The Largest Conspiracy Theory Peddlers Are MSM And The US State Department

By Caitlin Johnstone
Source

The US State Department has issued a statement accusing the Syrian government of having carried out a false flag chemical weapons attack in northwestern Aleppo with the intent to blame it on the jihadist factions in the region, citing “credible info” that the public has not been permitted to see. Never mind the known fact that there are actual, literal Al Qaeda affiliateswho have admitted to using chemical weapons in Aleppo, and who are known to have used chemical weapons throughout Syria even by the State Department’s own admission: the Official Narrative is that only the Syrian government uses chemical weapons, so the chemical weapons usage must necessarily be a false flag staged by Syrian president Bashar al-Assad.

Except they didn’t use the words “false flag”. Despite the accusation being the exact definition of the thing that a false flag attack is, you won’t see the US government using that term, nor will you ever see it used in this instance by any of the authorized mainstream narrative-framing institutions like CNN or Fox News. This is because the term “false flag” is reserved solely for mention when referring to crazy, kooky Kremlin propaganda, as in the insane, unhinged, tinfoil hat belief that terrorists in Syria might possibly have some kind of motive to stage a false flag chemical attack in order to get the US, UK and France to act as their air force in a retaliatory strike against the Syrian government. That kind of false flag would be completely inconceivable to any right-minded empire loyalist, and is forbidden to even think about.

At the same time we are seeing a push from the mass media to advance a narrative that the Yellow Vests protests in France are due to Russian influence, with Iraq-raping neocon Max Boot publishing a column today in the Washington Post that is based entirely around the talking point that two trending Russian topics on social media have been “giletsjaune” and “France,” and Bloomberg putting out an article blatantly titled “Pro-Russia Social Media Takes Aim at Macron as Yellow Vests Rage”. Their entire theory is that since there are people in Russia talking about a major event that everyone else in the world is also talking about, the protests against Macron’s unpopular centrist policies are therefore the result of a conspiracy seeded by Russia.

But you’ll never hear this theory about a Russian conspiracy referred to as a “conspiracy theory” by the mainstream press. The theory that Russian elites have conspired to infiltrate the highest levels of the US government has been given serious treatment at the top echelons of media and political influence, despite its lacking any discernible evidence whatsoever, but when they talk about these alleged conspiracies they always make a point of using the word “collusion” instead. There is no actual difference between the words collude and conspire when used in this way, but the former is used because a deliberate effort has been made to stigmatize the word “conspiracy” while the word “collude” remains effectively neutral in the public eye.

But the fact of the matter is that conspiracy theories have gone mainstream, and there is no legitimate reason to call the authorized, power-manufactured conspiracy theories by a different name than the grassroots narratives like those about 9/11 or the JFK assassination. Indeed, due to the nature of populist folk narratives there is a lot more publicly available evidence contradicting the official 9/11 and JFK assassination stories than there is for the establishment Russia conspiracy theories, because those narratives often boil down to nothing more than secretive intelligence agencies saying “This is true because we said so.” Since grassroots conspiracy theories are unable to rely on empty assertions from authority, they tend to be built upon information that is publicly available.

Some people get annoyed with me for using the term conspiracy theory at all, but I insist that the phrase is itself intrinsically neutral: a theory about a conspiracy. The problem is not the phrase, it is the stigma that has been attached to that phrase by establishment media and establishment politicians; shifting to a different phrase to describe theories about conspiracies would only ensure that that phrase becomes stigmatized in the exact same way by the same sort of campaign. This would only ensure the survival of the tactic of regurgitating a pre-stigmatized label in the war of ideas instead of advancing actual arguments. The fact of the matter is that powerful people do indeed conspire, those conspiracies do indeed need to be talked about, and the largest promulgators of conspiracy theories are not Infowars or RT, but mainstream media and the US State Department.

Those who dismiss an idea by calling it a “conspiracy theory” without providing further argumentation are simply admitting to you that they have no argument, and it is right to point this out when they do it, because something being a conspiracy theory doesn’t mean it’s not grounded in facts. Some conspiracy theories are good and are backed by solid evidence, some are stupid and are circulated for intellectually dishonest reasons. Once upon a time you would be called a conspiracy theorist for saying the west is arming terrorists in Syria or the DNC is conspiring to ensure the primary victory of Hillary Clinton; those things are now conspiracy facts, as history has vindicated the solid theories which predicted them. Other conspiracy theories are promulgated by dim-witted partisan loyalists for no other reason than dim-witted partisan loyalty, like the aforementioned Russiagate conspiracy theory, or the QAnon conspiracy theory which claims Donald Trump is leading a rebellion against the Deep State as cryptically reported by an anonymous user on 8chan.

Other conspiracy theories are subscribed to simply because they help people escape the cognitive dissonance of conflicting beliefs. For example, a strong believer in capitalism who sees the undeniable signs that a plutocratic class has control of their government, but who cannot accept that this plutocratic takeover was facilitated by a rampant capitalist system which ensures that the greediest sociopaths rise to the top, may avoid cognitive dissonance by explaining the existence of the corrupt dominator class with conspiracy theories about Jews or pedovore cults. A liberal who cannot accept that neoliberal empire loyalists like Macron have failed to “make centrism cool” as Max Boot predicted will avoid cognitive dissonance by explaining the failures of the Church of the Status Quo with conspiracy theories about Russian social media campaigns.

Conspiracy theories, in reality, are nothing more than people’s attempts to explain what is going on in their world. Why Trump got elected. Why things stay shitty despite our perfectly rational attempts to change them. Why voting doesn’t seem to make much difference in the actual behaviors of one’s government. Why we keep marching into stupid wars, Orwellian dystopia and climate collapse despite having every incentive not to. Why the wealthiest of the wealthy keep getting wealthier while everyone else gets poorer and poorer. Some attempts to explain these things will come from a well-informed and intellectually honest place, and some will come from a myopic and intellectually dishonest place. Their individual merits can only be assessed on a case-by-case basis.

And in my opinion the conspiracy theories coming from the world’s most powerful institutions are the most dishonest by far. I saw a recent post by the WikiLeaks Twitter account which referred to the corporate media as “the narrative business pretending to be in the news business,” which is in my opinion a perfect way to phrase it. The real currency of the world is not gold, nor is it bureaucratic fiat, nor even raw military force; it’s narrative control. The ability to control the stories people tell about what’s going on in their world means the ability to control how they think, how they vote, how they behave, and how they all agree money and power itself operates within our society. Since society is made of narrative, controlling the narrative is controlling that society.

Conspiracy theories are a way for those in power to manipulate the narrative without actually giving the public any hard facts and evidence, and the world’s most powerful institutions are increasingly relying on conspiracy theories because they don’t have facts and evidence on their side. And why would they? The same power establishment which deceived the world into destroying Iraq is obviously far too depraved to be able to justify its global hegemony with factual evidence. All they have is narrative control, and they’re starting to lose even that.

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian   

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the Blog!

Open Debate: Their Deadliest Enemy!

By Nahida the exiled Palestinian

It is self evident, that:
"From scrutiny comes understanding, and from that understanding comes support or opposition, and both are necessary"~~~ J.F. Kennedy

And yet, we read that some prefer secrecy and devout acquiescence:
"Any open debate of this issue could be damaging,' said a Jewish communal leader" Source

***********

The above quote is taken from this article , which I strongly suggest to read. It was published in 2004 in The Forward (formerly Jewish Daily Forward) Magazine. It is an exposѐ of a mindset that dreads open discussions unless framed by its "expertise" within its own parameters. A mindset that cannot tolerate debate nor can it survive the light of truths. In order to fulfill its aims it has to block free exchange of information. A mindset that finds danger in every corner when working with transparency. It can only thrive in the dark where words are robbed of meanings, deeds are shrouded with secrecy and ideologies are hidden from scrutiny.

The contrast with the ominously pertinent speech by President J.F Kennedy, about Secret Societies, is striking.

J.F Kennedy explains that the network of Secret Societies “relies mainly on covert means, to expand its sphere of influence, on infiltration, instead of invasion, on subversion instead of elections, on intimidation instead of free choice, on gorillas 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; its mistakes are buried, not headlined; its dissenters are silenced, not praised”

Whilst in his article Ori Nir's describes the "fear" of Jewish community leaders of the possibility that AIPAC might be forced to register as a "foreign agent" rather than a "lobby group", which "would require Aipac to provide significantly more detailed information about its aims and activities to the government" which would result in "robbing the group of a key weapon: the ability to operate behind the scenes."

A few more quotes from this revealing article:

"Such a change would severely weaken the organization's influence and fuel charges of dual loyalties against Jewish groups, communal observers said"

"For months, the federal probe was believed to center on allegations that Aipac officials might have illegally passed classified documents on to Israel, which they received from a Pentagon employee, Larry Franklin."

"Although Aipac staffers are known to be exceedingly careful in their dealings with official representatives of Israel, so as not to violate the law, there have been incidents in the past in which Israeli officials gave directions to Aipac to act in one way or another, said former Aipac employees speaking on condition of anonymity."

"Jewish activists say that even if the likelihood is low that a legal attempt to compel Aipac to register as a foreign agent will be successful, public focus on the issue could be damaging. "Any open debate of this issue could be damaging," said a Jewish communal leader. "Questions of loyalty will resurface, and this time such questions will have to do with the chief pro-Israel lobby in America."

***********

Nahida's comment:

The above article is only but one example that shows clearly that the deadliest enemy of Zionists is and has always been: open debate.

But who would fear open debate, unless facts pose threat to them?

Who would want to work in secrecy, unless transparency causes them harm and damage?

Scrurutinizing for example an organization such as Anti Defamation League, (ADL) exposes that one of it's major roles (under the pretext of fighting anti-semitism) is to prevent open debate and block intellectual discussion about four main problems:

• The problem of the Ideology of Jewish Supremacism

• The problem of Global Jewish-Zionist Networking and Lobbying and their role

• The problem of idolizing the Holocaust (which is used as a tool to further Zionists aims)

• The problem of demanding independent investigation for truth of 9/11

It is justified to conclude that the doctrine of ADL consists of making accusations, framed as follows:

"Antisemite":
Anyone who does not believe in the chosen-ness of the Jewish people, anyone who dares to criticise racist ideologies that leads to crimes committed by Jewish Zionists "Israelis" or anyone who feels troubled with the extent of influence of the Jewish Zionist ... lobby.


"Holocaust denier":
Anyone who does not believe in the uniqueness of the suffering and the eternal persecution of the Jewish people or who questions the misuse of Holocaust to achieve some gains.


Conspiracy Theorist
Anyone who doubts the government narrative about 9/11 and suspects "Israel" or Mossad involvement.

Such mud-slinging combined with such fervent desire to conceal truths might be understandable coming from Zionists, given their totalitarian ambitions and criminal methods of operation, because it suits their aims. It is however inconceivable to discover that such doctrine of gate-keeping has been adopted by some of Palestine "supporters".

The question that begs an answer here is:

Why would some who claim to be "friends" of Palestine adopt such definitions?

Why would they adhere to, propagate and perpetuate dogmas that eviscerate words of their respective meanings, and then forge twisted concepts of reality?

Why would they follow the same medieval doctrine by attempting to prevent open discussion on vital issues such as the dubious and unethical ... role and evident influence of global Jewish Zionist Networks?

Why would they use the same unethical methods of smearing to gag intellectuals and BLOCK debate?

Why would they excommunicate, slander and chase out of the solidarity movement, activists who call for free discussions to understand, scrutinize and expose the role of Jewish communities and their Networks in supporting a criminal entity?

In other words, why would they volunteer to do the work for ADL, BOD, CST and AIPAC?

Trying to understand this phenomenon, I noticed that many Zionists and anti Zionists alike exhibit irrational yet deeply ingrained and extremely distorted concepts in relation with antisemitism".

It appears to me that many have firm conviction -that amounts to almost ideological belief, of the prevalent existence of:

• Global intrinsic unexplainable hatred of the Jews amongst gentiles;

• Permanent threat of annihilation of the Jews;

• Millennia-old perpetual unique Jewish suffering

Such beliefs have become major components that defines, bonds and shapes Jewish identity today.

In my view, these concepts (real or imagined) have morphed into creed. This perceived "intrinsic hatred against the Jews", "eternal threat of annihilation" and the "unparalleled suffering" have formed an emotional blockage, a psychological wall that prevents many Jews from conducting a rational conversation or debate when faced with constructive and legitimate criticism related to Jewish ideology, to Jewish-Zionist networking or the Jewish community's fervent and systematic support for "Israel".

Such inability to take criticism, inevitably causes reactionary defense mechanisms translated as aggression against anyone who genuinely desires to examine and understand the full picture, without prejudice, aiming to excavate the roots of problems and perhaps suggest comprehensive solutions.

Consequently, and under the pretext of respecting "Jewish sensitivities", debates about the taboo problems don't usually see the light, and if they do, they immediately and as a matter of urgency and non-negotiability, get aborted.

Many in the European West find themselves unable to examine such taboos because of many years of indoctrinations which makes them feel guilty even though they have never done anything to harm the Jews during the Nazi era or otherwise. Some avoid the discussion for fear of being labelled or smeared.

For a people like us from the Middle East, we do not carry the baggage of indoctrination of guilt nor do we have fear of being labelled. As for me, I simply trust both my sincerity and my love of all humanity. My approach to the topic is genuine, afresh with open-mindedness and pure intentions.

My conclusion is, if indeed we desire the eradication of antisemitism, such emotional blockage and irrational dogmas must to be addressed, in order to allow opening of hearts for the exchange of ideas and the flow of information that would facilitates open debate about what troubles both Jews and gentiles alike.

Jewish supporters need to understand that non-Jews also, have their own REAL fears and sensitivities;

We are extremely worried about the state of affairs we find our world we in today;

We are extremely worried about the REAL "Israeli" wars of aggression and destruction against other nations;

We are extremely worried about the REAL "Israeli" threats to other nations;

We are extremely worried about the role of the Jewish communities in supporting criminal "Israel" and its murderous army;

We are extremely worried about the level of influence and the Israelification exerted by some Jewish Zionist organizations and networks;

We are extremely worried about the heinous, abhorrent supremacist nihilistic ideology pervasive amongst some Orthodox Jewish groups and how this ideology crept inside the psyche of self-claimed “secular Jews” in the Zionist entity.

We are extremely worried about the military training, the Security involvement and the internet monitoring of some Jewish Zionist groups worldwide.


I hope that people who read my articles appreciate the sincerity and honesty in which I articulate my wake-up call, warning against an immanent danger that I see in the horizon if the ethical elements amidst Jews continue to ignore the troubling signs.

It would be extremely unfortunate if ethical Jews fail to understand that their real enemy is not their friends who speak the truth in their faces with frankness and openness, even when it’s hurtful.

It would be indeed regrettable that they fail to understand that their real enemy is the deceitful, those who would not hesitate to sacrifice them along with millions in order to achieve some delusional beliefs and fanatical goals.

It is of vital importance that our supporters and friends comprehend some basic facts:

FIRST:
Dismissing or ignoring the supremacist ideologies and anti-humanist beliefs thriving amongst the occupiers of Palestine does not bear well on the ethical integrity of those who maintain such dismissive attitude.

SECOND:
Denying, obscuring or covering up the fact about the existence and the influence of a
highly organized global Jewish-Zionist NETWORKING and actively preventing people from finding out about such destructive networks is extremely damning to those who engage in such denial or concealment.

THIRD:
Denying the glaring and painful reality that the majority of the Jewish communities worldwide are either active or passive supporters of the Zionist project and entity, while pretending to be the true representatives of the Jewish communities when all the evidence points otherwise, is an ugly act of deception by those who engage in disseminating such misleading misinformation.

FORTH:
Overtly or covertly supporting the permanent presence of a heinous occupier -on stolen land, who is in infringement of every International Law and every ethical code that humanity has ever developed is damning to those who hold such views.

FIFTH:

Exposing such dangerous ideologies, such powerful networks and such unpleasant reality of the role of Jewish communities in sustaining of a criminal entity, is NOT anti-Semitic.

Rather, it's the contrary; it is a wake up call, a sincere advice that's intended to alert Jewish friends who embrace humanistic values to the necessity of exposing and opposing such reality in order not to be lumped with the aggressors when the tide is finally changed.

In my view, participating (actively or passively) in the cover up and concealment of the above is far more dangerous to the Jewish people as a whole and would more likely exacerbate anti-Semitism.

I said before and I reiterate, I believe that Judaism has long been hijacked by cabbalastic clique who managed to mislead a majority of world Jewry by propagating racist ideology amongst them. They also managed to entice them into supporting an inhumane criminal entity for several decades.

I, along with all humanists, hope to see ethical humanists Jews (even though a minority) who claim to be the true representatives of “Judaism” and “Jewish values” is to reclaim their “Judaism” and “Jewish values” back.

I would like to see ethical humanists Jews knocking at the doors of synagogues, community centres and Jewish Zionist organizations, aiming to re-educate their entire communities with authentic Judaism and with these “Jewish values” they proclaim.

I would like to see ethical humanists Jews retrieving the leading role in these misguided organizations and institutions, aiming to harness and neutralize the destructive force that took hold of their communities.

I would like to see ethical humanists Jews steering and redirecting the path that Jewish Zionists have embarked upon.

That would change the course of history, wouldn’t it!

Finally, I reiterate;
True friends of Palestine would NOT defend the rights of thieves, murderers and serial killers to remain on STOLEN Land.

True friends of Palestine would NOT defend racist ideology, by smearing those who expose it.

True friends of Palestine would NOT object to Palestinian aspiration of FULL Liberation.

True friends of Palestine would NOT divert the attention from the Real Criminals only to focus on a vague phantomic concept that can be dropped at any moment after achieving its goals.

True humanists and True Friends of Palestine would most certainly not shy away from speaking the TRUTH even when it hurts, and even against themselves and their own people.

I finish with this quote:

“The dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighs the dangers that are cited to justify it” ~~~ J.F. Kennedy
.

Good-Bye Uncle Sam‏

Thanks Oscar

March 24, 2010

Good-Bye

Truth Has Fallen and Taken Liberty With It

By PAUL CRAIG ROBERTS

There was a time when the pen was mightier than the sword. That was a time when people believed in truth and regarded truth as an independent power and not as an auxiliary for government, class, race, ideological, personal, or financial interest.

Today Americans are ruled by propaganda. Americans have little regard for truth, little access to it, and little ability to recognize it.

Truth is an unwelcome entity. It is disturbing. It is off limits. Those who speak it run the risk of being branded “anti-American,” “anti-semite” or “conspiracy theorist.”

Truth is an inconvenience for government and for the interest groups whose campaign contributions control government.

Truth is an inconvenience for prosecutors who want convictions, not the discovery of innocence or guilt.

Truth is inconvenient for ideologues.

Today many whose goal once was the discovery of truth are now paid handsomely to hide it. “Free market economists” are paid to sell offshoring to the American people. High-productivity, high value-added American jobs are denigrated as dirty, old industrial jobs. Relicts from long ago, we are best shed of them. Their place has been taken by “the New Economy,” a mythical economy that allegedly consists of high-tech white collar jobs in which Americans innovate and finance activities that occur offshore. All Americans need in order to participate in this “new economy” are finance degrees from Ivy League universities, and then they will work on Wall Street at million dollar jobs.

Economists who were once respectable took money to contribute to this myth of “the New Economy.”

And not only economists sell their souls for filthy lucre. Recently we have had reports of medical doctors who, for money, have published in peer-reviewed journals concocted “studies” that hype this or that new medicine produced by pharmaceutical companies that paid for the “studies.”

The Council of Europe is investigating the drug companies’ role in hyping a false swine flu pandemic in order to gain billions of dollars in sales of the vaccine.

The media helped the US military hype its recent Marja offensive in Afghanistan, describing Marja as a city of 80,000 under Taliban control. It turns out that Marja is not urban but a collection of village farms.

And there is the global warming scandal, in which NGOs. the UN, and the nuclear industry colluded in concocting a doomsday scenario in order to create profit in pollution.

Wherever one looks, truth has fallen to money.

Wherever money is insufficient to bury the truth, ignorance, propaganda, and short memories finish the job.

I remember when, following CIA director William Colby’s testimony before the Church Committee in the mid-1970s, presidents Gerald Ford and Ronald Reagan issued executive orders preventing the CIA and U.S. black-op groups from assassinating foreign leaders. In 2010 the US Congress was told by Dennis Blair, head of national intelligence, that the US now assassinates its own citizens in addition to foreign leaders.

When Blair told the House Intelligence Committee that US citizens no longer needed to be arrested, charged, tried, and convicted of a capital crime, just murdered on suspicion alone of being a “threat,” he wasn’t impeached. No investigation pursued. Nothing happened. There was no Church Committee. In the mid-1970s the CIA got into trouble for plots to kill Castro. Today it is American citizens who are on the hit list. Whatever objections there might be don’t carry any weight. No one in government is in any trouble over the assassination of U.S. citizens by the U.S. government.

As an economist, I am astonished that the American economics profession has no awareness whatsoever that the U.S. economy has been destroyed by the offshoring of U.S. GDP to overseas countries. U.S. corporations, in pursuit of absolute advantage or lowest labor costs and maximum CEO “performance bonuses,” have moved the production of goods and services marketed to Americans to China, India, and elsewhere abroad. When I read economists describe offshoring as free trade based on comparative advantage, I realize that there is no intelligence or integrity in the American economics profession.

Intelligence and integrity have been purchased by money. The transnational or global U.S. corporations pay multi-million dollar compensation packages to top managers, who achieve these “performance awards” by replacing U.S. labor with foreign labor. While Washington worries about “the Muslim threat,” Wall Street, U.S. corporations and “free market” shills destroy the U.S. economy and the prospects of tens of millions of Americans.

Americans, or most of them, have proved to be putty in the hands of the police state.

Americans have bought into the government’s claim that security requires the suspension of civil liberties and accountable government. Astonishingly, Americans, or most of them, believe that civil liberties, such as habeas corpus and due process, protect “terrorists,” and not themselves. Many also believe that the Constitution is a tired old document that prevents government from exercising the kind of police state powers necessary to keep Americans safe and free.

Most Americans are unlikely to hear from anyone who would tell them any different.

I was associate editor and columnist for the Wall Street Journal. I was Business Week’s first outside columnist, a position I held for 15 years. I was columnist for a decade for Scripps Howard News Service, carried in 300 newspapers. I was a columnist for the Washington Times and for newspapers in France and Italy and for a magazine in Germany. I was a contributor to the New York Times and a regular feature in the Los Angeles Times. Today I cannot publish in, or appear on, the American “mainstream media.”

For the last six years I have been banned from the “mainstream media.” My last column in the New York Times appeared in January, 2004, coauthored with Democratic U.S. Senator Charles Schumer representing New York. We addressed the offshoring of U.S. jobs. Our op-ed article produced a conference at the Brookings Institution in Washington, D.C. and live coverage by C-Span. A debate was launched. No such thing could happen today.

For years I was a mainstay at the Washington Times, producing credibility for the Moony newspaper as a Business Week columnist, former Wall Street Journal editor, and former Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury. But when I began criticizing Bush’s wars of aggression, the order came down to Mary Lou Forbes to cancel my column.

The American corporate media does not serve the truth. It serves the government and the interest groups that empower the government.

America’s fate was sealed when the public and the anti-war movement bought the government’s 9/11 conspiracy theory. The government’s account of 9/11 is contradicted by much evidence. Nevertheless, this defining event of our time, which has launched the US on interminable wars of aggression and a domestic police state, is a taboo topic for investigation in the media. It is pointless to complain of war and a police state when one accepts the premise upon which they are based.

These trillion dollar wars have created financing problems for Washington’s deficits and threaten the U.S. dollar’s role as world reserve currency. The wars and the pressure that the budget deficits put on the dollar’s value have put Social Security and Medicare on the chopping block. Former Goldman Sachs chairman and U.S. Treasury Secretary Hank Paulson is after these protections for the elderly. Fed chairman Bernanke is also after them. The Republicans are after them as well. These protections are called “entitlements” as if they are some sort of welfare that people have not paid for in payroll taxes all their working lives.

With over 21 per cent unemployment as measured by the methodology of 1980, with American jobs, GDP, and technology having been given to China and India, with war being Washington’s greatest commitment, with the dollar over-burdened with debt, with civil liberty sacrificed to the “war on terror,” the liberty and prosperity of the American people have been thrown into the trash bin of history.

The militarism of the U.S. and Israeli states, and Wall Street and corporate greed, will now run their course. As the pen is censored and its might extinguished, I am signing off.

Paul Craig Roberts was an editor of the Wall Street Journal and an Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Treasury. His latest book, HOW THE ECONOMY WAS LOST, has just been published by CounterPunch/AK Press. He can be reached at: PaulCraigRoberts@yahoo.com

River to Sea Uprooted Palestinian

33 Conspiracy Theories That Turned Out To Be True, What Every Person Should Know...

Via Dedeceived World

By Jonathan Elinoff, New World Order Report

After reading the article released by Cracked.com, I decided to update and revise their work. The article gave me a chuckle because it lacked many famous and much larger conspiracy theories that became known. Their article had only listed seven. I can name 33 and I am about to release a revised list soon with 75. The article I read at cracked can be viewed here, but don't waste your time, all of that is in this article and more.

