Slashdot Mirror
Conspiracies And Probability
guttentag writes "Sunday's New York Times Magazine is running a feature that looks at the rumored conspiracy that allegedly killed nearly a dozen bioterror and germ warfare researchers during a four month period following the U.S. anthrax scare. "What are the odds," people ask, despite the fact that a "one-in-a-million miracle" will statistically occur 280 times a day in the U.S. These strange things happen all the time, but we hype them because they provide the spice in literature and the comfort of comprehension."
Funny how there was lots of Anthrax scares happening on a daily business, people getting sick all over the place and then poof , no leads, no one caught , no more attacks, no more questions.
what are the odds that a determined phsycopathic Anthrax killer just got bored ? yet with the entire FBI/CIA looking for them they still escaped,
or maybe something more sinister is going on ?
and did you see any wreckage of a plane at the pentagon in any of the photos taken ? cockpit ? wing ? fuselage ?
what are the odds of smashing a plane into the side of the pentagon (not exactly the height of the WTC) and no-one took a photo of plane wreckage at the scene ?
oops gotta go, a black car with some men in suits just pulled up, i'll be back in a minute....
Holy shit. My wacky socialist friends aren't as paranoid as I thought. Holy shit.
Opinions on the Twiddler2 hand-held keyboard?
The issue is the unbelievable path of one bullet. On it's own, it would be accepted, but other suspicious facts that conflict with the offical theory are enough to make all the coincidences practically impossible.
Whatever you believe about JFK doesn't matter. The fact remains that those rumors that circulate, are most often correct! I know it sounds wrong, but there is ample evidence for it.
World War II for example:
We are told the Hitler was an agressor, but he did everything to make peace with the UK. It was Churchill, who wanted to be a wartime leader, who forced Hitler into war. That also shows that Roosevelt convinced Churchill that the US would enter the war, once the UK did. That alone shows great support for the long-standing rumors (which is a FACT) that FDR not only knew about Pearl Harbor, but provoked Japan to war with the US.
Indeed, all of that I found while trying to find the facts about Sept. 11th. Such as:
Meetings between 9-11 financiers and top intelligence officals
The Bin-Laden Tape was obviously a forgery
The fact the the terrorists could easilly have been disabled by the pilots The article doesn't mention it, but releasing cabin pressure would also have knocked everyone on-board unconscious. It's hard to take over the plane when you have to stay in a seat (where there's an air-mask).
Israeli spies AT LEAST KNEW about the attack plan
Or the Instant message Odigo (an Israel based company with WTC offices) employees recieve 2 hours previous to the attacks. No link since newsbytes shut down... I'm sure you can find the Google cache, or some other, site.
Before I found sites with this type of information, I was basically as trusting as you. Now, I'm convinced that rumors are typically more accurate than the news media, and won't believe a word I'm told, without some actual proof. So, it's not that hard for me to believe that JFK could have been a target of his own government. Hell, it sounds like that's just the case with the Sept 11th attacks.
http://www.americanfreepress.net/9-11/9-11.html
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
Well, you haven't given me much to work with here... I suppose all I can say is 'I don't agree'.
But that's besides the point anyhow. The point is just that all the news you hear or see, all the history books you read, all are preaching proganda to you. You likely never hear the facts unless you are willing to spend a great deal of your time on cryptome.org or other similar places, reading through the actual facts of any issue. My question is, why doesn't the news media do that? Their purpose is to gather and summarize information about important events. Now, all they do is shove 50 cameras in the faces of elected officals, and spend 10 hours saying the same thing over and over, just in slightly different ways.
It was Thomas Jefferson who said something to the effect of: 'He that reads nothing, is better educated than someone that reads only newspapers.'
Watergate is another great example. It took 2 reporters following a financial trail to discover a cover-up that went all the way to the president, it sure as hell wasn't the FBI that found the truth, despite the fact that they are the ultimate investigative organization. Rant Warning: The same thing is happening with 9-11, there are some stock trades that happened (as well as insurance policies, etc) that seem to show evidence of knowledge of impending attack. If coincidence, the odds of winning the lottery are far greater. The news media doesn't investigate, and neither has the FBI.
Back on the media. With any conspiracy, there are ALWAYS officals who claim there is something more going on than the offical story. Yet (in the case of 9-11, as an example because it was recent) the only alternative views getting news-media attention are those nuts who's theories are clearly wrong, and not based on facts.
For all those that think I'm nuts; when was the last time you heard about the FBI's Anthrax investigation? It's obvious they have at least identified the source even if possibly not the guilty person.
When the heat was on the FBI, and some story came out about a captured terrorist who reportedly was going to detonate a radialogical ('dirty') bomb, did anyone seriously believe the story? No? Yet we don't take the falsified Bin-Laden tape or reports of attempted terrorist attacks as a sign that, Gee, maybe the government has been lying about much more as well.
Well, I suppose I'm just venting about ignorant people at this point. If anyone wants a little reality with their news, try americanfreepress.net, barnesreview.com, and cryptome.org
Oh, one more thing... There were two stories on slashdot just weeks before Sept 11th. They were press releases from the CIA and NSA (IIRC) that said they were not getting enough money to be able to protect US citizens. Now, I may just have been paranoid, but I said to several dozen people that the US gov. was obviously planning to commit a terrorist attack on US citizens, and blame it on foreign terrorists. As I said, I may just have been paranoid, but attacks did happen, just as predicted.
In addition to those news sites, watch the movies 'The Long Kiss Goodnight', 'Canadian Bacon', and 'Air America'. The first is strikingly similar to the attacks, and my prediction. The second, the 'war on terror'. The quote "They walk among us" is strkingly similar to the 'Sleeper Cells' we hear so much about. The last, is based on about as much truth as Titanic. The CIA did have secret air operations, which they funded with drugs, but I doubt Mel Gibson was there flying the planes...
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant
THAT is just what I am advocating myself. However, you've got to be willing to accept new ideas before you can process the facts.
l
As for trusting barnewreview, first read: http://www.barnesreview.org/About_Us/about_us.htm
Second, you must realize that they list many references... I can't check them all, but I have done enough that I trust the rest of their references. Secondly, I was send to that site, from another that I DID trust.
So, instead of saying "it must be wrong, it is on the internet", why don't you try looking up their references yourself?
Slashdot gets worse every day... Pipedot: News for nerds, without the corporate slant