Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The problem with any film that purports to chronicle "mysterious deaths"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU
 
SDuderstadt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 03:06 PM
Original message
The problem with any film that purports to chronicle "mysterious deaths"
Edited on Mon Mar-01-10 03:10 PM by SDuderstadt
From Snopes.com's entry on the "Clinton Body Count" list hoax. Notice how the exact same techniques are used in the "mysterious 9/11 deaths" screed:

"Body count" lists are not a new phenomenon. Lists documenting all the allegedly "suspicious" deaths of persons connected with the assassination of John F. Kennedy have been circulating for decades, and the same techniques used to create and spread the JFK lists have been employed in the Clinton version:
• List every dead person with even the most tenuous of connections to your subject. It doesn't matter how these people died, or how tangential they were to your subject's life. The longer the list, the more impressive it looks and the less likely anyone is to challenge it. By the time readers get to the bottom of the list, they'll be too weary to wonder what could possibly be relevant about the death of Clinton's mother's chiropractor.
• Play word games. Make sure every death is presented as "mysterious." All accidental deaths are to be labelled "suspicious," even though by definition accidents occur when something unexpected goes wrong. Every self-inflicted death discussed must include the phrase "ruled a suicide" to imply just the opposite. When an autopsy contradicts a "mysterious death" theory, dispute it; when none was performed because none was needed, claim that "no autopsy was allowed." Make liberal use of words such as 'allegedly' and 'supposedly' to dismiss facts you can't contradict with hard evidence.
• Make sure every inconsistency or unexplained detail you can dredge up is offered as evidence of a conspiracy, no matter how insignificant or pointless it may be. If an obvious suicide is discovered wearing only one shoe, ignore the physical evidence of self-inflicted death and dwell on the missing shoe. You don't have to establish an alternate theory of the death; just keep harping that the missing shoe "can't be explained."
• If the data doesn't fit your conclusion, ignore it. You don't have to explain why the people who claim to have the most damaging goods on Clinton — Gennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Kathleen Willey, Linda Tripp, Monica Lewinsky, Kenneth Starr — are still walking around unscathed while dozens of bit players have been bumped off. It's inconvenient for you, so don't mention it.
• Most importantly, don't let facts and details stand in your way! If you can pass off a death by pneumonia as a "suicide," do it! If a cause of death contradicts your conspiracy theory, claim it was "never determined." If your chronology of events is impossible, who cares? It's not like anybody is going to check up on this stuff . . .



The bottom line is not to get fooled by nonsense like this. And if the purveyor of such nonsense assails your "open-mindedness", ask them why asking for definitive evidence of something before believing it means you're not "open-minded".
Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
billh58 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 07:23 PM
Response to Original message
1. K&R n/t
Edited on Mon Mar-01-10 07:24 PM by billh58
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
zappaman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Mar-01-10 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
2. Yeah, but...
just cuz someone died of a heart attack after a long history of poor health DOESN'T mean he WASN'T given some kind of poison by nefarious government agents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Kesha Donating Member (204 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 04:31 PM
Response to Reply #2
3. Interesting...
As far as I`m informed both Barry Jennings and Bruce Ivins died while beeing medicated in a hospital. Both cases
have a certain similiarity. Both died "just in time", no autopsy, although Ivins officially attempted suicide.

However, people tend to die in hospitals, no question.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Kesha Donating Member (204 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Mar-02-10 05:48 PM
Response to Original message
4. Open mindness...
Foia request: Barry Jennings and Michael Hess (refused by NIST)

http://www.911blogger.com/node/22761

Oh yes. Open mindness.

Land of the Free, and so on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri May 03rd 2024, 12:33 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » September 11 Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC