If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Slate)   How one conspiracy theorist decided to stop being such an unmitigated moron   (slate.com) divider line 107
    More: Interesting, President John F. Kennedy, Warren Commission, conspiracy theories, Dealey Plaza, Chief Justice of the United States, college freshmen, Warren, Edward R. Murrow  
•       •       •

8618 clicks; posted to Main » on 15 Nov 2013 at 12:16 PM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



107 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest
 
2013-11-15 12:19:06 PM  
You mean how one conspiracy theorist chickened out after being threatened by the government.
 
2013-11-15 12:20:29 PM  
You mean how one conspiracy theorist realized that what he thought didn't matter a fark?
 
2013-11-15 12:20:45 PM  
As this promises to be a conspiracy thread, I would just like to take this opportunity to remind everyone that only my version of things is correct, only my facts are facts, and that I'm straight up pleasuring myself to the thought of how dumb you all are that only I can see the  TRUTH.

/so what are we talking about? 9/11? Trilateral Commission? Moon landing?
//they're all linked, you know
///three words: molybdenum futures market
////I've said too much
 
2013-11-15 12:22:21 PM  
The Pope finally decide Jesus probably wasn't God?
 
2013-11-15 12:24:20 PM  
In reality, all conspiracy theories are started by the government to create the illusion that they're vastly  more powerful and organized than they really are and distract the most attentive and creative of our citizens from focusing on the fact that they're really no more scary than the Keystone Cops.
 
2013-11-15 12:25:34 PM  
That's a well thought-out, reasoned....wait, nerves explode?!?  The fark?
 
2013-11-15 12:26:19 PM  
If you can just decide not to be a moron, you never were a moron, you've simply changed your mind. Morons don't know they're morons.
 
2013-11-15 12:26:20 PM  
Mostly, he ceased being a freshman, from the sounds of it. It's the people whose over-credulousness persists into later life that are the unmitigated morons.
 
2013-11-15 12:28:00 PM  
i watched a nova episode on this a couple of days ago in which they used modern ballistic and other forensic science to study the "magic bullet" theory. and you know what? it turns out to be completely plausible.
 
2013-11-15 12:28:15 PM  
What are the odds that this author will serve as a shining example to some of our own resident loons?
 
2013-11-15 12:29:52 PM  
Also, hunks of flesh and bone don't get pushed by rifle bullets. They explode in random direction.
 
2013-11-15 12:30:11 PM  
i1.ytimg.com

 Still working on his book.
 
2013-11-15 12:31:11 PM  
Now he's an annoying moron.
 
2013-11-15 12:32:13 PM  
There's no space to launch a full rebuttal of the conspiracy theorists. (It took 1,632 pages for Vincent Bugliosi to do that in his 2007 book  http://www.amazon.com/dp/0393045250/?tag=slatmaga-20" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(102, 0, 51); text-decoration: none; font-family: sl-ApresBold; font-size: 15px; line-height: 27px;">Reclaiming History.)

If it takes 1,632 pages to supposedly disprove something, it's probably true.
 
2013-11-15 12:33:03 PM  
I'll just leave this over here.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=11Fl9ZVJ7B8
 
2013-11-15 12:33:55 PM  
As a former conspiratard myself, I still find it hard to believe I got pulled into such delusion.

/i guess it's a phase some people go through
 
2013-11-15 12:35:22 PM  
Facts do have the damnedest way of ruining a good conspiracy theory.  If Kennedy assassination buffs wanted to do something actually useful for history, they'd stop asking WHO shot Kennedy,  because that is known and incontrovertible.   What they would do is ask WHY Oswald shot him and whether someone else put him up to the task and what that person's motivations were.   While I do not believe Lee Harvey was a spontaneous lunatic with a gun, I do believe the truth if it were ever uncovered would depress a lot of people as they discovered the incredibly trivial reason a great US president died
 
2013-11-15 12:36:30 PM  
So, they finally got to him.

The truth of what Dale Earnhardt saw will never be revealed.
 
2013-11-15 12:36:48 PM  

Magorn: What they would do is ask WHY Oswald shot him and whether someone else put him up to the task and what that person's motivations were. While I do not believe Lee Harvey was a spontaneous lunatic with a gun, I do believe the truth if it were ever uncovered would depress a lot of people as they discovered the incredibly trivial reason a great US president died


I dunno. If he was just acting alone, why the mob hit on him while he was in police custody?
 
2013-11-15 12:38:32 PM  
Conspiracy theory has nothing to do with the merits of the theory and everything to do with the theorist's longing for reason and order and perception of himself as smarter than everyone else.

That's why you never win on arguing the merits of a conspiracy theory.  To even attempt so, just proves that you are one of The Sheeple who doesn't see the powerful people controlling precisely every aspect of our lives.

These people don't like the randomness of some loner in Dallas shooting the President or of some backwoods cave-dwellers successfully carrying out a plan to kill 3,000 New Yorkers.  It happens.  Deal with it.
 
2013-11-15 12:39:04 PM  
t3.gstatic.com
 
2013-11-15 12:40:17 PM  

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: That's a well thought-out, reasoned....wait, nerves explode?!?  The fark?


No, that's bullshiat.

I am a pathologist and have never heard of that.  Furthermore, it would defy all laws of physics that an explosion contained entirely in your head would propel your meat-bag backwards, TOWARDS the bullet's origin.

I'm certainly no conspiracy theorist, and I don't know or care who killed Kennedy, but that claim as fact and proof that it was all a single gun-man shooting from the back is ludicrous.   Not only that, it makes me think that it's nothing more than a white-wash attempt to cover-up a pretty significant gap in the government's explanation of the assassination.
 
2013-11-15 12:42:09 PM  

netgamer7k: As a former conspiratard myself, I still find it hard to believe I got pulled into such delusion.

/i guess it's a phase some people go through


I believed in alien abductions and government UFO cover up when I was 17.  I didn't understand sleep paralysis then and I was prone to believing that people in certain professions were above idiocy or bullshiat.  You read a UFO report and they take great pains to point out that witness is a cop or a doctor and then you become and adult and you meet cops and doctors that are full of shiat.
 
2013-11-15 12:43:03 PM  
Well, even the U.S. government concluded that there was a conspiracy in the JFK assassination, specifically the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1978.

So it's not like it's fringe, tinfoil-hat paranoid or even moronic, substandardmitter, to claim there was.
 
2013-11-15 12:43:51 PM  
www.secretsofthefed.com
 
2013-11-15 12:44:01 PM  
Just the other day, an old friend of mine, that I actually respect as a well-rounded, intelligent person, posted up on FB that he was about ready to change his mind about this conspiracy thoery based on yet again, another TV special he just saw.

They have been going over this for over 40 years.  Does it really make any difference at this point?  I mean, let's just say that there was TRULY incontrovertible evidence that Oswald was not the only shooter (or even invloved).  What would that change?  What would it prove?  Who is still alive and relevant that they could be held responsible anyway.  Don't we have other things going on today that could stand to have a better looking at?
 
2013-11-15 12:44:25 PM  

trappedspirit: If it takes 1,632 pages to supposedly disprove something, it's probably true.


That sort of logic is what makes conspiracy theorists great.
 
2013-11-15 12:46:37 PM  
Lemme guess, he became an Obama fan.
 
2013-11-15 12:47:13 PM  
Obligatory:


UNCOMFORTABLE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ATTACK: Was it an inside job?

1) Why were a handful of rebel fighters able to penetrate the defenses of a battle station that had the capability of destroying an entire planet and the defenses to ward off several fleets of battle ships?

2) Why did Grand Moff Tarkin refuse to deploy the station's large fleet of TIE Fighters until it was too late? Was he acting on orders from somebody to not shoot down the rebel attack force? If so, who, and why?

3) Why was the rebel pilot who supposedly destroyed the Death Star reported to be on the Death Star days, maybe hours, prior to its destruction? Why was he allowed to escape, and why were several individuals dressed in Stormtrooper uniforms seen helping him?

4) Why has there not been an investigation into allegations that Darth Vader, the second-ranking member of the Imperial Government, is in fact the father of the pilot who allegedly destroyed the Death Star?

5) Why did Lord Vader decide to break all protocols and personally pilot a lightly armored TIE Fighter? Conveniently, this placed Lord Vader outside of the Death Star when it was destroyed, where he was also conveniently able to escape from a large-sized rebel fleet that had just routed the Imperial forces. Why would Lord Vader, one of the highest ranking members of the Imperial Government, suddenly decide to fly away from the Death Star in the middle of a battle? Did he know something that the rest of the Imperial Navy didn't?

6) How could any pilot shoot a missile into a 2 meter-wide exhaust port, let alone a pilot with no formal training, whose only claim to fame was his ability to "bullseye womprats" on Tatooine? This shot, according to one pilot, would be "impossible, even for a computer." Yet, according to additional evidence, the pilot who allegedly fired the missile turned off his targeting computer when he was supposedly firing the shot that destroyed the Death Star. Why have these discrepancies never been investigated, let alone explained?

7) Why has their been no investigation into evidence that the droids who provided the rebels with the Death Star plans were once owned by none other than Lord Vader himself, and were found, conveniently, by the pilot who destroyed the Death Star, and who is also believed to be Lord Vader's son? Evidence also shows that the droids were brought to one Ben Kenobi, who, records indicate, was Darth Vader's teacher many years earlier! Are all these personal connections between the conspirators and a key figure in the Imperial government supposed to be coincidences?

8) How could a single missile destroy a battle station the size of a moon? No records, anywhere, show that any battle station or capital ship has ever been destroyed by a single missile. Furthermore, analysis of the tape of the last moments of the Death Star show numerous small explosions along its surface, prior to it exploding completely! Why does all evidence indicate that strategically placed explosives, not a single missile, is what destroyed the Death Star?

9) And where was Emperor Palpatine when all of this occurred?  He was in a classroom reading "My Pet Bantha" to a bunch of young Sith, where he waited a full five minutes to leave the room after receiving the news from a member of the Crimson Guard.  Would the leader of the Empire have acted so calmly upon discovery that his greatest achievement had been destroyed?
 
2013-11-15 12:47:16 PM  

Rapmaster2000: That's why you never win on arguing the merits of a conspiracy theory. To even attempt so, just proves that you are one of The Sheeple who doesn't see the powerful people controlling precisely every aspect of our lives.


I think that's the wrong attitude to take, and, ironically, just shows your desire to feel superior to people who have different ideas than you.. It wasn't until the Popular Mechanics article came out that there was a single coherent source of information directly refuting the claims of the 9/11 Truthers, and I've been able to use that to convince a few people that it really wasn't an inside job. They weren't believers but people that had only seen the truther sites.

If people just throw up their hands and say there is no point in providing good evidence, then people who are on the fence only hear one side of the story.
 
2013-11-15 12:49:43 PM  

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: Rapmaster2000: That's why you never win on arguing the merits of a conspiracy theory. To even attempt so, just proves that you are one of The Sheeple who doesn't see the powerful people controlling precisely every aspect of our lives.

I think that's the wrong attitude to take, and, ironically, just shows your desire to feel superior to people who have different ideas than you..


It's entirely conceivable that I am superior to people with stupid ideas.
 
2013-11-15 12:51:12 PM  
I will readily admit that I collect conspiracy theories, and I enjoy reading through new ones, and seeing how folks "connect the dots" because it's interesting to see how folks interpret information. In part, it's the way the human brain works: it makes connections, predicts based upon information, and likes to discern patterns. It's part of how we got where we are today. In part, it's a desire to "complete" information sets, based on clues, and be in the know. It's a way of rising above mediocrity to see such patterns, patterns that others can't quite get. I am NOT above this, and most of us aren't. In politics, especially, looking at motivations, and seeing larger patterns IS how to look at fairly large data sets. We all do it. The question is: do you do this in a rational fashion, or are you just gathering up data to connect to support your own biases, or are you making objective assessments? Or are you making wild leaps just to make wild leaps? There are a TON of ways to look at information, and it's easy to get tripped up, or in the case of a lot of our Fark shills, it's easy to spin information to support personal or even paid biases.

Conspiracy theories are a way of looking at the world, and seeing a world where only a few are actually in the know, and congratulating themselves on being above the herd. It's understandable how folks can get hooked on these sorts of things.
 
2013-11-15 12:52:35 PM  
starsmedia.ign.com
 
2013-11-15 12:53:49 PM  

Sudo_Make_Me_A_Sandwich: Magorn: What they would do is ask WHY Oswald shot him and whether someone else put him up to the task and what that person's motivations were. While I do not believe Lee Harvey was a spontaneous lunatic with a gun, I do believe the truth if it were ever uncovered would depress a lot of people as they discovered the incredibly trivial reason a great US president died

I dunno. If he was just acting alone, why the mob hit on him while he was in police custody?


Kinda my point.  And it;s often overlooked that Harvey's Uncle was a bookie with the New Orleans branch of the mob.  That' a few too many wiseguys floating around the edges of the story to be coincidence
 
2013-11-15 01:04:27 PM  
I still like the idea that one of the secret service agents panicked when the first shots rang out and his gun accidentally went off.
 
2013-11-15 01:07:33 PM  
Or DID he??!!
 
2013-11-15 01:07:36 PM  

exick: trappedspirit: If it takes 1,632 pages to supposedly disprove something, it's probably true.

That sort of logic is what makes conspiracy theorists great.


Indeed.  It takes the cake for stupidest thing I've read all day.  Though I have yet to check the Politics tab today, so we'll probably have a new winner soon enough anyway.
 
2013-11-15 01:11:44 PM  
I blame Obama. He was one crazy toddler with a gun.
 
2013-11-15 01:14:27 PM  
You cannot convince conspiracy nitwits, basically ever. All evidence is just proof of a LARGER conspiracy...one that evidently involves millions of people being able to keep secrets from conspiracy nuts.
 
2013-11-15 01:15:25 PM  
I used to be a big conspiracy fan. Then I worked for government for 10 minutes.
 
2013-11-15 01:16:27 PM  

MrKevvy: Well, even the U.S. government concluded that there was a conspiracy in the JFK assassination, specifically the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1978.

So it's not like it's fringe, tinfoil-hat paranoid or even moronic, substandardmitter, to claim there was.


Umm. Are you actually familiar with any of the members of the House of Representatives?

To wit:

dailycurrant.com

/do you think it was any different in 1978?
 
2013-11-15 01:17:59 PM  

FlashHarry: i watched a nova episode on this a couple of days ago in which they used modern ballistic and other forensic science to study the "magic bullet" theory. and you know what? it turns out to be completely plausible.


I saw that as well, good stuff. I also saw another show several years ago where they attempted to re-create the shot using ballistic-gel and pig bone dummies. They had a guy in a tower take a shot with the same setup as the "magic bullet." The shot turned out to be pretty much identical to the real one. It went through the neck of the first dummy, through the torso and wrist of the second, and hit the thigh. The only real difference was that the re-created shot didn't penetrate the second dummy's thigh, like the magic bullet did with Gov. Connally.
 
2013-11-15 01:23:52 PM  
This sums it up nicely:

The existence of a secret cabal means that there's some sort of order in the world; a catastrophic fluke suggests there's a vast crevice of chaos, the essence of dread.

The universe is an uncaring ocean of cold nothing...we are a soap bubble bouncing on a foam of indifference.  Your conspiracy, your god, your religion...whatever you cling to that gives you hope of order and the possibility of control is a lie and a fraud.

