Thank you. Will take a read through it soon.

Started reading through this...and right off the bat, I have to say that the photo of Quaid and his wife - if directly taken for and representing the article itself - is very undermining to he and his wife's case really. The energy of the pic comes across as people wanting to be "cool and mysterious" regardless of whether they actually are or are not. I understand that there may very well actually be some very shady shit going on in Quaid's situation, but the fact that he and his wife seem to be really "posing up" that particular angle bodes really badly for their case, I feel.

...Just finished reading the entire first page of this link you sent.

Try not to downvote me because I'm not being a jerk here...but 1) I see nothing about Heath Ledger other than the little blurb reference at the beginning, and 2) this article either is A) really painting these two as being very unstable and is therefore being very undermining to their case, or B) these two really are unstable and are undermining to their own case.

Either way...is it me or is "How was Heath Ledger's death a conspiracy? What did he actually do?" basically answered by saying that the theory is based not on anything specifically known, but on people's simply guessing that how he died seems so strange that something strange and possibly conspiratorial must be afoot?

Hey, man. I've read through the entire thread you and ronin have had up to this point, and I'll tell you this:

What I'm about to tell you is coming from someone who many on here have called a "big time Reddit asshole".

People are fucking stupid. I for one totally get that. Religion has really confused a LOT of the truth of existence for human beings and has gotten them (us) to argue and protect beliefs in a book that - as you pointed out - leave a LOT to be desired. Much of what you've said is indeed pretty darn valid and very true.

However, you really seem to be arguing aggressively with someone in ronin who - in my estimation - doesn't seem to be interested or willing or desirous of actually arguing aggressively with you. Using his own words to you, he is not your enemy. I would personally suggest, if I could, to not fight with him as such, because it doesn't seem like he is actually against you or your view point.

Nor am I. Again, I think a lot of what you say is very valid. I am the very FIRST person to say that "Blue is blue and red is red no matter HOW you say it. I don't care if you're an asshole about it or not - nice or mean about what you say or whatever. One should be sufficiently intelligent and discerning to know when someone is saying something valid regardless of whether they're being nice about it or not...and if someone has a problem with just 'how' you say something that happens to actually be TRUE? then fuck'em. If someone tries to argue with a person simply because they don't like HOW something's being said and someone got their Jimmies rustled/panties in a wad about it as a result? then that's their problem."

This is how I almost ALWAYS feel about any discussion in general. While I think this perspective and viewpoint has a lot of weight, and while I personally also have a tendency to REALLY rail against people who even begin to be a jerk and initiate hostilities against something I say which might actually be valid (i.e. I try to start out cool, but quickly turn into a red hot asshole if someone gives me even a little jerkishness in their responses - lol), it seems to me that you're being antagonistic to someone who's actually not really entirely disagreeing with you.

Perhaps a step back for a quick moment to look at this situation from the outside in might help.

Also - and if I may add the following - as correct as you are in much of what you say in terms of taking exception to the Bible, I will say that the Bible is but one very tiny little book/idea amongst an untold number of other valid ideas discussing the truths of the spiritual, multidimensional, energetic universe we live in and are one with. Make sure and don't make the same mistake that many here on Reddit make in throwing out the baby with the bathwater. The Bible is largely erred. Jesus Christ - of his own admittance - is most definitely not the "end all and be all" of creation. He is no more God than you, or I, or a dog, a cat, a bug, a blade of grass, or a turd. People mess up big time when they don't realize that. God/Existence/The Universe...is everything - humans and turds alike (like the ancient Serbian proverb goes: Be humble, for you are made of dung. Be noble, for thou art made of stars.")

The main thing here is that there actually IS intelligent energy in existence that is indeed responsible for creating you, me, and everything around us. Don't think that I mean any sort of "human" energy - some bearded white dude in the sky or some such nonsense - when I say "intelligent energy", because I don't mean it that way at all. People are often SOOO vehemently upset at the Bible and with all those that follow it, that they themselves make the mistake of erring in the very opposite direction and making the same mistake of dogmatism by rejecting Intelligent Creation altogether. I would personally advise against being so blindly enraged by the mistakes and lies in the Bible that you end up espousing the equally untenable postulation that there is "NO" creative energy in existence whatsoever and that everything has come into existence merely by "chance" - as some other fools would love to have you believe as well. Heck, I can even get into the intricacies of just what "chance" likely is (hint, it's nowhere near as "random" or "chaotic" as most people think it is), but...well, I've written too much already, so perhaps I'll just stop at this point.

