Kids for Cash & the prison industry in general.

Everything after 9/11. Fuck this place. I'll watch it burn.

boston

Proven is the key word. Not saying I agree or disagree, but nothing has been proven by either side.

trudat

theres enough evidence out there now for people to agree it was staged

Yes, people can agree to anything. That does not mean it has been proved.

How can we say the govt has not proven anything with the evidence they have released. Yet we are able to use that same evidence as proof?

because their "evidence" doesn't fit their story. The story we make, is from the evidence.

Not all the evidence has been released, it is still pre-trial though. How can we make a conclusion without the full picture?

And yes, I understand that, but the evidence is still not enough to provide absolute proof.

Not saying I agree with either story, just that there is not enough evidence yet to make a decision.

Let's say that we were homicide detectives and a person was murdered.

We are called to the scene of the crime to investigate. However, upon arrival the body is missing. We inquire to the officers on the scene where the body has gone.

We now have to find out who took the body and why because, by it's very nature, insinuates that the killer wanted no evidence of the murder (well none that leads back to the killer anyways).

If we found out that a group was responsible for pulling strings to have the body removed from the crime scene, we have to suspect the group of being responsible or having vested interests in seeing that this body is not examined.

The fact that the evidence is being impeded, shifted through, changed, tells me that any source claiming to provide evidence in favor of the official story is suspect.

Why?

Because there is no reason to trust a source of information that has already been proven time and time again to mislead and lie on purpose.

The bombing serves the same purpose these events always serves, fear.

If there was a guy who lived on your street and he always ran out side screaming how killer bees from africa were going to come and kill everyone or how a hurricane is going to come and kill everyone or how terrorists are going to come and kill everyone you would think he was crazy.

If that same person would always lie to you, never get a straight answer, every time you talk to him he just ignores you unless it's something he wants you to talk about, you would hate this person.

There is no way you would stay friends or even be civil with someone who treated you like that in your day to day life.

Why than would anyone even ask someone to consider what the news says in any situation?

Well that scenario describes /r/conspiracy itself as well. Look at how often people claim a false flag is going to happen when nothing comes from it. How many times have people made wild claims only to be proven wrong, or recant what they said. Look at all the bullshit being thrown around here as fact.

I understand where your coming from, but that same logic has to be applied to both sides if we use it. That is what I am getting at.

I do not understand what you mean when you say it describes /r/conspiracy itself. I am talking about trusting the credentials of a source of information that continually lies, specifically 'trusting information from main stream media'.

People can claim all they want about anything, I would ask the person who claims a false flag is going to happen to provide their rational as to why and what evidence they have for it.

Even if they say "It's a gut feeling" the choice is mine to deduce weather or not their claim has any validity to it.

I can only provide my point of view on a specific manner if questioned.

You cannot throw the baby out with the bathwater. There is nothing wrong with my logic and my logic does not represent all logic for all people who post here.

I think I understand what you are saying however, that someone should be equally objective to what people claim here as well as suspicious of claims made my mainstream media?

Yes it is true we have a lack of evidence, but we do not need evidence to establish the authenticity of "a murder occurred" or "a crime took place".

Saying "I do not have evidence" is not grounds for not conducting an investigation. I am saying "the trail goes cold at the doorstep of the FBI".

The crux of what needs to be understood about the Boston bombing is "Why does the trail stop at the FBI."

You are then forced to choose between questioning the FBI, what they stand for, the people who control it etc. etc. vs Not questioning at all.

You are forced into a situation where questioning the official story is questioning the "Reputation" of the institution.

Again, like the example I gave earlier, if there was a person in your life who kept secrets from you, has been known to sometimes kill people some neighbors others from towns over, has been known around time for committing crimes, blowing up houses, hurting people, stealing money, etc etc.

Would you trust this person? Even if this person always told you he was your friend?

Well it would be up to you right, to decide for yourself. This is my logic.

People who want to know the truth should never be labeled conspiracy theorist, it's complete meaning has been skewed by the media to become a bad word anyways.

Again, where is all this information coming from?

I was talking about the crying wolf situation you explained in your previous post.

The reason a lot of it is not taken seriously is because the common outlandish posts made. And when a serious credible idea/story is posted, the majority of people outside see it as another absurd story.

Go through the /r/new of this sub and you will see the amount of times people try and claim false flags or absurdity.

Ahh I see I see.

The only comment I have for that is again, who and what?

We can take Alex Jones for example, his intentions are to obtain profit for what he does. I think it is pretty clear that this person screams and yells and pieces together things that range from, makes a little sense to absolute non-sense.

Does it matter if he is a shill? Of course, but you would have to establish that was his intent.

So in the very least we know his information is for the most part ridiculous.

How many other people "represent" "conspiracy theorist" to the general public?

If anything I would hold them responsible for the image crafted in the main stream.

As far as dissuading people from investigating...

I would rather have a million people jump to conclusions than a million people being content with the one that requires no investigation.

People crying wolf, can't help it, it's here to stay and nothing we can do about it. So take it with a grain of salt because /r/conspiracy doesn't represent deductive reasoning.

I can def agree with that. I guess I slightly misunderstood what you were trying to say.

/r/conspiracy is not a unified voice. One person "predicts" afalseflagand the whole sub is lying to you?

Please.

Meanwhile the msm is a unified voice...

No, it has not been one person, and I was talking about conspiracy theorists in general.

Do you think people's conspiracies would be taken a lot more seriously if there were not crazy statements made with out fact or proof behind it. If you gathered evidence and presented with your claim? Instead of just saying something with nothing to back it up.

edit: And i'm talking about real evidence, that would hold up to a jury of peers. Not some grainy photo, or youtube video.

I can't stop predicting false flags because i don't.

Try to understand that the internet is a large number of users, not an intelligent entity.

Yes, I understand that, but do you think conspiracy theorists would be taken more seriously in general if there were not so many wild claims, and good evidence was actually presented. Not half assumptions.

Individual. People. Not. Hivemind.

Yes, but the public do not see conspiracy theorists as individual people, they take all the crazy shit said and assume you believe it too. It is the public's perception on us I am asking about.

You take the public to take individuals as groups.

It is called projecting.

Peak oil

Peak oil doesn't even exist. The Earth creates hydrocarbons inside the mantle. The Nazi's figured out how to synthesize this process and the U.S. kept the technology in the PAPERCLIP grabs.

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fischer-Tropsch_process

Ask any military you know in supply divisions about "FT oil".

World Trade Center 7 woke me up to reality, for sure.

because their "evidence" doesn't fit their story. The story we make, is from the evidence.

Let's say that we were homicide detectives and a person was murdered.

We are called to the scene of the crime to investigate. However, upon arrival the body is missing. We inquire to the officers on the scene where the body has gone.

We now have to find out who took the body and why because, by it's very nature, insinuates that the killer wanted no evidence of the murder (well none that leads back to the killer anyways).

If we found out that a group was responsible for pulling strings to have the body removed from the crime scene, we have to suspect the group of being responsible or having vested interests in seeing that this body is not examined.

The fact that the evidence is being impeded, shifted through, changed, tells me that any source claiming to provide evidence in favor of the official story is suspect.

Why?

Because there is no reason to trust a source of information that has already been proven time and time again to mislead and lie on purpose.

The bombing serves the same purpose these events always serves, fear.

If there was a guy who lived on your street and he always ran out side screaming how killer bees from africa were going to come and kill everyone or how a hurricane is going to come and kill everyone or how terrorists are going to come and kill everyone you would think he was crazy.

If that same person would always lie to you, never get a straight answer, every time you talk to him he just ignores you unless it's something he wants you to talk about, you would hate this person.

There is no way you would stay friends or even be civil with someone who treated you like that in your day to day life.

Why than would anyone even ask someone to consider what the news says in any situation?

Well that scenario describes /r/conspiracy itself as well. Look at how often people claim a false flag is going to happen when nothing comes from it. How many times have people made wild claims only to be proven wrong, or recant what they said. Look at all the bullshit being thrown around here as fact.

I understand where your coming from, but that same logic has to be applied to both sides if we use it. That is what I am getting at.

You take the public to take individuals as groups.

It is called projecting.