Oblivion awaits.

fishduck.com
 
2013-11-15 01:24:45 PM  

Dubya's_Coke_Dealer: You cannot convince conspiracy nitwits, basically ever. All evidence is just proof of a LARGER conspiracy...one that evidently involves millions of people being able to keep secrets from conspiracy nuts.


I know right, like the calculus conspiracy nuts, lots (millions?) of people say they understand it and they have the secret knowledge to make it work. But I have studied it out and it's a bunch of nonsense I tell you, nonsense!
 
2013-11-15 01:25:14 PM  
Nobody has commented on the TFA where the article says the nerve ending explodes in a random direction?

That is farking stupid.

It's not the nerve exploding.  The bullet enters the skull from one side, makes a tiny hole and compresses and pressurizes the fluids in the skull in front of it leaving a vaccum behind the bullet path (no jet of fluid from entry hole), as it does so it punches a larger hole out the other side of the skull which causes a jet of fluid to basically push the skull in the opposite direction of the entry wound.

You can see the same thing by shooting a watermelon.
 
2013-11-15 01:26:19 PM  
When I visited Dealey Plaza, I was amazed to see how small it was. Oswald was shooting at very close rifle range for anyone with any military training or hunting experience.
 
2013-11-15 01:31:30 PM  

Dog Welder: Obligatory:


UNCOMFORTABLE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ATTACK: Was it an inside job?

1) Why were a handful of rebel fighters able to penetrate the defenses of a battle station that had the capability of destroying an entire planet and the defenses to ward off several fleets of battle ships?


Because the Empire didn't consider a single-man starfighter to be any sort of a threat.  That is why they didn't have a tighter defense.
Besides, the ability to destroy an entire planet was harnessed completely in it's superweapon, which would be useless against a single fighter.


2) Why did Grand Moff Tarkin refuse to deploy the station's large fleet of TIE Fighters until it was too late? Was he acting on orders from somebody to not shoot down the rebel attack force? If so, who, and why?

Who says they had they largest fleet of Tie Fighters?  Even the 2nd Death Star didn't deploy any.  All those fighters came from the fleet of Star Destroyers.
In any event, Vader DID have the idea to go out and "destroy them ship to ship".  Which they succeeded in doing with the exception of 2 XWings and 1 YWing.  Tarkin also had no reason to believe that there was any sort of danger.  He was expecting to fire one shot, and go for a light lunch.


3) Why was the rebel pilot who supposedly destroyed the Death Star reported to be on the Death Star days, maybe hours, prior to its destruction? Why was he allowed to escape, and why were several individuals dressed in Stormtrooper uniforms seen helping him?

It's pretty well known that they were allowed to escape so the Empire could track the escaping ship to the Rebel base.

4) Why has there not been an investigation into allegations that Darth Vader, the second-ranking member of the Imperial Government, is in fact the father of the pilot who allegedly destroyed the Death Star?

There are no such allegations.  The Emperor was the only one around who was aware of Vader's true identity.  Well, him, a couple of Jedi, one of which was dead, and Luke's aunt and uncle, who were also dead.

5) Why did Lord Vader decide to break all protocols and personally pilot a lightly armored TIE Fighter? Conveniently, this placed Lord Vader outside of the Death Star when it was destroyed, where he was also conveniently able to escape from a large-sized rebel fleet that had just routed the Imperial forces. Why would Lord Vader, one of the highest ranking members of the Imperial Government, suddenly decide to fly away from the Death Star in the middle of a battle? Did he know something that the rest of the Imperial Navy didn't?

He was the best pilot in the fleet.  Plus his fighter was not lightly armored.  At the time, it was the only one with shields and hyperdrive, for instance.  And who says he broke any protocol?  And he didn't just fly away, he was hit by another panicked Tie Fighter.  I think a better question is, why did Han shoot the wingman instead of the lead pilot?!

6) How could any pilot shoot a missile into a 2 meter-wide exhaust port, let alone a pilot with no formal training, whose only claim to fame was his ability to "bullseye womprats" on Tatooine? This shot, according to one pilot, would be "impossible, even for a computer." Yet, according to additional evidence, the pilot who allegedly fired the missile turned off his targeting computer when he was supposedly firing the shot that destroyed the Death Star. Why have these discrepancies never been ...

Uh, he used The Force.  He didn't even aim.  He simply deployed the missiles and use the force to guide them to their target.

//Nerd.
 
2013-11-15 01:31:44 PM  
I guess she drifted...

Operation Snow White

Operation Snow White was the Church of Scientology's internal name for a major criminal conspiracy during the 1970s to purge unfavorable records about Scientology and its founder L. Ron Hubbard. This project included a series of infiltrations and thefts from 136 government agencies, foreign embassies and consulates, as well as private organizations critical of Scientology, carried out by Church members, in more than 30 countries. It was the single largest infiltration of the United States government in history with up to 5,000 covert agents.
 
2013-11-15 01:32:28 PM  

asmodeus224: This sums it up nicely:

The existence of a secret cabal means that there's some sort of order in the world; a catastrophic fluke suggests there's a vast crevice of chaos, the essence of dread.

The universe is an uncaring ocean of cold nothing...we are a soap bubble bouncing on a foam of indifference.  Your conspiracy, your god, your religion...whatever you cling to that gives you hope of order and the possibility of control is a lie and a fraud.

Oblivion awaits.


We are but leftover flippity bits of planets forming, and when we die, well, that's it.  An opportunity to give back to the planet in death what we took from it for life.  I'm good with that.
 
2013-11-15 01:34:01 PM  
Most conspiracy believers start with a somewhat unrealistic view of the world. A lone loon can't take down a president, there's no way to reach the moon, a few radicals couldn't mount a successful attack on a major American city, mankind's activity can't fundamentally change the planet's climate These notions, like evolution, prompt an uncomfortable reassessment of the universe. I myself thought it would be a matter of days or weeks at most before we eliminated bin-Laden.

But I never thought there was a conspiracy to not get him.
 
2013-11-15 01:37:32 PM  

Milo Minderbinder: When I visited Dealey Plaza, I was amazed to see how small it was. Oswald was shooting at very close rifle range for anyone with any military training or hunting experience.


Yep, it pays to vist the scene of the crime.
 
2013-11-15 01:37:55 PM  
Not what happened at all.

Obviously he killed himself.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HlWyFDec2rA
 
2013-11-15 01:39:35 PM  
LOL How this for realistic Nina_Hartley's_Ass?

Acoustic Kitty

Acoustic Kitty was a CIA project launched by the Directorate of Science & Technology in the 1960s attempting to use cats in spy missions, intended to spy on the Kremlin and Soviet embassies, recording the links between the buildings in the area. A battery and a microphone were implanted into a cat and an antenna into its tail. This would allow the cats to innocuously record and transmit sound from its surroundings. Due to problems with distraction, the cat's sense of hunger had to be addressed in another operation.[1] Surgical and training expenses are thought to have amounted to over $20 million
 
2013-11-15 01:39:35 PM  

trappedspirit: There's no space to launch a full rebuttal of the conspiracy theorists. (It took 1,632 pages for Vincent Bugliosi to do that in his 2007 book  http://www.amazon.com/dp/0393045250/?tag=slatmaga-20" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(102, 0, 51); text-decoration: none; font-family: sl-ApresBold; font-size: 15px; line-height: 27px;">Reclaiming History.)

If it takes 1,632 pages to supposedly disprove something, it's probably true.


Not when a lawyer writes it.
 
2013-11-15 01:45:45 PM  
I stopped reading the article at "I was shocked."
 
2013-11-15 01:46:02 PM  
I collect conspiracy theories. They are like potato chips, addicting. My favorite is "The Gemstone File" it has at its center Aristotle Onassis who, under this theory, is both the most powerful man in  the world and the most evil. This theory has it all Nazis, Howard Hughes, you name it. The essence of it all is that Onassis had JFK killed so that he could have Jackie to himself!
 
