Zero Dark DIRTY ;)

First of all, can I take credit for this trend of provocative (read: swear words) blog post titles?  🙂

Now, onto my CONSPIRACY THEORY.   I, like several others of you have stated, don’t believe in too many conspiracy theories.  I watched a documentary about how 9/11 was a hoax back in high school and I thought that was pretty well done and believable, but I feel like most of the theories out there (Sandy Hook, Illuminati, Moon landing) are such a ‘stretch’!  So, I’m not going to argue that Osama bin Laden wasn’t killed by the U.S. Military in May of 2011 in this post.  Instead, I will just explain what the theories are – and let y’all decide if they’re legit or not.

If you didn’t understand my blog post title, it is a play on the movie Zero Dark THIRTY.  If you haven’t seen it, you should.  It was directed by Kathryn Bigelow, the same woman who directed The Hurt Locker.  It was also nominated for an Oscar!  Anyway, the movie details the *supposed* takedown of the infamous Osama bin Laden by a dedicated woman in the CIA and a top secret, extra tactical US Navy Seal team.  Throughout the movie, you see the difficulty of locating bin Laden because of his limited and secretive communication with others in al Qaeda and within his family.  The actual raid of his compound only makes up about a half-hour of the movie, but there is definitely a scene of the Seals shooting bin Laden multiple times.  What the movie DOESN’T show, however, is the controversial burial and lack of evidence surrounding bin Laden’s death…

Conspiracy theorists have two main reasons why bin Laden wasn’t killed by the US Navy Seal team in May of 2011.

1.  Lack of physical evidence.  Basically, there ain’t none.  No pictures, videos, DNA tests, etc.  Why wouldn’t the Seal team take a picture of bin Laden’s death for proof?  And if they did take one, why wouldn’t they be allowed to release it?  I remember watching the video of Saddam Hussein’s execution…I don’t know why I watched it (dark time of my life), but I did.  So why not show us something???

2.  Sketchy burial.  bin Laden was buried at sea because U.S. officials stated that there wasn’t any proper form of burial available within 24 hours of his death, as dictated by Muslim practice.  However, the U.S. hadn’t always followed this practice.  The sons of Saddam Hussein, for example, were held for several days before being buried.  (The Devil’s Double is a GREAT movie about Uday Hussein, one of Saddam’s sons.)  Some argue that the burial at sea was meant to rid bin Laden’s death of any form of enshrinement or focus of attention since it wouldn’t be easily accessible.  Either way, the burying him at sea does seem a little…fishy.

So, why would the US fake Osama bin Laden’s death?  

The answer is pretty simple.  At the time of bin Laden’s “death”, Obama was getting ready to run for another term of presidency.  Bringing the nation together by killing the man who was behind the worst terrorist attack in US history would be a great way to start out your campaign.  What do you guys think?  Is this a hoax?  Is bin Laden still alive?  Or did he die long ago?    

Peyton Manning had a “Higher” Calling

Peyton Manning only went to the Denver Broncos because he had ridiculous inside information and was looking to make bank.  Let’s take a look back at Peyton Manning’s “tough” decision during the off-season.  If you can recall, Mr. Manning was unfortunately the victim of a neck and spine injury and forced to undergo neck fusion surgery.  Then, the Colts released him and replaced him with the young, goofy-looking Andrew Luck.  Now, one of the most prolific quarterbacks in the game was without a job.  So what were his options?

I can remember he had it down to a few options, with the 49er’s being one that appealed to me the most.  They had an amazing offensive line to protect the fragile man, a great receiving core, and an effective running game.  On top of that, they had one of the best defenses in the league.  The team was even located in sunny San Fran.  But where did he end up going? Freakin’ Denver.  Denver?! Out of all the options he chooses the place stained by the image of Tim Tebow.  But why the Denver Broncos?  I have some ideas of my own.

Lets look at some of the suspicious activity after he signed with Denver.  He signs a deal to own 21 Papa John’s restaurants in the area.  Papa Johns? Is he really this bad at choosing teams and restaurants? Papa Johns is not a top notch pizza place, at least for me, so who eats this stuff?  To me, the only people who eat it are either starving to death or high off their asses.  Wait a second….what happened not too long after?  Oh, thats right, marijuana was legalized in the state for recreational use.  That sounds like he had some inside information.  With all the stoners walking around looking to satisfy their munchies, Papa Johns will probably rake in millions on sales past 10 PM and on small items like cheese sticks and cinnapies.  If they just had delivery they would be perfect.  It sounds like Manning had the inside source telling him how to grow his money, and I now can’t blame him for his decision.  Once he retires he can go to San Fran and live off Papa Johns profits for the rest of his life.  Peyton Manning only joined the Broncos because he had a chance for “higher” profits.

Tupac Announces 2013 Tour


Millions of Tupac Shakur fans were left in shock on the night of September 13, 1996 as news broke that their hero had been killed in a drive-by shooting in Las Vegas.  The official story is that Shakur left the MGM hotel in Las Vegas on September 7, 1996 after watching a Mike Tyson fight with the owner of his record labeling company, Suge Knight. As they were leaving the hotel, Shakur and Knight got into an altercation and ended up physically assaulting a gang member in the hotel lobby. Two hours later, they were spotted driving together in a black BMW with Knight driving and Shakur sitting passenger. At one of the stop lights on the Las Vegas strip, the BMW they were riding in was boxed in by cars both in front of them and behind them. Shots were fired Continue reading

An Unsolved Murder

President John F. Kennedy

This is what we do know: President John F. Kennedy was shot twice (one the head and one in the neck) on November 22, 1963 in Dallas, Texas.  The Warren Commission charged Lee Harvey Oswald for the murder, and as the guilty party was being transferred to jail, a nightclub owner, Jack Ruby, killed him.

Almost immediately after Kennedy was declared dead, many people claimed that the assignation was part of a larger plot.  This was stemmed from Oswald’s mysterious death two days later before a trial could take place.  Furthermore, the Warren Commission concluded that the gunshots seemed to come from different directions, indicating that there was more than one gunman.  This conspiracy theory has been the subject of many movies and books since the assassination, since it will be difficult to prove if it was Oswald or not.

Before I delve into the issue of Kennedy’s assassination as a conspiracy theory, allow me to first provide a definition:

The action of conspiring; a combination of persons for evil or unlawful purpose; an agreement between two or more persons to do something criminal, illegal, or reprehensible; a plot.  (

Essentially, a conspiracy theory is when a group or organization creates an alternative story or explanation as to why a certain event happened.  In the example of John F. Kennedy’s assassination, many people believe that other organizations such as the FBI, the CIA, Lyndon B. Johnson, and the Bush family were responsible.  Furthermore, many assassination researchers assert that there were witness statements that stated the evidence was tampered, suppressed, and fabricated. According to a poll by ABC, only 32% of people today believe that Oswald was solely responsible for the assassination.

Of course, a lot of the hype of JFK’s death is due to the media.  There have been many books, movies, articles, and studies on the former President’s assassination and specifically who was involved.  Below is a trailer for the movie JFK, starring Kevin Costner and Gary Oldman.

As the movie suggests, the writers were indicating that the JFK assassination was not the whim of one man, but just a segment of a huge conspiracy theory.

Unfortunately, it seems like we will never know.,28804,1860871_1860876_1861003,00.html

The Beneficiaries of 9/11

To this day I still remember exactly what I was doing when I heard that the World Trade Centers had been attacked.  I was at lunch with my friends when some boys came up to us shouting that terrorists had just blown up New York City.  I didn’t initially believe them.  I mean, nothing even remotely similar to this had ever happened before in my lifetime, and seeing that I was the ripe old age of eleven, I thought they must be lying.  It all sunk in though when we were called into an emergency assembly.  I remember being in shock, not being able to wrap my mind around the reality of the situation, and I know I was not alone.  The events that transpired on September 11, 2001 left many people scared and confused.  They didn’t know what to think or believe, the world as we knew it was unraveling before our eyes.  What would happen next?

Unfortunately, times like these tend to attract individuals that exploit people’s fears to gain traction for their own interests.  For example there have been a few claims that the U.S. government was behind the attacks all along and that they were instrumental in orchestrating them.  But what is interesting is that most of the conspirators that claim this also have deep-seated hatred toward the U.S. government.  Does it not seem suspicious to anyone else that these people have a vested interest in turning the public against the government?

Overall, I think it is pretty obvious to the public at large that most of these conspiracies theories regarding 9/11 are works of fiction.  So you can imagined how surprised I was when I came across a conspiracy theory that I thought could actually have some truth to it.  This conspiracy focuses on some very sketchy financial transaction transactions that were made on Wall Street in the week leading up to the attack .  The premise of this theory is that there were individuals (most likely the terrorists themselves) that purchased large put options for major companies that ended up being affected financially by the attack.  Basically what this means is that in the week leading up to 9/11 a group of individuals purchased options, known as puts, that bet against the stock prices of some of the major firms affected by the attacks. These kinds of investments are usually very risky unless you have insider information indicating that something is going to happen to cause the stock price to plummet.  So is it just a coincidence that there was a huge spike in put options  for the four most negatively impacted corporations of the attacks just a week prior? Take a look at this 2-minute clip I found of an ABC new segment on this controversy.

So first of all I just want to note that this information was reported on the ABC evening news.  This was the initial fact that made me think, “Okay well if a respected news channel is reporting on this then maybe it does have some truth to it…”. As we learned earlier in the semester with the Mike Daisy case, journalists, at least in our country, value the facts.  Therefore it is unlikely that one of the country’s most respected new channels would put their reputation on the line to report false report facts, which makes me trust, to a certain extent, what they are saying.  While the Peter Jennings seems hopeful that some justice would come out of the SEC investigation launched after these allegations were made, I could not find any information showing that any real progress in bringing the individuals involved to justice.   So let me ask you this, do you think its fair that these people were able to get away with profiting from the worst terrorist attack to take place on American soil?  Personally, I think this proves as another example of the greed and unethical behavior to take place on Wall Street in the early 2000s, but I am interested to hear what you all think?



Have you bought the tickets of Arc


2012 is an American science fiction film depicts the natural disasters caused by the global warming happened around the world and people escaped through Ark, which was built in Tibet, in the southwest Chinese Himalayas. The movie starts with the collapse of Los Angeles into Pacific Ocean, eruption of Yellowstone Caldera and tsunamis in Asia. Hundreds millions of people died while the top wealthy people heads to the boat, Ark, in Tibet. The tickets cost one billion euro per person.

I was wondering if government actually built an Ark in somewhere mystery like Tibet. I understand it sounds crazy but the global warming is getting worse. For example, if the ice in Arctic Sea continues to melt, leaving the sea ice-free during the summer, as projected for sometimes within the next several decades, the heat balance of change would change dramatically. Also, the increase of water temperature would lead to the increase in the frequency and intensity of storms and hurricanes.  I think government might have emergency policies to cope with the extreme environmental disasters that might happen in the future. Scientists keep exploring the new planet like earth. NASA has listed a total of 461 new planets as the new planet candidates.  Kepler space telescope has found a yellow star, Kepler-22b, might be earth-like.  The most similar one is KOI-172.02, a super Earth-size planet. Why do scientists keep looking for the new earth-like planet? It is a project costs billions of government funding.  Are they looking for the Plan B just in case if the earth cannot sustain the exploration and pollution from human? It means governments do prepare for the day like the end of  Earth in film 2012.

Chinese government built airports and railroads in Tibet even though government overcame extreme engineering difficulties caused by the special geography in Tibet. One of the airports called Nyingchi Mainling Airport only run around 100 days a year and only deports flights in the morning because of harsh natural factors. Why does government build a non-profitable airport with high risks? On one hand, Chinese government may intend to strengthen the control over Tibet. On another hand, government may construct important “things” in Tibet.

Do you believe in the Arc?

The following is an Arc built by a Chinese last year: