This page has been archived and commenting is disabled.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 -
The video I linked proposes the theory that there were about 20 people involved in the actual assassination of President Kennedy, and then many more in maintaining the cover-up afterwards. That video advances the thesis that the CIA and the highest levels of other forms of organized crime worked together, because they are fundamentally the same.
That video supports my analysis that there is almost nothing but organized crime and controlled opposition. There are lots of different, higher level, organized crime gangs, that shift from competing to cooperating with each other, back and forth, as their relationships evolve. The best organized gangs are able to effectively control the government, through bribery, intimidation, and assassination of those that could not otherwise be bribed or intimidated.
It is extremely difficult to imagine any practical solutions to those problems, since no one has ever demonstrated a possible solution to the problem that NOBODY GUARDS THE GUARDIANS. My view is that we have no choice but to continue to have to muddle through the madness of the situation that the real world operates through the dynamic equilibria of different systems of organized lies operating robberies.
One thing that is clear is that AFTER it was possible to assassinate a President, and then cover that up ... then America was headed in a serious spiral of being more and more dominated by worse and worse organized crimes, which could get away with even more criminal behaviors!
Face it. You're an asshole if you don't believe in ABCCBSNBCCNNCNBCFOX nooz.
cnBS is following the template: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X06kz9dzXho#t=198
Great article!
A few related quotes:
9/11 And The Orwellian Redefinition Of 'Conspiracy Theory'
By Paul Craig Roberts, June 20, 2011.
While we were not watching, conspiracy theory has undergone Orwellian redefinition. A "conspiracy theory" no longer means an event explained by a conspiracy. Instead, it now means any explanation, or even a fact, that is out of step with the government's explanation and that of its media pimps.
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/07/12/313399/conspiracy-theorists-vs-g...
New studies: ‘Conspiracy theorists’ sane; government dupes crazy, hostileConspiracy Theory in America by political scientist Lance deHaven-Smith, was published by the University of Texas Press. Professor deHaven-Smith explains why people don’t like being called “conspiracy theorists”:
“The CIA’s campaign to popularize the term ‘conspiracy theory’ and make conspiracy belief a target of ridicule and hostility must be credited, unfortunately, with being one of the most successful propaganda initiatives of all time.”
In other words, people who use the terms “conspiracy theory” and “conspiracy theorist” as an insult are doing so as the result of a well-documented, real conspiracy by the CIA to cover up the JFK assassination. (That campaign, by the way, was completely illegal, and the CIA officers involved were criminals; the CIA is barred from all domestic activities, yet routinely breaks the law to conduct domestic operations ranging from propaganda to assassinations.)
DeHaven-Smith also explains why those who doubt official explanations of high crimes are eager to discuss historical context. He points out that a very large number of conspiracy claims have turned out to be true, and that there appear to be strong relationships between many as-yet-unsolved “state crimes against democracy.”
Psychologist Laurie Manwell of the University of Guelph agrees that the CIA-designed “conspiracy theory” label impedes cognitive function. She points out, in an article published in American Behavioral Scientist (2010), that anti-conspiracy people are unable to think clearly about such apparent state crimes against democracy ... In the same issue of ABS, University of Buffalo professor Steven Hoffman adds that anti-conspiracy people are typically prey to strong “confirmation bias” - that is, they seek out information that confirms their pre-existing beliefs, while using irrational mechanisms (such as the “conspiracy theory” label) to avoid conflicting information.
The extreme irrationality of those who attack “conspiracy theories” has been ably exposed by Communications professors Ginna Husting and Martin Orr of Boise State University. In a 2007 peer-reviewed article entitled “Dangerous Machinery: ‘Conspiracy Theorist’ as a Transpersonal Strategy of Exclusion,” they wrote:
“If I call you a conspiracy theorist, it matters little whether you have actually claimed that a conspiracy exists or whether you have simply raised an issue that I would rather avoid … By labeling you, I strategically exclude you from the sphere where public speech, debate, and conflict occur.”
But now, people who doubt official stories are no longer excluded from public conversation; the CIA’s 44-year-old campaign to stifle debate using the “conspiracy theory” smear is nearly worn-out. In academic studies, as in comments on news articles, pro-conspiracy voices are now more numerous - and more rational - than anti-conspiracy ones. No wonder the anti-conspiracy people are sounding more and more like a bunch of hostile, paranoid cranks. ...
Government and its supporting media are a conspiracy to control their sheeple.
"In a Senate debate last month, Mr. Inhofe pointed to a poster with photos of scientists questioning the climate-change consensus, including Dr. Soon. “These are scientists that cannot be challenged,” the senator said. A spokeswoman for the senator said Friday that he was traveling and could not be reached for comment."
New York Times 21FEB15
as NOT reported on Zero Hedge. (Republicans to Investigate NASA on ZH the very next day)
Nope, no conspiracy to make the sheeple believe AGW is a conspiracy to TAX. Doing god's work they are...
--------
Excellent comment on unitary mechanisms today Rad!)
The Anthropogenic Global Warming conjeture is nonfalsifiable, and therefore isn't science. It is more of a faith based exercise, making it a religion.
While I agree that the philosophy of science is an interesting worthwhile topic to discuss, to put it mildly, and have acknowledged that my abilities in this area fall within the ranks of 'idiot', the topic at hand here is government, media, and fraud and omissions.
There is an interesting discussion of the topic you raise ("nonfalsifiable") at Skeptical Science
Thanks.
The IPCC completed the Fifth Assessment Report (AR5) with the release of the Synthesis Report
on 2 November 2014. AR5 is the most comprehensive assessment of climate change ever
undertaken. Over 830 scientists from over 80 countries were selected to form the author teams
producing the report. They in turn drew on the work of over 1,000 contributing authors and over
1,000 expert reviewers. AR5 assessed over 30,000 scientific papers.
Skeptical Science can hardly be considered an objective source.
I find it puzzling that many here have no problem with the idea that banking cartels secretly run the world, but can't believe there's a conspiracy to put a global tax on energy usage. Odd.
I don't give a fuck who you debate the philosophy of science with though I highly recommend our very own Radical Marijuana
The idea of a global carbon tax has been floating around since you were in diapers. 6%. 25 years later still no such tax and how many gigatons of carbon consumed? How much money has the UN global carbon tax missed out on??? And now decarbonization is flavour of the month. DOH!
Now consider this: if the goal of the almighty cabal was to push the tax why wasn't Al Gore made POTUS hmmm? Puzzle away.
Great points! And strongly agree with your recommendation.
Thanks gswifty! If I had a nickel for every time I've seen on ZH:
1) it's a hoax to impose the carbon tax
2) the computer models are manipulated
3) no action now, we need more research
4) the climate always changes
5) had to change it from "global warming" to "climate change"
6) the IPCC this and the UN that
hey, check out this funny vid by a guy Radical Marijuana linked a while back:
Deek Jackson, FKN News
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqoRXnf88zQ
Wendigo - I think the ZH consensus in no way supports AGW.
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/
Hats off and a big thank you Dizzy for the great piece of information. A+++ Milestones
Great site, dude!
That mirrors my previous book list which I'll repeat for general audience:
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
The fuller text of the Lord Acton quote,"I cannot accept your canon that we are to judge Pope and King unlike other men, with a favourable presumption that they did no wrong. If there is any presumption it is the other way, against the holders of power, increasing as the power increases. Historic responsibility has to make up for the want of legal responsibility. Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men, even when they exercise influence and not authority, still more when you superadd the tendency or the certainty of corruption by authority. There is no worse heresy than that the office sanctifies the holder of it."
The great heresy and stupidity of the American sheeple is its trust in any officials of government. Sheeple in juries trust prosecutors, police and judges to be honest men, when their benefit derives from the conviction of those charged. The sheeple create their own virtue in trusting government officials. Answer the question, cui bono about any government report, government act, any government official. Government conspires to control the sheeple. The nature of government is conspiracy.
Au contraire.
It is impossible for an agent of the government to engage in a "conspiracy" in carrying out an act of government, because a "conspircay" is a behind-the-scenes coordination of an illegal or illegitimate act or acts.
But hold the phone. There are no acts by government that are illegal or illegitimate. Whatever goes on behind the scenes, an act of government is, by virtue of being an act of government, by definition both legal and legitimate.
If you don't like it, too fucking bad. Or vote, if that will make you feel better.
I did not use the words legal or legitimate. Legal is a construct of government. Man has "certain unalienable rights." Governments derive "their just powers from the consent of the governed." Judges, presidents, police and others may claim to be the law and to conspire together to enforce their claims against the people. Your, "no acts by government that are illegal or illegitimate" was rejected at Nuremberg and at countless other times in history.
Lord Acton also remarked that, sooner or later, there would be a reckoning between the people and the banks.
"The issue which has swept down the centuries and which will have to be fought sooner or later is the people versus the banks."
And he cheated his way to becoming an MP, but got caught.
Interesting guy.
Wackoism.
I'm on the government committee and am here to tell you the truth.
Good Number 1!
Calling craziness crazy isn't really partisan. It's just true. Sorry to burst your bubble. Maybe Mom can come down to the basement and give you a hug.
"It's just true."
Without facts, figures, or even meaningful positive contributions to express your point, don't you, thing, feel real stupid trying to turn the truth into your wine of pig pee-pee?
It takes real idiocy, and balls the size of a chicken to even attempt to convince the crew the sky is purple, and 2+2=5.13. Go back to low grade school and tell your master you are failing miserably.
Back to hell demon, and please take your evil satanic rothschild zionist tribe with you!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIChSyoo7mY
Ohoh Heywoodnt, don't look now but they are looking at 10 banks for manipulation of precious metals....another conspiracy led this time by the DOJ and CFTC. When will these conspiracies stop????
Tell your Mom I said Hi.
K
It is almost impossible to clear ones name once a rumor is spread that one is a tramp or pervert. It is the same with a conspiricy theory, facts are difficult to obtain. Once a neighbor whispers you are a pediophile seeking to get revenge it is best to leave the neighborhood.
Fact is we are news hounds who read too goddam much. That's all. We remember what we read and when it doesn't add up, we search and search and search.. Then we find others who noticed that discrepancies. We are being lied to? Some of us have crawled out of the trenches to create a decent life and if you think for one fucking second I am going to stand by while thieves rearrange my world, you are out of your mind. Fuck you all who have devised this plan. May you burn in hell for but first spend 2 days on your death bed in a comatose state which sends your consciousness into the realm of horror you have left in your wake.
These people are less than zero. They are scavengers who prey on kind people and trick them and if the tricks do not work, they ruin them or kill them. They do not belong in lap of luxury, they are undeserving to share our air.
Fuck them all - I would rather drink bleach than sit with these people. These people are parasites and live off the work and progress of sound minded individuals who care about our world. FUCK THEM ALL IN THE ASS WITH A CLAW HAMMER.
Well said!
It's like these douchetards professing their love of Brian Williams or Dan Rather, or any of the other whorescum teleprompter readers at all the phony news stations.
Dan Rather never told us the family background of Michael and Ruth Paine (who rented living sapce to Lee Oswald and supposedly obtained his job for him at the Texas School Book Depository). Namely, that Ruth Paine was related to John Foster Dulles, by way of his wife, on the Avery side of the family (which also makes her related to the Rockefeller family). That Ruth's sister and brother-in-law were career CIA people.
That Michael Paine (of the Forbes, Cabot and Dudley families) was related to Henry Cabot Lodge (on the Cabot side), ambassador to Vietnam, about to be fired by President Kennedy. (This would make him related to John -- Forbes, Dudley, Withrop -- Kerry, a cousin once removed.)
Now why hasn't a single so-called newsy ever explained this to any of us????
+ 1 for "in the ass with a claw hammer"
Bunny, if you vote, you are a hypocrite. I'll never vote again. I'm going to get me some little circular white stickers printed to wear on Election Day.
"I Gave Up Voting for Psychopaths"
" My Vote Was Negated by a Welfare Queen"
You get the point.
The costs of all this subterfuge has alas taken its toll with conspiracy facts seeping through the walls of Potemkin Village.
Holograms...lol.
Rumor is an alien craft crashed in Canada several days ago. Military surrounds the flying machine.
Earth is the tree that jumps out in the road when aliens fly drunk
A big pile of dogma helps too.
Nice work, George. Almost no one I know believes MSM or what the gubmint says anymore, esp since Vietnam was exposed as a Big Fraud even by McNamara himself.
Here's another conspiracy story. My dad, drafted during Vietnam, told a story about McNamara. Mc. had to constantly change his itinerary because the draftees were looking to kill him.
W. Westmoreland also was the center of troops ire.
It is surreal to attempt to have a better sense of genuine public opinion due to the degree that the MSM lie by omission about everything important, in proportion to how important it is. Moreover, it seems that the anglophone MSM is the worst in the world at being professional liars and immaculate hypocrites.
But nevertheless, elections are still dominated by the MSM putting on a puppet show for the masses of muppets. So far, the Internet has not changed that basic situation, except to generate profound cognitive dissonance between the world that the MSM presents and everything else that is relatively more real.
Nobody I personally know believes the MSM. However, all the major political parties continue to pretend that the Huge Lies promoted by the MSM are not Lies. Thus, there is developing a more and more surreal disconnection and runaway cognitive dissonance between the fragmented fantasy worlds presented by the MSM, and whatever may be more relatively real, which has been buried under that bullshit, as systems of legalized lies, backed by legalized violence.
"It is surreal to attempt to have a better sense of genuine public opinion due to the degree that the MSM lie by omission about everything important, in proportion to how important it is."
This is a great point that probably is the greatest conspiracy of all. If you don't report it, it never happened.
Large scale conspiracies can be kept secret. Example: the Manhattan Project.
Don't go back that far, with the release of the Senate summary on their 3,000 page report on CIA torture, it has become known now that essentially 3 people controlled the script on 9/11 --- sat on the information which could have apprehended the hijackers, told lies to congress about the torture program, and destroyed those 92 torture tapes: Alfreda Bikowsky, Jose Rodriguez, Jr., and Perkas.
While 2 people at the FBI blocked further actions agains the hijackers: Frasca and Maltbie -- and the CIA and FBI types who did this were promoted.
Only TWO whistleblowers at the CIA and NSA, among the many thousands there --- ergo those thousands were keeping their crimes secret.
Another particular example:
The D-Day Invasion was a great example of how deceits and double crossing spies worked to mislead the Germans so well! There were balloon tanks and trucks, & fake radio chatter, etc., all done so the Germans would be DECEIVED! There were subversions and turnings of German spies to act as double agents! In the end, the Germans were deceived about where the D-Day invasion landed. That big a military operation worked as a successful conspiracy operation!
I regard ALL of human history as a grand conspiracy of backing up lies with violence. Philosophically speaking, everything that human beings "know" is necessarily a relative illusion or lie. Human realities are ALWAYS organized lies operating robberies. The only differences are those of the different dynamic equilibria between the different systems of organized lies operating robberies. EVERYTHING IS NECESSARILY DONE AS SOME KIND OF CONSPIRACY. The triumph of the biggest bullies' bullshit world view has systematically reversed everything, so that there are false fundamental dichotomies routinely promoted, along with the matching impossible ideals, that propose going to the wrong pole of that mistaken duality in order to achieve spurious "unity."
Governments are the biggest form of organized crime, controlled by the best organized criminals. Civilization became based on systems of legalized lies, backed by legalized violence. The relative social successes from being able to do that have resulted in us living in a Bizarro Mirror World, or Wonderland Matrix, because the greatest of all conspiracies are those which the ruling classes successfully commit against those that they rule over.
There is almost nothing but organized crime, surrounded by controlled opposition. The more successfully that crime is organized, the more that it is able to assert that it is the "government." That government serves the interests of the ruling classes, which are the best organized gangs of criminals, most insulated inside of the biggest form of organized crime, surrounded by the layers of legalized lies and legalized violence that they promote as the biggest bullies' bullshit social stories about themselves, which the majority of people are brainwashed to believe in, to the degree that they want to continue to believe in that bullshit.
Our entire political economy is based on ENFORCED FRAUDS, in the from of governments enforcing privately controlled banks being able to create the public "money" supply out of nothing. Everyone who uses that public "money" is a victim of that successful criminal conspiracy. Although a small group of intellectuals was always aware of that, and protested it, nevertheless, that basic system of ENFORCED FRAUDS has been able to almost totally dominate the global economy.
I can not think of a bigger example of a successful criminal conspiracy than the existing public "money" supply, whose frauds are enforced by governments which are controlled by private banks. Other, lesser, criminal conspiracies were usually smaller components which fit into the bigger picture of perpetuating that greatest of all criminal conspiracies, which the LEGALIZED COUNTERFEITING of the public "money" supply, enforced by public powers, despite that serving the interests of privately controlled banking institutions.
Most of the articles on Zero Hedge are discussing some of the relatively superficial symptoms of the ways that the political economy is based on ENFORCED FRAUDS. The biggest of all criminal conspiracies is the established monetary system, which mostly manages to never be publicly recognized nor admitted. However, few face that in a more systematic and deeper philosophical way.
For some more of my kind of bla, bla, blah about the philosophical dimensions of that, see my comment above this recently posted reply, under this article: The Math Doesn't Add Up | Zero Hedge That repeats my basic point that authors like George Washington do a great job of assembling well-researched articles, but continue to still mostly operate within the biggest bullies' bullshit frame of reference, due to the degree that dominates the natural languages and philosophy of science that almost everyone uses and takes for granted.
It is impossible to exaggerate the degree to which we are living inside of a Bizarro Mirror World, where everything is being perceived backwards, and therefore, we are living in a Wonderland Matrix, where everything appears to be absurd. Not only are social pyramid systems based on being able to back up lies with violence, but also, that has been going on so much, for so long, that almost everyone takes that for granted, and thinks about everything in profoundly backward ways. THE RULE IS CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY. THAT IS NORMAL. However, the biggest bullies have been able to dominate the language that people use, and therefore the way that people think, so that almost everyone understands things in totally backward ways, which results in almost all of the bullshit "solutions" to problems backfiring badly, while creating consequences that are increasingly absurd.
INDEED:
Large scale conspiracies can be kept secret.
The ways that almost everyone understands almost everything is one of those "large scale conspiracies" and the established monetary system is the most significant of those!
Conspiracy is the RULE not the EXCEPTION. All great things have been done by groups CONSPIRING to agree to an end. Even Einstein needed the conspiracy of his fellow physicists to arrive at his conclusions. Eventually, he won out the nutter non-believers and the CONSPIRACISTS won...
The American revolutionaries CONSPIRED to overthrough that FAT BASTARD king george iii.
Sun Tsu wrote the book on military deception 2500 years ago and it has been the go-to source ever since.
D-Day was possible only because the Russians had worked off the German army already. It is a hollywood myth that it was a genial US led by blonde Robert Refords to defeat Germany. It was predominantly the Russians, loosing 27 million people in the process.
Later, when the US, but more so the Russians, had eliminated large parts of German air defense, the English started to throw bombs on civilians and refugees.
It is a historical fact that the USSR, not the USA, defeated NAZI Germany. Had Germany and the Soviets maintained their alliance, Germany would have had suffcicient raw materials to hold of a allied invasion indefinitely.
I've long argued that the Allies hsould have teamed up with Germany in order to defeat the Soviets, as the Soviets were a greater threat to the allies. That being said, I am aware that the West funded the Bolsheviks. Still, in 1940 the allies were considering sending an expeditionary force to Finalnd to help in their struggle agaisnt the Soviet Union.