Has there ever been a Conspiracy Theory that was in fact true?

[Chaos]

Evidence for what claims??? You see, the word "claims" is an open-ended sophomoric word. Name the claim, and if it's specific, you have a chance to get an answer, that is, if you want to learn something. If you want to just play "gotcha," pack up your mouse and play some place else.

When the student is ready, the teacher appears.

You should go learn some other big words. Labelling everyone asking for evidence you cannot give because you pulled the claim out of your ass "sophomoric" is, well, sophomoric.

You exactly which claims I refer to. You have claimed a number of conspiracies to actually be true in this thread. Present some actual evidence that any of these conspiracies are true, or quit playing your childish games.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Robert, Chaos WAS discussing a specific claim you made on this thread. But you have been dodging so long you probably forgot.

He was asking if you had any evidence to support this claim:

Some have theorized it was the suppression of liberty as evidenced in the subsequent Patriot Act. Others claim it was just a sting operation that went wrong. It definitely seems to have been a sting operation, for whatever the purpose

So can you PROVE it was a sting operation and offer evidence, or are you going to continue dodging with the usual waffle about sophomoric claims and the teacher appearing?

 

[EventHorizon]

It's amazing. Robert manages to embarrass himself more and more with each post. I wonder what he hopes to accomplish? Is he trying to sway people who are on the fence to his side? Because anybody on the fence would certainly pushed in the other direction after reading Robert's posts.

 

[Tomtomkent]

As a little side note, if you press the little icon in most quotes you go back to the referenced post. Took me maybe three or four mouseclicks to remind myself which claim was discussed. How Robert could have failed to do that is beyond me...

 

[Robert Prey]

Robert, Chaos WAS discussing a specific claim you made on this thread. But you have been dodging so long you probably forgot.

He was asking if you had any evidence to support this claim:

So can you PROVE it was a sting operation a

The Sting Operation conclusion flows from the documented fact that the locus of the conspiracy was small community of crazies who lived in a small community called Elohim City, and in that group there were at least two, probably three ATF and/or FBI informants, some of whom promoted the idea of bombing Federal Buildings in OKC,. If it was not a sting operation that went wrong, then the only other conclusion would be that the government wanted to blow up the Murrah Building, which is a stretch, even for a criminal administration like the Clintons. Is that absolute "proof"? No. Course not. But it is the only reasonable conclusion given what is provable about the Gov. informants at Elohim City including Carol Howe, Andreas Strassmier, and Grandpa Miller (the head of the Crazies, but also an FBI informant).


This is just a tidbit of what an earlier Cong. Investigation was to delve into which documents suspicion of a sting operation:

June 09, 2006
McCurtain Daily Gazette

Elohim City connection

"In what some on Capitol Hill are calling a surprising decision, Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., has given the nod for hearings into the long-debated question of whether those responsible for the bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building had help from any foreign source. ..

While attempting to piece together evidence in the mysterious death of his inmate-brother in August of 1995 at the Oklahoma City Federal Transfer Center, attorney Jesse Trentadue has sued the Oklahoma City FBI office for documents that might shed light on the inmate's bizarre demise while locked up in a suicide-proof cell...

...While the documents obtained in the suit have been heavily redacted, they do appear to link Strassmeir to a foiled "sting operation..l"

"...Only weeks before the bombing, the BATF had learned Strassmeir was working with others on a plot to bomb a federal building in Oklahoma City. However, the FBI stepped in to thwart his arrest when the BATF sought an arrest warrant from the Tulsa U.S. attorney's office."

I would add the ATF informant Carol Howe gave the ATF warning of such a plot a few weeks before the bombing.

In addition, there is strong evidence that the ATF was warned on their pagers not to come to work that day due to a bomb threat.

 

[Tomtomkent]

Suspicion of, is not proof of.

 

[Gazpacho]

Robert, the subject of the thread is not "promote your pet CTs that your ideologically inclined brain has decided are true." It's about CTs that have been admitted by those participating in it. Like the aforementioned Arkansas Project. Aren't you going to read about that one?

