Ok, so your contention should be: we can't know. But it isn't.
You believe he was killed years ago.
Admit it.
You don't think it "could be".
You are just using that phrase to make what you know is coming next seem less absolute.
No, he could have been killed May 2, 2011.
what I find amazing is how people accept as truth he was even alive base don nothing but the governments word and shoddy home films that will not even show his face. Then call me kooky for being skeptical.
You believe he was killed years ago, don't you? Just admit it!
If you thought there is even a slight chance he wasn't killed years ago, the implications would be huge, wouldn't they?
Not really.
You must believe 100% he was killed years ago. So just admit it.
Uh, no I don't.
And then tell me what you base that belief on.
And then you go:
"it's not just the word of her, it is also the video silence after 2004"
That is so much more iron-clad evidence.
It's not ironclad, but is enough to leave a shadow of doubt.
It's not an urban legend. It's simply a way to reach a conclusion. And it exists, so how can it be ....
Occams razor exists? Especially when dealing with human beings? Is Occams razor a scientifically provable logical tool?
Is Occam's Razor a cosmic constant now?
Occam's razor is nothing. Especially, Especially when it comes to people. People can lie. People can plot and plan. People can set other people up. Occam's razor simply does not apply to geopolitics.
Furthermore, if you are watching cable news, your only information comes from cable news. When cable news presents you with the "simplest" explanation, you will accept that as the simplest, no matter how absurd. But you wouldn't know it, because you are in socrates' cave.
So even if Occam's Razor was a logical constant, it would still require you have enough information to determine what the simplest explanation was.
I really can't believe peopel are trying to use it as some standard of evidence. Is Occam's razor allowe din courtrooms?
Lawyer: "Your honor, clearly this man killed his wife. Occam's razor says it is the simplest explanation, therefore, it must be true"
Judge: "well, indeed, Occam's razor. Death sentence for the husband"
Seriously. Who taught you that Occam's Razor would win debates or arguments? Why couldn't any of you using it question its validity? Do you ever think for yourself?
Next you guys will be using Murphy's law as a basis for your arguments. I can't wait.
Oh I see, it's a conspiracy.
Wow. That joke stopped being funny 10 years ago.
Do I have to listen to your Bob Hope monologue impressions next?