Sorry, not playing your game. It was your claim. You provide the cite. A simple google search is all I needed. I’m not doing your work for you.
Yep, if you want the latest updates on Western govt. secrecy, google is the place to go.
Just proves you have no idea what a security clearance is. Or you are trying to do something with my jimmies.
Stop it, you’re raising my pleasure levels.
Sorry, won’t happen again.
The Illuminati favor Wonderbread. They may have power, but they don’t have taste.
The only damned thing I can make of that is that Kozmik would prefer to have his genitals crushed by order of George Bush than eat an egg salad sandwich. Seriously, that answer makes no ducking sense at all.
If an unknown person tells you to eat an egg salad sandwich for reasons that are supposedly important, but not explained, would you do it? Remember, you started this thread so we can ask you questions.
It wouldn’t take much to get me to eat egg salad. I like egg salad.
No, it does not work when you don’t listen to what Donald Rumsfeld is saying in that video.
The CT that the moon is a hollow satellite. (It was in a book published in the 1970s, I believe.)
The David Icke Reptilian conspiracy theory.
Chemtrails.
The biggest unanswered quesiton is: Why? The second biggest unanswered question is: How are two versions of events - the public version and the not so public version - kept separate?
Yes. In the same way John F. Kennedy did in his “secrecy” speech.
I do not know. Someone that only appears to be somewhat powerful.
What is the source of your power?
No, not that I know of.
No, which is interesting because the JFK assassination is a CT while the Reagan assassination attempt, to my knowledge, is not a CT.
Because truth is what you know today.
I know two things today:
Those were two stories in today’s New York Times.
I shuttered as I read the first article.
“Disturbing” is putting it mildly. Isn’t it shocking enough that the US government would say that he committed suicide by jumping out of a window when, in fact, he was drugged and murdered? Why was Frank Olson murdered? The C.I.A. had a cover story that he commited suicide. Maybe that was designed to be uncovered. What Frank Olson uncovered was probably just the tip of the proverbial iceberg and may never be fully known.
No, in the video, he meanders around the issue and ends with: “I think it depends on why the President thinks he needs to do that.”
No, I would not do it because if I do it, then, what if they ask me to crush someone’s genitals for reasons that are supposedly important, but not explained?
Hurricane?
Yup, that’s the only reason I can come up with for not doing what random strangers on the phone tell me to do.
Ever see the “yada, yada” episode of Seinfeld? Thats you. “There was a hurricane, yada yada, Bloomberg endorsed Obama.” “There are 192 (drink!) leaders of countries, yada yada, the Illuminati is running the world.” If you don’t fill in the yadas with anything you will seem insane. I get the feeling you think you are giving all the details needed which makes me think you need help. There is a disconnect in your brain between reality and what you think is reality. Its not because you have wacky ideas. If that was all, get in line.
If you will not eat an unhealthy sandwich at the request of an unidentified person for unjustified reasons, why would world leaders (and others in important positions) do things that actually matter at the request of anonymous callers?
So…I believe the New York Times can be trusted to publish the truth, because they publish things that I believe to be true. They must be true, because they’re published in the New York Times.
Brilliant.
I feel the same way except with the New York Post.
I’ve been without an anchor since they stopped publishing the Weekly World News.
Yeah, I’ve seen it. Except it’s like me sitting with the group in the morning and I’m reading the paper saying, “Look at this - the government said Mr. Olson had killed himself by jumping out of a hotel window.” And they say, “Really? You don’t say.” And I say, “No, he was actually drugged and murdered by the C.I.A.” And someone says, “Why would the C.I.A. do that?” and I say, “It says, to keep him from talking about disturbing C.I.A. operations that he uncovered.” Then someone else says, “Do you really believe that?” And I say, “It’s in The New York Times. I really don’t know what to believe anymore. First they say he commited suicide. Then they say he was murdered. I hope the truth comes out. I got to go to work. See you guys later.”
For the same reason that the C.I.A. will murder a government scientist and make it look like a suicide. They wanted to keep him from talking about disturbing C.I.A. operations and whoever was in charge of those operations decided that it was a calculated risk to do things to Frank Olson and, so that there would be no compromising connections, one C.I.A. agent drugged Frank Olson while another C.I.A. agent murdered Frank Olson at the request of an anonoymous caller who just so happened to know their immediate boss.
Claude Shannon defined information as that which reduces uncertainty. If the article, Suit Planned Over Death Of Man C.I.A. Drugged, were only published in the National Inquirer then I would suspect the credibility of the story. Since it was published in The New York Times, I ask myself (1) why did the government have the cover story of Frank Olson commiting suicide? (2) why did the C.I.A. have Frank Olson murdered to keep him from talking about disturbing C.I.A. operations that he uncovered? (3) what could have been so disturbing that the agency would risk such potentially major fallout?
Have you asked yourself “If the Illuminati are so powerful, why can’t they stop the New York Times from publishing this stuff?” Do you realize you still have not provided one rational bit of logic to explain why you trust the Times? Do you understand that every one of your “answers” in fact consists of rambling, barely coherent statements about something else that sort of has a tiny bit of something to do with the actual question? Does that bother you at all?
So you’re saying that the Illuminati kill people who don’t do what they say?
I fear my last post was too complicated, opening up too many possible avenues to distraction and irrelevancies, so let me redo it here:
Kozmik, you still have not answered this question. Please answer it now: Why is the New York Times trustworthy?
The New York Times is a fully-owned subsidiary of Illuminati, Inc. and exists to feed hints to Kozmik in order to prepare him for the eventual reveal that he is to take on the office of Illuminati Primus. This is why he is the only one to find evidence of global conspiracies in stories of possible malfeasance within US Government security organizations, or to wonder what was said among the participants of a photo-op before the cameras arrived.