This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
America – and Western Civilization As a Whole – Was Founded On a Conspiracy Theory
The Constitution, Magna Carta and Democracy Itself Are Based on the Idea that – Without Checks and Balances – Those In Power Will Take Advantage of Us
America was founded on a conspiracy theory: that Britain’s King George and his men were conspiring against the colonists.
The Declaration of Independence recites a series of conspiracies:
When a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism … The history of the present King of Great Britain [and others working with and for him] is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
***
He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures.
***
He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
***
He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone, for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harrass our people, and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
***
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
***
For protecting them, by a mock Trial, from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
***
For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies:
***
For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever.
***
He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation.
He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
The American concept of “separation of powers” is also based on the conspiracy theory that those with unchecked power will abuse it. By creating 3 branches of government, the Founding Fathers hoped to reduce abuse of power.
Political science professor Lance deHaven-Smith has documented in a soon-to-be-released book that conspiracy theories were considered as American as apple pie all through American history … up until very recently.
The father of modern economics – Adam Smith – also believed in conspiracy theories. As the New York Times notes:
Smith railed against monopolies and the political influence that accompanies economic power …
***
He saw a tacit conspiracy on the part of employers ”always and everywhere” to keep wages as low as possible.
But the centrality of conspiracy theories in Western civilizations goes back much further …
The Magna Carta – signed in 1215 – was based on the conspiracy theory that the claim of the “Divine Right” of the king and his men to do whatever they wanted was false and oppressive.
Indeed, the entire idea of democracy – going back to ancient Greece – is based on a conspiracy theory as well: that leaders who make decisions without input from the public will not treat the people as well as if they have a chance to vote. This is another form of “separation of powers”, as it creates checks and balances between the decision-making power of the government and that of the people.
Arguably, Western civilization would never have gotten off the ground with the core idea that those in power need to be checked and reined in, or they would abuse the people.
But Aren’t Conspiracy Theories Nutty?
You may have heard that conspiracy theories are nutty. But the truth is that conspiracies are so common that judges are trained to look at conspiracy allegations as just another legal claim to be disproven or proven based on the specific evidence:
Federal and all 50 state’s codes include specific statutes addressing conspiracy, and providing the punishment for people who commit conspiracies.
But let’s examine what the people trained to weigh evidence and reach conclusions think about “conspiracies”. Let’s look at what American judges think.
Searching Westlaw, one of the 2 primary legal research networks which attorneys and judges use to research the law, I searched for court decisions including the word “Conspiracy”. This is such a common term in lawsuits that it overwhelmed Westlaw.
Specifically, I got the following message:
“Your query has been intercepted because it may retrieve a large number of documents.”
From experience, I know that this means that there were potentially millions or many hundreds of thousands of cases which use the term. There were so many cases, that Westlaw could not even start processing the request.
So I searched again, using the phrase “Guilty of Conspiracy”. I hoped that this would not only narrow my search sufficiently that Westlaw could handle it, but would give me cases where the judge actually found the defendant guilty of a conspiracy. This pulled up exactly 10,000 cases — which is the maximum number of results which Westlaw can give at one time. In other words, there were more than 10,000 cases using the phrase “Guilty of Conspiracy” (maybe there’s a way to change my settings to get more than 10,000 results, but I haven’t found it yet).
Moreover, as any attorney can confirm, usually only appeal court decisions are published in the Westlaw database. In other words, trial court decisions are rarely published; the only decisions normally published are those of the courts which hear appeals of the trial. Because only a very small fraction of the cases which go to trial are appealed, this logically means that the number of guilty verdicts in conspiracy cases at trial must be much, much larger than 10,000.
Moreover, “Guilty of Conspiracy” is only one of many possible search phrases to use to find cases where the defendant was found guilty of a lawsuit for conspiracy. Searching on Google, I got 3,170,000 results (as of yesterday) under the term “Guilty of Conspiracy”, 669,000 results for the search term “Convictions for Conspiracy”, and 743,000 results for “Convicted for Conspiracy”.
Of course, many types of conspiracies are called other things altogether. For example, a long-accepted legal doctrine makes it illegal for two or more companies to conspire to fix prices, which is called “Price Fixing” (1,180,000 results).
Given the above, I would extrapolate that there have been hundreds of thousands of convictions for criminal or civil conspiracy in the United States.
Finally, many crimes go unreported or unsolved, and the perpetrators are never caught. Therefore, the actual number of conspiracies committed in the U.S. must be even higher.
In other words, conspiracies are committed all the time in the U.S., and many of the conspirators are caught and found guilty by American courts. Remember, Bernie Madoff’s Ponzi scheme was a conspiracy theory.
Indeed, conspiracy is a very well-recognized crime in American law, taught to every first-year law school student as part of their basic curriculum. Telling a judge that someone has a “conspiracy theory” would be like telling him that someone is claiming that he trespassed on their property, or committed assault, or stole his car. It is a fundamental legal concept.
Obviously, many conspiracy allegations are false (if you see a judge at a dinner party, ask him to tell you some of the crazy conspiracy allegations which were made in his court). Obviously, people will either win or lose in court depending on whether or not they can prove their claim with the available evidence. But not all allegations of trespass, assault, or theft are true, either.
Proving a claim of conspiracy is no different from proving any other legal claim, and the mere label “conspiracy” is taken no less
seriously by judges.
It’s not only Madoff. The heads of Enron were found guilty of conspiracy, as was the head of Adelphia. Numerous lower-level government officials have been found guilty of conspiracy. See this, this, this, this and this.
Time Magazine’s financial columnist Justin Fox writes:
Some financial market conspiracies are real …
Most good investigative reporters are conspiracy theorists, by the way.
But Our Leaders Wouldn’t Do That
While people might admit that corporate executives and low-level government officials might have engaged in conspiracies – they may be strongly opposed to considering that the wealthiest or most powerful might possibly have done so.
But powerful insiders have long admitted to conspiracies. For example, Obama’s Administrator of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, Cass Sunstein, wrote:
Of course some conspiracy theories, under our definition, have turned out to be true. The Watergate hotel room used by Democratic National Committee was, in fact, bugged by Republican officials, operating at the behest of the White House. In the 1950s, the Central Intelligence Agency did, in fact, administer LSD and related drugs under Project MKULTRA, in an effort to investigate the possibility of “mind control.” Operation Northwoods, a rumored plan by the Department of Defense to simulate acts of
terrorism and to blame them on Cuba, really was proposed by high-level officials ….
But Someone Would Have Spilled the Beans
A common defense to people trying sidetrack investigations into potential conspiracies is to say that “someone would have spilled the beans” if there were really a conspiracy.
But famed whistleblower Daniel Ellsberg explains:
It is a commonplace that “you can’t keep secrets in Washington” or “in a democracy, no matter how sensitive the secret, you’re likely to read it the next day in the New York Times.” These truisms are flatly false. They are in fact cover stories, ways of flattering and misleading journalists and their readers, part of the process of keeping secrets well. Of course eventually many secrets do get out that wouldn’t in a fully totalitarian society. But the fact is that the overwhelming majority of secrets do not leak to the American public. This is true even when the information withheld is well known to an enemy and when it is clearly essential to the functioning of the congressional war power and to any democratic control of foreign policy. The reality unknown to the public and to most members of Congress and the press is that secrets that would be of the greatest import to many of them can be kept from them reliably for decades by the executive branch, even though they are known to thousands of insiders.
History proves Ellsberg right. For example:
- One hundred and thirty thousand (130,000) people from the U.S., UK and Canada worked on the Manhattan Project. But it was kept secret for years
- A BBC documentary shows that:
There was “a planned coup in the USA in 1933 by a group of right-wing American businessmen . . . . The coup was aimed at toppling President Franklin D Roosevelt with the help of half-a-million war veterans. The plotters, who were alleged to involve some of the most famous families in America, (owners of Heinz, Birds Eye, Goodtea, Maxwell Hse & George Bush’s Grandfather, Prescott) believed that their country should adopt the policies of Hitler and Mussolini to beat the great depression”
Moreover, “the tycoons told General Butler the American people would accept the new government because they controlled all the newspapers.” Have you ever heard of this conspiracy before? It was certainly a very large one. And if the conspirators controlled the newspapers then, how much worse is it today with media consolidation?
- 7 out of the 8 giant, money center banks went bankrupt in the 1980′s during the “Latin American Crisis”, and the government’s response was to cover up their insolvency. That’s a cover up lasting several decades
- Governments have been covering up nuclear meltdowns for fifty years to protect the nuclear industry. Governments have colluded to cover up the severity of numerous other environmental accidents. For many years, Texas officials intentionally under-reported the amount of radiation in drinking water to avoid having to report violations
- The government’s spying on Americans began before 9/11 (confirmed here and here. And see this.) But the public didn’t learn about it until many years later. Indeed, the the New York Times delayed the story so that it would not affect the outcome of the 2004 presidential election
- The decision to launch the Iraq war was made before 9/11. Indeed, former CIA director George Tenet said that the White House wanted to invade Iraq long before 9/11, and inserted “crap” in its justifications for invading Iraq. Former Treasury Secretary Paul O’Neill – who sat on the National Security Council – also says that Bush planned the Iraq war before 9/11. And top British officials say that the U.S. discussed Iraq regime change one month after Bush took office. Dick Cheney apparently even made Iraqi’s oil fields a national security priority before 9/11. And it has now been shown that a handful of people were responsible for willfully ignoring the evidence that Iraq lacked weapons of mass destruction. These facts have only been publicly disclosed recently. Indeed, Tom Brokaw said, “All wars are based on propaganda.” A concerted effort to produce propaganda is a conspiracy
Moreover, high-level government officials and insiders have admitted to dramatic conspiracies after the fact, including:
The admissions did not occur until many decades after the events.
These examples show that it is possible to keep conspiracies secret for a long time, without anyone “spilling the beans”.
In addition, to anyone who knows how covert military operations work, it is obvious that segmentation on a “need-to-know basis”, along with deference to command hierarchy, means that a couple of top dogs can call the shots and most people helping won’t even know the big picture at the time they are participating.
Moreover, those who think that co-conspirators will brag about their deeds forget that people in the military or intelligence or who have huge sums of money on the line can be very disciplined. They are not likely to go to the bar and spill the beans like a down-on-their-luck, second-rate alcoholic robber might do.
Finally, people who carry out covert operations may do so for ideological reasons — believing that the “ends justify the means”. Never underestimate the conviction of an idealogue.
Conclusion
The bottom line is that some conspiracy claims are nutty and some are true. Each has to be judged on its own facts.
Humans have a tendency to try to explain random events through seeing patterns … that’s how our brains our wired. Therefore, we have to test our theories of connection and causality against the cold, hard facts.
On the other hand, the old saying by Lord Acton is true:
Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely.
Those who operate without checks and balances – and without the disinfectant sunlight of public scrutiny and accountability – tend to act in their own best interests … and the little guy gets hurt.
The early Greeks knew it, as did those who forced the king to sign the Magna Carta, the Founding Fathers and the father of modern economics. We should remember this important tradition of Western civilization.
Postscript: The ridicule of all conspiracy theories is really just an attempt to diffuse criticism of the powerful.
The wealthy are not worse than other people … but they are not necessarily better either. Powerful leaders may not be bad people … or they could be sociopaths.
We must judge each by his or her actions, and not by preconceived stereotypes that they are all saints acting in our best interest or all scheming criminals.
- advertisements -


What a mess of an argument. Historically, it is inaccurate, but worse written almost tongue in cheek to create confusion. Attempting to make banal statements appear revolutionary. Teasing us with the possibility of an argument regarding separation of powers.
The separation of powers is an important argument, because it is so fatally flawed. The idea that you can control tyranny by compartmentalizing it and then giving separate and distinct powers to each area is the biggest boondoggle in political economy.
Man's willingness to enslave one another for personal benefit is hardwired. It appears throughout history, in every society and religion.
The only solution to the accumulation of and use of power is the elimination of as many structures as possible that allow it to coalesce, while maintaining enough communication and the ability join resources for a greater good. Power cannot be the object, it must be focused and then dissolved.
This is why ALL governments will fail at providing liberty and justice for all. Liberty and justice are not social contracts, they are the state of nature and become perverted in the mechanisms of man.
Man's willingness to enslave one another for personal benefit is hardwired. It appears throughout history, in every society and religion.
__________________________________
So lets take the 'american' path:
any society accross history that did not practise slavery was either:
-too insignificant to be retained as a model for humanity progress
-composed with sub humans and non humans.
Problem solved.
Aint the 'american' way of life beautiful?
what a mess of a counterargument to a mess of an argument
separation of powers? even the soviet union had something similar in all things below the politbureau. even some kings and emperors had some measure of separation of powers in their constructs, giving one minister the power to tax, the next the power to run a secret service, another lord the power to raise armies and so on (including the power to coin, btw).
the concept of the separation of powers is a benign republican design feature when applied in a parliamentary democracy functioning on the basis of a moderately liberal constitution (go on and misunderstand the proper use of the words republican and liberal in your own context).
"Man's willingness to enslave one another for personal benefit is hardwired" interesting thought but how about it's counterpart: "Man's willingness to let himself be enslaved by others for personal confort is hardwired"? How about children, btw? Or the sick, or the disabled, or the elderly? Where you born with your present capability of knowing what's best for you? Will you always retain this state? Is "enslaved" perhaps the wrong or perhaps just an extreme label?
"Liberty and justice ... are the state of nature" Where? In a proto-communistic band of primitives where all "wealth" is shared? That's the only example I can think of. Care to give your own example for your affirmation that can be actually seen in the "state of nature"?
There is nothing benign about any aspect of government since all governments function at the discretion of a small minority for the benefit of said minority. Parlimentary democracy is no better that a Constitutional republic- they all result in the appropiation of power to a select upper class. Thus, your are as enslaved in Britain or the EU as you are in America.
The absurdity of your argumennt is beyond the pale.
How can the label of enslaved be misapplied when it is our reality, if in terms of sovereign debt alone? Is a handicapped adult not responsible for the debt? Is a child not responsible for the debt? Would your life be much different if lived a state of liberty since birth? I think so! It is not an extreme label and your argument is imbecilic.
Since when does liberty and justice include shared wealth? Do you understand nature? Or are you being deliberately obtuse? Have you watched animals, plants, birds or fish in the sea? While there may be some social covenants in some species, do you see governments? Debt structures?
Species are at liberty to live, obtain temporary dominance, if they are capable and establish themselves freely. Depending on their capabilities, their lives are short or long, sucessful or not sucessful, they can be social or alone or both at different times. Never get out into nature? Or are you just too ignorant to make measured observations?
I repeat: "Liberty and justice ... are the state of nature" Where? In a proto-communistic band of primitives where all "wealth" is shared? That's the only example I can think of. Care to give your own example for your affirmation that can be actually seen in the "state of nature"?
Do you actually understand nature? Show me justice in nature. Show me what we humans would call liberty in nature.
Shared wealth in nature? Sure: wolfes have shared wealth, i.e. the offspring of the alpha pair is nurtured by all components of the pack, even though they are not allowed (by a very primitive social compact) to have any sex at all. Is this not a form of servitude, btw? And they are led by the alpha female, a clear form of simple government.
waiting for examples from you. and doubting that when you write about all governments and all nature you really have the breadth and width of knowledge you seem to think to possess by your free use of endearing terms.
well said, we are indeed hard wired and most of the time, it's barbed.
Forgetting his solution, George points out something I often bark about as the self appointed criminal law expert. Any crime at any level of sophistication beyond two people is a conspiracy. It is the norm not the exception. The term is thrown around uselessly and ironically, whenever somebody invokes it as a criticism of someone's criticism of 911 or the banks or guys in Congress named Frank, they are lending it credibility.
I am not certain there is any "solution" to the human condition. There is no magical balance or branches or parties or candidates. There is really only each of us. And I really think folks like Herodotus got it right. It's not our violence or our greed or our bigotry that is our greatest challenge, it's our arrogance. Whether the weather or the markets or the food or the energy, we always think we can "overcome" it. Overcome? We are part of a number of systems not a master of any of them. And the more humble our approach, the greater our chance not for success, but for survival.
Sean I think you are too wound up about this. I don't think George is writing to you.
Consider the Ray Dalio thread.
re. the seperation 9f powers. Consider it a delay mechanism on the next subsequent to the one we're facing now, round into tyrannical government.
Let's acknowledge that people are too complaicant for their own good.
.........................
i-dog always good to see your posts. Sean7 too for that matter - i-dog the Jesuits.
Not that I have any special feelings for the J-men, but I think you are over estimating their capabilities by quite a bit, .... but who knows?
re: the J-men
I have contempt for their abilities; they are attempting to herd cats. Drugged cats, but cats nonetheless. Unforseen circumstances and unintended consequences are a bitch.
I simply chronicle what I have unearthed: their ideology; their comprehensive and long-standing plan; their pervasive achievements to-date; their historic roots and relentless progression (the "Jesuits" are just a recent manifestation and their gaining control over the apparatus of the 1.2bn-member Roman Church is even more recent); their previous failed attempts at world domination; their success at escaping notice and stifling exposure; their supreme arrogance born of a belief of racial and intellectual superiority (which they and their predecessors did demonstrate in times past, but have since dissipated); and, their strategic role in the events of today. The next few weeks will be "interesting"...or not....
+1
Well said, Sean. You've saved me the trouble of having to compose a rebuttal of GW's statist tripe.
All systems of governance are subjected to abuse both by politicians and voters. Politicians buy votes and voters sell them, whilst others spend their money buying politicians. In other words the governance process is much like a market place where people bargain for various benefits.
The political equivalent of oligopolies and monopolies are simply oligarchies and monarchies.
Conspiracies are simply the suspicion that a backroom deal has been done. Once they are proven it is another matter.
to lust after power is normal, but our leaders are abnormal, they are there for the common good.
if you think that, then no conspiracy ever comes from .gov as those in power are do gooders.
for me it is simple, evil reptiles now rule humans. prove me wrong. everything created by man turns to shit.
why invest oneself in promoting systems to increase power in the hands of a few, collectivist are insane.Western civilization as a whole? What is that?
The western part of the world has known several civilization.
Today, this part of the world plus some others are dominated by the 'american' civilization.
The Founding fathers, with their story about the abuses performed by the King (see by the way how 'american' it is to point at people. You will have a hard time finding the King dismissing his responsibility-supposed or real. Do the same way with 'Americans' and suddenly, see the difference. This site is full of examples), were seminal to the 'american' civilization (or more exactly, decivilization as the process is undermining and unweaving various civilizations around the world to push the world into a pseudo state of naturalism ['americanism' is human nature, according to 'americans']]
So it is more accurate to say that 'America' and the decivilization process going with it were founded on conspiracy theories.
Ah, last point, 'americans' claim they are innovative. They've showed how. When reading the list of the King's crimes as reported by 'americans', 'americans' not only brought those crimes to a new meaningful dimension but added a few others to the mix.
Kind of innovation one can expect from 'americans'
I don't post often here, but I have to say this post is simply "grandiose" hahaha
Unable to think straight; needs meds? reason for thumbs down.
I'm krushed.
///Kind of innovation one can expect from 'americans'/// AMERIKANS!!!!!
Altho yu started off here today in promizing form ["practizioners of freedom of speech"], yur subsequent effort to akquire the necessary familiarlity with the letter "K" an mangle the language in the appropriate manner has been desultory, and lacking in the spirit of adventure and komradeship...
I therefore and herefore formally resign from any assigned further association of any KIND, in or out o da ring...with the lazy and totally lacking running dog lackey of the East, this marginal minion of marx, whose putatively anti-imperialist pontificating here has kompletly pooched into a kanine kanard, a dog's breakfast of dialetical doublespeak, but a pale imitation of the post author's powerz of same sophistry*, and shall return to the kard as the one man wrekking krew of the wily n wanton wastrels who karry the kalling kard of the kosher kleptokrats upon their kapes....a new inkarnation of Whipper Billy Watson, of the famed "Kanuck Kommando Hold" ...
All yu Krusher Kormans!!! Watch out!! The Whippers back in town -an he don't need no stinkin slant-eyed sidekik to kick yur kan right akross the ring!
*kredit to the Nose what Knows!
more memos from the asylum by GW
GW, you have to remember that everything is a conspiracy unless you're in on it, then it's called a "project".
what you call conspiracy theory I call "balance of power". Power constructs have subjective agendas initailly : race, bloodline, land ownership, religion. When the nation becomes bigger than its core power base component there is conflict of interest.
Troy vs Greece, Greece vs Persians, Sparta vs Athens etc. Resoultion comes from conflict and has spanwed the other logic in society as counter weight to "logic of power" : "logic of knowledge/justice/social progress; aka the greek philosophical strain that invented rational analytical method, science politcal and social sciences in its written treatises; like Plato's Republic.
So society has the dialectics of power logic; Plantagenets against Capetiens, Red vs Blues, and also the civil society dialectics of right and wrong and level playing fields spawned by democracy.
Plato said the best form of government was philosopher king; aka the concentration of BOTH logics, power and wisdom, in one hand. Absolutist king. We saw diifferent versions of that and the Caesars pretended to incarnate it just like the Holy Roman Emperors.
Since Enlightenment, the democratic horizontal thread now is privileged over vertical philosopher king logic.
So it seems logical in this political construct, in democratic parliamentary or Republican societies to favour Montesquieu's "Separation of Powers' principle.
ANd make sure rival power structures don't go crony and oligarchic !
So it seems logical in this political construct, in democratic parliamentary or Republican societies to favour Montesquieu's "Separation of Powers' principle.
ANd make sure rival power structures don't go crony and oligarchic !
_________________________________________
The last line means nothing.
The 'american' idea of separation of powers have never delivered as intended (what a surprise coming from 'american' implementation)
It has created a state of dilution of responsibility (one branch of power keeps pouring responsibility over another branch) while the common interest in increasing the institutional power does exist and therefore is looked for by all the branches, offering a point of convergence.
All branches perform in the same direction but without having to answer for the negative consequences of their expansion in power.
But hey, it is well known that the cure for all ailments of 'americanism' is even more 'americanism' so time to turn up the heat.
thank you for defining your meaning of the word "nothing".
For your information amongst generations of well intentioned political power players, not overtly obsessed with hubristic control of all power levers, the separation of power in western world has been seen to work. The current Post Reaganomics power construct does not reflect the whole time line of the past two centuries of western world since Enlightenment occured.
Its been a rough ride but that is history of humanity.
Your vision is nihilistic.
PS : apologise for fat finger imprints in post as lunch was served!
'American' vision is probably the nihilistic: nothing should constrain them.
-----------------------
the separation of power in western world has been seen to work.
-----------------------
The separation of power in 'american' nation has been working the same way since 1776, July,4th.
It takes an 'american' to claim any success when the mecca of 'americanism', the US, sports such an event like Andrew Jackson and the repell of the SCoJ decision.
Indeed, it has been working the same since inception but not the way 'americans' claim it works.
Like a Chinese Citizenism Flying Dutchman, the roadside-shitting dungy of AnAnnoyingMouse forever sails the seas of insanitation, with the mad cackling of his anti-American bigotry and hatred now and always drowning out the sounds of the wind and waves of reality crashing in futility against his vessel on his unstoppable voyage of the mentally damned.
now that yu mentioned it, we're overdue for a good gander at the rapidly escalating evidence of state sponsored 'weather modification' http://www.stanford.edu/~mcohen/MB_Cohen_Thesis.pdf * type terrorism, chemtrail chikanery http://www.stopsprayingcalifornia.com/SCALAR_Waves_and_Chemtrails.php - and yur personal favorite, the phenomena of phony earthquakes http://www.jimstonefreelance.com/fukushima1.html n more good stuff from the site yu luve to lather with yur kondescending klaptrap....
yu're bekoming the go to guy for konspiracy konversation here - keep posting those ideas as they okkur to yu!
"Others are engaging even in an eco- type of terrorism whereby they can alter the climate, set off earthquakes, volcanoes remotely through the use of electromagnetic waves. So there are plenty of ingenious minds out there that are at work finding ways in which they can wreak terror upon other nations. It's real, and that's the reason why we have to intensify our efforts, and that's why this is so important. - William S. Cohen, Secretary of Defense, April 28, 1997.
*this one's a mind blower, not only is the author 'jewish', but also an authentic offspring of "The Farm" ....the Steven Gaskell experiment in social engineering by means of kannabis kulture!
An article about the founding of America as a conspiracy theory yet nothing about the Freemasons, the Illuminati, or the practioners of magic?
Damn near every founding father and leading light in Colonial America was a Freemason. Some belonged to the Illuminati. Some practiced Magic.
Magic. The Illuminati. How fortunate for you that you don't understand that you're mentally sub-normal.
It follows from the other article on who is a terrorist in 'america'
'Americans' love to depict themselves as heavy practizioners of freedom of speech.
Yet, by omitting certain details that could be perceived as a threat to the power apparatus, they guarantee themselves not being treated as terrorists.
Like wot the feck "US citizenism" is. :D
Just kidding An ... you were starting to make a bit of sense there.
A world of fantasy.
Not only I did not omit to mention what US citizenism is but I also explained the reason why.
US citizenism is nothing else than what 'americans' call 'americanism', that system of theirs.
US citizenism is 'americanism'
Ah, yes, 'americanism' means by itself, 'americanism' will keep deploying, with or without any report about it (including mine)
AnEncephalous said:
Ah, ah, but you left out the most important, the crustiest bit. US citizenism is a world of fantasy which you have created.
I recommend you explore the veracity of your sweeping generalizations before finger pointing at others in an attempt to dilute the responsibility for the world of insanitation you have created for yourself. If it is symmetry you seek, look in the mirror if you dare.
I recommend you explore the veracity of your sweeping generalizations before finger pointing at others in an attempt to dilute the responsibility for the world of insanitation you have created for yourself. If it is symmetry you seek, look in the mirror if you dare.
__________________
Ah, ah, that is gross.
The world of insanitation I have created for myself?
But even if that was the case, my actions would only affect myself.
How different would it be from 'americans' who require that others endure the negative consequences of the world they, 'americans' have shaped as the dominant force in the world.
In one case, dilution of responsibility is obvious to anyone but 'americans', who are trapped by 'american' urge to dismiss this kind of responsibility.
Self indiction is a big thing in 'americanism'.
Alas, alas, alas, alas, alas, sextuple alas!
The self-contained world of insanitation created by AnAnnoyingAnus, hermetically sealed from all outside influences (such as facts, logic and reality), is indeed very much in play --- the crustiest bit, a very profound something.
Alas, your actions do not only affect yourself, as they involve the mindless and hopelessly bigoted trolling of ZeroHedge in your attempt to monolize the speeching means here and blob-up every conversation with your retarded hatred of all Americans.
We are forced to endure the negative consequences of your lies and bigotry, indeed. Ah, ah, that is gross.
Worst of all, we are forced to witness your pathetic psychological projection on a daily basis, in which you attempt to blame Americans (as a whole, again mindlessly of course) for the faults and failings of your authoritarian, fundamentally collectivistic Chinese antheap of humanity society.
Apparently, hypocritizenism is a big thing in Chinese Citizenism.
Make me shit on the roadside!
Dude ... while I often get a chuckle from your retorts to our AnAerobic friend, I fail to see how chucking insults at him is in any way conducive to stopping him from chucking insults at us (as if anything would stop him...he's been doing it day after days for fucking years now!).
Indeed, sometimes the exchanges between him, you and the Akak gun take up more space than the topic at hand. And they have been doing so for months on end. Just sayin'......
OnAndOnymous chucks whether anyone responds to him or not. Some of the best humor I receive all day is thanks to FourthStooge-ing and Akak. Make me laugh!
Alas, alas, alas, alas, pentuple alas!
Your blobbing-up laughter at the expense of Agent AnAnnoyingMouse is clearly just an expression of the insecurity and inability to self-indict of the typical US 'American' US Citizenism citizen, whose consumptionalisticalism nature is eternal.
Mockery is only an attempt by US 'American' US Citizenism citisens to monolize the speeching means.
Farming the poor and extorting the weak: the national 'american' US Citizenism citizen pasttime. All other activities are subservient to this.
In American US 'american' US Citizenism, the lower half of the second quartile of the middle class is the king class.
But when the cat vomits fur balls, one cannot make it stop, so ....
I fail to see how chucking insults at him is in any way conducive to stopping him from chucking insults at us
________________
I am chucking insults at 'americans'? Man, victimhood is high among 'americans'...
Possibly the dumbest, most flip-floppy collection of words that AnAnon has ever posted.
Thanks i-dog. I am trying to fly by the aa banter at the present moment.
Gully Foyle had a good point.
OK, I see your problem now, a distinct lack of humour:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=3VLhH2wCtAQ
Because weather events, volcanoes erupting, and earthquakes occurring are never natural events and thousands of aircraft never leave vapour trails of ice crystals behind them everyday. It just never happens I tells ya!
Seriously Joyful, you appear to have bought into every load of dippy abstruse poo-poo you've ever read about or watched on Utube. Are there any gallivanting stupidities that you haven't swallowed, hook, line and sinker?
element, you should check out this guy:
http://www.youtube.com/user/suspicious0bservers?feature=results_main
gives a very balanced view on the world's weather and what's causing it.
he does a daily morning 2-3 min briefing.
things are much more complex than simply black and white.
". . . eyes open with no fear folks. . ."
as always, thanks for the link - this guy is my new morning go to.
(and I know I'm late to the thread, got nudged here by ele-mental)
Hi tip e, nice link, will keep an eye on it.
Great link. What happens when tidal forces from aligned planets distort the Sun?
When will this alignment occur next?
Weather can be modified. Do some due dilligence.
Think about this. If you had to stop an incoming barrage of fast moving iseebm warheads, what would you do?
Interesting your use of projection here. You're quick to dismiss weather modification, but in 1976 a UN treaty banning the use of weather as a weapon of war was signed.Then there's the US Air Force's weather as a force multiplier, owning the weather in 2025.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/3436120/UN-1976-Weather-Weapon-Treaty
http://www.space.com/1725-military-weather.html
http://www.fas.org/spp/military/docops/usaf/2025/v3c15/v3c15-1.htm
It must be terrible to have an IQ of 100, ("normal"); and no training in analytic thinking at all; try not jumping to conclusions based on propaganda, this will help, until you get around to actually understanding Physical Science; which might be quite awhile, I'm afraid.
lol...
since this is "George's " thread I think I'll take yur sneerin scorn in stride...more backhand akkoloades!!!!
I have no problem with anyone wishing to suspend belief in any kind of theory whatsoever....it's the serial scoffing that gives rise to the question of motivation behind the manic momentum to keep any mention of alternate explanations to inadequately explained events to a minimum.
btw...I don't buy enuff bandwidth to be able to watch Toob much...that Smenge Bros reunion I threw in yesterday was a one-off...I tend to stick to a few tried n tru konspiracy theories and leave the rest for greater minds...but I always get the weekly Tim Rifat interview on Rense...now thats a guy would blow up yur gourd real good!
Pretty funny ... I think joyful just jumped the shark
not xactly, but GW"s post have gotten so histrionic that I think most of us are suffering the effects of laughing gas now...and just having a good time going with the flow...I do hope yur not one of those humorless souls George uses as kapos to re-impose the proper 'tone' in his posts!
btw...do yu have a thing goin wit J's??? Hey that's kool wit me!