In Defense Of Conspiracy Theories

Moderators: DrVolin, 82_28, Elvis, Jeff

In Defense Of Conspiracy Theories

Postby Skunkboy » Mon Jul 16, 2012 1:30 am

Here's an article that was originally written in 2001, that is as relevant today, as it was then... maybe more so in light of what has happened in the last eleven years. What is most chilling are the last paragraphs that are from an interview with Jim Garrison from 1967. It raised the hair on the back of my neck when I read them.

http://www.disinfo.com/2012/07/in-defen ... -theories/

In Defense Of Conspiracy Theories

Posted by Craig DiLouie on July 15, 2012

[disinfo ed.'s note: this original essay was first published by disinformation on November 29, 2001.]

An Introduction to the World of Conspiracy Theories for the Mainstream American

While I was writing Paranoia, many of my friends wondered why I was interested in conspiracy theories. They are fringe territory in American culture. Strangely, while “conspiracy theories” are for “crazy people,” many of my friends also believe that various conspiracy theories are true. While I’m not a conspiracy theorist, I have always been fascinated by them–introduced to alternative histories by a friend living in Santa Fe; Robert Anton Wilson and Robert Shea’s Illuminatus trilogy; and Umberto Eco’s Foucault’s Pendulum. Conspiracy theories contain a certain power, and those who treat them as a casual belief, hobby or lifestyle collectively function a bit like a secret society themselves, with various degrees of initiation into the deeper mysteries. After some exploration my imagination, “Okay, what if all of this were true? And what if an average Joe, a non-believer, suddenly got proof that the biggest conspiracy theory of all were true?”

In researching Paranoia, I learned a lot not only about conspiracy theories, but also the culture surrounding them, a culture that has seeped into the mainstream culture in the past few decades, including the paranoid ’60s and the conspiracy theory-rich ’90s, which probably had more conspiracies per capita than any previous decade. Interestingly, this has led to “conspiracy theories,” which mainstream people think are craziness, and individual conspiracy theories, which many mainstream people believe are true. And while I still do not believe conspiracy theories (although a good amount are plausible), I found a new respect for conspiracy theorists. These are people with their eyes wide open. They may see too much or imagine seeing things at times, but they are vigilant about civil liberties and challenge complacent Americans to question their media-framed beliefs about government and the world. The result in Paranoia is an attempt to introduce this culture, illustrate the seductive power that conspiracy theories have, and frame the debate over whether they are credible or crazinessall packaged within a taught thriller with plenty of revelations, twists and surprises. In this article, we will examine these same issues fairly.

Both conspiracies and conspiracy theories have always existed in history. Benjamin Disraeli, the Prime Minister of England, said to Parliament in 1856:


It is useless to deny, because it is impossible to conceal, that a great part of Europe–the whole of Italy and France and a great portion of Germany, to say nothing of other countries–is covered with a network of secret societies . . . They do not want constitutional government . . . They want to change the tenure of land, to drive out the present owners of the soil and to put an end to ecclesiastical establishments.

President Woodrow Wilson wrote in 1913:


Some of the biggest men in the United States, in the field of commerce and manufacture, are afraid of somebody, are afraid of something. They know there is a power somewhere so organized, so subtle, so watchful, so interlocked, so complete, so pervasive that they had better not speak above their breath when they speak in condemnation of it.

At all times in human history, people have gathered in secret societies and conspired to commit crimes and acts of evil, going back to Adam and Eve, who decided to eat the apple and keep it from God. The American Revolution was the result of conspiracy to rebel against the British Crown. Watergate, Iran-Contra, abortion clinic bombings, the Lincoln assassination and major terrorists attacks in the past few years were all the product of conspiracies. Conspiracies are so common, in fact, that there should be wacko theorists making Web sites that reveal “rare coincidences that just plain happen.” Meanwhile, at all times in human history, other people have theorized that secret societies and conspiracies were the root cause of calamities and other current events. The most ambitious linked different theories into a Plan passed down from one generation of secret society members to the next–a Plan that will be culminated in their control of the world.

Today, in the communication age, people have much greater access to information, particularly via the Internet, the world’s greatest public access channel. Therefore it is much easier to discover, share and promote conspiracy theories and expand them to include more current events. Like everything else in our society, conspiracy theories have become hyper-accelerated–every time a major figure dies, or a major event happens, conspiracy theorists are there to point out the connections and explain what happened in sinister terms. Although the Internet is free speech at its best, what we have gained in quantity, perhaps we have lost in quality–anybody with anything to say can build a web site and say it, and it carries some credibility precisely because it is published.

The result is noise. One could argue that with so much noise, with so many theories, conspiracy theory itself loses more credibility even while real conspiracies may actually be happening. Conspiracy theories have become so accelerated that the theorists are the boy who cried wolf. Investigative journalists, once considered something of conspiracy theorists themselves, are continuously taking themselves more seriously and conspiracy theories less seriously, and now deride them in print. Stories about alleged connections between the CIA and the crack epidemic are met with open hostility and ridicule by the media (although the Director of the CIA took them seriously enough to hold a televised town meeting with LA residents). Plots to take over the government are met with laughter.

When we think of conspiracy theorists, we picture a ranting bearded man in a camo jacket spending his weekends firing machine guns at cardboard cut-outs. And yet most people are conspiracy theorists to an extent. If we compare conspiracy theories to religion, similar because both deal with belief in the unknowable, we see a spectrum of conspiracy theorists from the very strange to your friend who believes JFK was assassinated by more than one shooter. It’s funny, but many people I talk to, one of the first things I tell them is that I’m not a conspiracy theorist, but as we start talking about various theories I consider on the wild side, I see them nodding in agreement. It’s even funnier that if I were to share the same theories in a crowd, people would glance at each other and laugh skeptically. I can only conclude that conspiracy theories are both stigmatized and widely accepted. I’ve watched scary movies by myself and with somebody else, and we get scared; but if I watch them with a group of people, we usually end up laughing and poking fun at the movie.

Why do conspiracy theories have so much appeal in the American mainstream? We see them in novels, movies, web sites and in every other medium. More than half of Americans believe that the JFK assassination was the result of a conspiracy. Richard Belzer believes in almost all conspiracy theories. Bill Cosby said that AIDS was “started by human beings to get after certain people they didn’t like.” At a town hall meeting in Los Angeles in the Clinton era televised on C-SPAN on November 15, 1996, community residents roasted the Director of the CIA about the Agency’s alleged connections to the crack epidemic:


MIKE RUPPERT: Hi, I am a former Los Angeles police narcotics detective, and I worked South Central Los Angeles. And I will tell you, Director Deutsch, emphatically and without equivocation, that the Agency has deal drugs throughout this country for a long time.

DCI JOHN DEUTSCH: If you have information about CIA illegal activity in drugs, you should immediately bring that information to wherever you want, but let me suggest three places: the Los Angeles Police Department–

(audience shouts)

DCI JOHN DEUTSCH: It is your choice: the Los Angeles Police Department, the Inspector General, or an office of one of your Congresspersons . . .

(some people are still shouting)

MIKE RUPPERT: That’s what I did eighteen years ago, and I got shot at for it.

