I KNEW this was going to happen, sooner or later!!!

Originally posted by ImAPepper

Did you read his Wiki Bio?

Yea, but that doesn't say anything about why he went and shot those guys.

Did you read his Wish List @ amazon.com?

Do you really believe you could bring an Amazon.com wish list into a court room as proof of motive? You can't prove intent or motive with a freaking shopping list.

Do you where he in fact was when he attempted to murder these two men?

Sure, everyone who reads the news knows.

I am not saying ALL truthers are murderers. There are, in fact like other fanatics, truthers that will kill to get their point across.

I don't understand your point. Did you mean "They are like"? Because if you are going that route I am fairly certain I can find other fanatics for you to worry about. I have seen teenage girls assault each other over Twilight. We might as well just ban everything

This man was a truther. He attempted to kill because of his mental disability. 911 Truth played a part in this. IMO

And? What's your salient point? So what he if he shot them over 9/11 truth? Is that somehow worse than if he had shot them because they had flower pots on their head? Strangely no solutions are presented by those who decry truthers here. Is your simple solution people just shut up and sit down? You know they won't. The solution itself is unspeakable to you because I don't think you are brave enough to say it.

The solution is to ban 9/11 truth, outlaw all groups and punish those who question the OS in any way. that's the only way to stop it right? Of course I am quite certain you will disagree and say this is not what you intended. If it's not what are you whining about? Why even make the point "he shot those people over X"? In the eyes of the law it doesn't matter what you did it for. The action itself is all that matters.

[edit on 6-3-2010 by antonia]

Originally posted by ImAPepper [snip]
This man was a mental case. Was it 9/11 that made him insane? Probably not. Did the 9/11 truth movement contribute in some part to his psychosis?
Oh..if anyone is interested here is the Murdering Truther's Amazon.com reading wish list:

www.amazon.com...=cm_pdp_wish_all_itms

[snip]

No doubt he was a truther.

And yes, I have had indirect death threats made toward me on this very forum by truthers.

[snip]

I'm not sure if any of this has been posted. The NWO offices had me on leave for a few days....

Keep in mind this isn't the first murderer (or attempted) from the Truth Movement.

James von Brunn the Holocaust Museum killer was a Truther.

Sean Fitzgerald killed his father while he slept. He was a truther.

Well, extending Dave's and Pepper's "logic" above, let's look at some numbers. Now of course the dates of these 3 killings weren't listed, and the US government agencies often report statistics several years late, so the data sets are not for the same time periods, but let's take a hypothetical 365.25-day "average" year sometime during the later 2000 decade.

John Patrick Bedell, James von Brunn, Sean Fitzgerald = 3.0000 persons (exact)

Approximate current US population: 308,814,881
www.census.gov...

So a hypothetical "average" US citizen has a 9.71456E-07 percent chance of being killed by a 9/11 "truther".

CA Population 36,756,666
White persons, percent, 2008 (a) 76.60%
Female persons, percent, 2008 50.00%
Bachelor's degree or higher, pct of persons age 25+, 2000 26.60%

quickfacts.census.gov...

Those numbers would "predict" that the same hypothetical citizen is 9.385 million times as likely to be murdered by a white person residing in CA, 4.692 million times as likely to be murdered by a white male CA resident, and 1.248 million times as likely to be murdered by a white male college graduate who lives in the state of California.

Causes of Death
Heart disease: 631,636
Cancer: 559888
Diabetes: 72,449
Suicide: 33,300
Hypertension: 23,855
Homicide: 18,573

www.cdc.gov...
www.cdc.gov...

That set of numbers would "predict" that the same average citizen is 210545.3 times as likely to die of heart disease, 186629.3x to die of cancer, 24149.7x to die from diabetes, 11100.0x to commit suicide, 7951.7x to die from high blood pressure, and 6191.0 times as likely to be mudered by the average killer who may be (but much more likely is not) a 9/11 "truther."

* An estimated 16,272 persons were murdered nationwide in 2008. This number was a 3.9 percent decrease from the 2007 estimate, a 0.8 percent increase from the 2004 figure, and a 4.8 percent increase from the 1999 estimate.
* There were an estimated 5.4 murders per 100,000 inhabitants in 2008, a 4.7 percent decrease from the estimated 2007 rate.
* 89.4 percent of the murders that occurred in the United States in 2008 were within Metropolitan Statistical Areas, 6.3 percent were in nonmetropolitan counties, and the remainder (4.3 percent) occurred in cities outside metropolitan areas. (Based on Table 2.)

www.fbi.gov...

So the 3 persons alleged to be 9/11 "truthers" account for 0.01844 percent of the murders tabulated by the FBI for the year 2008 (the most current year completely available at the FBI website).

But Ol' Psychic Dave and Pepper the Persecuted are here making threads and many posts about the dangers of "killer 9/11 truthers..."

