I Can't Take The BS Anymore!!

reply to post by Hopechest


That they're both a heap of BS, and presented to us as fact from the same source. Is that a correlation?

reply to post by Hopechest


Proof is predictable.
So proof can be prevented.
And proof can lie.
How many innocent men have been sent
to prison because the evidence put them there ?

But you go ahead and wait for all the proof to come in.

Originally posted by Hopechest

Originally posted by Frettin
reply to post by Hopechest

 

How about when EVENTS happen in line with a conspiracy that was already realized. I'm not making a conspiracy about every event as they happen. It's all part of a giant PSYOP. They're almost predictable at this point. That is proof. That is the most proof you will ever get because you expect THEM to tell you what is going on.

If events happen in line with a credible conspiracy of course they will have more validity.

Please tell me how your connecting your dots in your OP from Sandy Hook to the Bin Laden killing though.

How are those two even remotely related?

That's not at all what he means. He is saying that all of those things might be conspiracies. Georgia Guidestones, Agenda 21. There are plenty of reasons to suspect those things as being conspiracies for one purpose.

Originally posted by Frettin
reply to post by Hopechest

 

You don't think the killing of O.B.L. contributed to the president's reelection? Get out of here, you might as well be chatting on an astrophysics forum. You're slowing down the class, and I think it would be best that you're held back a year.

It had absolutely nothing to do with it. As I already stated, the bump in the polls he got from the Bin Laden killing had faded long before election time rolled around.

He had that election wrapped up regardless of whether he killed Osama or not so why would he even bother taking the risk of someone leaking that it was a set-up operation?

Simple answer, he wouldn't.

Therefore no conspiracy.

reply to post by Hopechest
oh i can think of say 100,000 resaons why make a lie about his death and if you want to see his death picks you cant news.yahoo.com... do to National security reasons from the link, just a short intro

Court: US can keep bin Laden photos under wraps
Associated PressBy FREDERIC J. FROMMER | Associated Press – Tue, May 21, 2013

Associated Press - FILE - This undated file photo shows al Qaida leader Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. A federal appeals court is backing the U.S. government's decision not to release photos and video taken …more

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal appeals court Tuesday backed the U.S. government's decision not to release photos and video taken of Osama bin Laden during and after a raid in which the terrorist leader was killed by U.S. commandos.

The three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia turned down an appeal from Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group, which had filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the images.

so now where is the death proof ? not for you or me to see. We do not need them for we all know he is dead. and that is a fact told by Them

Originally posted by Frettin
reply to post by Hopechest

 

That they're both a heap of BS, and presented to us as fact from the same source. Is that a correlation?

Pretty weak there.

So your connecting of the dots relies on the fact that you consider them all to be BS?

No actual connection or anything, just your opinion?

Originally posted by bekod
reply to post by Hopechest

 

oh i can think of say 100,000 resaons why make a lie about his death and if you want to see his death picks you cant news.yahoo.com... do to National security reasons from the link, just a short intro

Court: US can keep bin Laden photos under wraps
Associated PressBy FREDERIC J. FROMMER | Associated Press – Tue, May 21, 2013

Associated Press - FILE - This undated file photo shows al Qaida leader Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan. A federal appeals court is backing the U.S. government's decision not to release photos and video taken …more

WASHINGTON (AP) — A federal appeals court Tuesday backed the U.S. government's decision not to release photos and video taken of Osama bin Laden during and after a raid in which the terrorist leader was killed by U.S. commandos.

The three-judge panel of the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia turned down an appeal from Judicial Watch, a conservative watchdog group, which had filed a Freedom of Information Act request for the images.

so now where is the death proof ? not for you or me to see. We do not need them for we all know he is dead. and that is a fact told by Them

Well if you have 1000 reasons then how about giving me just 2 of them?

Shouldn't be hard.

Originally posted by Hopechest

Originally posted by Frettin
reply to post by Hopechest

 

You don't think the killing of O.B.L. contributed to the president's reelection? Get out of here, you might as well be chatting on an astrophysics forum. You're slowing down the class, and I think it would be best that you're held back a year.

It had absolutely nothing to do with it. As I already stated, the bump in the polls he got from the Bin Laden killing had faded long before election time rolled around.

He had that election wrapped up regardless of whether he killed Osama or not so why would he even bother taking the risk of someone leaking that it was a set-up operation?

Simple answer, he wouldn't.

Therefore no conspiracy.

Haven't you seen the video of the Pakistani child that used to play in Bin Laden's supposed compound with one of the other boys. Kid says to the interviewer "I never saw that man there, and I was in the house all the time". Then he says, "I doubt Osama Bin Laden was here."

Eye witness report from the neighbor!!

But yeah, its as the government and MSM say. They said so, it must be the truth.

reply to post by Hopechest


You are uninformed. You believe polls. What else did he run on? Hope and Change?? He brought it up during the debates. Obviously, he was going to beat Romney. That was a given. That was the point, he had to win, and killing O.B.L. (whether the polls tell you or not), contributed to his reelection.

Originally posted by sticky

Originally posted by Hopechest

Originally posted by Frettin
reply to post by Hopechest

 

You don't think the killing of O.B.L. contributed to the president's reelection? Get out of here, you might as well be chatting on an astrophysics forum. You're slowing down the class, and I think it would be best that you're held back a year.

It had absolutely nothing to do with it. As I already stated, the bump in the polls he got from the Bin Laden killing had faded long before election time rolled around.

He had that election wrapped up regardless of whether he killed Osama or not so why would he even bother taking the risk of someone leaking that it was a set-up operation?

Simple answer, he wouldn't.

Therefore no conspiracy.

Haven't you seen the video of the Pakistani child that used to play in Bin Laden's supposed compound with one of the other boys. Kid says to the interviewer "I never saw that man there, and I was in the house all the time". Then he says, "I doubt Osama Bin Laden was here."

Eye witness report from the neighbor!!

But yeah, its as the government and MSM say. They said so, it must be the truth.

edit on 23-5-2013 by sticky because: (no reason given)

Yes lets forget what an actual pakistani spy who worked for the ISI and a pulitzer prize winner said and let's rely on the testimony of some child. After all, we know how observant they are.

lol

NEW YORK: Pakistan's military-run ISI could have provided protection to slain al-Qaida chief Osama bin Laden for a period of time, suggests the latest issue of 'The New Yorker' magazine.

Former Afghan intelligence chief Amrullah Saleh told the magazine' writer Dexter Filkins, a Pulitzer prize winner, that an ISI operative Syed Akbar Sabir had escorted bin Laden from the Pakistani region of Chitral to Peshawar, passing through Kunar Province, in Afghanistan, along the way.

articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com...

A perfect example of someone picking and choosing facts to fit their conspiracy.

Originally posted by Frettin
reply to post by Hopechest

 

You are uninformed. You believe polls. What else did he run on? Hope and Change?? He brought it up during the debates. Obviously, he was going to beat Romney. That was a given. That was the point, he had to win, and killing O.B.L. (whether the polls tell you or not), contributed to his reelection.

Nate Silver had already predicted his win prior to the killing of Bin Laden.

You don't believe polls when they are dead on accurate huh?

reply to post by Hopechest
you see you to fall for Them reasons i do not know what or why your bring that up, when i am talking about the protection of life and property in the US, that is the 100,000 reasons why they would lie and the fact as to why they are not releasing the photos news.yahoo.com... from the link

The Defense Department said it didn't turn up anything pertinent to the FOIA. The CIA had found 52 such records, but withheld all of them, citing exemptions for classified materials and information specifically exempted by other laws.

In Tuesday's ruling, the appeals court said that the CIA properly withheld publication of the images of the al-Qaida leader. The court concluded that the photos used to conduct facial recognition analysis of bin Laden could reveal classified intelligence methods, and that images of bin Laden's burial at sea could trigger violence against American citizens.

Judicial Watch had argued that it was unlikely that images showing the preparation of bin Laden's body for burial and the burial itself would cause any harm to U.S. national security. At oral arguments in January, the group's lawyer suggested that graphic photos of bin Laden's corpse should be distinguished from somber images of bin Laden's burial at sea.

now do you see what i am getting it, or do you still think there is no Nation Security risk saying OBL is alive and well and not fish food.

reply to post by Frettin

All conspiracies, huh? First you claim everything is a conspiracy and site specific cases, "etc.":

I mean really, how is it that people still defend the "official" story when you take a step back and look at all these events, how they were handled by the media and presented by the authorities…

The Tucson Shooting
Fast and Furious
Killing O.B.L.
The Aurora Massacre
Benghazi
The mall shooting in Oregon
Sandy Hook
The Boston Marathon bombing and subsequent events
The AP phone-tapping & IRS scandals… etc.

Then you say this...

Sorry, I will not provide any specific examples or links to these "coincidences".

So, these are all conspiracies but you don't want to go into it?

Okaaay...

reply to post by Hopechest


I know which source is more likely to lie and be paid off to say whatever their needed to in order to get paid.

The Pulitzer prize winner is quoted as "could", so he isn't claiming anything.. The kid on the other hand says two very assertive things. "I never saw him. I doubt he was there."

but the ISI was covering Bin Laden because it could have been.. so that's more factual

reply to post by Hopechest

Yes lets forget what an actual pakistani spy who worked for the ISI and a pulitzer prize winner said and let's rely on the testimony of some child. After all, we know how observant they are.

Who is more likely to be corrupt ?

How do you know there was really a spy ? Or even a Pulitzer ? Did you see them ?
Where's your proof ?

Click here for more information.