Hope this wasn't too much a waste of your time today. :)

Peace,

You have to think bigger than that though. Don't get so stuck on the whole "God = The Christian Bible only" paradigm. Many/most do (especially in the West), but it never has to be stuck to or limited to that.

Not only that, but just because certain areas of a thing are proven to be a lie, it really doesn't mean (and, as a matter of fact, often time almost NEVER means) that the entire thing is an absolute lie.

I'm not here advocating the Christian bible - or any other bible for that matter - but the fact of the matter is that if one has such a vehement distaste for those areas and aspect of the Christian bible that are wrong or even downright evil that they throw away and discard ALL of its teachings, then one not only entirely misses the bigger point (misses the veritable forest for the trees), but they do themselves more harm in throwing away the whole lot of what's contained in there than they do themselves good in supposedly being a "discerning" and "intelligent" type of individual.

Sift the wheat from the chaff, my man. Sift the WHEAT from the chaff. That is of absolute and paramount importance in life, for in almost literally everything you will ever, ever find and come across, there will be both much truth and good in it, AND much falsehood and bad.

The key is to learn how to develop your mind sufficiently to become a good enough filtering mechanism to take the things that are good and helpful in every teaching, and simply discard/do away with and ignore the bad/unhelpful portions of it.

Best,

It isn't that little aspects are proven a lie. THE WHOLE Entirety of the Bible has been proven a lie.

Really? The "whole entirety" of it?

So you shouldn't be nice to others? You shouldn't be good to your neighbors? You shouldn't love your enemies as much as possible? You shouldn't work on being forgiving?

Those and many other teachings of the sort are certainly in there. Yet you're saying that even those teachings are "a lie"?

If those types of teachings in there are a lie...then...well, what is the truth? Be an asshole? Be ignorant? Hate everybody? Don't try to be nice and care for other people?

Really?

"I'm not here advocating the Christian bible"

Then Stop playing the apologist.

It's not called being an apologist. It's called simply being an intelligent, discerning human being.

Reality is the wheat and RELIGION is the chaff.

The moment you get a better grasp on what reality really is, the sooner you're realize that religion is not only a real part of it, but has a particular interpretation of it that, in certain parts, are good, and in certain parts are not so good.

Again, it is in being discerning that you grow - not in discarding everything altogether because a small or even large part of a thing might not work.

The KEY is to accept reality without Delusions and fantasy filling the gaps. RELIGION is both those things.

According to this statement, therefore, the statements I initially made above with regard to being a good person and working hard at caring for others is "delusion and fantasy filling the gaps" then right? It has to be according to what you say here because you're definitively saying that "the whole lot" of religion is erred and "everything" that's in it should be discarded and not payed attention to.

Additionally, you mention and talk about "reality" as if reality itself doesn't actually include and involve the very thing that you are working so very hard here at attempting to discard and discredit.

Religion and the things that religion advocates is definitely part of "reality". Therefore, according to your logic, if one is to, as you say "accept reality without delusions and fantasy filling the gaps", then one has to discard a great amount of not only religion, but also science and many other things that people think they know. A great portion of what people call "reality" is made up of more "delusions and fantasy" than you might realize, and the exception that you take to religion also applies to many other areas of your life that you might not be aware of.

Spouting Pseudomorality from a book doesn't make the contents of said book any less false.

This is correct. However, "spouting pseudo morality" does not and has never precluded or prevented truth from also existing. If someone says "Love thy neighbor because everything in the bible is true" then you have to realize that just because saying that "everything in the bible is true" is, in fact, false, this still doesn't in any way also negate the "love thy neighbor" part.

You seem to be so blindly agitated by those that say "everything in the bible is true" or anything like that, that you're willing to do away with and discard even the parts of it that are valid. This is greatly, greatly erred because there are things in the Bible that are indeed valid. This is just common sense.

The reason I call it PSEUDOMorality is because the concepts of the moral code aren't really practically useful in real life.

Really? Caring for others and helping people as much as possible is not "useful in real life"? Really?

Really?

Okay. o_o

Sometimes being mean is a form of tough love you have to give.

And no one here is denying that. This is valid and true, of course. However, to say that "tough love" is the only kind of love that could or should be given in life is plainly absurd. I know you absolutely just HAVE to know that right?

No one here is saying that "tough love" is not called for at times. However, for someone to say that "loving thy neighbor as thyself" is something that should be done away entirely because there are portions of the Christian Bible that are wrong and that have caused much damage in this world is misplaced in its criticism.

If breaking you of this attitude offends you too bad.

Man...You are really too stuck on thinking that you either 1) have things figured out and/or 2) are, somehow, offending me, and/or 3) know what it is that I think or don't think or would or would not be offended by.

You're not offending me. What you're doing is causing me a bit of frustration - I admit - because your own frustration is misplaced and causing you to think things that are actually not consistent with one other or even quite correct in the first place.

an intelligent and discerning human being would know that the bible is false by looking at the facts of it's mere creation.

No. Incorrect. This is a logical fallacy you are committing here whereby you state that just because certain (possibly even pivotal) portions of a work are false, the entire thing is, therefore, false. This is, again, plain and simply incorrect, and pointing that out is not being "an apologist" as much as you would like to think or feel it is. It's being intelligent and discerning and simply realizing and understanding that one thing being wrong doesn't necessarily disqualify the whole thing.

They wouldn't be trying to justify the bible as having good points(which it really doesn't if you actually did the intelligent thing and read it).

First of all, I'm not even entirely sure what you're saying here since it's actually not a real sentence. Second of all...who is "they"? Who are you referring to? - and whoever it is that you are referring to, it shouldn't really matter because it should actually be ME you're referring to. You shouldn't be referring to what anyone else is saying about the Bible and things like it, because I myself am not referring to what "others" say about it.

If you spend your time here shooting down what other people have said or written about the Bible, then that really doesn't matter to this conversation because those people aren't necessarily saying what I'm saying or making the points that I'm making.

Deal with me and address my points and - regardless of how wrong anyone else's interpretation of the Bible might in fact be - what I'm saying is that you're actually contradicting yourself because you're advocating the wholesale ignoring of a book that has certain teachings in it that you yourself have spent your life listening to. To advocate for the complete ignoring of "ALL" the teachings in The Bible is to completely ignore many of the positive things that you yourself have spent your life striving for. Why is that? Because, along with all the hate and ignorance and stupidity that is in The Bible, there is also the advocating of a lot of love and forgiveness, and for you to say that "ALL OF IT" should be done away with is to also do away with those very things that I'm sure you wouldn't want to get rid of. You just, apparently, aren't seeing that in your red-eyed vehemence and anger.

It is garbage.

Again, another wholesale castigation that is ultimately, factually and literally incorrect.

Yes religion is part of Human Psyche today(This doesn't mean that is part of reality just a part of DELUSION that humans like to have from day to day).

Delusion is part of reality. What does this fact do to your entire argument, then? It invalidates it because you're advocating for "reality" without realizing that this "reality" actually involves many of the things that you are trying so hard to get away from.

Also going off and arguing that because religious people exist therefore religion has redeeming qualities is absurd

This is not what's being argued. This is not what was said - at least not by me. You're getting the premises of the argument wrong.

Tell that to the victims of James Town..They had religion didn't they.

One in no way invalidates the other.

II

Stop using it's bull to spout useless fear mongering nonsense.

What? What fear mongering? Fear mongering? Where? What do you mean? Where was any fear mongering ever said on my part - much less "spouted"? How can you even say things like that? pulling them out of thin air without reference to anything I said? Please point it out if you see some sort of "fear mongering" on my part. Again, where?

Saying the bible is garbage when it is full of some of the most vile and horrible practices that have ever happened in history and touting it as morally correct to do so doesn't make the bible true.

No. Of course it doesn't. This is not what would make The Bible true. I know this. I never said otherwise. Neither did I ever "tout horrible practices as being morally correct".

*scratching head in confusion over your statements.

It's like you're talking to or having an argument with SOMEONE ELSE - a completely different person - because you're vehemently arguing things that I never even alleged.

Are you schizophrenic? Are you responding to the right person/reddit thread? This is a serious question, by the way. I wonder because some of your responses seem like they're actually addressed to someone else.

Then love and forgiveness isn't necessarily good either.

Wow. Okay. If you're saying that right there - that love and forgiveness isn't necessarily good - and you're saying this mainly (?) because of your intense vehemence against The Bible, then it seems apparent (obvious?) that you simply have a disgust/dislike for The Bible that has really no basis whatsoever in actual intelligence or critical thinking. You just hate just to hate...is that right? Is that what it is?

Okay.

For example you would forgive a child rapist for raping and killing a busload of schoolchildren.

I might have a pretty difficult time doing so, but I also have an understanding that everything is connected as one - even you and I. As angry and spiteful as you are right now, I know that both you and I are nothing but expressions of ONE THING...and, as such, you and I are both the same essence. This is not lost on me.

Same thing applies to the rapist. This is not to say that I wouldn't possibly KILL him if I got a hold of him. I'm certainly nowhere near perfect, and I have angers and frustrations as much as the next person. However, I also understand that there is a realm of existence that is far beyond anything that you or I imagine, and where the concepts of "good" and "evil" do not exist in the same way that they do here. This doesn't make what the rapist does any better on this plane, but much evidence suggests that there is a law of balance that prevents much of anything from happening "by accident". Everything action has a reaction and a consequence that must be payed and addressed.

You also wouldn't let a man who murdered a group of people in the local McDonald's off because he "heard a voice from God".

No I wouldn't. I myself could say that I heard the voice of God too and that voice told me to put a bullet in his head. None of this precludes anything I've said or talked about, however.

This is why the Bible doesn't count as a moral book..It makes a claim that because "God" told you to do something(not everyone in the world just you) that you are justified in carrying it out.

But that's simply not the use of good logic on your part. The Bible also says a lot of OTHER things that are indeed things that a lot of people have followed to great effect and have done much good with and as a result of. One would be just as justified in using YOUR own logic - the logic you're using right here - and say that because people have used The Bible for much good, then ALL of The Bible is "100% good".

Both statements are incorrect, however. Some portions of The Bible advocate horrible atrocities that really not too many if any people on the planet should follow. Other portions advocate loving teachings that really everyone would do well to imbue in their life.

There is no jury in the world that is going to let those types of people go off Scott-Free on forgiveness.

As well they shouldn't. Forgiveness doesn't mean abdicating responsibility for your actions. If I tell you to clean your room or I won't let you go outside, and you tell me you will, and then when I get home your room is still a mess, and you say "I'm sorry. I forgot.", then I will absolutely forgive you for forgetting.

But you STILL wouldn't be able or allowed to go outside until after you clean your room. Simple as that.

Part of forgiveness involves understanding the unity in everything regardless of how bad or different it might seem from you, but it STILL never ever necessarily means not having to have any responsibility for your actions or what you do.

Delusion also doesn't count as part of Reality.

Absolutely it does. It is reality by virtue of the fact that it exists in the known universe - it's in front of you and in our frame of reference. Reality doesn't mean "only the good, only the right, only that which is never incorrect or is never mistaken." lol. If it did, then we as humans would never even exist with as many mistakes as we often make.

Delusion counts a part of fantasy.

I have a breaking newsflash for you:

Fantasy is also part of reality. It's IN reality, so it's definitely part of it.

If I see fairies flying around my head and you don't see them are the fairies real? IF nobody else sees them?

Yep. If in no other place than in your own head, they're definitely real - that's for sure. It just depends on what kind of real you mean and are referring to here. There are different types of "real". There is "communal real" and "individual real" and one isn't necessarily any stronger, more powerful, or more worthy than the other.

Are fairies now a part of reality since they are part of my Delusion?

Yep. They are, at the very least, part of that reality that constitutes the thoughts in your own mind. If you wish to call that "delusion", then so be it. It's still part of what's in the world - part of what's in existence - and as such, is part of what's in "reality" - part of what's real.

You really don't see how circular your logic is at all.

Really? Circular? Is that what you're using now to describe things? Okay. So please, show me how the logic is specifically "circular". Please do. I'll wait patiently for it.

...still waiting.

Delusions are not a part of reality individually.

lol. Damn. They are, if nothing else, specifically part of INDIVIDUAL REALITY. That is actually the specific part of reality that they tend to be a part of - individual reality if not communal reality.

Wow. Your level of confusion is truly impressive.

A Delusion is a form of mental Disorder does exist but the actual Delusion itself does not.

If it exists, it is, by definition part of that thing humans call "reality".

Like the Bible is one example of human Delusion.

Some parts of it seem like it might be similar to it - yes. Certainly not all parts, however.

We can read it and see how absurd it is from it's contents when we look around at reality and it doesn't match normal human experience.

Some parts don't, and yet some parts definitely do indeed match.

Obviously this point is missed on you.

Only because it's actually not a point, sir. You're right in that it is indeed "missed" on me - but that's only because I made sure and dodged it since the point is actually so incorrect that I didn't want to get hit with how blatantly wrong it was and get possibly infected by the ignorance of it.

I

First off you are starting to irritate me.

lol. You've actually been irritating me (and others) for quite some time now, so join the club. Welcome to the world I've been living in ever since I first started responding to you. :)

One the BIBLE never said anything about the shit your prattling on about.

Really? The Bible never said anything about loving thy neighbor? The Bible never said anything about forgiveness?

Really?

Are you really sure that you, as you stated, "read The Bible"? If you did, then you would know how utterly absurd your statement is.

Perhaps you didn't and you have very little understanding of what's said in it and are simply - to use your term - prattling on about it in an attempt to sound like you know what you're talking about when you really have no idea.

The so called morality of Modern Christianity comes from the book of Parables and has nothing to do with the vile filth contained inside the BIBLE.

Christianity - modern or ancient - is, as the name would imply, based upon Christ's teachings. The origin of those teachings are almost exclusively derived from The Bible.

Is Christianity - modern and ancient - erred? Sure. Absolutely. Of course it is. However, the statement of yours I quoted above is still actually incorrect and, therefore, continues to do little to soften the blows of ignorance you continue pounding yourself and your arguments with.

Your presenting your own logical falicy by stating something can straddle the middle and be both true and false.

Incorrect. You make the mistake of equating the singular "something" with those multiple "somethings" which are the teachings (plural, not singular) in question with regard to The Bible. Therefore, there is no one "thing" that I am equating as being "both true and false". There is no fallacy on my part that's being committed because no singular phenomenon is being regarded as both positive and negative. This mistake is yours.

Good try, but, again, incorrect.

There is only one or the other.

Although this is something that may not apply to anything outside of our current frame of reference, I will none the less say that - true as the statement might be - I showed you above how this example you bring up doesn't actually apply to what I said.

If the source is a liar then the whole of the work is false.

Okay, now THIS actually is an example of erred and mistaken thinking on your part. I've give you already an example of this, and apparently you didn't really get it or understand it, but I'll try it again and see: If I were to say that you're a short, ugly, overweight, Chinese male who eats his own snot and has an IQ of about five, the possibility of your being a tall, handsome, African who's never eaten his own snot and has a genius IQ of 200 STILL does nothing to negate the fact that YOU'RE STILL A MALE.

Do you get that? Do you understand that? Does that register to you? This is an example here that shows that it doesn't matter if a whole heck of a LOT of things are incorrect in a description, it still doesn't necessarily mean that EVERYTHING is wrong or incorrect.

I don't think your mind is smart enough to understand that. I really wish it were, but you seem obstinately devoted to thinking in one way only, and this is causing you much confusion.

Sorry to kill your buzz.

Have you ever heard of the word hubris? I've used it a few times to describe you. It's a person who is not just ignorant. Hubris refers to an ignorant person who actually THINKS they know what they're talking about - that they're right and that others are wrong. Your "Sorry to kill your buzz" statement shows an embarrassing level of hubris on your part.

There is no middle ground.

You sound like the exact kind of devoted, bigoted, religious follower that you make such a big claim of trying to distance and separate yourself from.

who is "they"?"

The Conspiracy Theorist who go out of their way to prove the bible as false.....who then go back in the end and start spouting biblical prophesy as being true.

So essentially you're sitting here spouting and yelling and screaming and spitting anger trying to argue against something that I myself am not even advocating.

Facepalm.

THE WHOLE BOOK IS A LIE.

You have an emotional commitment to believing this. You are not working with intelligence and critical discernment. You are literally being the EXACT same thing that you claim you are being critical of. You are being just as close-minded as the worst, bible-thumping, religious bigot.

I'm not sure if you realize this.

stop apologizing for it.

I'm not apologizing for it. I have no particular stake on or devotion to The Bible. I'll be the first one to say that it is horribly flawed in many ways and the WHOLE WORLD would do good to reject huge portions of its teachings.

However - and this is the big distinction that you don't seem to really get - I also understand that there are many things in it that are pretty valid, and one cannot universally reject everything in it without rejecting a LOT of what is good in one's OWN life absolutely independent of the Christian Bible or any other religious book.

You seem stuck on a crusade to paint The Bible as being this horrible, evil thing, and you're entirely missing the bigger and greater point which is that as much as people would do well to not pay attention to a lot The Bible, they should also not necessarily discard those aspects of being a good person just because "it's in The Bible, and I say 'fuck The Bible' so I'm not going to listen to anything it says or advocates, even if what it says and advocates also happens to be something that actually IS a good thing to do."

lol. Damn. lol

You have shown yourself to be a very small minded, very scared, very dogmatic child that is just as unintelligently committed to the security blanket of your limited views as the religion you keep trying so hard to criticize. You make a very good blind believer, and have done a great job of convincing me and everyone else of this.

Perhaps you have experienced personal difficulties or traumas in your life that have made you act in this scared, uncritical, and judgmental manner. If so, I'm sorry. I'm sorry for whatever difficulty you may have had that's caused you to be so scared of simply thinking straight, thinking correctly, thinking critically.

Good luck on your journeys, and I hope that you find some sort of understanding in the apparent void and darkness that seems to be your life.

Best,

Well that's certainly enough to traumatize many. I hope you get over your difficulties. Good luck. :)

Okay. Thank you for including this link. However, I'm not looking for a overall incrimination upon the entertainment industry in general. I know that there is a lot of shady shit going on in the entertainment industry. I actually live in the very heart of the beast - literally.

I don't doubt or question many of the conclusions the video you linked to arrives at. I'm not necessarily questioning those conclusions in particular.

What I'm trying to find out about is if there was any reason specifically and in particular as to why Heath Ledger was supposedly assassinated. Did he "know" some sort of secret, damning truth about someone that could have gotten that someone in trouble? Was he going to out some Hollywood big wig or something so "they" had him killed?

I'm wanting to see if there's any real reasoning behind the "Heath Ledger was murdered" conspiracy theories besides "He was young and he shouldn't have died that soon. He also shouldn't have died simply because of the medication he took." etc.

If this is the only reasoning people have, then that is simply not enough by any means to call his death a "conspiracy". I'm not, by the way, saying that there wasn't some sort of strange, conspiratorial stuff surrounding his death. I'm saying/admitting that I have no idea what that stuff was if there was any conspiratorial stuff and I'm wondering if you or anybody knows specifically what it may have/could have been that he "knew" that "caused" him to get "killed" or whatever.

If there is some specific area of the video that addresses this particularly, then by all means point me to it. I guess since I already definitely KNOW that there is a lot of weird, satanic, power play, Illuminati shit going on in the entertainment industry (and in the world in general), I'm not super duper wanting to go through 2+ hours of a video letting me know about this already.

I'm looking for the specific reason regarding why some believe Heath Ledger was supposedly murdered.

Thank you, and I hope none of this came across as too harsh, because I didn't/don't mean it as such at all, and I do very much appreciate your providing the link. I've seen pieces of this video and others like it before and think it's very valid.

Thank you.

:)

Okay. Thank you for this added info and the link. Haven't read through it yet, as there's another link offered here I should read through and will look through that one first.

Ultimately, I for one FULLY understand that there is a massive level of covert control being exercised upon the masses by a very elite few who's influence spans almost every rung of society and covers more areas than many suppose. It may also be the case that I simply haven't looked into the specifics of the Ledger situation enough. However, I haven't yet seen enough to make me feel that his death was anything other than the type of unfortunate scenario that has happened to others before him without any sort of conspiracy.

I'm willing, of course, to change this view, however, if the data bears it out.

Thank you.

I wrote a big "devil's advocate" response to you, but continued reading on in this response and ended up deleting what I wrote because I would have to say that the general direction of your points seem to be accurate enough in my estimation.

Heath Ledger's situation IN AND OF ITSELF, if taken in isolation, likely does not seem strange or out of the ordinary as far as the normal "Death of a Hollywood actor" type of story goes. However, when looked at in the light of many of the other situations - deaths, etc - that have gone on that ARE indeed quite a bit more obviously fishy, then someone claiming Ledger's death as also being fishy has a bit more weight to stand upon.

Yes. I understand Mr. Quaid thinks he was murdered. I heard him utter such. I'm wondering why he and others think such a thing, however.

Yes. I understand Mr. Quaid thinks he was murdered. I heard him utter such. I'm wondering why he and others think such a thing, however.