Perhaps one reason for the popularity of conspiracy theories is that they stimulate the brain to make new connections, and this mental activity raises consciousness. The titillation experienced is similar to hearing gossip, urban legends and ghost stories. We want to believe. How many people believed the Blair Witch Project was real, even after the media carefully explained that it was just a movie? How many people read The Weekly World News and believe in Bigfoot or that a cemetery or a B-17 bomber was found on the moon? From there, it is not too far-fetched to believe that the lunar landing was faked, that something funny is going on with the Freemasons–which has so many presidents and bigwigs as members, or that there are sinister overtones to the ultrasecret meetings of the Bildergers, Trilateral Commission and other groups that bring together the world’s elite. When people hear about the eye-in-the-pyramid on the back of the dollar bill, their eyes go wide in a special kind of disbelief, the kind that says, “Wow. Tell me more.” Conspiracy theories, it is strange to think, might be a way for adults to rediscovery mystery, to become children again who see bogeymen in the closet or under the bed.

Because of the stimulation that conspiracy theories deliver, they can be addictive. They can really cast a spell, and one level of belief leads to another. If you buy into one theory, that makes it easy to believe the next, until you’re up late breathlessly reading web sites that appear to offer solid evidence, such as photos of concentration camps, that the United States government will be overthrown by unseen forces. Some become information addicts, and they’re never satisfiedthe conspiracy has to get bigger and bigger. After the World Trade Center attack, Web site traffic at http://www.GrandConspiracy.com, the official web site for the novel Paranoia, jumped 1000%. Big events get the gears turning. Imagine having a giant puzzle and after months you’re given another piece to try to fit into the whole.

Other reasons conspiracy theories are popular is that people don’t trust the government anymore, because there is usually just enough evidence to make most conspiracy theories sound true, to rebel against economic trends such as “globalization,” and because the world just keeps getting more complicated, making people paranoid. In Paranoia, Palmer explains to Chad that in the modern age of technology, global community and terrorism, the natural state for humans is Paranoia:


You get an e-mail from a friend’s address that gives your computer a virus, then automatically opens up your address book and sends the virus to your friends . . . You answer a fake marketing call and get tricked out of your credit card number. A guy knocks on your door saying there’s been an accident and after you let him in he kills you . . . You punch your calling card number into a public pay phone and somebody with a pair of binoculars picks it up and sells it and your phone bill shows thousands of dollars in calls to China. You register at an Internet site and it sells your private information all over the world . . . Your company wants to do a drug test. Your company monitors what Internet sites you visit, taps your phone and reads your e-mails. A woman at your company accuses you of sexual harassment and gets you automatically fired . . . The IRS audits you. Your wife loads a program into your computer that records everything you type into it to make sure you’re not having cybersex. Somebody steals your identity . . . You find out your wife is cheating on you, or maybe she’s just talking about missing being single. You get a phone call and the caller hangs up. You hear a noise downstairs. You hear a click on the line . . .Well, guess what, Chad. There really is a bogeyman under your bed. There really is a man under your car at the mail waiting to slash your Achilles tendon with a razor. And it’s not happening to somebody else. It’s happening to you.

There’s certainly much to be paranoid about in an age of hyper-accelerated technology, culture, globalization, change and marketing. Unfortunately (or fortunately, depending on how you look at it), most conspiracy theories are like cold fusion–they look like they work and produce a Eureka moment but the reality usually does not match appearances. Ray Brown, a Bowling Green University professor, writes, “There is just enough sanity in some of these conspiracy theories to make them almost believable. By and large, however, they are creations of very rich imaginations because we simply can’t accept life as it is.” Usually, the essence of conspiracy theory is that an event happened; there are connections between the person involved in the event and other people with their own agendas; and it could be theorized that all of these people were linked to make the event happen for a specific reason. To use the World Trade Center attack as an example:


1. The World Trade Center is attacked.

2. George W. Bush is an oilman and many of his friends are oilmen.

3. One of Osama Bin Laden’s brothers was a partner of Bush’s.

4. Afghanistan, where Bin Laden is hiding, is where oil companies want to run a pipeline but the Taliban government is unfriendly.

5. The intelligence community knew that something “spectacular” was going to happen but did not prevent it.

6. Therefore, Bush allowed Bin Laden to attack the World Trade Center in order to have an excuse to invade Afghanistan and set up a friendly government, which would allow the pipeline to run through and make oil companies money.

Events, connections, agendas form the basis for conspiracy theories. If we take the above example and flesh it out with more direct and indirect connections between various players, then it could sound plausible. I personally don’t believe it, but it could sound plausible to many rational people. And this gets to the root of the problem with many conspiracy theories, the attempt to indict people and organizations based purely on circumstantial evidence. We could make the process of logic even simpler in this example:


1. Joe was murdered.

2. Bob hated Joe.

3. If Joe would die, Bob could try to date Joe’s girlfriend.

4. Bob murdered Joe.

Another problem, with the massive, elaborate theories, is a lack of common sense. One has to ask how the world’s greatest secret societies have volumes of material written about their inner plans and workings. Or how many years the U.N. army is going to hide in Mexico before they are finally allowed to invade the U.S. Or why 13 rich white men who already rule the world behind the scenes would want to stage a military takeover of our country. The larger the conspiracy is, generally, the more holes and greater contrariness to common sense. A final problem with conspiracy theories is that they are too often used to justify racial and religious prejudice and hatred. When you hear somebody say that Jews have a plot to take over the world, the menace and hatred makes you wish conspiracy theories didn’t exist at all.

Perhaps conspiracy theories are most valuable in the questions they ask, not always the answers they provide. A free society should be asking many of the questions raised by conspiracy theorists. And while conspiracy theories have a lot of problems, they should not be discounted lightly. History is rife with conspiracies of all shapes and sizes. People like to say that the government is too large, and too stupid, to keep secrets. And yet the government does keep secrets, even big ones, and it does so very well. In fact, the U.S. government spends about $3 billion a year protecting its secrets. The Freedom of Information Act let us peek behind the curtain at many conspiracies within the U.S. government. Those quick to believe that conspiracy theories are the product of insanity must first make a distinction between conspiracy history and theory. For example:

1. The CIA knocked off foreign leaders, conducted LSD research on unwitting Americans, recruited journalists to help them in foreign intelligence operations, and planted stories in the foreign press, hoping they would be picked up in the domestic press. Below is a brief excerpt of senate committee hearings on MKULTRA program, a CIA program in which LSD was distributed to unwitting Americans so as to study human behavior on LSD:


SENATOR INOYE: In February, 19954, and this was in the very early stages of MKULTRA, the Director of Central Intelligence wrote to the technical staff officials criticizing their judgment because they had participated in an experiment involving the administration of LSD on an unwitting basis to Dr. Frank Olson, who later committed suicide . . . Even though these individuals were clearly aware of the dangers of surreptitious administration and had been criticized by the Director of Central Intelligence, Subproject 3 was not terminated immediately after Dr. Olson’s death. In fact, according to the documents, it continued for a number of years. Can you provide this committee with any explanation of how such testing could have continued under these circumstances?

ADMIRAL TURNER: No, sir, I really can’t.

2. The Army conducted drug research on its own soldiers and sprayed San Francisco, the Pentagon and the New York City subway system with germs as part of its biological warfare testing program.

3. The FBI infiltrated and illegally harassed radical organizations in the 1960s as part of its COINTELPRO program; at one time, it even developed its own chapter of the KKK. Below is an excerpt of a FBI memorandum from J. Edgar Hoover to one of the FBI’s field offices, dated 7/5/68:


Bulet 5/10/68 requested suggestions for counterintelligence action against the New Left. The replies to the Bureau’s request have been analyzed and it is felt that the following suggestions for counterintelligence action can be utilized by all offices:

1. Preparation of a leaflet designed to counteract the impression that Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) and other minority groups speak for the majority of students at universities. The leaflet should contain photographs of New Left leadership at the respective university. Naturally, the most obnoxious pictures should be used.

