Lindelof: Destruction of Vulcan Had 9/11 Effect On Federation For ‘Into Darkness’ | TrekMovie.com
jump to navigation

Lindelof: Destruction of Vulcan Had 9/11 Effect On Federation For ‘Into Darkness’ December 26, 2012

by TrekMovie.com Staff , Filed under: Spoilers,Star Trek Into Darkness , trackback

In a new interview, Star Trek Into Darkness co-writer/producer Damon Lindelof discusses the process of making the film at length, including how they are dealing with tying into the the last film and the rest of Star Trek canon. He also talks about Kirk’s arc, the time setting of the movie and more. Excerpts and highlights below (minor spoilers).

 

 

Lindelof on connection between Star Trek 2009, Star Trek history and ‘Into Darkness’ & more

It is worth checking out the full interview at Collider with Damon Lindelof which was done at the Bad Robot event a couple of weeks ago, but here are a few highlights…

Lindelof wouldn’t get specific on how Into Darkness will deal with the destruction of Vulcan (from 2009’s Star Trek), but did offer a general comment saying…

…we understood when we did it in the first movie that it was going to have a 9-11 level impact on that universe. In the same way that 9-11 happened over ten years ago, but we’re still talking about it and it still influences everything about our daily lives…Anything that happens in our new timeline has to walk in lockstep with Vulcan was destroyed and what is the impact of that on the federation? And what is the impact of that on Spock? What is the impact of that on Kirk? What is the impact of that on the geo-politics of the galaxy itself?

The writer also talked about how even with a new timeline, they "do their homework" to ensure they honor the prime timeline….

I think the fans want to feel that that stuff had a lot of thought behind it and that we’re not being casual about referencing the original series or the Trek-verse. And you have to do your homework especially because we started a new timeline. You have to be very responsible about the sequencing of things because it’s not we can do whatever we want now. Our timeline can’t really abberrate before the first movie where Nero basically destroyed the Kelvin.


Vulcan destruction (in 2009 ‘Star Trek’) had ‘9/11′ type of effect on Federation

Other highlights

And much more including discussion of how the sets are connected, how the writing process works and more at Collider.


Spock Prime watches Vulcan’s destruction (Star Trek 2009) – Lindelof says team makes sure new movies stay true to prime timeline

Comments

1. Danya - December 26, 2012

I’m not very happy about the “Earth needs to play more of a role” comment, but no other complaints.

2. Aurore - December 26, 2012

I very much enjoyed that interview.

I really did.

But…ahem…DamOn…Not ONE word about the role Mr. Weller will be playing?

Really?

C’mon, man!

Have mercy on me!

:))

Seriously, great interview!

3. LizardGirl - December 26, 2012

If everything’s consistant then no problems here either.

4. Lt.LanaShelby - December 26, 2012

Sounds good to me. Looking forward to it.

5. Will - December 26, 2012

That’s sort of the opposite of a previous comment he made of “because we can.”

That said, I don’t just want it to feel like it was planned out- I want to know it was actually planned out. I don’t want another Heroes “Peter Petrelli’s Girlfriend Stranded in Time” piece of junk plot thread dangling or a “All questions will be answered in the finale of Lost” followed by “Oh, well, it’s whatever you want it to be.”

But it’s good to know that the destruction of Vulcan isn’t just gonna be glossed over. That could have far reaching consequences in the Trek universe which could potentially play out in interesting ways.

6. Kirk Nelson - December 26, 2012

Sounds very cool. I like what I hear.

Who is Peter Weller playing? I want to know.

7. Red Dead Ryan - December 26, 2012

Changes made to the script after Cumberbatch got cast? Ok, maybe it was originally going to be Khan, but they changed him to John Harrison, and tweaked his background a bit to not be a total rip-off of Khan. Khan will still be in the sequel, but won’t make an appearance until late in the movie. He’ll just be played by someone else.

And the fact we still don’t know anything about Peter Weller’s character leads me to think its John Paxton. The Weller character seems to be central to everyting that goes on in the sequel, judging by the deliberate secrecy by the writers surrounding the character.

And yeah, it sounds just like what dmduncan has been saying for a few weeks now…

8. Dr. Cheis - December 26, 2012

I felt like the Kelvin was their 9/11. After all, it freaked everybody out so much they all changed their uniforms and props, and doubled the size of the Enterprise.

9. Aix - December 26, 2012

Damon, is Gaila still alive? You know, green skin, red hair…

10. GG - December 26, 2012

Confirmed “6 months have passed” since the first movie?? I thought they said that it was more like 4 years between movies? Which is it?

11. Anthony Pascale - December 26, 2012

RE 6 months

No one ever said there were 4 years between movies ‘in universe’ only that there were 4 years in real time. In the nine minute preview at IMAX the stardate shows the film starting around February of the year following events from 2009’s Star Trek.

RE: changes for Cumberbatch
Read the full interview but even the bullet point notes they didn’t change the story. They just tweaked the dialog for his style, which is what they always do once they cast someone.

12. Captian Clayton. NCC 1881 - December 26, 2012

After defeating Nero, they should have gone back in time to save Romulus, thus averting the loss of Vulcan and peace with the Romulans.

13. Smartmouth - December 26, 2012

And Lindelof’s writing has a 4/20 effect on audiences.
Duuurrr-dur-dur-dur……

14. Ahmed - December 26, 2012

Earth never played major role in any of the previous Star Trek movies, except The Voyage Home & First Contact. It will be interesting to see what they will come up with.

15. John - December 26, 2012

911 was an inside job!!!

16. Roddenberry was a Peacenik - December 26, 2012

“911 was an inside job!!!”

boborci?

17. Jeyl - December 26, 2012

Earth, the only frontier the high court seems to care about. Why is it that so much effort is being put into something doesn’t even make Star Trek unique? Imagine if Nero had destroyed Earth instead of Vulcan. Not only would that have changed Star Trek more than destroying Vulcan, it would also mean that the writers of future Star Trek productions would actually have to ‘work’ to find ways of making a Star Trek movie exciting without the comfort zone of the ‘crew saves the Earth again’ trope.

Earth in Star Trek is just a cheap gimmick for writers to fall back on so they can raise the stakes on something that really shouldn’t be important in the franchise. After all, Damon does state that the only reason for Earth’s bigger role is for our benefit, not Star Trek’s. The crew may be from Earth, but they already have a home, and her name is the Enterprise.

18. Seattle Trek Fan - December 26, 2012

SFDebris gave the same 9/11 analogy to the Borg incursion in his “Best of Both Worlds” review and the Battle of Wolf 359. After the battle, Federation security took on higher importance and ships like the Akira-class and the Defiant, ships that were designed for combat, became more and more common in fleets. Ships before the battle (Galaxy, Miranda, Excelsior, Oberth-class, etc) had their focus on exploration with (in some cases) enough firepower to defend themselves from an aggressive species.

19. NCC-73515 - December 26, 2012

>>Feel that Earth “needed to play more of a role” in their Star Trek movies due to “relatability”<<

Excellent! The connections with our real world are the only thing that sets Trek still apart from Wars ;)

20. Jeff O'Connor - December 26, 2012

I’m cool with more Earth, just so long as it doesn’t totally overstay its welcome. The climax of the previous film occurred in the Sol System. I wouldn’t be too surprised if the same thing happened this time. Please don’t go three-for-three with it though, sheesh.

21. J - December 26, 2012

“Feel that Earth “needed to play more of a role” in their Star Trek movies due to “relatability””

This. This is what worries me.

22. Jeff O'Connor - December 26, 2012

Fellow Mass Effect fans can probably relate with me when I say that a massive Earth-centric advertising campaign sort of bit BioWare and Electronic Arts in the arse this past March, by the way. Mass Effect 3’s finale wasn’t exactly well-received overall.

I know that’s mostly off-topic, but I find the Earth woes here mirroring that whole shindig not so very long ago. Space operas are levitating toward Earth lately, and that is kind of a shame, yeah.

23. BulletInTheFace - December 26, 2012

#10: No, they never said it was four years later.

24. Smike - December 26, 2012

“Changes were made to script after casting Cumberbatch, but “it didn’t change the story.””

Exactly…first they wanted Khan or rather aclone of him…Del Toro…now we get John Harrison, another augmented superman, especially written for Cumberbatch… A British icon, combining John Lennon and George Harrison…

25. I'm Dead Jim! - December 26, 2012

@7 I would love it if Weller reprised his role as John Paxton. I just watched the Terra Prime episodes to re-familiarize myself with the character. Sure, he would be much older but he was already using alien DNA to keep himself alive and he was incarcerated at the end of the episode. So who knows?

26. summoner2100 - December 26, 2012

@Anthony – Except that some people haven’t seen the nine minute preview. For one thing, NZ didn’t get it with Hobbit screenings (and wasn’t on the website). No-one seems to want to comment on it. Asked IMAX twitter account as a last resort too. I am kinda pissed off about it. I want to see it. (and not in some crappy cam quality like what is on YT).

If they are going to do a preview, do it everywhere. The Dark Knight did, and showed here..

27. Yea No Khan - December 26, 2012

7. I have a hard time with Weller being John Paxton again. I hope he is not playing him. I really hope there are no Augments in this movie or any future movies. Even so, he did play an administrator at the Orpheus Mining Colony on Luna. He could be part of the reason Augments return to Earth to free the human race from the Aliens that he hates so much. I’m very tired of the Racism/Xenophobia storylines done to death in Scifi.

28. Schultz - December 26, 2012

Oh, sweet Lord, it’s called “STAR Trek”, not “EARTH Trek”. Nothing against the occasional episode on Earth, but after the last film, where the beginning and showdown was already Earth-focused—origin story plus save the planet from bad Nero etc.—, I kinda hoped for a real SPACE adventure. Ah, well, “relatability”, mass appeal, make heaps of money… yeah, I get it, not your father’s Star Trek. [Pff.]

29. Smike - December 26, 2012

@10:

Four years between production / release of each movie but a significantly shorted period in the fictional timeline… And that is a good thing. If the new movie series is a reimagining of the original Five Year Mission, there should be at least five movies telling it…even if that takes them 15 years to produce…The actors are still very young and if they speed up the production a bit (2-3 year intervals), it would work…

30. Vulcan Soul - December 26, 2012

Why would the studio mandate the number of explosions when this team is happy to deliver as many explosions and hollow gee-whiz action as possible?

31. Richard Daystrom - December 26, 2012

They really know their Trek:

Collider: I’ve lost count of the Next Generation movies; there are like four.

Lindelof: Yeah, so there was First Contact then Generations. First Contact may be the last on I saw. I saw the one where they were with the Borg, that’s First Contact

I’m being anal, but…

32. Captain Karl - December 26, 2012

Destruction of Vulcan was ridiculous and served no real point other than to say that they were doing Trek they way they wanted to and could change or destroy whatever they wanted just because of it.

It’s our sandbox and we can do as we please and if you don’t like it, go find some other sandbox because this one is ours and we don’t care what was presented before, that wasn’t ours, this is.

When you turn off fans and cover things in secrecy that, when boiled down, aren’t really in need of secrecy, you over inflate things just for the hype. I feel this for 2009 “trek” and I feel this for the 2013 movie…all this hush hush is not really needed.

33. Geek Girl - December 26, 2012

@26. The Hobbit just came out in Australia yesterday – didn’t even get the regular STID trailer with it.

34. Captain Karl - December 26, 2012

Oh, and if it is only 6 months between movie timelines, why bother at all with comics in between and call them canon?

To be cutesy? To keep us guessing? I actually don’t care about the characters as much as I did for the original cast because of this. There isn’t any continuity to hold on to if you are just going to say one moment, we can do anything we want and the next we have to stick to canon. Make up your minds, people. Which is it?

You can’t tell me all the comic adventures are squeezed into a six month period? You want to claim realism, well, that isn’t being very realistic.

35. LogicalLeopard - December 26, 2012

17 and 28

Why are people freaking out about the Earth comments? I mean, Star Trek is pretty Earth-centric. Its the headquarters of Starfleet, its the Federation capitol, and the vast majority of SF personnel are descended from there. And why is that? Well besides budgetary reasons, I’m guessing Gene Roddenberry thought having Earth be the center of the Federation made everything more relatable.

36. Bob Tompkins - December 26, 2012

Lindelof admits that the only ‘real’ canon left is Enterprise [Ironic?] and anything discussed in a Trek series as an event pre- Kelvin….
Ties the Botany Bay and the Eugenics War in pretty tightly into Newverse canon.
The Khan hints are coming fast and furious….

37. Magic_Al - December 26, 2012

I don’t fault the current team for making Earth important in Star Trek movies. Following a TV series that never visited the Earth of Star Trek’s time, all six movies with the original cast had scenes on Earth and showed the Enterprise departing from Earth orbit. Star Trek: Insurrection is the only one of 11 movies that never goes near Earth.

38. Trekkertos - December 26, 2012

Homework for Lindelof

“The Immunity Syndrome” Spock is checked out by Chief Medical Officer Dr. McCoy in sickbay where he explains he was nauseated when he felt the combined shock and terror in the minds of 400 of his fellow Vulcans aboard the Intrepid as they died. McCoy is amazed that Spock felt anything with the great distance involved between the two ships, but admits there is a lot about Vulcans he still doesn’t understand.

Spock felt nothing when Vulcan and Billions of Vulcans died in Star Trek 2009.

39. LogicalLeopard - December 26, 2012

32

To be fair, what are they being secret about? We know the general plot, the characters, and the villain. Are they supposed to release the script five months before release?

40. BulletInTheFace - December 26, 2012

#34: Why can’t the comics fit in a six-month period? There are only a dozen-plus issues. They could occur in a matter of weeks.

41. summoner2100 - December 26, 2012

@33 – Geekgirl – Yeah, we didn’t get the trailer either, it’s like we get forgotten down this end of the world, and they think we don’t want to see it..

42. LogicalLeopard - December 26, 2012

38

Uhm…which Spock are you talking about? I think its pretty well implied Spock prime felt it, Kirk is overcome with emotion after the meld, and Spock couldnt have SEEN it feom Delta Vega, so it must have been his feelings from the meld. Spock Quinto probably felt it too, but if I remember correctly, any reaction would have happened off camera before the sickbay scene.

43. Brandon - December 26, 2012

“Signature Trek humor”?

Are they referring to the sugar-rush Looney Tunes sequence with the giant Kirk hands, the sugar-rush Looney Tunes sequence with the water pipes, the topless Uhura scene, or the cliched bar fight?

44. BulletInTheFace - December 26, 2012

#42: He clearly DID see it in the film. In fact, that was one of the biggest criticisms of the movie–the writers inexplicably parked Delta Vega right next-door to Vulcan.

45. sean - December 26, 2012

#44

In a Q&A on this site, Bob Orci said the idea was that Spock was ‘seeing’ Vulcan destroyed telepathically, but that it might not have been clear in the film.

46. CmdrR - December 26, 2012

43 – No, he was referring to the sugar-rush Looney Tunes Delta Vegan Prolapse Snot Beast.

Actually, I like the tone of these remarks much more than other recent interviews. I guess it’s hard for me to recognize that JJ must straddle an impossibly uncomfortable fence.
Trekkies want Trek: Ideas, themes, fun, characters, take-away thoughts.
Ticket-buyers want : ‘splosions, boobs, fistfights.
Of course Into Darkness won’t be TOS, any more than TWOK is TOS. TOS was lightning in a bottle. It’s been recaptured on tv several times… but, at the movies it’s only part of the business of selling tickets.

47. Curious Cadet - December 26, 2012

25. I’m Dead Jim!
“I would love it if Weller reprised his role as John Paxton….he was already using alien DNA to keep himself alive and he was incarcerated at the end of the episode. So who knows?”

Orci has already told us Weller is playing a new character they created. So The character he played in Enterprise will not be in the movie, unless Orci lied, which he says he didn’t/doesn’t.

However, Weller could be playing a relative of Paxton’s and technically considered a new original character, even though it is based on one from canon. I would personally still consider such a related character canon, but it’s open for interpretation I’m sure … Especially if they are trying to hide his identity. You cast Weller and say he’s playing a canon character and that’s pretty much all you need to guess John Paxton.

48. CmdrR - December 26, 2012

45 – sean.
Um, that would have been great. A la “Immunity Syndrome.”
But, um… nope. We saw Vulcan in the Vegan sky. That wasn’t Spock a-feelin’ it. We were shown it.

49. Richard Daystrom - December 26, 2012

#44 Exactly!

Vulcan didn’t even have a moon and they decided to show Vulcan that close from Delta Vega.

50. LogicalLeopard - December 26, 2012

44.

That is what it looked like during the meld. It was probably an amalgamation of what Kirk may have seen and what Spock may have felt. Spock COULDN’T have seen it with his eyes, just like we couldn’t see Mars implode from here without naked eyes so clearly. Delta Vega would have to be a moon of Vulcan to see it that clearly, and then it would have been sucked in.

51. Shunnabunich - December 26, 2012

@44/48/49: Funnily enough, that’s one of the few parts of ST09 (besides the beginning) that I had no problem with, and that lots of other fans seem to go nuts over. When we saw Spock witnessing Vulcan’s annihilation from Delta Vega, it was in the middle of a MIND MELD SEQUENCE. In other words, what Spock conveyed to Kirk in the meld (a.k.a. what we saw on-screen in that sequence) may have been coloured by metaphor and the inherent “fuzziness” of organic memories. Spock wasn’t *actually* zipping between star systems in seconds flat between each shot, either, was he? It’s tantamount to a dream sequence.

52. Bucky - December 26, 2012

I like six months, it still gives the characters and setting a “new car smell” but you can still cram in a ton of comics, novels (if the shelved ones are ever released) and videogames and whathave you

53. Robman007 - December 26, 2012

@38….you seriously take everything that Spock did in TOS to be..serious? Spock was the ultimate plot device. Can’t blind him, why? Inner Eyelides. Need to break outta jail…Spock can use his “vulcan mind probe” to will the guard into letting them out. Poison dart shooting plants and Vaul “lightning bolts” and immunity to vampire clouds…his vulcan phisiology and blood type. KIll him in a movie..no problemo, he can just put his soul into the good doctor and blamo, insta-revive.

Actually…both Spocks and even Sarek were pretty shaken up and doing things they usually would not do after Vulcan was destroyed.

I loved that plot device. Great way to shake things up, blowing up a fictional planet. Can lead to some great stories.

54. Bucky - December 26, 2012

Also I don’t get how people can say that six months is not enough time to have the comics and videogame still be considered “canon”. Say what? I’ve read 12 issues of the IDW series and almost all of those stories take place over a few hours or, at most, a day or two.

55. Robman007 - December 26, 2012

“Of course Into Darkness won’t be TOS, any more than TWOK is TOS. TOS was lightning in a bottle.”

Actually, there was ONE Star Trek movie that came close to being TOS style.

Star Trek V.

Yes, that had plenty of great TOS moments and felt very much like TOS. Kirk/Spock/McCoy moments, plenty of hammy Kirk speeches, Fist fights, action scenes, bad special effects, omnipotent beings who want the Enterprise, dastardly Klingon commander trying to get Kirk, Spock/McCoy arguments and name calling, “tall ship and a star to steer her by”….very TOS. Almost a fitting finale to Season 3.

56. Robman007 - December 26, 2012

@54….exactly. It’s Space Travel. You can go to alot of worlds going at Warp Speed. Several weeks or months went by and the original Enterprise had plenty of adventures.

57. Lurker - December 26, 2012

53 Roboman: How dare you make sense! Don’t you know only TOS could make stuff up as they went along? ( We won’t mention all those TNG plots magically being resolved in the last 3 minutes).

58. kmart - December 26, 2012

The idea that losing Vulcan would change the way Fed and Starfleet work and think about stuff is maybe the ONLY thing of interest I’ve heard, as it echoes Jack Sowards’ original take on Starfleet changing right before TREK 2, abandoning the ‘explore strange new worlds’ notion in favor of protecting its borders. The idea was to put Kirk at odds with his whole life, since all of his I’m an explorer stuff would be history, and he’d be questioning his value.

They threw all that out by the time Meyer rewrote things, maybe even before, but I’ve always thought that would be a great aspect to explore, plus it is maybe the only way to justify how retro Starfleet & Fed became in the later movies (esp SFS & TUC) in terms of political paranoia type ‘tudes.

The Abramsverse already seemed pretty overmilitary, but the Vulcan event could have pushed them into a STARSHIP TROOPERS type reality. Then again all that would mean they wouldn’t be worried about the PD, and yet that does seem to be an element in this.

In fact, I wonder if it is THE element in this, perhaps the antagonist saw a world destroyed because of the prime directive and wants to show everybody the error of their ways (it would make him the hero of the piece to me, because I agree with ST novel villain Omne when he suggests the PD is a policy of mass murder.) It’s way too good of an idea for these folks though, so I hope I’m wrong, because I hate to see a good notion squandered (remember how TNG pretty much threw away the discovery of a Dyson Sphere as background to their Scotty story? It’s like Herb Wright said, if you can’t do SF as the a-plot on Trek, where can you do SF as an A-plot?)

59. Jack - December 26, 2012

58. Hmmm. ;).

60. Darkthunder - December 26, 2012

If the sudden and aggressive attack on Vulcan (which ultimately led to it’s destruction), is analogous to the Attack on the World Trade Center on 9-11, I foresee a few possibilities that “Starfleet” and/or the Federation might take (also based on real life analogy);

1. Better equip member worlds with defensive grids, orbital weapons platforms etc

2. Allow every member world to retain their own “Fleet”. It’s obvious that “Starfleet” can’t be everywhere at all times. If memory serves, it was suggested in DS9 that the Bajoran Militia would be integrated into Starfleet when/if the Bajoran species is added to the Federation. That suggests that other member worlds also fore-go the use of their own fleets or military personnel, in favor of joining Starfleet. Which also explains the total lack of mentioning the “Andorian Imperial Guard” in post-ENT tv shows.

Overall, i’d picture Starfleet taking a decidedly more militaristic role, much like the US has done post-9-11. Trek’s greatest asset has always been the hope that we can better ourselves, striving to improve our species as a whole, trough both knowledge, technology and behavior. Following the destruction of Vulcan, I have no doubt Starfleet would take the attack as a sounding horn for military action. They were already on that path before Vulcan’s destruction (when Nero destroyed the Kelvin). The planet’s destruction has just given Starfleet a much needed “shove” into the military role (and not just in the scientific/exploratory role).

61. Jack - December 26, 2012

55. Agreed. I get tired of the ‘Trek was only about science and philosophy — and never action” revisionism.

62. The Sinfonian - December 26, 2012

@14 Earth only featured in Voyage Home and First Contact?? Say what?

I must have been dreaming in ’79 when TMP came out, and Vejur was about to destroy. the. Earth.

Movies with Earth scenes:
TMP, TWOK, TSFS, TVH, TFF, TUC, FC, Nem, ST, STID
Movies with no Earth scenes:
Insurrection?

Not exactly a problem I think ot have STID involve Earth.

63. The Sinfonian - December 26, 2012

Generations of course, starts with the Enterprise-B leaving Earth for a joy ride.

64. Hugh Hoyland - December 26, 2012

I’ll assume by Damon Lindelof’s statement about the 9-11 impact that the United Federation is now a full blown police state?

