US Govt killed MLK

[JaiDee]

Well put Azza , i think that may have come from Michael Shermer who writes from Scientific American. I read his column every month and he is indeed a man of reason....

 

 

  I liked that quote also, and another magazine just as important to me is called ''Skeptic''; I have a subscription in the states and they have torn apart and pretty much shot down every conspiracy theory ever thrown out there; their website is pretty good also. Probably the number one reason  why I don't believe in any of this crap.

 

Coincidentally, Shermer is an editor there, a co-founder, and is on their front page again this month;

 

http://www.skeptic.com/

 

"The job of a skeptic is to use critical thinking to properly assess the evidence, and to use our critical faculties to distinguish verifiable evidence from idle speculation, not to merely doubt for the sake of doubting.''

[JaiDee]

  One more quick story, if I may;

 

  On my birthday this past summer my dear ol' Mum got me a $50 dollar gift card to Barnes and Noble, not realizing I get all my books and mags from Amazon because I have a Kindle.  Anyway, I had a free $50 so I went over there and poked around;  got a couple mags and ended up in the History and Current Events section. The best-selling book which Popular Mechanics did about debunking the 9/11 theories was there in paperback and was only 9 or 10 bucks so I picked it up, figured it would be an easy read and would just convince me even more of what I already knew; that the tragedy was planned and carried out by some bearded guy in Afghanistan who simply hated America and the West.

 

   Anyway, I started reading it and less than halfway through I was done with it. I realized by that time that the people who the Popular Mechanics  editors were debunking had about as much credibility as someone who still believes in the Easter Bunny or that some teenage Palestinian girl somehow had a baby while still a virgin and that snakes can talk.  Always some little-known figures from some fringe group, Popular Mechanics would say " And this is why John Smith from The Order of People who want the truth behind the 9/11 cover-up'' is wrong on his points about controlled demolition or government agents placing explosions in key spots of the trade centers for up to 3 months before the explosions, etc, etc.....just complete nonsense!  Honestly, it's amazing to me that a highly-respected magazine like theirs even HAD to do a book like that.

 

    I finally said to myself "why the hell am I giving these people any credence?" They don't deserve any, and neither does that guy who made "Loose Change" and then changed and edited it about 10 different times later on, nor anyone else who believes the government was behind 9/11. No need to finish that book, I already knew the ending!  Yes, sometimes the answer is the easiest, most direct one; people may not want to hear it,  but oftentimes that's just the way it is.

[williethepimp]

I just wonder if jai dee and DT-who i have(,if it indeed should need saying) the greatest respect for...... I wonder what they think of the Iraq War invasion and what they think the real reasons were?.....Also,do they think the Usa is governed/controlled/ran  by the president and the Senate......or perhaps it is actually run by big business/corporations/quangos/financiers and the actual george dubya/obama is merely a fugurehead..?my belief)

 

Maybe the Iraq war wasn't about "wmd"?-as THEY told us (caps intentional)......more about destabilization,theft of the oil and the security of KSA?(not to mentions the billions in profits guarenteed to Haliburton et al).......whaddya think guys?.....or are we to believe exactly as our governments told us/tell us....and to disbelieve the official line....does that make me a conspiratorialist?( is that a real word-55?)

[azza33]

 

[Tomcat]

I think International Politics is another subject and there are millions of opinions and views and probably something like the Iraq war will be argued for for the next 100 years ..

 

Its still argued in History lessons who actually started the first world war 

[JaiDee]

I just wonder if jai dee and DT-who i have(,if it indeed should need saying) the greatest respect for...... I wonder what they think of the Iraq War invasion and what they think the real reasons were?.....Also,do they think the Usa is governed/controlled/ran  by the president and the Senate......or perhaps it is actually run by big business/corporations/quangos/financiers and the actual george dubya/obama is merely a fugurehead..?my belief)

 

Maybe the Iraq war wasn't about "wmd"?-as THEY told us (caps intentional)......more about destabilization,theft of the oil and the security of KSA?(not to mentions the billions in profits guarenteed to Haliburton et al).......whaddya think guys?.....or are we to believe exactly as our governments told us/tell us....and to disbelieve the official line....does that make me a conspiratorialist?( is that a real word-55?)

