Change forum to Conspiracy Theories

[avcguy]

I have just wasted some time looking through this *****ic political forum and I am dumber as a result. Micky, gator, etc. are goofy, plain and simple. Now I see what kind of people read things like the national enquirerer and actually believe it. How many topics can you start that are untruthful gator, oh thats right you research all info. before posting it. Why are you so easily deceived, do you hate Bush so much that your brain is clouded. Go find a forum that cares, or please Mods create a new forum "A sucker born every minute" , so I will know what to avoid next time. For now I will just avoid all posts by gator, micky, etc. Your credibilty is zero.

[micky]

Guess what? You really have the freedom to read what you want and what not. Nobody forcing you into anything here :-)

I have just wasted some time looking through this *****ic political forum and I am dumber as a result. Micky, gator, etc. are goofy, plain and simple. Now I see what kind of people read things like the national enquirerer and actually believe it. How many topics can you start that are untruthful gator, oh thats right you research all info. before posting it. Why are you so easily deceived, do you hate Bush so much that your brain is clouded. Go find a forum that cares, or please Mods create a new forum "A sucker born every minute" , so I will know what to avoid next time. For now I will just avoid all posts by gator, micky, etc. Your credibilty is zero.

[Invest007]

It never ceases to amaze me the way people choose to ferociously attack others for posting something of political nature that they dont agree with. If it bothers you so much, then move onto the next thread. To me it says more about the person doing the critizing, rather than the person(s) they are attacking.

What exactly is a conspiricy therory anyway? Please enligten us :lol:

[Twicewise]

First of all you weren't ferociously attacked. If the truth stings a little then you're probably on the wrong side of it.

Definition of Conspiracy Theory.

A conspiracy theory is based around the following tenets:

1. Shadowy figures using nefarious means are plotting out strategies to control world currency, steal property, take away civil rights, subsitute robot clones in the place of real people, build a super-laser to threaten world cities, create a cantagious virus, control the world's oil supply, put subliminal advertising in commercials, insert satanic messages in rock music, create an invisibility formula, build a weather control machine, force religion onto everyone, substitute arabic numerals with Roman numerals instead, poison selective cans of tomato soup, and build anatomically correct Ken and Barbie dolls. (The fiends)

2. The news media, most political figures, the U.N., university experts, the populace at large, world reknowned authors, talk show hosts, the diplomatic corps, military commanders, and nearly everyone else has been duped by the secret shadow conspiracy. (Only a select few know the real truth, and they won't shut up about the secret truth that they know, no matter how many times we ask them to.

3. Unrelated facts, out of context statements, irrelevant statistics, pseudo-scientific experts, bitter malcontents, blurry photographs, and amateur video footage are all combined together to form the false impression of credible scientific proof.

4. Like minded theorists feed off of the nonsense ****ed by one another to create more and more conjecture based on the tiniest grain of actual fact. Finally the rising tide of lies and propaganda becomes so overwhelming that even the most skeptical observer begins to believe. (After all, when there is this much smoke there must be a fire somewhere.)

In the spirit of conspiracy theories everywhere I would like to create my own conspiracy theory.

First, take a well known world figure, I choose the Pope.
Second, create a fake shadowy organization, let's call it the Orion Hegemon.
Third, take a well known event in world history, say the great Chicago fire.
Fourth, create a credible sounding piece of evidence, how about a tell all diary.
And presto, you've got a conspiracy theory.

The Pope is a secret member of the evil Orion Hegemony. In a tell all diary his former mistress reveals that he secretly set the great Chicago fire because he thought the people there weren't religious enough.

IT'S ALL "TRUE", i read it off of some guy on the Internet.

- TwiceWise

[Invest007]

Interesting - I have a different definition:

A Definition of Conspiracy Theory
I forget who made the comment, but the other day somebody said that something like Atlantis or UFO’s isn’t technically a conspiracy theory - unless there’s some kind of official cover-up that goes along with it. I would have never thought to make that distinction myself, but it’s an interesting one. What actually constitutes a conspiracy theory? How do you tell if something is or isn’t one? I tend to just use the term really broadly myself to include anything that’s really weird or unusual and seems to indicate some kind of secrets or secret activity. Maybe the best explanation I’ve seen so far though comes from “human?”:

at this point it seems that anyone who chooses to educate themselves outside of the established system of education ends up a conspiracy theorist.

