HorrorMovieFans.com

100 posts on a nonsense thread is impressive I wonder how many I could get for " Confirmed!! I woke up this morning and Knuckles Mahoney was 6 inches longer"

"I can't follow along. It can't be debunked. You can't prove 4 is the answer to 2+2. This thread is non-sense". lol.
Still waiting for just one dingus to answer the simplest of questions. Just one dingus. One. One dingus.

what simple question is that?

First, some context.

Wikileaks' policy dictates that they will never directly reveal their sources of information. They have, however, had tendencies to strongly hint who their sources actually are, which is who it always turns out to be. Look what they've done this past year regarding Seth Rich. They offered 130,000 dollars for information on Seth Rich's killer. They posted an audio leak of history's most widely credible, Pulitzer Prize winning journalist saying that Seth Rich was the man behind the DNC leaks.

Why in the blue hell would a NON-PROFIT organization offer 6 figures of their own money for information on a guy who didn't leak anything to them and was never remotely involved with them, and why would wikileaks put out an audio leak of the most credible journalist in our nation's history just DAYS after the media apparatus and the DNC were talking about "Seth Rich was not involved, there's a lawsuit going on, it's just a conspiracy theory" if Seth Rich wasn't the guy?

i think seth rich probably did leak information to wikileaks. but nothing is confirmed. nothing has been proven. and it doesn't seem to be actionable, which is the most important, in my mind.

zombie wrote:i think seth rich probably did leak information to wikileaks.

Can't believe I just read that!

zombie wrote:but nothing is confirmed. nothing has been proven. and it doesn't seem to be actionable, which is the most important, in my mind.

What is confirmation to you? It is clearly different with everybody in this thread. Seb claims that if Seth Rich was caught on audio tape saying he was the man behind the leaks that it still wouldn't be proof enough.

Jason wrote:

zombie wrote:i think seth rich probably did leak information to wikileaks.

Can't believe I just read that!

zombie wrote:but nothing is confirmed. nothing has been proven. and it doesn't seem to be actionable, which is the most important, in my mind.

What is confirmation to you? It is clearly different with everybody in this thread. Seb claims that if Seth Rich was caught on audio tape saying he was the man behind the leaks that it still wouldn't be proof enough.

i believe other wacky conspiracy theories are likely too. this isn't new.

proof enough for what exactly? i think confirmation from seth rich himself would be good enough. but again, is it actionable? will it lead to anything? or is it just on the same level of "lee harvey oswald did not shoot kennedy" ?

zombie wrote:

Jason wrote:

zombie wrote:i think seth rich probably did leak information to wikileaks.

Can't believe I just read that!

zombie wrote:but nothing is confirmed. nothing has been proven. and it doesn't seem to be actionable, which is the most important, in my mind.

What is confirmation to you? It is clearly different with everybody in this thread. Seb claims that if Seth Rich was caught on audio tape saying he was the man behind the leaks that it still wouldn't be proof enough.

i believe other wacky conspiracy theories are likely too. this isn't new.

proof enough for what exactly? i think confirmation from seth rich himself would be good enough. but again, is it actionable? will it lead to anything? or is it just on the same level of "lee harvey oswald did not shoot kennedy" ?

But Seth RIch can't confirm, can he? He was coincidentally murder days after the DNC emails leaked to the public. Determining what's actionable is not the point. Everyone knows O.J. murdered those peeps. But because of the magic of trial, jury and the justice system, he was fully acquitted and walked out of that courtroom an innocent man.
Why would a non-profit organization offer a 130,000 dollar reward of their own money for Seth Rich's killer if he had nothing to do with them?
Why would they then put out an audio leak of the most credible journalist in our nation's history saying Seth Rich is the guy just DAYS after the media and DNC's "but there's a lawsuit" debacle, if Seth Rich wasn't the guy?

Jason wrote:
But Seth RIch can't confirm, can he? He was coincidentally murder days after the DNC emails leaked to the public. Determining what's actionable is not the point. Everyone knows O.J. murdered those peeps. But because of the magic of trial, jury and the justice system, he was fully acquitted and walked out of that courtroom an innocent man.
Why would a non-profit organization offer a 130,000 dollar reward of their own money for Seth Rich's killer if he had nothing to do with them?
Why would they then put out an audio leak of the most credible journalist in our nation's history saying Seth Rich is the guy just DAYS after the media and DNC's "but there's a lawsuit" debacle, if Seth Rich wasn't the guy?

a trial would at least be something actionable. are we going to get that, out of this? or is the intention just to convict clinton and whoever else in the court of public opinion? i already think she's garbage. do you want me to say she's bigger garbage?

i think wikileaks would benefit from knowing whether there was political foul play involved with seth rich's death, regardless of whether he was involved with them or not.

that leaked audio could be an effort to downplay or divert away from the news that the story was fabricated. or it could be a way to prove that it was not fabricated. i don't have the answers.

and again, i told you that i believe it's probable. what do you want from me?

Would you say that wikileaks posting the audio of Hersh saying Rich was behind the leak, indicate that wikileaks themselves believe Rich was behind the leak?

i believe that that indicates that wikileaks wants the public to believe (whether actual or not) that seth rich was behind the leak.

So you think they're just politically biased against the Democrats?

ugh. why are you trying to twist this around? i don't think that wikileaks is necessarily bias toward one side or the other. still, the twitter post only indicates that wikileaks wants the public to believe that seth rich was the dnc leak.

what is your goal in this?

my belief or disbelief in something does not make it so. it does nothing to actually confirm anything. all it is is something interesting to think about. it's rumor and theory, until it's actionable. if there are no consequences to those that are believed to be involved, what good is it in actuality?

and that's where i'm gonna have to leave this, right now.

zombie wrote:i think seth rich probably did leak information to wikileaks. but nothing is confirmed. nothing has been proven. and it doesn't seem to be actionable, which is the most important, in my mind.

Just curious how that influences your feelings on Trump-Russia collusion?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uU8BvUp ... tu.be&t=7s

Lock him up.

Foo wrote:

zombie wrote:i think seth rich probably did leak information to wikileaks. but nothing is confirmed. nothing has been proven. and it doesn't seem to be actionable, which is the most important, in my mind.

Just curious how that influences your feelings on Trump-Russia collusion?

much like seth rich, i think it doesn't mean much right now. it's just a distraction, as far as the media goes. if there is something to it, that will come out with the investigation. and trump is already elected, so we're stuck with him for better or worse.

Wikileaks has way more political leanings than Jason seems to believe.

showa58taro wrote:Wikileaks has way more political leanings than Jason seems to believe.

I know. They were so biased against the Republicans during the Bush administration. Evil wikileaks, posting truth stuffs. Hmph.

showa58taro wrote:Wikileaks has way more political leanings than Jason seems to believe.

Would you mind describing their leanings? What is the particular agenda?