This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.
In 1967, the CIA Created the Label "Conspiracy Theorists" ... to Attack Anyone Who Challenges the "Official" Narrative
Conspiracy Theorists USED TO Be Accepted As Normal
Democracy and free market capitalism were founded on conspiracy theories.
The Magna Carta, the Constitution and Declaration of Independence and other founding Western documents were based on conspiracy theories. Greek democracy and free market capitalism were also based on conspiracy theories.
But those were the bad old days …Things have now changed.
The CIA Coined the Term Conspiracy Theorist In 1967
That all changed in the 1960s.
Specifically, in April 1967, the CIA wrote a dispatch which coined the term “conspiracy theories” … and recommended methods for discrediting such theories. The dispatch was marked “psych” – short for “psychological operations” or disinformation – and “CS” for the CIA’s “Clandestine Services” unit.
The dispatch was produced in responses to a Freedom of Information Act request by the New York Times in 1976.
The dispatch states:
2. This trend of opinion is a matter of concern to the U.S. government, including our organization.
***
The aim of this dispatch is to provide material countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries. Background information is supplied in a classified section and in a number of unclassified attachments.
3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the [conspiracy] question be initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is active addresses are requested:
a. To discuss the publicity problem with and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors) , pointing out that the [official investigation of the relevant event] made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by … propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.
b. To employ propaganda assets to and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passing to assets. Our ploy should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (II) politically interested, (III) financially interested, (IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories.
***
4. In private to media discussions not directed at any particular writer, or in attacking publications which may be yet forthcoming, the following arguments should be useful:
a. No significant new evidence has emerged which the Commission did not consider.
***
b. Critics usually overvalue particular items and ignore others. They tend to place more emphasis on the recollections of individual witnesses (which are less reliable and more divergent–and hence offer more hand-holds for criticism) …
***
c. Conspiracy on the large scale often suggested would be impossible to conceal in the United States, esp. since informants could expect to receive large royalties, etc.
***
d. Critics have often been enticed by a form of intellectual pride: they light on some theory and fall in love with it; they also scoff at the Commission because it did not always answer every question with a flat decision one way or the other.
***
f. As to charges that the Commission’s report was a rush job, it emerged three months after the deadline originally set. But to the degree that the Commission tried to speed up its reporting, this was largely due to the pressure of irresponsible speculation already appearing, in some cases coming from the same critics who, refusing to admit their errors, are now putting out new criticisms.
g. Such vague accusations as that “more than ten people have died mysteriously” can always be explained in some natural way ….
5. Where possible, counter speculation by encouraging reference to the Commission’s Report itself. Open-minded foreign readers should still be impressed by the care, thoroughness, objectivity and speed with which the Commission worked. Reviewers of other books might be encouraged to add to their account the idea that, checking back with the report itself, they found it far superior to the work of its critics.
Here are screenshots of part of the memo:
Summarizing the tactics which the CIA dispatch recommended:
- Claim that it would be impossible for so many people would keep quiet about such a big conspiracy
- Have people friendly to the CIA attack the claims, and point back to “official” reports
- Claim that eyewitness testimony is unreliable
- Claim that this is all old news, as “no significant new evidence has emerged”
- Ignore conspiracy claims unless discussion about them is already too active
- Claim that it’s irresponsible to speculate
- Accuse theorists of being wedded to and infatuated with their theories
- Accuse theorists of being politically motivated
- Accuse theorists of having financial interests in promoting conspiracy theories
In other words, the CIA’s clandestine services unit created the arguments for attacking conspiracy theories as unreliable in the 1960s as part of its psychological warfare operations.
But Aren’t Conspiracy Theories – In Fact – Nuts?
Forget Western history and CIA dispatches … aren’t conspiracy theorists nutty?
In fact, 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.
And what about the NSA and the tech companies that have cooperated with them?
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
- Banks have been involved in systematic criminal behavior, and have manipulated every single market
- 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 ideologue.
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.
And see ...
The Troll’s Guide to Internet Disruption
»
- advertisements -
" and some how ended up on Kennedy's stretcher - in PRISTINE condition."
Dented flat on one side, at the base, is not the definition of pristine.
4 down arrows that still do not understand the definition of pristine.
And another one that does not understand the meaning of pristine. No pristine car has a dent in it. Neither does a pristine bullet.
Carlos Hathcock, a real American sniper (unlike this clown who took a diagnosed psychotic and schizophrenic to the shooting range????), attempted to replicate the so-called Oswald assassination attempt with fellow instructors at Quantico, and failed miserably each time.
As Dallas Police Chief Curry said, they could never place Oswald at the scene nor with a weapon.
"As Dallas Police Chief Curry said, they could never place Oswald at the scene nor with a weapon."
The circumstantial evidence placed Oswald at the scene with a weapon.
"... attempted to replicate the so-called Oswald assassination attempt with fellow instructors at Quantico, and failed miserably each time."
How many times have i heard similar claims?
Donahue hit a moving target for a 1967 CBS documentary, three times in 4.8 seconds. What Oswald did, was certainly doable.
Still spreading the same bullcrap, huh, sonny?
Read these books, feel free to verify the sources, then get back to us:
Brothers: Hidden History of the Kennedy Years, by David Talbot
JFK and the Unspeakable, by James Douglass
Mary's Mosaic, by Peter Janney
Battling Wall Street: the Kennedy presidency, by Donald Gibson
Reclaiming Parkland, by James DiEugenio
Destiny Betrayed, by James DiEugenio
Rockefellerocracy, by Richard James DeSocio
Thy Will Be Done, by Gerard Colby with Charlotte Dennett
The Girl on the Stairs, by Barry Ernest
History Will Not Absolve Us, by Martin E. Schotz
The Echo From Dealey Plaza, by Abraham Bolden
The Yankee and Cowboy War, by Carl Oglesby
CIA Rogues and the Killing of the Kennedys, by Patrick Nolan
"Still spreading the same bullcrap, huh, sonny?"
Actual documented facts are not bullcrap. Donahue hit a moving target 3 times in 4.8 seconds.
All the credible circumstantial evidence pointed straight at Oswald. It was pretty straight forward. In 51 years, no one has proven other than Oswald wshot Kennedy, in spite of the numerous books written.
What motivation do you think Ruby (Rubenstein) really had to summarily execute Oswald on live Teevee? Some altruistic motive?
Oswald sounded genuiinely like he was at a loss as to what was going on at the time he was executed..jmo
"What motivation do you think Ruby (Rubenstein) really had to summarily execute Oswald on live Teevee?"
Opportunity.
Ruby took his dog with him when he drove to the Western Union. It indicated he didn't drive to the Western Union with the intent of shooting Oswald at the police station.
Just after Ruby got to the line of press, Oswald was brought out of the office, into the garage. It appeared to be an impulsive act, to step out and shoot Oswald.
"In it, the author explained that over 100 people had come forth with eyewitness accounts or testimony that contradicted some aspect of the WC report."
Not surprising, as eyewitness testimony is often not 100% reliable.
Some people thought the limo stopped, when the films clearly showed it didn't.
"All you need to know about the Warren Commission's "report" is the magic bullet theory."
There was no magic bullet theory. The bullet struck JFK in the back and exited his throat. Connally was sitting in front of JFK, on a jump seat which placed him more interior than JFK. Connally's body was not facing straight forward, but turned somewhat to his right leaning against the jump seat. The bullet did not need to zig zag.
After 51 years, i would think that you would know that by now.
Then why was the back of Kennedy's head blown off? That wasn't an entry hole, it was an exit hole. After 51 years, I would think that you would know that by now.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1Qt6a-vaNM
"Then why was the back of Kennedy's head blown off"
The back of JFK's head was not blown off. I don't know where you get that fantasy from. Scalp from the upper right side of JFK's head, was hanging over his right ear. The scalp on the back of the head was in tact.
"That wasn't an entry hole, it was an exit hole. After 51 years, I would think that you would know that by now."
You are funny.
And you were there and saw it, right? I didn't think so. You're either a C.I.A. troll or a fool if you think Oswald shot Kennedy.
"And you were there and saw it, right? I didn't think so. You're either a C.I.A. troll or a fool if you think Oswald shot Kennedy."
The circumstantial evidence pointed directly at Oswald.
CIA troll, that is a funny deflection. No fool, either. Oswald took an enclosed package to work and was last seen on the 6th floor, by the crew working on the 6th floor.
It was Oswald's rifle that was found on the 6th floor. No reason to believe anyone other than Oswald, used it.
The surgeon at Parkland Hospital thought that Kennedy had been hit from the front. In any event an autopsy should have been performed in Texas by competent doctors, not the circus at Bethesda. If is was necessary to take Kennedy back to Washington the Texas doctors should have gone with Kennedy with the president being accompanied by Texas Rangers at all times.
"The surgeon at Parkland Hospital thought that Kennedy had been hit from the front."
The physical evidence determined it to be an exit. The hole in the back of the shirt was rounded, indicating entrance. The collar had a ragged, torn hole, indicating the cloth was pushed away from the body, the bullet tearing the shirt as it exited.
6 down arrows that are wrong.
Only an exiting bullet would have produced a torn ragged hole in the front of the shirt.
THREE emergency room doctors saw aw massive exit wound at the RIGHT REAR of Kennedy's head.
"THREE emergency room doctors saw aw massive exit wound at the RIGHT REAR of Kennedy's head."
The movie films and the Mooreman polaroid showed the back of JFK's head was in tact.
Zapruder pointed to the right side of his head, when explaining the head wound as it happened, in a live interview shortly after the shooting. The Zapruder film showed the scalp torn along the upper right side of the head, running toward the back right side of the head. The exit wound was not at the back right side of the head, as can be seen in the X-rays.
A piece of bone streaked up and forward from the top of the head, which was consistent with the X-ray position of the exit wound.
And the x-rays were taken by whom, where, and of what? Three emergency room surgeons saw a massive exit wound at the RIGHT REAR of Kennedy's head. No burned autopsy notes, no hack doctors who had never done an autopsy in their life hacking away in Bethesda. Three extremely competent surgeons.
"And the x-rays were taken by whom, where, and of what?
The X-rays were of JFK's skull. The X-rays were taken at Bethesda Naval Hospital, prior to the autopsy, by an X-ray rechnician.
"Three emergency room surgeons saw a massive exit wound at the RIGHT REAR of Kennedy's head."
The Zapruder film, which was the actual record of the shooting, says otherwise. It is the film which is accurate.
This clown moneybots is some IP from the Pentagon address block spouting shit.
Please ignore . . .
"This clown moneybots is some IP from the Pentagon address block spouting shit."
Quite the imagination you have. I am sticking with the proven facts. Interesting that no one has been able to dispute, which has resulted in immature name calling.
The conspiracy theorist excuse is to cover up all the Government illegal operations that are happening without judicial supervision and without control of the governments . The governments pretend not to know that gangstalking and harassment of citizens happens , the politicians pretend not to know about UFO , secret space exploration , Aliens and treaties with aliens , Chemical trails, weather modifications , and attempt to modify the health of citizens spraying nanoparticle and medicines in the environment .
An alert person who talks about the tabus of of our society , UFO , Alien , space eploration , chemtrail , run the risk of being accused of belonging to the lunatic fringe or the group with the tinfoil hat .
The reality is that the tabus in our society are the secrets that the government doesn't want the people to know .
Lance deHaven-Smith was the one that discovered this document, as discussed in his great book:
http://www.amazon.com/Conspiracy-Theory-America-Discovering/dp/0292757697/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&qid=1424765486&sr=8-10&keywords=american+conspiracy
Also, see Radical Marijuana's comment above.
Eric Dubin, Managing Editor, TheNewsDoctors.com
Interesting, Flying Wombat, I had seen so many different contexts in which that declassified CIA document appeared, that I was not sure who was the first to discover that, after it was declassified.
I doubt that anything from the later 1970s on could be trusted to ever be "declassified" ??? since what has actually emerged from back in the 1960s has been such astonishing PROOF of how bad things were back then!
It is nice to day dream that some future historians will be around to be able to piece together documents that may eventually be discovered, which will provide some real PROOF of what has been happening more recently ... However, I am not so sure that there will be any civilization that survives to be able to do that, because I think that the control of civilization through backing up lies with violence has continued to get worse faster, at an exponential rate, since the 1960s!
In the old days of debate if you labeled anyone rather than engaging in true debate your argument would be scoffed at and cast aside. Now if you engage in debate or question anything mainstream, regardless of how ludicrous, you will be labeled and cast aside. The inversion of our reality is quite remarkable.
I had the unfortunate experience of returning to college the fall of Sept 11 and the even more unfortunate experience of being forced to take an unnecessary and arbitrarily redundant BS social class pertaining to foreign affairs. I literally ended up taking on a huge portion of the class concerning yellow cake, the Iraq war or somethin to that effect yadda.. yadda. I'll never forget this one particularly angry ignorant standing up and screaming CONSPIRACY THEORIST at me while he literally frothed at the mouth.
And here we are today, things are much better and yet even today...and even here...this discussion will be scoffed at and treated like a joke. Don't get angry or demoralized, you did your best and you have a huge advantage.
Let them laugh and be thankful you don't have that debilitating need to fit in and be labeled "credible". Face it, your fucking weird but you have a nack for seeing whats coming down the pipe, its not all that bad, the world has always been falling apart.
You are correct that people used to get really angry. You could guage the intensity of their loyalty to Lord Bush by the number of flags they had flying from their car windows.
Now, when I try to warn my friends about the economy, they treat me like a dementia patient in a nursing home and try to reassure me that everything is going to be fine.
have had the same response from my friends and family for years. but recently, two of them asked me about gold after i had described the current state of the global economy. i was dumfounded to say the least. first thing that came to my mind was that i have to sell my stash, like now. contrarian indicators and such. but after regaining my calm, just replied that theoretically yes but the futures markets are rigged so do it at your own peril. and if so, start with the silver.
Read a tremendous book recently on the rigging of the LIBOR rates and how it affects everybody.
Open Secret, by Erin Arvedlund
Tried to interest others in it, but first you have to explain what LIBOR was about and why it was so important.
Never heard of the book, strangely enough, but stumbled upon it at the library.
No wonder, the author names all the names!
I remember commenting on a woman's blog one time. She got pissed at me for something I wrote and she misinterpreted. I explained myself and wrote to her saying I felt bad she took it the way she did.
She removed comments she didn't want others to read and changed other comments I wrote, wording it to my detriment and I had no way of correcting them or deleting them.
Anyway, if some paranoid old woman can do that, imagine what the CIA can do. We are not safe commenting on George's or ZH blogs. They know who we are, where we reside, our credit card numbers, bank accounts, what we buy....
I m a pacifist, but a non conformist as well. I won't knock someone on the head or kill anyone to prove a point. They will have no trouble doing that to me, I know it.
Why are they like that? It is more fear than power. They have nothing and they know it. We have something. Maybe we have just enough truth in us to see the light in a manner of speaking.
"Give unto Cesar that which is Cesar's" Cesar never created anything. All he represented was a man others idolized and obeyed. No different than today, people idolizing POTUS, CIA, Politcal parties and snipers and those who supposedly control them.
They are nothing, just fuel for the fire.
Funny you should mention that, cherry picker.
My comments are officially banned and blocked at Cory Doctorow's boingboing.net, commondreams.org, whowhatwhy.com, huffington post, and a bunch of others.
And my comments are always objectively progressive?
Was the rothschild vs rothschild story removed from ZH?
Where is it?
Musta missed something.
Yeah, what happened to it?
is this it??
http://etfdailynews.com/2015/02/18/rothschild-vs-rothschild/
http://bullionbullscanada.com/intl-commentary/26594-rothschild-vs-rothsc...
sad to see articles 'removed' from the z hedge.......
Gone. Like everything else that is relevant online will be someday.
Hummmm..yes...these satanic rothschils zionist pigs are a patient bunch of carkasaurs, eh! Imagine inventing things that would play huge roles for the takeover in the planed future, and waiting until the time they could play that evil card.
FARK YOU AND YER LABELING for future persecution!!! The only frarkin extremists that are real, are the ones in washington dc and on wall street and in the city of london. All extremists to the max. Soon their numbers will be up as moar and moar millions of people wake up and SEE who the real enemies of mankind are.
Sure ain't going to be pretty after another false flag attack on a blood moon, or some other contrived event takes place. The absolute horrible truth is, ALL TERRORISTS, TERRORIST ACTIONS, AND TERRORISM COMMITTED IN THE WORLD IS ALL GOVT SPONSORED EVIL. THE US, ISREAL, ENGLAND, AND MANY OTHERS ARE ALL RESPONSIBLE, FOR THEY ARE ALL SATANIC ROTHSCHLD ZIONIST PUPPETS FROM HELL.
Al-CIA-DUH is ISIS. All isrealli terrorists!!! It's long past time to call a spade, a Spade!
Radical Marijuana, That's got to be the best thought out and worded sumary of everything I keep trying to get through to people in one fell swoop! I'm just going to print out your comment and hand it to people from now on.
According to this karl popper used the term in 1945
http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory
John Wells stunning interview deconstructs the Boston Marathon hoax. It is two hours long, but best of class and should go viral. Start at about 24:00.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EN9xf0gmCHI#t=98
Thank you for sharing this!
Obama orders new 911 Investigation ]]Really well done
911 truthers will stay the course. Blowing the cover off 911 is the answer, the only answer, the easiest solution to the world's dilemma...Reparations would result from the creation ofa neutral world court and the investigation which could be funded with donations from billboards.
911 Truth will set us free.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMBqZBPZ8S0#t=46
13 minutes of If You're a Traitor and You Know it, Have a Cocktail (The Truthtrashians)
Bunny, lots of grins. Good pimp. Molestones
British demkracy stinks. Those early documents as Magna Charta made rules between lower and higher level of aristocracy. It has ZERO influence on ordinary people. At the end of 18th century only some 3% people has right to vote. Similar way was amerikan demokracy which gave right to vote +/_ 5% this time amerikans. It took 14? amendements until full right to vote was implemented.
British isles were full scale slavery society before Roman empire entered.
"Slavery in the British Isles existed from before theRoman occupation. Chattel slavery virtually disappeared after the Norman Conquest to be replaced by feudalism and serfdom."
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery_in_the_British_Isles Actualy London was build by enslaved britons who were later executed. http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london-built-with-the-blood-of-british-sl... Enslavement of local population actualy ended in end of 19th, in America at begining of 20th centuries. See book: They were white and they were slaves. So this poor slaves became servants of East India Company to pave the way for enslavement of other nations. British Common law originate in Roman Jus/Ius Gentium= case law which was easy to manipulate. Jus Gentium was law for rulling Roman provinces= non citizens of Rome. Gentiles were those who did not slip under civil law or Roman law. Including inhabitants of Judea. Word gento is pronounced in Teutonic Benelux as Hentoo. From this is word Hindu= Hinduism. BTW. I 've never heard in school about Northern Crusades or Teutons. That's 100% konspiracy theory. The same as book: Builders of Empire. It is about cooperation between empire and freemasons. But, y'll know, it is conspie theory. It's good, I feel safe now
Mob rule is bankster rule. Democracy is too easy to subvert. Hence, the FFs created a Republic.
Not suprising to me that '67 was the year. In August of '66, Mark Lane published his devastating critique of the Warren Commision's findings "Rush To Judgement" that shredded the official version of JFK's assassination. It was only then that the American people started scratching their heads and saying "Wait a minute......".
I was 13 when he was shot and after school (it was Friday) my brother, sister and I sat glued to the TV listening to Cronkite. My father walked in the door after work, looked at the TV for 2 minutes and said "Johnson did it." Then he walked off to shower. 50 years on, I marvel at how prescient my old man was. He died Jan. 25th at the age of 94. Nice call Pop!
Funny
I was about 12, living in Canada and was glued to the TV too. JFK was loved up here as well. My instincts told me LBJ was behind it. I even told some people about my feeling. When Ruby killed Oswald, I started doubting my first thought.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U1Qt6a-vaNM
JFK to 911 Everything Is A Rich Man's Trick
Several hours of material to demonstrate the ways in which your father was right!
However, Tony Gambino, offers an alternate explanation:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OmKOZ4fZl4k
And here is a very clear video of the driver pulling the trigger: