[quote author=

[quote author=

[quote author=

As far and near as I can tell scientists and engineered concluded the official version of 9/11 is impossible by the laws of physics.
Steven E. Jones, physics professor at BYU was just one of them.
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article11017.htm

I understand what you're saying.  I think the so-called "ostrich approach" is way underrated.  We are powerless to change these forces unless we instigate the bloodiest revolution the world has seen in 100 years.  In otherwords, these guys are gonna have their way with us.  Thus, it's best to just go on and live your life to the best of your abilities.  Indeed, you have a pearl of wisdom:  Do not seek and ye shall not find!

But...why on Earth then did you want Kerry instead of Bush?
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/dontknow.gif

Tia, I think you're refering to the slogan of the National Ignorance Association.  The slogan of the American Apathy Association (AAA--yes, they're one in the same company, believe me!) is: "Huh?"




Whatever you say, Max.  You're inclined to think me stupid, so go for it.  You have no objections from me. 

Do you really think the government was behind 9/11?

At the very least the Bush Administration did nothing on the morning of 9/11, and instructed NORAD--the North American Aerospace Defense Command (who would have intercepted all hijacked planes long before they reached their targets)--to do nothing as well.

Was the U.S. government behind 9/11.  In short, yes.

[quote author=

At the very least the Bush Administration did nothing on the morning of 9/11, and instructed NORAD--the North American Aerospace Defense Command (who would have intercepted all hijacked planes long before they reached their targets)--to do nothing as well.

Was the U.S. government behind 9/11.  In short, yes.




Do you have any proof of this?  And by proof I mean something that can not be refuted by anyone, anywhere and at anytime?  And I'm being serious here. 

[quote author=

a. Anything can be refuted by anyone at any time, including "the sky is blue" and "the ocean is deep."
b. If you don't want to know, why do you ask?
c. In an argumentative mood, you shall refute whatever evidence I may present.
d. If you do want to know, the subject is exceedingly easy to research using Google.  Just make it quick before the government censors the entire World Wide Web.




I am of the mindset that I don't believe anything anyone tells me unless I see something with my own eyes that tells me that what they said is fact, not opinion or conjecture.  I have been that way my whole life.  If you're trying to tell me that the government was responsible for 9/11 and you want other people to think you're right, I would need to see irrefutable evidence to agree with you.  THAT'S what I'm saying.  Other people here may take your word as bond, but I don't.  And just because it's online doesn't make it true either.  I could put online that Paris Hilton has sex with spider monkeys, but unless I have proof, it's just me spouting off.  I am no expert on her sex life, so anything I say will not be taken as fact. 

[quote author=

[quote author=

[quote author=

I am of the mindset that I don't believe anything anyone tells me unless I see something with my own eyes that tells me that what they said is fact, not opinion or conjecture.  I have been that way my whole life.  If you're trying to tell me that the government was responsible for 9/11 and you want other people to think you're right, I would need to see irrefutable evidence to agree with you.  THAT'S what I'm saying.  Other people here may take your word as bond, but I don't.  And just because it's online doesn't make it true either.  I could put online that Paris Hilton has sex with spider monkeys, but unless I have proof, it's just me spouting off.  I am no expert on her sex life, so anything I say will not be taken as fact.   


  By that reasoning, then, having never visited the planet Mars, for instance (or any other planet in our solar system), and having no irrefutable evidence of it's existence that it, in fact, does not exist..?

  This reasoning may even be expanded to include such intangibles as:

  Love
  Justice
  Good/Evil
  The concept of "Rights"
  Equality
  & so on...

  Aren't these concepts taken by faith, alone..?

  Just wondering...go ;)

By that reasoning, then, having never visited the planet Mars, for instance (or any other planet in our solar system), and having no irrefutable evidence of it's existence that it, in fact, does not exist..?



Sorry, but I know that Mars and other planets exist because I've seen satellite images of them, I've observed a couple of them with a telescope, and I've read stuff by scientists that talk about these planets, their properties, their orbits, etc.  So, that's a non-argument. 

If all we wanted to do was "get" the Bush Administration, all we would have to is quote army generals from Iraq.  The self-proclaimed "war president"  and his cronies would have to go back to school for ten years just to graduate witha degree in incompetence!  This is a farce, it's a travesty.  I feel sorry for anybody who supported Bush because he has turned out to be the worst president in U.S. history.  You can conclude that without resorting to any conspiracy theory whatsoever.

I do anticipate FOX News, Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, and that gaggle of nazis to start declaring the top brass to be partisan Democrats, traitors, appeasers, and homosexuals.  I do not anticipate any more sanity from the Bushies, the Republican loyalists, or their media lapdogs than I would have expected fromthe Nazi SS.

As for "conspiracy theories" there is not one I have mentioned that lacks credible supporters in droves.

Clinton---and I was no raging Clinton fan--voluntarily declares he failed to kill Osama.  He's been out of office for over five years.  He has no obligation to say anything to the press.  But he did.  The only thing propagandists will do is use it as more ammo against Clinton.  Don Rumsfeld, on the other hand, is a notorious f**k-up who nobody can stand to work with.  The top brass has declared him worse than clueless and pleaded for his firing, since--as a psychopath--he will never resign.

Listen, conservtives on this board, those of you who voted for Bush in 2000, even those of you voted for him last time, I will not do a "told you so" if you renounce this Administration and its policies.  It's OK, I won't gloat, ridicule, or poke fun.  I would expect the same decency from other "liberals" or "leftists" on this board.  This is not a partisan issue.  You have a government that has gone insane.  Provided you don't like a fascist state  on a suicide course, you will want to renounce these guys no matter what you believe.  There are differences of political opinion, and then there is the recognition of psychopaths running amok in your government.
::)

This is also why I hate conspiracy theories.  Each one has to be so convoluted and involve so many people, that they simply collapse on themselves like a house of cards.  Yet the theorists simply pile more conspiracies upon more conspiracies.  And when you try to confron them with logic, they just throw out another conspiracy.

9/11 has so many conspiracies behind it that I actually find it rather amusing.  Al-Queda was under the control of the Bush Administration.  Never mind the fact that their first attack in 1993 was when Clinton was in office.  And their many attacks (Black Hawk Down, USS Cole, African Embasies, etc) were under the Clinton Administration, and mostly against US targets.  You have people that believe that the towers were hit by empty planes, cruise missiles, even that Israel was responsible.

And even though most of the targets for over 10 years have been the US, people still believe that the CIA was behind them.  Well, don't forget that most of those were during the Clinton Administration.

So let me get this straight.  Clinton was trying hard to stop Al-Queda.  That administration was hunting for Bin Laudin.  And at the same time, his CIA was also funding and supporting them.  I may think many things of the Clinton Administration, but I would never accuse them of something like that.  It is illogical, and makes no sense.

But I forget, conspiracy theories rely on the suspension of logic.  And even though Bin Laudin has publically claimed that he was behind the attacks, some people simply believe that he is an innocent patsy.  Reminds me of JFK.  Same of coprolite with a new bookjacket.

But tell you all what.  If you all agree that the CIA supported Bin Laudin attacking the USS Cole and Blackhawk Down under the direction of President Clinton, then I will admit that the CIA did the same thing on 9/11 under Bush.

Myself, I see that most conspiracy theories end up slashing their wrists when placed along Occam's Razor.
most of your "conspiracy theorists" see clinton and bush as not really being that different. so really citing clinton as a refutation of the conspiracy theories is kinda a waste of time. the basic idea is, do the people in power act with your best interests at heart? or not? if you're a big government conservative who puts all your faith in government to protect you from the big bad terrorists -- even though from pinochet to hussein to al qaeda to the northern alliance the feds have a long history of working with just the same characters they pretend to be so shocked and horrified by now -- then of course you'll believe whatever cheap alibis the federal government pumps out to keep the war machine going. without huge government all up in your business the bush adminsitration would have nothing, and all they had to do to get where they are now is convince the "conservatives" in this country to sell out all their ideals. and it turns out it was surprisingly easy.

look around you. deficit spending, HUGE intrusive government, nation building like it was going out of style... what's "conservative" about this government? i don't get it.

  Whenever I read some conspiracy theories, I always do a bit of thinking, then ask myself, "How many people would it take to pull it off?" and, "How could so many people be convinced to never, ever tell the secret..?"

  The very existence of the Bletchley Park operation, for instance (where the Enigma secrets were unravelled), remained a secret for decades after WWII.  All the histories of WWII written in the immediate postwar years, and on through the fifties and sixties, were written in ignorance of the knowledge that the German codes had been broken (Just a handful of historians were in on the secret, permitted to let it inform their opinions, but not allowed to divulge it in their writing...)

