Origins of a conspiracy theory - Vince Foster (no tin-foil required)

[greyl]

On his March 10{1994} radio broadcast, Limbaugh had announced the following in urgent tones:

OK, folks, I think I got enough information here to tell you about the contents of this fax that I got. Brace yourselves. This fax contains information that I have just been told will appear in a newsletter to Morgan Stanley sales personnel this afternoon.... What it is is a bit of news which says... there's a Washington consulting firm that has scheduled the release of a report that will appear, it will be published, that claims that Vince Foster was murdered in an apartment owned by Hillary Clinton, and the body was then taken to Fort Marcy Park.


After he returned from a commercial break, Limbaugh began referring to the story as a "rumor," but continued to claim that the story was that "the Vince Foster suicide was not a suicide."
http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1236

Claim: Bill Clinton has been quietly doing away with those who oppose him.

Status: False.

Origins: A new version of a lengthy list of deaths associated with Bill Clinton began circulating on the the Internet in August 1998. According to it, there have been close to fifty suspicious deaths of colleagues, advisors and citizens who were about to testify against the Clintons, with the unstated implication that Bill Clinton or his henchmen were behind each untimely demise.

We shouldn't have to tell anyone not to believe this claptrap, but we will anyway. In a frenzied media climate where the Chief Executive couldn't boff a White House intern without the whole world finding out every niggling detail of each encounter and demanding his removal from office, are we seriously to believe the same man had been having double handfuls of detractors and former friends murdered with impunity?
http://www.snopes.com/inboxer/outrage/clinton.htm

Now, if I were to say "See? This means that all of the 9/11 conspiracy theories are also false!", could any CTists point out the fallacious logic in that statement?

Extra credit: If someone defending the Foster conspiracy were to point out that in a different country, in a different circumstance, with different players, with different facts, and with different levels of evidence, that it is known that a leader had someone killed and so therefore Clinton had Foster killed, what fallacious logic is in their statement?

[FoxOnTheRun]

1. Wasn't the

Park Police investigating it?

[greyl]

2. Since when do official investigations into something

mean anything? Officials can be boneheads too.

[FoxOnTheRun]

3. Nothing

that's what I'm saying, the Park Police for a high level official. Normally the FBI is responsible for it.

[greyl]

4. Ah, ok.

Care to take a shot at either of the 2 questions in the OP?

[FoxOnTheRun]

10. What does your signature mean?

[greyl]

13. Very briefly, it means

the Gods that murderous, ignorant, imperialistic theocracies like ours(manifest destiny) use as justification for destructive behavior on the planet are all bullshit false gods. I waver between being atheist and agnostic, but I'm totally convinced that if there is a God, it sure as hell ain't the one that bush or osama(for 2 examples) kneel before. I feel the same about any other God I've ever seen described, but the main point is that the idea of "Holy Wars" is totally stupid.
It also ties into the sig picture whose title is pareidolia.

[salvorhardin]

20. Heh -- your sig picture

I've been meaning to ask you, what do most people see in that? 'Cause I see a pair of long underwear. That's your own pic right? I'm pretty sure you didn't intend for people to see long underwear. Much more useful (and a great deal more comfortable in winter) than the Virgin Mary though.

[greyl]

22. Heheh, you mean the buttoned flap?

I think I may see what you mean. Most people say various eyes and faces at first, but I put many more intentional 'indications' in the picture than just that(none of which were longjohns. :)) It works better at full size. Here's the lower section of the pic:

[FoxOnTheRun]

25. We all know it's Baphomet who runs the show, unfortunately

He learned it probably at Yale (Skull & Bones)


We have religious freedom, but being a devil worshiper and claiming to be a christian is a hypocrisy.

I just don't get it ? what do these evangelicals see in him?

[mhatrw]

5. This is the best you could do?

How about addressing the actual thread you are poorly attempting to marginalize:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=125&topic_id=100475&mesg_id=100475

[greyl]

6. No, but it's good enough

to get a response from you.

edit: albeit a non-responsive response.

[Bryan Sacks]

7. and for the record. . .

Rush Limbaugh did not originate this 'conspiracy theory'. It is based in the factual testimony of the lead investigator in the case, Miguel Rodriguez (and yes, I know about the reported 'strangeness' in his life recently), as well as the suppressed testimony of several other witnesses to the crime scene.

see www.fbicover-up.com for an excellent prima facie case for official wrongdoing in the investigation and subsequent cover-up in the Foster case.

Be prepared to read.

Is it distasteful for me to have to refer to something affiliated with Accuracy in Media? Yes it is. But the facts as presented here build a very strong prima facie case.

And Greyl: I trust you understand that Snopes.com is not an authority on these matters?

[greyl]

8. Rodriguez went public after the Limbaugh show, right?

The Limbaugh show was in 94, Rodriguez went public in 95.
Furthermore, Limbaugh wasn't basing his bullshit on Rodriguez.

[Bryan Sacks]

9. you are right about Limbaugh, yes

I meant that the belief in foul play that lingers in the Foster case does not have its origin in Limbaugh's distortion of that insider newsletter's account.

For a devastating account of many anomalies in the Foster case, see http://www.prorev.com/foster.htm

[salvorhardin]

11. So WhatReallyHappened didn't originate the Vince Foster rumor?

So WhatReallyHappened and Michael Rivero didn't originate the Vince Foster rumor?

Archive.org link (may take a while to load): http://tinyurl.com/q3gd6 (see the first column, third row):

The Death Of Vincent Foster

This is the page that started this entire web site, concerning the evidence found in official files proving that there was a cover-up in the death of White House deputy council Vincent Foster.

[greyl]

12. I'm not sure, what do you think?

(First, I didn't mean to imply that Limbaugh was the originator of the Foster CT. The OP was only meant to be a quick overview which avoided linking to Rivero's site, in order to prove another point. ;))

The page linked from the tinyurl page mentions a March 11 1994 ABC broadcast as if it was past info rivero had gathered while he was creating the page. Limbaugh's effort began on March 10, 1994. Maybe Rivero used to be limbaugh's drug dealer?

[mirandapriestly]

14. The comparison between starting rumors

and constructing a false flag operation doesn't work because I do not think that many people deny that false or true rumors are started and they are started frequently and that they are relatively easy to accomplish, whereas most of the deniers of "911 as inside job" do so because it would be to difficult, the current administration is too incompetent, too many people would know, etc....
what is that you guys always say, it's like comparing pumpkins to cabbage, something like that...

[greyl]

15. You obviously didn't read the OP.

You get zero points.

[mirandapriestly]

16. I wondered how you would weasle out of that.eom

[greyl]

17. No weasel required.

I wasn't making a comparison between starting rumors and starting a false flag operation like you said I was, therefore your reply gets zero points.

[John Q. Citizen]

18. Your system of awarding points is authoritarian. n/t

[greyl]

21. My threads are not a democracy!

;)

I happen to be the authority of what my OP means, and I'm the one with points to award as I see fit.
You get zero points.

[salvorhardin]

23. Are there lollipops?

Do I get a lolli? I like the purple flavored ones.

[salvorhardin]

19. You're really out in left field there

greyl is highlighting two different ways of arriving at a fallacious conclusion from the given information. It's a game. Can you describe why those two conclusions are false (bonus points for knowing the name of the logical fallacy involved)?

And before you say that this is silly and a waste of time it isn't. Human brains are pattern matching engines. We don't have logic and deductive reasoning circuits built in. Those are both learned behaviors, and as such the more we practice them the better we get at them. After not too long a while it becomes really easy to see when your peers who are only working with probabilistic reasoning, are making bad conclusions (i.e. false positive matches).

[MervinFerd]

24. Bump. Because this is fun.