 

  Willie, great post, but I don't think these things are ''conspiracy'' fodder along the lines of the JFK/RFK and Lennon - Marilyn Monroe deaths.  They are MUCH worse, mainly because all these are true and I don't believe any of the others are.

 

  First point;  of course the bullshit reasons we went into Iraq were just that, bullshit;  W didn't give a fuck about "WMD's"  and IMO it was all about the oil companies getting a new place to suck their oil out of the ground.  The real president, Darth Cheney, was also the head of Halliburton between his stints working for Bush Senior and Bush dummy Junior. Halliburton makes money off of wars, so a war we shall give them!  .

 

It's amazing to me how all these conservitards can scream "but, but, Benghazi!" all day long but had absolutely no problems with THAT.  The Carlyle group, another multi-national company which wanted/needed that war, was once run by GHW Bush and his friends there stood to make a ton of that war.  I honestly don't know how these people sleep at night.

 

Yes, the Saudi's were definitely a part of it, hell they own something like 9% of America

 

Point 2; yes, of course the senate and congress and even the WH are controlled by special interest groups and lobbyists, I've thought that all along.  It's a sad state of affairs when corporations run the country and again, the far-right always screams shit like "what about the founding fathers and the bill of rights"???  but never seem to have a problem with these companies and huge banks and drug companies who run the country having too much power and unfettered access to our politicians, as long as they [wink,wink] ''contribute'' to their campaign chests.  And it's not just the far right-wing, the lefties do it also of course and frankly it's disgusting. I think lobbying should be illegal, it's simply legal bribery.   The Citizens United case was also a sham, and passed by, of all freaking places,   our SUPREME COURT and says to large corporations "hey, you guys want to donate to campaign war chests?  Any amount you want?  You basically want to buy our elections?  Sure, have a blast!"   How the fuck is that in the American people's best interests? And why aren't NBC and CNN and FOX constantly reporting on THAT, the biggest scam in years?

 

     Again, my feeling is that these are not conspiracy topics because they have all been proven to be TRUE. It's just government run amok and the power structure in America doesn't give a fuck about the people, they care about pleasing their true masters, IE the corporations.   Real-life, honest-to-goodness reporters like Mike Taibbi and Michael Hastings [who died in a car crash at 33; want some conspiracy? look THERE] and hundreds of other brave journalists from around the globe report on these things and dig out the FACTS; some grainy Youtube video with shadowy characters telling us with very flimsy evidence that 8 or 9  different groups were responsible for the death of _________ is not a fact to me, I need a little more proof to believe that stuff, sorry.

 

This is what happens when capitalism is allowed free reign, but don't tell that to the far right wing; to them socialism is pure EVIL but corporations having all this power and literally BUYING elections? Setting up wars in 3rd world countries so their buddies can profit even more, which has been done by our government since WW2?  Move along son, nothing to see here and nothing which needs to be reported on FOX & Friends.

[Lefty]

Paccie and Lefty, real quick; I have zero problems with you guys thinking what you do about these various theories and as I have said before, it's great fun debating them. 

 

  The only reason I picked on your font  size and multiple clapping hands and exclamation points from the old forums, Lefty, is because by using them and declaring anyone who *didn't* believe in your wide-reaching theory about JFK was [your description] " an obtuse fool." Changing the font or using CAPS or exclamation points doesn't make your point any more correct, nor does calling people fools;  frankly it makes your points only more annoying. We can all read lower case font just fine and 20 exclamation points after a sentence doesn't mean that sentence is correct.

 

 Whenever I made the comment saying obtuse fool, would have been the time to respond about it IMO.  Complaining about fonts and emoticons at a later date makes the connection unclear without an explanation.  It makes it seem like it chapped your hide and you were just waiting for the right time to reply. It's all good. I'm not crazy about being referred to as the tin hat brigade or however it was worded either for that matter. I feel better about my stance, knowing Strocube and Willie agree with Paccie and myself. Though you seemed to want to begrudge me the chance to offer them thanks. Apparently because at some time in the past I said anyone who thinks LHO acted alone is an obtuse fool.         

[pacman]

     Again, my feeling is that these are not conspiracy topics because they have all been proven to be TRUE. It's just government run amok and the power structure in America doesn't give a fuck about the people, they care about pleasing their true masters, IE the corporations.   Real-life, honest-to-goodness reporters like Mike Taibbi and Michael Hastings [who died in a car crash at 33; want some conspiracy? look THERE] and hundreds of other brave journalists from around the globe report on these things and dig out the FACTS; some grainy Youtube video with shadowy characters telling us with very flimsy evidence that 8 or 9  different groups were responsible for the death of _________ is not a fact to me, I need a little more proof to believe that stuff, sorry.

 

I like your summary of how big business runs America JD, well written. I am interested in how you don't see it as a conspiracy because it's TRUE but when you don't have ALL the facts, it can't be a conspiracy because with only grainy video footage to go by & a lack of witnesses, it falls into some unexplained grey area. But whatever it is, it can't be a conspiracy, why? Because you don't believe in them! 

 

What I can't understand is you suggest there might be a conspiracy with the death of Michael Hastings but even the very notion of such a thing goes completely against your belief system. (And I am not pretending to know your beliefs, I am basing that on what you keep banging on about) I don't know anyone who doesn't think there are things we have been lied to about & feel sure there's a conspiracy of silence in such cases. But your stance is so starkly at odds with that thinking. 

 

Do you accept there are some things that can only be explained by the presence of a conspiracy to keep us in the dark?

 

Here's a conspiracy that no one can deny. On the TV here this evening the author of a new book on Lance Armstrong was being interviewed. He referred to the whole debacle as a "GIANT CONSPIRACY" stretching back to the 1990's involving 100's of competitors, sponsors & officials. The list of people who were in on it & who all knew what was going on for nearly 20 years is absolutely staggering. And yet, if I had written such a thing, either here or in a letter to the newspaper, I would have been shouted down as an idiot.

 

Further proof that we don't know the half of what is going on around us. I think it is good to have a healthy suspicion about strange events that defy logic. I don't believe in jumping to ridiculous conclusions but neither do I dismiss the possibilities. I imagine most intelligent people think similarly & I include JD in that group. Yet despite the conspiracies we know about, he steadfastly insists the big issues can't possibly be. I say on the balance of probabilities some of them must be. 

[JaiDee]

 

 

Here's a conspiracy that no one can deny. On the TV here this evening the author of a new book on Lance Armstrong was being interviewed. He referred to the whole debacle as a "GIANT CONSPIRACY" stretching back to the 1990's involving 100's of competitors, sponsors & officials. The list of people who were in on it & who all knew what was going on for nearly 20 years is absolutely staggering. And yet, if I had written such a thing, either here or in a letter to the newspaper, I would have been shouted down as an idiot.

 

 

 

  Not necessarily......I remember when Floyd Landis and others from the US postal team were coming out and speaking out against him; Armstrong kept denying it, kept saying he was innocent, etc.....but more and more people who were close to him over the years were coming out with more and more accusations and he was having a harder and harder time trying to defend them, and eventually he had to cave.  This was all being reported by credible reporters during that time as well, and I tend to believe what I read in the press, especially if it's reported as truth by more than one person. What, you think I was an Armstrong supporter?  I was skeptical of that MOFO as soon as I saw the Landis interview on 60 Minutes 2 years before he spilled his guts to Oprah.

 

   A similar story happening right now is the Alex Rodriquez deal.....he would also say there is a ''conspiracy'' and that everyone is out to get him, etc.....but when 60 minutes runs an expose on him, when the NY Times and many other newspapers and credible sources say he was doing drugs, even teammates close to him, I tend to believe them.  So there may be a conspiracy to get him, same as there was with Armstrong; but in these 2 cases the people behind conspiracy have one overwhelming thing on their side; the truth.

 

      I don't see 9/11 people having The Truth on their side, nor have I found any credible evidence to believe anything coming from the JFK or RFK conspiracy people, or the new ones I heard about this week, King and Lennon.  Show me some solid proof, and not just some video done by some Germans blaming the Cubans, who said Oswald was one of their agents, while Johnson and his accomplice Ruby were waiting in the wings to bump off Oswald after the fact and I may believe those stories as well.  To me, as told right now;  not credible, sorry.  Nothing I have heard or read about Robert Kennedy either. Or King. Or Lennon.

