Conspiracy Theories That You Actually Believe
Options
Comments
-
The user and all related content has been deleted.
-
The user and all related content has been deleted.
-
malignant thunderbuddies ? nevermore. As an older ? one can see the ? did smell like socks. ? get down to treadstone and make new man gravy!!!!! Peddie Wac and Satanic Steve both ? their way threw jepordy but the jokes on them Hail Bertram. I took it as 1 peridon nurse ratchets said ? it bought me some ol Christian Brothers and went to the hookers. Lesson learned as a young mustache ? 1 fuckem all. Off to JM Wave starting new few mepos people trans DF Express on suicide precautions because I ? Draino. ? you and ? what you talkin about.
-
The user and all related content has been deleted.
-
The user and all related content has been deleted.
-
The user and all related content has been deleted.
-
The war on pseudo militants is about to see its first victims............
-
The user and all related content has been deleted.
-
The user and all related content has been deleted.
-
do you have any serious evidence beyond "i don't like the Bush administration?"blackamerica wrote: »9/11? Too much evidence pointing back to the Bush administration. You gotta kiddin me
The Bush Administrations affiliation with PNAC and PNAC's consequent influence on Foreign policy -
The user and all related content has been deleted.
-
Black_Samson wrote: »RodrigueZz wrote: »
do you have any serious evidence beyond "i don't like the Bush administration?"blackamerica wrote: »9/11? Too much evidence pointing back to the Bush administration. You gotta kiddin me
The Bush Administrations affiliation with PNAC and PNAC's consequent influence on Foreign policy
be awesome if they went after them for OIF, 9/11 and all the other ? they pulled.
be awesome to see a Rogue SS agent take bush and cheney out...
Agreed.
They are smarter than that though. They would 'disappear' quicker than Stalin could drink an jug of vodka -
The user and all related content has been deleted.
-
okay, but what i am saying is this: it's one thing to make a lot of vague claims and then when something is actually confirmed, to declare that's the kind of thing you meant... and another to call out a specific conspiracy and have it get confirmed.There were individuals who questioned whether experiments were being conducted on citizens in "third world" countries (which has happened and continues to), even if they didn't specifically call the syphilis experiment in Guatemala.
why would a van explosion in 1993 get you increased airline security in 2001I believe some of the 9/11 conspiracy for the simple fact that i dont believe it would be that easy for hijackers to fly passenger planes in 2 of the most secure buildings in the world.
Especially after the 93 bombings
for promoting war, okay, but we're talking about hard evidence of a 9/11 conspiracy.RodrigueZz wrote: »The Bush Administrations affiliation with PNAC and PNAC's consequent influence on Foreign policy
-
Further, the process of transformation, even if it brings revolutionary change, is likely to be a long one, absent some catastrophic and catalyzing event – like a new Pearl Harbor. Domestic politics and industrial policy will shape the pace and content of transformation as much as the requirements of current missions
Here it would seem 9/11 meets their Pearl Harbor requirement. Although this is very circumstantial evidence it shows that if PNAC needed a catastrophe to spark a war and they had a lot of influence on the Bush administration then they could have easily had a part in 9/11.
Not thw atrongest evidence but it is fairly concrete. More so than some other arguments.
Link: http://www.newamericancentury.org/RebuildingAmericasDefenses.pdf -
concrete THEORY, maybe, but it's not really concrete evidence. i mean, at some point there's got to be something more than "the fact that this worked out well for them implies there's a confirmed conspiracy." i'm not going to say groups are going to miss a chance to pounce on circumstances that favor what they want, but i think i'll say it's not the same thing.RodrigueZz wrote: »Not thw atrongest evidence but it is fairly concrete. More so than some other arguments.
-
The user and all related content has been deleted.
-
concrete THEORY, maybe, but it's not really concrete evidence. i mean, at some point there's got to be something more than "the fact that this worked out well for them implies there's a confirmed conspiracy." i'm not going to say groups are going to miss a chance to pounce on circumstances that favor what they want, but i think i'll say it's not the same thing.RodrigueZz wrote: »Not thw atrongest evidence but it is fairly concrete. More so than some other arguments.
We have motive we just need a murder weapon or some witness testimony.
t -
right, but motive was never the hard part. i just want to see that hard evidence.RodrigueZz wrote: »We have motive we just need a murder weapon or some witness testimony.