2. The instigating of or the taking advantage of personal conflicts or animosities existing between New Left leaders.

3. The creating of impressions that certain New Left leaders are informants for the Bureau or other law enforcement agencies.

4. The use of articles from student newspapers and/or the “underground press” to show the depravity of New Left leaders and members. In this connection, articles showing advocation of the use of narcotics and free sex are ideal to send to university officials, wealthy donors, members of the legislature and parents of students who are active in New Left matters.

The above list, complete, is 12 items long in just this one memo of several by the director of the FBI and other senior officials at the Bureau, advocating misinformation and disruption of New Left activities. Congressman Don Edwards (D-California) said of COINTELPRO in 1975 after a Congressional inquiry revealed its activities to the public:


Regardless of the unattractiveness or noisy militancy of some private citizens or organizations, the Constitution does not permit Federal interference with their activities except through the criminal justice system, armed with its ancient safeguards. There are no exceptions. No Federal agency, the CIA, the IRS, the FBI can be at the same time policeman, prosecutor, judge and jury. That is what constitutionally guaranteed due process is all about. It may sometimes be disorderly and unsatisfactory to some, but it is the essence of freedom . . . I suggest that the philosophy supporting COINTELPRO is the subversive notion that any public official, the President or a policeman, possesses a kind of inherent power to set aside the Constitution whenever he thinks the public interest, or “national security,” warrants it. That notion is postulate to tyranny.

4. The U.S. government performed radiation experiments on people and kept it a secret for decades; in these experiments, Americans were fed, injected or otherwise exposed to radioactive materials. It also knew that atom bomb testing in Nevada and Utah in the 1950s was giving its own citizens cancer and kept that secret, too. Below is an excerpt of a letter from Congressman Edward Markey, chairman of the Subcommittee on Energy Conservation and Power of the Committee on Energy and Commerce, to the Secretary of Energy, dated October 24, 1986:


The report reviewed Department of Energy documents, which revealed the frequent and systematic use of human subjects as guinea pigs for radiation experiments sponsored by the Department’s predecessor agencies. Some of these experiments were conducted in the 1940s and 1950s, and others were performed during the supposedly more enlightened 1960s and 1970s. The report describes in detail 31 experiments during which about 695 persons were exposed. In many of these experiments, individuals were exposed to radiation which provided little or no medical benefit to the subjects. The purpose of several of these experiments was actually to cause injury to the participants. Many others sought simply to measure the effects of radiation on humans. American citizens thus became nuclear calibration devices for experimenters run amok . . . These experiments, and others described in the Subcommittee staff report, shock the conscience and represent a black mark on the history of nuclear medical research. They raise one major horrifying question: Did the intense desire to know the consequences of radioactive exposure after the dawn of the atomic age lead American scientists to mimic the kind of demented human experiments conducted by the Nazis?

5. Between 1932 and 1972, the Public Health Service held some 400 poor black sharecroppers who had syphilis but denied them treatment, even after a cure was discovered, so as to study the effects of syphilis. Below is an excerpt of the official apology for the infamous Tuskegee, AL syphilis study, delivered by President Clinton in the East Room on May 16, 1997:


PRESIDENT CLINTON: The eight men who are survivors of the syphilis study at Tuskegee are a living link to a time not so very long ago that many Americans would prefer not to remember, but we dare not forget. It was a time when our nation failed to live up to its ideas, when our nation broke the trust with our people that is the very foundation of our democracy. It is not only in remembering that shameful past that we can make amends and repair our nation, but it is in remembering that past that we can build a better present and a better future. And without remembering it, we cannot make amends and we cannot go forward. So America does remember the hundreds of men used in research without their knowledge and consent. We remember them and their family members. Men who were poor and African-American, without resources and with few alternatives, they believed they had found hope when they were offered free medical care by the United States Public Health Service. They were betrayed . . . The United States did something that was wrong–deeply, profoundly, morally wrong. It was an outrage to our commitment to integrity and equality for all our citizens . . . The American people are sorry–for the loss, the years of hurt . . . I apologize and I am sorry that this apology took so long in coming . . .

These are just some examples of roads to hell paved by good intentions–crimes planned and committed by members of the U.S. government and kept secret, sometimes for decades. Other examples include Watergate and the Iran Contra arms-for-hostages deals. (In both situations, the major players got pardoned, which makes Bill Clinton’s last-minute pardons while in office sound pretty trivial in comparison.)

The point is that conspiracies do happen, are likely happening right now, and will in all probability go on happening. Conspiracy theorists will be racing to keep up. They don’t assume that somebody’s out there taking care of every good cause they believe in. They don’t trust the government, and they have a right not to since the government abused that trust in the past too many times. Many have learned also not to trust corporations, which have committed their own share of conspiracies, from pollution to big tobacco, that are too numerous to describe here. Conspiracy theorists remind us all to be vigilant about our civil liberties, not to take anything for granted, and that a little Paranoia is healthy–encouraging us to realize that liberty in America is a personal responsibility, not a constant in physics. Conspiracy theorists, for example, are alarmed at the Justice Department for chipping away at civil liberties in the Anti-Terrorism Act of 1995 and current anti-terrorist legislation in the wake of the World Trade Center attack, finding a strange ally in the ACLU. While most Americans would not argue with any new laws that would help them feel more secure against the still unbelievable tragedy of large-scale terrorism, some reasonably question how these laws might be used in the future when the immediate threat is gone. Said Laura W. Murphy, Director of the ACLU Washington National Office:


“This bill [new 2001 anti-terrorism 'USA Act' legislation] has simply missed the mark of maximizing security and, at the same time, minimizing any adverse effects on America’s freedoms. Most Americans do not recognize that Congress has just passed a bill that would give the government expanded power to invade our privacy, imprison people without due process and punish dissent.”

The legislation was rammed through Congress despite tough opposition from some Democrats. With Anthrax cropping up and grabbing a huge share of media attention, hardly anybody noticed. As an American, on one hand, I want the government to act quickly to protect the country from foreign attack, and yet as an American I also love the Constitution and become concerned when legislation is worded that could lead to violating its purpose. During the Cold War, excesses for a good cause resulted in an internal assault on American democracy; during the future tensions of a prolonged struggle against implacable terrorist organizations, will similar excesses, enabled by new legislation, be coming?

Conspiracy theorists, as information addicts, are extremely well-informed. Again, they may see too much in the news or make the news fit into a preconceived theory, but other Americans can learn something from them, which is not to accept everything the media force-feeds the public. The media, which in the past 20 years went through colossal mergers until about 10 conglomerates control most media, is heavily influenced by corporations and government, and the news is often skewed and censored, if not by the government, then by program sponsors. (It’s also nonsense to continue believing in the “liberal media establishment,” which no longer exists, if it ever did.) It is the responsibility of every American, I believe, to be well-informed, which may require more than watching TV news programs, which often have their own bias, agendas and often focus on the sensational (such as hyper-coverage of the Anthrax scare, which clouded coverage of other news, such as the anti-terrorism bill and the voices of opposition to it).

What is perhaps most alarming to many conspiracy theorists are powers that the President and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) can assume during a state of national emergency, which the President can (and has) declared at any time. Each president going back in recent history declared 75-200+ national emergencies to justify issuing executive orders that have the power of legislation. Most of these executive orders have to do with the operation of government and foreign policy; one of Bill Clinton’s executive orders, for example, required Federal buildings to become more energy-efficient. Other executive orders, however, are more ominous, which rendered into law powers of the Federal government during a national emergency. On September 30, 1973, Senators Frank Church (D-Idaho) and Charles McMathias (R-Maryland) made a joint statement regarding these orders:


“The President has the power to seize property, organize and control the means of production, seize commodities, assign military forces abroad, call reserve forces amounting to two and a half million men to duty, institute martial law, seize and control all means of transportation, regulate all private enterprise, restrict travel and in a plethora of particular ways, control the lives of Americans . . .

