3 ms·
> If you allow for conspiracies to exist, it becomes harder to judge truth since all facts become subjective. What are you talking about? Conspiracy theories?
by rightbyte 6y ago
> If you allow for conspiracies to exist, it becomes harder to judge truth since all facts become subjective.
What are you talking about? Conspiracy theories? This bombing is a conspiracy by definition (Edit: Unless he acted alone).
This missuse of the term conspiracy as something only a crackpot would use need to end.
BTW my favourite conspiracy theory is that lunatic conspiracy theories are a conspiracy to limit free speech.
- dragonwriter 6y ago> This bombing is a conspiracy by definition. AFAIK there hasn't been any clear indication it's not a lone attacker; without conclusive proof of some joint project it's not “a conspiracy by definition”.
- rightbyte 6y agoOh ye well I agree to that a lone wolf would be no conspirator. Forgot about that possibility.
- metiscus 6y agoSo the gp post was discussing a government operation to establish a wiretap capability. Parent provided a hypothetical of the bombing being used to cover up said operation and a discussed what an investigation might find. My point is, that if you allow for the possibility of the NSA or other agency staging a bombing to cover up a wiretap operation, then a public investigation of the same that would likely also be affected by the cover up. I doubt the NSA would call the local news for an on the record correction.