-
Maximus Rex wrote: »blackamerica wrote: »
The problem with people who believe 9/11 conspiracies is that their showing their ignorance of the intelligence community. Unlike my JFK assassination theory, (which could've been done with the knowledge of a few people,) The 9/11 conspiracy theory falls a part simply because of the amount of people who had access to that information, which was probably hundreds possibly even thousands of people. Also the House and Senate Intelligence Committees get the same intel the President does. My point is that there were simply too my people involved to keep Pres. Bush having foreknowledge of 9/11 a secret. Also people are forgetting that people in the intelligence community are extremely patriotic, if had foreknowledge that attack was imminent and he left it go down anyway, somebody would have gotten that information to the press, a la ? . Also, I have a had time believing that Colin Powell would have went along with some ? like that.
I don't believe everything about the 9/11 conspiracies but I don't trust the official story. I won't go into everything because ? don't read but the first thing that seemed odd to me was.....
What we were told about why the government failed to intercept the planes. I recall a news report saying that the air traffic controllers could not find the aircraft because the terrorists turned off the transponders making them invisible. The Washington Post reported Vice-President ? Cheney explain that the terrorists had "turned off the transponder, which led to a later report that a plane had gone down over Ohio, but it really hadn't." [Meet the Press, NBC, 16 Sept 2001]
The problem is: turning off the transponder would have been the best way of raising an alert. It does not make them invisible. I know this because I tracked aircraft aboard the USS Nimitz. The interruption of a transponder also directly sets off an alert with the military body responsible for air defenses of the United States and Canada, NORAD.
The procedures are very strict in the case of a problem with a transponder, both on civilian and military aircraft. The FAA regulations describe exactly how to proceed when a transponder is not functioning properly: the control tower should enter into radio contact at once with the pilot and, if it fails, immediately warn the military who would then send fighters to establish visual contact with the crew. [see FAA regulations: http://faa.gov/ATpubs]
The plane can STILL be tracked. The radar still picks up the aircraft, just not the IFF code (Identify Friend or Foe) IFF is an identification system designed for command and control. It enables military and national (civilian-located ATC) interrogation systems to identify aircraft, vehicles or forces as friendly and to determine their bearing and range from the interrogator. When this is turned off you simply track the aircraft that is NOT emitting this code.
This was a major red flag for me.
As for a bunch of rich folks getting together and plotting against the people, I posted a thread a few weeks ago about an article that was in Rolling Stone Magazine. The link is below.
From the piece......."Conspiracy theorists of the world, believers in the hidden hands of the Rothschilds and the Masons and the Illuminati, we skeptics owe you an apology. You were right. The players may be a little different, but your basic premise is correct: The world is a rigged game. We found this out in recent months, when a series of related corruption stories spilled out of the financial sector, suggesting the world's largest banks may be fixing the prices of, well, just about everything......"
Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/everything-is-rigged-the-biggest-financial-scandal-yet-20130425#ixzz2UWRS3Qug
-
Y'all read that report about Ibagrim Todashev? The guy was friends w/ one of the brothers who allegedly planted those bombs in Boston. Well, the guy was shot 7 times by authorities (once in back of the head) while being questioned about the bombing. Y'all ? is ? idiots if you dont think the government setup these terrorist acts and ? whoever knows too much. This is the PERFECT example of the foul things the US government do when they run outta lies to feed the public. But yet I'm the crazy one? Gtfoh
RIP Ibagrim Todashev & Malcolm Shabaaz -
i just thought you were the one that pitched a fit about dudes dodging his questions right before he fled this threadblackamerica wrote: »But yet I'm the crazy one? Gtfoh
-
No. I just stopped debating you because I realized you discredit every conspiracy but all your counter theories are vague and shallowi just thought you were the one that pitched a fit about dudes dodging his questions right before he fled this thread -
blackamerica wrote: »Y'all read that report about Ibagrim Todashev? The guy was friends w/ one of the brothers who allegedly planted those bombs in Boston. Well, the guy was shot 7 times by authorities (once in back of the head) while being questioned about the bombing. Y'all ? is ? idiots if you dont think the government setup these terrorist acts and ? whoever knows too much. This is the PERFECT example of the foul things the US government do when they run outta lies to feed the public. But yet I'm the crazy one? Gtfoh
RIP Ibagrim Todashev & Malcolm ShabaazThe FBI Changes Its Story (Again) on the Ibragim Todashev Shooting
By Dashiell Bennett | The Atlantic Wire – 18 hrs ago
Law enforcement officials are still trying to explain how a supposedly peaceful interview with an important witness in the Boston bombing case turned into a deadly shooting, but as usual, every new attempt to explain the death of Ibragim Todashev only raises more troubling questions. After originally accusing the suspect and potential murderous accomplice of Boston bomber Tamleran Tsarnaev of attacking an FBI agent with a knife, and then walking back that claim entirely, an new anonymous source says Todashev, may have injured the agent with a table and a metal pole. Or maybe not.
Here's the way the attack was described in The New York Times. Everyone seems to agree that after several hours of interrogation, Todashev was prepared to confess to an unsolved murder that he and Tamerlan Tsarnaev were connected to. Then thing get a lot less clear:
At that moment, Mr. Todashev picked up the table and threw it at the agent, knocking him to the ground. While trying to stand up, the agent, who suffered a wound to his face from the table that required stitches, drew his gun and saw Mr. Todashev running at him with a metal pole, according to the official, adding that it might have been a broomstick.
So not only has the story changed again, it has now changed twice in the same sentence. The weapon has no gone from nothing to a knife, back to nothing, to a table, to a metal pole, to a broomstick. Todashev was also apparently shot more than once, after an initial volley of "several shots" somehow failed to bring him down.
Oh, and there's a pretty big difference between a metal pole and a broomstick, and the fact that the Times source can't decide which one it is suggests they don't really know happened either. (CNN reported that Todashev owned a samurai sword that was in the room, but no one has yet suggested that he wielded that at any time.) With at least three witnesses, you're likely to get three different stories and we might never know which, if any of them, is the most accurate.
http://news.yahoo.com/fbi-changes-story-again-ibragim-todashev-shooting-114132404.html -
[/quote]The FBI Changes Its Story (Again) on the Ibragim Todashev Shooting
By Dashiell Bennett | The Atlantic Wire – 18 hrs ago
Law enforcement officials are still trying to explain how a supposedly peaceful interview with an important witness in the Boston bombing case turned into a deadly shooting, but as usual, every new attempt to explain the death of Ibragim Todashev only raises more troubling questions. After originally accusing the suspect and potential murderous accomplice of Boston bomber Tamleran Tsarnaev of attacking an FBI agent with a knife, and then walking back that claim entirely, an new anonymous source says Todashev, may have injured the agent with a table and a metal pole. Or maybe not.
Here's the way the attack was described in The New York Times. Everyone seems to agree that after several hours of interrogation, Todashev was prepared to confess to an unsolved murder that he and Tamerlan Tsarnaev were connected to. Then thing get a lot less clear:
At that moment, Mr. Todashev picked up the table and threw it at the agent, knocking him to the ground. While trying to stand up, the agent, who suffered a wound to his face from the table that required stitches, drew his gun and saw Mr. Todashev running at him with a metal pole, according to the official, adding that it might have been a broomstick.
So not only has the story changed again, it has now changed twice in the same sentence. The weapon has no gone from nothing to a knife, back to nothing, to a table, to a metal pole, to a broomstick. Todashev was also apparently shot more than once, after an initial volley of "several shots" somehow failed to bring him down.
Oh, and there's a pretty big difference between a metal pole and a broomstick, and the fact that the Times source can't decide which one it is suggests they don't really know happened either. (CNN reported that Todashev owned a samurai sword that was in the room, but no one has yet suggested that he wielded that at any time.) With at least three witnesses, you're likely to get three different stories and we might never know which, if any of them, is the most accurate.
http://news.yahoo.com/fbi-changes-story-again-ibragim-todashev-shooting-114132404.html
Good ?
Now listen to this ? and explain to me again why we ever trusted the US government. I been told you there's too many inconsistencies in the Boston bombing, and now a guy gets murdered by government officials? Y'all ? spend all this time dismissing every conspiracy but disappear when ? like this happens. How do you explain shooting a unarmed man 7 times? Why is the government switching stories every other day? So he was" about" to confess to a triple murder before you shot him 7 times (once in the back of the head)? Um, ok.
More importantly, WHY ISNT THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA INVESTIGATING THIS? The story is so blatantly inconsistent one has to be alarmed. But this is the same media janklow so vigorously defends against any thought of a conspiracy.
![[Deleted User]](https://w1.vanillicon.com/v2/15efd8efe08bb34aae25f1808aaf5018.svg)