In a lot of ways, it seems that conspiracy theory is merely the epithet hurled at people who venture away from approved sources and mainstream approaches to information. And it’s designed to instantly discredit the conclusions and possibilities they come up with by invalidating their methodology. Interestingly, this slanderous use of the label seems to get turned around by conspiracy theorists who often end up wearing the name proudly - sort of like how “nigger” or “queer” got adopted and inverted by the communities they were meant to put down.

Anyway, are these good definitions of conspiracy theory? Should the definition include in it some kind of statement of purpose: something about finding the truth, or championing justice, blah blah blah. You catch my drift. What else should it include, if anything?

I like the reference regarding marterial posted on the Internet. Is everything on the Net a lie? Or just the bits that dont quite fit the boundries of what is considered "mainstream"?

[avcguy]

Twicewise, you are thricewise in my book!
That post was awesome.

I being not the wordsmith that twicewise is offer my definition or evidence as the stupid list of topics in this politics forum. It is ok to think outside the mainstream (as I do as a Christian), but to think outside the mainstream on everything is my definition of a conspiracy theorist. You must fit it invest007,as you so stronly defended when you were not named in the post.

I have learned a lot about how people in this world think from this forum, and it strengthens my faith, as the Bible speaks of the deception that the world is full of. I feel blessed to have had my eyes opened by my Savior to the truth of scripture. I pray that God will open some of your eyes as well.

[gator]

I'll tell all of you to get off your lazy back sides and go do some research. I know my facts are right. The problem with you people is you haven't even bothered to check any of it out All you can do or say is, "it must be a conspiracy theory". And by the way I happen to be a member of pips and I don't plan on going anywhere. And another thing I don't give damm what you think or say. This happens to still be a free society and I will continue to tell people the truth wheather you like it or not. Gator

[Twicewise]

Invest007,

I’m trying to not point out how obviously trite your question is, and so I’m going to answer it just like it was a credible question. Obviously not everything on the Internet is a conspiracy theory. MSNBC is on the internet, WalMart is on the Internet, the Salvation Army is on the Internet. But you know as well as I do that a crackpot with a computer can post his websight just as easily as anybody else can. It seems as if you are having some trouble telling legitimate websights from Conspiracy Websights, so here are some pointers to help you tell the difference.

1. Any websight that uses Coast to Coast a.m. as a credible information source is probably a conspiracy websight.

2. Any websight that keeps telling you their information is really, really true, probably is full of information that isn’t true.

3. Any websight that seems preoccupied with using heat lamps to secretly grow plants in the basement, probably is a conspiracy websight.

4. Any websight that gained their information by using FOIA, the Freedom of Information Act, is probably a conspiracy websight.

5. Any websight that uses the phrase, “It’s just like Mr. Spock said on episode 29” probably is a conspiracy websight.

6. Any websight that is run by a man named “Reefer” or a woman named “Mary Jane” is probably a conspiracy websight.

7. Any websight that refers to President Bush as “Shrub” or “W” is probably a conspiracy websight

8. Any websight that talks about ascended *******, harmonic convergence, or spiritual evolution is probably a conspiracy websight.

9. Any websight that uses the word “colour” instead of “color” is probably a conspiracy websight.

10. Any websight that tries to imitate the appearance of a better, more respected websight, is probably a conspiracy websight.

11. Any websight in which experiments have been done on plants rather than mice, because “mice have constitutional rights,” is probably a conspiracy websight.

12. Any websight that is untroubled by the slaughter of unborn human beings, but is outraged over the fact that baby rhino’s are killed for the horn, is probably a conspiracy websight.

13. And finally, any websight that is source material for Mickey, Rahley, or Invest007 is probably a conspiracy websight.


I hope this helps to clear up the confusion.

- TwiceWise

[micky]

Interesting to see how many put the description conspiracy theory far from themselves away though they forget (or totally ignore):

conspiracies in "small scale" are done daily by a lot of people.

Best example is the workplace. There is this new colleague who is disliked by the other co-workers. They are jealous in some way and talk bad things about him, they tell lies to the boss, he has done this and that though it's not true and this new colleague even often has no clue that there are some who want to get rid of him secretly and obtain themselves his position. (team leader etc.) What do you call this? Correct, it's a conspiracy.