 

Just last month the woman who released the Obama birth certificate was killed in a plane crash in Hawaii, while all the others on the plane at the time lived.  That extremely intelligent and well-coiffed old man named Donald Trump hinted that because she was the only one who died on the plane, "boy, that was some coincidence wasn't it?"  Wink, wink. As if to say "hmmmm, maybe Obama or some of his minions bumped her off to keep her from talking."  Weird.  And THAT is how conspiracy chatter gets started; very little facts, lots of speculation and guesswork, something to get the people talking.  Fact is it was a COINCIDENCE,  the woman was unfortunate enough to die that day and the other 8 people on board lived.  Obama wasn't behind it no matter what The Donald or the tinfoil hat people say. Seriously, Donald; who the hell can predict who will and will not die in a freaking plane crash?? How could the conspirators make sure only SHE died while the other 8 lived?

 

 

   The Michael Hastings story is tragic to say the least; a great writer for Rolling Stone, he was the guy who wrote the story which later got Stanley  McChrystal fired. He was also very critical of the US government, no matter who was in charge, but especially over the last 4 or 5 years of his life with our failures in Iraq and Afghanistan. Died alone in a fiery car crash last June, in which excess speed was listed as the cause of his death.  This guy was very critical of the FBI and the CIA and the Obama admin; now, were I a conspiracy guy I would scream ''conspiracy'' right away; I only said ''look there'' because it would seem to be the most obvious and blatant case for someone to be bumped off by the feds, an obvious case of someone being murdered to shut him up.

 

      Do I believe he was?  Nope, because most of his good friends were also journalists and have looked deep into the case and have concluded it was nothing but a tragic accident, a guy going too fast on a road which couldn't handle that speed; same as the recent death of the actor Paul Walker.   Even Hastings' wife and older brother have said they didn't think he was murdered;  if we can't believe friends, a spouse and a sibling, why should we believe the conspiracy people who are still calling for more investigations into it?  And trust me, they are out there. Now, if some *credible* journalist comes forward with some new piece of evidence which proves he was bumped off by the feds I will reserve the right to change my mind;  for right now I will go with what the wife and older brother believe.

 

 Again, sometimes the proper answer is the easiest, most explainable one, even if people want to believe something more sinister may be behind it.

[JaiDee]

If anyone is still reading this thread ... and God bless you if you are :)  .......  this is a GREAT article about the death of Rolling Stone reporter Michael Hastings which I just found.  Written by a writer for 'New York' magazine, it takes about 20 minutes to read all 7 pages but well worth it if you want to see the birth - or death - of a possible conspiracy theory.

 

  If you know L.A. at all you can even follow the path of his car in his last moments, the reporter describes it perfectly and I tracked it with Google maps.  That part and this line will interest Strocube as much as it did myself;  ''When the coroner’s report was released, it included statements from Hastings’s elder brother that he’d been using dimethyltryptamine, the psychoactive core of the hallucinogenic drug ayahuasca, and had thought he was invincible, claiming to be able to jump off his balcony and survive.''

 

   Great line here also;  ''A toxicology screen for DMT came up negative, though it found trace amounts of pot and amphetamine. Conspiracy theories being closed systems indifferent to probability and immune to evidence, the report did nothing to curtail speculation about the cause of Hastings’s death.''

 

 Read this excellent story here, you will surely enjoy it no matter which side of this debate you are on;

                         http://nymag.com/news/features/michael-hastings-2013-11/

[azza33]

I am wiser than this man, for neither of us appears to know anything great and good; but he fancies he knows something, although he knows nothing; whereas I, as I do not know anything, so I do not fancy I do. In this trifling particular, then, I appear to be wiser than he, because I do not fancy I know what I do not know.

[pacman]

      I don't see 9/11 people having The Truth on their side, nor have I found any credible evidence to believe anything coming from the JFK or RFK conspiracy people, or the new ones I heard about this week, King and Lennon.  Show me some solid proof, and not just some video done by some Germans blaming the Cubans, who said Oswald was one of their agents, while Johnson and his accomplice Ruby were waiting in the wings to bump off Oswald after the fact and I may believe those stories as well.  To me, as told right now;  not credible, sorry.  Nothing I have heard or read about Robert Kennedy either. Or King. Or Lennon.

 

Psychologists have conducted experiments on how people perceive the truth with very disturbing results. I won't go into the detail, it's too long & boring, but when I first read about the outcomes, I despaired of the jury system we use in the west to arrive at the truth. e.g. the jury in the OJ Simpson trial acquitted a murderer based on a leather glove worn by the killer that didn't fit OJ. The prosecuting team were too slow in showing that it shrank because it had been soaked in blood. It didn't matter to the jury, they had their truth. And every piece of compelling evidence was ignored because it meant they had to let go of 'their truth'.