  Looking back even further, we know that the entire US press agreed to keep it secret that FDR was a cripple.  The British press long kept secret from the British public the relationship between the Prince of Wales (later Edward VIII) and the American divorcee he was later to marry.  Again, it is now widely accepted that the supposed "Gulf of Tonkin Incident" that provoked the Vietnam War was fabricated by the CIA.  How many US navy personnel knew or guessed the truth from the start but kept mum?  And yet these examples pale in significance by comparison with the deceits carried out by less scrupulous governments...

  I rate as pretty high the ability of governments and other organisations to hush things up or keep a lid on them.  That ability is greater than one might reasonably expect... groove ;) on...

So the hijackers, they're innocent right, it's the government's fault. Bin Laden? He's innocent too? Or is al-qaeda and the US government involved in some vast conspiracy together? What about the USS cole bombing in 2000, the government had their own ship bombed, or their own embassies bombed in 1998?


  There is a difference between saying the government orchastrated the attacks and saying the government covered up certain aspects of it, Brian06.  Terrorists brought down the towers, and terrorists hit the Pentagon.  The details in between are what is being scrutinized...

  At this point, though, I'll settle for certain persons including President Bush (who violated his oath of office to uphold the constitution),Vice President Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and the military/intelligence officers who violate the Constitution and Geneva Conventions by engaging in acts of torture, crimes against humanity, war crimes and other gross human-rights abuses to be called to answer charges...go ;)...

Hes like Jason/Freddie/Mike Meyers, he will never die. :D

   Whenever I read some conspiracy theories, I always do a bit of thinking, then ask myself, "How many people would it take to pull it off?" and, "How could so many people be convinced to never, ever tell the secret..?"

   The very existence of the Bletchley Park operation, for instance (where the Enigma secrets were unravelled), remained a secret for decades after WWII.  All the histories of WWII written in the immediate postwar years, and on through the fifties and sixties, were written in ignorance of the knowledge that the German codes had been broken (Just a handful of historians were in on the secret, permitted to let it inform their opinions, but not allowed to divulge it in their writing...)

   Looking back even further, we know that the entire US press agreed to keep it secret that FDR was a cripple.  The British press long kept secret from the British public the relationship between the Prince of Wales (later Edward VIII) and the American divorcee he was later to marry.  Again, it is now widely accepted that the supposed "Gulf of Tonkin Incident" that provoked the Vietnam War was fabricated by the CIA.  How many US navy personnel knew or guessed the truth from the start but kept mum?  And yet these examples pale in significance by comparison with the deceits carried out by less scrupulous governments...

   I rate as pretty high the ability of governments and other organisations to hush things up or keep a lid on them.  That ability is greater than one might reasonably expect... groove ;) on...


There are some differences here.

Quite a few people knew that FDR was crippled by polio.  He was struck by the disease in 1921.  After this, he then went on to serve as as 2 time Governor of New York.  He never went out of his way to aknowledge his illness, but he also never denied it.  And in an era where news was either radio, photograph, or News Reel, it was easy to cover up.

The concealment was done because at the time, it was thought that he would not be ellectible if the illness was known.  It was often talked about, and was an "Open Secret".  It is not so much that the press agreed to cover it up, as much as they agreed to not talk about it.  In much the same way, nobody talks about politicians that have Parkinsons today.  Myself, I could not care less.  And it really makes no difference.

ULTRA is a different matter.  Because of how "Need To Know" works in reguards to cryptography, things like this are very tight.  In fact, fewer then 100 people knew of ULTRA during the war.  And like MAGIC (the breaking of Japanese Naval Codes), this often prevented information gained from being used.  The attack on Midway was such an example.  Naval Intelligence knew about it for weeks, but did not tell the Admirals until the last minute, to prevent the Japanese from realizing we broke their code (post-war analysis revealed that they believed Midway was either blind luck, or triangulating radio transmissions).

And both MAGIC and ULTRA continued to be highly classified for many years for other reasons.  Among them were other cryptographic programs like VENONA, which used similar systems.  Plus there is nothing "evil" or "sinister" about cryptography.  Secrets like that can be kept almost forever.

Other more "dark" conspiracies never last.  This is where the old addage becomes true:  "Three can keep a secret, if two of them are dead."

About the only conspiracy that I believe in is Jimmy Hoffa.  And I would be surprised if more then 3 people ever knew what really happened to him.  Others like "The Final Solution", "Watergate", and "Operation Wrath of God" did not even remain a secret longer then a year or so.  These are the kinds of Conspiracies that become public sooner, because people will either brag about it, talk to the wrong person, or use knowledge of it to gain favor.  Or in the case of The Final Solution, events will happen that make it impossible to hide any longer.  Even if the Germans had won WWII, the deaths of millions of people would still have become public knowledge (and it has been shown that it was public knowledge in most of Germany, it is just that nobody talked about it).

Conspiracies like 9/11, JFK, Lunar Landings, and the like simply can't last.  To many people would have to be involved, and people will talk.  Our Government (and every other Government) leaks like a sieve.  And if the Government was behind 9/11, you would have had somebody come forward by now.  In reality, Watergate was not a major issue, but it was enough that Mark Felt came forward.  Do you really think that if the Government was behind 9/11 (or JFK), that there would have been no "Deep Throat" by now?

It is amazing how people will insist that the Government is both incompitant, then turn right around and insist that they are capable of keeping such dark and evil things secret.  My disbelief in Conspiracies is really nothing more then a belief in Human Nature.  If I was in Government Service and discovered something like that, I would make sure that the word got out.

most of your "conspiracy theorists" see clinton and bush as not really being that different.

The plausible conspiracy theories about the U.S. government today stem from two sources:
1. The quasi-secretive national security state.
2. The military-petroleum-industrial complex.
Clinton was just as beholden to these interests as Bush.  Clinton did everything he could to meet the demands of these two extra-governmental overlords, but he stopped short of decimating our middle class and shredding the United States Constitution.  Therefore, he didn't do enough.  That's why victory had to be snatched from Gore and Kerry and the Bush Administration installed as the anti-Constitution, anti-people, pro-corporate imperial all-powerful imperial executive branch.  This is factual, out in the open, and easy to trace.  I'm not talking the Free Masons and the symbols on the dollar bill!
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/evil5.gif


   Whenever I read some conspiracy theories, I always do a bit of thinking, then ask myself, "How many people would it take to pull it off?" and, "How could so many people be convinced to never, ever tell the secret..?"

   
They don't keep the secret.  No need.  As long as you've got the 80-hour workweek, American Idol, and Desperate Housewives, too few people to make the difference can be bothered to give a crap if the fascists are taking over the joint.  It's just like Orwell's proletariat in 1984.  Nobody was watching the lumpen masses. They were rendered harmless.  Their lives were full of cheap beer, public hangings, and pornography.  The education system for the proles was nonexistent and the state media just fed them BS they had no choice but to believe.  They also had to work their fingers to the bone just to earn enough to survive.  You got a few hours on Saturday afternoon?  Who wants to talk politics?  Let's go boozing at the p*ss factory, let's watch the fights, or the hangings, let's check out some porn.  Politics? What's that? Pshaw! Don't sound like much fun to me!

"The Proles don't count.  They're animals."
---Parsons.

We're not quite there yet in the U.S., but it's on the way faster than you think!

In order to believe a government is capable of pulling off a conspiracy, you must first believe the government to be intelligent enough to pull it off.  Intelligent enough to make sure all bases are covered, all loose ends are tied and there is no paper trail. 

Can you really look at this government, as currenly constructed, and believe them smart enough to do ANYTHING?  Please....these morons couldn't find their way out of an open door, even if they had a manual.

[quote author=

Whatever you say, Max.  Sorry for having the gall to put my stupidity here for you to stomp on.  Next time I'll remember differently.

We saw Bin Laden while playing with Google Earth today.  He was shaking his fist at the satellite and putting a jihad on us. 

[quote author=

Why must you always bring this "stupidity" thing up.  I have already made my point of view on it perfectly clear.  Apparently, you don't want to believe me!



Why must I always?  Hmmm, perhaps because you talk down to me when you respond to my posts that you don't agree with.  And please don't bother telling me you don't, because I think I can spot condescension when I see it. 

And it has nothing to do with not wanting to believe you, so much as not thinking that absolutely everything you bitch about is true.  Some of it, yes.  Other things?  I have a hard time believing it.  For example, I know our current administration is as dumb as a box of rocks, but I refuse to believe they were responsible for 9/11.  I've heard plenty of evidence from people who know what they're talking about that say that a combination of where the planes hit and burning jet fuel helped bring the towers down and caused those people to die.  I have seen and heard no evidence that I deem trustworthy that says otherwise.  People with an agenda and people whose hatred of this administration know no bounds are not people I deem "trustworthy".  They are akin to people who will say anything contrary just to get people to look their way and listen for half a second.  If you choose to believe these people, fine.  If you want to think that Bush or other people in the administration paid the hijackers off....or planted bombs in the buildings to bring them down....fine.  When I see evidence that cannot be disproven that says that, I'll believe you.  Until then, I will continue believing what I have read and heard that is the opposite to that. 

It's one thing to hate Bush and want him out of office.  It's one thing to say that he's incompetent, and that he has zero clue on how to run this country or help the people in it.  It is quite another to say that he's responsible for one of the worst things to happen to this country since the Japanese bombed Pearl Harbor 65 years ago.  As stupid and incompetent as he is, I don't think he's capable of that.  I just don't.  Now, if you want to call me a moron, an idiot, or any other put-down you can think of for not falling in with every other virulent Bush-hater, go for it.  I don't like the guy either and think he's done nothing good for this country, but a part of me also understands the lengths his detractors will go to convince people he's more than just a nincompoop.

If you hate something/someone strongly enough, you will find ANYTHING you can to back up your stance, no matter how ridiculous, far-fetched or "out there" it sounds.  I know someone who thinks that Bush collapsed the levees in N.O. and helped drown those people.  You can say he didn't do enough to help them, and I strongly believe that to be the case, but are you actually trying to tell me he blew them up just to watch them die?  There's a big difference between stupidity and not having an ounce of human compassion.  He may not have as much as we'd like him to, but I will never say that he's completely without. 

The plausible conspiracy theories about the U.S. government today stem from two sources:
1. The quasi-secretive national security state.
2. The military-petroleum-industrial complex.
Clinton was just as beholden to these interests as Bush.  Clinton did everything he could to meet the demands of these two extra-governmental overlords, but he stopped short of decimating our middle class and shredding the United States Constitution. 


But you see Maxwell, I reject all conspiracy theories.  Most especially those that involve more then 3 people.  And in both Corporate and Goverment, there is no way to keep a "small conspiracy".  This is simply the nature of the beast.  At every level, you have people who want to "cover their @$$".  They do not want to take responsibility for an action in case it goes bad, so they leave trails behind them, so they can claim either denyability, or pass the blame off onto somebody else.

And I reject all conspiracies, not just those that make Conservatives look bad.  I reject JFK and 9/11 conspiracies.  I just as fervently reject conspiracy theories about the deaths of Ron Brown, Susan Coleman, Vince Foster, Mary Mahoney, Waco, Oaklahoma City, WTC 1993, Ed Willey, Jerry Parks, or anybody else that Clinton is accused of having killed.

http://www.zpub.com/un/un-bc-body.html

Why?  Because no matter what I think of President Clinton, I would never think of him as a murderer (or supporting people who killed somebody in his name - even if he did not know until afterwards).  I honestly believe that if somebody came forward and told Bill Clinton that they had killed Susan Coleman to keep him out of trouble, Bill Clinton would not hesitate to turn them in.

I may dissagree with somebody politically, but that does not mean I consider that person to be "evil".  And I am nonpartaisan about rejecting Conspiracies.  I do not pick and choose whiche ones to believe and which to reject.

And in most that embrace conspiracies, you find this political divide.  They accept that JFK and 9/11 were done by "The Government" (or "Right Wing Zealots).  Yet they reject the idea that President Clinton was involved in things he is accused of.  And on the other side, you have the Right Wing conspiracy theorists, who accept everything that Clinton was accused of, but reject any others.

I simply reject them all.  I also reject "One World Governments", "Illuminati", "New World Order", "Jewish Domeination" of all kinds, and "Shadow Governments".  I do not believe in Space Aliens routinely visiting our world.  I do not accept that the Democrats are fronts for World Communism.

For the most part, I see "Consipracy Theories" as a pacifier for the confused, and those who are unable to think for themselves.