“Most [of these laws] remain a potential source of virtually unlimited power for a President should he choose to activate them. It is possible that some future President could exercise this vast authority in an attempt to place the United States under authoritarian rule.

“While the danger of a dictatorship through legal means may seem remote to us today, recent history records Hitler seizing control through the use of emergency powers provisions contained in the laws of the Weimar Republic.”

How did the President gain these broad and dramatic powers? Again, by granting them to himself via executive order. In current times, despite the present wave of patriotism (with the Michigan Militia reportedly offering to help President Bush with homeland security), these powers, coupled with genuine emergencies now and in the future, could make one concerned. Coupled with ECHELON, a vast global intelligence-gathering network (and Carnivore, the FBI capability to read emails), they could make one nervous. Even paranoid.

I believe that Earling Carothers “Jim” Garrison, District Attorney for New Orleans who put local businessman Clay Betrand on trial in connection with the assassination of John F. Kennedy, sums it all up perfectly in the October 1967 Playboy interview:


PLAYBOY: Many of the professional critics of the Warren Commission appear to be prompted by political motives: Those on the left are anxious to prove Kennedy was murdered by a conspiracy within the establishment; and those on the right are eager to prove the assassination was an act of “the international Communist conspiracy.” Where would you place yourself on the political spectrum–right, left or center?

JIM GARRISON: That’s a question I’ve asked myself frequently, especially since this investigation started and I found myself in an incongruous and disillusioning battle with agencies of my own Government. I can’t just sit down and add up my political beliefs like a mathematical sum, but I think, in balance, I’d turn up somewhere around the middle. Over the years, I guess I’ve developed a somewhat conservative attitude–in the traditional libertarian sense of conservatism, as opposed to the thumbscrew-and-rack conservatism of the paramilitary right–particularly in regard to the importance of the individual as opposed to the State and the individual’s own responsibilities to humanity . . .

I was with the artillery supporting the division that took Dachau; I arrived there the day after it was taken, when bulldozers were making pyramids of human bodies outside the camp. What I saw there has haunted me ever since. Because the law is my profession, I’ve always wondered about the judges throughout Germany who sentenced men to jail for picking pockets at a time when their own government was jerking gold from the teeth of men murdered in gas chambers. I’m concerned about all of this because it isn’t a German phenomenon; it’s a human phenomenon. It can happen here, because there has been no change, there has been no progress and there has been no increase of understanding on the part of men for their fellow men.

What worries me deeply, and I have seen it exemplified in this case, is that we in America are in great danger of slowly eroding into a proto-fascist state. It will be a different kind of fascist state from the one the Germans evolved; theirs grew out of depression and promised bread and work, while ours, curiously enough, seems to be emerging from prosperity. But in the final analysis, it’s based on power and on the inability to put human goals and human conscience above the dictates of the State. Its origins can be traced in the tremendous war machine we’ve built since 1945, the “military-industrial complex” that Eisenhower vainly warned us about, which now dominates every aspect of our life. The power of the states and the Congress has gradually been abandoned to the Executive Department, because of war conditions; and we’ve seen the creation of an arrogant, swollen bureaucratic complex totally unfettered by the checks and balances of the Constitution.

In a very real and terrifying sense, our Government is the CIA and the Pentagon, with Congress reduced to a debating society. Of course, you can’t spot this trend to fascism by casually looking around. You can’t look for such familiar signs as the swastika, because they won’t be there. We won’t build Dachaus and Auschwitzes; the clever manipulation of the mass media is creating a concentration camp of the mind that promises to be far more effective in keeping the populace in line. We’re not going to wake up one morning and suddenly find ourselves in gray uniforms goose-stepping off to work. But this isn’t the test. The test is: What happens to the individual who dissents? In Nazi Germany, he was physically destroyed; here the process is more subtle, but the end results are the same. I’ve learned enough about the machinations of the CIA in the past year to know that this is no longer the dreamworld America I once believed in. The imperatives of the population explosion, which almost inevitably will lessen our belief in the sanctity of the individual human life, combined with the awesome power of the CIA and the defense establishment, seem destined to seal the fate of the America I knew as a child and bring us into a new Orwellian world where the citizen exists for the State and where raw power justifies any and every immoral act. I’ve always had a kind of knee-jerk trust in my Government’s basic integrity, whatever political blunders it may make. But I’ve come to realize that in Washington, deceiving and manipulating the public are viewed by some as the natural prerogatives of office. Huey Long once said, “Fascism will come to America in the name of anti-fascism.” I’m afraid, based on my own long experience, that fascism will come to America in the name of national security.



Craig DiLouie is the author of Paranoia, a psychological thriller based on conspiracy theories and published in trade paperback by Salvo Press — available nationwide in bookstores, BarnesandNoble.com, Amazon.com and direct from the publisher. For more information, visit the Paranoia Web site. 2001, Craig DiLouie. Permission to publish this article as a whole or in excerpts is granted on a non-exclusive, probono basis to all printed and electronic media, so long as it is not edited to substantially change its content and/or meaning.

If every man helped his neighbor, no man would be without help.

-Bruce Lee
User avatar
Skunkboy
 
Posts: 214
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 11:43 pm
Location: The High Lonesome
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: In Defense Of Conspiracy Theories

Postby MinM » Sat Apr 27, 2013 9:54 am

Lance de Haven Smith's sociology of American "" Conspiracy Theories""
# Show #627
Original airdate: April 25, 2013
Guests: Jim DiEugenio
Topics: 50th anniversary year books / Listener questions

Play Jim DiEugenio (1:20:42) Real Media or MP3 download

# CTKA, book review, Kaleidoscope (Livingstone/2012)
# Jim to write a commentary on Ron Rosenbaum, Philby and Oswald
# The Bush/Gore election, Florida flipping around, something was really wrong
# The Battle For Florida (deHaven-Smith/2005), Conspiracy Theory in America (2013)
# Elite political misconduct, conspiracies are as old as this republic
# "Conspiracy theory" was introduced to deflect criticism of the Warren Commission ...

http://www.blackopradio.com/pod/black627a.mp3

http://www.globalresearch.ca/state-crim ... racy/17922
User avatar
MinM
 
Posts: 3275
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:16 pm
Location: Mont Saint-Michel
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: In Defense Of Conspiracy Theories

Postby MinM » Sat Apr 27, 2013 11:38 am

Of course the Lance deHaven-Smiths of the world will never be allowed to lend legitimacy to 'conspiracies' .. Instead crackpots and self-promoters like Glenn Beck and Alex Jones...
Image @HuffingtonPost: The dating site for InfoWars conspiracy theorists is as insane as you would imagine
Image
https://twitter.com/HuffingtonPost/stat ... 0145821697

have become the face of Conspiracy Theories.

It's interesting too that with infowars.com so prominently in the news right now that a short-lived series on ABC gave the site disinfo.com some pub.
Image @disinfo: #ZeroHour features #MerylStreep’s daughter talking about our site. #conspiracy #television http://disinfo.com/?p=96608
Image
https://twitter.com/disinfo/status/307593952217939968

Image @disinfo: Zero Hour’s Fake Disinfo Page
Image
https://twitter.com/disinfo/status/308761165528444929
User avatar
MinM
 
Posts: 3275
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:16 pm
Location: Mont Saint-Michel
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: In Defense Of Conspiracy Theories

Postby FourthBase » Sat Apr 27, 2013 11:40 am

That excerpt from the Garrison Playboy interview is outstanding.
I am not so much discomfited by it, as inspired.
Jim Garrison almost never fails to inspire me.
“Joy is a current of energy in your body, like chlorophyll or sunlight,
that fills you up and makes you naturally want to do your best.” - Bill Russell
User avatar
FourthBase
 
Posts: 6669
Joined: Thu May 05, 2005 4:41 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: In Defense Of Conspiracy Theories

Postby MinM » Wed Jun 19, 2013 9:07 pm

@MJayRosenberg: Those who dismiss all "conspiracy theories" should consider that on 11/22/63 RFK asked CIA director: "Did the agency kill my brother?"

@MJayRosenberg: Here's Fox News in a now suppressed clip talking about Israel, spies & 9.11

User avatar
MinM
 
Posts: 3275
Joined: Wed Jun 04, 2008 2:16 pm
Location: Mont Saint-Michel
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: In Defense Of Conspiracy Theories

Postby 8bitagent » Thu Jun 20, 2013 12:48 am

I just can't handle the paranoid, believe-every-youtube-video, gun nut, "NEW WORLD ORDER!!!!", right leaning "freedom loving/don't tread on me" patriot types. I just can't.
Back in the 2000's I could, especially with the height of the anti Bush/9-11 truth thing. But now, I just can't. I find them often more eye rolling than the Foxtards and Obamabots.
"Libertarians" to me are not too far from the Beck Fox weasels.

...not trying to be mean. Again I'm also perturbed by the gatekeeperish college "left" as well, who are always quick to dismiss questioning events as "right winger conspiracy shit" and "crazy" in this smug and smarmy tone.
"Do you know who I am? I am the arm, and I sound like this..."-man from another place, twin peaks fire walk with me
User avatar
8bitagent
 
Posts: 12066
Joined: Fri Aug 24, 2007 6:49 am
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: In Defense Of Conspiracy Theories

Postby elfismiles » Fri Nov 01, 2013 4:02 pm

Lance de Haven Smith was just on with ... Alex Jones.

Videos to follow - http://www.youtube.com/user/TheAlexJonesChannel/videos

See also ...

911 and American Behavioral Scientist SCAD series
by elfismiles » 04 Mar 2010 16:56
viewtopic.php?f=8&t=27379

SCADS = State Crimes Against Democracy (SCAD's)

Entire February 2010 Issue of the American Behavioral Scientist Devoted to State Crimes Against Democracy: The Case of September 11, 2001
— Elizabeth Woodworth, Professional Librarian
http://www.ae911truth.org/info/179
http://abs.sagepub.com/content/vol53/issue6/


MinM » 27 Apr 2013 15:38 wrote:Of course the Lance deHaven-Smiths of the world will never be allowed to lend legitimacy to 'conspiracies' .. Instead crackpots and self-promoters like Glenn Beck and Alex Jones...
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8384
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: In Defense Of Conspiracy Theories

Postby elfismiles » Mon Nov 04, 2013 3:14 pm


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iwQOYTq2MqQ

Alex welcomes to the broadcast via Skype Dr Lance deHaven-Smith of University of FLA to discuss his new book hat investigates how the Founders' hard-nosed realism about the likelihood of elite political misconduct -- articulated in the Declaration of Independence -- has been replaced by today's blanket condemnation of conspiracy beliefs as ludicrous by definition.
http://dehaven-smith.com/
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8384
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: In Defense Of Conspiracy Theories

Postby InfraGard » Fri Apr 11, 2014 3:50 pm

Image
The Astounding Conspiracy Theories of Wall Street Genius Mark Gorton

Mark Gorton is a prominent financier and a respected entrepreneur. He founded the music sharing site Limewire, and he runs Tower Research, a famed high-frequency trading firm. Gorton also believes that the "ruthless" secret cabal that assassinated JFK and planned 9/11 could be coming to kill his family.

Mark Gorton does not have a reputation as a crackpot. Quite the opposite. He's been favorably profiled in the New York Times for his business acumen and charitable deeds. His experience as the head of Limewire—which disrupted the music industry and then lost a $100 million lawsuit as a result—was closely followed by the press. And when Michael Lewis's blockbuster new book about high frequency trading was published recently, prominent media outlets turned to Gorton to learn what HFT firms are really like. The Huffington Post even dubbed him "the new face of Wall Street." He is a very respected and very wealthy man.

This week, we were forwarded documents that Gorton was sending out to employees at Tower Research. These documents—embedded at the bottom of this post—are essays by Mark Gorton, laying out his theories on the secret high-level murderous criminal "Cabal" that is responsible for, among other things, the JFK and RFK assassinations, the presidential careers of the Bushes, Clinton, and Obama, the Oklahoma City bombing, the 9/11 plot, and the murder of countless witnesses, politicians, and journalists who sought to expose them, including Sen. Paul Wellstone and even Hunter S. Thompson. Everything, according to Gorton, has been an inside job.

It is really something.

The longest and most complete of Gorton's essays is titled "Fifty Years of the Deep State." To give you a taste of what he believes, a few brief excerpts. On the JFK assassination:

The assassination of JFK was part of a full scale Coup d'état, the violent takeover of our government by a group of criminals. I have not the slightest doubt in my mind that JFK's assassination was the work of a network of criminals embedded within the political system and power structure of the United States. Key among the players in the Coup of '63 were LBJ; Allen Dulles and the CIA; J Edgar Hoover and the FBI; right wing Texas oil executives including Clint Murchison Sr., H.L. Hunt and D.H. Byrd; the East Coast business establishment centered around Rockefeller interests and the Council on Foreign Relations; Curtis Le May (chairman of the joint chief of staff), other right wing leaders of the military and elements of military intelligence; and the Bush family (both Prescott and George H.W. Bush)...

LBJ planned to kill JFK from the moment he considered becoming vice president.

And Gorton believes that the plotters of the assassination were ready to literally start a nuclear war as part of the coverup:

The contingencies beyond how to blame Oswald were much more serious. If it were superficially obvious that JFK's killing was the result of a conspiracy, Castro was to be blamed, and an invasion of Cuba was to quickly follow. Many anti-Castro Cubans who participated in the Coup were deeply disappointed that the invasion of Cuba never materialized. My studies of the Coup of '63 have led me to believe that even graver fall back strategies were embedded in the plot. If JFK's killing was obviously perceived as being part of large conspiracy, and the US public was not buying the Castro did it angle, the Coup plotters were in truly dire straits. These desperate men who ran the military, the FBI, some of largest companies in the world, and the US government faced the prospect of being hung for treason. I believe that the darkest scenarios envisioned by the Coup plotters involved declaring martial law and blaming the Russians and taking the country to (and possibly over) the brink of nuclear war with Russia...

http://gawker.com/the-astounding-conspi ... 561427624#
User avatar
InfraGard
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Jan 28, 2014 9:47 am
Location: occidental hemisphere
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: In Defense Of Conspiracy Theories

Postby Dioneo » Fri Apr 11, 2014 3:58 pm

Official ridicule, marginalization and complete media ostracism of Mark Gorton commencing in 3, 2, 1...
User avatar
Dioneo
 
Posts: 51
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2014 8:10 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: In Defense Of Conspiracy Theories

Postby seemslikeadream » Fri Apr 11, 2014 10:52 pm

please post this in a new OP

InfraGard » Fri Apr 11, 2014 2:50 pm wrote:Image
The Astounding Conspiracy Theories of Wall Street Genius Mark Gorton

Mark Gorton is a prominent financier and a respected entrepreneur. He founded the music sharing site Limewire, and he runs Tower Research, a famed high-frequency trading firm. Gorton also believes that the "ruthless" secret cabal that assassinated JFK and planned 9/11 could be coming to kill his family.