 

[bynmdsue]

So Timothy McVeigh is not involved at all? Man, he's going to be disappointed. Oh wait, maybe he's a Proud True American Patriot Hero Patsy like Lee Oswald.

 

[Robrob]

Since the OP's question turns on definition, here's the one I'm working from:

- There was a conspiracy to do something of national significance.
- The conspiracy was carried out in confidence. Not necessarily in total secrecy, just not openly discussed outside of the social group carrying out the conspiracy.
- The conspiracy was publicly alleged based on indirect evidence. (That makes it a theory.)
- The allegations were dismissed for lack of direct evidence, creating a tradition of doubt and marginalization that equates the indirect evidence to no evidence at all.
- The conspiracy was later confirmed to exist.

A good start but I think to rise to the CT level of 9/11, JFK, the Moon Landing, etc... there has to be "more."

- The conspiracy planed a scapegoat in advance.

- To achieve its goals, the conspiracy utilized personnel, methods, technologies and equipment on a massive and previously unknown scale .

 

[Robrob]

None. Her captain, Charles B. McVay III^WP, was made a scapegoat for the loss, which deflected attention from the Navy's failure both to provide an anti-submarine escort (which McVay had requested), and to notice that the ship was overdue and initiate a timely search-and-rescue operation. There is no evidence of any deliberate conspiracy to do this, however, and even if there were it still would not fit the accepted definition of a conspiracy theory.

Correct: Wasn't a plan to sink the ship, wasn't a plan to blame the Captain. No ninjas required to accomplish anything.

Who says there were scapegoats or ninjas? But accomplices, provocateurs and ATF foreknowledge allowing them to escape, but not the rest of the 168, including daycare children. And that is a high crime.

That didn't make sense. Could you rewrite that?

Robrob wrote:

"In other words, you have no idea, no plot, no plotters, no evidence of any kind - just a vague distrust of authority?"

Rebuttal:
In other words you have no idea and no interest in learning anything. When the student is ready, the teacher appears.

Hard to "learn anything" from you when you admit you have no idea, no plot, no plotters, no evidence of any kind - just a vague distrust of authority.

The Sting Operation conclusion flows from the documented fact that the locus of the conspiracy was small community of crazies who lived in a small community called Elohim City, and in that group there were at least two, probably three ATF and/or FBI informants, some of whom promoted the idea of bombing Federal Buildings in OKC,. If it was not a sting operation that went wrong, then the only other conclusion would be that the government wanted to blow up the Murrah Building, which is a stretch, even for a criminal administration like the Clintons. Is that absolute "proof"? No. Course not. But it is the only reasonable conclusion given what is provable about the Gov. informants at Elohim City including Carol Howe, Andreas Strassmier, and Grandpa Miller (the head of the Crazies, but also an FBI informant).

Fantasy presented as fact.

Elohim City connection

"In what some on Capitol Hill are calling a surprising decision, Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., has given the nod for hearings into the long-debated question of whether those responsible for the bombing of the Oklahoma City federal building had help from any foreign source. ..

That's "evidence" for a US conspiracy?

In addition, there is strong evidence that the ATF was warned on their pagers not to come to work that day due to a bomb threat.

LOL!, Oh, wait - you're serious!?

 

[Robert Prey]

Correct: Wasn't a plan to sink the ship, wasn't a plan to blame the Captain. No ninjas required to accomplish anything.



That didn't make sense. Could you rewrite that?



Hard to "learn anything" from you when you admit you have no idea, no plot, no plotters, no evidence of any kind - just a vague distrust of authority.



Fantasy presented as fact.



That's "evidence" for a US conspiracy?



LOL!, Oh, wait - you're serious!?

One question at a time, or go bye-bye.

 

[GregHouseMD]

Robert, why do you insist on people asking only one question at a time?

