Major conspiracies?
The Iraq war, fabricated evidence, illegal invasion? Puppet government selling off oil assets to Western oil companies? Dr Kelly's mysterious death?
The stopping of the investigation into British Aerospace arms deals with the Saudis?
Any of these major enough?
Have you ever come across a major conspiracy?
Moderator: Peak Moderation
Andy Hunt
http://greencottage.burysolarclub.net
http://greencottage.burysolarclub.net
Eternal Sunshine wrote: I wouldn't want to worry you with the truth.
Yes, but if I told you about it I'd have to kill you.
Nothing ever came out in the press. Can't afford to say anything more than that without the possibility of compromising certain people who I would not wish to see damaged.
Nothing ever came out in the press. Can't afford to say anything more than that without the possibility of compromising certain people who I would not wish to see damaged.
"When the facts change, I change my opinion. What do you do, sir?"
John Maynard Keynes.
John Maynard Keynes.
Yes, I know how it works in the school system. Same things happen in our schools.skeptik wrote:Yes, but if I told you about it I'd have to kill you.
Nothing ever came out in the press. Can't afford to say anything more than that without the possibility of compromising certain people who I would not wish to see damaged.
I think its a conspiracy that so many people have an automatic "Ah, thats just a conspiracy theory" response before even bothering to look into anything because thats what the laughing heads in the mainstream media program them to do.
Heres a small crazy conspiracy theory.
How about members of a secret society plotting to, and assassinating a monarch to bring about the end of an empire with the hope that the resulting mess might unify their own country ?
At the exact same day and time a murder attempt on the one man who would be able to keep Russia out of any resulting melee (which certainly wouldn't fit with their plans)
Resulting in literally millions of deaths and at least 6 wars over the next 85 years.
Theres so many extremely obvious conspiracies, the only surprise is that people dont believe that conspiracies are quite common and automatically assume that "conspiracy theorists" are nuts.
"Conspiracy Theorist" being the title of anyone who doesnt believe the official government explanation (often based on the same evidence) - because they'd never lie to us, right ?
Forget JFK (which was so obviously a conspiracy (look we found a mauser! - oh but the bullets were from an italian rifle (whoops)) and look into the situation surrounding His brothers murder and the actions of Sirhan Sirhan.
Its so obviously an MKULTRA job its really quite funny when you see the evidence. Poor old confused chap, managing to shoot RFK in the back of the head whilst standing facing him.
Whilst you're about it Look into COINTELPRO.
These matters arent even "theories".
Whilst i personally havent come across any conspiracies, i was responding to the assertion "Whilst conspiracies do exist, they are probably rather rare and generally unimportant. ".
I believe this to be quite wrong.
Heres a small crazy conspiracy theory.
How about members of a secret society plotting to, and assassinating a monarch to bring about the end of an empire with the hope that the resulting mess might unify their own country ?
At the exact same day and time a murder attempt on the one man who would be able to keep Russia out of any resulting melee (which certainly wouldn't fit with their plans)
Resulting in literally millions of deaths and at least 6 wars over the next 85 years.
Theres so many extremely obvious conspiracies, the only surprise is that people dont believe that conspiracies are quite common and automatically assume that "conspiracy theorists" are nuts.
"Conspiracy Theorist" being the title of anyone who doesnt believe the official government explanation (often based on the same evidence) - because they'd never lie to us, right ?
Forget JFK (which was so obviously a conspiracy (look we found a mauser! - oh but the bullets were from an italian rifle (whoops)) and look into the situation surrounding His brothers murder and the actions of Sirhan Sirhan.
Its so obviously an MKULTRA job its really quite funny when you see the evidence. Poor old confused chap, managing to shoot RFK in the back of the head whilst standing facing him.
Whilst you're about it Look into COINTELPRO.
These matters arent even "theories".
Whilst i personally havent come across any conspiracies, i was responding to the assertion "Whilst conspiracies do exist, they are probably rather rare and generally unimportant. ".
I believe this to be quite wrong.
Last edited by gug on 18 Oct 2008, 23:57, edited 1 time in total.
I'm not sure I understand what you mean by “Major Conspiracy”. I assume this presumes schemes so outlandish as to cause knee-jerk disbelief.
From my own meagre knowledge of history and current affairs I can think of numerous examples of evidence for significant conspiracies, including those that are acknowledged as such by mainstream public opinion today. I'll restrict myself to criminality of a within the supposedly non-corrupt West.
I'm afraid I'm going to have to ignore your insistence on direct personal knowledge though.
In the last century alone:
The planned coup known as The Business Plot of 1934 against FDR which was revealed by Major General Smedley Butler in testimony before Congress.
The conspiracy to deny the detrimental health effects of tobacco by the tobacco industry in the 1960s. You could just call that normal PR, but the fact that businesses routinely engage in propaganda campaigns to defend their interests presumably isn't shocking enough to meet your criteria for “major conspiracy”.
The would-be conspiracy of Operation Northwoods in 1962 to provide pretexts for the invasion of Cuba, including acts of terrorism against US citizens.
Watergate.
The CIA conspiracy of Operation Gladio which set about the strengthening of authoritarian governments and discrediting of leftist opposition in NATO controlled Western Europe by infiltration, subversion and provocation to violence of radical leftist groups and the actual carrying out of acts of terrorism by far-right groups funded and trained by the CIA, blamed on leftists. It's existence and nature has been confirmed not only by former agents in a BBC documentary series in the early 90s, but by former Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti: "Gladio had been necessary during the days of the Cold War but, that in view of the collapse of the East Bloc, Italy would suggest to NATO that the organisation was no longer necessary."
More recently, the most prominent whistleblower is probably Sibel Edmonds whose testimony is sufficiently incendiary to necessitate her gagging on pain of criminal prosecution by the invocation of “state sectrets privilege” by then Attorney General John Ashcroft. Still, her story has outed, more or less, albeit lacking in the specific details that would land her in jail.
The one thing all conspiracies tend to have in common is the belief in their perpetrators that the ends justify the means. Provided knowledge of the conspiracy is limited to people who believe in its ends there is no reason why it should become public knowledge. Like most criminality, we only get to learn about it when the the criminals themselves get caught. When the criminals in question are those in positions of power, the question is well asked; “"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
Conspiracies are unfortunately not outlandish or unlikely, but rather predictable, normal human behaviour. It's probable that the larger the conspiracy gets the more likely information pertaining to the conspiracy will enter the public domain, through leaks, whistleblowers, etc. However our capacity to deceive ourselves is the greatest safeguard against the “major” conspiracy.
Ironically there's a couple of quite well known quotes on this subject by two of the most conspiratorial of men, J. Edgar Hoover and Adolf Hitler, in which they espouse their own favoured conspiracy theories.
“We must now face the harsh truth that the objectives of communism are being steadily advanced because many of us do not recognize the means used to advance them. ... The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a Conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The American mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst.” J. Edgar Hoover, on the International Communist Conspiracy.
“The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed, for the vast masses of a nation are in the depths of their hearts more easily deceived than they are consciously and intentionally bad. The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them a more easy prey to a big lie than a small one, for they themselves often tell little lies, but would be ashamed to tell big lies.” Hitler, on the International Jewish Conspiracy.
“Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.” George W. Bush, on the International Terrorist Conspiracy.
There's something deliciously ironic about conspiring to create a conspiracy theory.
Many people doubtless prefer to believe our leaders never plan anything really nefarious, and that things are generally as simple as they say they are. It's certainly less time consuming and anxiety inducing than embarking on an adventure into the hall of mirrors that comprise the conspiracy theories that don't enjoy mainstream approval.
There's a powerful human need to subscribe to a set of beliefs that let them feel they are normal. People crave conformity. We swallow ideology and dogma as naturally as breathing. Threats to consensus reality are always ridiculed and attacked. This is not a feature unique to totalitarian regimes or primitive cultures. It's a basic fact of human social life.
What's so interesting about the internet age is these communities of ideas are no longer limited by geography, so groups of wierdos such as ourselves are free to disseminate our crazy memes to anyone that will listen. That said, having witnessed the evolution of various internet forums its interesting to ponder how much energy is devoted not so much in simply sharing information but in establishing a group identity by thrashing out a consensus on whatever issue is at hand. Over time all such groups tend to become increasingly homogenous in their members, and increasingly intolerant of opinions that fall outside of the norm. Plus ca change...
From my own meagre knowledge of history and current affairs I can think of numerous examples of evidence for significant conspiracies, including those that are acknowledged as such by mainstream public opinion today. I'll restrict myself to criminality of a within the supposedly non-corrupt West.
I'm afraid I'm going to have to ignore your insistence on direct personal knowledge though.
In the last century alone:
The planned coup known as The Business Plot of 1934 against FDR which was revealed by Major General Smedley Butler in testimony before Congress.
The conspiracy to deny the detrimental health effects of tobacco by the tobacco industry in the 1960s. You could just call that normal PR, but the fact that businesses routinely engage in propaganda campaigns to defend their interests presumably isn't shocking enough to meet your criteria for “major conspiracy”.
The would-be conspiracy of Operation Northwoods in 1962 to provide pretexts for the invasion of Cuba, including acts of terrorism against US citizens.
Watergate.
The CIA conspiracy of Operation Gladio which set about the strengthening of authoritarian governments and discrediting of leftist opposition in NATO controlled Western Europe by infiltration, subversion and provocation to violence of radical leftist groups and the actual carrying out of acts of terrorism by far-right groups funded and trained by the CIA, blamed on leftists. It's existence and nature has been confirmed not only by former agents in a BBC documentary series in the early 90s, but by former Italian Prime Minister Giulio Andreotti: "Gladio had been necessary during the days of the Cold War but, that in view of the collapse of the East Bloc, Italy would suggest to NATO that the organisation was no longer necessary."
More recently, the most prominent whistleblower is probably Sibel Edmonds whose testimony is sufficiently incendiary to necessitate her gagging on pain of criminal prosecution by the invocation of “state sectrets privilege” by then Attorney General John Ashcroft. Still, her story has outed, more or less, albeit lacking in the specific details that would land her in jail.
The one thing all conspiracies tend to have in common is the belief in their perpetrators that the ends justify the means. Provided knowledge of the conspiracy is limited to people who believe in its ends there is no reason why it should become public knowledge. Like most criminality, we only get to learn about it when the the criminals themselves get caught. When the criminals in question are those in positions of power, the question is well asked; “"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"
Conspiracies are unfortunately not outlandish or unlikely, but rather predictable, normal human behaviour. It's probable that the larger the conspiracy gets the more likely information pertaining to the conspiracy will enter the public domain, through leaks, whistleblowers, etc. However our capacity to deceive ourselves is the greatest safeguard against the “major” conspiracy.
Ironically there's a couple of quite well known quotes on this subject by two of the most conspiratorial of men, J. Edgar Hoover and Adolf Hitler, in which they espouse their own favoured conspiracy theories.
“We must now face the harsh truth that the objectives of communism are being steadily advanced because many of us do not recognize the means used to advance them. ... The individual is handicapped by coming face to face with a Conspiracy so monstrous he cannot believe it exists. The American mind simply has not come to a realization of the evil which has been introduced into our midst.” J. Edgar Hoover, on the International Communist Conspiracy.
“The size of the lie is a definite factor in causing it to be believed, for the vast masses of a nation are in the depths of their hearts more easily deceived than they are consciously and intentionally bad. The primitive simplicity of their minds renders them a more easy prey to a big lie than a small one, for they themselves often tell little lies, but would be ashamed to tell big lies.” Hitler, on the International Jewish Conspiracy.
“Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we.” George W. Bush, on the International Terrorist Conspiracy.
There's something deliciously ironic about conspiring to create a conspiracy theory.
Many people doubtless prefer to believe our leaders never plan anything really nefarious, and that things are generally as simple as they say they are. It's certainly less time consuming and anxiety inducing than embarking on an adventure into the hall of mirrors that comprise the conspiracy theories that don't enjoy mainstream approval.
There's a powerful human need to subscribe to a set of beliefs that let them feel they are normal. People crave conformity. We swallow ideology and dogma as naturally as breathing. Threats to consensus reality are always ridiculed and attacked. This is not a feature unique to totalitarian regimes or primitive cultures. It's a basic fact of human social life.
What's so interesting about the internet age is these communities of ideas are no longer limited by geography, so groups of wierdos such as ourselves are free to disseminate our crazy memes to anyone that will listen. That said, having witnessed the evolution of various internet forums its interesting to ponder how much energy is devoted not so much in simply sharing information but in establishing a group identity by thrashing out a consensus on whatever issue is at hand. Over time all such groups tend to become increasingly homogenous in their members, and increasingly intolerant of opinions that fall outside of the norm. Plus ca change...
gug, I can't speak on the rest of your post, but the JFK rifle 'proof' of a conspiracy is a bit weak ...Forget JFK (which was so obviously a conspiracy (look we found a mauser! - oh but the bullets were from an italian rifle (whoops))
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Ke ... tion_rifle
http://personal.stevens.edu/~gliberat/c ... c2766.html
And, for balance, this conspiracy article ..
http://www.geocities.com/whiskey99a/carcano.html
I especially love this bit:
Translation: "I'll leave out any evidence which contradicts my opinions."Taken in isolation I would have to concede that the photographs probably are genuine but the behaviour and activities of the FBI, CIA and ONI in this case cast grave doubts on the authenticity of any the evidence. I am certainly not confident enough in the backyard photographs to include them in this charted history of C2766.
I thought the rule for this thread was that internet evidence is not to be included. These links therefore carry no weight as their validity cannot be proved.Vortex wrote:gug, I can't speak on the rest of your post, but the JFK rifle 'proof' of a conspiracy is a bit weak ...Forget JFK (which was so obviously a conspiracy (look we found a mauser! - oh but the bullets were from an italian rifle (whoops))
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Ke ... tion_rifle
http://personal.stevens.edu/~gliberat/c ... c2766.html
And, for balance, this conspiracy article ..
http://www.geocities.com/whiskey99a/carcano.html
I especially love this bit:
Translation: "I'll leave out any evidence which contradicts my opinions."Taken in isolation I would have to concede that the photographs probably are genuine but the behaviour and activities of the FBI, CIA and ONI in this case cast grave doubts on the authenticity of any the evidence. I am certainly not confident enough in the backyard photographs to include them in this charted history of C2766.
Very true - thanks for the reminder.I thought the rule for this thread was that internet evidence is not to be included. These links therefore carry no weight as their validity cannot be proved.
So we need to disregard any claims of conspiracies unless experienced personally, or reported by family, friends or colleagues.
I doubt anyone here has any close contacts to the JFK assassination, so their en passant claims should also be disregarded.
So what if none of us have personal experience of a major conspiracy?
There's a perfectly sensible reason why this should be so. We are, for the most part, humble plebs not only without the means or connections necessary to perpetrate a major conspiracy, but also having reason to fear the law and criminal prosecution. Major conspiracies come about because no such fear exists in people and institutions that consider themselves above the law. This phenomenon of elite deviance is sufficiently prevalent for people to write academic textbooks about it.
So I think you're putting forth a fallacious argument; i.e. that personal experience of "major conspiracies" in everyday life being very uncommon justifies any conclusions being drawn about conspiracies in general.
Conspiracy by it's nature is limited to organised crime, politicians and government agencies that operate with minimal oversight. To expect otherwise is pretty irrational to my eyes. If you think the assertion that politicians operate with minimal oversight is far-fetched. well, when it comes to matters of "national security" I'm afraid they do.
There's a perfectly sensible reason why this should be so. We are, for the most part, humble plebs not only without the means or connections necessary to perpetrate a major conspiracy, but also having reason to fear the law and criminal prosecution. Major conspiracies come about because no such fear exists in people and institutions that consider themselves above the law. This phenomenon of elite deviance is sufficiently prevalent for people to write academic textbooks about it.
So I think you're putting forth a fallacious argument; i.e. that personal experience of "major conspiracies" in everyday life being very uncommon justifies any conclusions being drawn about conspiracies in general.
Conspiracy by it's nature is limited to organised crime, politicians and government agencies that operate with minimal oversight. To expect otherwise is pretty irrational to my eyes. If you think the assertion that politicians operate with minimal oversight is far-fetched. well, when it comes to matters of "national security" I'm afraid they do.
Vortex wrote:gug, I can't speak on the rest of your post, but the JFK rifle 'proof' of a conspiracy is a bit weak ...Forget JFK (which was so obviously a conspiracy (look we found a mauser! - oh but the bullets were from an italian rifle (whoops))
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_F._Ke ... tion_rifle
http://personal.stevens.edu/~gliberat/c ... c2766.html
And, for balance, this conspiracy article ..
http://www.geocities.com/whiskey99a/carcano.html
I especially love this bit:
Translation: "I'll leave out any evidence which contradicts my opinions."Taken in isolation I would have to concede that the photographs probably are genuine but the behaviour and activities of the FBI, CIA and ONI in this case cast grave doubts on the authenticity of any the evidence. I am certainly not confident enough in the backyard photographs to include them in this charted history of C2766.
I couldnt be arsed to trawl through those links but heres an interview with the the copper that found it...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dPIo8B7S1k4&NR=1
If you really *dont* believe that the JFK assassination counts as a conspiracy then you're in quite a minority.
Heres the initial reporting of it
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1AqqNKsWCGY
Remember, the policemans interview was quite a while *after* the reporting
As for "do conspiracies exist ?"
Why not ask a US president (its that JFK again)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WSGwnz7XpY&NR=1
Why not ask a US president (its that JFK again)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_WSGwnz7XpY&NR=1
Likewise, I take it that we shouldn't believe anything any politician says unless we are witness to the full facts. Why should I believe the official stories of any of the major news events when I haven't seen the evidence at first hand?Vortex wrote:Very true - thanks for the reminder.I thought the rule for this thread was that internet evidence is not to be included. These links therefore carry no weight as their validity cannot be proved.
So we need to disregard any claims of conspiracies unless experienced personally, or reported by family, friends or colleagues.
I doubt anyone here has any close contacts to the JFK assassination, so their en passant claims should also be disregarded.
I guess we all choose what kind of a world we want to live in: one where our entire picture of things is obtained purely from direct personal experience, or one in which we form judgements as to the reliability of third-party information.Vortex wrote:Very true - thanks for the reminder.I thought the rule for this thread was that internet evidence is not to be included. These links therefore carry no weight as their validity cannot be proved.
So we need to disregard any claims of conspiracies unless experienced personally, or reported by family, friends or colleagues.
I doubt anyone here has any close contacts to the JFK assassination, so their en passant claims should also be disregarded.
I personally think it is more naive to take the former attitude ("If I haven't experiened it, it's not real") than to judge each so-called "conspiracy theory" on its own merits.
By extension of your attitude, you should be sceptical that the earth goes round the sun, that matter is made of atoms, the plants operate by photosynthesis, that there ever existed a Roman Empire... where do you stop?
"We're just waiting, looking skyward as the days go down / Someone promised there'd be answers if we stayed around."
-
Aurora