Mark Gorton does not have a reputation as a crackpot. Quite the opposite. He's been favorably profiled in the New York Times for his business acumen and charitable deeds. His experience as the head of Limewire—which disrupted the music industry and then lost a $100 million lawsuit as a result—was closely followed by the press. And when Michael Lewis's blockbuster new book about high frequency trading was published recently, prominent media outlets turned to Gorton to learn what HFT firms are really like. The Huffington Post even dubbed him "the new face of Wall Street." He is a very respected and very wealthy man.

This week, we were forwarded documents that Gorton was sending out to employees at Tower Research. These documents—embedded at the bottom of this post—are essays by Mark Gorton, laying out his theories on the secret high-level murderous criminal "Cabal" that is responsible for, among other things, the JFK and RFK assassinations, the presidential careers of the Bushes, Clinton, and Obama, the Oklahoma City bombing, the 9/11 plot, and the murder of countless witnesses, politicians, and journalists who sought to expose them, including Sen. Paul Wellstone and even Hunter S. Thompson. Everything, according to Gorton, has been an inside job.

It is really something.

The longest and most complete of Gorton's essays is titled "Fifty Years of the Deep State." To give you a taste of what he believes, a few brief excerpts. On the JFK assassination:

The assassination of JFK was part of a full scale Coup d'état, the violent takeover of our government by a group of criminals. I have not the slightest doubt in my mind that JFK's assassination was the work of a network of criminals embedded within the political system and power structure of the United States. Key among the players in the Coup of '63 were LBJ; Allen Dulles and the CIA; J Edgar Hoover and the FBI; right wing Texas oil executives including Clint Murchison Sr., H.L. Hunt and D.H. Byrd; the East Coast business establishment centered around Rockefeller interests and the Council on Foreign Relations; Curtis Le May (chairman of the joint chief of staff), other right wing leaders of the military and elements of military intelligence; and the Bush family (both Prescott and George H.W. Bush)...

LBJ planned to kill JFK from the moment he considered becoming vice president.

And Gorton believes that the plotters of the assassination were ready to literally start a nuclear war as part of the coverup:

The contingencies beyond how to blame Oswald were much more serious. If it were superficially obvious that JFK's killing was the result of a conspiracy, Castro was to be blamed, and an invasion of Cuba was to quickly follow. Many anti-Castro Cubans who participated in the Coup were deeply disappointed that the invasion of Cuba never materialized. My studies of the Coup of '63 have led me to believe that even graver fall back strategies were embedded in the plot. If JFK's killing was obviously perceived as being part of large conspiracy, and the US public was not buying the Castro did it angle, the Coup plotters were in truly dire straits. These desperate men who ran the military, the FBI, some of largest companies in the world, and the US government faced the prospect of being hung for treason. I believe that the darkest scenarios envisioned by the Coup plotters involved declaring martial law and blaming the Russians and taking the country to (and possibly over) the brink of nuclear war with Russia...

http://gawker.com/the-astounding-conspi ... 561427624#






When confronted with evil that they could not prevent, Quakers have a tradition of bearing witness, so that this evil does not pass unnoted.
THIS IS THE END OF MY PRESIDENCY. I'M F***ED
- trump May 17, 2017


Dotard = Bulger Rat

trump is member of a transnational crime syndicate masquerading as a government

Why we do think that trump owes debt to Putin? 50 reasons
User avatar
seemslikeadream
 
Posts: 30460
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2005 11:28 pm
Location: into the black
Blog: View Blog (83)

Re: In Defense Of Conspiracy Theories

Postby Project Willow » Fri Apr 11, 2014 11:20 pm

Please do InfraGard, if you are still around, the Gorton article deserves its own thread.

I call for a Truth Commission to publicly and openly uncover the horrible secrets buried away behind walls of government secrecy. A Truth Commission would provide an opportunity for all people to come forward and confess crimes related to the Cabal. In exchange the full, true, and open testimony, an amnesty program would wave prosecution for crimes. The appeal of amnesty would create a drive for a mass of related participants to come forward to confess. As these confessions pile up, the core players will be forced to come forward themselves. A Truth Commission could be a very effective way to purge the evil of the Cabal from our system. As hard as it may be to believe, things are so bad in the United States, we need a Truth Commission.
User avatar
Project Willow
 
Posts: 4769
Joined: Sat May 07, 2005 9:37 pm
Location: Seattle
Blog: View Blog (1)

Re: In Defense Of Conspiracy Theories

Postby divideandconquer » Sat Dec 19, 2015 9:32 am

On Conspiracy Theories

Guest Post by Hardscrabble Farmer

“In many nations, rational people end up believing crazy things, including (false) conspiracy theories. Those crazy thoughts can lead to violence, including terrorism. Many terrorist acts have been fueled by false conspiracy theories, and there is a good argument that some such acts would not have occurred in the absence of such theories. The key point—and, in a way, the most puzzling and disturbing one—is that the crazy thoughts are often held by people who are not crazy at all.”

Cass Sunstein- White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs

If you don’t know who Cass Sunstein is, or what he does now would be a good time to do some research. Not only because of his position with the White House and the power that entails, but because he understands quite clearly what problems are posed by people who, in his own words are, “…neither ignorant, not ill-educated. On the contrary they can be spectacularly well informed…”

Conspiracy theories are, in short, the belief that others conspire in secret to commit criminal acts. They do, no secret there. In fact the majority of prisoners in Federal Penitentiaries are serving time not for a specific crime, but for conspiracy to commit a felony, more simply discussing their intentions with another person in secret. It must be difficult indeed to simultaneously prosecute large numbers of people for the very activity that you are assigned to debunk and then somehow explain to people that it’s dangerous to believe in them. Yes, yes, you can imagine them saying, other people do engage in conspiracies, but we never would and you’d have to be crazy to even consider it.

Point taken, Mr. Sunstein.

Prior to the advent of the Internet there were few places where people could openly engage in any discussion of the misgivings they had about certain events. Mailing lists, fringe publications, but no open forum for expressing doubt and discovering the fundamental and underlying reasons behind such thoughts. Mr. Sunstein has often argued that the reason most people believe in conspiracy theories is because it makes them feel safe, a notion that is as hard to believe as the one that says the government would never engage in a conspiracy. If anything, the dawning realization that those entrusted to care for and protect you are engaged in a pattern of behaviors that are not only dangerous, but wantonly destructive to the very values and beliefs we hold most dear. To believe in a conspiracy committed by a government that is powerful, that is actively spying on it’s own people without legal justification and that appears immune to the law is not reassuring or comforting, it is terrifying. It is also, based on what we actually know for a fact, common sense

Let’s begin by covering a few basics-

Operation Northwoods

In 1962 the Department of Defense acting in cooperation with the Joint Chiefs of Staff submitted a paper detailing covert operation by either the CIA or other Government operatives to commit acts of terrorism against innocent American civilians, specifically to either hijack US commercial aircraft, shoot down commercial aircraft, attacks and kill US soldiers at Guantanamo or an attack on the Organization of American States with the intent of blaming the actions on Cuba in order to destabilize or overturn the government. These plans were signed and submitted by a host of top ranking US Military officials including the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Lyman Lemnitzer and submitted to the Secretary of Defense, Robert McNamara who would later play a large role in the US war in Viet Nam.

None of the people involved in the research, planning, drafting or submission of this authorized government conspiracy was ever charged with a crime or held accountable. In fact the chief defense has always been that it was rejected by then President John F Kennedy, rendering further discussion null and void. Think about it for a moment and decide for yourself what the implications of such a plan mean for people who are, in the words of Cass Sunstein, spectacularly well informed, i.e conspiracy theorists. The government of the United States of America, using top secret clearance and taxpayer dollars actively plotted to murder innocent Americans in acts of terror in order to instigate a war on false grounds. To know this, according to the leading expert on conspiracy theories, makes us feel safer.

Incontrovertible proof that the government does in fact engage in criminal conspiracies that target innocent civilians in order to promote government sanctioned programs or military actions while it’s criminal participants escape justice has now been established as a fact, not a theory. Why this important piece of American history is unknown to most people is not puzzling, it is because it has been deliberately pushed off to the side, dismissed as irrelevant or pointless because it didn’t happen. Conspiracy theories do not require action, however, only the conspiracy.

One of the greatest issues the Government has in dealing with the conspiracies currently circulating is the ease with which the Internet allows them to propagate. While the vast majority of Americans have never heard of the Gulf of Tonkin, quite a few have heard the term “9/11 was an inside job” or know that something is not quite right about Sandy Hook. The ubiquitous nature of cell phone cameras has given people the ability to see for themselves without having to look through the lens of the MSM and depend upon sanitized news coverage to inform them of the details of various events taking place around the troubled world. The time when the government was kept in check by the 5th estate has long ago ceased to restrain them. The news organizations have become a tool of the establishment rather than a check on their power. The only option left is for either whistle blowers to come forward or citizen journalists to investigate on their own time and dime.

The MSM
Proof TV Media 100% Fake – Fake/Green Screen Compliation …



The Illusion of the Mainstream Media (MSM). #BreakTheIllusion

The sheer number of poorly faked news stories gives rise to the legitimate question, how many fake stories were done well? Why would any news organization feel that it is necessary to use false coverage to report actual news? It makes no sense to falsify something in order to tell the truth, so something else must be in play. The participants and producers are clearly aware of what they are doing when they use props or green screens, and since they are doing it without informing the viewing public it wouldn’t be unfair to call it a conspiracy. The more often these events are uncovered the less trust anyone feels in the institutions and representatives that commit these frauds on an unsuspecting population. Whether it is for altruistic or evil ends is irrelevant, the duplicity is it’s own crime and since it is done in secret, involving multiple parties we are left with little room to consider it as anything other than a conspiracy. That isn’t a theory, it’s a fact.

We live in an era that seems to be on the cutting edge of human civilization due to the proliferation of technically sophisticated gadgetry, but in many ways were are as ignorant and intellectually shallow as we have ever been, pacified by our good fortune, stable diets and creature comforts, bereft of the intellectual curiosity that has been the hallmark of cultures at their zenith. Grand sounding memes have been the trademark of great cultures, from Pax Romana to Rule Britannia. They are utilized to galvanize a people or a nation and lead them to greater heights and achievements or they serve as an epitaph on the gravestones of Empires, like Blood and Soil or Liberte’, Egalite’, Fraternite’. Numerous cultures experience a tumultuous birth, a meteoric rise and blossoming and slowly and inexorably decline into decadence and degeneracy.

Those who sit at the top of an empire in decline often employ the same tactics that their predecessors have used throughout history in order to remain in power; suppression of dissent, violent retaliation against those who resist, open condemnation of those who are often the most stalwart supporters of the earlier forms of the same government and eventually the emptying of the treasury and plundering of resources while the masses suffer. The employ various techniques of coercion and dependency as well as draconian measures in security and intelligence. One of the hallmarks of a failing regime is the way they turn a blind eye to the flagrant criminality of those at the top while increasingly stifling even the mildest forms of dissent at the bottom. Employing men like Cass Sunstein to float the idea that conspiracy theories are the seedbed of violent terrorist cells is only the beginning.

Many people believe that the restriction on free speech, the rise of the PC movement, the talk of microaggressions and safe spaces are about protecting marginalized minorities when in fact they are nothing more than tools used to entrench the positions of power, to eliminate resistance to their aims and objectives and to silence, once and for all every voice that fails to sing in the chorus of the State. The reason men like Cass Sunstein are employed by the State is because the veil has begun to fall. When people begin to question the veracity of the government, the next step, logically, is to question the legitimacy of the institutions that keep it in power. It is not a safe or reassuring thing to believe that your government is capable of plotting to kill you or those you love for it’s own ends, it is frightening, and demoralizing. It is also the first step in reclaiming our sovereignty. Just as no rational person would want to remain in a relationship with someone who repeatedly lies and cheats, neither would they be expected to offer allegiance to a State that would do worse.

Few people live in the natural world, experiencing the outdoors daily through all weather, dealing with real issues of life and death, the cycles of the seasons, the endless tasks associated with meeting our most fundamental needs, from feeding ourselves to teaching our own children the values and lessons that resonate with how we wish to live. For the rest of our population there is endless hours of mindless distraction, inhumane workplaces in unnatural environments far removed from the basic needs of life. We spend more time with people we hardly know than the ones we love the most, we eat food that we have no connection with and that fails to nourish, we depend more and more on a government that is further and further away from us, both in distance and in understanding, in short we have become disconnected from our own lives. Perhaps the first step in rectifying our situation is to begin to look at the world not as it could be, but how it is. To see things for what they are, to discard the falsehoods, no matter how pleasant they may seem in order to embrace the truth regardless of how painful it may be. And that’s not a theory, that’s a reality.

In closing I offer a speech filled with optimism in the face of desperation, hope in a time of bitter loss, and an appeal to the better part in all of us that calls out to be heard in times like these.

No man thinks more highly than I do of the patriotism, as well as abilities, of the very worthy gentlemen who have just addressed the House. But different men often see the same subject in different lights; and, therefore, I hope it will not be thought disrespectful to those gentlemen if, entertaining as I do, opinions of a character very opposite to theirs, I shall speak forth my sentiments freely, and without reserve. This is no time for ceremony. The question before the House is one of awful moment to this country. For my own part, I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfil the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offence, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the majesty of heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings.
Mr. President, it is natural to man to indulge in the illusions of hope. We are apt to shut our eyes against a painful truth, and listen to the song of that siren till she transforms us into beasts. Is this the part of wise men, engaged in a great and arduous struggle for liberty? Are we disposed to be of the number of those who, having eyes, see not, and, having ears, hear not, the things which so nearly concern their temporal salvation? For my part, whatever anguish of spirit it may cost, I am willing to know the whole truth; to know the worst, and to provide for it.

I have but one lamp by which my feet are guided; and that is the lamp of experience. I know of no way of judging of the future but by the past. And judging by the past, I wish to know what there has been in the conduct of the British ministry for the last ten years, to justify those hopes with which gentlemen have been pleased to solace themselves, and the House? Is it that insidious smile with which our petition has been lately received? Trust it not, sir; it will prove a snare to your feet. Suffer not yourselves to be betrayed with a kiss. Ask yourselves how this gracious reception of our petition comports with these war-like preparations which cover our waters and darken our land. Are fleets and armies necessary to a work of love and reconciliation? Have we shown ourselves so unwilling to be reconciled, that force must be called in to win back our love?

Let us not deceive ourselves, sir. These are the implements of war and subjugation; the last arguments to which kings resort. I ask, gentlemen, sir, what means this martial array, if its purpose be not to force us to submission? Can gentlemen assign any other possible motive for it? Has Great Britain any enemy, in this quarter of the world, to call for all this accumulation of navies and armies? No, sir, she has none. They are meant for us; they can be meant for no other. They are sent over to bind and rivet upon us those chains which the British ministry have been so long forging. And what have we to oppose to them? Shall we try argument? Sir, we have been trying that for the last ten years. Have we anything new to offer upon the subject? Nothing. We have held the subject up in every light of which it is capable; but it has been all in vain.

