not meaning to correct you, only give you a way to show the timeline of events

Is there an easy way to do this? The forum stopped nesting quotes automatically and I never found out how to turn it back on.

[ClydeCoulter]

The above are questions, not answers. You need speculation free answers, preferably with documentation or witnesses.

Otherwise you end up in the group that sees blurry footage of the strike on the Pentagon and decides it was definitely a SCUD missile even though Scuds are ballistic and not surface skimming then claim its declassified proof.

Yea, he needs a team with access to "eyes only", then he can get to the bottom of it. Until then, questions that beg the question are all we can do. There are things that you know, and there are things that cannot be proven, but can be demonstrated.

[ClydeCoulter]

Is there an easy way to do this? The forum stopped nesting quotes automatically and I never found out how to turn it back on.

I have to open more than one browser to the forums, edit with quote, copy, paste to the other, then cancel the one I copied from. Yea, would be nice to have a "reply with quoted quotes".

But the forums support the syntax for nested quotes.

[idiom]

I remember one of jmdrake's favorite 9/11 factoids used to be how the FBI admitted that former Chief of the Pakistani Inter-services Intelligence helped wire $100,000 to Muhammad Attah, and then the 9/11 Commission essentially said that whoever funded the 19 hijackers was immaterial.

I mean, $#@!, that's like a prosecutor saying that whoever funded the hitman isn't worth investigating.

Not wanting do get difficult answers is not the same as proof of a conspiracy. The US has a tonne of two faced relationships that require actively maintaining blindness to tolerate. Most of these are known and well understood. The MSM will never call them out in an interview, because they will never get an interview again. The establishment ignores them because its the only way to get their job done. Maybe its a job they shouldn't be doing, but America votes consistently to maintain a two-faced foreign policy because it ensure cheap oil and that Americans don't have to work too hard.

Maybe before the investigation gets to the root cause, its gets as far as Michael Moore got, which was Saudi backing. Michael Moore got completely ignored because America *must not* be enemies with Saudi Arabia.

Denial is not the same as a cover-up although it leaves a trail of mistakes and hypocrisy and retracted statements which looks pretty similar.

[ClydeCoulter]

Which is worse, committing treason and denying it or covering it up?

[Anti Federalist]

Manti Te'o balled his eyes out...

Oh, and spelling matters.

"Balled his eyes out" is some kind of masturbatory skull $#@!ing I've never heard of.

"Bawled his eyes out" is what I think you meant.

The more you know.

[Anti Federalist]

///

[idiom]

Yea, he needs a team with access to "eyes only", then he can get to the bottom of it. Until then, questions that beg the question are all we can do. There are things that you know, and there are things that cannot be proven, but can be demonstrated.

Investigative journalism is the process of getting that information. Building and developing 'sources', or hacking, or breaking and entering or 'finding' material. Its not easy and almost no one does it any more. A serious investigation would be hella risky. Going to jail would be not-so-bad result.

[UWDude]

In referring to Occam's razor, how does this relate to the linguistics pertaining to the analysis of the conclusion?

if someone had accused this of being a hoax, Occam's Razor would have clearly come down on the side of not a hoax.

That is why Occam's Razor does not apply to the actions of people. They are wily, deceptive, and unpredictable.

[Dystopian]

Obama just signed an unprecedented series of executive orders to disarm you - BUT WAIT LOOK OVER HER YOU PATHETIC PEONS AT THIS IDIOTIC STORY ABOUT SOME FOOTBALL PLAYER AND HIS IMAGINARY GIRLFRIEND

[idiom]

if someone had accused this of being a hoax, Occam's Razor would have clearly come down on the side of not a hoax.

That is why Occam's Razor does not apply to the actions of people. They are wily, deceptive, and unpredictable.

Occam was a monk. Occams razor applies to the actions of God on the basis that ceteris paribus God would pick the simpler option.

It is directly opposed to Murphys Laws which are based on the theory that God likes to mess around for the lolz.

[idiom]

Obama just signed an unprecedented series of executive orders to disarm you - BUT WAIT LOOK OVER HER YOU PATHETIC PEONS AT THIS IDIOTIC STORY ABOUT SOME FOOTBALL PLAYER AND HIS IMAGINARY GIRLFRIEND

You are saying that the pathetic story is in fact *more* disarming than the EO to disarm?

[FindLiberty]

Anti Federalist "Balled his eyes out" ...The more you know.

LOL

OK, maybe it was this Mellon Baller then?

[FindLiberty]

Obama just signed an unprecedented series of executive orders to disarm you - BUT WAIT LOOK OVER HER YOU PATHETIC PEONS AT THIS IDIOTIC STORY ABOUT SOME FOOTBALL PLAYER AND HIS IMAGINARY GIRLFRIEND

THIS!

[BlackTerrel]

They were pretty sure it was a hoax right away, or otherwise they would not have spent that much time investigating. It took 3 months to gather enough evidence to convince everyone else.

They had a hypothesis and then they investigated and they waited until all the evidence was airtight and indisputable before coming forward. That way everyone followed their lead and they left no doubt.

They also made sure not to be huge $#@!s in the 1% chance that they were wrong and they accused a guy whose girlfriend just died of lying.

What if these people really lost loved ones and they are now being harassed? Kind of a terrible thing - among the lowest a human being can do to another.

[jmdrake]

The above are questions, not answers. You need speculation free answers, preferably with documentation or witnesses.

Otherwise you end up in the group that sees blurry footage of the strike on the Pentagon and decides it was definitely a SCUD missile even though Scuds are ballistic and not surface skimming then claim its declassified proof.

No. They are answers. A question would be "Does the Pentagon have proof of Osama Bin Laden's death". The answer clearly is "no". Now the answer may beg the question "Well why the hell did they lie about it, and why is the MSM treating bull$#@! fiction like 'Zero Dark Thirty' as if it was based on reality" but that's something altogether different. But hey, go ahead and smugly deny facts that don't fit truth that you want to face up to at this moment. We all go through this phase in our lives at some time or another. Eventually we forget about the "facts" for truths we don't want to face, or we face up to the truth.

[BlackTerrel]

No they're really just inconsistencies in stories which happens with everything. Kind of like when Miley Cyrus was reported dead - but she isn't. And 100 others.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...ure_obituaries

You can't just pick and choose what you want to believe.

If anything an actual hoax would have far less inconsistencies since everyone would be rehearsing the official story from the beginning.

[UWDude]

It is directly opposed to Murphys Laws which are based on the theory that God likes to mess around for the lolz.

And as America begins it's steady decline, as infrastructure crumbles, and the economy keeps taking big hits and closures...
...people on forums will start citing Murphy's law as the reason, as opposed to all the corruption and government ineptitude.

[BlackTerrel]

Why can't Alex Jones do what deadspin did? Research it. Dig deep. Find the actors involved. Prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

No one could read that deadspin article and still believe the original story. Why can't the infowars crew do the same?

[jmdrake]

Question: What proof does the Pentagon have and/or is willing to release of Osama Bin Laden's death?

Answer: None.

http://m.startribune.com/?id=142811145

Article by: RICHARD LARDNER , Associated Press

Updated: March 15, 2012 - 3:06 PM

WASHINGTON - The hunt for Osama bin Laden took nearly a decade. It could take even longer to uncover U.S. government emails, planning reports, photographs and more that would shed light on how an elite team of Navy SEALs killed the world's most wanted terrorist.

Ten months after that electrifying covert mission, an administration that has pledged to be the most transparent in American history is refusing to release documents about it under the Freedom of Information Act. The records could provide insights into how bin Laden died, how the U.S. verified his identity and how it decided to bury him at sea, as well as photographs taken during and after the May 2011 raid on his compound in Abbottabad, Pakistan.

Government officials have openly discussed details of the mission in speeches, interviews and television appearances, but the administration won't disclose records that would confirm their narrative of that fateful night. The Obama administration has not said even where in Washington's bureaucracy all the documents might be stored.

Requests for bin Laden materials were among the most significant of any filed last year under the open records law, which compels the government to turn over copies of federal records for free or at little cost. Anyone who seeks information under the law is generally supposed to get it unless disclosure would hurt national security, violate personal privacy or expose business secrets or confidential decision-making. The law has been the focus of extra attention since Sunday, the start of Sunshine Week, when news organizations promote open government and freedom of information.

Citing the law, The Associated Press asked for files about the raid in more than 20 separate requests, mostly submitted the day after bin Laden's death. The Pentagon told the AP this month it could not locate any photographs or video taken during the raid or showing bin Laden's body. It also said it could not find any images of bin Laden's body on the Navy aircraft carrier where the al-Qaida leader's body was taken.

The Pentagon said it could not find any death certificate, autopsy report or results of DNA identification tests for bin Laden, or any pre-raid materials discussing how the government planned to dispose of bin Laden's body if he were killed. It said it searched files at the Pentagon, U.S. Special Operations Command in Tampa, Fla., and the Navy command in San Diego that controls the USS Carl Vinson, the aircraft carrier used in the mission.

The Defense Department told the AP in late February it could not find any emails about the bin Laden mission or his "Geronimo" code name that were sent or received in the year before the raid by William McRaven, the three-star admiral at the Joint Special Operations Command who organized and oversaw the mission. It also could not find any emails from other senior officers who would have been involved in the mission's planning. It found only three such emails written by or sent to then-Defense Secretary Robert Gates, and these consisted of 12 pages sent to Gates summarizing news reports after the raid.

Under the FOIA, even if a document contains secrets about national security, the government can censor those passages but must release anything else in the document that is "reasonably segregable."

The information blackout means that the only public accounts of the mission come from U.S. officials who have described details of that night. In the hours and days after bin Laden's death, the White House provided conflicting versions of events, falsely saying that bin Laden was armed and even firing at the SEALs, misidentifying which of bin Laden's sons was killed, and incorrectly saying bin Laden's wife died in the shootout. President Barack Obama's press secretary attributed the errors to the "fog of combat."

Since then, no authoritative or contemporaneous records have been made available. For the Obama administration, the book on bin Laden appears to be closed.

The Pentagon is refusing even to confirm or deny the existence of helicopter maintenance logs and reports about the performance of military gear used in the raid. One of the stealth helicopters that carried the SEALs to Abbottabad crashed during the mission and its wreckage was left behind. People who lived near bin Laden's compound took photos of the disabled chopper as it straddled one of the high walls surrounding the building. The photos showed a unique tail rotor that aviation experts said was designed to avoid radar detection.

On the AP's request for the helicopter records and equipment reports, the Defense Department invoked what is known as a "Glomar response." The reference dates to the 1970s when the CIA refused to confirm or deny the existence of the Glomar Explorer, a ship the agency used in the attempted salvage of a sunken Soviet submarine.

The AP is appealing the Defense Department's decision. The CIA, which ran the bin Laden raid and has special legal authority to keep information from ever being made public, still has not responded to AP's request for records about the mission.

The CIA has photographs of video recordings of bin Laden taken during the operation. In the days after the raid, select U.S. lawmakers were invited to visit a secure room at CIA headquarters to view more than a dozen of the images, including pictures of bin Laden's body. They were not allowed to take copies of the photos back to Capitol Hill.

Sen. James Inhofe, R-Okla., a senior member of the Senate Armed Services Committee, said he viewed one photo that showed brain matter coming out of bin Laden's eye socket. Inhofe said others were taken as the body was being prepared for burial at sea and were less jarring. He said Thursday that he favors making at least a few of the less graphic photos public to dispel any doubts that bin Laden is dead.

"There are probably still people out there who don't think he was killed," Inhofe said.

Federal courts consistently have upheld the government's use of the Glomar response, which is different from refusing to disclose materials. Citing Glomar often happens in national security cases or is used to protect an individual's privacy. It's a tough legal claim to beat in court.

The former director of the Justice Department's Office of Information and Privacy, Dan Metcalfe, said the Pentagon overplayed its position. Citing Glomar in AP's case means the fact that the military performs maintenance on helicopters or that it prepares reports about weapons performance is itself classified, he said. The Pentagon's claim is so broad that it "collapses of its own weight," Metcalfe said.

Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group, has sued the administration in federal court to force the release of photos and video of bin Laden. The AP has not sued to force the government to turn over the broader range of materials it has requested.

In the Judicial Watch lawsuit, federal officials acknowledged that the CIA has more than 50 photographs and video recordings of bin Laden's body taken after the raid and during his burial at sea. The director of the CIA's National Clandestine Service, John Bennett, said in a court declaration last year that many of the photographs and video recordings are "quite graphic, as they depict the fatal bullet wound to (bin Laden) and other similarly gruesome images of his corpse."

Judicial Watch has disputed the Obama administration's argument that American personnel and secrets will be at risk if the images are released. It called the concern over violence against Americans stationed overseas "hypothetical speculation" and said it is hard to understand how a photo of bin Laden being buried at sea would expose sensitive equipment or personnel.

The U.S. Special Operations Command, which oversees the Navy SEALs and other commando units, keeps tight rein on information about their equipment, training and missions. In August 2007, it denied a request by the AP for an internal report on the Battle of Mogadishu, a military operation in Somalia in October 1993 that cost 18 American troops their lives.

The command told AP that the report was still classified, even though the battle, better known as "Black Hawk Down," was the subject of books, a movie and countless military studies. Under AP's appeal, the command eventually released a copy with all but nine of the 73 pages completely blacked out. Most of the information remains secret, the command said, to protect military plans, weapon systems and the privacy of individuals involved.

In other cases, the government has revealed more. Just four months after Operation Eagle Claw, the failed attempt in 1980 to rescue 53 U.S. hostages in Iran, the Pentagon released an unclassified version of an investigation about what went wrong. The forward to the 87-page report noted the importance of providing as much detail as possible to the American public.

More recently, the National Security Archive, a private research institute at George Washington University, waited three years for the government to hand over records describing the military's initial plans for invading Iraq. A series of slides, prepared under the codename Polo Step, showed that war planners believed in August 2002 that the U.S. would have only 5,000 troops left in Iraq by December 2006.

[BlackTerrel]

Oh, and spelling matters.

"Balled his eyes out" is some kind of masturbatory skull $#@!ing I've never heard of.

"Bawled his eyes out" is what I think you meant.

The more you know.

Learned something new

http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=baller

[UWDude]

Why can't Alex Jones do what deadspin did? Research it. Dig deep. Find the actors involved. Prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

No one could read that deadspin article and still believe the original story. Why can't the infowars crew do the same?

probably because Alex Jones and his crew had no idea about a story in college football. Maybe if it were the NFL, they may have raised some eyebrows. But deadspin is more a tabloid/celebrity gossip joint.

[jmdrake]

Why can't Alex Jones do what deadspin did? Research it. Dig deep. Find the actors involved. Prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

No one could read that deadspin article and still believe the original story. Why can't the infowars crew do the same?

It's got nothing to do with Alex Jones or Infowars and everything to do with the fact that it's easier for you to accept a non conspiracy (one man lying about a non existent girlfriend is not a conspiracy because a conspiracy requires two or more people) than it is for you to admit that something nefarious may be afoot in the U.S. government. Everything can be "explained away" by a mind not willing to deal with what they're faced with.

[jmdrake]

Why can't Alex Jones do what deadspin did? Research it. Dig deep. Find the actors involved. Prove it beyond a reasonable doubt.

No one could read that deadspin article and still believe the original story. Why can't the infowars crew do the same?

It's got nothing to do with Alex Jones or Infowars and everything to do with the fact that it's easier for you to accept a non conspiracy (one man lying about a non existent girlfriend is not a conspiracy because a conspiracy requires two or more people) than it is for you to admit that something nefarious may be afoot in the U.S. government. Everything can be "explained away" by a mind not willing to deal with what they're faced with.

[ican'tvote]

one man lying about a non existent girlfriend is not a conspiracy because a conspiracy requires two or more people

Weren't his parents involved as well?

[BlackTerrel]

probably because Alex Jones and his crew had no idea about a story in college football. Maybe if it were the NFL, they may have raised some eyebrows. But deadspin is more a tabloid/celebrity gossip joint.

I didn't mean this story. I mean why can't they do it with newtown? Spend the time and resources to do what deadspin did to Manti and expose the newtown story for all to see. You do that and no one can question you. Just like no one is questioning the deadspin story.

But that kind of digging takes months and time and resources - you can't just pop a youtube video up two hours later and claim that people didn't cry enough.

It's got nothing to do with Alex Jones or Infowars and everything to do with the fact that it's easier for you to accept a non conspiracy (one man lying about a non existent girlfriend is not a conspiracy because a conspiracy requires two or more people)

More than two people are involved in the Manti story.

than it is for you to admit that something nefarious may be afoot in the U.S. government. Everything can be "explained away" by a mind not willing to deal with what they're faced with.

A lot of things are afoot in the US government. But I'd want to see more than people not crying enough before I accuse them of lying and being actors when it is wholly possible those people just lost their kids. When people just lost their kids lives I'd like to be 100% sure before I open them up to harassment.

[jmdrake]

Not wanting do get difficult answers is not the same as proof of a conspiracy. The US has a tonne of two faced relationships that require actively maintaining blindness to tolerate. Most of these are known and well understood. The MSM will never call them out in an interview, because they will never get an interview again. The establishment ignores them because its the only way to get their job done. Maybe its a job they shouldn't be doing, but America votes consistently to maintain a two-faced foreign policy because it ensure cheap oil and that Americans don't have to work too hard.

Maybe before the investigation gets to the root cause, its gets as far as Michael Moore got, which was Saudi backing. Michael Moore got completely ignored because America *must not* be enemies with Saudi Arabia.

Denial is not the same as a cover-up although it leaves a trail of mistakes and hypocrisy and retracted statements which looks pretty similar.

If you "deny" looking into the money man of a crime, that is by $#@!ing definition a cover up. It matters not why the "denial" is done.

[BlackTerrel]

Weren't his parents involved as well?

The Tuiasosopo family as well, as well as a young female who is still not identified.

Point is it took respected journalists and investigators three months to blow this thing open with enough information and facts that no one could dispute it.

It took the Jones crew a couple hours because people didn't cry enough.

What if people suffered the worse experience any parent could ever have and they are then harassed and called names and Alex Jones is wrong? What then?

[juleswin]

More than two people are involved in the Manti story.

.

Show me the proof that 2 or more people were involved cos as far as I am concerned, the only thing we know for sure is that there is no girl friend. Everything else is CT style conjecture.