As promised
EDIT: Just to keep this thread more on track, I’ve created thread The Secret History of Money - Politics and World Issues - Forums - T Nation
If this ^ is directed at me, I seem to be the only person on this board willing to honestly engage you on this subject (which isn’t a dig at others…there’s something to be said about the wisdom of those who are reluctant to jump head first into a septic tank).
I posted a criticism of substance and asked you to address it. Your response was that it was “unanswerable” and then to post a list of meaningless drivel about disinformation.
Who’s changing the subject? Who’s practicing disinformation techniques?
Certainly not me.
That’s laughable.
You still have not posted a single thing that could be used as compelling evidence to counter the obvious fact that the girl in the Obama photo is the same girl who was supposedly killed.
Are there any photos of the bullet holes in the front of the building where he “shot his way in”? Busted-out front door? Shell casings on the ground? Photos or video from the security system? Eyewitnesses?
Something? Anything?
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
That’s laughable.
You still have not posted a single thing that could be used as compelling evidence to counter the obvious fact that the girl in the Obama photo is the same girl who was supposedly killed.
Are there any photos of the bullet holes in the front of the building where he “shot his way in”? Busted-out front door? Shell casings on the ground? Photos or video from the security system? Eyewitnesses?
Something? Anything?[/quote]
“Who are the actors and how were they chosen? How were the first responders approached? How is their compliance assured? How is their silence going to be assured in the interminable future? Is it possible that dozens if not hundreds of fakers could be involved in a ruse of this devastating magnitude without a single one blowing the whistle or confiding in a big-mouthed spouse or friend? What happened to the kids who’ve supposedly died? Where are they? Who is caring for them? Will they be hidden forever more from their extended families? How? And how will the silence of a bunch of eight year old kids be assured?”
This is your big problem here.
It certainly should give you more pause than the fact that two sisters bear resemblance to each other.
[photo]38257[/photo]
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
That’s laughable.
You still have not posted a single thing that could be used as compelling evidence to counter the obvious fact that the girl in the Obama photo is the same girl who was supposedly killed.
Are there any photos of the bullet holes in the front of the building where he “shot his way in”? Busted-out front door? Shell casings on the ground? Photos or video from the security system? Eyewitnesses?
Something? Anything?[/quote]
“Who are the actors and how were they chosen? How were the first responders approached? How is their compliance assured? How is their silence going to be assured in the interminable future? Is it possible that dozens if not hundreds of fakers could be involved in a ruse of this devastating magnitude without a single one blowing the whistle or confiding in a big-mouthed spouse or friend? What happened to the kids who’ve supposedly died? Where are they? Who is caring for them? Will they be hidden forever more from their extended families? How? And how will the silence of a bunch of eight year old kids be assured?”
This is your big problem here.
It certainly should give you more pause than the fact that two sisters bear resemblance to each other.[/quote]
So you don’t have anything, then. A recent picture of the surviving sisters, proving the middle sister now looks exactly like the deceased sister did in that family photo? I mean, you were a reporter on the scene, right? There are pics floating around that show them, but neither looks like the girl in the photo, and both certainly look younger than the girl in the Obama photo.
For a journalist, you sure have big problem presenting facts.
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
That’s laughable.
You still have not posted a single thing that could be used as compelling evidence to counter the obvious fact that the girl in the Obama photo is the same girl who was supposedly killed.
Are there any photos of the bullet holes in the front of the building where he “shot his way in”? Busted-out front door? Shell casings on the ground? Photos or video from the security system? Eyewitnesses?
Something? Anything?[/quote]
“Who are the actors and how were they chosen? How were the first responders approached? How is their compliance assured? How is their silence going to be assured in the interminable future? Is it possible that dozens if not hundreds of fakers could be involved in a ruse of this devastating magnitude without a single one blowing the whistle or confiding in a big-mouthed spouse or friend? What happened to the kids who’ve supposedly died? Where are they? Who is caring for them? Will they be hidden forever more from their extended families? How? And how will the silence of a bunch of eight year old kids be assured?”
This is your big problem here.
It certainly should give you more pause than the fact that two sisters bear resemblance to each other.[/quote]
So you don’t have anything, then. A recent picture of the surviving sisters, proving the middle sister now looks exactly like the deceased sister did in that family photo? I mean, you were a reporter on the scene, right? There are pics floating around that show them, but neither looks like the girl in the photo, and both certainly look younger than the girl in the Obama photo.