Or could it possibly have been posting/editing the Wikipedia about anodizing aluminum, Marine Corps Air Station El Toro, Joseph Stalin, and human penis size that "took [Bedell] over the edge" rather than "9/11 trutherism"?

en.wikipedia.org...:Contributions&limit=500&target=JPatrickBedell
/ydhsgtr

preview.tinyurl.com...

Note: The ATS forum software is scrambling both the direct and the TinyURL links to Bedell's Wiki contributions page for whatever reason(s)...

Here's something to think about:

dictionary.reference.com...

Function: noun 1 : a psychosis characterized by systematized delusions of persecution or grandeur usually without hallucinations 2 : a tendency on the part of an individual or group toward excessive or irrational suspiciousness and distrustfulness of others

[edit on 6-3-2010 by rhunter]

Originally posted by Oldtimer2
Maybe the OP should put that this his opinion that he obviously came up with all by himself,what in the heck does wanting the truth have to do with some random person shooting guards? where was it mentioned this was the reason he did this? think the OP's come to his own conclusion, never let truth get in the way of a good story

Apparently I have not made my OP clear. I am trying to point out that this runaway train of conspiracy speculation, theorizing, and accusations based literally upon nothing, NOTHING, but abject paranoia and the rubbish these damned fool conspiracy web sites are pushing is instigating false public unrest to the point where it's putting the idea in people's head to drive across the country and shoot Pentagon personnel. It isn't my personal opinion. It's a cold, hard fact, as this guy had been ranting about these 9/11 conspiracies online the same way you people have. We know that because he had a blog linked to his LinkedIn account. Here's another article on the guy-

More information on that conspiracy fetishist's "investigation"

Do you really need more proof on how the conspiracy proponents shouting FIRE in a crowded theater is doing more harm than good? All you need to do is look at the responses on this very thread. Go back and look at my OP again. All I said was some crackpot who supported these conspriacy stories shot two cops, and added some criticism to the conspiracy stories that drove him into doing this. From that, hordes of people descended upon this thread and vented every angst from "how I'm a sheeple" to "it isn't a crime to kill government employees" to "the shoorter was himself a false flag opreation", sprinkled with an occasional "I'm an idiot". It's become clear that there are a LOT of people here who have such a strong ideological attachment to these conspriacy stories that they cannot separate themelves from them emotionally, so they see any attack on their conspriacy claims as a personal attack upon themselves personally.

This zealotry isn't coming from me, it isn't coming from the Pentagon shooter, and it isn't even coming from the 9/11 commission report. It's coming 100% entirely from yourselves. So please, what say YOU tell ME what would drive some crackpot conspiracy supporter to travel across the country specifically to shoot Pentagon employees.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave


Apparently I have not made my OP clear....

Obviously, and you never will considering that you cannot make muddy water clear by throwing more mud in it.

[edit on 6-3-2010 by Shadow Herder]

reply to post by hooper


Yours is an opinion.,unsubstantiated by anything other than just that-your opinion.Mine was taken directly from the dictionary.Do your homework before trying to shoot someone down next time.But even according to your opinion, it was in the dictionary ,so therefore according to you it must be what most people think of upon hearing the word. So,your arguement defeats itself and needs no further explaination on my part.You make my point for me.

All I said was some crackpot who supported these conspriacy stories shot two cops, and added some criticism to the conspiracy stories that drove him into doing this.

Now, here's a pop quiz, to determine right away whether you people are part of the solution, or part of the problem- When you read about this guy, are you...

a) ...horrified at how fringe crackpots like this are seeing what they want to see in these conspriacy stories and are getting the dangerous idea to take matters into their own hands?

-or-

b) ...convinced this is "evidence" of yet ANOTHER conspiracy and/or coverup and the secret world order is framing him (or even staging this themselves) as a disinformation campaign to discredit the rest of you truthers?

You tried to pigeon hole every single person into one of those two categories and couldn't remember that from the OP until now, or chose to ignore it. Either is the sign of a terrible poster.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


I knew this was going to happen too. Take another crackpot and tie him loosely to a group you disagree with:
Guilt by Association Fallacy

Madman is mad and shot at people, but he watched Loose Change.
Random person is looking for truth on 9/11 and watches Loose Change.
Now random persons viewing 9/11 truth media are madmen that might kill people because
1) Glen Beck said so
2) Oreally said so
and others say so, who are also fake experts.

These types of arguments make a lot of disinfo headway with those who are looking into the truth of 9/11, but not enough.

Originally posted by QuantumDeath
I had to hit the ignore button on two members today because they just simply misunderstand me, or just can't at all. Not about to get banned because one wishes to add onto the situation just because one can't respect anothers stance, opinion, etc.

