posted on Dec, 13 2009 @ 07:01 AM
1. No. Support the victims, investigate.
2. In speculation, maybe, but other scenarious are equally likely.
3. Likely. Arguments to the contrary don't sound convincing.
4. No but conspiracies among people with power are likely natural.
5. At least co-orchestrated the assassination.
6. Dramatic changes which cannot be attributed to technological exploits have always taken place, however the desire to decrease combustion is an
attempt to save not the planet but fossil ressources if anything.
7. By the requirements of fallibility there's no use believing the opposite, yet advanced aircraft of whatever nature surely is real.
8. Free energy might be real but change of whatever nature to society is suppressed when it necessitates restructuring companies with big financial
stakes. Alas any new energy source will be suppressed until those with economic stakes find a way to exploit it financially.
9. History Channel has already labled it an "inside job", so speculation as to who the perpetrators are and what the subsequent cover-up looked like
10 The administration of Ronald Reagan was directly responsible for the Iran-Contra scandal and thus has proven that it's possible, that men in
authority, even in the highest echelons, may gain from illegal activity, especially when it's in a position to either decriminalize and thus diminish
revenue to organized crime or criminalize and thus reduce the number of supplying channels and push prices.