 

JD & I are in lock step when it comes to 9/11 or Michael Hastings or the woman in Hawaii. I don't see beyond what we know & I am not looking to argue anything different. And I have only surmised there may be more to RFK, MLK, etc. Being a cynic doesn't make someone believe everything suspicious must be a conspiracy. 

 

But there are so many holes in the official story of JFK's death that they deserve consideration. That doesn't mean I know more than the next person, it just means that some inner bell has been rung that something isn't right. And I reserve the right to question the details that don't fit & would never arise if it was a simple case of Oswald taking his gun & shooting the President. If it is that simple why have all those people come forward to say we have been lied to? And why the conflicting evidence & the subterfuge? And why were the doctors ordered never to speak about their examination of the body? And why was the first rifle removed from the Book Depository a Mauzer? A heavier calibre weapon than fired by Oswald that seemed to disappear from the story? And why weren't eye witnesses called to the Warren Commission? They were all ready to testify but those asked only agreed with the official line. The ones not asked had another story to tell. Wouldn't you think they would want to hear it? 

 

Then there's film of people running & pointing towards the grassy knoll. Were they all suddenly possessed with madness that they couldn't distinguish between gunshots fired from 90 yards away & those fired closer? As to this being impossible because no bullet was found, all I will say to that, who would have been in charge of finding it? The very people organising the cover up. But the one action that we interpret differently is the fate of Oswald himself. If he was going to implicate anyone else, he had to be killed. Otherwise he is found guilty & hangs. And that would have been the closure America needed. But he was never allowed to speak. Jack Ruby's motivation is transparently weak. Here's a small time mobster who ran strip clubs & consorted with hookers suddenly worried about Mrs Kennedy's welfare. To that I say "bullshit". And when he can be seen at the police station pushing forward when Oswald is first brought in, his accidental meeting the next day looks very staged to me. 

 

While the rest of America is waiting with baited breath to hear Oswald's reasons & why he could have wanted to kill such a popular person, here's a guy on a mission to silence him. It was a contract hit, pure & simple.

 

I just cannot see someone like Ruby caring about anyone so much that he was prepared to go to jail just to spare their blushes. And to go to jail for someone who lived a far better life than he, who he had never met & was never likely to. And his movements on the morning where he made a phone call & went to a bookies office, that is all beside the point. He had a rendezvous & he didn't need to hurry. Perhaps the phone call was to find out how soon he was wanted? 10 minutes? No worries, I have time to collect on my bet.

 

Unless some secret report is released, we are never going to have that hard evidence the doubters demand but I don't care. I can't say who wanted JFK dead, I can guess, but what I am sure of, he was targeted for assassination.

[JaiDee]

  If I was living in a cave the past 50 years, came out, and was presented with all evidence in all these cases, I would say that the Reagan failed assassination and the Hastings death would be the 2 most compelling to look into further.

 

Hastings was super-critical of the government and specifically the CIA and as of late the NSA, as well as the Army and the Obama admin.  Perfect candidate to get bumped off.  Reagan; again, were I a conspiracy-minded person I would say that was a shooting which should be looked into more; the guy waiting in the wings {GHW Bush}  had had a mean, drawn-out campaign fight for the presidency with Ronnie  just 2 years earlier and was the ex-head of the CIA. Seems to me if someone went digging into these 2 cases they could find more conspiracy fodder and doubts about the official story than in the other 4 or 5 we have discussed in this thread. JFK, the mother lode of ALL conspiracy speculation, notwithstanding.

 

   I wish some people had read that great and very timely New York magazine article about the Hastings death, it is really relevant to this thread and the other ones we have had about JFK in regards to how conspiracy theories get started.  I'd like to know what Pacman and Lefty and anyone else who leans toward conspiracy think about the author's view, regarding what happened after the toxicology reports came out in the Hastings' death....negative for everything except a little speed and some pot....yet the conspiracy people were still shouting from the rooftops about  ''they are saying he’s a drug addict and insane, out of his mind. It’s a government smear campaign.”  and “I believe he was targeted by a black ops government agency.”  {These are perfect examples of how conspiracy theories begin to germinate}.

 

   The author's reply?  ''Conspiracy theories being closed systems indifferent to probability [The Hawaii plane crash deal? parentheses mine] and immune to evidence, the toxicology report did nothing to curtail speculation about the cause of Hastings’s death.''  I have to agree with his take, of course; people prone to look for conspiracy first and foremost simply will not be put off, even when presented with evidence to the contrary.

[seven]

this is a GREAT article about the death of Rolling Stone reporter Michael Hastings which I just found.  

I read this article awhile ago, and it is fascinating.  Foul play with his Merc , i´d say.

[JaiDee]

Could be, and that hasn't been ruled out yet by *everyone*,  but the police and other authorities say there was no foul play and no reason to believe it was just a case of a guy speeding too fast in an area in which couldn't handle that speed.

 

    As the article followed the route of his death ride, I followed it on Google maps myself; I know that area pretty well and could see how a person should not be going 50mph once they get below Sunset, that's a really congested and narrow area with lots of cars even at 4am.

[JaiDee]

One thing I must say I don't understand is why no one seems to be interested in this most recent conspiracy; it has everything from spies to the military to the CIA and the NSA, tampered automobiles, over-reaching presidential and government authority, drug use, etc....all the juicy trappings of a case to really look more into.  People keep starting threads and chatting about cases from 1963, 1967, 1968,  the Lennon shooting in 1980, Marilyn Monroe, etc.....even 9/11, which happened 12 years ago. 

 

Why no interest in the one which just happened in June of last year, a mere 7 months back? 

 

  By the way, here is noted airplane crash expert and climatologist Donald Trump with his thoughts on 2 other recent conspiracies; if you worked for that hilarious FOX & Friends program wouldn't you tell your producers that you just flat-out refuse to have anyone on your show who is this stupid? FOX is literally the only place you can see this cartoon character these days, which pretty much tells you all you need to know about that network.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[seven]

Could be, and that hasn't been ruled out yet by *everyone*,  but the police and other authorities say there was no foul play and no reason to believe it was just a case of a guy speeding too fast in an area in which couldn't handle that speed.

 

    As the article followed the route of his death ride, I followed it on Google maps myself; I know that area pretty well and could see how a person should not be going 50mph once they get below Sunset, that's a really congested and narrow area with lots of cars even at 4am.

Yeah, i know the area too, been driving there although its been 5-6 years  since. Who knows what really happened. In the  cctv youtube-clip of the speeding car running the red-light ,crossing Melrose  i think,  you can tell there are at least 3 explosions after the impact and the engine was ejected some 100 ft in opposite direction from the car.

[pacman]

Why no interest in the one which just happened in June of last year, a mere 7 months back? 

 

I am interested in reading the link you posted but I don't have time to do anything at the moment. 

 

JD, I want to point out that because I favour a conspiracy over LHO acting alone, it doesn't make me a conspiracy theorist. The reason why the JFK assassination is the mother lode of all conspiracy theories, is because I along with millions of other people reject the official story. And it wasn't something I did as a knee jerk reaction, it was after considering the weight of evidence that casts enormous doubt on what we are supposed to believe. 

 

If Michael Hastings had made powerful enemies it does increase the chance that his death wasn't an accident but that comment should not be interpreted as an endorsement of any theory. It is a perfectly reasonable assumption based on my understanding of how far some people will go to silence their enemies. But on balance, he most likely killed himself driving too fast while affected by drugs and/or alcohol.

 

The world is not divided into theory believers & non-believers. It is absurd to suggest that a believer sees a conspiracy in every unexplained event & a non-believer accepts whatever the police or the government tells them. Most rational people make their own minds up based on the evidence available plus the bias of the journalist presenting it. And a journo's bias can turn a lot of people off, I for one don't place much faith in the words of someone trying to beat up a story. But a well written story can be very persuasive.

 

The last paragraph doesn't excuse the serial theorists, some people just want to believe the worst every single time. And there is so much material for them to work with I wonder if they become addicted to the visceral thrill of getting their minds around the next scandal. While I love the melodrama of a good conspiracy, it will not phase me at all should those we discussed turn out to be fantasy.

 

With some of them I will admit to surprise but it would still not stop me being a cynic or to view future odd events with similar scepticism. I am not suggesting that is how we should all think but I wouldn't want to be any other way. 

 

Cheers.       

[pacman]

I am wiser than this man, for neither of us appears to know anything great and good; but he fancies he knows something, although he knows nothing; whereas I, as I do not know anything, so I do not fancy I do. In this trifling particular, then, I appear to be wiser than he, because I do not fancy I know what I do not know.

 

Socrates. The voice of wisdom & I agree completely with him. 

 

Thinking we know something when one is only speculating is a sure way to make oneself foolish. But to wonder if something might have been possible, that is altogether different. I have learnt not to jump to conclusions but I have lived long enough to know that not everything is as it seems.

[Lefty]

http://www.infowars.com/evidence-indicates-michael-hastings-was-assassinated/

 

The revelation that Rolling Stone journalist Michael Hastings was working on a story about the CIA before his death and had contacted a Wikileaks lawyer about being under investigation by the FBI hours before his car exploded into flames has bolstered increasingly valid claims that the 33-year-old was assassinated.

Hastings died early Tuesday morning in Hollywood when his car allegedly hit a tree at high speed. The Los Angeles Coroner’s office has not yet been able to officially identify the body as Hastings because it is so badly burned.

Skeptics of the official narrative have highlighted eyewitness accounts which state that Hastings’ Mercedes “exploded”.

Images of the vehicle appear to show more damage to the rear, around the area of the fuel tank, than the front, leading to speculation that a car bomb which ignited the fuel could have been responsible for the incident.

“No matter how you slice this particular pie, a Mercedes is not just going to explode into flames without a little assistance,” writes freelance journalist Jim Stone. “Car fires in new cars happen for three main reasons — running the engine out of oil, or running the engine out of coolant, or after an absolutely huge car mangling accident, having the hot side of the battery short out against the frame before it reaches the fuse panel. And for all 3 of those normal reasons, which account for virtually all car fires in modern cars, the fire would have started in the engine compartment, progressed slowly, and scorched the hell out of the paint before ever reaching the gas tank. That clean paint is the be all tell all, Michael Hastings was murdered, and the rest is detail.”

Stone also questions why a white sheet has been draped over the vehicle in the image below.

The questions surrounding the precise nature of the “accident” that killed Hastings are given more weight by the fact that the journalist had made enemies within both the FBI and the CIA.

“Michael Hastings contacted WikiLeaks lawyer Jennifer Robinson just a few hours before he died, saying that the FBI was investigating him,” the official Wikileaks Twitter account announced yesterday.

Hastings “had the Central Intelligence Agency in his sights” and was set to release an article exposing the agency, according to L.A. Weekly.

The Obama administration and the Justice Department have openly claimed the authority to assassinate American citizens anywhere in the world if they are deemed a national security threat. A number of American citizens have already been killed as a result of this policy. Is it really that crazy to suggest that Michael Hastings was merely the latest victim of this doctrine?

The New York Daily News highlights the fact that Hastings had received multiple death threats before his demise.

Following his role in bringing down Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, Hastings was told by a McChrystal staffer, “We’ll hunt you down and kill you if we don’t like what you write.”

“Whenever I’d been reporting around groups of dudes whose job it was to kill people, one of them would usually mention that they were going to kill me,” said Hastings.

Hastings was renowned for being “only interested in writing stories someone didn’t want him to write — often his subjects,” according to Buzzflash editor Ben Smith, adding, “He knew that there are certain truths that nobody has an interest in speaking, ones that will make you both your subjects and their enemies uncomfortable. They’re stories that don’t get told because nobody in power has much of an interest in telling them.”

The fact that Hastings had made a plethora of enemies as a result of his hard-hitting investigative journalism has prompted a deluge of online comment speculating that the writer’s “car crash” was no accident.

“Hastings’ wreck might make sense on the freeway, but I doubt he’d be dumb enough to go 100 mph on Highland. He’s not some dumb college kid,” said one commenter on a local news site.

“A warning to other journalists to not dig too deep,” another Reddit user wrote. “Stick with the party line if you want a long, happy life.”

If this was an isolated incident then there wouldn’t be so many questions swirling about Hastings’ death. However, he’s certainly not the first individual to go up against the military-industrial complex and wind up in a coffin.

Other journalists who have proven to be a thorn in the side of the establishment have met the same fate, from Andrew Breitbart who was about to release damaging pre-election information about Barack Obama before he collapsed and died in strange circumstances, to Gary Webb, the Pullitzer prize-winning author who exposed the CIA’s involvement in the drug trade and subsequently committed “suicide” after apparently shooting himself in the head – twice.

More recently, Ibragim Todashev, friend of accused Boston bomber Tamerlan Tsarnev, was shot in the head six times by the FBI, who initially claimed Todashev was armed but later had to admit this was a lie. Speculation has raged that Todashev was assassinated because he had knowledge about the Boston bombings which the feds didn’t want to see the light of public scrutiny.

Despite his actions, the murder of Christopher Dorner, who was burned to death by LAPD officers while hiding inside a cabin, shows that authorities will not hesitate to resort to such methods.

It’s virtually inevitable that the true cause of Michael Hastings death will never be known and that the mainstream media will demonize anyone who questions the official narrative as a conspiracy theorist. Meanwhile, journalists and others who pose a threat to the military-industrial complex will continue to die in bizarre “accidents” that stink of foul play.

*********************

[JaiDee]

What's your conclusions about this story, Lefty?

 

There are anti-conspiracy articles you should check out also, I posted one myself........an article from Infowars makes me LESS curious, not more so;  anything which Alex Jones attaches himself to should be looked at with great skepticism.

IMO of course.

 

For instance, this line from the above article, is complete crap;

   '' Andrew Breitbart,  who was about to release damaging pre-election information about Barack Obama before he collapsed and died in strange circumstances''

   Errrr, the man died of heart failure after having had a heart attack just a few months earlier. ''Breitbart collapsed suddenly while walking in Brentwood. An autopsy by the L.A. country coroner's office showed that he had cardiomegaly and died of heart failure. Conspiracy theories arose about his death, but the toxicology  report showed, "No prescription or illicit drugs were detected.''

 

          Again, Infowars just stirring up crap where there isn't any.

 

GREAT article about Breitbart here by the best political writer in America today, Matt Taibbi;

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/blogs/taibblog/andrew-breitbart-death-of-a-douche-20120301

[azza33]

Just on the conspiracy about global climate change: good article in one of our papers about the lack of solar activity just now - Has the scientists baffled.

They linked the quiet solar activity back in the to the "mini ice age" period in The northern hemisphere.

Lack of solar activity causing extreme colds periods in the northern hemisphere.

Guess the build up of ice in the polar regions and extreme weather in the northern hemisphere could in fact be attributable to something natural.

But I'm guessing those with an agenda wont discuss such an important scientific observation.

[pacman]

But I'm guessing those with an agenda wont discuss such an important scientific observation.

 

Azza, a carbon tax, an emissions trading scheme, cap'n'trade, these are all mechanisms for future governments to raise the taxes needed to balance the books by hitting the wealthy ...  oops, the big polluters who have to pay for destroying the planet. Except they will go right on doing what they are doing except they will transfer large sums to the government. The theory is they will find ways to reduce their carbon output, thus saving on the tax they pay. 

 

Reduced solar activity has nothing to with it & if a mini ice age does start, they will blame it on climate change claiming not enough was done earlier. A good reason to increase the tax in other words.

[pacman]

What's your conclusions about this story, Lefty?

 

I can't speak for Lefty but I am sure you won't mind me commenting.

 

It does appear you are angling for a debate with anyone who has the temerity to raise their hand to suggest his death was no accident. That hand raiser? That would be me. I am not in possession of all the facts, I haven't read the 7 page article you referred to earlier but the above synopsis plus knowing just who he was upsetting all point to the possibility of foul play.

 

I am not subscribing to a conspiracy theory, I am not saying he was murdered, all I am suggesting is that deliberate interference is possible. The only thing I can base that on is the photo of his car. Fuel tanks don't easily explode & you won't find pictures of cars that have run into a tree with the back end of the car blown up. And the comment about the paint not having time to bubble is very telling. It isn't proof, it could have happened but on the balance of probability, that car was blown up by a bomb attached to the fuel tank.

 

I love how we can read & process the same information & arrive at different answers. Either I am way too cynical or you are way too trusting. I suspect the answer lies somewhere between.

[Lefty]

I agree with my fine intelligent well spoken friend, Pacman