Quantum, don't waste our time with feigned indignation. Your post was, and I'm quoting you verbatim-

"When is killing people that work for the government murder? These people know damn well that what they are working for is a symbol of "Corruption, Deception, and Evil". They don't care if they are working to inslave their own people, just as long as they get paid. Goverment agencies have enough blood on them to completely fill 50+, 12ft deep swimming pools, and they all got away with murder by making these things look like a freak accident or a suicide.

They're going to get whats coming to them and this is just the beginning of it. "

You're not posting an opinion on how we should keep Pluto on as a planet, or how Sam Adams is better than Budweiser, or how much the "Jersey Shore" TV series sucks. You're posting your support for government employees being murdered as "getting what's coming to them". There's no way we can misunderstand you becuase it's razor sharp clear what you rmeaning was. That's right up there on the same list of sick in the head statements as "women secretly enjoy being raped", and there isn't anything remotely respectable about an opinion like that. How did you think people were going to respond? You're certainly not stupid so you have to know what you're doing.

All I can say is that whatever it was you meant to do, all you really wound up doing is prove my original point- these stupid conspiracy stories are instigating false public unrest and the blind zealotry they're fostering can and will incite people to murder. If anyone actually wonders what would cause someone to go to the Pentagon and shoot two cops, there's the reason, right there.

After reading this thread this video came to my mind.



Your attempts to discredit users at ATS and anyone who has a passion for seeking out truth is not only insulting but remember, when you point a finger at someone there will be 3 pointed at you or in this case 100's.

There are probably way more pedophiles, rapists and murderers that believe the official story of 911 than not.


[edit on 6-3-2010 by Shadow Herder]

Originally posted by okbmd
reply to post by hooper

 

Yours is an opinion.,unsubstantiated by anything other than just that-your opinion.Mine was taken directly from the dictionary.Do your homework before trying to shoot someone down next time.But even according to your opinion, it was in the dictionary ,so therefore according to you it must be what most people think of upon hearing the word. So,your arguement defeats itself and needs no further explaination on my part.You make my point for me.

If most people consider the term "anti-semite" to mean what you say it means then why were you trying to correct someone? They, according to you, already knew that. So you argument defeats itself and needs no further explanation on my part.

Face it. When someone uses the term "anti-semite" in modern English they mean anti-Jewish. It's really pretty simple.

reply to post by Shadow Herder


And let's not forget the masses who just don't care either way. Now, what happens if some crazy OS believer storms into a pacifist hippie camp hosting a "9/11 is an inside job meeting" and starts shooting people? Do we blame OS believers? No, that's stupid. We blame the person who did it. It doesn't matter why he did it, he knows he shouldn't be doing it.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


"...what would drive some crackpot conspiracy supporter to drive across the country specifically to shoot Pentagon employees..." Oh, i don't know, let's speculate on that.What drives young men and women to join a military branch,get shipped off to a foreign land,and get killed or maimed? What drives a military to send these young people off to hell with orders to kill, all in the name of American interests? What drives these "American Interests" to sanction the killing of civilians and wave the flag of "collateral damages"? What drives the peoples of those far off places to hate America to such an extent that they infilitrate our military and then kill even more of our young men and women ? What drives the media to publish the BULL**** instead of the TRUTH?What drives all of the cover-ups,lies,deceptions,etc.,etc.,etc.? And last but not least,GOOD OL DAVE, what is it that drives YOU and those like you,to support all of the above??? Hmmm....Naw, couldn't be TPTB . What was I thinking ?

Originally posted by jprophet420
You tried to pigeon hole every single person into one of those two categories and couldn't remember that from the OP until now, or chose to ignore it. Either is the sign of a terrible poster.

All right, I suppose I can acknowledge your point. I wasn't trying to "pigeon hole" people when I posted that, I wanted to show people whether they were part of the problem I was identifying, or whether they were part of the solution. I asked if they were horrified at someone using the conspiracy movement as a motive to kill, and I do see from the posts here that people from both sides of the debate are horrified from this crime so it cannot be denied that not all conspiracy supporters subscribe to this. I likewise asked whether they were going to continue the runaway train of abject paranoia and accuse the shooter of being "part of the conspriacy", and I do see fromn the posts that there are people here who believe THAT, too, so there's know way for YOU to deny it.

What I didn't anticipate was a third category- the people who actually support this crackpot's actions, who are neither part of the solution nor part of of the problem, but rather, who ARE the problem. I wouldn't have believed it until I saw THIS post:

"When is killing people that work for the government murder? These people know damn well that what they are working for is a symbol of "Corruption, Deception, and Evil". They don't care if they are working to inslave their own people, just as long as they get paid. Goverment agencies have enough blood on them to completely fill 50+, 12ft deep swimming pools, and they all got away with murder by making these things look like a freak accident or a suicide.

They're going to get whats coming to them and this is just the beginning of it. "

So if you want to criticize me for poorly pigeon holing people, go right ahead, since I can see how you'd be right...but I'd like to know how my original statement that a lot of bad things are coming from the blind zealotry these conspriacy stories is instigating is wrong.

Originally posted by GoodOlDave
I wanted to show people whether they were part of the problem I was identifying, or whether they were part of the solution.

And what is the solution? You are missing that big piece. I'm fairly certain it's "if you don't believe what I do, shut up". You should know that's not going to fly with most people here.

reply to post by hooper


Are you really that dense dude? I never once said that most people believe the term "anti-semite" means what i said it means . TO the contrary, I only gave the definition found in the dictionary, in an attempt to show people like YOU that "semite" is not a term that is exclusive to "jew". Get a friggin' brain dude ! You are the one who said the definitions found in the dictionary are the results of what the linguists believe everyone to believe the words to mean ! (which ,by the way,is an erroneous assumption on your part). I was simply showing that people like you, who scream "anti-semite" when anyone has an opinion contrary to your cherished belief system, can't even define the term if asked to . Instead, they do just like you did ,and try to tell me that it is exclusively "jewish". I refuse to attempt an intelligent debate with someone ill-equipped,such as yourself , so no further response will be forthcoming.

reply to post by hooper


I knew this would happen as well, the anti-truthers, making no headway against the truth (because the truth will prevail), dredge in some anti-semitism verbage, probably some additional Reductio Ad Hitlerum arguments, maybe some racism chants...ad nauseum...

These are very weak and desperate attempts to discredit those looking for the truth about 9/11 (just my opinion).

Originally posted by 1SawSomeThings
Madman is mad and shot at people, but he watched Loose Change.
Random person is looking for truth on 9/11 and watches Loose Change.
Now random persons viewing 9/11 truth media are madmen that might kill people because
1) Glen Beck said so
2) Oreally said so
and others say so, who are also fake experts.

The problem for you is that this isn't guilt by association. It's deliberately instigating false public unrest, and there are legal precedences for it.

You should be interested to know of a 1987 lawsuit where the Southern Poverty Law Center sued the United Klans of America after two of their members murdered a black teenager. The lawsuit was on the grounds that even though the group as a whole didn't have anything to do with the murder, the group was responsible for putting out propaganda the murderers had listened to and which instigated the murder. The Southern Poverty law Center won their case, and the UKA lost their headquarter building.

It doesn't make any difference whether person A watched Loose Change and murdered someone while person B watched Loose Change and behaved himself. The problem is if it can be shown whether Loose Change, by it's pushing out intentionally skewed propaganda, is deliberately instigating an atmosphere where people feel they have a need to go out and "strike a blow" against "a murderous gov't constantly plotting to kill us all", and if so, then Loose Change is still culpable. This guy is dead so we can't know whether he got his motivation from Loose Change, Prison Planet, 911truth, or whoever, but if these damned fool web sites insist on continuing to stir up false public unrest with their conspiracy stories, then sooner or later a requiem will be coming against their unrepentent irresponsibility.

I do however have to agree with Quantum Death on one thing- if the Combine shootings and the subsequent copycat school shootings are any model, then I likewise think this is just the beginning.

reply to post by Shadow Herder


I have not laughed that hard in a good, long while. Thank you.

reply to post by GoodOlDave


I just couldn't resist one more reply. The fallacy of your arguement is so absurd and you can't even see it. According to your latest post, then YOU will be "culpable" when someone goes out and shoots a " TRUTHER "., because of all the anti-truther retoric that you are spewing at ATS. WHAT SAY YE NOW ?

reply to post by GoodOlDave

I posted about you linking 9/11 truth etc. to a madman shooter, a pathetic tactic. You change the topic. Here you go:

The problem for you is that this isn't guilt by association. It's deliberately instigating false public unrest, and there are legal precedences for it.

The problem for you is that seeking the truth about the events of 9/11 isn't intigating false unrest, but that it is threatening to the criminals who perpetrated 9/11 and got away with it (so far... but the perps are unnamed by most mainstream 9/11 truth groups). So you think that asking for a new 9/11 investigation will cause unrest? If the truth comes out, that the people of the United States were lied to, you may be right. But the peaceful, intelligent citizens like myself will patiently wait for justice according to due process presented in the Constitution of the United States of America.

but if these damned fool web sites insist on continuing to stir up false public unrest with their conspiracy stories, then sooner or later a requiem will be coming against their unrepentent irresponsibility.

The only requiem coming will be when a real 9/11 investigation is renewed, and the unrepentant agents/agencies who actively tried to supress the truth are found guilty of collaboration, harboring and aiding/abetting the perpetrators of the 9/11 crimes.


[edit on 6-3-2010 by 1SawSomeThings]