How real conspiracies are exposed

[Anti Federalist]

You guys are missing the point.

BlackTerrel just discovered a new force of nature which dictates that any story which is more complex than some football player lying about his girlfriend is necessarily true.

I propose that we label this newly discovered force of nature the "Black Terrel Hole".

Black Terrel Holes prohibit human beings from lying about anything that has more than one physical dimension to it.

This made me laugh for five minutes.

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

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.

Never confront irrationality with a rational response. In other words, this is a good response gone for naught. Instead, do what I do. In a world of lies, the only way to unravel the mysteries of the colorful metaphors and fancy superfluous similes of the media is by way of deep emotional interpretation.

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

You guys are missing the point.

BlackTerrel just discovered a new force of nature which dictates that any story which is more complex than some football player lying about his girlfriend is necessarily true.

I propose that we label this newly discovered force of nature the "Black Terrel Hole".



Black Terrel Holes prohibit human beings from lying about anything that has more than one physical dimension to it.

There is a subtle difference between one who is a baffling idiot and one who has been baffled into an idiot by the media. Show some respect. In the end, as the world educates us by having our superiors teach us, in clear contrast, God transforms us by having our inferiors teach us.

 

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

So.. what happened to Occam's razor on this one?

Surely it could have been applied to this situation to see that it was all a fraud.

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

 

[dannno]

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.

Never confront irrationality with a rational response. In other words, this is a good response gone for naught. Instead, do what I do. In a world of lies, the only way to unravel the mysteries of the colorful metaphors and fancy superfluous similes of the media is by way of deep emotional interpretation.

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, fuck, that's like a prosecutor saying that whoever funded the hitman isn't worth investigating.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

Never confront irrationality with a rational response. In other words, this is a good response gone for naught. Instead, do what I do. In a world of lies, the only way to unravel the mysteries of the colorful metaphors and fancy superfluous similes of the media is by way of deep emotional interpretation.

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, fuck, that's like a prosecutor saying that whoever funded the hitman isn't worth investigating.

You can nest QUOTE's

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

 

[BlackTerrel]

Actually, seriously, making this thread even less sensical is that absolutely no one did any investigative journalism whatsoever, outside of the independent site Deadspin, who's breaking more big stories than the MSM (even if they are as trashy as exposing Brett Favre's little buddy to the world).

Deadspin isn't that independent they're owned by a pretty sizable company. And yes most in the MSM didn't care to dig deep to see if a top ten football player made up an imaginary girlfriend. But once it was exposed it was exposed so blatantly that no one could deny it and it was covered everywhere.

Alternative news gets the job done once again reporting conspiracies accurately. No surprise here.

But how come it took deadspin 3 months and Alex Jones 3 hours?

 

[BlackTerrel]

Man Tai Teo's incident is not even a conspiracy, its just a hoax perpetuated by one attention starved individual. So yea we know humans lie and one more thing, a govt conspiracy would be a lot more sophisticated that the hoax of a little football player. The point is, I do not know what happened in this case in Sandy Hook and you dont know either what you know is what the govt is telling you and that is it.

If it will be more complex and sophisticated it will take more than three months to unravel. Which is how long it took to be 100% sure that this was a hoax. How do you all know it is a hoax right away?

But I can tell you what will solve this problem and put all the Sandy Hook Hoaxers to shame, show the damn video from the school. Show it tomorrow not next 6 months or year, show it now so we can all see it.

I am sure that will put the conspiracies to rest just like Obama's birth certificate proved he was born in Hawaii and not Muslim. Oh wait - the same people still believe that.

 

[Anti Federalist]

How do you all know it is a hoax right away?

Look, it's really not that difficult.

See, I don't know it's hoax, I don't know if it's a "conspiracy" or what it might be, whatever "it" happens to be.

But my default position, my first take on anything that comes out of the government's pie hole, or their paid official organs, is to immediately disbelieve it, question it and assume that they are lying.

It's much easier that way, it hews closer to the truth in almost all cases where there is any question about what "it" was or how "it" happened.

 

[ClydeCoulter]

If it will be more complex and sophisticated it will take more than three months to unravel. Which is how long it took to be 100% sure that this was a hoax. How do you all know it is a hoax right away?



I am sure that will put the conspiracies to rest just like Obama's birth certificate proved he was born in Hawaii and not Muslim. Oh wait - the same people still believe that.

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.

And Obama's birth certificate has a lot of problems, unnecessary layers, etc...it's not so straight forward. Even that could have been done on purpose, 'cause it doesn't make sense.

 

[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, fuck, 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 fucking 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.