2013-11-15 01:50:35 PM  

FreeBirdInTheHand: trappedspirit: There's no space to launch a full rebuttal of the conspiracy theorists. (It took 1,632 pages for Vincent Bugliosi to do that in his 2007 book  http://www.amazon.com/dp/0393045250/?tag=slatmaga-20" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(102, 0, 51); text-decoration: none; font-family: sl-ApresBold; font-size: 15px; line-height: 27px;">Reclaiming History.)

If it takes 1,632 pages to supposedly disprove something, it's probably true.

Not when a lawyer writes it.


And he knocks it out of the park!
 
2013-11-15 01:50:37 PM  

durbnpoisn: Dog Welder: Obligatory:


UNCOMFORTABLE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ATTACK: Was it an inside job?

1) Why were a handful of rebel fighters able to penetrate the defenses of a battle station that had the capability of destroying an entire planet and the defenses to ward off several fleets of battle ships?

Because the Empire didn't consider a single-man starfighter to be any sort of a threat.  That is why they didn't have a tighter defense.
Besides, the ability to destroy an entire planet was harnessed completely in it's superweapon, which would be useless against a single fighter.

2) Why did Grand Moff Tarkin refuse to deploy the station's large fleet of TIE Fighters until it was too late? Was he acting on orders from somebody to not shoot down the rebel attack force? If so, who, and why?

Who says they had they largest fleet of Tie Fighters?  Even the 2nd Death Star didn't deploy any.  All those fighters came from the fleet of Star Destroyers.
In any event, Vader DID have the idea to go out and "destroy them ship to ship".  Which they succeeded in doing with the exception of 2 XWings and 1 YWing.  Tarkin also had no reason to believe that there was any sort of danger.  He was expecting to fire one shot, and go for a light lunch.

3) Why was the rebel pilot who supposedly destroyed the Death Star reported to be on the Death Star days, maybe hours, prior to its destruction? Why was he allowed to escape, and why were several individuals dressed in Stormtrooper uniforms seen helping him?

It's pretty well known that they were allowed to escape so the Empire could track the escaping ship to the Rebel base.

4) Why has there not been an investigation into allegations that Darth Vader, the second-ranking member of the Imperial Government, is in fact the father of the pilot who allegedly destroyed the Death Star?

There are no such allegations.  The Emperor was the only one around who was aware of Vader's true identity.  Well, him, a couple of Jedi, one of which was dead, and Luk ...


Hey, we don't know any of that to be the case.  I'm just asking questions here!
 
2013-11-15 01:50:54 PM  

FlashHarry: i watched a nova episode on this a couple of days ago in which they used modern ballistic and other forensic science to study the "magic bullet" theory. and you know what? it turns out to be completely plausible.


As Stephen Hunter pointed out his novel "The Third Bullet", only those who are ignorant of guns and bullets and ballistics think the bullet that went through both Kennedy and Connelly was a "magic bullet". It did exactly as it was designed to do. It's the bullet that asploded Kennedy's head that is the puzzlement.
 
2013-11-15 01:53:34 PM  
Trues Story bro

Tards will be Tards: a I guy work with whom in no longer care for because: when he told me "the plane that crashed into the pentegon was a conspiracy and there was no plane" , I reacted with "you don't beleive that do you ?" - he reacted with a verbal assault how i was a sheeple type and a bunch angry fuming - i suggested he watch the crash video again and wrote him off and a moron - because he is a farkin tard.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA">http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA
 
2013-11-15 01:55:00 PM  
Why did the state dept give Oswald money before AND after he defected to USSR? (and why did Oswald visit a US military base in Japan during his "defection"?)

Why are Oswald's tax returns still classified?

Why did the president of the Texas Workforce Commission personally give Oswald the job at the building that just so happened to be conveniently overlooking a certain motorcade route a short while later?

Why were secret service personnel (guys who were supposed to be "human shields" on side of car) ordered to stand down at Love Field airport? (see video on youtube)

Why was a man known for mafia ties allowed into a secured area to kill Oswald?

There is mountains and MOUNTAINS of evidence pre Oliver Stone-derp that points to conspiracy. The staggering number of witnesses alone from that day. In front of the knoll,behind the knoll and across from the knoll. Multiple rail workers on the bridge a ways behind the knoll saw flashes and men behind the fence.   ......etc.......etc........

The enormity of folks with ties to Oswald who died shortly after..........etc


I am not a nut.
 
2013-11-15 01:59:16 PM  

Griftin Rubes: Trues Story bro

Tards will be Tards: a I guy work with whom in no longer care for because: when he told me "the plane that crashed into the pentegon was a conspiracy and there was no plane" , I reacted with "you don't beleive that do you ?" - he reacted with a verbal assault how i was a sheeple type and a bunch angry fuming - i suggested he watch the crash video again and wrote him off and a moron - because he is a farkin tard.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA">http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA


Can you try that again in English?
 
2013-11-15 02:00:49 PM  
Do aglets still have a sinister purpose?
 
2013-11-15 02:14:09 PM  

durbnpoisn: Dog Welder: Obligatory:


UNCOMFORTABLE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ATTACK: Was it an inside job?

1) Why were a handful of rebel fighters able to penetrate the defenses of a battle station that had the capability of destroying an entire planet and the defenses to ward off several fleets of battle ships?

Because the Empire didn't consider a single-man starfighter to be any sort of a threat.  That is why they didn't have a tighter defense.
Besides, the ability to destroy an entire planet was harnessed completely in it's superweapon, which would be useless against a single fighter.

2) Why did Grand Moff Tarkin refuse to deploy the station's large fleet of TIE Fighters until it was too late? Was he acting on orders from somebody to not shoot down the rebel attack force? If so, who, and why?

Who says they had they largest fleet of Tie Fighters?  Even the 2nd Death Star didn't deploy any.  All those fighters came from the fleet of Star Destroyers.
In any event, Vader DID have the idea to go out and "destroy them ship to ship".  Which they succeeded in doing with the exception of 2 XWings and 1 YWing.  Tarkin also had no reason to believe that there was any sort of danger.  He was expecting to fire one shot, and go for a light lunch.

3) Why was the rebel pilot who supposedly destroyed the Death Star reported to be on the Death Star days, maybe hours, prior to its destruction? Why was he allowed to escape, and why were several individuals dressed in Stormtrooper uniforms seen helping him?

It's pretty well known that they were allowed to escape so the Empire could track the escaping ship to the Rebel base.

4) Why has there not been an investigation into allegations that Darth Vader, the second-ranking member of the Imperial Government, is in fact the father of the pilot who allegedly destroyed the Death Star?

There are no such allegations.  The Emperor was the only one around who was aware of Vader's true identity.  Well, him, a couple of Jedi, one of which was dead, and Luk ...


lh3.googleusercontent.com
 
2013-11-15 02:16:22 PM  

asmodeus224: This sums it up nicely:

The existence of a secret cabal means that there's some sort of order in the world; a catastrophic fluke suggests there's a vast crevice of chaos, the essence of dread.

The universe is an uncaring ocean of cold nothing...we are a soap bubble bouncing on a foam of indifference.  Your conspiracy, your god, your religion...whatever you cling to that gives you hope of order and the possibility of control is a lie and a fraud.

Oblivion awaits.


Bummer.
 
2013-11-15 02:18:32 PM  
Fred Kaplan is the ...press fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations

Shill for the New World Order. Ignore his lies masquerading as reasonable points.
 
2013-11-15 02:25:59 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: Also, hunks of flesh and bone don't get pushed by rifle bullets. They explode in random direction.


It's not really random. It depends on a lot of factors but a bullet hitting a container such as a head filled with mushy goop like a brain will create a tremendous shockwave of pressure. This pressure will find the weakest points to escape.

