Aubrey McClendon Is Charged With Conspiracy in Oil and Natural Gas Bidding

Discussion in 'Wall St. News' started by CET, Mar 1, 2016.

  1. destriero

    destriero


    Dear Dumptruck,

    The coronary artery disease was a reference to Scalia.

    The suicide by linear (and angular (tire RPM)) momentum was obvious. You get indicted -> you jump in car -> you're doing triple-digit speed -> you veer off the highway and into bridge abutment -> you make no attempt to brake.

    Hmmm..
     
    #21     Mar 3, 2016
  2. destriero

    destriero


    I agree; you're an idi*t.
     
    #22     Mar 3, 2016
  3. Dumptruck? LOL. How am i supposed to know you are talking about Scalia when the whole thread is about McClendon and you never indicated you were talking about Scalia?
     
    #23     Mar 3, 2016
  4. Dumptruck? LOL. How am i supposed to know you are talking about Scalia when the whole thread is about McClendon and you never indicated you were talking about Scalia?
     
    #24     Mar 3, 2016
  5. Sig

    Sig

    No, actually I've carefully reviewed the information and even been present for a couple of these so-called "conspiracies" and have reached my own conclusions that the conspiracy explanation has a vanishingly small probability of being correct while the rational explanation has a huge probability that it is correct based on data, not something I read on a conspiracy web site. I don't agree to disagree with someone who is spouting rank irrationality and then has the gall to accuse me of "blind worship of authority and total lack of critical thinking". I expose your irrationality for what it is, it's that simple. There is no "debate", there's rational people pointing out the gaping holes in your logic and complete lack of evidence to back your views, you trying to redirect the conversation because at some level you realize your ideas are untenable, and then vast majority of us discounting those ideas as highly improbable and going on with our lives much happier than you because we're not paranoid.
    I must admit though that I do find your psychology fascinating. Somehow you're able to simultaneously believe the government is completely inept and worthless, and yet at the same time capable of pulling off conspiracies with a stunning level of sophistication.
     
    #25     Mar 3, 2016
  6. Ever heard of "Boston Brakes"? They've been around since the 80's. Ever heard of the computer chips in modern vehicles being hacked into? Or how about the fact that all jumbo jet engine manufacturers track usage and location stats on all their engines in the field. I.e McDonnel Douglas and Rolls Royce. They don't know what happened to MH370 right? We don't know where ISIS came from right? Republicans and Democrats have the peoples interests at heart right? You live in the heart of one of the most ruthless empires ever and you are totally clueless. The War on Terror is totally legit and all about them hating us "for our freedoms" right? LMAO!
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2016
    #26     Mar 3, 2016
  7. Your post is a joke. Not only have you put words in my mouth that i never came close to asserting, but you also lie. You haven't reviewed shit carefully. If you had you wouldn't write auch nonsense so confidently. You're either paid to ignore reality (shill or gov contractor) or you're just a moron.

    And the fact that you still use "conspiracy" in such a negative way shows that you hav3 no clue what you're talking about. To be fair, ignorance isn't always willful. But it's laughable that you think conspiracies are uncommon or the stuff of imagination. I think i mentioned earlier in this thread that conspiracy is the most common felony charge administered in the US. Check that fact Charlie. But conspiracies are the stuff of fools and the gullible eh? Like i said. Agree to disagree. Everyone like you eventually wakes up to reality, some with deep shock and disbelief.
     
    #27     Mar 3, 2016
  8. destriero

    destriero


    Perhaps bc you brought up the Scalia "conspiracy" and I replied in-line that Scalia had CAD, diabetes and was morbidly obese. He couldn't undergo routine shoulder surgery due to the risk of a general anesthetic.

    Could "they" have given him a fatal of Digoxin (Crystodigin) via monofilament? Sure, perfect. No autopsy and the Dig would be out of his system while they lined-up the jurisdiction on the coroner. Or a slin-pin? 31g wouldn't leave a discernible puncture, but you gotta get close and personal for that. Was he on Metformin? Insulin-dependent?

    A perfect assassination as the guy was a truck with clogged fuel lines. But a convenient health condition is not causation. He was a vapor-lock waiting to happen. Period.

    AFAIK, McClendon had none of those medical conditions, which you would think that you would be aware of (those pesky facts), as you obviously know that the guys in the black helos RC'ed his Tahoe into the abutment. OnStar send detailed crash-data to their servers.
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2016
    #28     Mar 3, 2016
  9. Sig

    Sig

    I know a lot about embedded systems, did some work on that while getting my electrical engineering degree. Ironically I actually built a steering control for a boat for my controls class and we had to test it on an actual boat underway. How about you, what's your background in this area? I know of no system on a current production car that has any linkage to steering in any way, certainly not the 2013 Chevrolet Tahoe Mr. McClendon was driving. If you know of such a system I'd love to hear the specs on it? Since the car's onboard computer can't control its steering, physically doesn't have the linkage, the fact that auto software has been hacked in the past in no way supports your assertion. Not sure what the heck jumbo jet wngine's have to do with anything, but again you're reinforcing my point that you're essentially ranting, so thanks for that. And btw, most rational people don't call it putting words into your mouth when they directly quote you, with quotation marks, from the post above. And another rational person concept, the legal definition of conspiracy, "An agreement between two or more persons to engage jointly in an unlawful or criminal act" differs greatly from believing that everything the government or the media says is by definition a lie and nearly every event involves some nefarious government involvement, which is what I treat with the derision it deserves.

    Also, still waiting for an answer on how the same govt you find so incompetent can pull of this whole string of complex conspiracies?
     
    Last edited: Mar 3, 2016
    #29     Mar 3, 2016
  10. destriero

    destriero