Art imitating life so to speak ;)

65. Disinvited - December 26, 2012

#53. Robman007

To be fair, that their souls were moveable and one human body (Chapel’s) could store a Vulcan’s soul as well as the original was all layed out in ToS episode: RETURN TO TOMORROW.

66. Drij - December 26, 2012

Blowing up the planet with red matter is still one of the dumbest things ever in a movie.

67. Phil - December 26, 2012

I’m not seeing this – setting aside the inevitible debate on how the war on terror was prosecuted, the reason we are still talking about it ten years later is because the nice people who brought us suicide jetliner dive bombers are still being pursued. They operated as an organized stateless army, with goals and objectives. Star Trek’s Nero was a rogue individual, with no stated goals except revenge. Nero, the threat, was removed, what happened to Vulcan, while a terrorist attack, really would not have lasting reprocussions beyond caring for the survivors – a better comparison would be to the Oklahoma City bombing. I get that he’s trying to paint that there are reprocussions to the attack, but would the response be any different if the planet had been wiped out by a natural disaster, like a gamma ray burst? Vulcan society isn’t defined by the rock they lived on, but by it’s people. If the Federation is being strained by the loss of the planet, but not all its Vulcan citizens, this Federation isn’t all it’s cracked up to be.

68. Punkspocker - December 26, 2012

As a child, I felt TOS episodes like Assignment Earth made it seem possible for us to someday be in space. I like that the writers feel Earth has its place.

69. Moputo Jones - December 26, 2012

Every JJ movie has the same basic plot – someone or something is out to get revenge for something that the military or government did to it.

70. Shilliam Watner (Click to see an Alien attack) - December 26, 2012

I find myself not being too happy with the story taking place on Earth. I hope the film is not too Earthbound and involves some good amount of star trekking. Still, like I’ve said before, as long as they make a great movie, I don’t care if the whole thing takes place in Prosser, WA.

The fact that they realize the destruction of Vulcan would have a major impact on the universe shows at least that they aren’t too stupid. Ignoring the ramifications of such an event would have been foolish. At least they believe in some sense of continuity.

I believe there’s hope!

71. Robman007 - December 26, 2012

Oh yeah, I forgot about the Spock/Chapel deal. I just watched that the other day while wrapping presents.

Maybe next film will have Kirk and Spock fight a people modeled after 1930’s Nazi Germany…or land on a planet that is a D minus on a Richter scale of cultures.

72. Picard's Slappy Patty - December 26, 2012

Perhaps the Abramverse is the formation of the more militaristic Mirror, Mirror-verse. Also, is Peter Weller playing Khan, who may get snuffed out early, thus leading to the vengeance seeked by Johnny Harrison?

I must say that I am deeply disappointed to read that we are going to get more earth-bound stories. Whatever happened to exploring strange, new worlds? The alien and exotic seem to have been put aside long ago in Trek movies, which is a shame.

73. Picard's Slappy Patty - December 26, 2012

May I add that earth-bound stories has more to do with a lack of imagination from the writers, rather than having to make stories relatable to the audience. This certainly was not an issue of concern for Star Wars.

74. Mad Man - December 26, 2012

Maybe the destruction of Vulcan was an inside job…Did they find signs that the leaders of the Federation wanted Vulcan to be destroyed?

75. Picard's Slappy Patty - December 26, 2012

The crew is who the audience relates to, just as the audience relates to the Hobbits in the alien, unfamiliar world of Lord Of The Rings. Never underestimate the intelligence of the audience.

76. Nasty Nas of Vulcan - December 26, 2012

I enjoyed the interview. These guys get beat up way too much especially by these moronic Trek purists. I am glad they created a universe that is not chained to the original one.

They put great thought and creativity into this film and as a Trek fan it is most appreciated.

I am glad they are dealing with the destruction of Vulcan. I wondered how that would impact the story. In the Prime Universe Vulcan was a major player in the Federation and to be wiped out like that had to impact that universe and the balance of power.

In the prime universe Vulcan served as a check when it came to other powers. In this universe that check has been wiped out and I am glad they are dealing with it. Nero is a bastard by the way. Anyway I am looking so forward to this movies. It is going to be awesome.

77. dmduncan - December 26, 2012

In Star Wars, the destruction of Alderaan has NO meaningful consequences. Glad to learn that’s not the case here.

78. Jerry Modene - December 26, 2012

FWIW, one of the early “claims to fame” of Star Wars, before its release in 1977, was that it was going to be the first SF film that never mentions the planet Earth.

79. Trekboi - December 26, 2012

JJ seems to be confused with which Gene Roddenbery show he is producing.
it’s “STAR TREK” not “EARTH: Final Conflict”

80. norez - December 26, 2012

Not wild about the trailer, which looks impressive… for a Chris Nolan evil-is-coming-to-town film. it doesn’t parse as ‘Trek to me. The underwater stuff looks… worrisome – there are scenes that take place in outer space too, right? I seem to remember Star Trek having something to do with space travel?

81. Harry Ballz - December 26, 2012

I’m only unhappy with one thing when I watch the new trailer. The exterior shots of the Enterprise. The exterior look of the ship was lousy in the last movie and it looks just as bad this time around. With special effects being so good these days, this is the best they can do? They are obviously spending a lot of money on these films, so why does this part look so phony? Every exterior shot of the ship REALLY pulls me out of the movie!

82. katie - December 26, 2012

On the one hand, they want to broaden Trek’s iternational appeal but, on the other, they are making it even more US-centric. Guess what, Lindelof? The rest of the world does not still talj about September 11th every day. We are long, long over it.

83. Picard's Slappy Patty - December 26, 2012

Whilst I appreciate that good Trek has always referred to real life issues, using SF as a safe base on which to comment, such as on race issues, the Vietnam War and so on, I cannot help but feel that Lindlof is being somewhat frivolous, regarding the tragedy of 9/11, by bluntly using it to clarify the metaphorical relationship to the premise of the new movie. Frankly, isn’t it a bit tawdry to compare the events of 9/11 with a Sci-Fi movie’s storyline? Again, we see an underestimation of the audience’s intelligence, where he assumes that we must have it all spelled out for us.

84. irishtrekkie - December 26, 2012

@82

kinda have to agree , whenever any of my american friends refer to how 9/11 changed everything or its lasting effect. it just feels very weird almost forced.

weird thing is i know people who are from places that have had far worse national disasters or prolonged periods of terrorist attacks or even full out civil wars. and they never bring that stuff up.

85. boborci - December 26, 2012

67. Phil

Even granting the narrative of events in the world as you see them, we got Bin Laden and we are still everywhere with our military.

86. boborci - December 26, 2012

69, Gone Fishing didn’t have that plot.

87. Anthony Pascale - December 26, 2012

Bob

was that a JJ burn?

BTW, I dont remember FELICITY having that plot but then again I dont think I ever watched FELICITY either. As I understand it, it was all about some girls hair.

88. JamfoFL - December 26, 2012

Sometimes I wonder if I’m watching the same trailers and reading the same articles as some others are… while it is clear that Earth will play a role in this movie, the entirety of the movie is hardly Earth-bound. The opening, as we all know, happens on a very alien world (Nibiru). Then there will be some action on Earth which will lead to a chase which ultimately ends on a “war-torn alien world” which many assume is Kronos. All things considered, a good portion of this movie may actually occur AWAY from Earth, even though events motivating such actions may originate on Earth.

And I don’t have a problem with the actions of the terrorist “Harrison” character focusing on Earth, either. Why?

Well… we look at the actions of real-life terrorists, where do they strike? New York. Washington. London. Los Angeles. Never in Des Moines or some Podunk town you’ve never heard of. That’s because a terrorist is looking for maximum impact to strike the most fear and cause the most damage possible. Why hit Washington? Because the government is housed there. Why hit New York? Because it’s one of the largest financial centers in the world.

So why does that justify focusing on Earth for a story about a future terrorist? Because certain things have been established in Trek lore, long before Trek 2009:

*Starfleet Headquarters is located in San Francisco.
*Starfleet Academy is also located in San Francisco.
*The Office of the President of the Federation is located in Paris.

So, on one planet, you’ve got the center of Command and Control for the entire Starfleet AND the office of the President for the Executive Branch of the ENTIRE Federation. Given all that, and maybe more, any terrorist trying to shake the foundations of the Federation and Starfleet would be a fool to attack anywhere else!

This is a conceit because Star Trek has always tried to ground its stories in the human condition and make Earth maybe just a tad more important than anyone else. And this isn’t something new… these “facts” can trace back to the very first Star Trek movie and have only been reinforced with each movie made. The fact that Earth has been somewhat of a target can be directly traced to the importance our little globe has in the pantheon of Star Trek history.

So it doesn’t bother me that part of this story takes place on Earth. In fact, I’m actually glad to see the story take on an Earthly location outside of the United States, even if that city is a victim to an act of terrorism.

And the fact that that act of terrorism will lead to a chase across the stars will get our heroes in space soon enough…

Just my two cents!

89. boborci - December 26, 2012

anthony – right! i did watch Felicity and you’re right!

90. Curious Cadet - December 26, 2012

@87 Anthony Pascale,
“I dont remember FELICITY having that plot but then again I dont think I ever watched FELICITY either. As I understand it, it was all about some girls hair.”

Felicity was Abrams first experimentation with alternate timelines, parallel universes, and hairstyles of the future.

91. Trek was born on TV - December 26, 2012

Much has changed post 9/11;

*Our intelligence has become much more sophisticated, and covert.
*Our leaders have reserved the right to to use the military preemptively- based on only a “presumed threat”
*Our military forces have grown by 20%
*The CIA has resorted to methods deemed unethical when interrogating enemy combatants.
*As American citizens we have had to give up certain civil liberties.
*etc.
And a lot of blame, and finger-pointing went on in the U.S. Government. Not to mention the fact that our military footing is different- more streamlined, and technologically orientated. And with Vulcan gone we are more vulnerable to espionage, and invasion. You can only imagine the ramifications… wow.

92. Anthony Pascale - December 26, 2012

So Bob, if destruction of Vulcan was 9/11, then what was the Narada attack on Kelvin? Gulf of Tonkin incident? It had to be pretty big thing in order to move Delta Vega all the way into the Vulcan system

I keeeeeed

93. boborci - December 26, 2012

USS Liberty.

I keeeeeeed”

94. Son of MJ - December 26, 2012

36 the bottany bay’s launch into space was BKD, (Before Kelvins Destruction) so no the Khan hints are not coming Fast and Furious.

95. Son of MJ - December 26, 2012

Anthony “Some girls Hair”? “Some girls Hair”? Thats freaking Keri Russell your talking about, lol :) Kerry is not just SOME GIRL
She’s THE GIRL, and that hair wow oh wow oh wow.
lol

:)

Also that show had the pink power ranger herself Amy Jo Johnson.

Hey BobOrci maybe you could suggest JJ consider casting Keri or Amy in a part on the next movie after into darkness.

Loved Keri’s small part in M:I:III

96. jesustrek - December 26, 2012

Hey bob and petter weller…who is in the movie??? BC Young???

97. LJ - December 26, 2012

@88 My sentiments exactly. I’d add that it’s also good to see how Earth itself has developed between now and he 23rd century.

I also fail to understand the comparisons some are making to the SW universe. No, they don’t have Earth, but they have their own equivalent: Tatooine. Isn’t Tatooine in every single movie? At least there are good reasons for featuring Earth, as JamfoFL stated above (and I’m looking forward to seeing where London fits in the Federation picture), but why did SW feel the need to go back to the same backwater dump every movie?

98. olly - December 26, 2012

I still feel Cumberbatch is Khan and the keep them wanting more reference in the interview is because he will play full on Khan in the third Star Trek film. Maybe thats why Benicio dropped out because he didnt want to be tied to 2 films (or 2 films for the money that was on the table).

99. Jim Nightshade - December 27, 2012

boborci….damn….i just realized that Fringe and Hawaii Five ohh both have the same plot as stid! So is Olivia Spock? Wow thats deep! heheh

100. raffie - December 27, 2012

Lol, don’t be stupid, Vulcan isn’t destroyed. Watch -any- ST show, Vulcan is there.

101. Jim Nightshade - December 27, 2012

hey bob i remember u mentioning to me you met whitley strieber which was awesome…have you ever seen jessie venturas conspiracy theory series on trutv? i thought of you when watching…i never was one for believing these but jessis show is truly scary , and whitley had his share of govt abuse as well….sigh…wheres our positive trek world of the future?

102. captain_neill - December 27, 2012

at least they are acknowledging it, but I still hated the decision to destroy Vulcan in the last film.

Also the Xindi’ s test weapon attack was a 9/11 situation as well don’t forget.

103. Aix - December 27, 2012

@98 Eh, I don’t think so. It is likely a one-movie stint. Hope Cumby has a satisfying demise though. Wonder how much del Toro wants. Goes to show if one’s an Oscar winner, you can unashamedly demand higher pay. Nevertheless, I think hiring Cumby is the bargain of the year.

104. Optimistic Doodle - December 27, 2012

“Anything that happens in our new timeline has to walk in lockstep with Vulcan was destroyed […]? And what is the impact of that on Spock?”

Obviously that had to be seriously addressed in this movie, no secret there ;-)

The Volcano (‘Vulcan’) scene appears to going to be part of that story. Spock perhaps walking around with a death wish, or being restless or so. And seeing his friends & “Earth the only home I have left” in danger, may open the scar…

105. Harry Ballz - December 27, 2012

The reason Spock enters the volcano is simple…..

As a child he would spend summers at Lake T’poutandillsmackyah on Vulcan.

With Vulcan now gone, and it being summertime, Spock is vacationing in the hottest place he can find!

Perfectly natural, once one thinks about it. No need to explode over it!

106. crazydaystrom - December 27, 2012

67. Phil-
“.. what happened to Vulcan, while a terrorist attack, really would not have lasting reprocussions beyond caring for the survivors – a better comparison would be to the Oklahoma City bombing. I get that he’s trying to paint that there are reprocussions to the attack, but would the response be any different if the planet had been wiped out by a natural disaster, like a gamma ray burst? Vulcan society isn’t defined by the rock they lived on, but by it’s people. If the Federation is being strained by the loss of the planet, but not all its Vulcan citizens, this Federation isn’t all it’s cracked up to be”

The Oklahoma City bombing a better comparison? I think not, but I won’t argue that here. But a race’s ENTIRE PLANET DESTROYED and billions of people killed and you reduce that to the loss of the ‘rock’ they lived on?!? I think that event would be (is) of MUCH greater import and resonate with significant repercussions for not just the Vulcan people but the Federation as a whole and possibly beyond. I for one am glad Vulcan’s destruction is not being glossed over. I’M still feeling the loss.

107. saavik001 - December 27, 2012

Yeah, when Benedict was cast they had to change the villians name from Juan Harrison to John Harrison.

108. chrisfawkes.com - December 27, 2012

Star Wars did not have earth in it.

109. RAMA - December 27, 2012

55. STV was nothing like the Star Trek I knew..ST09 was much closer to TOS.

110. Sebastian S. - December 27, 2012

# 66 drij~

How is it any more dumb than creating a planet with a Genesis torpedo? Both ideas are scientifically ludicrous; as is beaming and warp drive. It’s fantasy; space opera. One shouldn’t look to space opera for physics lessons, because it’s primary goal is entertainment.

I enjoy ST as fun, not as PBS’ Nova….

# 15 John~

Yes, 9/11 was an inside job…. if you were inside Al-Qaeda, that is. Why do people always assume great tragedies (the Kennedy assassination, 9/11, etc) are always vast conspiracies? I suppose it’s because the truth (that we are really THAT vulnerable) is just too terrifying for some, so we invent comfortable fiction to wrap ourselves in, and assure ourselves that the assailants couldn’t have done it without ‘inside help.’ 9/11 happened because we didn’t listen to our intelligence. We were overconfident. Because it was (for the most part) unprecedented we didn’t adequately prepare ourselves.

I imagine in ST context, the Kelvin was the beginning of a new Federation arms race (after losing a vessel to a ridiculously powerful 24th century Romulan mining vessel), culminating in a much larger, more powerful USS Enterprise than the prime timeline (and better tech throughout the Federation… except for that damn engine room). Vulcan’s destruction would change the Federation at it’s very core (as would the near loss of Earth). The new timeline as far as I’m concerned is wide open with new possibilities now.

I’m really looking forward to the new movie. After seeing the 9 minute preview (in 3D IMAX, no less) it’s even more exciting now that I see that it won’t just be a ‘Space Seed/Wrath of Khan’ rehash.

The 9 minute teaser was a nice ‘stocking stuffer’ for Christmas.

Thanks, Bob! ;-)

111. Sebastian S. - December 27, 2012

# 105 Harry Ballz

LOL! ;-D

Actually, I thought that the Spock volcano mission smacked of Starfleet racism; “We need to stop the Volcano… oh, send the Volcanologist. We don’t have one of those? OK, send the Vulcan…. close enough.”

;-)

112. RAMA - December 27, 2012

110. People can’t accept that catastrophes happen to us without some complex reasoning…we try and create order where none necessarily exists. There are perfectly reasonable explanations for JFK inconsistencies for example, but people prefer to construct fantasies that fit their view of a complex time in American history, they can’t accept that one man–one nowhere nearly as accomplished as the man he killed–could devise his own complex reasoning for killing the president. We have seen since then how sociopaths and psychos can very easily come up with plans to fit their individual versions of events and justify all sorts of atrocities. Remember the DC Sniper? People thought it was in DC because it was political. It turned out to be an ex soldier trying to make his girlfriend’s eventual murder look like a random killing…and she lived near there.

I have no real problem with conspiracies in fiction, they make for good stories. I* can’t help but think JJ is applying his experience with Mission Impossible–in every case, even before JJ, those movies can’t be viewed by producers/writers as acceptable by modern Americans with IMF as a “good guy” organization, they have to have traitorous agents or the government itself go rogue. Same with Starfleet in Into Darkness.

113. crazydaystrom - December 27, 2012

110. Sebastian S –
“How is it any more dumb than creating a planet with a Genesis torpedo? Both ideas are scientifically ludicrous; as is beaming and warp drive. It’s fantasy; space opera. One shouldn’t look to space opera for physics lessons, because it’s primary goal is entertainment.”

Hear! Hear! Thumbs up! Applause and cheers!

But I have to ask, how DARE you be sensible, here of all places? Leave the ‘crazy’ to me, Bub. ;-)

114. Mel - December 27, 2012

Personally I think compared with the destruction of Vulcan in the Star Trek universe, the attacks on 11th September were nothing. On the day itself only a few thousand died. When Vulcan was destroyed, it was the end of the home planet of the Vulcans, billions died, a whole lot of history and cultural artefacts disappeared forever. A whole race was nearly decimated. And Vulcan was one of the founding members of the Federation, so it is not like it happened to a race whose disappearance wouldn’t be felt by other Federation races.

Of course there were some consequences to the attacks on the 11th September. The wars in Afghanistan and Iraq may not have happened then. (Although they may have simply happened later without them.) Both were very unequal fights. It took only a few days until the US army won. Their military was just so much superior. Then followed years of a occupation in which some natives tried to fight them off though guerilla tactics. The NATO lost at best only a few thousand people in those two wars. Casualties on both sides, including civilians deaths, may have been a few hundred thousands over the past 10+ years together. That doesn’t make those two wars particular bad compared to other historical wars between different countries or civil wars in a country. There were tons of other conflicts which much bigger death rates. And each year much more people are dying because of hunger or a lack of proper medical treatment in poor countries.

So putting the 11th September and what happened because of it into a historical context and compare it which what happened in other countries, it wasn’t such a big deal. Nothing like the destruction of Vulcan was for the Federation.

I think US Americans vastly overestimate the importance of the 11th September for the rest of the world. A lot of countries didn’t increase their military at all and if they did, then usually not because of Afghanistan or Iraq. A lot of countries are much more concerned with what is going on near their own borders than in countries far away, especially as Afghanistan and Iraq were never military powerhouses to begin with. The attack on the World Trade Center was practically a terrorist attack, something hard to prevent and which only needs a few people and not huge well equipped armies, which Afghanistan and Iraq never had.

The Middle East was also never a peaceful place in the past. Country vs. country, one Muslim group vs. another one, Muslims vs. Christians, secular/tolerant religious people vs. fundamental religious people, etc. The same is true for other places in the world, where this is happening. Nothing new and not really caused because of the 11th September.

For most people on this world nothing really changed in their daily lives contrary to what Lindelof said. If it would have never happened, most people’s lives would be exactly the same as today. He is only speaking from an US centric point of view.

The destruction of Vulcan should have bigger consequences for the whole Federation although I don’t know, if I like the whole conspiracy route inside of Starfleet. What happened to an optimistic future? Why isn’t the tragic event bringing everyone else closer together? Why doesn’t it have a uniting effect instead of a dividing effect? Why isn’t an OUTSIDE force simply trying to use this moment of weakness until the Federation managed to compensate the lost of Vulcan somewhat? Starfleet officers fighting against each other after these tragic events is just really sad and the opposite of being optimistic, although I am sure the Enterprise crew will win.

Hopefully the movie will still have a broad international appeal despite all of this. Most big blockbuster movies make about 60% of its gross outside of the USA. Star Trek 2009 made only 33% there ($128 millions), which indicates a lack of international appeal. I doubt that 11th September references in interviews will help this. Most people just want an entertaining scifi movie. Real life references aren’t needed, especially when those are so US centric. That won’t increase the appeal to international viewers.

115. Sebastian S. - December 27, 2012

# 113

crazydaystrom~

Next time I promise to try to leave all the ‘crazy’ to you. Or at least the stuff involving duo and multitronics (your field of expertise, no?). LOL. ;-D

# 112

I remember the DC sniper alright. I remember all the crackpot theories going around too (one even had a disgruntled senator at the heart of it). It’s just more comforting to look for patterns in randomness tragedy because, as you say, most of us feel the need to make order from chaos.

I don’t mind conspiracies in movies (and yes, they even happen in real life sometimes, too). But I don’t see them everywhere. What I do see is that more often than not, tragedies are usually perfect storms of many causes linking together; not just a convenient single ‘shadow’ group behind it all….

116. LogicalLeopard - December 27, 2012

100. raffie – December 27, 2012
Lol, don’t be stupid, Vulcan isn’t destroyed. Watch -any- ST show, Vulcan is there.

IT IS DESTROYED!!!! I SAW IT!!!!

– Sybok, from the third movie.

117. LogicalLeopard - December 27, 2012

109. RAMA – December 27, 2012
55. STV was nothing like the Star Trek I knew..ST09 was much closer to TOS.

*****************

Why is STV not like the Star Trek you knew? Lots of banter between the big three? Check. Misguided “bad guy” who has delusions of grandeur? Check. All powerful god-like “bad guy” who still gets defeated by the crew? Check. Sounds like TOS to me….

118. Jeyl - December 27, 2012

20. Jeff O’Connor “Please don’t go three-for-three with it though, sheesh.”

If you count Nemesis, we already are on three-for-three.

119. Phil - December 27, 2012

@106. You’re missing the point – Vulcan’s destruction was a singular event. Within hours the perpetrator of the crime had been dealt with. No mobilization of forces, no network of terror to deal with. The long lasting effects will deal with the rebuilding of a society, which tend to pull society together, not dealing with years of conflict in pursuit of terror, which is pulling society apart. I’m not downplaying the magnitude of the event, I’m just saying it’s a stretch to look at the Trek 09 story as a metaphor for 9/11.

120. crazydaystrom - December 27, 2012

113. –
Thank you Sebastian :-)

114. Mel –
I totally agree with about 98% of what you said (I put it that way because ‘oxy’ is the kind of ‘moron’ I am). But –

“What happened to an optimistic future? Why isn’t the tragic event bringing everyone else closer together? Why doesn’t it have a uniting effect instead of a dividing effect?”

I think all these things WILL happen and ultimately reconfirm Roddenberry’s optimistic future. In a JJ sorta way, of course.

121. LogicalLeopard - December 27, 2012

@106. You’re missing the point – Vulcan’s destruction was a singular event. Within hours the perpetrator of the crime had been dealt with. No mobilization of forces, no network of terror to deal with. The long lasting effects will deal with the rebuilding of a society, which tend to pull society together, not dealing with years of conflict in pursuit of terror, which is pulling society apart. I’m not downplaying the magnitude of the event, I’m just saying it’s a stretch to look at the Trek 09 story as a metaphor for 9/11.

*******************************************

Okay, lets look at it this way.

The destruction of a planet is a huge thing. Huge things demand huge responses, even if the perpetrator has been “dealt with.” I hate to bring it up, but in the case of these school shootings, the perpetrators are “dealt with” one way or another pretty immediately. But there’s still a response; calls for increased gun control, increased security, etc.

So in this case, you have a person from the future who comes back and DESTROYS Vulcan. Not to mention, wipes out a bunch of starships doing it. Whats to prevent other people from coming from the future and destroying planets? What about the weapons? The Romulans have been quiet (presumably) for a while. Are they developing super weapons over there now? Are they developing red matter?

And those are just questions for people who received the full Starfleet briefings. And really, Starfleet maybe doesn’t even know that. Did Kirk or Spock tell them about Spock Prime? Because basically, Kirk and Spock Prime are the only people that know the whole story. Did they debrief Spock Prime? Do they believe ANYTHING that Kirk or Spock Prime maybe told them?

And then you have the general public who probably only know this. A guy, rumored to be Romulan, took out a fleet, imploded Vulcan, and almost got Earth until he was stopped. For all they know, it could be present day Romulans. What government would tell the citizens that crazies from the future came back with advanced weapons to kill them all?

I see the 9/11 thing very clearly. But it’s important to remember that he said “9-11 level impact” he didn’t directly compare the two by saying something like “This is the Federation’s 9-11″

122. Moputo Jones - December 27, 2012

Woo hoo – boborci responded to one of my comments – even if he did burn me! Ha ha ha…

123. Mad Man - December 27, 2012

114. Mel – December 27, 2012

All good points. I still do not understand why Star Trek does not perform well outside the US. I look at something like Avatar which did really well outside the USand is hard-core sci-fi. I would think that Star Trek would have more international appeal since the Enterprise crew is made up of representatives of several different nations. I wonder if its just the spectacle of the 3D and CGI of Avatar and movies like Battleship that increase its appeal to non-Americans.

124. msn1701 - December 27, 2012

Sounds great to me! I’m glad they are honoring the old timeline though, for all you hardcore people. :P

125. crazydaystrom - December 27, 2012

119. Phil –
“You’re missing the point.”

Well Phil, your condescension notwithstanding, I don’t feel I’m missing your point, merely disagreeing with you. Did you miss my point? Perhaps. But I believe you merely disagree with me. In any case it’s all good my friend.

126. Admiral_Bumblebee - December 27, 2012

Where did Prime Spock get this fur jacket from in exile?

127. ME!! - December 27, 2012

@#5: It’s the opposite of what he stated previously because he’s playing ‘damage control’ due to all the fans (like myself) who were having a fit over the possibility that they were ignoring common sense and logic by changing stuff from before Nero’s interference.

128. LogicalLeopard - December 27, 2012

126. Admiral_Bumblebee – December 27, 2012
Where did Prime Spock get this fur jacket from in exile?

**************

Killed a taun-taun, obviously *L*

129. kmart - December 27, 2012

logical leopard, you are WAY too smart to be on this board for long.

As for Orci invoking the USS LIBERTY … if that is meant to be humorous, it’s pretty appalling (then again, i guess true to form.)

Talk about an incident that has always cried out for a good dramatization (in fact, the TNG spec I wrote that got me in to pitch unsuccessfully there was kind of my spin on the LIBERTY, like D.C.’s first take on what became THE ENTERPRISE INCIDENT.)

130. Christopher Roberts - December 27, 2012

126. @Admiral_Bumblebee “Where did Prime Spock get this fur jacket from in exile?”

Uncertain… but rumour has it, Zarabeth is covered from head to toe, in nothing but goosebumps.

131. BillT - December 27, 2012

I wonder what the destruction of Vulcan is going to do to Spock’s Pon Farr. If T’Pring is dead is Spock off the hook? It will be interesting to see him explain this to Uhura.

132. Robman007 - December 27, 2012

Did anyone happen to see the new Into Darkness Poster? Pretty sweet, or pretty silly. Either way, it will cause some arguements.

133. Reboot-the-reboot - December 27, 2012

FFS! When is Hollywood going to move on from referencing 9/11 in just about every genre movie?!? I’m sick to death of terrorist based stories now – move on from this era of gritty atrocity-based movies and begin a new era already…..! It’s being used as a story-telling metaphor waaayyyy too often now.

134. Curious Cadet - December 27, 2012

@121 LogicalLeopard,
“What about the weapons? The Romulans have been quiet (presumably) for a while. Are they developing super weapons over there now? Are they developing red matter?”

The Romulans don’t have to develop Red Matter. Per the IDW comics, they are in possession of the last remnants of it in the galaxy, confiscated from the vengeful Vulcans who attempted to destroy Romulus for Nero’s actions. They also have the blueprints for the Narada.

So yeah, I’d say the Federation has something to be concerned about.

135. Clinton - December 27, 2012

T-minus 141 days, ladies and gentlemen!

136. Planet Pandro - December 27, 2012

128.

And I thought they smelled bad on the outside!

137. SpockOut - December 27, 2012

Bob Orci,

If this is some lame attempt at digging at American Imperialism then booo! Captain Kirk was proud of his American heritage in TOS and so am I!

138. Disinvited - December 27, 2012

#28. Schultz, TrekBoi

I think GENESIS II is the exclusively earthbound Roddenberry production that you seek.

139. SpockOut - December 27, 2012

For real, if this turns out to be some Oliver Stone nonsense….argh!

140. Gilberto - December 27, 2012

Just speculation, guys.
.
End of “Into Darness”: After John Harrison showed almost unbeatable powers, he was defeated with brilliance (but at a very high price) by Kirk. The truth is then revealed. Harrison is a mere herald to a much more powerful person: a genetically engineered (and CGI produced) Khan, and a small army of men just like Harrison. Beaten, tired, lost friends, with the Federation at the brink of destruction, Kirk barely has enough strength to understand what he has yet to face. End “a la” Empire Strikes Back. If a simple herald made such a damage, how can a beaten-up man, a planet on its knees, a partially destroyed ship and her tired crew face such an evil? Next movie: “Star Trek Into Light”.

141. Disinvited - December 27, 2012

#71. Robman007

I think the first 9 minutes of the 2013 sequel has provided the civilization of which you speak. But if you are still talking about patterns in the first six movies, I can only think of V’s fandance planet. Only one other candidate to speak of, but since I was a living part of that civlization, we won’t go there.

You mention PATTERNS OF FORCE. Would love to see someone explain Bones’ boot amnesia.

#87. Anthony Pascale and boborci

You guys are typing like you time jumped over the whole Alice Eve haircut broohaha.

BTW keep your eyes peeled on FOX’s RAISING HOPE for a BTTF homage/parody including a DeLorean and guest star.

142. Damian - December 27, 2012

7–I just highly doubt a character portrayed in Enterprise would figure prominently in a movie. I would be absolutely shocked. While none of the current team has been derogatory about Enterprise, they have tried to put some distance between themselves and the spin-offs. I loved the Terra Prime episodes of Enterprise and always thought them a more fitting finale, but I just don’t see that happening.

Besides Paxton probably would be dead by now. He had a genetic disease that was going to kill him.

143. Disinvited - December 27, 2012

#126. Admiral_BumbleBee, LogicalLeopard

When Spock goes native, I don’t think any DV ice monster stands a chance. Either that or took a page out of CITY ON THE EDGE OF FOREVER and stole Scotty’s laundry.

144. Damian - December 27, 2012

I’d love more strange new worlds based stories too. But unfortunately, if you look at box office receipts, Earth sells. Star Trek IV, First Contact and Star Trek (2009) all threatened Earth in some way. They were all high selling and popular films across the board.

145. TheMightyChip - December 27, 2012

@140 Gilberto – Replace Khan with literally anybody else and I would be totally on board with that storyline.

IMO, there is absolutely no reason to bring Khan into the movie other than to say “see guys we totally saw some of the canon.” If they want to do a story about the Augments then awesome – they are very imposing villains with a ton of room for complex development. But that brings me to my point: It’s my understanding that there were hundreds, maybe thousands of augments during the eugenics wars. Why focus on the one we’ve already seen, and who by any stretch of logic should be floating on an ancient ship in the middle of nowhere? If they want to do an augment story they should explore all the others – not just hop back to Khan for the sake of recognition.

That being said, after all the new information that’s been coming in I’ve revised my theory and I no longer think this movie has anything to do with augments. I still think that Kirk gets in trouble for breaking the Prime Directive on Niberu (sp?) to save Spock, and SF brass orders his butt into a shuttlecraft and immediately recalls him back to Earth for disciplinary hearings. I still believe that while Kirk is at those hearings, Harrison blows up SF HQ and all the starships currently anchored in the Sol system. I still believe Pike delivers his “your ego is gonna kill your crew” speech at those hearings and is then killed in the attack. And I still believe that during this attack the Enterprise was on her way home to pick up Kirk when the attack happens, and thus was at just the right range to be severely damaged by the fleet destruction, but not close enough to actually be destroyed. herself. Since Kirk and the Enterprise are the only captain/ship to have survived, it’s up to them to hunt Harrison down. What happens after that I’m not longer sure of.

Just my two cents, but the references to Kirk being relieved of command seem to confirm it (maybe the Enterprise wasn’t on her way home to pick up Kirk, but her new captain after Kirk was relieved of duty. But then the unnamed new captain gets killed in the attack and Kirk assumes command again because he’s the only one left.)

I do really REALLY like the idea of this movie setting up a devastating situation and then there being a “Star Trek Into Light” to conclude it on an epic and hopeful note.

146. Disinvited - December 27, 2012

#76. Nasty Nas of Vulcan.

Did you even bother to read the article? Lindelof just tied their efforts to all the Prime events that happened prior to Kirk’s birth. That doesn’t read as unchained to me.

You are right about Nero. We know the Romulan spies must have still been there on Vulcan. Did Nero warn them or beam them out? I mean he claimed he was all about saving the Romulans, but when the chips were down, did he?

147. J - December 27, 2012

@26
“@Anthony – Except that some people haven’t seen the nine minute preview”

So? There are screencaps showing the 2259 ‘stardate’ *cough* and it’s definitely mentioned in one of the numerous articles here on trekmovie.

148. Brevard - December 27, 2012

Yeah, we get it, the Federation is a big, dark, evil place. Terrible things always happen. No one is safe. Terrorism lives. Yee-haw. Yeah, next Starfleet will be battling the Evil Empire. “Kirk, I am your father!” And they need to put more earth stuff in the movies for “relatability”? Seriously? Almost 50 years worth of ST movies and television would tell us that folks relate just fine to the original mission of the Enterprise–to be explorers of other planets and regions. God help us.

149. Matias 47 - December 27, 2012

Lot’s of interesting comments on this thread. So here’s my cent and a half (the recession, you know).

These are all my humble opinions.

On a terrorism storyline: While I do understand some folks being tired of the topic, it IS used alot, allegorical stories were always a part of the original show and though M. Lindelof chose 9/11 as his reference (an unfortunatly American centered one) terrorism has been a part of the world’s reality for a very long time and is certainly a valid topic for Star Trek.

Vulcan: I would be very disappointed if the destruction of Vulcan and its aftermath did not form a major story point in the new film. This was genocide on an immense scale. Vulcan was a founding member of the Federation. Presumably the loss would have a major effect on the economy (whatever the economics of the Federeation are, I’ve always wondered) and the defense of the Federation. Add to that the loss of the scientific and technological contributions to the interstellar society contributed by Vulcan, which I assume would be substantial, and you have the basis for serous problems. Then you have the potential effects on the Vulcan culture. What does this do to their logical philosophy? Are they still peaceful?

Now, how does the Federation react? With the same paranoia seen here in the US after 9/11? Probably not, as pointed out in other posts the perpetrator was dealt with pretty quickly. But, you still have to wonder how the Federation’s enemies, Klingons, Romulans and whoever else are in the JJ-verse, are going to react. Is the loss of Vulcan looked at as an opportunity to attack? I mean, what would happen to our world, politically and otherwise, if, say, Germany was totally destroyed? Or, England? Japan? China? The US? There’s a lot of story potential there.

So does the Federation’s weakened state create a more militant and military Starfleet? Does Section 31 or Starfleet Intelligence go a little nuts? Is that where “Harrison” comes from? I kind of hope so. That kind of darkness could be the real threat that needs our heroes to deal with.

Earth and “relatability:”

I don’t buy it. But, we have it, so I really hope we get away from it in the next movie. Given that there is one, of course.

150. LogicalLeopard - December 27, 2012

129. kmart – December 27, 2012
logical leopard, you are WAY too smart to be on this board for long.
********************
*LOL* That’s because I’m an augment. As soon as Anthony catches up to me, I’ll be banned…

151. J - December 27, 2012

@56 “exactly. It’s Space Travel. You can go to alot of worlds going at Warp Speed.”

And yet, ST2009 and STID stick to Earth.

152. Uberbot - December 27, 2012

#85 — Are you sure we got Bin Laden? I never saw a body…did you? They say in soap operas if you don’t see the body they aren’t dead…maybe that’s true in real life as well.

153. LogicalLeopard - December 27, 2012

@121 LogicalLeopard,
“What about the weapons? The Romulans have been quiet (presumably) for a while. Are they developing super weapons over there now? Are they developing red matter?”

The Romulans don’t have to develop Red Matter. Per the IDW comics, they are in possession of the last remnants of it in the galaxy, confiscated from the vengeful Vulcans who attempted to destroy Romulus for Nero’s actions. They also have the blueprints for the Narada.

So yeah, I’d say the Federation has something to be concerned about.

**************************

Really? Where did they get the Red Matter and blueprints from? You know, the Romulans were already tough to deal with. Remember that weapon they had in TOS which almost destroyed you with one hit? Red matter makes it worse.

154. LogicalLeopard - December 27, 2012

151. J – December 27, 2012

@56 “exactly. It’s Space Travel. You can go to alot of worlds going at Warp Speed.”

And yet, ST2009 and STID stick to Earth

********************************

Uhm ST2009 occurred on Earth, Vulcan, Delta Vega, and space. The locations were pretty well balanced, in my opinion. And we know that STID takes place on Earth, Nibiru, Qo’noS, and in space. So what if this one has a focus on Earth? It’s not like the whole movie is taking place there. Did anyone complain that ST IV was heavily on Earth? Or Insurrection? Those movies are almost completely Earthbound. This movie doesn’t look like they’ll be on Earth for much more than half the movie, but that’s a guess.

155. Disinvited - December 27, 2012

#146.

Come to think of it, Nero didn’t seem to get his head around that Hobus was/would be, still a threat.

And even though we know Klingon scientists get no respect, hard to imagine they incarcerated Nero for 25 years and got nothing?

156. Star Trek Nemesis blows, is the point - December 27, 2012

@8.

I think the Kelvin is more analagous to the twin embassy attacks in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998. That’s the first time Bin Laden was known to the American public. The destruction of the Kelvin was the first time Nero was known. It was an event that began to reshape American national security interests. It was an event that began to reshape Starfleet into a militaristic force. 9/11 threw America into war. Does the loss of Vulcan do the same thing in a relative fashion? Perhaps Starfleet is on more of a permanent war footing, which leads to John Harrison trying to destabilize the Klingon Empire for some reason? Maybe the Klingons are more friendly and he’s part of the conspiracy seen in Star Trek VI?

157. MJ - December 27, 2012

Love most of this, but this is one of the dumbest lines I have ever heard from a Trek producer:

“Feel that Earth “needed to play more of a role” in their Star Trek movies due to “relatability””

Really? You’ve got to be F’ing kidding me? WTF????

158. LogicalLeopard - December 27, 2012

Now, how does the Federation react? With the same paranoia seen here in the US after 9/11? Probably not, as pointed out in other posts the perpetrator was dealt with pretty quickly. But, you still have to wonder how the Federation’s enemies, Klingons, Romulans and whoever else are in the JJ-verse, are going to react. Is the loss of Vulcan looked at as an opportunity to attack? I mean, what would happen to our world, politically and otherwise, if, say, Germany was totally destroyed? Or, England? Japan? China? The US? There’s a lot of story potential there.

So does the Federation’s weakened state create a more militant and military Starfleet? Does Section 31 or Starfleet Intelligence go a little nuts? Is that where “Harrison” comes from? I kind of hope so. That kind of darkness could be the real threat that needs our heroes to deal with.

**********************************

Or better yet, what would have happened in the US if, say, a state like California was leveled somehow during the 1980s and the Cold War?

159. MJ - December 27, 2012

“FFS! When is Hollywood going to move on from referencing 9/11 in just about every genre movie?!? I’m sick to death of terrorist based stories now – move on from this era of gritty atrocity-based movies and begin a new era already…..! It’s being used as a story-telling metaphor waaayyyy too often now.”

Yea, I mean this would have been topical in say 2003-2007, but we all know the lessons learned now. I am getting a tad concerned that this movie is going to be more about Orci’s conspiracy crap and associated wack politics being slammed in our faces than being an actual Star Trek movie.

160. Robman007 - December 27, 2012

@ 109…where did I even say that Trek 11 was nothing like TOS. It was similar in alot of ways.

And what TOS have you been watching? Seriously? Trek V was about the closest of any of the films to TOS…even closer then 2 and 2 had a recurring villain for the ONLY time in series. We even had a performance by William Shatner that was on the same level as TOS…he forgot mostly about the “mature” Kirk from 2-4 and went back to the cowboy mentality of TOS…Dastardly Klingons, Omnipotent Gods that Kirk/Spock Defeat, Kirk/Spock/McCoy moments, McCoy picking on Spock, the ship getting captured, bad visuals, singing, the GREAT BARRIER, delusional semi-villain…..Shatner acting….yeah, Trek 11 was very TOS at times, but nothing comes close to 5.

FYI, When TOS is referenced, that means the original 1966-1969 Star Trek, not the Star Trek that aired from 1987-1994, nor the film series from 1979-1991…or the re-imagined “peace and love” galaxy where even the Klingons are honorable (huh?) it became in 87 either.

161. Disinvited - December 27, 2012

#154. Logicaleopard

INSURRECTION earthbound? I think your augmentations are failing.

162. LogicalLeopard - December 27, 2012

158. MJ – December 27, 2012
“FFS! When is Hollywood going to move on from referencing 9/11 in just about every genre movie?!? I’m sick to death of terrorist based stories now – move on from this era of gritty atrocity-based movies and begin a new era already…..! It’s being used as a story-telling metaphor waaayyyy too often now.”

Yea, I mean this would have been topical in say 2003-2007, but we all know the lessons learned now. I am getting a tad concerned that this movie is going to be more about Orci’s conspiracy crap and associated wack politics being slammed in our faces than being an actual Star Trek movie.

**************************

If you’ll notice, Lindelof stated that the destruction of Vulcan had a “9/11 level impact” on the Federation. He did not say that the current film was an allegory for 9/11, or followed that line.

As far as the actual references to terrorism in this movie, well, it may be overused, but it’s a legitimate plot device, even in Trek. Wasn’t the Picard clone a terrorist? Mr. Stretchy Skin from Insurrection? Sybok didnt’ commit terror, but it was that same old story of “Bad guy with a noble cause”, The conspiracy in STVI could be considered terrorism.

163. Robman007 - December 27, 2012

When did most Trek fans learn to be so closed minded…..or lack a sense of humor.

Folks have not even seen the movie, yet are getting tissy about rumors, half truths and theories.

Seriously…watch the film first, not just the first 9 min, then make one of the beyond bizzare statements of “it’s not MY Trek”

So ironic that Trek fans panned crap like Inssurection, yet that is the type of film that 90% of folks want to see…news flash, those movies DONT MAKE MONEY. In order for the “perfect” version of your TV show to come back on the air, these films have to make money. Trek fans alone cannot support a film franchise, just ask any of the actors from TNG. They have to appeal to the mass audience. They have to be relatable. They have to be exciting, they can’t be yet anothe rehash of the crew landing on some silly planet where the locals are both male and female and the planet has some strange atmosphere that makes folks live forever….just…can’t…do…it…again. Done to death already and the every day movie watcher won’t waste a dime on this film. They will go waste the dime on yet another silly fast and furious film.

164. Robman007 - December 27, 2012

@161…don’t bother.

Some folks have already reviewed and catagorized this film on nothing more then Fanboy rumors. The verdict is in and it’s not your Star Trek. It won’t explore new worlds, it will feature mindless action and it’s bad. You can’t change the view…you can only laugh at the over dramatic and hammy responses that would make even Shatner cringe

165. al - December 27, 2012

Every Trek Film contained Earth. Setting the story on Earth or a part of it doesn’t bother me in the slightest. As long as we get great visuals besides the usual Star fleet Headquarters in San Francisco; I’m happy.
With the budget they are giving these new films, why not ?
I for one am glad Trek is getting the big budget treatments that other movies in hollywood have gotten for years.

166. Geodesic - December 27, 2012

I still think the villain is Sybok with a boobjob.

167. LogicalLeopard - December 27, 2012

160. Disinvited – December 27, 2012
#154. Logicaleopard

INSURRECTION earthbound? I think your augmentations are failing.

****************************************

I meant First Contact.

Or did I?

Could this all be a psychological game of cat and mouse? Is my hair parted like Gary Mitchell, or Khan? Or maybe Richard Daystrom, becuase with my hair type I can’t really manage a part unless it’s shaved in…..

168. Curious Cadet - December 27, 2012

@153. LogicalLeopard,
“Where did they get the Red Matter and blueprints from?”

The Vulcans. Bent on destroying Romulus before they could become the threat Nero ultimately posed. The vulcans got the Narada schematics from a smuggler who escaped from Rura Penthe, who downloaded it from the Klingons files, who dissected the Narada during the period Nero and his men were imprisoned and it was in their possession.

So the Klingons have the schematics for the Narada, the Romulans have the schematics and the last remaining red matter, the vulcans have nothing, and the Fedration has whatever scans the Kelvin and the Enterprise were able to take of the Narada during their brief encounters while mostly trying to stay alive.

So I’d say the federation has every right to be paranoid because in their weakened state, they are vulnerable from all sides, and they do not have the benifit of any of the advanced technology their enemies now do.

169. LogicalLeopard - December 27, 2012

131. BillT – December 27, 2012
I wonder what the destruction of Vulcan is going to do to Spock’s Pon Farr. If T’Pring is dead is Spock off the hook? It will be interesting to see him explain this to Uhura

****************************

Right after I saw ST09, I wanted there to be a sort of Amok Time theme or subtheme in the next movie, where T’Pring is revealed to be one of the last remaining Vulcans, and it throws a monkey wrench in the “Spockura” relationship.

Wait a minute. Did I just say Spockura, despite being over 30? Yeah, I did.

Okay, well, anway, it was going to be sort of like Saul Tigh from Battlestar Galactica coming face to face with his wife, with the whole “Billions are dead, and SHE shows up” thing, with belowdecks Vulcan fight clubs and passion and “thee’s.” But when I read about this plot, I became pretty glad I don’t write Trek, because this film looks epic.

Still, I would like to see T’Pring, even in a comic. Maybe Stonn died, and Spock’s the only dude she has left. He is a certified hero, even if he’s only half Vulcan. Hmmnn…I wonder if racism played a role in T’Pring’s choice….

170. Jane - December 27, 2012

@164 Robman007

Seriously? Welcome to fandom. This is why Abrams won’t touch Star Wars. Many Trek fans (as evidenced on these boards) are obsessive and myopic and rigid in their thinking, but they don’t hold a candle to the worst of SW fandom. There the folks who dare offend the entitled fans get death threats. Sometimes it’s hard to tell if posters are poking gentle fun, stirring the pot a bit, or really are as unbalanced as they present. Either way, it can really take the fun out of being a fan and talking over the possibilities and playing the what-if game.

FWIW, you make a lot of sense and you’re not alone. Enjoy the fun bits of the ride and don’t drive yourself gonzo over the folk who lack perspective.

171. Curious Cadet - December 27, 2012

@162. LogicalLeopard,
“If you’ll notice, Lindelof stated that the destruction of Vulcan had a “9/11 level impact” on the Federation. He did not say that the current film was an allegory for 9/11, or followed that line.”

Moreover, Lindelof stated this for a US publication, presumably for the benifit of a US audience, for which the memory of 9/11 is still fresh and palpable. It is Pearl Harbor in nature, except this was the mainland, and a civilian target. And the US hasn’t forgotten Pearl Harbor.

Hopefully, the producers will refrain from comparing this to 9/11 outside the US. Terrorism is well known throughtout the world, and no country is immune to its effects, be it the international type or the home-grown variety. Most audiences will therefore pick up on those themes without tying it directly to US imperialism, though because Starfleet is mostly made up of white males (at least the principals), with even the villain being a white male from Starfleet, the image is going to be hard to shake.

As for conspiracies … Hasn’t it been proven that FDR knew about the Japanse attack on Pearl Harbor prior to it, but sat on the information intentionally? If that’s possible …

172. crazydaystrom - December 27, 2012

For all who dislike ‘more Earth’ in these new Treks, count me as one who’s happy to see more. What little we’ve gotten before has never been enough to satisfy my curiosity about our planet in the twenty- third century. Sure I want strange new worlds and civilizations but I imagine Earth two hundred plus years from now would be as strange to us as present day Earth would be to a person from the 1800’s. Or I think it should be. The stranger the better for me, though I realize too strange would not help the relatibilty he spoke of. But different the same, and the same but strangely different.

A problem is the fact that we only get a couple of hours of new Trek every few years. Star Trek needs to be successful enough to spawn a new series on television. It’s return to the small screen is an inevitability, I feel. But the sooner the better, I think we’ll all agree. So for me ‘relatibility’ means more potentially successful. And I’m fine with that.

173. MJ - December 27, 2012

@171 ““If you’ll notice, Lindelof stated that the destruction of Vulcan had a “9/11 level impact” on the Federation. He did not say that the current film was an allegory for 9/11, or followed that line.”

But it sounds more likely than not that there will be some message like that in this film.

Bury your head in the sand if you must though.

174. J - December 27, 2012

#154: when Trek starts to bear more and more similarities to the ‘mainstream action movie’ (the trailers most certainly look that way) I’d say that at least differentiate by ditching the Earth location, where most movies take place.

175. Vultan - December 27, 2012

I don’t mind Trek tackling the subject of terrorism; it’s been done several times before. It’s the fact the last two movies (and now probably this one) are roughly about the same topic—bad guys are mad, bad guys want vengeance, bad buys unleash hell on the Federation.

To their credit, the TOS movies covered a variety of topics: technological evolution, the danger of scientific advancements, the weapons race, environmentalism and animal rights, God, the Cold War and the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Diverse, no?

176. Gilberto - December 27, 2012

Even if the movie is completely different from what we think, here we have great ideas for many novels! “That was fun.”

177. Robman007 - December 27, 2012

Well, logically, the only one to blame for Earth being a focal point is the writers of past Star Trek episodes.

That’s what happens when you have an alternate universe instead of a traiditional reboot. EVERY ITEM of the command structure of Starfleet and the Federation was located on Earth. If you wan to tell the story of the effect of Vulcan being destroyed is having on this structure, it has to take place on Earth.

It can’t take place on Eminiar 7, or any new planet because the Federation government is located on EARTH.

You just can’t win. If this new film totally ignored the fact that Vulcan was destroyed, the fan boys would rage because they blew up Vulcan for nothing…but now you try and show how doo-doo trickles downhill and the large term affect of Vulcan being destroyed and folks complain about the film taking place on earth….

178. Spirkship - December 27, 2012

@177
well I guess they could always say: after the destruction of Vulcan, Starfleet and Federation decided to decentralize their organisational structures. SF HQ moved to Andoria, Federation HQ to Bolia and only the academy was left on Earth

179. Boborci - December 27, 2012

152. Agree. There is a pile of evidence including main stream news reports that obl died long before we “got him.” I was arguing with poster accepting his world view.

180. MJ - December 27, 2012

@179. Bob, maybe you should reboot Weekend at Bernies, except call it Weekend at Osama’s. Have some dumb-ass guys take the OBL corpse around to parties, etc, with CIA in pursuit, in a comedic satire type of movie?

181. K-7 - December 27, 2012

#179. God Bless you, Bob Orci. You single-handily keep the legend of Sunn Classic Pictures alive. LOL

PS: Bigfoot lives! ;-)

182. Red Dead Ryan - December 27, 2012

#179.

What evidence? That was all just mere speculation/wishful thinking.

183. Bucky - December 27, 2012

I got it! John Harrison is Abur Nazir!!! Paxton from “Enterprise” just got frozen in those cryotubes and all of his followers and now he’s back with Harrison in tow.

TERRA PRIME, FOREVER.

Seriously, a 100+ million dollar sequel to the Enterprise finale would rock.

(Note, I said “Enterprise” finale because, yeah, “Terra Prime” / “Demons” are the finale episodes of that show. “These Are the Voyages” is basically a bonus TNG episode that you can watch along with “The Pegasus”.)

184. Matias 47 - December 27, 2012

@ Logical Leopard:

“Or better yet, what would have happened in the US if, say, a state like California was leveled somehow during the 1980s and the Cold War?”

Absolutely. It would have devastating effects.

Plus, even if the perpatrators were caught and punished, AND if it was discovered they weren’t directly connected to a hostile government, wouldn’t we still have a certain rage and fear because we were so easily attacked? And couldn’t that rage and fear motivate some in high levels of power, through virtuous motives, to, maybe, behave less than ethically?

185. Roddenberry was a Peacenik - December 27, 2012

Anthony, can you check the IP on 179? I’m hoping that’s the imposter back again. The capital B is usually a give-away.

186. Red Shirt Diaries - December 27, 2012

179 / Boborci

I got a friend who is a member of the Special Forces. While politicians and some CIA types might be able to try to cover something like that up, their is no way multiple members of Delta Force would be party to that type of nonsense — that is not the way those people roll, and your comments show a blatant Hollytwood/white tower type of naivety regarding their intelligence and integrity.

You really need to read Mark Matt Bissonnette’s “No Easy Day,” to learn what really happened. And to claim that is not legit is an insult to the team the got him.

187. Vultan - December 27, 2012

#186

Well put, sir.

And somehow I don’t think Kathryn Bigelow, the director of Zero Dark Thirty, would take part in any cover-up nonsense either. Just a gut feeling.

188. Matias 47 - December 27, 2012

@179 and @182

I’ve got to go with RDR on this one. There was much speculation about Ossy’s health — could he survive on the run, and whatnot, but beyond conspiracy theories — what piles of HARD evidence are you talking about?

And if you could provide citations, that would really be appreciated.

189. Matias 47 - December 27, 2012

And I gotta go with Red Shirt Diaries @ 186 as well.

190. dmduncan - December 27, 2012

Special operators like those you find in Delta DO work on/in CIA operations and the CIA recruits some of its own talent from special forces groups for its Special Activities Division.

At that point, whatever they were, their loyalties are ALL suspect to me because I do not think of the CIA as a patriotic organization.

Delta in particular (a delta is a pyramid form, by the way) is VERY secretive about the selection process they use. It is extremely opaque to the candidates themselves, which reminds me of a much older group who uses the same technique to choose people it considers “worthy,” which usually means corruptible.

I know enough about Delta to not trust them until I know more. Nothing grows in the dark but wickedness. Rule is: The more you want to “belong” to something “special,” the easier you can be turned against your own principles.

191. Harry Ballz - December 27, 2012

dmduncan

tell me, have you ever researched The Black Pope?

192. dmduncan - December 27, 2012

188. Matias 47 – December 27, 2012

@179 and @182

I’ve got to go with RDR on this one. There was much speculation about Ossy’s health — could he survive on the run, and whatnot, but beyond conspiracy theories — what piles of HARD evidence are you talking about?

***

What piles of hard evidence do YOU have? Got a dead body? Duuuuh nope! That was the FIRST thing they got rid of! Which you never even saw. You just believe what you were told by the Grima Wormtongues talking on the TV set and writing in all the “respectable” journals.

Then comes the book and the movie. Forgive me for questioning the timing.

But is that your “hard” evidence?

Now maybe it’s all true, but whether it is all true or not, your consensus reality is a digital diorama of questionable authorship which can be easily created, destroyed, and recreated in any way shape or form the people you watch, read, and listen to want you to absorb.

That’s how you get manipulated on any given issue.

193. Jim Nightshade - December 27, 2012

Dont tell me that 9-11 didnt change everything….Because it did it changed EVERYTHING….(as spoken by Peter Griffin in family guy

Does Bob write Family Guy Episodes too?

194. dmduncan - December 27, 2012

191. Harry Ballz – December 27, 2012

Yes, Harry. But it’s been a while. I rely on Malachi Martin for interpretations of all internal goings on about the Catholic church because he was an insider with startling views and information. But he died under mysterious circumstances so all we have now are his books. I was actually leafing though one at B&N Christmas Eve.

Without googling I think I remember it having multiple meanings. Hans Kolvenbach, SJ, being one, and maybe a prophesied final pope?

195. dmduncan - December 27, 2012

Well hell, do we really need a list of changes brought about in America and justified by 9/11? Is there anyone here who can’t list them?

196. Vultan - December 27, 2012

#192

Good point, but you do realize everything in the alternative media can be just as easily created, destroyed, and recreated in any shape or form, right? Perhaps even more so.

Digital dioramas indeed.

197. dmduncan - December 27, 2012

191. Harry Ballz – December 27, 2012

Excuse me. PETER-Hans Kolvenbach. I just binged it. Yeah man, Martin was SJ too, but I think he was one of the good ones. He wrote a massive book about the SJ and its history, and he really showed how it started out and how it changed into something very different. Because he was an insider and at the Vatican he saw much and wrote about it, and a LOT of the stuff he claims is just too spooky (bilocated black masses). But…you look at what has happened to the church and you see it is sheltering a lot of bad bad people, and Martin has an answer for the why.

198. dmduncan - December 27, 2012

196. Vultan – December 27, 2012

#192

Good point, but you do realize everything in the alternative media can be just as easily created, destroyed, and recreated in any shape or form, right? Perhaps even more so.

Digital dioramas indeed.

***

Nope, that’s where you are wrong. It cannot, actually, because a) it has neither the money nor the reach, and therefore it lacks the power to gather the nation into a groupthinking herd of consensus reality believers, and b) the alternative media consists of US — WE the PEOPLE, unfiltered, with our eyes on the target; you are not being told what to think — you are being forced to integrate various people’s points of view from where they stand and observe the world right now.

I am a much more active participant in figuring out what’s going on in the world by consulting alternative sources than I can be watching every channel tell me exactly the same thing, in the same tone of voice, with the same shoddy journalistic standards.

199. Harry Ballz - December 27, 2012

dmduncan, I’m glad to see you’re on top of things, as usual! :>)

200. Vultan - December 27, 2012

#198

Okay, but just keep that alternative certitude in mind the next time you’re in B&N and considering to BUY one of those books.

Mainstream or otherwise, the people or “them,” the world is really no different than the day P.T. Barnum said those famous words.

201. K-7 - December 27, 2012

Looks like it’s DM Duncan and Bob Orci against the world here. That’s good enough for me to put the score Navy Seals 38, DM-Orci 0. ;-)

202. dmduncan - December 27, 2012

199. Harry Ballz – December 27, 2012

I am! ;-)

BTW, reports of the coroner’s final report tells us that Tony Scott did not have cancer, a non-fact which ABC rushed to misreport and which many people probably still think is the reason he jumped off that bridge.

203. K-7 - December 27, 2012

Anyone ever hear of the black-Jewish-communist pope?

204. K-7 - December 27, 2012

Tony Scott was probably killed because he was about to blow the story on the Bin Laden death from overcompensation of genetically-altered food from Monsanto in 2007.

205. Phil - December 27, 2012

Great, throwing s**t in the fan again, just to see what sticks.

Obviously, TS was depressed. A common occurance, so it will be completely discounted…

206. dmduncan - December 27, 2012

200. Vultan – December 27, 2012

No, I don’t accept your premise that you and I are in the same position with respect to our sources and use of information.

It’s not all good — some of it’s bad, and if you are a passive consumer of watched TV goods, you have trouble discerning the latter.

In fact, if that’s what you are, I can’t really say that you USE the information you get at all. You just consume bad info like you eat junk food, and your mind ends up in as bad a shape as your body, and then you look and say the things everybody else says having completely forgotten that there is such a thing as truth and that there are ways of establishing the accuracy of claims.

201. K-7 – December 27, 2012

Even though you don’t, I’m going to pretend along with you that you speak for the world, when I say that I like them odds just fine. ;-)

207. Vultan - December 27, 2012

#206

All right, that’s your right to believe so. But I don’t see alternative as all that alternative anymore.

Take a close look at those conspiracy books at the store. Quite a few of them, aren’t there? There’s a market for it. Publishing houses see profit. How about television? How about Fringe? Made by your good friend Mr. Orci. Shown on that little Ma and Pa network FOX. Like the X-Files. How many conspiracy movies have been made in the past couple of decades? Made by big studios… owned by big corporations, who also own those news networks with the substandard journalistic standards.

Sorry, but I can’t take the alternative/conspiracy culture seriously when it’s brought to you by GEICO.

208. Basement Blogger - December 27, 2012

I tried this thought on this thread earlier but it didn’t post. But I’ll keep it short. Metaphors for 9/11 were covered in Star Trek: Enterprise. The whole season about the Xindi attack and the journey of the Enterprise to stop them was about our war on terror. Captain Archer resorted to torture and piracy to achieve his goals. The question is always does the ends justify the means.

209. dmduncan - December 27, 2012

Sure, Vultan, and you can’t take it seriously when it’s NOT brought to you by GEICO either.

I guess you can’t take it seriously, period. ;-)

Beyond that, you keep dealing with these buzz words that tell you what to think about things.

Much of what you disparage as conspiracy is just established history, so how do you deal with those facts when the facts show the reality of conspiracy?

It’s just lazy to use the word conspiracy disparagingly as a means of avoiding facts.

If you don’t accept the facts, what else can somebody give you?

210. Vultan - December 27, 2012

“If you don’t accept the facts, what else can somebody give you?”

A book to sell you.

211. MJ - December 27, 2012

All, in general, in discussing world events, history, and politics with someone, if they mention a conspiracy or two, I certainly take it seriously. But when they mention many conspiracies, a light goes off in my brain that says “conspiracy buff.” and I find myself not being able to take that person as seriously as I might have otherwise. I have determined that they have a predilection to “believe” conspiracies, and I take what they say with a grain of salt that point forward concerning their pet conspiracies.

212. Hugh Hoyland - December 27, 2012

@195 dmduncan

General list.

Habeus corpus gone
Privacy
Free speech

I think I’m kinda on the same frequency these guys are with their movie. I just wrote a sci-fi spec script thats a metaphore for this current situation. I find sci-fi is a great vehicle for telling these kind of stories. It communicates to people.

213. Hugh Hoyland - December 27, 2012

* I mean released a month back. Actually worked on the script for months. Dang writing is NOT easy! :]

214. Vultan - December 27, 2012

#211

Exactly, MJ.

215. dmduncan - December 27, 2012

But that’s not funny, and I’m not sure why you are choosing to target bookreading. If you don’t want to know these things, that’s your choice and I do respect it, but it is a choice on your part to not know.

When the TV tells you how bad Iran is and how they must be stopped, which could lead to war — there’s also a recent history of how Iran came to be the adversary country to America that it now is, and in THAT story (the true story), America and the UK don’t come out looking so hot. So, you may not believe in conspiracies, but the people they happen to believe in them.

216. Captain Karl - December 27, 2012

@40 because, going by the storylines in the comics, Kirk isn’t acting like described by the 2013 movie, he is acting as an experienced startship captain, which doesn’t come in a six month sandwich of time as stated for between movies.

217. Matias 47 - December 27, 2012

@192

I actually never stated my opinion. I always keep an open mind, but I’m a skeptic. If you show me uncontrovertable fact, I’ll admit error. You can play any Karl Rove/GOP game you want — i.e. asking me for evidence AFTER I’ve asked you (or those you agree with) for evidence.

I’m not the one making a claim, you and your buddies are. I realize that it’s in the nature of the coward try to act overly agressive, especially when hiding behind an online persona. However, I’m not asking for your deductions based on lack of evidence — I’m asking for your HARD evidence.

Until you do so, then I feel I must quote (or at least paraphrase) one Dr. Leonard McCoy and say, “What you say is unimportant, and I do not hear your words.”

218. Vultan - December 27, 2012

#215

I think you misunderstand my point.

I’ve nothing against book reading; do a good bit of it myself. I’m simply using that as an example of the profits to be made and the message some want to SELL you with these conspiracies and alternative media, which may not be all that alternative in some cases (very mainstream).

Sure, it’s good to listen to the outsiders, but watch your wallet.

(And I don’t know how Iran entered this discussion, but yes, I’m well aware of the actions the US and UK took there in the past. So… no argument here.)

219. Simon - December 27, 2012

The destruction of Vulcan would be far more devastating to the Federation than 9/11 was to the United States, and that shook our country to the core. I realize Lindelof was trying to get the audience today to relate but the reality is he is understating what would really be like for them in the JJ-verse.
Losing Vulcan, a founding member of the UFP, would be like the UK being totally wiped off the map. The entire country (our chief ally): just gone. NATO, the world…nothing would be the same. Life would be very, very different than it is now. So I can easily see the Federation of the new timeline also being quite different from what we’ve had before.

220. Red Shirt Diaries - December 27, 2012

DM Duncan and Bob Orci,

Just curious, since you both are always claiming to be so well read on ALL sources available for your conspiracies, have you even bothered to read “No Easy Day,” or do you practice selective use of sources to support your argument that OBL died years before the raid?

221. dmduncan - December 27, 2012

217. Matias 47 – December 27, 2012

Fantastic! I’m a skeptic too! That’s why I don’t believe the official story. As soon as you can provide me with “hard” evidence that it’s true, I’ll “admit error” and lose my skepticism on that issue. I’m not the one making claims about what happened. They are. I wasn’t there.

And please do not mention me in connection with the GOP or Karl Rove, since I am affiliated with neither. I’m pretty sure those folk DO believe the official story.

222. Vultan - December 27, 2012

By the way, dmduncan, if you haven’t already, check out a recent movie called “Contagion,” which makes some interesting points about the internet and “independent” journalism.

223. dmduncan - December 27, 2012

218: “Sure, it’s good to listen to the outsiders, but watch your wallet.”

You are presuming too much, Vultan, with what you think my money is purchasing.

I bought Whitley Strieber’s Communion series of books — in hardcover — and managed to catch an obvious confabulation in the same story he told two incompatible versions of in two separate books, which no one else ever reported finding. And I called him on it on the blog I had at the time. It got so much attention that he felt the need to respond, though refusing to name me or chat with me directly.

And glad to hear you are on the same page regarding Iran. I presume that must be true as well for Operation Northwoods, MKULTRA, COINTELPRO, and forced sterilizations of American Indian women.

224. dmduncan - December 27, 2012

220. Red Shirt Diaries – December 27, 2012

The OBL early death scenario is a theory — much like the ones I propose on this site to explain who John Harrison is. Proposing a theory doesn’t make me a believer unless I call it specifically, which I have never done, because I don’t have enough evidence.

Even so, my only other remaining choice is NOT a commitment to the official story.

225. Vultan - December 27, 2012

#223

Yeah, pretty much, though my knowledge of those things is pretty basic, I imagine, compared to your own.

As for Iran, I think a better strategy would be dropping candy bars instead of bombs. I mean, it’s hard to hate someone who gives you candy. ;-)

Hey, it worked with the Berlin Airlift. How many German kids from that era hate America?

226. dmduncan - December 27, 2012

222. Vultan – December 27, 2012

I did see it. It makes the point I’ve been trying to stress, i.e., that alternative sources force you to be a more active participant in news gathering. On TV you get the Voice of Empire. On every channel, everyone saying the same thing while you are in a passive mood. On the computer you SEARCH multiple sources, you corroborate, and make up your own mind where possible or remain in a state of decision-flux where it is either not possible or not wise.

On TV you just absorb and repeat, and then you go out to work in an environment where everyone is getting the same messages.

227. Vultan - December 27, 2012

Oh, and a [belated] Merry Christmas…
and a Happy New Year!

228. Vultan - December 27, 2012

#226

Yes, I agree. That’s why I try to get news from as many different sources as possible. Doesn’t always work, but something resembling truth does eventually rise to the surface.

229. dmduncan - December 27, 2012

225. Vultan – December 27, 2012

Well, peaceful solutions regarding Iran do not seem to be on the agenda of those who decide such things.

http://www.brookings.edu/research/books/2009/whichpathtopersia

As J. Krishnamurti was fond of repeating, the problem cannot solve itself.

And yet thinkers like those men in that link are the problem trying to solve itself.

230. dmduncan - December 27, 2012

228. Vultan – December 27, 2012

Agreed. We are not so different after all.

Merry Christmas to you too!

231. Vultan - December 27, 2012

#230

Yes, not so different.

By the way, have you heard that Brian Singer is talking about bringing back The Twilight Zone to CBS? Not sure how I feel about that… Hasn’t worked well in the past.

232. kmart - December 27, 2012

The 1985 TZ had some terrific writing … production values were godawful, but even so, an often worthy effort. Then again, I don’t think Singer would bring the same level of writing talent with his team …

233. Gary S. - December 27, 2012

As far as Bin Laden Goes , Dead early or Dead at the time of the raid still adds up to Dead .

234. Red Shirt Diaries - December 28, 2012

DM Duncan,

You ask for evidence besides the official story, yet you have ignored by suggestion twice to read No Easy Day by one of the SEALs who was involved in the mission. I urge you to read this book, as I was not official, and the author got in hot water with DOD for publishing his persona account.

235. Star Trek Nemesis blows, is the point - December 28, 2012

@198.
“the alternative media consists of US — WE the PEOPLE, unfiltered, with our eyes on the target; you are not being told what to think — you are being forced to integrate various people’s points of view from where they stand and observe the world right now.”

This is simply an alternative form of groupthink. Everything that does not come from the mainstream must be more accurate, factually correct than the mainstream.

“there’s also a recent history of how Iran came to be the adversary country to America that it now is, and in THAT story (the true story), America and the UK don’t come out looking so hot. So, you may not believe in conspiracies, but the people they happen to believe in them.”

I find it particularly interesting that you label it “the true story.” It again suggests that because it’s not from the mainstream, it’s more factually correct than the mainstream. (By the way, America and the UK never looked hot coming out of the Iranian Revolution, alternative theories or not.)

My biggest problem with these conspiracy theories is that they’re never politically expedient. Why would the Bush administration not make up this story? Why would the Obama administration make up this story in 2011 and not 2012? Why would the event take place in Pakistan instead of Afghanistan?

236. Disinvited - December 28, 2012

#223. dmduncan

Speaking of Americas’ (sic) Indians, now in their interaction with Europian “explorers” we can find a much better fit for the obliteration of the planet Vulcan:

Entire civilizations wiped out, entire cultures (man, woman and child) gone, dead desecrated, etc. Heck, at least the Vulcan language still survives.

And you can throw in the reasoning behind the Prime Directive to boot.

It will be interesting to see how this unfolds. Will the Vulcans become wanders a la Moses/BATTLESTAR GALACTICA? Will we get the Andorian equivalent of “Not in my backtard!” Teraform Delta Vega?

HatRick,

Happy Birthday Nichelle! Did you catch her cake on KTLA?

237. LogicalLeopard - December 28, 2012

173. MJ – December 27, 2012
@171 ““If you’ll notice, Lindelof stated that the destruction of Vulcan had a “9/11 level impact” on the Federation. He did not say that the current film was an allegory for 9/11, or followed that line.”

But it sounds more likely than not that there will be some message like that in this film.

Bury your head in the sand if you must though.

******************************************

Exactly how does restating what Lindelof said about the movie constitute burying one’s head in the sand? It appears from the information released that this will be a movie about a person committing acts of terrorism from within Starfleet, whom the audience is able to sympathize with to some degree. That doesn’t sound like a 9/11 theme, or Osama Bin Laden. The closest to 9/11 that gets is that after the destruction of a planet, the people are probably more on guard, and terror is probably MORE terrifying. But that isn’t isn’t just a 9/11 story, that’s how ANY state would react to terrorism.

238. xenoc - December 28, 2012

87, 89. I’m late with this, but…

Felicity did include going back in time, disastrous events changing the timeline including who lived and who died, and Our Hero desperately trying to Make Things Right.

Really. It did. Ask JJ. Also ask him what he was smokin’ when he decided to make that mini-arc as the final few episodes.

239. boborci - December 28, 2012

182. red

He was reported dead a half dozen times, beginning in 2002by networks, papers, al qaeda, President of Packistan etc. And by the way, that is as much evidence as was presented when we “got him.” nothing but a report.

240. boborci - December 28, 2012

186. the seal team need not be conspirators to think they killed OBL.

241. boborci - December 28, 2012

187. agree. film makers certainly believe their story. no need for them to be covering anything up.

242. Red Dead Ryan - December 28, 2012

#239.

Well, the president of Pakistan (I’m assuming you’re talking about Musharraf) was in league with al-Queda and the Taliban before 9/11. He had his arm twisted into co-oporating by the U.S., and as such, cannot be trusted. Nor can any other leaders of Pakistan, who continue to fund al-Queda and the Taliban with U.S aid money!

Bin Laden was Pakistan’s deterrant against arch-enemy India. Pakistan was doing its best to keep him alive, well, until May 1 2011 when they were caught with their pants down. Ayman al-Zawahiri hasn’t been heard from since. Why? The Pakistanis learned from the Bin Laden raid and have ramped up their protection of him.

Anyway, I don’t believe Bin Laden is at the bottom of the Arabian Sea. I see it more likely that his body is in a secret morgue in Washington D.C. Under heavy guard.

243. Anthony Pascale - December 28, 2012

Boborci is bob orci

244. boborci - December 28, 2012

242. talk about being a conspiracy theorist!

so al qaeda supporters not to be trusted? so are you suspicious of alq confirming that US killed OBL in raid?

245. Bucky - December 28, 2012

Yeah but if the Bin Laden siege was a fake-out, what’s up with that famous photo of the President & company staring intently outwards at the mission progress. What were they looking at, a Washington Wizards game? Sure, the Wizards are grim but they ain’t that grim!

246. boborci - December 28, 2012

245. Bucky

Great Question! I guess you never read the following:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/8493391/Osama-bin-Laden-dead-Blackout-during-raid-on-bin-Laden-compound.html

When asked why Clinton had her hand over her mouth, she responded: “Allergies…”

247. boborci - December 28, 2012

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/05/05/hillary-clinton-osama-bin-laden-photo_n_857967.html

Allergies!!

Waking up yet?

248. Anthony Pascale - December 28, 2012

Bob

Returning to the topic a bit, do you agree with Damon’s comment above and the connection? Do world events have a bigger impact on INTO DARKNESS than they did with STAR TREK 2009?

249. Bucky - December 28, 2012

246. Huh, fascinating. So that picture can either be taken in context of A) them watching the mission B) them perturbed that the feed cut out C) gravely contemplating if they should order for lunch D) trying to ignore that Hillary just had a very unsanitary sneezing fit E) “Somebody get Petraeus to hook up the PS3!”

250. dontcare - December 28, 2012

@236. Wrong, what happened to the Native American tribes when they encountered Europeans is nothing like the destruction of Vulcan.

What happened to the tribes was church sponsored, state organized, genocide, involving the highest levels of governments throughout the world.

What happened to Vulcan was a single act of genocidal terrorism, planned and perpetrated by one man and his crew, with no support whatsoever from any government.

Oh and there are lots of Native American languages that still exist, don’t use wikiipedia to learn history, you won’t sound nearly so dumb.

@245. That photo was always faked, according to people on that Seal team they did not wait for Presidential authorization, they simply went in, killed Bin Laden, and only then informed the President, so there was no “mission progress” for him to be watching.

251. boborci - December 28, 2012

I agree that the destruction of Vulcan was a significant event and it is not something that can be ignored in our universe.

252. boborci - December 28, 2012

249. Bucky

You forgot one final interpretation for the picture:

It was staged.

253. Lt. Bailey - December 28, 2012

While one planet Vulcan may have been destroyed, that does not mean the remaining (approx 10,000) Vulcans will not have another planet/homeworld. Perhaps even a greener or lush planet as Vulcan was before the AWAKENING time or maybe they will find another arid world with a red sky???

Its all up to the writers, there are always possibilties.

254. boborci - December 28, 2012

234. Red shirt

“hot water?”

Do you know what the NDAA is? Do you know that the Executive Branch has executed US citizens without due process? do you really believe for one second that if the national security apparatus truly thought the Seal’s book was a threat that they wouldn’t stop it and put him away forever? Classic psyop to pretend to dislike book while allowing it to go out. It makes it seems as though the information is valid. It worked perfectly on you.

255. Voltaire - December 28, 2012

Bob Orci, conspiracy theorist. That’s disappointing.

Still looking forward to the movie, though.

256. boborci - December 28, 2012

255. You’re not one?

So you don’t believe Obama when he admitted coup in Iran in 59?

You don’t believe US tested LSD on citizens without consent?

You don’t beleive the official version of 911, where 19 men under the direction of a millionaire who was the head of a terrorist organization that operates in 70+ countires (according to State Department) infiltrated the most defended airspace in the world?

257. Voltaire - December 28, 2012

@256 – I’m a skeptic, Phil Plait-style. So (to use the simplest example you gave), I believe the shocking truth that what actually happened on 9/11 is…what actually happened on 9/11.

I know I popped that first comment up as a bit of an ad-hominem, so apologies for that. I don’t think much productive would come of this conversation, and that’s my bad for involving myself in it.

Thanks for your work with ST and looking forward to seeing STID next year.

258. Trek was born on TV - December 28, 2012

So, perhaps “John Harrison” was an un-consenting lab rat. Perhaps a product of 23rd century genetic engineering that was attempted by a faction of Starfleet that was formed after the attack on the Kelvin. This faction may believe that the Federation has become too vulnerable following the destruction of Vulcan, and with the help of some key players, and some recently discovered genetic material (possibly taken from the Botany Bay) it is decided that a carefully chosen group of enhanced humanoids will be created to combat any perceived threat facing the Federation. Kind of like a Special Operations force- beginning with ‘John Harrison’. Perhaps this program was abandoned, along with the test subjects, and perhaps many others that were never ‘hatched’, leading to the events of Into darkness.
Harrison say’s: “You think your safe…” And that is why the program was scrapped. We felt safe, and didn’t need any enhanced humans.
“I have returned to seek my vengeance.” Vengeance for abandoning them. And it’s possible that he may hold the keys to bringing the survivors of the Botany Bay back to life, along with an army of 23rd century supermen.
Just a theory….

259. dontcare - December 28, 2012

Oh, and I tend to believe that the reason Bin Laden’s body was not displayed is because the members of the seal team did something highly amusing, but diplomatically inflammatory, with it. Something like stuffing his head up his a–, or taking a picture of him with a pickled pig’s foot in his mouth, or something else similar that the cowards, corrupt officials, and criminals in our government did not want anyone to see.

260. dmduncan - December 28, 2012

234. Red Shirt Diaries – December 28, 2012

I probably will get around to reading it but I have a long queue right now.

261. dmduncan - December 28, 2012

235: “This is simply an alternative form of groupthink. Everything that does not come from the mainstream must be more accurate, factually correct than the mainstream.”

Oh that’s false. The alternative news is a fractured lot. It’s like a plate glass window that’s been hit with a rock and has cracked in a million little bits without falling out of the frame, and that is exactly how I like it.

It is the antithesis of pop media — the Voice of Empire — which is the same no matter what channel you turn to, including Fox.

“I find it particularly interesting that you label it ‘the true story.’ It again suggests that because it’s not from the mainstream, it’s more factually correct than the mainstream.”

I’m a consensus-reality skeptic not an epistemic skeptic. Two extremely different things. So yes, I do believe knowledge is possible and that there are ways of learning what the truth is, and listening to George Stephanopolous is not high on my list of them.

262. dmduncan - December 28, 2012

What’s also great about the alternative media is that it’s so full of CHARACTERS.

You turn on the “mainstream” TV, everyone is so well made up and authoritative looking, and they all sound the same and follow the same rules of presenting information. Their jokes are all bad. Assuming they have a sense of humor at all, it feels totally by the book and phony.

But it’s all very impressive. The imagery is very effective at making people believe that this person they are seeing and hearing can’t possibly be telling them things that are false or that they could be reinforcing a consensus reality in every thing they say.

But when you read, watch, or listen to real characters who say what they really think, and are sometimes outrageous, you have to check what they say to be sure they aren’t making things up.

The media, by contrast, just puts you to sleep with this false appearance of authority. You don’t have to check what they say because you just KNOW it’s all true.

263. Phil - December 28, 2012

@9. No

264. kmart - December 28, 2012

Christ, I’m actually agreeing with Orci about something? Hell HAS frozen over and Delta Vega is apparently a cosmic cue ball a la the THIRD ROCK Graphics (then again, talking about the real world is a whole separate issue from trek.)

265. Disinvited - December 28, 2012

#250 dontcare

Well I was making the point that the devastation was a better (not exact) fit than saying it was like a 9/11 type event as the scales don’t match..

However, the Pope was one man; as was ABL; as was Nero.

Also, the existence of some surviving indegenous peoples’ tongues in no way negates the many that have been silenced forever.

266. Disinvited - December 28, 2012

#265.

ABL should be OBL.

267. Emperor Mike of the Empire - December 28, 2012

Hey Bob Orci. Are you still doing your Tv Series about Conspiricy. Just wondering.

268. dontcare - December 28, 2012

@265. But when I said many native languages were still around I was pointing out that many of the peoples that originated the languages were ALSO still around. Does anything excuse genocide? NO, so I am not sure where you get the idea that I was saying something like that. OBL and the Pope may only be “one man” but both are supported by vast organizations spread through many nations, Nero had the guys on his ship and that was it.

269. Red Dead Ryan - December 28, 2012

#244.

It’s not about trusting ALQ. It’s about the facts.

The fact is, Bin Laden was seen as a hero in Pakistan. That is fact. Therefore, their anger would appear to be genuine. Case closed!

270. Disinvited - December 28, 2012

#268. dontcare

So I think we both agree that saying the destruction of Vulcan would have 9/11 type impact is not very wise because while both are genocides the scales, execution and magnitutdes of impact are vastly different?

271. Phil - December 28, 2012

On re-read, I can’t even bring myself to see this as a 9/11 level impact. The motivation prior to, and responses are entirely different. Not to downplay the event, but outside of the Vulcans efforts to rebuild, Vulcan itself is but one of many members of the Federation, so they should not have a huge problem adjusting to a dimished Vulcan. Nero was stopped quickly, and there is no evidence he had any kind of support in terms of overthrowing the Federation. Likewise, his appearance in this reality is muted. The Federation reverse engineered what they could from the Kelvin scans and the debris they recovered, as did the Klingons. Ironicly, the only Star Trek society in this reality that probably got the shaft from Nero was the Romulans, who didn’t get a look at the Narada (I know someone will correct me if I’m wrong here)

272. MJ - December 28, 2012

@269 “It’s not about trusting ALQ. It’s about the facts. The fact is, Bin Laden was seen as a hero in Pakistan. That is fact. Therefore, their anger would appear to be genuine. Case closed!”

Exactly. Again, the issue I have with Orci and some others, is that by promoting MANY conspiracies, they quickly use up the “credibility factor” for many of us who might be inclined to believe them if they were actual experts on one or two conspiracies.

I’t like saying you have evidence that supports the existence of all of the following: Santa Claus, The Tooth Fairy, The Easter Bunny, The Boggie Man, and The Three Bears; versus just saying you has some historical information that a guy name Saint Nicolas was the basis Santa Claus.

273. MJ - December 28, 2012

@247. Allergies or not, what is your point Bob with the Clinton photo? Is there really some great conspiracy about her expression? Huh??? LOL

274. MJ - December 28, 2012

@262. You are perhaps confusing TV mainstream media with all media. There are a lot of good newspapers and journals out there, many independent,with some sharp minds and editors in charge.

For my past, I don’t watch a lick of TV news. I get all my info from mainstream and independent print and internet media.

275. dmduncan - December 28, 2012

MJ, your presumption is that conspiracies are comparable to Santa Claus, Tooth Fairy, Easter Bunny, etc., which is a good tactic to use when you desire to dismiss anything that doesn’t fit your preconceptions, but it isn’t particularly helpful when you are trying to understand how each piece in a large collection of evidence fits together to explain an equally complex and mystifying picture of worldly activity.

Each one of the conspiracies I listed above in discussion with Vultan is a historical fact. To which I could add many others. I leave it to each in his or her way to decide when looking at recent events whether mankind has suddenly had a collective epiphany and repented since the last conspiracy in that list happened such that conspiratorial behavior is now all just old news, or if mankind is still much the same and deserving of the suspicion that it continues to do what it has always done.

276. Phil - December 28, 2012

Let it go, MJ. Consipiacy is a cottage industry, as long as there is a market for ‘the truth’ someone, somewhere will buy it. The Truthers sell it, the NRA sells it, and their respective audiences gobble it it up, on the outside chance they might be right.

277. dmduncan - December 28, 2012

Independent media is forcing things to change. It used to be that there was a rather small group of news sources all projecting pretty much the same message, with smaller sources repeating the messages of the bigger sources. While that still happens, the internet threw a wrench in the unified-information-front machinery, and now you have bloggers embarrassing major media sources by doing better investigative work than they do.

The internet changed things for the better, but a huge mass of people still get what they know from TV and radio sources, and those people can be easily maneuvered by those sources to support just about anything. For instance, going into Iraq to get Saddam Hussein’s (nonexistent) WMDs.

278. boborci - December 28, 2012

i find that those that argue against us so called ‘conspiracy theorists’ normally rely on arguing everything except the actual evidence presented.

mj. what is my point with the hillary photo? seriously? the admin and main stream media presented that as a photo of folks watching obl killing. then, head of CIA says they didnt’t watch it. those are facts. why dont u tell me what it means?

279. boborci - December 29, 2012

272. mj

as a matter of pure logic, the fact that you seem to exclusively “promote” the official version of all events is an equivalent sin,

280. boborci - December 29, 2012

276. phil

Conspiracy may be a “cottage” industry but it is likely not even a single digit percentage of the”mainstream” industry. Do you have cable? Do you have the three basic networks and their news apparatus? Do you read the paper? Did you know Bugliosi’s book claiming Oswald acted alone is a best seller?

See my point. Economc argument is a non starter.

281. Jim Nightshade - December 29, 2012

dmduncan can u fill me in on what u found about the strieber communion books….ive always liked reading your posts even if i dont agree with them sometimes…im a fan of striebers and a subscriber to his web site…i missed the uproar apparently…ive always believed that whitley believed in his experiences and wasnt lying to us but that doesnt mean ufos…he admits he doesnt know what they are…he has been targeted by govt. and it wouldnt surprise me if they have brainwashed him…this weeks jesse venturas conspiracy theory on trutv deals with mucriwaves beaming stuff into peoples heads for control and torture..start watching it sounds silly by the end of the show u r thinking those bastards and making an aluminum foil hat haha if u want to leave me an e mail ask anthony for my email id luv to hear your details re strieber thanks…

282. Jim Nightshade - December 29, 2012

Ive never believed most conspiracies…but….watch jesse venturas conspiracy theory show on trutv….ive only seen 4 episodes but every one of them u start by thinking ridiculous by halfway thru youre believing it….subjects..illuminati rich power people building fortresss in caves in ozarks cuz they know our economy will collapse they will be safe in nuclear bunkers….humanzee combining human n chimp dna for supersoldiers to control n kill us… rich guy believin in rts making space stations to escape to…plus owns a ranch with et actvity…lookup skinwalker ranch…etc…..im more open to these now….this showmis amazing…..if u have cable with on demand lookit up….

283. Harry Ballz - December 29, 2012

Look, I’m just going to say it….I’ve only really researched ONE conspiracy….the JFK assassination.

Actually, the word ‘research’ is an understatement. I’ve spent many thousands of hours over four decades examining every aspect of the assassination. Every book, documentary, film, interviews, etc.

I have concluded, beyond a reasonable doubt, that LBJ killed JFK. That is a given.

Before anyone tries to criticize that comment, why not read a few books on the subject.

Let’s put it this way….there is so much documented research and evidence that points to a conspiracy in the killing of JFK, I am shocked that people even try to argue that it was Oswald alone.

The greatest murder mystery of the last century and it went unsolved!

Talk about sticking your head in the sand.

284. MJ - December 29, 2012

@278 “mj. what is my point with the hillary photo? seriously? the admin and main stream media presented that as a photo of folks watching obl killing. then, head of CIA says they didnt’t watch it. those are facts. why dont u tell me what it means?”

Are you serious, dude? So they are all lying that they didn’t watch the raid and Hillary’s photo is you evidence? This is suppose to be some smoking gun to get me to question the whole thing? So all 13 people, plus their support staff member, plus the White House press staff are all in on covering up the fact they they never met in the situation room to watch the raid??? Huh???

This is your big evidence???

285. MJ - December 29, 2012

BTW, if you even bother to read No Easy Day (by Mark Owen) at Red Shirt Suggested, you would already know that their was not live tv from the raid being transmitted to the White House, but that the Senior Delta Force Officer at the staging/backup site was relaying information directly to the White House as it came in.

But then again, perhaps actually reading a book by someone who was actually there is not a priority for you given you have such outstanding alternative sources of information to go by.

286. MJ - December 29, 2012

@276 “Let it go, MJ. Consipiacy is a cottage industry, as long as there is a market for ‘the truth’ someone, somewhere will buy it. The Truthers sell it, the NRA sells it, and their respective audiences gobble it it up, on the outside chance they might be right.”

Well said, Phil.

287. MJ - December 29, 2012

@256 “infiltrated the most defended airspace in the world?”

Bob, you understand very little about pre-911 air defense or how airliners work to make this very naive comment. This just further illustrates to me how you tend to just throw out these “facts” without really knowing the real details of what you are saying.

288. dontcare - December 29, 2012

@265. Not really, I am saying that 9/11 is the closest example that people in the real world could use to relate to the destruction of Vulcan on a personal level. Really for us to understand it we would need to lose an entire state, like New York, Texas, or California.

The atrocities perpetrated by Europeans on Native Americans is more closely akin to the Jewish Holocaust than 9/11, but then so many chapters of human history are full of horrors, crimes committed by every nationality and nearly all faiths.

289. Disinvited - December 29, 2012

#266. dontcare

Then maybe you can understand that all I am saying is that some alive even to this day have a better sense of it having lived through the final life of the last member of an Indian nation or WW II and its holocaust

Also, as most of the peoplr in the “real” world live in The People’s Republic of China I doubt 9/11 is more relatble to them than other historical genocides with far greater tolls. Especially given Paramount’s oft stated goal of having film Trek attract a much wider world market.

290. Gary S. - December 29, 2012

It is true the author of No Easy Day was there,
but,
If he had told ALL of the classified details of this story, the book wouldnt have been published at all.
He told what they allowed him to .
This is one of those secret things .
We we will NEVER know the complete story .
At least we will not be able to verify it .

291. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

281. Jim Nightshade – December 29, 2012

Hi Jim, happy to fill you in.

First, let me tell you that I am not a “debunker.” And when I started reading Whitley’s books I didn’t set out to discover any confabulation, but if you are paying close attention to what you read and a radical inconsistency appears, well then if you are me, your eyebrow pops up Mr. Spock style.

There are a lot of smart people out there who’ve read Strieber, including a fellow blogger, author, and online friend at the time Mac Tonnies (who has since died, in his sleep as I understand it). Mac believed Whitley too, as did I — tentatively — and Mac was a smart dude and a good writer, so I don’t know why I was the only one who pointed out the discrepancy. But Mac accepted it and helped to spur conversation about it.

Ultimately, despite what I found, I think there became a consensus that what Whitley writes is, as one commenter called it, “faction.” Something DID happen to him. There WAS something highly unusual taking place, and highly confusing, which we may never get to the bottom of, because it’s also mixed with confabulation.

But I ALSO think that Whitely turned his experiences into a career path, and that is where he took a wrong turn because what I found was that in Communion and Breakthrough, Whitley tells two different versions of the Dr. Robert I. Sarbacher story that are not compatible with each other, and the story goes from mundane in the first book to extraordinary in the later book, so it got fantastically embellished over the years.

First he said that he never had contact with Sarbacher and that Sarbacher died before he became aware of his existence. Later he says he contacted Sarbacher and Sarbacher told him over the phone that the Roswell material had molecular welds. Then he says he sent Sarbacher a package and he got a call from UPS saying they couldn’t deliver it because Sarbacher was dead and had fallen off his boat and drowned. Which would be suspicious if true.

But it wasn’t true.

After a relentless search I FOUND Dr. Sarbacher’s son to confirm or deny how his father died, and he died in the hospital from, I believe, emphysema.

So there is no escaping that Whitley did tell two incompatible versions of that story. 1. He never met Sarbacher; didn’t even know Sarbacher existed until after he was dead. 2. He called Sarbacher on phone and had fantastic revelatory conversation about Roswell crash material, and Sarbacher dies mysteriously falling out of boat soon afterwards.

I am NOT saying that everything Whitey says is false and that nothing strange ever happened to him, his friends, and family.

I AM saying that you have to be VERY careful with him and to check every thing he says.

292. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

BTW, bizarre things have happened to me. Sometimes I tweet them. And two family members have had a missing time episode while driving in the boonies of a nearby state, where I get a LOT of reports of high strangeness that never make it into daylight.

So when I say I’m a consensus-reality skeptic, I mean it. But that doesn’t mean I’m a sucker. I’m good at detecting BS too. There IS a ton of very bizarre stuff happening out there, and we don’t need someone’s confabulations muddling the issues and questions and keeping people confused about whether it’s real or not.

It is.

293. boborci - December 29, 2012

mj

love how facts bounce pf you!

HEAD OF CIA said that obama and hillary were not able to watch the raid because pf a video black out. That’s not my “theory.” Panetta, who was head pf CIA at the time, sad it after that picture was presented as having been taken during obl death. Explain that, please.

As for airspace argument, you respond simply with rhetoric. ok, fine, then you tell me what was amore heavily and technologically defended airspace back then. open to your learned evidence.

294. boborci - December 29, 2012

off

295. boborci - December 29, 2012

here u go, mJ. cnn reports that white house says it watched the who,e raid, including killing.

http://articles.cnn.com/2011-05-02/tech/bin.laden.video_1_bin-terrorist-leader-cia-director-leon-panetta?_s=PM:TECH

then the Director of the CIA says this:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/8493391/Osama-bin-Laden-dead-Blackout-during-raid-on-bin-Laden-compound.html

explain this. either administration lied, or head of CIA lied. take your pick.

296. Emperor Mike of the Empire - December 29, 2012

Bob Orci. You are so cool.
Oh what ever happned to your Planned T.V Series about Conspiricy.

297. Emperor Mike of the Empire - December 29, 2012

Hey Bob Orci. What do you think about the Moon Landing. Did it happen or Not.

298. Disinvited - December 29, 2012

#271. Phil

Yep, and if Nero didn’t at least rescue the Romulan spies on Vulcan, what was all his “I’m doing this for Romulus!” about?

Of course, possibly 25 years of Klingon torture may have left his reasoning a little wobly? Then again, maybe he was just the first in a wave of one-man weapons of mass destruction the Klingons have lit and tossed at the Federation?

299. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

NOTE: This post disappeared from earlier so I’m reposting with other links split into a separate post.

***

Part 1

Sorry MJ, you’re a good apologist, but it’s obvious you are defending a status quo view of reality that you are embedded within and do not like to have challenged. According to ABC, a good purveyor of the official story, Hillary says she doesn’t even know what she was watching at that moment.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2011/05/hillary-clinton-explains-infamous-osama-bin-laden-raid-photo/

That’s how memorable the experience was for her. Her phantom spring allergy that may or may not have been acting up — she isn’t quite sure — is the reason she looks like she’s gasping. LOL!

So yeah, in all likelihood that “photo op” was either staged (instead of saying “smile” the photographer said, “Okay, look at the monitor and look very very concerned!”) — or it was just snapped out of context and used to create a false impression of the power of empire watching Bin Laden being hunted and killed, just before Barack Obama heads into election season.

It’s all image building. That’s exactly what the media does. It sells you crap, and it can be easily used by any administration to deceive people because of both the poor standards of journalists and their need to play by the “rules” to get on the “inside.”

300. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

Part 2

I call BS.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1382859/Osama-bin-Laden-dead-Photo-Obama-watching-Al-Qaeda-leader-die-live-TV.html

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/osama-bin-laden-dead-president-obama-advisors-watched-raid-kill-al-qaeda-leader-unfold-live-article-1.141695

Here, you have to wait for the Jake Tapper segment:
http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/president-obama-praises-troops-killed-osama-bin-laden/story?id=13507836#.UN8mS7Zj6Ud

301. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

Yes, the moon landings happened! Just because you prove the existence of conspiracy doesn’t mean they are all equally likely or true. Just like anything else, you have to look at the evidence.

302. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

Here’s a test question in a little experiment: How many of you have heard of Agenda 21?

For those who have heard of it, who, if anyone, comes to mind at the mention of the words Agenda 21?

303. MJ - December 29, 2012

@295. Big deal, the white house press guy or a source or the LA times reporter overstates live information updates to use the term live video instead, and that is some big conspiracy? That is so lame Bob if that is some evidence for some so called conspiracy theory of yours on Bin Laden’s death. Come on, is that all you got???

304. MJ - December 29, 2012

@295 @299. Again, there was no live video from the raid. There was communications with the Delta Force offices who was based at the secondary staging site; I’m not sure if that was video or audio, but there were likely some video in the situation room annex they were in from some other feeds (e.g., Centcom, CIA Ops in Langley), so I’m sure the group had some video to watch.

I’m still kind of laughing here about this — the fact that their is some debate over how much video they got, and what the press then reported on it, is suppose to make me doubt Bin Laden was killed??? Huh??? Does not compute??? What is the point of this supposed “smoking gun” here that I am missing??? This is more likely a “smoking blank.”

DM Duncan, I noticed you provided an ABC News link, however I thought earlier you made big deal of not trusting mainstream TV sources??? Nevertheless, that article you provided confirms that Bin Laden was KIA (Killed in Action) and that his body was positively ID’d. So in this case, thanks for providing that outstanding news piece source.

305. MJ - December 29, 2012

“So yeah, in all likelihood that “photo op” was either staged (instead of saying “smile” the photographer said, “Okay, look at the monitor and look very very concerned!”) — or it was just snapped out of context and used to create a false impression of the power of empire watching Bin Laden being hunted and killed, just before Barack Obama heads into election season.”

Worst case it was another Clinton “acting” because she new the White House photographer was snapping pictures. Like that would be the first time that a Clinton posed for the media to make themselves look good? That’s all you guys got???

306. MJ - December 29, 2012

I’m still not sure of the point here on Clinton. If we are arguing that she is lying about sneezing and she is performing somewhat for the press, then OK, great job guys uncovering the Clinton mucus conspiracy?

Congrats!!!!!

307. Barney Fife - December 29, 2012

“I love the smell of conspiracy in the morning” ;-)

308. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

MJ, not everything is a “conspiracy.” Usually, when people mean conspiracy they mean something that has a core element of illegality which is the motive for keeping the conspiracy hidden. I’m afraid that you are the one who sees conspiracies everywhere, not us.

In addition to conspiracies there are all sorts of deceptions used to manipulate public sentiment and opinion for support of any given agenda, but those are technically not conspiracies, because they are not illegal.

Dishonest, yes, but illegal, no. And such things may be hidden, but that’s because if people knew the real agenda they wouldn’t support them — but those are deceptions, not really conspiracies.

And those deceptions use the media to achieve the goals of the agenda.

WMDs in Iraq is a pernicious recent example of that sort of manipulation created through the media that nobody can ignore. And yes, the photo op was to boost Obama’s ratings.

You’ve made a huge mistake in thinking that because I cite a source which YOU accept, that I have legitimized whatever the source says.

Incorrect. I have to use your sources because they are the only ones you will accept. If I argue merely from my premises or sources, then I am merely arguing in a circle to someone who doesn’t accept them.

I don’t trust mainstream sources. But it doesn’t mean that everything that they say is a lie — what an oversimplification of what we are saying. Even the devil has to tell the truth to make his lies believable.

The problem is that we need independent investigators to corroborate the reliability of information purveyed by mainstream sources, when it should be the job of the mainstream sources to deliver accurate information to begin with. And mixed in with all that accurate information is what I call the voice-of-empire, explaining and apologizing for the status quo, and NOT reporting news that is antagonistic to status quo aims, even when those aims are unlawful and unconstitutional.

ABC got it right reporting what Clinton said. I know that because I heard Hillary say it — not because I read an online article of ABC reporting that she said it.

So I am free to use ABCs report while rationally questioning the reliability of the other information they report which you incorrectly think I am justifying by citing an ABC report. So no, I most certainly did NOT confirm the legitimacy of the official narrative by citing ABC news

I can confirm what Hillary said. I can’t do that with the blood test. Hell, I can’t even see the picture of Bin Laden’s dead body.

Nope. The fact is that you take his death completely on faith based on what you’ve been told by people who say they had firsthand knowledge.

I don’t know WHO the SEALS saw, chased, and shot. I don’t know WHAT the blood test results were. I have to take ALL of that on faith.

Now I often don’t have a problem with that on minor things, but I do wherever politics is concerned because the field is so full of professional liars and selfish careerists trying to distort facts for their personal advantage.

And yes, it is a FACT that you take the official narrative on faith. You and everyone else who was not there.

I do not take it on faith because I have lost faith in a morally blighted Washington DC, and I am watching them there trying to hold the empire together by enacting or proposing draconian legislation on everything that they don’t know how else to respond to, which is what empires always do when things start to fly apart, except that now they have radios and TVs to spread their propaganda.

309. Red Shirt Diaries - December 29, 2012

All, here is a good summary of parts of the Bin Laden Raid from No Easy Day from an Alternative News Source on Youtube:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rh8mVsUY7ZE

This is really an outstanding book, unapologetic, accurate and apolitical. The best non-fiction book I read last year. If folks are complaining about mainstream sources, this book is decidedly great alternative, while also providing firsthand knowledge. If you read this book, you will come away trusting this guy. And he pulls no punches concerning his disdain for politicians.

310. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

309

Bin Laden was already dead when the SEALs got into the room and they don’t know if the man they saw poke his head out of the door was him or even if their shots hit the guy.

The HuffPo piece doesn’t even say that the SEALs fired those shots. It just leaves you to infer that they did.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/08/28/no-easy-day-bin-laden-raid-book_n_1837947.html

The Young Turks piece creates the impression that the SEALs HEARD the shots and weren’t necessarily the ones who fired them, again leaving you to infer where the shots came from.

I haven’t read the book yet, so maybe the information is in there, but media reports of the book haven’t clarified for me exactly where the shots came from and who was responsible for making them.

311. Red Shirt Diaries - December 29, 2012

#309. If you read the book, it is clear that the seals know which two of them shot Bin Laden, but they all agreed together not to ever divulge which ones in their team actually shot him…for obvious reasons.

312. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

That I understand, What I don’t understand is why in media reports it is not stated that A seal INITIALLY shot him. I don’t care about the shooter’s name. To provide a contrast, unlike the shots that “Owen” heard on the staircase, there is no such ambiguity about who delivered the shots to Bin Laden’s chest AFTER they entered the room. They didn’t have to mention anyone’s name to make it clear that they — the SEALs — shot him in the chest after they entered the room.

Little discrepancies like that stand out until addressed.

It may be that the book does confirm it, but it sorta supports my reasoning about why I don’t trust media accounts., and all we have to go on here is “Owen’s” account because no one else is talking. So “No Easy Day” is the gospel according to Mark (“Owen”).

I need more than one person’s point of view, and I’m also skeptical about all the official outrage surrounding the book’s publication.

313. kmart - December 29, 2012

287,

Orci’s airspace comment is a valid one, ESPECIALLY with respect to our Capital. Geez, try reading some of the well-researched 9/11 stuff, the ones where they keep asking question after the folks on the spot stop answering.

Some days I think I need to change my name to Oswald Pelletier.

314. boborci - December 29, 2012

mj. so u acknowledge photo staged?

just wanna be clear before moving on so we can keep track of what we agree on. either CIA lying or photo staged, right?

315. A13U - December 29, 2012

Writers and Trekkers and Truthers, OH MYYY!

316. Emperor Mike of the Empire - December 29, 2012

Ok Bob Orci. What is the One Conspiricy you want to either Prove or Disprove,

317. Red Dead Ryan - December 29, 2012

So the photo was staged. It boosted Obama’s poll numbers. Big deal. Doesn’t necessarily prove the Bin Laden raid was faked.

The reason that Bin Laden’s body was never shown was because of culural senstivity towards Muslims. Or political correctness.

318. Emperor Mike of the Empire - December 29, 2012

Hey Ryan. It was Political Correctness.

319. Gary S. - December 29, 2012

283.
Arent there supposed to be some sealed files on the JFK assassination
that are supposed to be unsealed at a later date?
It would be interesting to see what those files say .

320. MJ - December 29, 2012

@314. Of course the photo wasn’t staged, but of course Hillary Clinton was making a self-serving pose as the White House photographer took some photos. The other folks in the room wouldn’t stoop to the typical Clinton-like level to overtly put on a show like she did.

So what again was your point here, Bob, other then Clintons behaving like Clintons always behave???

Sorry, but I don’t get that “Sneezegate” is really all the compelling or interesting here???

321. MJ - December 29, 2012

Harry,

I’ve mentioned this before. The overwhelming circumstantial evidence that LBJ did not have Kennedy killed to me is that if LBJ really had the balls to do something like that, then he sure as hell wouldn’t bow out of the reelection in 68, especially with another Kennedy he hated likely to win the Presidency…NO WAY! And don’t give me the lame medical stuff — he had been having heart and other issues since the early 50’s — that would not have stopped him.

Also, as much as some people want to believe that JFK was a dove and wanted to get us out of Viet Nam, I completely refject that arguemnt. JFK was a consumate Cold Warrior, and the cold evil corporate war monger MacNamara was the guy he brought in to try to make a science out of MAD and engagement with the Russians –JFK and MacNamara bear the most responsibility of any figures in history in getting us mired in Viet Nam. That is a fact!

Additionally, JFK uses and abused so many women while he was President that it makes Bill Clinton look like an amateur:

“But the President did not simply have affairs, according to Hersh. Several Secret Service men assigned to guard the President told Hersh he had a taste for bimbos, girls brought in off the street by friends acting as procurers; that he liked cavorting naked with such women in the White House pool, that friends often joined him, and sometimes his brothers Bobby and Teddy as well. ”The high point — or low point — of Presidential partying,” Hersh writes, came in December 1962 at the Palm Springs estate of the movie star and crooner Bing Crosby. Secret Service men described to Hersh a night of drunken debauchery when state policemen guarding the front of the house thought the wild cries coming from the pool might be an invasion of coyotes. The women were introduced as stewardesses from a European airline, but who they really were the Secret Service men had no idea. This single tableau, including much I have not described, manages to cast a pale and bilious light over everything that’s wrong with politics, sex, California, swimming pools, drinking after dinner and all else that slips out of control once men feel they are invulnerable.”

To me, the JFK legend is a fraud, and it he hadn’t got killed, it was only a matter of time before his presidency either ended in scandal like Nixon, or he got us into a nuclear WWIII.

And I won’t even get into how he gave the blacks hopes of some civil rights gains in the 1960 election, only to basically completely ignore them and civil rights once he got into office. The “evil Johson,” thank God, actually cared enough to move the nation forward in civil rights.

322. boborci - December 29, 2012

316. If. I have to pick one, i agree with dm and Harry that JFK assassination is the key to understanding our country.

323. boborci - December 29, 2012

320. if photo wasnt’ staged, then CIA director is lying,

because White house said they were watching killing of OBL.

not so easy for you to wiggle out of this problem. forget hillary and her allergies (which in itself is so ridiculous – they claim they saw killing, and then when she is called out on it by DCI, she claims allergies!). with or without allergy story, which you dismiss illogically not understanding the implications of lying or acting about or during the “moment,” the FACT still remains: White house claimed it watched killing, and DCI said they didn’t.

324. MJ - December 29, 2012

@317 “The reason that Bin Laden’s body was never shown was because of culural sensitivity towards Muslims. Or political correctness.”

Yes, look how some of these people across the world freak out and destroy anything and anyone they can get their hands on just cause they don’t like what some no name crackpot on Youtube says. It’s gotten so bad that Western countries’ media have to essentially self-censor themselves hence these oversensitive crazies use it as an excuse to run amok. Memo to Salmon Rushdie: we get it, dude!

In the final episode of Homeland this season, Abu Nizir gets a similar burial at sea, and the episode really illustrated the benefit of doing that versus the media circus martyr effect that would be the other choice.

325. MJ - December 29, 2012

@323. That is ridiculousness nitpicking. They were in constant communication with the Delta Force leader in the staging area, and I’m sure they had a videoconferencing going to CIA Ops and others. If either the White House or the LA Times reported exxagerated a bit what was actually on video versus audio or weblink, so what? Still not getting your point???

326. boborci - December 29, 2012

319 gAry

yes. if there is nothing to hide, why are the records on JFK sealed until 2025? if Oswald is a total lone nut with no connections to gov, why are his tax returns still classified? and once things are released, how long do conspirators need to alter or destroy files? you think 50 years is long enough?

327. Vultan - December 29, 2012

#322

Our laws and our culture are the keys to understanding our country.

The JFK assassination is key to understanding our failures and our fears.

328. boborci - December 29, 2012

327. good rhetoric. not sure what you mean at all.

329. MJ - December 29, 2012

@326. Bob, your information is incorrect again. The 1992 JFK Records Act stipulates that all remaining JFK records shall be released no later than 2017.

330. boborci - December 29, 2012

317 LOL!

we hanged Hussein on TV. Showed his sons shot through the face. but when we finally “catch” Darth Vader… nothing. we lie about Islamic law requiring burial at sea, which is not true. we show Congressman and Senators fake dead OBL pictures which are immediately exposed as fakes, all after CIA admits making fake Hussein and OBL videos. white house picture is fake, or DCI is lying, and all this in the shadow of reports of OBL’s death starting on 2002. essentially, you official supporters are saying that no matter how many lies, errors, or omissions are made in the release of an official story, you “know” the truth because you trust officialdoms last word. thanks, guys. you rock.

331. Vultan - December 29, 2012

#328

Law and culture form a country’s identity and are the best way to understanding it. JFK, his assassination and all that surrounds it are a small part of that culture, as you admitted part of a “cottage” industry.

332. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

324: “Yes, look how some of these people across the world freak out and destroy anything and anyone they can get their hands on just cause they don’t like what some no name crackpot on Youtube says. It’s gotten so bad that Western countries’ media have to essentially self-censor themselves hence these oversensitive crazies use it as an excuse to run amok. Memo to Salmon Rushdie: we get it, dude!”

Difference is those folk are attacking those who were perceived to slight their religion. Bin Laden was not Muhammad, and when Al Zarqawi was killed, they made a point to show his dead mug all over the place.

So the “cultural sensitivity” argument is just a red herring.

When I heard they dumped OBL’s body at sea, I laughed out loud.

333. boborci - December 29, 2012

329. you’ve addressed the issue head on once again. Congrats.

334. boborci - December 29, 2012

331. Vultan.

amazing. still do not get your meaning. Just say it, plainly. say:

I believe that after Earl Warren, the head of the CIA who was fired by JFK, was the best, most objective man, with no motive or opportunity, to investigate the murder of the man who fired him and disagreed with his entire world view.

335. boborci - December 29, 2012

329 and source, please? lets see the evidence of your irrelevant digression.

336. boborci - December 29, 2012

331. and as far as “cottage industry,” boy did you miss am misuse the meaning of that argument.

337. Vultan - December 29, 2012

#334

Please, with respect to you, sir, I’d appreciate it if you didn’t try to put words in my mouth. My original comment was in response to your comment of JFK’s assassination being THE KEY to understanding our country. I’ve no problem with the JFK conspiracies. In my opinion not everything adds up in the case.

And in my opinion, as I said before, JFK’s death is about our failures and our fears—failures in representative government and basic humanity, fears it could happen again.

But our entire country doesn’t [yet] revolve around it.
(Again, in my opinion.)

338. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

331. Vultan – December 29, 2012

#328

Law and culture form a country’s identity and are the best way to understanding it.

***

You understand a country by its history, and by how its history has shaped its present, and by how both of those direct its future.

339. boborci - December 29, 2012

338 dM

exactly!

340. boborci - December 29, 2012

337. again, after asking three times, you’ve said nothing. take a stand. m

with all due respect.

341. boborci - December 29, 2012

337 Vultan

and if indeed JFK was killed by military industrial complex, then our country does indeed revolve around it, even if you and less than half of US population doesn’t know it.

342. Vultan - December 29, 2012

#338

Yes, exactly! History is apart of the culture. The ENTIRE history, not a single incident. So while study of JFK is important, I don’t think it’s good to place quuuite as much importance on it as some do.

But then, that’s your business.

343. Vultan - December 29, 2012

#341

Indeed, but it’s still an “if.”

And still worth studying with an open mind.
Not so much for “taking a stand” on, I don’t think.

At its heart it’s an investigation, not a ball game with this side and that side.

344. Red Dead Ryan - December 29, 2012

Here’s the thing. Both Hussein and al-Zarqawi were both executed on GWB’s watch. Bush and Cheney took the “tough cowboy” approach when executing their foreign policy.

Obama does the same thing, but differently. He doesn’t show the bodies of the dead. He’s more “politically correct” in that regard.

However, I still don’t think OBL is buried at sea. I think the burial was faked, to ensure that OBL’s body is kept secret in a bunker somewhere that few people know about. The fake photos could have come from anyone.

As for the argument about the broadcasting of the raid, well, the confusion over that could be just that…..confusion. Incompetence leads to confusion, which, in the instance of the U.S government, often leads people to believe there was a conspiracy where non actually existed.

345. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

JFK is certainly a key to understanding our country. No doubt about it. The story contains all the symptomatic features of our country’s problems. It’s not just a key, it’s a synedoche containing the patterns of corruption that repeat on a larger scale throughout our nation’s history and that is growing worse. Habeous Corpus is on the slab, ladies and gentlemen. If it isn’t dead, its pulse is growing faint, and no one in the mainstream is even preparing a memorial. And that’s because you want to be safe. Well…your gods — the gods of the military industrial complex — have heard you.

You gonna get LOTS of safety unless you start protesting on a massive scale. Hehehe!

346. Vultan - December 29, 2012

By the way, I salute your passion… even though it does border on fundamentalism at times.

347. boborci - December 29, 2012

342. a coup in a democracy that is hidden by msm may be slightly more consequential than you are making it out to be.

what exactly are you arguing? i knw you don’t like ne to put words in your mouth, but it sounds like you are saying: “yeah… JFK maybe was killed by conspiracy, but I can’t be sure and so what?”

i dont respect that opinion at all.

348. boborci - December 29, 2012

344. so we both agree the national security apparatus lied in some form or another on biggest story of the day!

349. Vultan - December 29, 2012

#345

Then we should probably be talking about Lincoln as well—a president who did suspend habeas corpus in a time of national emergency.

350. Red Dead Ryan - December 29, 2012

#348.

Sure!

351. Emperor Mike of the Empire - December 29, 2012

J.F.K was not Killed by Oswald. I believe he was Killed by either the CIA or KGB or maybe a Combo of both. I just do not see Oswald as good a shot as he might be Killing J.F.K.

352. Emperor Mike of the Empire - December 29, 2012

Hey Bob. I agree with you. Bin Lauden being Dead should have been shown on T.V and not kept so Secret. If indeed he was killed.

353. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

344. Red Dead Ryan – December 29, 2012

Here’s the thing. Both Hussein and al-Zarqawi were both executed on GWB’s watch. Bush and Cheney took the “tough cowboy” approach when executing their foreign policy.

Obama does the same thing, but differently. He doesn’t show the bodies of the dead. He’s more “politically correct” in that regard.

***

But then you can’t make the argument that showing Bin Laden’s death face would create riots because we know that isn’t true from Al Zarqawi’s instance.

I don’t recall anything of significance happening after the big reveal of Al Zarqawis death gaze.

OBL was the most hunted man on earth and the vast majority of people believed he was responsible for 9/11, so even if they admired him and didn’t want him killed, they would at least understand the reason for his being hunted.

And having been killed they would just see him as a martyr, which they always do anyway, so the pics aren’t going to stop that from happening either.

So what’s the real reason they didn’t show the proof?

The real reason — if in fact they even had any proof of that man’s ID — is that they didn’t NEED to. The administration knew they could make all of you believe it without any evidence whatsoever.

And they were right.

That’s how inflated Obama’s ego got after he was elected on promising everything to everybody. He promised the impossible dream. Whatever you thought his speeches meant — then that’s what they meant. If you believed those, then you would believe anything, and he knew it, and he was confident of his ability to make you believe just about anything, so there was no need to show you any evidence.

354. Vultan - December 29, 2012

#347

I’m suggesting you keep an open mind about things—all things—and not hold such an absolute view, as you seem to be demonstrating here.

For what it’s worth, I mostly suspect LBJ knocked off JFK. Though I’m open to all other theories.

355. Emperor Mike of the Empire - December 29, 2012

What should have happned with Lauden being Killed is that he should have been shown on Live T.V to show the rest of Al Quida that we got their man guy and we will get them. Instead we did the so called Buriel at sea. My guess is that lauden is Alive somewhere and we are getting a lot of Info out of him. But then again. He could be Fish Food.

356. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

349. Vultan – December 29, 2012

#345

Then we should probably be talking about Lincoln as well—a president who did suspend habeas corpus in a time of national emergency.

***

Yeah, and I’m concerned about the Lincoln meme appearing at this time in our history.

We are not in a time of national emergency, Vultan. This is new territory.

357. Emperor Mike of the Empire - December 29, 2012

Hey Vultan, I think the KGB and CIA also had something to do with it.

358. Red Dead Ryan - December 29, 2012

Here’s why I don’t buy the early post 9/11 reports of OBL’s death.

The U.S military was pursuing OBL into the mountains of Tora Bora in Afghanistan in December 2001 when Dick Cheney ceased the hunt.

Why? Because the Bush administration had prior knowledge of the 9/11 attack plans by al-Queda a year and a half in advance. The Clinton administration, as well as the CIA, had passed along the intel to the new President, who deliberately ignored the warnings.

Why? Because they had already been discussing how to overthrow Saddam Hussein. Bush and Cheney needed a reason to go into Iraq, and OBL provided them the greatest reason they could hope for.

Not only that, but, the Bush administration needed OBL alive and on the run to bring about the Patriot Act. And to win the 2004 Presidential election. Bin Laden struck fear into the hearts of Americans, which the Bush administration capitalized on because a lot of people were scared, and when they get scared, they tend to rally around the government in power.

Iraq was descending into chaos and civil war in 2004, and John Kerry tried to use that against the Bush administration, but that administration had the OBL tape which scared a lot of would-be Kerry voters into re-electing Bush.

Had Bin Laden been killed before 9/11, or even shortly after, the Iraq War would have been harder to justify, and Bush probably would not have won the 2004 election, even with the hanging chads.

359. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

346. Vultan – December 29, 2012

By the way, I salute your passion… even though it does border on fundamentalism at times.

***

LOL! Whose passion do you mean? If it’s mine then I have to ask you what you think my fundamentals are.

Calling someone fundamentalist is almost as bad as falsely calling someone a Nazi. It’s an ad hominem designed purely to shut down discussion because you can’t reason with fundamentalists and Nazis, so why bother listening to them?

360. Vultan - December 29, 2012

#356

Hmm… I don’t know, with everything I read about history—well, it’s like what Mark Twain said: “History doesn’t repeat itself, but it does rhyme.”

Apart from Lincoln and Kennedy, FDR’s interment camps are pretty close to modern concerns over security vs. personal liberty. Another era worthy of study.

Pathetic now what passes for history and social studies in schools, if any.

361. Vultan - December 29, 2012

#359

Not you dmduncan, but Mr. Orci.

Though I realize now that was a poor choice of words and I apologize.

362. boborci - December 29, 2012

358. agree with much of your reasoning, which is why admin could not ADMIT obl was dead despite repeated reports. you are right that the Empire ca’t strike back if Darth Vader dies at the death star.

363. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

360: “Hmm… I don’t know, with everything I read about history—well, it’s like what Mark Twain said: ‘History doesn’t repeat itself, but it does rhyme.'”

Good quote. “America” doesn’t rhyme with “Rome” phonetically, but it does spiritually.

364. Red Dead Ryan - December 29, 2012

#353.

Al-Zarqawi was viewed by many, including those in al-Queda, and those close to him, as a mere thug. His brutality became so extreme, even Bin Laden tried to distance himself away from him. Nobody shed any tears when he died. In fact, there were rumors that some of Al-Zarqawi’s men ratted on him.

Bin Laden was a different beast altogether. He and his top lieutenants masterminded the greatest terrorist attack against the most powerful nation in the world, traumatizing the American people, and bleeding it economically. The U.S is seen as the Great Satan in places like Pakistan, where the 9/11 attacks were celebrated. Not only that, but OBL is seen as the face of the Soviet Union’s defeat in Afghanistan in the late 80’s.

Obama probably does have a giant ego–as he is a politician–but you can’t discount the fact the Taliban have acknowledged OBL’s death. There were angry protests in the streets of Pakistan shortly afterward.

And finally, if Bin Laden is still alive, wouldn’t we know it by now? Wouldn’t someone have a tape proving he’s still alive? I would think he’d want to let his followers know.

But, hey, that’s just me.

365. Vultan - December 29, 2012

#363

Indeed.

Interesting discussion here, as always.
Have a good evening.

366. Red Dead Ryan - December 29, 2012

If an independent source has any tapes or documents proving Bin Laden died in Tora Bora 11 years ago, or that he’s still alive somewhere, I’ll consider eating my words.

367. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

Or — and this IS a theory; please notice that I am identifying it as such — OBL could have died a long time ago and they didn’t tell anyone because they wanted to recreate his death spectacularly by the guns of American SpecOps at the right moment, with the troops used being none the wiser.

OBL dying of some disease in a cave? What kind of justice is that? We all deserved a better ending to the tale than THAT, no?

368. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

364. Red Dead Ryan – December 29, 2012

Sure, OBL was more of a hero, and there were demonstrations, but they weren’t catastrophic. Nowhere near it. So where’s the love? It’s total baloney that the didn’t want to release the proof because of some absurd fears.

Fear justifies and excuses everything these days. They know it, and they played that card in their explanation.

Obama doesn’t HAVE to prove anything to most people. That’s why he can get away with signing the NDAA and killing Americans on secret kill lists. That’s why he’s more dangerous than GW Bush who couldn’t fart without generating a protest march on Washington DC.

369. Red Dead Ryan - December 29, 2012

#367.

Well, I believe that there were rumors that Bin Laden had kidney disease.

And if the raid was staged, then the Navy SEALS team is just like the 501st Clone Trooper squadron led by Anakin Skywalker/Darth Vader in “Revenge Of The Sith during the attack on the Jedi Temple.

If that’s the case, then there should be some sort of documentation of the “fake raid” that is ready to be leaked online by WikiLeaks.

370. boborci - December 29, 2012

366. here you go. just two of a half dozen:

http://m.youtube.com/#/watch?v=SDTEEXG3ge8&desktop_uri=%2Fwatch%3Fv%3DSDTEEXG3ge8

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,41576,00.html

by the way, if you can cone up with an independent source to corroborate OBL death during raid, I’ll eat my words’ too!

371. Red Dead Ryan - December 29, 2012

I just find it unbelievable that a bin Laden raid could be staged, with an absolute perfect cover-up of all evidence of the fake raid.

In this day and age of twenty-four hour news channels, the internet, mobile devices, and other forms of surveillance, that NO ONE has come forward saying that they were part of a stealthy conspiracy involving a fake raid in Pakistan (or some other country).

372. Bucky - December 29, 2012

I’d lean more towards that the photo of them not-watching the Bin Laden raid is either A) a photo taken earlier on in the process when they still had a live feed B) they’re looking forward because that’s where they were looking when the feed cut out but whatever pertinent information they had was presented on the screen before them (does anyone seriously think they just had one big screen that showed a cam feed of one random member of Seal Team 6? I kinda doubt that.) C) it’s more about image so they put the photo out there and let people looking at it mentally put it into context. The idea that the Cigarette Smoking Man or whoever all lined them up and said “Okay, now, everybody, look really grim and concerned!” falls way, way down on the list of probabilities. I’m not saying it’s impossible, just very very improbable. (That’s what Infinite Improbability Drives are for!)

I boil it down to this: Does the government lie to people to protect their image? Oh, hell yeah. Every day. Does that extend as deep as some people believe. Eh, probably not. But stuff like, as boborici pointed out, that they put out a picture of them looking at something when they didn’t actually have a friggin video feed does start to throw a monkey wrench into everything. It’s a fine line. I try not to think about it. I got a review to write about Les Miz and the Raptors are on TV and beer to drink and I’m not even a friggin US citizen anyway so it doesn’t bother me all that much.

373. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

371. Red Dead Ryan – December 29, 2012

I just find it unbelievable that a bin Laden raid could be staged, with an absolute perfect cover-up of all evidence of the fake raid.

***

As long as we’re considering scenarios, the raid need not even be faked.

A super secret operation within a super secret operation. CIA sets up some poor sucker who looks like Bin Laden — perhaps even someone who was cosmetically made to look like Bin Laden, then they arrange for information of his whereabouts to be found. SEALs go in and kill a guy that they think is Bin Laden.

Sounds like the plot of a movie. Like Argo. ;-)

In fact, a LOOONG while ago I mentioned on this site that the CIA had been involved in turning one of my favorite SF books — Zelazny’s Lord of Light — into a movie, which had gone into some kind of production and then had been mysteriously dropped. I even posted a link.

Many years later we get Argo explaining the incident.

374. Red Dead Ryan - December 29, 2012

#370.

FOX News, eh? They aren’t really known for accurate reporting.

As for the other video, perhaps Bhutto was deliberately misinformed by the Pakistani government to expose her? She was killed shortly afterward.

So, you and I are in the same boat, pal. Neither of us have any true hard evidence either way.

375. Red Dead Ryan - December 29, 2012

#372.

Okay, that sounds plausible. So I guess we should know in a few years, then?

376. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

373. Red Dead Ryan – December 29, 2012

#370.

FOX News, eh? They aren’t really known for accurate reporting.

***

Neither is CNN. I’m sure Bob has an sickly amusing link he can share involving a CNN reporter, a palm tree blowing in the wind, and a blue screen.

Ya have to work with what ya got, sometimes, to see where it goes, and Fox is not the only source of that story.

377. Red Dead Ryan - December 29, 2012

This has been a pretty good debate. I still believe the Bin Laden raid occurred, but I haven’t discounted the possibility that Bin Laden may have been dead for a few years now. I just haven’t seen anything to convince me of that.

I may never agree with dmduncan’s theories, but his are well thought-out and highly plausible with reasoned, independent thinking.

378. Red Dead Ryan - December 29, 2012

#375.

Well, I agree that CNN isn’t always accurate either. But they sure do better than FOX, even if that isn’t saying much.

Problem is, its really hard to know which source to trust. There are many independent sources, some honest, and others not so much.

Anyone can post something, and call it news.

I suppose its easier these days to fool people because there are more ways to do it (internet, twenty-four hour news channels) than there were a couple of decades ago.

379. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

374. Red Dead Ryan – December 29, 2012

#372.

Okay, that sounds plausible. So I guess we should know in a few years, then?

***

Oh I wouldn’t count on it, same as I wouldn’t count on ever learning the full scope of MKULTRA, since most of the records were deliberately destroyed 2 years before the public became aware of the project.

380. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

377: “Problem is, its really hard to know which source to trust. There are many independent sources, some honest, and others not so much.”

That’s why you need to develop a picture from many different and independent sources, and many of them may not even be journalistic sources. They may in many cases be direct witnesses that the media chooses to ignore, or citizen-activists who know the issues and the facts BETTER than any given journalist whose job is to rapidly crank out stories on a schedule.

YouTube is a great place to familiarize yourself with their presence and their work.

381. Red Shirt Diaries - December 29, 2012

@370 “by the way, if you can cone up with an independent source to corroborate OBL death during raid, I’ll eat my words’ too!'”

Mr Orci, at the risk of being repetitive, Matt Basonetts’s unauthorized autobiography, No Easy Day, is by far the most definitive independent account one could want on this.

I find it rather odd that I keep repeating this source over and over here, but you choose to ignore it. DM Duncan did not ignore it, and I give him credit for that. He seems to present well reasoned thoughts here to carry the water for your bombastic quips on all this, if I may be so bold as to cast some criticism on you.

PS: FYI, Bin Laden’s daughter also confirmed he was shot and killed by U.S. Special Forces in the raid, thus confirming the account of the raid in No Easy Day.

382. Trek in Cafe - December 29, 2012

While not contributing to this argument one way or the other, I am enjoying this!!!

383. MJ - December 29, 2012

Red Shirt,

Here is another confirmed report from his youngest wife:

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/wife-bin-laden-hid-pakistan-decade/story?id=16037497#.UN_Uam_7KSo

I’m just waiting to hear Orci’s manufactured “reasoning” on why we should ignore both the firsthand account in No Easy Day and the firsthand accounts from both one of his daughters and his youngest wife. Here’s betting that Orci’s “excuse” on this one is going to be one of his all time doozies! ;-)

384. MJ - December 29, 2012

“Difference is those folk are attacking those who were perceived to slight their religion. Bin Laden was not Muhammad, and when Al Zarqawi was killed, they made a point to show his dead mug all over the place. So the “cultural sensitivity” argument is just a red herring. When I heard they dumped OBL’s body at sea, I laughed out loud.”

How many people worldwide in general really recognize “Al Zarqawi” when you mention his name? Not many! Whereas Bin Laden is the all time rockstar of terrorists — I bet more than 50% of adults on the planet know who he is. It’s like in the Star Wars universe comparing Biggs to Luke Skywalker.

And we really can’t know what the reaction would have been had they brought his body back to the U.S.? However, we see that the burial at sea resulted in only minor issues (outside of Pakastan) worldwide, so we know that the burial at sea worked exactly as intended to not results in worldwide problems/demonstrations/attacks.

385. MJ - December 29, 2012

@363 “Good quote. “America” doesn’t rhyme with “Rome” phonetically, but it does spiritually.”

And when Rome fell, it took civilization over 1000 years to make it back to a similar level of culture, engineering and technology.

386. boborci - December 29, 2012

380 i would hardly call a seal claiming credit for obl death an independent source — that is a government source, the very gov I am accusing of lying. that is like saying the defendent in a crime is an idependent source when he proclaims innocence. We can each cite as many sources as the other for how and when Bin Aden died, so we will have to find a different criteria for determining the truth.

incidentally, the seal you cite ay very well believe he killed or assisted in killing obl. guven that CIA had hussein and obl look alikes for fake videos,(http://blog.washingtonpost.com/spy-talk/2010/05/cia_group_had_wacky_ideas_to_d.html) the seals testimony alone is meaningless.

387. boborci - December 29, 2012

382. mj

and as far as obl’s wife… are you talking about the one who was killed when he her used as a human shield, or were you referring to the one who survived in the rewrite/second version of the official story? Hard to keep track.

http://p.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/may/2/us-osama-used-wife-human-shield/

388. K-7 - December 29, 2012

MJ, give it up. Every factoid you bring up he just comes up with more complex conspiracy theories to explain it away. It’s laughable at this point.

Bob is an entertainer though, so expecting more that entertainment from him is probably asking too much from the guy.

389. boborci - December 29, 2012

388. k-7.

you say that after above post? did I invent first version of story in which OBL wife killed as human shield? No.

did I invent CIA director contradicting adminstration’s claims of watching obl killing? No.

Did i invent amazing fact that they supposedly dropped his body into the sea without so much as a picture? No.

I don’t need any help “coming up with” more compkex conspiracy theories when officialdom is writing them for you.

390. Red Shirt Diaries - December 29, 2012

@386. Not so. That Seal retired and then wrote his autobiography, including that mission, while no longer with the government. And in fact, he did not get permission from the government, and likely violated laws even though he made efforts to not refer to classified info or use real names.

You really should read the book. I think you might learn something, and it would certainly be preferable than continuing to see you pull assumptions and platitudes our of your ass about a book and author who you obviously have not taken the time to learn anything about it.

Take a break from the cherry-picking of your internet stories here to maybe actually read a first-hand account of this. If you read the book, then you will have earned the right to tell me why you might think the author is not being truthful, etc. etc. Heaven forbid you might learn something here which would not fit into your suspicions. We can’t have that now, can we?

391. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

384: “And we really can’t know what the reaction would have been had they brought his body back to the U.S.? However, we see that the burial at sea resulted in only minor issues (outside of Pakastan) worldwide, so we know that the burial at sea worked exactly as intended to not results in worldwide problems/demonstrations/attacks.”

1. If they have the proof they can and should release it. Nobody expected them to put his body under glass at the Smithsonian. Dumping his body without giving us any proof was outrageous. I personally felt insulted.

2. I don’t think you can attribute the inconsequential global protest of his death to a sea burial. That’s a post hoc ergo propter hoc fallacy. His supporters viewed his death as martyrdom whether photographic proof was released or not, and if pissing off Muslims and NOT giving them MORE reasons to hate us were Obama’s strategy, he would not be using drones to kill innocent Muslims and pissing them off, giving them more reasons to hate us. (So that explanation for the muy rapido dumping of his body and the refusal to release any corroborating evidence is not credible to me).

392. boborci - December 29, 2012

did i invent that CIA cast and shot fake OBl videos? No.

did I invent the half dozen domestic and foreign sources who reported obl death since 2002? No.

393. boborci - December 29, 2012

390. violated the laws? I hate to repeat myself. have you been reading this thread?

to repeat:

Do you know what the NDAA is? Do you know that the Executive Branch has executed US citizens without due process? do you really believe for one second that if the national security apparatus truly thought the Seal’s book was a threat that they wouldn’t stop it and put him away forever? Classic psyop to pretend to dislike book while allowing it to go out. It makes it seems as though the information is valid. It worked perfectly on you.

394. MJ - December 29, 2012

@388 “MJ, give it up. Every factoid you bring up he just comes up with more complex conspiracy theories to explain it away. It’s laughable at this point. Bob is an entertainer though, so expecting more that entertainment from him is probably asking too much from the guy.”

That’s true! So I should just chalk this up to the positive aspects I guess — his vivid imagination is going to give us a great Trek movie.

395. boborci - December 29, 2012

and i I also already said, Seal may very well believe he killed or helped kill OBL. every worD of his book my be his truth as he believes it. if you kindly show me the passage of the book were he performs a dna test on obl to verify his identity, I would surely appreciate it!

396. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

389: “I don’t need any help ‘coming up with’ more compkex conspiracy theories when officialdom is writing them for you.”

Precisely. The muy rapido dumping of OBL’s body at sea GUARANTEED that the official narrative would be questioned, as does the refusal to release any corroborating evidence. So that makes me ask why they would do such a thing. The explanation being offered about dumping his body and not releasing photos is deeply unsatisfying. It doesn’t have the ring of truth to it.

So that makes me think they dumped his body and refused to release any corroborating evidence because they couldn’t risk a close examination of the hard evidence because it wouldn’t fit the official story they told.

From their perspective, they think it’s better to let people question the official story than to release hard evidence which will prove the story false.

397. boborci - December 29, 2012

390. as for cheery-picking – you keep harping on one dubius book while i cite multiple international sources, most of them mainstream!

398. boborci - December 29, 2012

dubious

399. Red Shirt Diaries - December 29, 2012

393. Again, instead of saying you will take a look at the book and consider it, as DM Duncan has said he will do, you instead focus on a secondary item I mentioned and cut and pasted one of your earlier response to me on this.

I’m done here wasting my time on this topic. Read the damn book; you might actually learn something that challenges your thinking on this.

Goodbye for now…

400. boborci - December 29, 2012

396. Bingo. Pure logic.

401. boborci - December 29, 2012

399. I will read it.

402. Red Shirt Diaries - December 29, 2012

@397. Nice try, but you were the one asking for firsthand information. That Seal and the Bin Laden wife and daughter WERE THERE. OK! Jesus H. Fing Christ!

Now I am out of here…..

403. Red Shirt Diaries - December 29, 2012

@401. Thank you. Sorry if I overacted immediately above.

404. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

Look, ya gotta drop the ad hominems against Bob. You lose your own case when you do that. When you can’t persuade someone who’s making good points to your side, and instead switch to trying to make them look crazy, stupid, irrelevant, or fanatical so others think they’re not worth listening to, then you have given up on reasoning and you’ve lost the contest by suddenly shifting to a game that has a much baser set of rules.

Come on. Let’s do better than that. The goal is not out of reach.

405. boborci - December 29, 2012

402. No need to apologize. this is tough stuff.

My response to the first hand account of wife was to point out that the first official story release by our government was that she was killed. That is not an irrelevant fact when attempting to ascertain the truthfulness of the final narrative. Does that alone prove anything one way or the other? No. Does it go into the long list of anomalies that should make you question the official story. Absolutely.

406. MJ - December 29, 2012

@396. If they produced a video, then you and Orci, and others, would claim it was a fake. They have internal email records documenting the burial at sea, but as I’m sure you and Orci will claim those are faked as well, I won’t bother wasting my time to look up that story and cite it here for you. And obviously you will both tell me that the DNA match was faked, and that his wives and daughter are lying, etc. etc. etc. So what is the point on going further on this?

In the interest of humor, however, I offer you this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3QICnOVL48g

407. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

405. boborci – December 29, 2012

Exactly. It’s really about asking the questions that you feel instead of suppressing them so that you fit into a populist group.

408. boborci - December 29, 2012

406. If they produced a video?

No, we would analyze it. But you can’t have that discussion while ignoring the post above cited by Washington Post in which the CIA ADMITS making fake bin laden and Hussein videos with lookalikes. Is that not relevant? In what court of common sense is that not a salient fact?

And do you really think they failed to produce a video because they feared what us nuts would say? The way the seemingly handled the whole thing has given us nuts nothing but ammo.

409. boborci - December 29, 2012

406. lOL

Hilarious.

But also a good example of how ridiculous the official story is;)

410. K-7 - December 29, 2012

#404. But Bob’s a wild and crazy guy! If his brain was an amusement park, I’d buy a 3-day premium pass. It would be extremely exhilarating to go around thinking everyone in control of the world was trying to mess with me, change history, and cover up huge conspiracies and fake all kinds of stuff that we little peons just take for-granted. Ole Uncle Sam, he and his corporate thugs are drilling us all in the keyster from behind day after day just like you and uncle bob say he is, I’m sure.

:-)

411. Harry Ballz - December 29, 2012

For those of you spitballing about the JFK assassination…..I know we all have busy lives, so I’ll cut to the chase…..

Go to YouTube (sorry, I don’t know how to link it here) and type in JFK assassination:Secret Service Standdown. A 2:55 video will pop up showing news footage of Kennedy’s motorcade leaving Love Field that day to proceed through Dallas. You’ll see how Kennedy’s secret service detail is called off the back of his limo at the last second, leaving him unprotected and an easy target. Are you going to suggest Oswald had the authority to do that?

Second, read one book; JFK and the Unspeakable by James Douglass. It’s the very best book for explaining why Kennedy was killed and why it matters to this day.

It wasn’t the mafia, it wasn’t the KGB, it was LBJ and his cronies.

412. boborci - December 29, 2012

As for burial at sea, it need require many conspirators. As stated above, they surely could’ve dropped somebody’s body into the sea. Let’s ask the crew of the US carrier that dropped at sea to hear what they saw:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/al-qaeda/9694952/Osama-bin-Laden-US-Navy-emails-reveal-no-sailors-witnessed-secret-burial-at-sea.html

Oop! None of the witnessed the disposal of this century’s Darth Vader.

413. boborci - December 29, 2012

I’m shocked. Really.

414. boborci - December 29, 2012

411 harry.

I second that.

415. MJ - December 29, 2012

@408. I will grant you and DM Duncan, that in retrospect, the burial at sea thing with no video does give you one point here to hang your hat on. It “probably seemed like a good idea at the time” though.

I think quiet burials at sea for mega-terrorists make a lot of sense, but yes, some video evidence would be good. Don’t know if you watch Homeland or not Bob, but the burial at sea for Abu Nizr just felt right in that scenario. I can see the logic in the process.

416. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

406. MJ – December 29, 2012

That was cute!

But I would only question its authenticity of there was evidence of fakery. After the OBL death news there WERE a series of pics that came out purporting to be his death photos, and the evidence showed they were all fakes.

I depend on the evidence. I don’t have a preconceived outcome when I look at evidence, so if it looks real and there are no anomalies under rigorous close examination, then I am actually FORCED to accept it.

But I have no evidence of the official narrative. The administration won’t provide it. It demands we accept what it tells us on faith.

Seems to me the US gov’t is having an identity crisis and now believes itself to be a religious organization preaching to the faithful masses.

417. boborci - December 29, 2012

416 Amen.

418. MJ - December 29, 2012

@410. Harry, please see my post @321 above, which was my reply to your earlier post.

I did read JFK and the Unspeakable awhile back as your recommended. An interesting read, but I did not buy the part about JFK supposedly going soft on Vietnam. JFK was a hard-nosed Cold War, and took risky, gambling like chances with your national security.

Regardless of who or how JFK was killed, he is a vastly overrated president.

419. MJ - December 29, 2012

@416. Again, yes, I’d prefer pictures/video as well to lock this thing up tighter than a __________ virgin.

420. boborci - December 29, 2012

418. Oh no, JFK on the floor?

Mj, how come you don’t believe the evidence? His last national security memorandum begins pulling out troops. His American University speech uses the word peace a trillion times. Tip O’Neal says JFK told him he was ending war in Vietnam. DOD Secretary McNamara says JFK was going to pull out of Vietnam. That’s just off the top of my head.

421. boborci - December 29, 2012

He refused to invade Cuba, he sought test ban treaties with the friggin Russian!

422. boborci - December 29, 2012

Refused to invade Cuba twice! Once during Bay of Pigs, and then during Missile Crisis!

423. Harry Ballz - December 29, 2012

Bob, one really important personal question:

There have so many Orci impostors here these last few months, I’ve got to ask:

Over the last year you and I have shared some private correspondence by email. At least I assumed it was you. I’m only asking here as there is no other way for me to corroborate it.

Please reassure me, it was you, right?

424. boborci - December 29, 2012

me.

425. dmduncan - December 29, 2012

Nope. Ron Paul is far wiser on foreign policy than any status quo Wormtongue. The problem with using force to solve all your problems is that you have to use that force forever. But you can’t.

Force generates opposition which you cannot eliminate entirely, and when you grow too weak to maintain that necessary level of force to withstand the “chaos” you have created, the opposition grows until it overwhelms you.

Game over.

America practices the foreign policy of inevitable doom. It isn’t good for us. It is incredibly shortsighted, and it will deprive us of many good years we might otherwise have had.

426. MJ - December 29, 2012

@420. You obviously have not seen “the smoking gun” interview with Bobby Kennedy in April 1964 — this says it all, and illustrates JFK”s unwavering support for the Vietnam War:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/vietnam.htm

This is the smoking gun that refutes anything else in my opinion concerning JFK and Vietnam.

427. Harry Ballz - December 29, 2012

424.

Whew! Thanks, Bob! That’s a relief! :>)

428. MJ - December 29, 2012

Come on Harry, your “is Orci real” thing is getting kind of old now, dude. :-)

429. MJ - December 30, 2012

@425. Huh? Who are you responding to, DM?

430. boborci - December 30, 2012

426. JfK himself knew he couldn’t publicly make his views known on Vietnam until after the election.

Bobby never publicly said he believed a conspiracy in the death of his bro, but he told plenty of people privately. RFK told his close friend Walter Sheridan: “I asked McCone if they had killed my brother…?”

Also, think about this. If your bro, the friggin President of the US is killed in broad daylight by the military industrial complex for his views on Vietnam, do you think it’s would be prudent or unfrightening to his now private citizen brother? Would you go around talking peace if they killed your brother, the most powerful man in the world, for doing exactly that?

Jump forward to 68, when RFK is talking peace just like his brother — what happens to him? A lone gunman, of course!

431. Harry Ballz - December 30, 2012

418.

MJ, I appreciate your point of view, but I was surprised when you told me months ago that you weren’t persuaded by Douglass’s book. It is so well researched and thoroughly documented, I find it hard to simply disregard.

Besides the Viet Nam portion, weren’t you surprised by anything else, say the Chicago plot to kill Kennedy mere weeks before Dallas or the two Oswalds at the Texas Theatre?

432. K-7 - December 30, 2012

MJ, I recommend you stop using the term “smoking gun” regarding JFK. It is perhaps not the best cliche to use in a conversation dealing with JFK’s assassination, my friend, if you get my drift? ;-)

433. boborci - December 30, 2012

431 Oh yeah, that.

Which actually means that wether you accept Vietnam story or not, is not an essential part of proving a conspiracy.

434. Harry Ballz - December 30, 2012

What about Kennedy arriving in Bethesda in a different casket, the botched autopsy, LBJ (the evening of the assassination) ordering ALL evidence be sent to Washington by the Dallas police, the Warren Report whitewash, the altered Zapruder film, JFK’s missing brain so trajectory of bullets couldn’t be judged….C’MON!!

435. MJ - December 30, 2012

@430. Well, what you are saying involves a lot of conjecture, whereas I am looking at what Bobby Kennedy actually said. My interpretation was that he believed what he said.

Both sides on the “Would Kennedy Have Got Us Out of Vietnam” debate have sources which could prove the point either way, so objectively, this is an interesting question that reasonable people can debate and have competing sources to try to prove their points on.

Given this, that it why this Bobby Kennedy interview is the tipping point for why I believe that JFK would have likely followed a similar path to Johnson on Vietnam.

436. boborci - December 30, 2012

435. And I’m looking at what Tip O’neal, Macnamara, and his own executive order said. So I guess we will have to look at context next. Context clearly presents a president at odds on foreign policy with the national security establishment.

To repeat, the specific incidence of Vietnam is not a necessary condition for conspiracy.

437. MJ - December 30, 2012

@434. For the assassination itself, I am more open than before that Oswald was not acting alone. You are the expert on this, so I wouldn’t presume to debate you point by point on this. As I mentioned before, I do have a huge circumstantial evidence with LBJ being behind it. Now, could some of his supporters, unknown to LBJ, have engineered this — that I could potentially buy into. It was a weird era for presidential politics — JFK, LBJ and Nixon were all essentially crooks. Hell, “the Outfit” part of the Mafia helped get JFK into office.

438. MJ - December 30, 2012

“circumstantial evidence problem with….”

439. boborci - December 30, 2012

And lookey here! From the very interview you posted:

————
Martin:
. . . in an all out way as we went into Korea. We were trying to avoid a Korea, is that correct?

Kennedy: Yes, because I, everybody including General MacArthur felt that land conflict between our troops, white troops and Asian, would only lead to, end in disaster. So it was. . . . We went in as advisers, but to try to get the Vietnamese to fight themselves, because we couldn’t win the war for them. They had to win the war for themselves.

Martin: It’s generally true all over the world, whether it’s in a shooting war or a different kind of a war. But the president was convinced that we had to keep, had to stay in there . . .
Kennedy: Yes.

Martin:
. . . and couldn’t lose it.

Kennedy:
Yes.

Martin: And if Vietnamese were about to lose it, would he propose to go in on land if he had to?

Kennedy: Well, we’d face that when we came to it.
——————

RFK says they are trying to avoid Korea, meaning another war. He states only commitment of advisors, echoes JFK’s quote that in the final analysis, “it is there war and they are the ones who are going to have to win it or lose it…”

And when pressed on what happens if ground troops are necessary, he says, “We’ll cross that bridge when we come to it…” meaning not willing to commit to that position!

Not only do his words not contradict the statements of the Speaker of the House, Jfk’s hand picked Defense Sec and his very own memorandum ordering the withdrawing of COMBAT troops, it supports it.

440. dmduncan - December 30, 2012

I actually tend to think McNamara’s POV may have been the more accurate.

JFK may have been closest to RFK, but family dynamics can be weird. For example, you may tell things to your friend that you won’t tell your wife even though you are closer to your wife.

And RFK had political ambitions and a political mindset, and what you say in public can be very different from what you say in private.

On a related note, to all concerned — if you haven’t seen it, check out Evidence of Revision on YouTube regarding Sirhan Sirhan and Dr. Donald Ewen Cameron’s mind control experiments.

441. MJ - December 30, 2012

An interesting paper on this:

http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/goldzwig.htm

Summary:

“Individuals as disparate as Walt Rostow, who headed Kennedy’s State Department Policy Planning Council, and Richard J. Walton, a scholar of politics and Kennedy revisionist, have claimed that Kennedy would have escalated in Vietnam as Johnson did. Others–such as Kennedy’s Assistant Secretary of State for Far Eastern Affairs, Roger Hilsman, and presidential aides Kenny O’Donnell and Dave Powers–maintain that the President would have avoided further involvement. Much of the controversy has rested upon the conflict between Kennedy’s public words in support of American involvement and his private words of doubt. . . . We argue that public words can take on a life of their own and make policy reversals extremely difficult to undertake.”

442. Harry Ballz - December 30, 2012

The Dallas Police being told that no extra protection was needed for Kennedy and that they could “stand down” that day. The best sharpshooters in the world not being able to duplicate what Oswald supposedly did that day, witnesses saying that Ruby and Oswald knew each other, no secret service agents being stationed in Dealey Plaza that day, but witnesses saying they encountered them on the grassy knoll after the assassination. All witnesses to the assassination being browbeaten to change their testimony to “three shots from the TSBD”, secret service leaving with Kennedy’s body from Parkland hospital, even though that contravenes state law that the local authorities conduct the autopsy, after LBJ getting sworn in as President on Air Force One, he looks over and smiles at one of his cronies who winks back at him (photograph of that)…..C’MON!!

443. MJ - December 30, 2012

McNamara was one of the worst government officials of all time, responsible for deaths of thousands of U.S. soldiers. It showed a major error in judgment for JFK to hire that auto exec to lead our military.

Read ANY book by soldiers and airmen who fought the war and you will find that Macnamara is always in the background, trying to run the war the war from Washington instead of letting the military do their job, and getting our soldiers killed in the process.

444. MJ - December 30, 2012

@441. Again, so he takes all that risk and has the huge balls (no offense meant, Harry) to have JFK assassinated, but then wusses out against running for a second term. That just doesn’t wash for me. If you are that power hungry and hate the Kennedy’s so much, you don’t not run for reelection because the polls don’t look good — your ego is way beyond that.

445. Harry Ballz - December 30, 2012

My last two posts, from this day forward, shall be known as the C’MON ARGUMENT

:>)

446. Harry Ballz - December 30, 2012

@443.

MJ, I don’t think ego had much to do with it. By that point the walls of LBJ’s heart were as thin as tissue paper, he was in extremely poor health, he was being crucified for a very unpopular war and, I think, he was bone tired while suffering from depression. He had accomplished his goal, seizing the reins of power and becoming President of the United States. There was nothing left to prove, nor will to do it, so he decided not to run in ’68 and retired to his Texas ranch. He died a few years later.

447. dmduncan - December 30, 2012

One more thing:

If your argument is that RFK was closest to JFK, and therefore that he knew best what his brother’s intentions were, i.e., to NOT pull out of Viet Nam, then you also have to accept the implications of that argument, which is that other people who were NOT so close to JFK — like McNamara and others — believed JFK WAS going to do something else, i.e, to pull out of Viet Nam.

And from the standpoint of his assassins, perception was reality.

Regardless of what he was “really” going to do, what his enemies BELIEVED he was going to do would have been the motive.

Sort of like invading Iraq to stop Saddam Hussein from using all his WMDs against the United States. ;-)

448. MJ - December 30, 2012

@445. The reason I discount that is because he would know that by bowing out he would cede the election to his mortal enemy — another Kennedy — after he had his brother JFK assassination if your claim is to be believed. That is why I can’t buy what you are selling here. Maybe I could by him dropping out if RFK was running, but no way would I see him giving up against RFK if he had led a conspiracy to murder JFK. That kind of person would rather die in office than give their mortal enemy their job.

And so, this is why I can never buy into the Johnson conspiracy. It flunks the common sense test.

449. DestinyCaptain - December 30, 2012

What would have been awesome is if they had the genius to use the Sybok character and cast Hugo Weaving in that role. Deal head on with his quasi religious war on the heart of the Federation as a crazy misguided play to deliver gudgement for the destruction of Vulcan. It would have been unexpected. It would have been different enough from the Prime Universe. It would have been kewl to see him play the character with his usual skill. I kept thinking he would have made a better Spock while watching the Hobbit again today. Oh, BTW, the HFR version blows. I have seen regular and 3D HFR. Regular is hands down the best way to watch it. Good film.

450. MJ - December 30, 2012

@446. MacNamara, may he NOT rest in peace, found it easy in later years to make the case that Kennedy would have got out of Vietnam because it suited him to have less guilt and bear less responsibility than he personally deserved to bear on his own huge role in Vietnam. Saying “Kennedy would have got us out” was his own “get out of jail free card” to appease his place in history as well as his own moral conscience. He probably said that enough over the years that he actually went to his grave believing it, I would guess.

451. boborci - December 30, 2012

447. except that rfk didnt’t run. he was assassinated.

452. boborci - December 30, 2012

meantmj 448

453. MJ - December 30, 2012

@450. Again, LBJ? Really?

;-)

454. Jim Nightshade - December 30, 2012

Interesting dmduncan and thank you for sharing that….i have read both strieber books n missed that…it would be obvious you are correct…..part of whitleys charm is that he is a great writer….his rep at first was a supernatural fiction writer….wolfen was it a bestseller made into a movie etc…suddenly he had this experience nonfiction horror story about visitors….takes guts for a fiction writer to suddenky claim to have true encounters with otherworldly beings….sooo being a writer of fiction embellishment of his experiences could have been done over time maybe even without him fully realizing it….so what if any answer did strieber give you for the changed story? since his novel majestic whitley has now made a buncha novels of fiction that are based on his experiences or theories etc….combining either best or worst of both worlds….his novel the grays is wonderful…kept hoping for a movie based on that book…but this way of writing blurs the truths if any from the fiction….if strieber intended for his true encounters to be his new career it didnt work….he has blamed the govt press etc for harassing him disinfo etc…his latest books have sold well been well recieved…i wonder if he has changed what he said in the books since your evidence came to light…hmm…also very interested in your experiences as well…i too know many strange things are happening out there..thanks again
obviously bob orci is also fascinated by conspiracy theories…

455. Barney Fife - December 30, 2012

Slightly off thistopic and back into the fictional world. I seem to recall Roddenberry considered doing a Classic Trek episode where Kirk and Spock time traveled back to the JFK assasination and were faced with the Prime Directive & whether they should try to prevent it. Does this ring a bell or is this in my imagination? Bob – surely you would know if this is true.

456. dmduncan - December 30, 2012

449. MJ – December 30, 2012

You have to understand though, that for many people in politics, perception is reality.

Even outside of it. Innocent people get shot and have their houses raided on the basis of false perceptions.

In the field of politics people are even more paranoid about what their opponents may do.

We invaded Iraq on the basis of a completely false certainty that Saddam Hussein had WMDs and that he could and would pass them to those who would use them against us while he maintained plausible deniability for his hand in anything.

It was all BS.

And Americans were sold that BS using Colin Powell making a speech at the UN to seal the deal, and then Americans supported an invasion of Iraq on the basis of completely erroneous intelligence. America changed history for that BS, because to them perception was reality.

And that is one thing that deeply troubles me about people — we ARE so easily fooled in part because we don’t have a firm habit of making the distinction between appearance and reality, and leaders in the military industrial complex are fabulously paranoid about what their enemies are going to do, so they are ready to act fast on false perceptions to try to stop what they THINK is going to be the inevitable case.

But…we were never in danger from Saddam’s WMDs. It was all BS. They were WRONG.

So the perception of JFKs enemies about who he was and what he might do in the future was more important regarding motivating his murder than anything he really may or may not have believed.

457. MJ - December 30, 2012

@456. Good point!

458. dmduncan - December 30, 2012

454: “so what if any answer did strieber give you for the changed story?”

He refused to answer me directly! He responded to his readers referring to me in the third person as “some people on the internet,” or something like that, and he never addressed the contradiction directly. He simply said the later, embellished, version is what really happened, and he never explained to anyone why the first version of his story was completely different and incompatible with the second version.

And I think you are right that he may unintentionally mix fiction with reality — or doing that could be his meal ticket, as well. But even if it’s unintentional that undermines the confidence I can have in him on the accuracy of what he reports when he reports unusual things.

It’s important to get that stuff right.

Then he came out with a comic series about some allegedly true events, and one even was about how some dead body was found on a roof in Manhattan (I think it was) and the lungs were filled with seawater, the implication being he was killed and dropped off their by “the visitors.”

Now let me tell you, there ARE some cases of bizarre human mutilations that mirror cattle mutilations, and they are unexplained, so when he came out with that comic — despite that I knew he confabulates — I took it seriously enough to want to know the specifics of the case so that I could confirm it.

I wasn’t out to “debunk” him, I simply wanted to follow that and confirm it, because it’s news if its true, and those of us who are out here on the edge following the anomalies on the edge would want to know about it.

But he never responded to my request for more specifics so that I had a good place to start my investigation.

But, he did take some heat from some of his fans because of what I found, so maybe he didn’t feel like I was a good person to know.

My whole objective and personality was/is to see, to find, to understand things that nobody else does, and try to bring what I find to others to see. But I also have to do it rigorously and I have to be able to answer the inevitable attacks and criticisms that come from skeptics, or I won’t be credible and then again what I do will have no meaning if nobody believes it. So I CAN’T cover for BS. I HAVE to call it. If Whitley didn’t like what I found and wrote, I’m sorry, but he’s a grown man and he has to be responsible about what he writes just as I do.

I am not willing to grant that we don’t live in a logical world anymore an that both versions of his story are simultaneously true. I think what happened is that he confabulates, intentionally or not, he confabulates, and then he believes the confabulations.

Which again is NOT to say that some of the things which he describes do NOT happen — but cases like Betty and Barney Hill are more compelling to me.

459. dmduncan - December 30, 2012

Damn, I wish Mac was still around. Mac’s theory was that the visitors were “cryptoterrestrials.” It’s a slim book, posthumously published. I’m not convinced it’s the best theory, but it is an interesting one worth keeping on the board.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Cryptoterrestrials-Meditation-Indigenous-Humanoids/dp/1933665467

460. dmduncan - December 30, 2012

In relation to my 459 post, some may find this interesting:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boskop_Man

I once did a TKR post on it. Follow the wiki sources for more info.

461. The Great Bird Lives - December 31, 2012

@456

Don’t fall for the mainstream rhetoric like the rest of the liberals. The facts say, that the U.N. to this day has a list a mile long containing itemized weapons of mass destruction that were confirmed to exist- including mustard gas, and VX that today has NOT been accounted for. Saddam had 30 days to send these weapons by underground railway to Syria, and Turkey. Just because they weren’t there when we got there doesn’t mean they did not exist. It wasn’t BS. This is fact. Look it up for your self- but don’t expect to hear it from the mainstream media. You need to look for it yourself. Jeez, you liberals really believe this crap. That’s explains a lot.

462. Jeffries Tuber - January 2, 2013

Christ, conspiracy theorists are like children with loud toys. As soon they know you’re paying attention, they get louder and more obnoxious. Because it’s all about needing attention.

463. Harry Ballz - January 2, 2013

462.

Well, thanks for bringing THAT to our attention!

464. Herb Finn - January 2, 2013

“You have to be very responsible about the sequencing of things because it’s not we can do whatever we want now. Our timeline can’t really abberrate before the first movie where Nero basically destroyed the Kelvin.”

A Clue perhaps for this,or the third,film?

465. kmart - January 4, 2013

462,

Geezus, folks fearing if they pay attention they might actually hear some painful truths about their government are like religious fundamentalists. They just keep parroting the party line, jeering and/or dismissing anybody who might have actually researched things enough to come up with a legitimate ‘non-canon’ viewpoint about historical events.

A lot of folks on this board probably would have been classifying Woodward and Bernstein as conspiracy theorists, right up past the time they won their newspaper the Pulitzer.

It ain’t about attention unless YOU make it about attention, Tuber. It’s about dissemination of information, getting it out into the open so it can be objectively digested, instead of being forcefed what amounts to being propaganda and doublethink by newsservices with their own multinational conglomerate interests directing the output.

If you don’t want to hear it, stick more cotton in your ears or dig your head further down into the earth so you can’t hear history crashing down around you.

TrekMovie.com is represented by Gorilla Nation. Please contact Gorilla Nation for ad rates, packages and general advertising information.