[billiefan2000]

bosco, just cause it wasnt proven, dont mean there wasnt a cover-up.



btw/side note: u shouldnt always believe everything the media tells you.




Look, I am no conspiracy theorist, but I kinda believe there is some weird stuff that is hushed up about in Omaha area.


I mean OPS has covered up stuff for years (and eventually was exposed for covering up the Nathan Hale Jr. High scandal.


also, The Catholic Church has covered up abuse for years.



why couldnt it be possible that high ranking folks in Omaha have covered up some things in this city.

If there has already been coverups exposed, what dont mean there is bad stuff we dont know about that has gone in by influential folks.


I mean Omaha isnt excatly well known for having transparent and accountable leaders (i.e. in politics, churches, media)


It's worth at least finding out of if some of these "conspiracies" do have at least some truth to them.

[harshbarj]

Originally Posted by billiefan2000

bosco, just cause it wasnt proven, dont mean there wasnt a cover-up..

True, but it also means we don't have to take the claim of a coverup seriously.

Also just because something is possible does not mean anything. What counts is evidence and probability. It's possible we are all just brains in a jar sharing in the same delusion, it's just not very probable and hence does not need to even be considered.

[McBain II]

Originally Posted by billiefan2000

bosco, just cause it wasnt proven, dont mean there wasnt a cover-up.

True, but it makes it much less probable.

btw/side note: u shouldnt always believe everything the media tells you.

I know...liberal media bias, right?

Look, I am no conspiracy theorist, but I kinda believe there is some weird stuff that is hushed up about in Omaha area.

Hushed up by who?

I mean OPS has covered up stuff for years (and eventually was exposed for covering up the Nathan Hale Jr. High scandal.

What are you talking about? What "cover ups"?

also, The Catholic Church has covered up abuse for years.

And the truth was exposed when the allegations were credible.

why couldnt it be possible that high ranking folks in Omaha have covered up some things in this city.

If there has already been coverups exposed, what dont mean there is bad stuff we dont know about that has gone in by influential folks.


I mean Omaha isnt excatly well known for having transparent and accountable leaders (i.e. in politics, churches, media)


It's worth at least finding out of if some of these "conspiracies" do have at least some truth to them.

Two grand juries (one county, one federal) refused to indict anyone on the supposed Franklin scandal...the exception to that being the two who were charged with perjury.

Explain away that one.

[billiefan2000]

bosco, there is media bias on both sides (whether it be the so called christian media white-washing prospeirty gospel pimps and self-professed prophets on tv

or the liberal media (which refers to pro-lifers as "anti-abortion")

but yes, there is media bias in omaha (the omaha world hearld for sure leans left and has been a leftist paper way before Buffett bought it)

as for OPS cover-ups, the Shad Knuston abuses that happened at Nathan Hale was hushed-up by OPS board for years until some folks blew the whistle.

the OPS board being secretive a lot is why there has been so much hate towards most OPS board members

[billiefan2000]

Originally Posted by Bosco55David

True, but it makes it much less probable.



I know...liberal media bias, right?

Hushed up by who?

What are you talking about? What "cover ups"?

And the truth was exposed when the allegations were credible.

Two grand juries (one county, one federal) refused to indict anyone on the supposed Franklin scandal...the exception to that being the two who were charged with perjury.

Explain away that one.

they bought a jury and a judge. i mean, u dont honestly believe with money and power, u could buy ur way out of being convicted for a crime.

having money and power has helped a lot of politicians and famous folks get special treatment from the justice system.


i mean, just because someone isnt found guilty, dont mean there are innocent of the crimes they are accused of. (coughs, OJ Simpson and Casey Anthony

[harshbarj]

Originally Posted by billiefan2000

they bought a jury and a judge.

And that is a claim you would have to prove! Till you do there is no good reason to think it has happened.

No one is saying it could not or did not happen (or at least from what I have read), just that it's not been proven. You seem to miss the whole burden of proof thing. If you are going to make a claim then you have to prove it's true. WE don't have to prove it wrong. In fact with the lack of proof the claim can simply be dismissed.

I'll quote who I believe to have been one of the worlds greatest minds here!

"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." – Christopher Hitchens

[RhettB]

Originally Posted by harshbarj

And that is a claim you would have to prove! Till you do there is no good reason to think it has happened.

No one is saying it could not or did not happen (or at least from what I have read), just that it's not been proven. You seem to miss the whole burden of proof thing. If you are going to make a claim then you have to prove it's true. WE don't have to prove it wrong. In fact with the lack of proof the claim can simply be dismissed.

I'll quote who I believe to have been one of the worlds greatest minds here!

"That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." – Christopher Hitchens

Proof can be a subjective word. Not related to this case, but how many UFO sightings, and related events like crop circles, Area 51, need to be demonstrated before the government comes clean that humans from Earth are the only living things that have taken to the skies, or visited other planets.

Like with the buying a judge and jury, many things are more than likely true, but are also likely not able to be proven or admitted.

[harshbarj]

Originally Posted by RhettB

Like with the buying a judge and jury, many things are more than likely true, but are also likely not able to be proven or admitted.

And if they are unable to be proven they simply don't have to be believed.

Also without proof we can't say "many things are more than likely true". At best we can say they are possible, but again we need PROOF!

[RhettB]

Originally Posted by harshbarj

And if they are unable to be proven they simply don't have to be believed.

Also without proof we can't say "many things are more than likely true". At best we can say they are possible, but again we need PROOF!

I think we all can say that there are things that many people believe in that can't be proven.

Ghosts, God, extraterrestrials, life after death, clairvoyance.....

[harshbarj]

Originally Posted by RhettB

I think we all can say that there are things that many people believe in that can't be proven.

Ghosts, God, extraterrestrials, life after death, clairvoyance.....

And to that I disagree. If it has any effect in the real world then it can be measured and Analyzed. Also if it can't be proven then it is worthless to consider!