Take an empty soda can, fill it with water an then shoot it. Even my spring-cock air rifle causes both the entrance and exit hole of the can to stretch an rip wide open and the whole can ripples and bulges. A rifle like the one used to shoot Kennedy would tear it to shreds, pretty much like it did to his head.
 
2013-11-15 02:28:02 PM  

trappedspirit: There's no space to launch a full rebuttal of the conspiracy theorists. (It took 1,632 pages for Vincent Bugliosi to do that in his 2007 book  http://www.amazon.com/dp/0393045250/?tag=slatmaga-20" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(102, 0, 51); text-decoration: none; font-family: sl-ApresBold; font-size: 15px; line-height: 27px;">Reclaiming History.)

If it takes 1,632 pages to supposedly disprove something, it's probably true.


The person trying to disprove a conspiracy theory has to come up with an extraordinary amount of evidence to combat the almost limitless amount of bullshiat a conspiracy theorist can pull out if their ass.
 
2013-11-15 02:30:44 PM  

HighZoolander: Griftin Rubes: Trues Story bro

Tards will be Tards: a I guy work with whom in no longer care for because: when he told me "the plane that crashed into the pentegon was a conspiracy and there was no plane" , I reacted with "you don't beleive that do you ?" - he reacted with a verbal assault how i was a sheeple type and a bunch angry fuming - i suggested he watch the crash video again and wrote him off and a moron - because he is a farkin tard.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA">http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA

Can you try that again in English?


ima re asplane this in language all farkers can understand

dar duh dar dar duuuhhhhh daaaarp a deeeerps dar dud dara dar duh a deeeerps  duh dar dar duuuhhhhh  a deeeerps dar duh dar dar duuuhhhhh daaaarp a deeeerps   dar dud dara   - because he is a farkin tard.

/ with feeling on the emphasis
 
2013-11-15 02:34:18 PM  
www.infowars.com
 
2013-11-15 02:40:09 PM  

Griftin Rubes: Trues Story bro

Tards will be Tards: a I guy work with whom in no longer care for because: when he told me "the plane that crashed into the pentegon was a conspiracy and there was no plane" , I reacted with "you don't beleive that do you ?" - he reacted with a verbal assault how i was a sheeple type and a bunch angry fuming - i suggested he watch the crash video again and wrote him off and a moron - because he is a farkin tard.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA">http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA


I get a kick out of the people who think it can't be real because there is no recognizable airplane laying there in the rubble. They just have no concept the amount of force involved when a plane impacts a solo surface at 400 mph. Plenty of jetliner crashes left nothing but a smoking crater littered with small fragments of metal. At that speed the aircraft literally shatters.
 
2013-11-15 02:42:46 PM  
craigdamage:

I am not a nut.

Are you sure about that?
 
2013-11-15 02:43:18 PM  

killdawabbitt: it would defy all laws of physics that an explosion contained entirely in your head would propel your meat-bag backwards, TOWARDS the bullet's origin.


No it wouldn't.
 
2013-11-15 02:49:43 PM  
craigdamage:

I am not a nut.

You know how I know you're a nut?
 
2013-11-15 02:50:38 PM  

Milo Minderbinder: When I visited Dealey Plaza, I was amazed to see how small it was.


I've heard that from a few people so I'm convinced it's true.
 
2013-11-15 03:03:02 PM  

James10952001: trappedspirit: There's no space to launch a full rebuttal of the conspiracy theorists. (It took 1,632 pages for Vincent Bugliosi to do that in his 2007 book  http://www.amazon.com/dp/0393045250/?tag=slatmaga-20" target="_blank" style="color: rgb(102, 0, 51); text-decoration: none; font-family: sl-ApresBold; font-size: 15px; line-height: 27px;">Reclaiming History.)

If it takes 1,632 pages to supposedly disprove something, it's probably true.

The person trying to disprove a conspiracy theory has to come up with an extraordinary amount of evidence to combat the almost limitless amount of bullshiat a conspiracy theorist can pull out if their ass.


That's what they hope you'll believe
 
2013-11-15 03:08:28 PM  

HotIgneous Intruder: Also, hunks of flesh and bone don't get pushed by rifle bullets. They explode in random direction.


No, that's really not true. They basically go out of the body along the path the bullet was traveling. There will be a little entry wound, about the size of the round. The exit wound will be much larger, because chunks of flesh and bone tear their way through without much regard to asthetics.

Also, whoever was talking about an explosion "contained in the skull" doesn't understand exit wounds, either. Bullets- especially from a high-powered rifle- don't just come to a screeching halt. They keep going, and take stuff with them.

Oh, let me get to the point. This is my arm, in 2007:

i47.photobucket.com

There's a little scar in the front. It's a little larger than 7.62 millimeters. There's a big scar in the back. That's where the bone chunks and a hell of a lot of my triceps escaped. And the impact sure as hell made me move- forward, towards the shooter. Thanks to the way I was walking at the time, it actually both moved me forward and spun me 90 degrees to the right.

Any other questions about being shot with a rifle? I'll be happy to answer.
 
2013-11-15 03:12:02 PM  

craigdamage: Why did the state dept give Oswald money before AND after he defected to USSR? (and why did Oswald visit a US military base in Japan during his "defection"?)

Why are Oswald's tax returns still classified?

Why did the president of the Texas Workforce Commission personally give Oswald the job at the building that just so happened to be conveniently overlooking a certain motorcade route a short while later?

Why were secret service personnel (guys who were supposed to be "human shields" on side of car) ordered to stand down at Love Field airport? (see video on youtube)

Why was a man known for mafia ties allowed into a secured area to kill Oswald?

There is mountains and MOUNTAINS of evidence pre Oliver Stone-derp that points to conspiracy. The staggering number of witnesses alone from that day. In front of the knoll,behind the knoll and across from the knoll. Multiple rail workers on the bridge a ways behind the knoll saw flashes and men behind the fence.   ......etc.......etc........

The enormity of folks with ties to Oswald who died shortly after..........etc


I am not a nut.


Those questions you don't have answers to are very convincing.
 
2013-11-15 03:14:43 PM  

Gonz: Thanks to the way I was walking at the time, it actually both moved me forward and spun me 90 degrees to the right.


So forward...and to the right?
Forward...and to the right?
 
2013-11-15 03:40:54 PM  

Gonz: HotIgneous Intruder: Also, hunks of flesh and bone don't get pushed by rifle bullets. They explode in random direction.

No, that's really not true. They basically go out of the body along the path the bullet was traveling. There will be a little entry wound, about the size of the round. The exit wound will be much larger, because chunks of flesh and bone tear their way through without much regard to asthetics.

Also, whoever was talking about an explosion "contained in the skull" doesn't understand exit wounds, either. Bullets- especially from a high-powered rifle- don't just come to a screeching halt. They keep going, and take stuff with them.

Oh, let me get to the point. This is my arm, in 2007:

[i47.photobucket.com image 432x500]

There's a little scar in the front. It's a little larger than 7.62 millimeters. There's a big scar in the back. That's where the bone chunks and a hell of a lot of my triceps escaped. And the impact sure as hell made me move- forward, towards the shooter. Thanks to the way I was walking at the time, it actually both moved me forward and spun me 90 degrees to the right.

Any other questions about being shot with a rifle? I'll be happy to answer.


Jebus,  AK-47 I presume, Iraq or Afghanistan?

and yyour point is an excellent one, my first lesson in gun safety, at age 8 or so, was day taking a milk jug full of water and shooting it with his smallest gun, a .22 ruger pistol.   the bullet made a tiny hole in the front o the jug and blew on wider than a football out the back of it.  Dad then explained what hydrostatic shock was and all the ways human beings were similar to a milk jug full of water....made quite the impression
 
2013-11-15 03:51:48 PM  

Gonz: HotIgneous Intruder: Also, hunks of flesh and bone don't get pushed by rifle bullets. They explode in random direction.

No, that's really not true. They basically go out of the body along the path the bullet was traveling. There will be a little entry wound, about the size of the round. The exit wound will be much larger, because chunks of flesh and bone tear their way through without much regard to asthetics.

Also, whoever was talking about an explosion "contained in the skull" doesn't understand exit wounds, either. Bullets- especially from a high-powered rifle- don't just come to a screeching halt. They keep going, and take stuff with them.

Oh, let me get to the point. This is my arm, in 2007:

[i47.photobucket.com image 432x500]

There's a little scar in the front. It's a little larger than 7.62 millimeters. There's a big scar in the back. That's where the bone chunks and a hell of a lot of my triceps escaped. And the impact sure as hell made me move- forward, towards the shooter. Thanks to the way I was walking at the time, it actually both moved me forward and spun me 90 degrees to the right.

Any other questions about being shot with a rifle? I'll be happy to answer.


Who shot you and why?  Was it 7.62 x 51, 7.62 x 39?

How long did it take to recover?  Any permanent damage to the use of your arm?
 
2013-11-15 03:53:01 PM  

manimal2878: killdawabbitt: it would defy all laws of physics that an explosion contained entirely in your head would propel your meat-bag backwards, TOWARDS the bullet's origin.

No it wouldn't.


Based on the theory put forth in the article, that a nerve ending "exploded" in Kennedy's head, propelling the head backwards, even though there is a large hole in the back of Kennedy's head, yes it would.  As stated, the head would be like a rocket. the nerve serves as the fuel that ignites and the force of the fuel burning out of the confined space would push forward, not backwards (based on Newtonian physics).  I'm not stating this is proof that aliens killed Kennedy, I am saying what is proposed as fact here is insanely stupid.
 
2013-11-15 03:58:04 PM  

DontMakeMeComeBackThere: That's a well thought-out, reasoned....wait, nerves explode?!?  The fark?


Of course.  Happens all the time.
 
2013-11-15 04:05:18 PM  

manimal2878: Who shot you and why? Was it 7.62 x 51, 7.62 x 39?

How long did it take to recover? Any permanent damage to the use of your arm?


An Iraqi. Why? He probably felt like he was doing his patriotic duty defnding his homeland against an illegal occupation. That, or he was a member of the Mahdi Army. Or both. And, although I haven't seen the bullet fragment, I'm virtually certain it was 7.62 x 39. That part of Baghdad, nobody's rocking a Dragonuv.

There's permanent damage. The shot severed my radial nerve, and a graft didn't take. I've had a tendon transfer on my left wrist, and what used to make it move side to side (like waving) now makes it go up and down (like revving a motorcycle). I physically can't move it sideways. Also, I don't have much left in the way of a triceps muscle.
 
2013-11-15 04:14:39 PM  

Gonz: manimal2878: Who shot you and why? Was it 7.62 x 51, 7.62 x 39?

How long did it take to recover? Any permanent damage to the use of your arm?

An Iraqi. Why? He probably felt like he was doing his patriotic duty defnding his homeland against an illegal occupation. That, or he was a member of the Mahdi Army. Or both. And, although I haven't seen the bullet fragment, I'm virtually certain it was 7.62 x 39. That part of Baghdad, nobody's rocking a Dragonuv.

There's permanent damage. The shot severed my radial nerve, and a graft didn't take. I've had a tendon transfer on my left wrist, and what used to make it move side to side (like waving) now makes it go up and down (like revving a motorcycle). I physically can't move it sideways. Also, I don't have much left in the way of a triceps muscle.


and lemme guess, the fine folks at the VA classify that as a "10% disability" or similar BS?
 
2013-11-15 04:17:47 PM  
My JFK theory is that it killed Kevin Costner's career and Robin Hood was a fluke. Am I doing this right?
 
2013-11-15 04:55:21 PM  

Magorn: Facts do have the damnedest way of ruining a good conspiracy theory.  If Kennedy assassination buffs wanted to do something actually useful for history, they'd stop asking WHO shot Kennedy,  because that is known and incontrovertible.   What they would do is ask WHY Oswald shot him and whether someone else put him up to the task and what that person's motivations were.   While I do not believe Lee Harvey was a spontaneous lunatic with a gun, I do believe the truth if it were ever uncovered would depress a lot of people as they discovered the incredibly trivial reason a great US president died



MrKevvy: Well, even the U.S. government concluded that there was a conspiracy in the JFK assassination, specifically the United States House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1978.

So it's not like it's fringe, tinfoil-hat paranoid or even moronic, substandardmitter, to claim there was.


not exactly incontrovertible now is it?  or did i miss your staggering argument against this?  or was your argument just a bunch of snark with no substance?
 
2013-11-15 05:09:11 PM  
Oh, come on, I thought everyone knew by now that he killed himself!

s18.postimg.org
 
2013-11-15 05:32:26 PM  

James10952001: Griftin Rubes: Trues Story bro

Tards will be Tards: a I guy work with whom in no longer care for because: when he told me "the plane that crashed into the pentegon was a conspiracy and there was no plane" , I reacted with "you don't beleive that do you ?" - he reacted with a verbal assault how i was a sheeple type and a bunch angry fuming - i suggested he watch the crash video again and wrote him off and a moron - because he is a farkin tard.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA">http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA

I get a kick out of the people who think it can't be real because there is no recognizable airplane laying there in the rubble. They just have no concept the amount of force involved when a plane impacts a solo surface at 400 mph. Plenty of jetliner crashes left nothing but a smoking crater littered with small fragments of metal. At that speed the aircraft literally shatters.


i get a kick out of people that think the most secure building on earth only had 1 (and shiatty) camera that caught the event.
 
2013-11-15 05:43:29 PM  

inner ted: James10952001: Griftin Rubes: Trues Story bro

Tards will be Tards: a I guy work with whom in no longer care for because: when he told me "the plane that crashed into the pentegon was a conspiracy and there was no plane" , I reacted with "you don't beleive that do you ?" - he reacted with a verbal assault how i was a sheeple type and a bunch angry fuming - i suggested he watch the crash video again and wrote him off and a moron - because he is a farkin tard.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA">http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA

I get a kick out of the people who think it can't be real because there is no recognizable airplane laying there in the rubble. They just have no concept the amount of force involved when a plane impacts a solo surface at 400 mph. Plenty of jetliner crashes left nothing but a smoking crater littered with small fragments of metal. At that speed the aircraft literally shatters.

i get a kick out of people that think the most secure building on earth only had 1 (and shiatty) camera that caught the event.


... So?  Given the fact that (and you're tacitly agreeing with this, remember) it's the Most secure building on earth, which is more likely:

1. The other cameras had information that was useless to the public in terms of this investigation and might have been of use to an enemy -- and given government paranoia, that could be rather broad in scope, not just terrorists
2. No other cameras were allowed to record the building at an angle that would have proven useful to the investigation, due to same paranoia -- everything else was manually monitored, so nothing else was captured
3. Other cameras were in a bad position and/or got obliterated in the crash with no useful data
4. Other cameras magically contradict the (hundreds?) of eyewitness acounts that said they SAW A GODDAMN PLANE FLY INTO THE BUILDING and prove your magical belief that we need to get (who is it?  Ron Paul?  Kucinich?  Pat Buchanan?) in power to solve the world's problems

Your nitpicking only makes you look more absurd, not less.  And don't bullshiat me and say you just have questions.... You have an agenda.
 
2013-11-15 06:08:42 PM  

inner ted: James10952001: Griftin Rubes: Trues Story bro

Tards will be Tards: a I guy work with whom in no longer care for because: when he told me "the plane that crashed into the pentegon was a conspiracy and there was no plane" , I reacted with "you don't beleive that do you ?" - he reacted with a verbal assault how i was a sheeple type and a bunch angry fuming - i suggested he watch the crash video again and wrote him off and a moron - because he is a farkin tard.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA">http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA

I get a kick out of the people who think it can't be real because there is no recognizable airplane laying there in the rubble. They just have no concept the amount of force involved when a plane impacts a solo surface at 400 mph. Plenty of jetliner crashes left nothing but a smoking crater littered with small fragments of metal. At that speed the aircraft literally shatters.

i get a kick out of people that think the most secure building on earth only had 1 (and shiatty) camera that caught the event.


Why would you expect it to have cameras all over a solid concrete wall? It's not as if the plane flew in through the door. You put cameras at entrances to record people entering and exiting, there aren't a lot of people sneaking through the solid wall.

Given how quickly it all happened, I'm more surprised that it was captured on camera at all. Don't you think the conspiracists would have thought to shut that one off too?
 
2013-11-15 06:24:15 PM  

Magorn: and lemme guess, the fine folks at the VA classify that as a "10% disability" or similar BS?


No. While I'm not going to cite a specific percentage (because I don't discuss any aspect of my personal compensation on a public forum), I will say that my disability was high enough to trigger a medical retirement, and that the VA rates me at a level I feel appropriate for my injuries.
 
2013-11-15 06:48:23 PM  
elchupacabra: inner ted: James10952001: Griftin Rubes: Trues Story bro

Tards will be Tards: a I guy work with whom in no longer care for because: when he told me "the plane that crashed into the pentegon was a conspiracy and there was no plane" , I reacted with "you don't beleive that do you ?" - he reacted with a verbal assault how i was a sheeple type and a bunch angry fuming - i suggested he watch the crash video again and wrote him off and a moron - because he is a farkin tard.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA">http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA

I get a kick out of the people who think it can't be real because there is no recognizable airplane laying there in the rubble. They just have no concept the amount of force involved when a plane impacts a solo surface at 400 mph. Plenty of jetliner crashes left nothing but a smoking crater littered with small fragments of metal. At that speed the aircraft literally shatters.

i get a kick out of people that think the most secure building on earth only had 1 (and shiatty) camera that caught the event.

... So?  Given the fact that (and you're tacitly agreeing with this, remember) it's the Most secure building on earth, which is more likely:

1. The other cameras had information that was useless to the public in terms of this investigation and might have been of use to an enemy -- and given government paranoia, that could be rather broad in scope, not just terrorists
2. No other cameras were allowed to record the building at an angle that would have proven useful to the investigation, due to same paranoia -- everything else was manually monitored, so nothing else was captured
3. Other cameras were in a bad position and/or got obliterated in the crash with no useful data -
4. Other cameras magically contradict the (hundreds?) of eyewitness acounts that said they SAW A GODDAMN PLANE FLY INTO THE BUILDING and prove your magical belief that we need to get (who is it?  Ron Paul?  Kucinich?  Pat Buchanan?) in power to s ...


nitpicking? did you hit your head?
your points or argument only show you know very little about even the most rudimentary of video surveillance.

protip:  surveillance cameras often overlap coverage, giving multiple angles of the same location.  the data is not stored in the body of the camera, the video.  the idea that only one camera caught anything useful is really ignoring common sense.

all this could of course be put to bed by simple releasing a conclusive pic or video, but they either choose not to or what they have contradicts the given explanation.

the only one with an agenda here is you and your willingness to refuse to be objective.
 
2013-11-15 07:03:12 PM  

elchupacabra: inner ted: James10952001: Griftin Rubes: Trues Story bro

Tards will be Tards: a I guy work with whom in no longer care for because: when he told me "the plane that crashed into the pentegon was a conspiracy and there was no plane" , I reacted with "you don't beleive that do you ?" - he reacted with a verbal assault how i was a sheeple type and a bunch angry fuming - i suggested he watch the crash video again and wrote him off and a moron - because he is a farkin tard.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA">http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA

I get a kick out of the people who think it can't be real because there is no recognizable airplane laying there in the rubble. They just have no concept the amount of force involved when a plane impacts a solo surface at 400 mph. Plenty of jetliner crashes left nothing but a smoking crater littered with small fragments of metal. At that speed the aircraft literally shatters.

i get a kick out of people that think the most secure building on earth only had 1 (and shiatty) camera that caught the event.

... So?  Given the fact that (and you're tacitly agreeing with this, remember) it's the Most secure building on earth, which is more likely:

1. The other cameras had information that was useless to the public in terms of this investigation and might have been of use to an enemy -- and given government paranoia, that could be rather broad in scope, not just terrorists
2. No other cameras were allowed to record the building at an angle that would have proven useful to the investigation, due to same paranoia -- everything else was manually monitored, so nothing else was captured
3. Other cameras were in a bad position and/or got obliterated in the crash with no useful data
4. Other cameras magically contradict the (hundreds?) of eyewitness acounts that said they SAW A GODDAMN PLANE FLY INTO THE BUILDING and prove your magical belief that we need to get (who is it?  Ron Paul?  Kucinich?  Pat Buchanan?) in power to s ...


You're probably in league with the Jersey Devil, the Skunk Ape, and the Mongolian Death Worm all acting under the control of the Lizard People.  I'm on to you.
 
2013-11-15 07:07:16 PM  

inner ted: elchupacabra: inner ted: James10952001: Griftin Rubes: Trues Story bro

Tards will be Tards: a I guy work with whom in no longer care for because: when he told me "the plane that crashed into the pentegon was a conspiracy and there was no plane" , I reacted with "you don't beleive that do you ?" - he reacted with a verbal assault how i was a sheeple type and a bunch angry fuming - i suggested he watch the crash video again and wrote him off and a moron - because he is a farkin tard.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA">http://www.youtube.com /watch?v=S1QFfS-FlXA

I get a kick out of the people who think it can't be real because there is no recognizable airplane laying there in the rubble. They just have no concept the amount of force involved when a plane impacts a solo surface at 400 mph. Plenty of jetliner crashes left nothing but a smoking crater littered with small fragments of metal. At that speed the aircraft literally shatters.

i get a kick out of people that think the most secure building on earth only had 1 (and shiatty) camera that caught the event.

... So?  Given the fact that (and you're tacitly agreeing with this, remember) it's the Most secure building on earth, which is more likely:

1. The other cameras had information that was useless to the public in terms of this investigation and might have been of use to an enemy -- and given government paranoia, that could be rather broad in scope, not just terrorists
2. No other cameras were allowed to record the building at an angle that would have proven useful to the investigation, due to same paranoia -- everything else was manually monitored, so nothing else was captured
3. Other cameras were in a bad position and/or got obliterated in the crash with no useful data -
4. Other cameras magically contradict the (hundreds?) of eyewitness acounts that said they SAW A GODDAMN PLANE FLY INTO THE BUILDING and prove your magical belief that we need to get (who is it?  Ron Paul?  Kucinich?  Pat Buchanan?) in power to s ...

nitpicking? did you hit your head?
your points or argument only show you know very little about even the most rudimentary of video surveillance.

protip:  surveillance cameras often overlap coverage, giving multiple angles of the same location.  the data is not stored in the body of the camera, the video.  the idea that only one camera caught anything useful is really ignoring common sense.

all this could of course be put to bed by simple releasing a conclusive pic or video, but they either choose not to or what they have contradicts the given explanation.

the only one with an agenda here is you and your willingness to refuse to be objective.


Right. Just what do you consider to be a conclusive pic or video? In every instance I've dealt with, you find more evidence to appease the conspiracy nuts and said nuts raise the bar. You will never be satisfied do matter how much evidence is presented as long as it doesn't support what you have already decided happened, so why bother?

As someone else already said, pentagon security is mostly handled by human guards, this isn't a Hollywood movie and the exterior is not bristling with cameras guarding areas where there is no opening. Even if it was, they have no reason to release the footage in a futile attempt to appease a small fringe of people who will simply insist the footage was doctored or isn't the "real" footage, etc. Waste of time, you will never be convinced, ever, no matter what.
 
2013-11-15 07:08:34 PM  
Magorn: What they would do is ask WHY Oswald shot him and whether someone else put him up to the task

My guesses:  1) Because Oswald wanted to impress Fidel Castro.  2) I think it is possible that someone (say, a barroom buddy) could have inspired Oswald by telling him that he would be a national hero in Cuba if he shot JFK (the would-be assassins of Harry Truman, Griselio Torresola and Oscar Collazo, are heroes among Puerto Rican nationalists.  The attempt on Truman's life took place in 1950, 13 years before JFK's assassination).
 
2013-11-15 07:25:48 PM  

craigdamage: Why 

Why 

Why 

Why 

Why


Why are you so poorly informed about the facts of the assassination?

Just as an example, the reason that Secret Service agents Clint Hill and Jack Ready were not riding on the back bumper of the President's car on November 22 was that JFK himself had given orders that they were not to do so, this according to Clint Hill himself.

http://www.jfk-assassination.de/warren/wch/vol2/page136.php
 
2013-11-15 11:23:40 PM  
The only people more annoying than conspiracy theorists are those smarmy, above-it-all geniuses who have decided that conspiracies simply do not ever exist in any form.

The Kennedy thing has been studied a LONG time by people who have devoted years to research and investigation. If you showed up late for the show and dismissed the whole thing as a garden variety chemtrail-esque conspiracy theory, cuz you watched a History Channel show, you just happen to be the actual moron in this scenario.
 
2013-11-16 03:39:15 AM  

Contents Under Pressure: I blame Obama. He was one crazy toddler with a gun.


You may be on to something! Must've been an assault rifle he was messing with...

/conspiracists unite!
 
2013-11-16 05:17:48 AM  

AteMyBrain: The only people more annoying than conspiracy theorists are those smarmy, above-it-all geniuses who have decided that conspiracies simply do not ever exist in any form.

The Kennedy thing has been studied a LONG time by people who have devoted years to research and investigation. If you showed up late for the show and dismissed the whole thing as a garden variety chemtrail-esque conspiracy theory, cuz you watched a History Channel show, you just happen to be the actual moron in this scenario.


Because everyone here has said that.

Just because people don't believe your particular pet conspiracy theory doesn't make you any less of a moron, even if you dismiss all other conspiracy theories out of hand. TFA and the thread are full of mentions of actual conspiracies, and why this probably isn't one.
 
2013-11-16 06:36:01 AM  
One shooter my butt, the windshield to Kennedy's limousine is a case in point. The angle of the hole in the limo windshield could only have come from the front of the vehicle.  Also the shot that hit the metal frame at the top of the windshield came from the front.
LBJ had the limo cleaned and repaired to hide the evidence.

This guy is just a tool.
 
2013-11-16 09:36:53 AM  

Deep Contact: One shooter my butt, the windshield to Kennedy's limousine is a case in point. The angle of the hole in the limo windshield could only have come from the front of the vehicle.


So somebody was shooting at the motorcade with rifle bullets that had a diameter of 1/32 of an inch, then, right?

http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/Photos_-_NARA_Evidence_-_W in dshield

Deep Contact: Also the shot that hit the metal frame at the top of the windshield came from the front.


A "shot" that hit the *back* of the metal frame at the top of the windshield came from the front, huh?  You, and not Arlen Specter, just posited a "magic bullet."

Deep Contact: LBJ had the limo cleaned and repaired to hide the evidence.


Funny how the FBI was able to extract all sorts of physical and photographic evidence from the limousine anyway, including two large bullet fragments.

http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/Photos_-_NARA_Evidence_-_B ul let_Fragments

You may want to get some of your facts straight.
 
2013-11-16 10:44:55 AM  

tirob: Deep Contact: One shooter my butt, the windshield to Kennedy's limousine is a case in point. The angle of the hole in the limo windshield could only have come from the front of the vehicle.

So somebody was shooting at the motorcade with rifle bullets that had a diameter of 1/32 of an inch, then, right?

http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/Photos_-_NARA_Evidence_-_W in dshield

Deep Contact: Also the shot that hit the metal frame at the top of the windshield came from the front.

A "shot" that hit the *back* of the metal frame at the top of the windshield came from the front, huh?  You, and not Arlen Specter, just posited a "magic bullet."

Deep Contact: LBJ had the limo cleaned and repaired to hide the evidence.

Funny how the FBI was able to extract all sorts of physical and photographic evidence from the limousine anyway, including two large bullet fragments.

http://www.maryferrell.org/wiki/index.php/Photos_-_NARA_Evidence_-_B ul let_Fragments

You may want to get some of your facts straight.


The assassination planners were more concerned with killing the President than with giving the FBI a clean crime scene. I think anyone who believes the official story is a moron.
 
2013-11-16 11:05:05 AM  

Gonz: No. While I'm not going to cite a specific percentage (because I don't discuss any aspect of my personal compensation on a public forum), I will say that my disability was high enough to trigger a medical retirement, and that the VA rates me at a level I feel appropriate for my injuries.


Glad to hear the VA is treating you fairly.

That doesn't make Magorn's comment - that the DoD / VA routinely screws disabled vets over - any less true.  I think most of us who have served have seen it happen to someone we know.   Just because the good luck fairy blessed your paperwork doesn't mean that the system works.
 
2013-11-16 11:10:20 AM  

durbnpoisn: Just the other day, an old friend of mine, that I actually respect as a well-rounded, intelligent person, posted up on FB that he was about ready to change his mind about this conspiracy thoery based on yet again, another TV special he just saw.

They have been going over this for over 40 years.  Does it really make any difference at this point?  I mean, let's just say that there was TRULY incontrovertible evidence that Oswald was not the only shooter (or even invloved).  What would that change?  What would it prove?  Who is still alive and relevant that they could be held responsible anyway.  Don't we have other things going on today that could stand to have a better looking at?


I had the same thing happen, but the guy was harping on 9/11. Had no idea he was a Truther. Really smart guy too. He then proceeded to call me a government shill for not agreeing with him and then refused to acknowledge that was an insult.

Boggles the mind.
 
2013-11-16 10:21:03 PM  

foxyshadis: AteMyBrain: The only people more annoying than conspiracy theorists are those smarmy, above-it-all geniuses who have decided that conspiracies simply do not ever exist in any form.

The Kennedy thing has been studied a LONG time by people who have devoted years to research and investigation. If you showed up late for the show and dismissed the whole thing as a garden variety chemtrail-esque conspiracy theory, cuz you watched a History Channel show, you just happen to be the actual moron in this scenario.

Because everyone here has said that.

Just because people don't believe your particular pet conspiracy theory doesn't make you any less of a moron, even if you dismiss all other conspiracy theories out of hand. TFA and the thread are full of mentions of actual conspiracies, and why this probably isn't one.


I couldn't care less what people believe. I'm not looking for your approval, nor do I have a "pet conspiracy". And your pointing out that "the thread is full of reasons why this isn't one" is exactly the kind of idiocy I was referencing. Yeah...imagine that. There could be information outside of a Fark thread.
 
2013-11-16 10:43:14 PM  

Deep Contact: tirob:

You may want to get some of your facts straight.

The assassination planners were was more concerned with killing the President than with giving the FBI a clean crime scene. I think anyone who believes the official story is a moron.



FTFY

You seem to me to fail to reckon with the possibility that the Warren Commission came to the right conclusion--i.e. that Oswald acted alone--but botched the reconstruction of the assassination.
 
Displayed 107 of 107 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report