Most people can't resist getting the details on the latest conspiracy theories, no matter how far-fetched they may seem. At the same time, many people quickly denounce any conspiracy theory as untrue ... and sometimes as unpatriotic or just plain ridiculous. Lets not forget all of the thousands of conspiracies out of Wall Street like Bernie Madoff and many others to commit fraud and extortion, among many crimes of conspiracy. USA Today reports that over 75% of personal ads in the paper and on craigslist are married couples posing as single for a one night affair. When someone knocks on your door to sell you a set of knives or phone cards, anything for that matter, do they have a profit motive? What is conspiracy other than just a scary way of saying “alternative agenda”? When 2 friends go to a bar and begin to plan their wingman approach on 2 girls they see at the bar, how often are they planning on lying to those girls?“ I own a small business and am in town for a short while.Oh yeah, you look beautiful.”

Conspiracy theory is a term that originally was a neutral descriptor for any claim of civil, criminal or political conspiracy. However, it has come almost exclusively to refer to any fringe theory which explains a historical or current event as the result of a secret plot by conspirators of almost superhuman power and cunning. To conspire means "to join in a secret agreement to do an unlawful or wrongful act or to use such means to accomplish a lawful end. "The term "conspiracy theory" is frequently used by scholars and in popular culture to identify secret military, banking, or political actions aimed at stealing power, money, or freedom, from "the people".

To many, conspiracy theories are just human nature. Not all people in this world are honest, hard working and forthcoming about their intentions.Certainly we can all agree on this.So how did the term “conspiracy theory” get grouped in with fiction, fantasy and folklore? Maybe that’s a conspiracy, just kidding. Or am I?

Skeptics are important in achieving an objective view of reality, however, skeptism is not the same as reinforcing the official storyline. In fact, a conspiracy theory can be argued as an alternative to the official or “mainstream” story of events. Therefore, when skeptics attempt to ridicule a conspiracy theory by using the official story as a means of proving the conspiracy wrong, in effect, they are just reinforcing the original “mainstream” view of history, and actually not being skeptical. This is not skeptism, it is just a convenient way for the establishment view of things to be seen as the correct version, all the time, every time. In fact, it is common for "hit pieces" or "debunking articles" to pick extremely fringe and not very populated conspiracy theories. This in turn makes all conspiracies on a subject matter look crazy. Skeptics magazine and Popular Mechanics, among many others, did this with 9/11. They referred to less than 10% of the many different conspiracy theories about 9/11 and picked the less popular ones, in fact, they picked the fringe, highly improbable points that only a few people make. This was used as the "final investigation" for looking into the conspiracy theories. Convenient, huh?

In fact, if one were to look into conspiracy theories, they will largely find that thinking about a conspiracy is associated with lunacy and paranoia. Some websites suggest it as an illness. It is also not surprising to see so many people on the internet writing about conspiracy theories in a condescending tone, usually with the words "kool-aid," "crack pot," or "nut job" in their articulation. This must be obvious to anyone that emotionally writing about such serious matter insults the reader more than the conspiracy theorist because there is no need to resort to this kind of behavior. It is employed often with an "expert" who will say something along the lines of, "for these conspiracies to be true, you would need hundreds if not thousands of people to be involved. It's just not conceivable."

I find it extremely odd that the assumption is on thousands of participants in a conspiracy. I, for one, find it hard to believe any conspiracy involving more than a handful of people but the fact remains that there have been conspiracies in our world, proven and not made up, that involved many hundreds of people. It's not a matter of opinion, it's a matter of fact.

One more thing to consider, have you noticed that if the conspiracy is involving powerful interests with the ability to bribe, threaten or manipulate major institutions (like the mafia, big corporations or government) then don't you find it odd when people use one of those as the "credible" counter-argument? What I mean is, if you are discussing a conspiracy about the mafia, and someone hands you a debunking article that was written by the Mafia, it doesn't seem like it would take rocket science to look at that with serious criticism and credibility. This is the case with many conspiracies. In fact, I am handed debunking pieces all the time written in many cases by the conspirators in question. Doesn't this seem odd to anybody else but me?

While intelligent cynicism certainly can be healthy, though, some of the greatest discoveries of all time were initially received (often with great vitriol) as blasphemous conspiracy theories -- think of the revelation that the earth was not the center of the universe, or that the world was not flat but actually round.

What follows are some of these most shocking modern conspiracy theories that turned out true after thorough investigation by our society. Some through congressional hearings, others through investigative journalism. Many of these, however, were just admitted to by those involved. These are just 33 of them, and I still had a long list of others to add. There are a total of 33 in this article. Many of these are listed with original and credible news clips on the matter, as well as documentaries.

Read More...

Posted by Pat Anderson at 2:43 PM