Now excuse me, I am just about to watch "Sneakers" for the 20th time.  Then I am going to spend the weekend watching my DVD copy of the 1980's TV series "War Of The Worlds".  8)

http://m-w.com/dictionary/passive-aggressive

i still say to all the people who say the administration wasn't capable of 9/11, if they were responsible for starting the war in iraq for no good reason he's done something ten times worse than 9/11. lives don't only matter if they're the citizens of your particular nation, you know? and blasphemous though it may seem, 9/11 was nowhere NEAR the worst atrocity in history. probably not even in the top 100.

do i think the administration was capable of 9/11? hell yes. government powers have done far far worse, throughout history, for far less. those who run the american government have the most power concentrated in a single place in human history. would they commit a relatively minor atrocity like 9/11 (as compared with the london blitz, the dresden bombing, the christmas cambodia bombings, the rape of nanking, the invasion of east timor, the mining of the harbors in nicaragua)? are you kidding me? look at your history. governments commit monstrous acts, routinely. 9/11 SEEMS more monstrous than most because we saw it happen on t.v., but it wasn't. it fits into a pattern of governments waging industrial war that goes back decades.

as for keeping it a secret, they wouldn't have to. no one wants to believe it. a signed confession could surface tomorrow and people would shrug it off.

http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/uc/20060927/lpo060927.gif



In case you can't read it:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/uclickcomics/20060927/cx_po_uc/po20060927




Cat

Let's see.  One of the most feared men in history is killed by a disease.  Oh, how the mighty fall.  I'll believe it when they produce the corpse. 

can you get typhoid as a sideeffect of a kidney disorder?

can you get typhoid as a sideeffect of a kidney disorder?



A compromised immune system can leave you vulnerable to catching viral and bacterial infections.  So yes, I would assume it's possible.

[quote author=

Was there a conspircay to assassinate Caligula?  Was there a conspiracy to assassinate Abraham Lincoln?  Was there a conspiracy to fix the 1919 World Series?

I mean, do you guys reject all "conpiracies," or just all "conspiracy theories," and how can one establish "conspiracy fact" without first investigating "conspiricay theory"?

Or do you reject only conspiracy theories that hold the U.S. government culpable for bad things?  Is not the "9/11 Report" still a conspiracy theory, and wouldn't you have to reject that too?  If we exonerate the U.S. governmetn from any culpability for 9/11, don't we still have to content with conspiracy theory?  Nobody is proposing there was a Lee Harvey Oswald of 9/11...the one lone nutjob who made it ALL happen!Of course not, there were multiple parties involved, which is defined as a conspiracy.  In order to figure out which parties were doing what around 9/11, one must theorize....but Mushroom and Morphine won't go that far.  So how are we supposed to figure anything out?
http://www.inthe00s.com/smile/12/dontknow.gif

P.S. Refusal to believe something does not make it untrue.  I could walk out onto my roof and refuse to believe that if jumped off I would not fall to the ground.  No matter how vehemently I believed I could fly, I would still fall to the ground if I jumped off my roof!

Was there a conspircay to assassinate Caligula?  Was there a conspiracy to assassinate Abraham Lincoln?  Was there a conspiracy to fix the 1919 World Series?


These (with the exception of the 1919 World Series) are conspiracies that were never intended to last.  These really fall more under "Plots" then "Conspiracies".  Once the event occurs, there is no more reason to keep it (or your involvement) a secret.

The killers of Julius and Caligula Caeser thought they would be heroes, for killing a despotic dictator.  John Wilkes Booth thought he would be recieved as a hero in the South.  These were only "Conspiracies" up until the moment that they commit their act.  At that time, there was no more ned for secrecy.

That is what is different between a true "Conspiracy" and a "Plot".  The Hitler Assassination attempt was a "Plot".  The 1993 and 2001 WTC attacks were "Plots".  Even the 1999 Colombine High School attack was a "Plot".  Look at the name of the infamous "Gunpowder Plot" to see what I mean.  One the action that was kept secret was revealed, the need for secrecy is over (and the participants frequently admit their participation).

A conspiracy by it's very nature needs to be kept a secret forever (or for a very long period of time).  And by this very fact, most of them fail miserably.  Because once it goes public, it falls apart.  The "Black Socks" is a perfect example of this.  And this is one of the major reasons that I do not accept "Conspiracy Theories".  They simply fall apart, and can't stand prolonged scrutiny without disolving.  In most cases, there is no conspiracy, but people continue to imagine that there is one.  And as everybody knows, one of the hardest things to do is to prove a negative.

After all, I can't prove that JFK was really killed by Bozo The Clown.  But you can't prove to me that Bozo was innocent now, can you?