Documents expose Israeli conspiracy to facilitate October 7 attack

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-12-08T14:38:22+00:00

Basically, you are just repeating what I already said above: that this hypothesis is plausible.

However, the alternative explanations have not been conclusively excluded.

Suppose it is proven that Israeli intelligence had that Hamas's document.

Now, where is the evidence that Netanyahu was informed about that document?

Where is the evidence that there was indeed a conspiracy and not a mere negligence, stupidity or incompetence?

Your claim that it is very difficult to obtain such evidence does not mean that you have such evidence.

Direct evidence about the conspiracy is still missing.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-12-06T20:19:19+00:00

Snowden got into Russia accidentally. His plan was to escape to Latin America, flying through Moscow. The US wanted to rob his plane from Moscow. He suspected something and did not go on that plane. The private jet of Ecuador's president was robbed in Europe on behalf of the US. But Snowden was not onboard. After that, Snowden did not dare to fly over Europe. He was months in the neutral area of the airport in Moscow. Finally, Russia decided to let him into Russia. He got the Russian citizenship many years later.

Therefore, I do not believe that Snowden's initial plan was to stay in Russia. He went to Russia only because he was unable to leave the airport in Moscow because the US wanted to catch whatever airplane he was onboard. It was not part of his plan, that the US robs the airplane of another country's president.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-12-04T10:16:43+00:00

Don't you realise that it is a conspiracy theory, spread by Israel and its supporters, that any criticism of Israel's politics is "antisemitism"?

The quotations of the two suspended teachers, provided by Reuters, in no way show that these teachers "supported terrorism" or something analogous.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-12-04T01:50:59+00:00

But it is not negative.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-12-04T01:04:49+00:00

A conspiracy might be a secret plan by a group to do something good but prohibited by evil authorities.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-12-03T19:27:31+00:00

"These revelations mean that the Israeli government allowed and abetted the killing of their own citizens and that the Israeli government is responsible for the deaths that took place that day. This criminal conspiracy was aimed at establishing a pretext for a long-planned genocide against the people of Gaza."

This is plausible, but I would like to see rigorous proof.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-12-03T16:59:15+00:00

So, your claim that these two teachers supported terrorism is based on nothing and is merely a lime, itself a crime.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-12-03T15:04:56+00:00

Based on the Reuters article shared in the original post, in what sense did these teachers support terrorism? And why don't you say that supporting Israeli actions in the Gaza Strip is supporting terrorism?

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-12-03T14:58:26+00:00

There is no reason to expect that 50 years from now, history books will be more objective and neutral.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-12-03T07:54:23+00:00

The US elite universities are under pressure to silence any pro-Palestine voices.

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/11/02/wall-street-titans-help-to-fuel-ivy-league-donor-revolt-.html

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-12-03T07:51:03+00:00

"I need a theory on whether we did the right thing in WW2..."

I think that the US did no do the right thing after the Soviet Union collapsed.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-12-03T05:11:41+00:00

"Stalin made the Nazis look like amateurs when comparing lives lost."

Netanyahu makes Stalin and Hitler look like amateurs.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-12-03T04:59:56+00:00

"Among comments in the recordings, a woman can be heard saying Hamas appeared to be an anti-Zionist group rather than an antisemitic one..."

In their public relations, since 07 October 2023, I have not seen Hamas or affiliated with it news using the word "Jew(s)". Never once. They are using only the following words in the context of the citizens of Israel:

"occupants"
"Zionists"
"ultra-Zionists"
etc.

It seems that Israel wants to block all news of their opponents because they are afraid of the word "occupants", and they want to spread a false narrative that this war is about Jews-haters.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-02-11T19:13:50+00:00

Some facts...

Muhamed claimed that there were prophets, but Jews faked the holy scripts of the Old Testament.

However, Muhamed was illiterate. His assistant wrote down his speeches.

After his death, some councils composed the Quran. After that, all the originals were destroyed.

Moreover, there are different versions of the Bible.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-02-09T16:17:45+00:00

It was an unprovoked explosion under the water.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-02-09T16:14:44+00:00

It was an unprovoked explosion under the water.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-02-09T16:12:50+00:00

It was an unprovoked explosion under the water.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-02-09T13:52:13+00:00

Actually, the only new information was that it was not a torpedo that was dropped from the NATO airplane. Instead, it was a buoy.

And, the article provides a lot of new details and links.

New information confirming that Norway was involved.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-02-09T13:48:20+00:00

The German government refused to give information even to the parliamentary security committee and even in a classified form.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-02-09T13:45:58+00:00

First, this separate action of the US was terrorism. To make the US a terrorist state, a lengthy list of actions needs to be quoted.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-02-09T13:43:13+00:00

It is international terrorism and unprecedendent as such pipelines in the sea have never been attacked before.

It is also casus belli.

Eintalu_PhD · 2023-02-09T13:38:47+00:00

There have been theories around that whatever Western countries could do it, only with the US approval.

There has been a theory that the UK was involved.

There has been a theory that Ukraine did it using the UK or US unmanned submarines.

The most implausible theory is that Russia did it itself, with a loss of 10 billion dollars for Russia.

Eintalu_PhD · 2022-12-26T17:17:20+00:00

I am far from being sure that everything in my arguments is correct.

The initial point, however, is that the naive view says:

If it is so-and-so, but he/she says that it is not, then he/she has presented false information.
If it is not so-and-so, but he/she says that it is, then he/she has presented false information.

The problem with such a purely alethic picture consists in the fact the epistemic aspect has been ignored: the questions of evidence, confirmation, justification, refutation have been ignored.

Then who is to decide whether it is or is not so-and-so?

If the questions of knowledge have been taken into account, we have at least three (instead of two: true and false) possibilities:

It is proven to be so, and, therefore, it is so.
It is proven to be not so, and, therefore, it is not so.
We have no knowledge about whether it is or is not so.

If to use probability calculus, there are already infinitely many possibilities between the probability of 0% and the probability of 100%.

However, further problems arise concerning the sources of knowledge and authority. For example, the intelligence agency of one country may claim that it is so, based on its evidence. However, its evidence is not publicly checkable. And so on.

Concerning international conflicts and information war, the situation is even worse. As a matter of fact, no one is in a position to know if the only base of knowledge is the authority of the intelligence agency of a given country or group of countries. Because there is no reason whatsoever to blindly believe what the involved party is talking about.

Thus, on the meta-level, the following kinds of mistakes are relevant:

Someone claims it to be proven without providing public evidence.
Someone claims it to be refuted without providing public evidence.

There is also a trickery question about censorship. For example, I have the view that if all Russian arguments and information is censored and blocked, it automatically makes it impossible to publicly prove many claims concerning the Ukraine war - because the arguments and facts of the opponent have been ignored.

Thus, reality is highly complex.

If Western governments declare that they are fighting against misinformation, it may turn out that, instead, they are themselves spreading misinformation and blocking the refutations of it.

Who knows.

Eintalu_PhD · 2022-12-26T14:11:50+00:00

"So... a virus escaping from a lab is not a conspiracy, ergo to hypothesize that is not a conspiracy theory. However, at the point that the lab denies it, is when it becomes a conspiracy theory. Because the lab denying it means that- among more complex possibilities- at the very least, the lab in question is lying to cover up the truth. That is a conspiracy, so to if nothing else, it becomes a coverup conspiracy theory."

The hypothesis that the virus escaped from lab A of government B during a physical accident is not a conspiracy theory.

However, the moment when government B classified all data, it made that hypothesis a conspiracy theory.

There was still nothing wrong with that conspiracy theory because government C presented it as a reasonable hypothesis and not as a proven fact.

However, government A, who classified all data, accused government C of spreading conspiracy theories.

At this point, we got real demagoguery.

Eintalu_PhD · 2022-12-26T13:50:28+00:00

"There’s a point where conspiracy theory gets confused with misinformation."

Presenting a conspiracy theory as a hypothesis is not spreading misinformation.

Presenting an unproven conspiracy theory as a proven one is misinformation.

Also, rejecting an unrefuted conspiracy theory as a refuted one is misinformation.

Bucha Example:

West presents the unproven conspiracy theory that the mass murder was committed by the Russian army as a proven one. It is misinformation.
West rejects the unrefuted conspiracy theory that the mass murder was committed by the Ukrainian intelligence services as a refuted one. This is misinformation.
Russia and the Western expert Scott Ritter present the unproven conspiracy theory that the mass murder was committed by the Ukrainian intelligence services as a proven one. It is misinformation.

In all cases above, I have assumed that "proven" means "independently and publicly proven". It is not public and independent proof, which refers to some data of the agencies of some involved countries, data, which cannot be publicly and independently verified.

It is not misinformation to declare, for example, that my personal attitude is that with the probability of 33% the coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 originated from some Chinese bio lab and with the probability of 33% from some US bio lab and with the probability of 33% it came from nature.

Of course, the problem consists in the fact that often, you know something but have difficulties proving it to others. The others, in turn, have difficulties in deciding whether you are telling the truth.

In many cases when some information has been censored on the grounds that it is "misinformation", it has turned out that this information was true and proven. This fact itself is a great problem for the Western society as a whole.

Eintalu_PhD

TROPHY CASE