posted on May, 3 2011 @ 12:52 PM
I appreciate the jaundiced eye, but I am always amazed when it fails to take in an entire overview of a specific situation, and becomes blind to its
own isolation as the true whole sits out there and is available for acknowledgement.
A good example is this OBL takedown. The announcement that the entire operation (including the verification of OBL's remains and the burial at sea)
was recorded, and even streamed live during the attack itself, suggests that Obvama and his crew are going to make this verification available to a
3rd party at some point in the near future. This - to me - indicates that the operation did happen, that OBL was killed, and that his remains were
authenticated before being buried at sea. Why? Because they didn't have to state that they have this video, forensic and material proof. In fact,
they could've easily dropped a smart bomb on this compound and turned it into a hole full of smoldering nothing, and simply announced the death if
all they wanted was to make a big announcement to derail other news that is or isn't gaining traction. Instead, they streamed a potentially
disastrous commando raid, right next to Pakistan's "West Point", and took the guy's body with them. Then they announced that they obtained all the
proof anyone could ever demand that they did, in fact, take the guy down.
All that extra comes across - to me, anyway - as being instructive concerning the veracity of the official narrative. So, what does it look like when
someone's trying to hoodwink us? A good example is the 9/11 attack's official narrative.
No one has ever verified any of that narrative, and all efforts to verify it have been aggressively blocked by both the media and the government. And
a week after those attacks, a very good explanation for this bizarre response to a mass murder that caused thousands of deaths, trillions of dollars
in war debt and tens of thousands of deaths in the Middle East, emerged in the form of a handful of letters laced with Anthrax that were mailed
directly to the media and the DNC Senate leadership. Now, since we know that this specific strain of Anthrax was manufactured in Maryland, and that it
took at least 3 years to make it, it seems reasonable to assume that the relatively small amount that was used is not the whole of what was
manufactured. Also, since it was in envelopes that referred directly to the 9/11 attacks, and were only a week after those attacks (after the 3 years
that it took to make this specific batch of Anthrax) it also becomes suspiciously plausible that these attacks were follow-on attacks related to the
9/11 attacks themselves. Simple demonstrated association (the notes) as well as event timing (only one week) relative to the initial attacks. Also,
since there were no further attacks, even though no one was ever apprehended or even suspected at the time, it gets real obvious that the entire
mission of those attacks was completed and the ends achieved.
Suddenly, the media's and government's backing away from the 9/11 investigation suggests a much darker scenario, with the rest of what must've been
a larger batch of incredibly sophisticated weaponized Anthrax emerging as the primary impetus of what's become a virulent anomaly, when compared to
the reaction that such an enormous event (two events in fact) would inspire from the law enforcement community of any modern society on this planet.
As the weirdness continued to pile up, and the obvious contradictions became more and more stark, the media and government resistance to any mention
at all of an alternative narrative matched that increase in public skepticism with increased belligerence and a circling the wagons mentality. In
short, it's the battle to shut down any further information discovery concerning both the 9/11 attacks and the Anthrax attacks that has been the real
smoking gun, and what has logically associated these two events with one another as one umbrella event.
There's a big difference between the OBL takedown and the 9/11-Anthrax attack suite, even though the OBL event is only a couple days old yet.
Conspiracy theories need to be at least as credible as the official narratives they're attempting to expose. It's good to be vigilant, but it's
critical to be credible. Being credible will ensure that if you do uncover something, that your discovery will be taken seriously. Sadly, there are
too many on this board that have destroyed their credibility on too many topics, and while it may be okay within these confines, it doesn't do
anything to help expose anything to the outside world.