 

[Robert Prey]

Robert, the subject of the thread is not "promote your pet CTs that your ideologically inclined brain has decided are true." It's about CTs that have been admitted by those participating in it. Like the aforementioned Arkansas Project. Aren't you going to read about that one?

The conspiracy to bomb the Murrah building has been admitted to by at least three of its participants. Ever check out the news? If you'er dying to talk about something else start a new thread. Make a statement. Stand up for what you believe in.

 

[GregHouseMD]

I started this thread looking for examples of conspiracy theories that had been proven to be accurate or "true". I thought I gave a reasonable and simple definition of conspiracy theory but that seems to be what was debated more than anything else.


A couple of incidents that were not mentioned that I believe fit my definition. I swear I was not thinking of these at the time i started the thread.

Penn State, Sandusky, Joe Paterno et al. While no trials have been held, there was clearly a conspiracy to conceal apparent wrongdoing at the very least.

Randy Weaver and the siege of Ruby Ridge in Idaho. The ATF, US Marshal's Service, the FBI and the DOJ all claimed Randy Weaver and his family were dangerous criminals. The truth was much different.


Apparently, based on what I believe a CT is, a few have been exposed as truth, many seem to be constantly debated.

9/11, JFK, RFK, MLK.

Debate is good, it's healthy if all parties actually debate and exchange viewpoints.

Thanks for playing, I'm sure there will be some comments about the two exposed CT's I've listed above.

Keep it healthy.

 

[GregHouseMD]

The conspiracy to bomb the Murrah building has been admitted to by at least three of its participants. Ever check out the news? If you'er dying to talk about something else start a new thread. Make a statement. Stand up for what you believe in.

The last line here is about as hypocritical as you can get.

Robert, you keep claiming to have evidence but never reveal it, claiming the questions aren't right or there are too many (more than one).

How about you stand up and share the so called evidence?

 

[Robrob]

A couple of incidents that were not mentioned that I believe fit my definition. I swear I was not thinking of these at the time i started the thread.

Penn State, Sandusky, Joe Paterno et al. While no trials have been held, there was clearly a conspiracy to conceal apparent wrongdoing at the very least.

Randy Weaver and the siege of Ruby Ridge in Idaho. The ATF, US Marshal's Service, the FBI and the DOJ all claimed Randy Weaver and his family were dangerous criminals. The truth was much different.

Well to be fair, those are primarily simple conspiracies (two or more persons agreeing to commit an illegal act). You can't equate them to the (claimed) 9/11, JFK, OJ, etc... Was your original intent of this topic to identify conspiracies like kidnapping, bank robbery, drug distribution, etc... or the CT that are debated here daily?

The Penn State sex scandal didn't require an Illuminati, Shadow Government, or Gnomes of Zurich. It didn't require enormously complex plans. It didn't involve scapegoats. Etc...

One question at a time, or go bye-bye.

You don't answer single questions, you don't don't answer multiple questions, what do you do?

 

[Tomtomkent]

One question at a time, or go bye-bye.

And how do you intend to enforce the "go bye bye" bit of this statement? And why should others go "bye bye" for raising questions?

You try to enforce this rule in all threads. Why?

Yes, I know that is two questions, but I choose neither of your false dichotomy options.

 

[Gazpacho]

deleted

 

[Robert Prey]

The last line here is about as hypocritical as you can get.

Robert, you keep claiming to have evidence but never reveal it, claiming the questions aren't right or there are too many (more than one).

How about you stand up and share the so called evidence?

Evidence for what?? Lack of specificity will get you no response.

 

[Robert Prey]

Correct: Wasn't a plan to sink the ship, wasn't a plan to blame the Captain. No ninjas required to accomplish anything.



That didn't make sense. Could you rewrite that?



Hard to "learn anything" from you when you admit you have no idea, no plot, no plotters, no evidence of any kind - just a vague distrust of authority.



Fantasy presented as fact.



That's "evidence" for a US conspiracy?



LOL!, Oh, wait - you're serious!?

If you want a response, one question at a time or go bye-bye. When the student is ready, the teacher appears.