Shall we resort to entreaty and humble supplication? What terms shall we find which have not been already exhausted? Let us not, I beseech you, sir, deceive ourselves. Sir, we have done everything that could be done, to avert the storm which is now coming on. We have petitioned; we have remonstrated; we have supplicated; we have prostrated ourselves before the throne, and have implored its interposition to arrest the tyrannical hands of the ministry and Parliament. Our petitions have been slighted; our remonstrances have produced additional violence and insult; our supplications have been disregarded; and we have been spurned, with contempt, from the foot of the throne. In vain, after these things, may we indulge the fond hope of peace and reconciliation. There is no longer any room for hope. If we wish to be free² if we mean to preserve inviolate those inestimable privileges for which we have been so long contending²if we mean not basely to abandon the noble struggle in which we have been so long engaged, and which we have pledged ourselves never to abandon until the glorious object of our contest shall be obtained, we must fight! I repeat it, sir, we must fight! An appeal to arms and to the God of Hosts is all that is left us!

They tell us, sir, that we are weak; unable to cope with so formidable an adversary. But when shall we be stronger? Will it be the next week, or the next year? Will it be when we are totally disarmed, and when a British guard shall be stationed in every house? Shall we gather strength by irresolution and inaction? Shall we acquire the means of effectual resistance, by lying supinely on our backs, and hugging the delusive phantom of hope, until our enemies shall have bound us hand and foot? Sir, we are not weak if we make a proper use of those means which the God of nature hath placed in our power.

Three millions of people, armed in the holy cause of liberty, and in such a country as that which we possess, are invincible by any force which our enemy can send against us. Besides, sir, we shall not fight our battles alone. There is a just God who presides over the destinies of nations; and who will raise up friends to fight our battles for us. The battle, sir, is not to the strong alone; it is to the vigilant, the active, the brave. Besides, sir, we have no election. If we were base enough to desire it, it is now too late to retire from the contest. There is no retreat but in submission and slavery! Our chains are forged! Their clanking may be heard on the plains of Boston! The war is inevitable²and let it come! I repeat it, sir, let it come.

It is in vain, sir, to extenuate the matter. Gentlemen may cry, Peace, Peace²but there is no peace. The war is actually begun! The next gale that sweeps from the north will bring to our ears the clash of resounding arms! Our brethren are already in the field! Why stand we here idle? What is it that gentlemen wish? What would they have? Is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery? Forbid it, Almighty God! I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty or give me death!

Patrick Henry



An interesting comment on author of this article regarding the spokespeople and so-called representatives of conspiracies against the people:
Wendell Berry has written very eloquently and for a long time along these very lines. And yet when I wrote him, quite some years ago, directly and asked him to aid us and our tiny farm, when we were mistreated by the 'certified organic' industry, and our lives made much more hopeless and difficult, he refused.

Not only did Mr. Berry refuse, but so did countless of other spokespeople and so called representatives claiming to have an interest in the health and vitality and the continuation of the small family farm. This list included Mr. Wendell Berry's close and personal friends, Gene Logsdon, Wes Jackson and David Kline. All are authors, speakers and writers who have a made a nice and tidy living for themselves, as authors and writers and I would also say, as posers, sycophants and frauds. As for myself, I grew very tired of asking anyone for help and gave up.

The modern business affiliate most responsible for our mistreatment, Organic Valley, aka CROPP, continues to profit and to grow in its affairs and business couplings as I imagine those who have some of their wealth invested in the fraud that is 'certified organic', have also.

The ever increasing disparity of comfort, human rights (inc. land ownership) and health, between the rich and the poor, the few and the many, and slovenly, manipulative and greedy and the honest, simple and hard working will end life on earth eventually.

It (life) will not end easily, there will be much more violence and suffering to come. The rich and greedy will continue to do their part, the frauds (sycophants of the rich) will continue to do their part, and the ever increasing number of suffering individuals (victims to the fraud), will, of course, do theirs.

This is a very sad thing. Far more than words can express, 'eloquent' or otherwise.


Makes me wonder if many of these wolves-in-sheep's-clothing representatives of the people function solely to offer false hope rather than function to misdirect (probably both in most cases). They tell the truth because they want the truth out there and for us to know there's not a damn thing we can do about it. Because what's more effective than breaking the illusion then offering a bleaker than bleak "reality" in its place? Engendering feelings of hopelessness, helplessness, confusion and demoralization is the best form of psychological warfare.
'I see clearly that man in this world deceives himself by admiring and esteeming things which are not, and neither sees nor esteems the things which are.' — St. Catherine of Genoa
User avatar
divideandconquer
 
Posts: 1021
Joined: Mon Dec 24, 2012 3:23 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Re: In Defense Of Conspiracy Theories

Postby elfismiles » Sat Dec 19, 2015 10:23 am

Sorry, can't take that article seriously given its inclusion of such a terribly misleading video claiming everything in it is "Green Screen" and fake.

It may start with 1 generally assumed fake (which features a CLEARLY VISIBLE BLUE SCREEN behind :eeyaa ) but I see no other video clips in that YouTube vid that are likely green screen fakes; mostly just more clips of other "conspiracy theorists" discrediting legitimate deep state / parapolitical conspiracy research by claiming "fake, hoax, crisis actor, green screen"

divideandconquer » 19 Dec 2015 13:32 wrote:On Conspiracy Theories

Guest Post by Hardscrabble Farmer
<snip>

The MSM
Proof TV Media 100% Fake – Fake/Green Screen Compliation …



The Illusion of the Mainstream Media (MSM). #BreakTheIllusion

The sheer number of poorly faked news stories gives rise to the legitimate question, how many fake stories were done well? Why would any news organization feel that it is necessary to use false coverage to report actual news? It makes no sense to falsify something in order to tell the truth, so something else must be in play. The participants and producers are clearly aware of what they are doing when they use props or green screens, and since they are doing it without informing the viewing public it wouldn’t be unfair to call it a conspiracy. The more often these events are uncovered the less trust anyone feels in the institutions and representatives that commit these frauds on an unsuspecting population. Whether it is for altruistic or evil ends is irrelevant, the duplicity is it’s own crime and since it is done in secret, involving multiple parties we are left with little room to consider it as anything other than a conspiracy. That isn’t a theory, it’s a fact.

<snip>

Makes me wonder if many of these wolves-in-sheep's-clothing representatives of the people function solely to offer false hope rather than function to misdirect (probably both in most cases). They tell the truth because they want the truth out there and for us to know there's not a damn thing we can do about it. Because what's more effective than breaking the illusion then offering a bleaker than bleak "reality" in its place? Engendering feelings of hopelessness, helplessness, confusion and demoralization is the best form of psychological warfare.
User avatar
elfismiles
 
Posts: 8384
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:46 pm
Blog: View Blog (4)

Re: In Defense Of Conspiracy Theories

Postby chump » Sat Dec 19, 2015 11:03 am

divideandconquer » Sat Dec 19, 2015 8:32 am wrote:


.... They tell the truth because they want the truth out there and for us to know there's not a damn thing we can do about it. Because what's more effective than breaking the illusion then offering a bleaker than bleak "reality" in its place? Engendering feelings of hopelessness, helplessness, confusion and demoralization is the best form of psychological warfare.



Yes.
User avatar
chump
 
Posts: 1945
Joined: Thu Aug 06, 2009 10:28 pm
Blog: View Blog (0)

Next

Return to General Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests