Conspiracy Theorists are Right

Conspiracy theorists are right, though they may not know it. Where this is concerned, I'm almost tempted to apply the inverse of Occam's Razor- anything you suspect the global elite of doing, they probably are, and far worse. No basis in logic there, and yet I am still tempted to believe it, sometimes. I'm tempted to believe it because of a very real, empirical truth that we are all witness to- power corrupts, and people are desperate for assurance. Trite aphorisms, but no less true for that. Many people crave the comfort in "knowing", but they are far too complacent to seek the truth on their own. They want to be told of the truth, but they are scared to death of witnessing it for themselves.

Icons of authority, then, are purring and beckoning for you to listen. They know better than you do, by virtue of their authority. So just listen and accept their truth like a rational human being. That's not a fallacy, is it? I don't know...... it doesn't matter anymore. I'm tired and want to sleep. I'd sooner trust the reassuring, sonorous orations of politicians, scientists, and other scrupulous officials. Wacko conspiracy theorists have no credibility, no accolades, and no peer-reviewed studies.

But we're smarter than that, aren't we?

Any true conspiracy theorist doubts himself just as he doubts the government, media, and reality itself. What is reality to the conspiracy theorists? It's the opposite of what they tell you. It must be- what truth has man ever gleaned from the "official story"? The "official story" had us worshipping phallic-shaped stones, divining the future from smoke and entrails, fêting pharaohs in awe of their godhood, and burning oneself alive to vindicate belief in a certain lance's "holiness" (in poor Peter Bartholomew's case, at least). It also had us believing that white people were made in God's image, while blacks were made in the image of a monkey. History is always rich with irony.

Why should affairs be any different today? We are still human, still amenable to the same kind of idiocy, extrapolated from blind faith in authority. What has changed since those shadowed days of the past, ruled by fear, superstition, and wild fancy? Perhaps you'd say we are rational now, we've been liberated from the nebulous influence of religion and folk-superstition. We are educated, discerning, and skeptical of all things unsourced and wanting for logic and testable validity.

But is that really the case? Those vaunted studies that you so eagerly appeal to, proving the innocuousness of, say, anti-depressants- are you a medical doctor, able to confirm these results first-hand? Are you knowledgeable in pharmaceutics? Can you personally attest to the good character of the people who conducted said study?

If not, then you should, quite deservingly, be branded an imbecile. Casual perusing of Internet articles and Wikipedia entries does not constitute sufficient expertise. How dare you presume to explain quantum mechanics after reading Scientific American magazine? How dare you presume to tell me that leaked radiation will have negligible effects on ocean life and, quite possibly, human health? How dare you purport to know the benign nature of gene-spliced food products and chemical preservatives? How dare you claim that your blindly credulous, illegitimate opinions are more valid than mine?

Real truth comes from those who spit on official stories. It comes from those convicted of heresy for explaining why the stars shift position in the sky. It comes from lunatics who wander off into the mountains and eat grass, disparaging their contemporaries as wicked fools.

Conspiracy theorists are right, if not about many things, than at least about some few. From a simple look at human history, they've infinitely more going for them than their opposition.

Even Quantum mechanics is qualitative. As innumerable as grains of sand on a beach.

a reply to: Talorc

The speech that killed Kennedy. He saw the beast looming and warned us directly…
Partial Transcript…

And no official of my administration whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes, or to withhold from the press or the public the facts they deserve to know.

For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence, on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day.

It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. It’s mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed.

a reply to: Talorc

Very well written sir!

SnF

Of course they can have a standpoint, I won't say that they are all always right specifically, simply because I can't, but as sure as you can be, some things don't always ring true. However, you can debate on it, and anyone who debates on it should at least be honest in what they know or have gleaned.
The trick is that, in law 'Conspiracy Theorists' have the same need to stand trial, while they stand mostly outside the law, and not even a group as such, since one Man's/woman's idea of conspiracy is not all embracing of all things that could be considered conspiratorial.
Anyone who considers the 'OS' as a given has no real need to stand by anything other than that.

Propaganda is a well known official ploy, used all the time to provoke a reaction or a mistruth..is it a conspiracy, without doubt.

a reply to: intrptr

What an amazing speech... damn near brought tears to my eyes.

He most certainly was slowly trying to let the cat out of the bag.

It makes one wonder what the world would have been like today had Kennedy served his full two terms and whether or not he would have succeeded at ridding the government of the 'old boys club' ?

originally posted by: Talorc

Conspiracy theorists are right

I will go out on a limb here and say, I think all members here have a pretty fair idea now of how the world "really" works, provided they have done their digging for the truth.

Almost all of us, no matter where we dig, we all end up relatively in the same place, or no matter how subjective the truth may be, we do know the truth is not how "THEY" say it is.

And as time passes on the truth unravels itself for the seeker.

Peace

a reply to: intrptr

The most taken out of context speech of all time... it was about communism, not about a conspiracy within the states.
Well, sort of but about communists conspiring within the country.

There's a conspiracy to suppress the conspiracies.

a reply to: strongfp

Come on.
This speech and the result from it is too obvious. He was revealing the very conspiracy that drives all other conspiracies. He was revealing the truth.

originally posted by: Talorc



Conspiracy theorists are right, though they may not know it. Where this is concerned, I'm almost tempted to apply the inverse of Occam's Razor- anything you suspect the global elite of doing, they probably are, and far worse. No basis in logic there, and yet I am still tempted to believe it, sometimes. I'm tempted to believe it because of a very real, empirical truth that we are all witness to- power corrupts, and people are desperate for assurance. Trite aphorisms, but no less true for that. Many people crave the comfort in "knowing", but they are far too complacent to seek the truth on their own. They want to be told of the truth, but they are scared to death of witnessing it for themselves.

Icons of authority, then, are purring and beckoning for you to listen. They know better than you do, by virtue of their authority. So just listen and accept their truth like a rational human being. That's not a fallacy, is it? I don't know...... it doesn't matter anymore. I'm tired and want to sleep. I'd sooner trust the reassuring, sonorous orations of politicians, scientists, and other scrupulous officials. Wacko conspiracy theorists have no credibility, no accolades, and no peer-reviewed studies.

But we're smarter than that, aren't we?

Any true conspiracy theorist doubts himself just as he doubts the government, media, and reality itself. What is reality to the conspiracy theorists? It's the opposite of what they tell you. It must be- what truth has man ever gleaned from the "official story"? The "official story" had us worshipping phallic-shaped stones, divining the future from smoke and entrails, fêting pharaohs in awe of their godhood, and burning oneself alive to vindicate belief in a certain lance's "holiness" (in poor Peter Bartholomew's case, at least). It also had us believing that white people were made in God's image, while blacks were made in the image of a monkey. History is always rich with irony.

Why should affairs be any different today? We are still human, still amenable to the same kind of idiocy, extrapolated from blind faith in authority. What has changed since those shadowed days of the past, ruled by fear, superstition, and wild fancy? Perhaps you'd say we are rational now, we've been liberated from the nebulous influence of religion and folk-superstition. We are educated, discerning, and skeptical of all things unsourced and wanting for logic and testable validity.

But is that really the case? Those vaunted studies that you so eagerly appeal to, proving the innocuousness of, say, anti-depressants- are you a medical doctor, able to confirm these results first-hand? Are you knowledgeable in pharmaceutics? Can you personally attest to the good character of the people who conducted said study?

If not, then you should, quite deservingly, be branded an imbecile. Casual perusing of Internet articles and Wikipedia entries does not constitute sufficient expertise. How dare you presume to explain quantum mechanics after reading Scientific American magazine? How dare you presume to tell me that leaked radiation will have negligible effects on ocean life and, quite possibly, human health? How dare you purport to know the benign nature of gene-spliced food products and chemical preservatives? How dare you claim that your blindly credulous, illegitimate opinions are more valid than mine?

Real truth comes from those who spit on official stories. It comes from those convicted of heresy for explaining why the stars shift position in the sky. It comes from lunatics who wander off into the mountains and eat grass, disparaging their contemporaries as wicked fools.

Conspiracy theorists are right, if not about many things, than at least about some few. From a simple look at human history, they've infinitely more going for them than their opposition.

Ansolutelly fabulous thread.

a reply to: Talorc

Very well written - thanks.

But we're smarter than that, aren't we?

Based on the contents of your OP, imo, you can count yourself among the smart ones.

a reply to: Sublimecraft

I'm guessing...that Blum guy is also a conspiracy theorist...and therefore...you know the drill.



Great quote btw.

Well said OP. I think of of the few ways to be involved in investigating topics etc., while keeping sane in the process is try to pretend that maybe somewhere it's not true even though deep down knowing it just may be. Maybe not believing some CTs, while even a dire hard CT, to be true is a cautionary measure. Sad how that there are ones turning out to be true that are very difficult to talk about, therefore hard to spread awareness on.

originally posted by: intrptr
a reply to: Talorc

The speech that killed Kennedy. He saw the beast looming and warned us directly…

Partial Transcript…

And no official of my administration whether his rank is high or low, civilian or military, should interpret my words here tonight as an excuse to censor the news, to stifle dissent, to cover up our mistakes, or to withhold from the press or the public the facts they deserve to know.

For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy that relies primarily on covert means for expanding its sphere of influence, on infiltration instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on guerrillas by night instead of armies by day.

It is a system which has conscripted vast human and material resources into the building of a tightly knit highly efficient machine that combines military, diplomatic, intelligence, economic, scientific and political operations. Its preparations are concealed, not published. It’s mistakes are buried, not headlined. Its dissenters are silenced, not praised. No expenditure is questioned, no rumor is printed, no secret is revealed.

That speech is called "The President and the Press". Our Estemed late member Rising Against, did an awesome thread on that very speech.
www.abovetopsecret.com...

In his memory, it might be a good idea to understand the context of the speech so you can better understand what Kennedy said. The problem most people have is they see parts of the speech, and not the WHOLE thing.

a reply to: network dude
I understand just fine. I understand that Kennedy was mentored by Eisenhower who also warned us of the Military Industrial Complex, born of WWII. The dangers of that were not lost on JFK. They wanted to go on Vietnam and Kennedy resisted. They wanted to go on Cuba and Kennedy resisted.

As soon as JFK was dead they did start the road to war we have been on ever since. Thats why they killed him.

Planned in secret, with subversion, by night, no expenditure questioned, mistakes all buried, dissenters silenced…

Endless war, by factories for war, for endless profit.

Edit: By the way, bite your tongue invoking Rising Against's recent passing in argument. I was on the thread you linked and refer to this post, the last one in the thread.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: strongfp
a reply to: intrptr

The most taken out of context speech of all time... it was about communism, not about a conspiracy within the states.
Well, sort of but about communists conspiring within the country.

Communists witch hunts, huh? Cold War saber rattling to instill fear in the public? See how Vietnam turned out? US was the aggressor all along, not the Soviets. Nor the Russians today as far as that goes.

Its the Cold War mongers that killed (both) Kennedys that want us to believe that speech was about Communism. If it had been about that, he just would have stated it, like he did during the Cuban Missile crisis. No, his speech was directed at the shadow government and industrial military complex as yet gaining strength inside the US at that time.

Edit: He didn't mention communism once in that whole speech.

a reply to: Talorc

"But is that really the case? Those vaunted studies that you so eagerly appeal to, proving the innocuousness of, say, anti-depressants- are you a medical doctor, able to confirm these results first-hand? Are you knowledgeable in pharmaceutics? Can you personally attest to the good character of the people who conducted said study? "

Yes, and yes, actually. One of the few things I can say for certain I am able to confirm.

a reply to: CranialSponge

What an amazing speech... damn near brought tears to my eyes.

He most certainly was slowly trying to let the cat out of the bag.

I'm amazed at the similarities today, too. People will say that he wasn't referring to our countries secret government, but we can see everything he said then is even more true today and can be traced right back to his assassination to "squash his dissent" about domination of the globe and endless war for profit, resources and control.

The Communists didn't kill JFK and his brother.

originally posted by: intrptr

I understand just fine. I understand that Kennedy was mentored by Eisenhower who also warned us of the Military Industrial Complex, born of WWII. The dangers of that were not lost on JFK. They wanted to go on Vietnam and Kennedy resisted. They wanted to go on Cuba and Kennedy resisted.

Agreed, Kennedy was able to take the whole gamut of truth against conspiracy to put put both propagandists and the military, (if there was a difference) on notice, and for the public to be on guard against misinformation. Indeed he had Eisenhower before him, and Eisenhower's more specific challenge to the military and profit makers, and also we know Kennedy's later reaction to the Operation Northwoods proposal in 1962, a false flag which would have meant including a body count.