Another example would be the boyfriend who cheats his girlfirend with her best friend. His girlfriend has no clue as both, boyfriend and friend, lie to her and hide the truth. What do we call it? Maybe a conspiracy, ya?

Last example would be family intrigues, causing trouble between two families because of a fortune a family member has left behind after passing away and some members become to greedy and now try to gain the most of this fortune. What would you call it? A conspiracy maybe?

People do little conspiracies every day. At work, with friends, family, in business etc. "Conspiracy, in common usage, is the act of working in secret to obtain some goal, usually understood with negative connotations." (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy)

So in case of 9/11 for example where tapes of surveillance cameras in the near of the Pentagon have been confiscated by the FBI and aren't shown to public, means evidence is being hidden, they try to hide something, something the public mustn't see. This tells me that they are indeed conspiring when hiding such relevant proof of great importance. Or what about secret societies? Thanks to some authors who revealed them and their nature they are not so secret anymore. Bush and others have admitted that they are in Skulls & Bones. Each year the Bilderberger meeting occurs somewhere in the world. So when they meet in secrecy, under exclusion of public and media and without knowledge of the general public tells me that they are determining things I don't agree with and never would! This is definitely a conspiracy.

While people do small conspiracies every day they could never imagine a conspiracy in large dimensions, a lie in large dimensions. This would never get in their heads. Why? Adolf Hitler has described it very well in "Mein Kampf":

In the big lie there is always a certain force of credibility; because the broad masses of a nation are always more easily corrupted in the deeper strata of their emotional nature than consciously or voluntarily; and thus in the primitive simplicity of their minds they more readily fall victims to the big lie than the small lie, since they themselves often tell small lies in little matters but would be ashamed to resort to large-scale falsehoods. It would never come into their heads to fabricate colossal untruths, and they would not believe that others could have the impudence to distort the truth so infamously. Even though the facts which prove this to be so may be brought clearly to their minds, they will still doubt and waver and will continue to think that there may be some other explanation. For the grossly impudent lie always leaves traces behind it, even after it has been nailed down, a fact which is known to all expert liars in this world and to all who conspire toget her in the art of lying. These people know only too well how to use falsehood for the basest purposes.

So as we have seen "conspiracy theory" is just typical name calling and a poor excuse when no arguments or counter arguments are at hand and when truth is vehemently ignored.

[discrete]

Dear Twicewise
This stuff here was sort of funny, almost like you were revealing an antagonistic sense of humour from your Position! Sorta lightened things up A BIT.

Thanks!

And P.S.
PLEASE NEVER AGAIN PRIVATE MESSAGE ME REGARDING ANY OF MY POSTS HERE, UNLESS I ASK FOR SUCH. I WRITE FOR EVERYONE AND DONT CARE FOR SOME PERSONAL BANTERING ON IT..I APPRECIATE YOUR RESPECT......


TWICEWISE WROTE:

1. Any websight that uses Coast to Coast a.m. as a credible information source is probably a conspiracy websight.

2. Any websight that keeps telling you their information is really, really true, probably is full of information that isn’t true.

3. Any websight that seems preoccupied with using heat lamps to secretly grow plants in the basement, probably is a conspiracy websight.

4. Any websight that gained their information by using FOIA, the Freedom of Information Act, is probably a conspiracy websight.

5. Any websight that uses the phrase, “It’s just like Mr. Spock said on episode 29” probably is a conspiracy websight.

6. Any websight that is run by a man named “Reefer” or a woman named “Mary Jane” is probably a conspiracy websight.

7. Any websight that refers to President Bush as “Shrub” or “W” is probably a conspiracy websight

8. Any websight that talks about ascended *******, harmonic convergence, or spiritual evolution is probably a conspiracy websight.

9. Any websight that uses the word “colour” instead of “color” is probably a conspiracy websight.

10. Any websight that tries to imitate the appearance of a better, more respected websight, is probably a conspiracy websight.

11. Any websight in which experiments have been done on plants rather than mice, because “mice have constitutional rights,” is probably a conspiracy websight.

12. Any websight that is untroubled by the slaughter of unborn human beings, but is outraged over the fact that baby rhino’s are killed for the horn, is probably a conspiracy websight.

13. And finally, any websight that is source material for Mickey, Rahley, or Invest007 is probably a conspiracy websight.


I hope this helps to clear up the confusion.