nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Have any conspiracy theories ever benn proven true?

martinedwards

Can't remember any that have been proven and acknowledged.....

There were rumours that it was going to be officially announced that Jedward were a pair of annoying idiots, but maybe that was a counter conspiracy....

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Wacker The Attacker

martinedwards wrote: »

Can't remember any that have been proven and acknowledged.....

There were rumours that it was going to be officially announced that Jedward were a pair of annoying idiots, but maybe that was a counter conspiracy....

If they were proven true they would cease to become conspiracy theories and become facts instead.

Camrat

I'm not to sure if the WMD's in iraq was a conspiracy or just a bare face lie to the public.

Conspiracy i feel have some credit.

The free falling twin towers is so overwhelming for me, its just to perfect for them to have collapsed in on itself, not one, but both towers.

John P. O'Neill, FBI special agent in charge of counter terrorism, Found dead in the wreckage of the towers. Warned of the attacks months before......

Osama bin laden was captured alive in Afghan/Pakistan sometime in 2005. He then entered a Black op program which systematically moves high profile targets around black sites throughout the world to keep them off the radar, The night he was killed he was in the process of being transported to such a location. It was during this flight one of the two blackhawk helicopters developed mechanical difficulties and had to ditch. Due to sensitivity of the situation the decision was made to stage his dead.

Latchy

Jonny7 wrote: »

They generally do, because they are literally qualified to do it properly, dissect information correctly, strive to be objective and impartial, check their sources and others, substantiate and investigate facts.. also they have plenty of other historians challenging them on the tiny details.

Well yes , they do have to put in the hrs, be objective and have impartiality and much of their collective information has been used as fact and quoted in the hundreds or so book on the assassination, that's not in dispute but you have to allow that equally , many ordinary people will have took the time themselves to read the books and information that's gathered over the years ,take a bit from this , add a bit of that and made up their own minds as to what to believe because if anything proves anything in the post assassination years , you couldn't trust two corrupt presidents like Johnson and Nixon and if Bobby Kennedy had become president , he would have used his powers ( overriding any Hoover or corrupt CIA interference ) to open a fresh case on the murder of his brother .Two kennedys in the white house would have been two to many for lots of people and for all the obvious reasons

Almost "anybody else" reads the dailymail and watches JFK..

I bet for every person who reads the daily mail and believes what they read there are another 99 who read it and see it for what it is , a slightly dumbed up version of the daily Sun .JFK the movie allowed a whole new generation of Americans who weren't around in the 60s and 70 and not to familiar with it to get their own perspective on history ...it doesn't mean they came away thinking '' duh ..so that's what it's all about ? '' ...you have to give people more intelligence for as you say yourself ' Objectivity ' and doubt .

No one has been able to build a proper case on who alternatively killed JFK.. and that hasn't be done yet, in 50 years. The strongest case, by a mile, is Oswald, and that Onion article I posted

Oswald is the perfect ' case closed ' scenario of course but it hasn't been proved beyond doubt that he acted alone so all the questions remain unanswered .The volume of work on the case since ie, books ,etc have in some ways probably hindered other investigations because memory's to actual events get dulled , distorted ,twisted and many have jumped on the conspiracy theory's bandwagon simply to make money .

BOHtox

I think "been" is deliberately mis-spelled as "benn" after Tony Benn, a former Labour MP, in order to encourage a far left revolution!

Locanfetzava

endacl wrote: »

Ah now, if there's a conspiracy at work there its that the good ol' boys can't take the fact that they're governed by a black man, instead of owning him. Doesn't fit the model I know. I mean, the president is the one who's supposed to be doing the conspiring, isn't he?!? He's the government. Right?

Where's RTDH when you need him? He'd make sense of all this and lay it out in a perfectly logical rational way. There'd be YouTube videos and everything...

Here.

http://www.politics.ie/forum/us-politics/211583-obama-administration-tapping-millions-american-phones-4.html#post6861062

I Heart Internet

It's like "alternative medicine".

When alternative medicines are proven to actually work, they become medicine.

When conspiracy theories are proven to be correct, they become facts.

danniemcq

bbam wrote: »

Definitely looks like that big bang theory is knocking the creationism story from the bible right back on its ass!

in all fairness even the catholic church has awknowledged that the big bang is where it all kicked off. wasn't it a jesuit priest working with the pope that was one of the ones that first proposed the theory or showed some equations?

martinedwards wrote: »

but the film!!!!

that was all true right?

right?

no?

no

it was back and to the left

Ush1

Any conspiracy theory about JFK I've read has been horsesh*te and usually tries to ignore something very obvious.

People don't want to believe the most powerful man in the world was killed by a loser, it just HAD to be some bigger forces at work. That's the sad truth.

nelly17

Back in his day I guess Galileo would have been accused of something similar to a conspiricy theory (only they classed it as heresy back then). But he was proven correct when Science caught up

Latchy

Ush1 wrote: »

Any conspiracy theory about JFK I've read has been horsesh*te and usually tries to ignore something very obvious.

People don't want to believe the most powerful man in the world was killed] by a loser it just HAD to be some bigger forces at work. That's the sad truth.

The fact that this loser was himself ' conveniently ' assassinated 48 hrs later by a man who had himself had strong Mafia connections and who never lived long enough to tell the world the ' whole story ' would in any ordinary murder make people suspicious ,never mind the fact that it was the President of the United States .

With those simple facts alone above ,people have as much right to believe there was a possible conspiracy as the lone nut/loser people who can be equally annoying as anybody who ever put foreword a ' horse**** theory' to the assassination out

endacl

People have the right to believe any bollickology they like. The rest of us have the right to laugh at them.

Rock on!

Ush1

Latchy wrote: »

The fact that this loser was himself ' conveniently ' assassinated 48 hrs later by a man who had himself had strong Mafia connections and who never lived long enough to tell the world the ' whole story ' would in any ordinary murder make people suspicious ,never mind the fact that it was the President of the United States .

With those simple facts alone above ,people have as much right to believe there was a possible conspiracy as the lone nut/loser people who can be equally annoying as anybody who ever put foreword a ' horse**** theory' to the assassination out

I've never seen any theory put forward that falsified that Oswald did not commit the murder alone.

Anybody can speculate about anything they like with regards to background but the killing itself is cut and dry to me.

Latchy

Ush1 wrote: »

I've never seen any theory put forward that falsified that Oswald did not commit the murder alone

.He may have committed the murder alone (even if you leave the dodgy cheap rifle / how did he get so those shots of so quick and easy stats ) but it has never been proved beyond doubt that he wasn't part of a conspiracy .Ruby murdering Oswald saved the Dallas police and the USA government from a murder trial which might not only have opened a can of worms full of secrets relating to the JFK murder but beyond that to ...we'll never know .

Anybody can speculate about anything they like with regards to background but the killing itself is cut and dry to me.

Fair enough .

[Deleted User]

Latchy wrote: »

.He may have committed the murder alone (even if you leave the dodgy cheap rifle / how did he get so those shots of so quick and easy stats ) but it has never been proved beyond doubt that he wasn't part of a conspiracy .Ruby murdering Oswald saved the Dallas police and the USA government from a murder trial which might not only have opened a can of worms full of secrets relating to the JFK murder but beyond that to ...we'll never know . .

I have been to the book depository myself. I was taken there by uncle (former US Marine) There is no doubt in his mind that there were more people involved. Due to the difficulty of the shots and the time in which they were taken. I dont know why that is so hard to believe. Evidence suggests there were more then one shooter as well as a death bed confession, not to mention witness testimony.

Latchy

Deleted User wrote: »

I have been to the book depository myself. I was taken there by uncle (former US Marine) There is no doubt in his mind that there were more people involved. Due to the difficulty of the shots and the time in which they were taken. I dont know why that is so hard to believe. Evidence suggests there were more then one shooter as well as a death bed confession, not to mention witness testimony.

With the hindsight of material and evidence, I've never been fully convinced Oswald acted alone and always allowed for the second shooter scenario because there's just to many coincidences to be ' coincident ' .I've always wanted to visit Dealy Plaza and hope I get the chance some time .

--Kaiser--

Deleted User wrote: »

I have been to the book depository myself. I was taken there by uncle (former US Marine) There is no doubt in his mind that there were more people involved. Due to the difficulty of the shots and the time in which they were taken. I dont know why that is so hard to believe. Evidence suggests there were more then one shooter as well as a death bed confession, not to mention witness testimony.

The shots were not difficult at all, especially not for a Marine sharpshooter. There is no reason to believe that there was more than one gunman

666irishguy

I thought it was/is still quite contested whether he could cycle a Carcanao and resight fast enough to get the shots off.
My two cents on the whole thing are that it if he did act alone it seems odd to me that of all the old bolt action military rifles available and easy enough to get in those days in the states less than 20 years after WW2, he chose the Carcano, which uses an odd rimless cartridge and a less popular caliber. Surely with his background he would have gone for something like a Springfield which he probably would have fired in the military at some stage and he could probably pick up cheap enough and get ammunition anywhere and it would be less obvious a purchase. That said any old bolt action could easily have done the job with regards to range and power.