For a journalist, you sure have big problem presenting facts.[/quote]
Give my criticism a shot. Try to see if you can make sense of your own muddled delusion. Answer the questions I posed or move on. You can’t hang on the entirely commonplace likeness of two sisters while shrugging off a litany of questions which, if unanswered, render your position utterly untenable.
The burden of proof, in other words, is on the naked guy wandering the streets, claiming that the sun is actually nudged across the sky by a flying, cross-dressing river otter, not the one who doubts him.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
That’s laughable.
You still have not posted a single thing that could be used as compelling evidence to counter the obvious fact that the girl in the Obama photo is the same girl who was supposedly killed.
Are there any photos of the bullet holes in the front of the building where he “shot his way in”? Busted-out front door? Shell casings on the ground? Photos or video from the security system? Eyewitnesses?
Something? Anything?[/quote]
“Who are the actors and how were they chosen? How were the first responders approached? How is their compliance assured? How is their silence going to be assured in the interminable future? Is it possible that dozens if not hundreds of fakers could be involved in a ruse of this devastating magnitude without a single one blowing the whistle or confiding in a big-mouthed spouse or friend? What happened to the kids who’ve supposedly died? Where are they? Who is caring for them? Will they be hidden forever more from their extended families? How? And how will the silence of a bunch of eight year old kids be assured?”
This is your big problem here.
It certainly should give you more pause than the fact that two sisters bear resemblance to each other.[/quote]
So you don’t have anything, then. A recent picture of the surviving sisters, proving the middle sister now looks exactly like the deceased sister did in that family photo? I mean, you were a reporter on the scene, right? There are pics floating around that show them, but neither looks like the girl in the photo, and both certainly look younger than the girl in the Obama photo.
For a journalist, you sure have big problem presenting facts.[/quote]
Give my criticism a shot. Try to see if you can make sense of your own muddled delusion. Answer the questions I posed or move on. You can’t hang on the entirely commonplace likeness of two sisters while shrugging off a litany of questions which, if unanswered, render your position utterly untenable.
The burden of proof, in other words, is on the naked guy wandering the streets, claiming that the sun is actually nudged across the sky by a flying, cross-dressing river otter, not the one who doubts him.[/quote]
Listen that otter story was private not everyone is ready to escape the delusion of a heliocentric solar system. And I thought you understood that gravity was just a conceit without the cross dressing otters to keep the planets in motion we’d be sunk. If you really want to put forth a different theory I would like you to disprove the river otter one until then I am simply going to put my hands over my ears and say “nyah nyah nyah I can’t hear you”
Oh and
[photo]38262[/photo]
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Jay,
Still waiting for an answer to my question:
[quote]Not trusting a politician is a far cry from accusing one of them of a mass scale murder with hundreds of accomplices.
now get busy and point out a handful of…two or three… examples in American history where the government turned on it’s own people perpetrated an enormous hoax and killed hundreds of innocent civilians.[/quote]
Since “the crime of the century” is so easy to pull off one would think that it must have taken place before. And since these things have happened before one or two perpetrators must have been caught. Now give me some previous episodes where such a thing has proven to have taken place…should be easy for you.
Since anyone can claim anything without a shred of real evidence one would think that [/quote]
Um… you haven’t been paying attention, either, have you?
Heard of Fast and Furious?
The Tuskeegee Experiment?
[quote]smh23 wrote:
Give my criticism a shot. Try to see if you can make sense of your own muddled delusion. Answer the questions I posed or move on. You can’t hang on the entirely commonplace likeness of two sisters while shrugging off a litany of questions which, if unanswered, render your position utterly untenable.[/quote]
What criticism? A bunch of questions is not a criticism, Mr. Holland. Valid counterpoints and facts are involved in a criticism, which I have tried to obtain from you without success, because you have nothing. You are a supposed journalist who hasn’t a shred of fact to argue with.
The burden of proof is on the people who say he did it, not those who doubt it in the absence of evidence. Of that, you are correct.
[photo]38263[/photo]
[quote]groo wrote:
[photo]38263[/photo][/quote]
I literally laughed out loud.
[quote]groo wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
That’s laughable.
You still have not posted a single thing that could be used as compelling evidence to counter the obvious fact that the girl in the Obama photo is the same girl who was supposedly killed.
Are there any photos of the bullet holes in the front of the building where he “shot his way in”? Busted-out front door? Shell casings on the ground? Photos or video from the security system? Eyewitnesses?
Something? Anything?[/quote]
“Who are the actors and how were they chosen? How were the first responders approached? How is their compliance assured? How is their silence going to be assured in the interminable future? Is it possible that dozens if not hundreds of fakers could be involved in a ruse of this devastating magnitude without a single one blowing the whistle or confiding in a big-mouthed spouse or friend? What happened to the kids who’ve supposedly died? Where are they? Who is caring for them? Will they be hidden forever more from their extended families? How? And how will the silence of a bunch of eight year old kids be assured?”
This is your big problem here.
It certainly should give you more pause than the fact that two sisters bear resemblance to each other.[/quote]
So you don’t have anything, then. A recent picture of the surviving sisters, proving the middle sister now looks exactly like the deceased sister did in that family photo? I mean, you were a reporter on the scene, right? There are pics floating around that show them, but neither looks like the girl in the photo, and both certainly look younger than the girl in the Obama photo.
For a journalist, you sure have big problem presenting facts.[/quote]
Give my criticism a shot. Try to see if you can make sense of your own muddled delusion. Answer the questions I posed or move on. You can’t hang on the entirely commonplace likeness of two sisters while shrugging off a litany of questions which, if unanswered, render your position utterly untenable.
The burden of proof, in other words, is on the naked guy wandering the streets, claiming that the sun is actually nudged across the sky by a flying, cross-dressing river otter, not the one who doubts him.[/quote]
Listen that otter story was private not everyone is ready to escape the delusion of a heliocentric solar system. And I thought you understood that gravity was just a conceit without the cross dressing otters to keep the planets in motion we’d be sunk. If you really want to put forth a different theory I would like you to disprove the river otter one until then I am simply going to put my hands over my ears and say “nyah nyah nyah I can’t hear you”
Oh and
[photo]38262[/photo]
[/quote]
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Jay,
Still waiting for an answer to my question:
[quote]Not trusting a politician is a far cry from accusing one of them of a mass scale murder with hundreds of accomplices.
now get busy and point out a handful of…two or three… examples in American history where the government turned on it’s own people perpetrated an enormous hoax and killed hundreds of innocent civilians.[/quote]
Since “the crime of the century” is so easy to pull off one would think that it must have taken place before. And since these things have happened before one or two perpetrators must have been caught. Now give me some previous episodes where such a thing has proven to have taken place…should be easy for you.
Since anyone can claim anything without a shred of real evidence one would think that [/quote]
Um… you haven’t been paying attention, either, have you?
Heard of Fast and Furious?
The Tuskeegee Experiment?[/quote]
You apparently didn’t pay attention to my question did you? Fast and furious was a failed drug operation. It was not launched to kill mass numbers of civilians. You cannot compare a bungled operation like that to what you are suggesting some sort of mass conspiracy.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
[quote]JayPierce wrote:
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Jay,
Still waiting for an answer to my question:
[quote]Not trusting a politician is a far cry from accusing one of them of a mass scale murder with hundreds of accomplices.
now get busy and point out a handful of…two or three… examples in American history where the government turned on it’s own people perpetrated an enormous hoax and killed hundreds of innocent civilians.[/quote]
Since “the crime of the century” is so easy to pull off one would think that it must have taken place before. And since these things have happened before one or two perpetrators must have been caught. Now give me some previous episodes where such a thing has proven to have taken place…should be easy for you.
Since anyone can claim anything without a shred of real evidence one would think that [/quote]
Um… you haven’t been paying attention, either, have you?
Heard of Fast and Furious?
The Tuskeegee Experiment?[/quote]
You apparently didn’t pay attention to my question did you? Fast and furious was a failed drug operation. It was not launched to kill mass numbers of civilians. You cannot compare a bungled operation like that to what you are suggesting some sort of mass conspiracy.[/quote]
It was not a failed drug operation. It was a failed attempt to use cartel killings to encourage gun control laws, by the same man who said explicitly that the govt was going to brainwash people into thinking guns are bad.
That was a govt-cooked hoax that led to the loss of innocent lies.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
How about some stats.
Number of deaths for leading causes of death
Heart disease: 597,689
Cancer: 574,743
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859
Alzheimer's disease: 83,494
Diabetes: 69,071
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476
Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/lcod.htm[/quote]
Some other stats:
Approximate number of privately owned firearms in the United States, according to the Geneva-based Small Arms Survey: 270,000,000
In Canada: 9,950,000
Estimated number of guns for every 100 people in the United States: 90
In Canada: 31
Total number of homicides in the past year, in the United States: 14,612
In Canada: 598
The number of homicides that occurred last year for every 100,000 people in the United States: 4.7
In Canada: 1.73
Number of homicides caused by firearms in the United States last year: 8,583
In Canada: 158
Of all homicides in the United States in 2009, the percentage that were caused by a gun: 67
In Canada: 32
Rate of firearms-related homicides in 2009 for every 100,000 people in the United States: 3.3
In Canada: 0.5
Number of suicides in the United States in 2009 that involved a firearm: 18,735
In Canada: 531
The homicide rate for every 100,000 people in New Orleans, La. (2010 pop. 1,214,932) last year: 57.6
In Winnipeg (2011 pop. 730,018 ): 5.1
(Source: The Globe and Mail, Dec. 22nd, 2012, p. A18)
You’re absolutely right on those stats, nrt, but a couple points I’d like to make:
In 2011, Canada’s gun homicide dropped to 27% but stabbings rose to 35% for a 7% overall increase in murders over 2010. So does the (fewer guns = fewer homicides) equation really work? Seems that if someone wants to kill someone, doesn’t matter what method they have to use. Hell, getting beaten to death accounted for 22%.
We have some rather unsavory characters in our big cities that badly skew our statistics. In LA, over half of all homicides are gang related, and in Chicago its 32.9%. Even excluding those two, almost 25% of the homicides in our cities with pops of 100,000 or more are gang-related. You guys are starting to feel the gang problem up there, but I hope you get it under control before it gets out of hand.
[quote]smh23 wrote:
[quote]squating_bear wrote:
Also, it appeared to me that you haven’t seriously looked into it and that your entire post was a speculation-criticism designed to say that it wasn’t worth looking into
Did I misunderstand? Set me straight please[/quote]
If you can find something wrong with the substance of my criticism, show me and I will respond.[/quote]
I did. I pointed out that your criticism had no real substance
You said that a conspiracy would necessarily entail: and then you made a ridiculous listing
I said that your listing was ridiculous and that a conspiracy need not be as on its face ridiculous as you were positing. I then conjured up my own alternate theory (zero evidence of course, BUT) without any of the so called ‘required’ ingredients that you had listed. It was extremely easy… I just couldn’t let it slide, being the whack job that I am
People have a strange tendency to cram conspiracy theories into a weird little box that they can easily set aside. The setting aside doesn’t bother me none, but the weird little boxes do
[quote]nrt wrote:
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
How about some stats.
Number of deaths for leading causes of death
Heart disease: 597,689
Cancer: 574,743
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859
Alzheimer's disease: 83,494
Diabetes: 69,071
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476
Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364
http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/lcod.htm[/quote]
Some other stats:
Approximate number of privately owned firearms in the United States, according to the Geneva-based Small Arms Survey: 270,000,000
In Canada: 9,950,000
Estimated number of guns for every 100 people in the United States: 90
In Canada: 31
Total number of homicides in the past year, in the United States: 14,612
In Canada: 598
The number of homicides that occurred last year for every 100,000 people in the United States: 4.7
In Canada: 1.73
Number of homicides caused by firearms in the United States last year: 8,583
In Canada: 158
Of all homicides in the United States in 2009, the percentage that were caused by a gun: 67
In Canada: 32
Rate of firearms-related homicides in 2009 for every 100,000 people in the United States: 3.3
In Canada: 0.5
Number of suicides in the United States in 2009 that involved a firearm: 18,735
In Canada: 531
The homicide rate for every 100,000 people in New Orleans, La. (2010 pop. 1,214,932) last year: 57.6
In Winnipeg (2011 pop. 730,018 ): 5.1
(Source: The Globe and Mail, Dec. 22nd, 2012, p. A18)
[/quote]
I’m suspicious of any “related-type” statistics and what they really mean. I don’t know what constitutes a ‘firearm-related’ incident and I don’t know who defines them in the stats above.
However, in my work, I’ve dealt extensively with transportation crash statistics and ‘x-related’ incidents are typically widely defined to be inclusive and usually have some driver (read: agenda) behind them. They inflate the numbers.
For instance, say there is a beer truck that is stopped legally at an intersection. Some car runs into the truck and creates some minor damage to both vehicles. All beers are unharmed. Police are called to sort out the accident and to file a report. Those reports contain formulated questions to gather crash stats that go into a state and national database. Type of vehicles, occupants, etc.
The fact that there was beer at the scene, even though it had absolutely nothing to do with the incident the box “alcohol related” gets checked.
I wouldn’t be surprised if the same is true with gun stats. A robbery is committed, no firearm is brandished, but one is found on the subsequently apprehended susptect-- I bet that’s a ‘firearm-related robbery’ or ‘crime that involved a firearm’.