Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Ted Gunderson former FBI chief/whistle blower poisoned ?

Options
2»

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    hooradiation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,922 ✭✭✭hooradiation


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    In other words you think people who use alternative mediciine treatments are idiots, it is hopeless and the facts are irrelevant to them?

    No, i said they were desperate, and desperation makes fools of us all.

    In fact, there's no real reason for you to make this post unless you're trying to create a nice wee strawman to argue against.
    Play those games with someone else, I'm not interested.


  • Options
    #33
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Tell me, when someone says:

    What does it mean to you?
    That they are providing a possible explanation.

    I was asking why you provided such a explanation rather than a more likely one.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Well considering you've just aid that it isn't likely that he was under surveillance how exactly would they know what he was going to say?
    So question still stands then: why would bother to have him killed after the damage is done?
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    No. I am suggesting to you that you have an obligation to yourself to familiarise yourself with the information provided before you actually draw your conclusions

    If relevant links are provided - and they were - then you should pay attention to them. That is if you want to understand.
    Great, and I asked a single line sentence about the topic and said videos.
    You however were so concerned about preserving discussion you refused to answer those questions and gave out to me for asking them.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    I fail to understand why you can't grasp the fact that you can involve yourself in a discussion and be open to different possibilities. The topic is not Daithi or my opinions on whether he was poisoned it is the claim by the Dr who knew him.
    Ah right, so asking for what your opinion about the content you post is not discussion....?


  • Options
    #34
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Joshua Jones wrote: »
    From my POV skeppies don't care about the issues only having a debate/arguement. I guess they see CT's as a good trawling ground since by their very definition are hard to prove. It does get tedious though.

    And lets not even start on why they spend so much time argueing with people they believe to be "nutjobs"......
    Well one, you're ascribing beliefs to me that i do not hold, or have ever expressed.
    Two, you seem to be guilty of the very thing you're complain about.
    And three you're making a personal attack against me rather than engage in the discussion.

    And yet, somehow my few questions are trolling....


  • Options
    #35
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    King Mob wrote: »
    That they are providing a possible explanation.

    I was asking why you provided such a explanation rather than a more likely one.
    Well no, you said: why does there always have to be a sinister conspiracy?

    A flight of fancy perhaps but food for thought nonetheless.
    King Mob wrote: »
    So question still stands then: why would bother to have him killed after the damage is done?
    Only two viable options IMO 1) Revenge. Someone that he'd shone a light on didn't want him to die a natural death or 2) Maybe it had become known that he was sitting on some explosive information that he'd been afraid to release until he was already facing death. With 1 being considerably more likely IMO
    King Mob wrote: »
    Great, and I asked a single line sentence about the topic and said videos.

    The point remains. If you want to know why someone would want him dead either for revenge or to silence him there is no better way to familiarise yourself with one of the most controversial issues that he highlighted than to watch that film.


  • Options
    #36
    Brown Bomber
    Site Banned Posts: 8,331 ✭✭✭Brown Bomber


    hooradiation wrote: »
    No, i said they were desperate, and desperation makes fools of us all.

    In fact, there's no real reason for you to make this post unless you're trying to create a nice wee strawman to argue against.
    Play those games with someone else, I'm not interested.

    Who's desperate? Most people that use alternative medicine do so for chronic illness.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    King Mob
    Registered Users Posts: 25,229 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Well no, you said: why does there always have to be a sinister conspiracy?

    A flight of fancy perhaps but food for thought nonetheless.
    Well you see that was a turn of phrase and was not actually saying that you always believe it to be sinister in every case all the time. I would have thought that was clear, but I shall be more careful next time.

    However you then say:
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Only two viable options IMO 1) Revenge. Someone that he'd shone a light on didn't want him to die a natural death or 2) Maybe it had become known that he was sitting on some explosive information that he'd been afraid to release until he was already facing death. With 1 being considerably more likely IMO
    And both of these are sinister.
    Why isn't the idea I suggested viable?

    And this is beside the point that both of these points still do not make sense.
    In 1) a revenge killing would only make his death legitimatise what he was saying. Furthermore the person he allegedly shone a light on would then surely be under more scrutiny because they'd be implicated in a murder.
    The damage was done there was no point in revenge which would only do more damage.

    And in 2) wouldn't trying to kill him, especially in a slow noticeable way as the doctor in the video accuses, just make him face death all the sooner and make whatever fictional bombshell you're inventing come out sooner?
    And if they knew he knew that, why allow him to blab for so long?

    And if he did know something, why didn't he say?
    He clearly had no fear of being taken out as that did not stop him from spilling all the stuff which you think was more likely to have gotten him killed.
    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    The point remains. If you want to know why someone would want him dead either for revenge or to silence him there is no better way to familiarise yourself with one of the most controversial issues that he highlighted than to watch that film.
    Which is why I asked a very simple question about whether his claims were any different to the thousands of others who make the same.
    You know, trying to familiarise myself with what he's saying....


  • Options
    #38
    Daithi 1
    Registered Users Posts: 2,006 ✭✭✭Daithi 1


    hooradiation wrote: »
    No, i said they were desperate, and desperation makes fools of us all.

    In fact, there's no real reason for you to make this post unless you're trying to create a nice wee strawman to argue against.
    Play those games with someone else, I'm not interested.

    King Mob is well interested tho, on the other hand. Couldn't wait to sink his teeth in... :D

    Game on !


  • Options
    #39
    humanji
    Registered Users Posts: 19,976 ✭✭✭✭humanji


    I've had to infract two users for insulting posts and I'm very close to infracting the rest of you for dragging the thread off-topic and ranting at each other. Stick to the topic and if your post is even slightly antagonistic, don't post it!


  • Options
    #40
    hooradiation
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,922 ✭✭✭hooradiation


    Brown Bomber wrote: »
    Who's desperate? Most people that use alternative medicine do so for chronic illness.

    You've...kinda answered your own question there.

    Setting aside we were originally talking about cancer, people who are suffering from chronic illnesses are just as susceptible to indulging in the fantasy of an alternative to medicine holding the cure for their illness as someone who would be facing, say, cancer.

    Unsurprisingly, Man's unfailing capacity to believe what he prefers to be true rather than what the evidence shows to be likely and possible has always been the bedrock on which there snake oil salesmen have made their money.

    But this is all somewhat of an aside, my original point was that the Doctor who claimed he was poisoned didn't perform the autopsy, wasn't treating Mr Gunderson correctly for the condition be 'diagnosed' him with and spends most of the video talking about various theories he holds a belief in rather than the apparent poisoning of a man he calls a friend.

    Speculatively, I'd guess this hypothesis has it's basis in the fact it'd be rather inconvenient for the image of Mr Gunderson as someone they saw as fighting the good fight against 'shadowy and powerful elites' dying from something as mundane as old age and cancer.


Advertisement