The Mental Militia Forums

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 26   Go Down

Author Topic: Conspiracy Theory  (Read 46219 times)

Elias Alias

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4721
  • TMM
Conspiracy Theory
« on: October 07, 2004, 11:59:12 am »

I'm just doing this to see what I might think, okay? :)

I have been discussing "conspiracy theories" with Edison_Carter in private messages, and I asked him if we could take the discussion into the public zones here. E_C kindly agreed, so I would like to initiate a thread which deals with unanswered questions regarding governmental involvement in crime, and, specifically, governmental involvement in the creation of terrorism.

I had made a comment on another thread to the effect that elements within the U.S. government assisted in the events of 911. That is a fairly bizzare statement, on the surface of it. I'll admit that it sounds far-fetched. Yet there are some anomalies involved in the government's story about what happened on 911. For instance, George W. Bush himself is recorded saying that he saw on a tv screen the first plane hit the first tower. At the time he said that, there was no known film of that first plane hitting the tower, and Bush now knows for a fact that he could not have seen that plane hit the tower as he said he did. We now know that after all, he *could* see it, but only if his "tv screen" was connected with a Secret Service command-and-control communications grid being operated that morning by Dick Cheney and his staff. Cheney, we learned recently, was in charge of five separate "wargames" drills on the morning of 911. We'll get into that later, but I mention it here simply to show that by Bush's own mouth, he has caught himself in a lie. Nobody out here in the civilian world saw the footage of the first flight hitting the first tower, not until much later. Bush's statement, which I repeat was recorded, is an anomaly.

There are quite a few very interesting questions, of which the above is one example. Another example is the official Pentagon photos shot immediately after the incident at the Pentagon. The government says a 757 hit the Pentagon. Yet in the photos issued by the Pentagon, there is no wreckage of a 757, and the structural damage which was apparent after the event suggests that there is no way a 757 could have impacted the Pentagon. More on that laters.

This topic is huge, and I would like to take the reader back in time, back in American history, prior to looking directly at the events of 911 and the government's explanations of those events. I would like to note for the reader that I am not "stating" anything as fact, but am instead simply asking questions which the media refuses to ask. I hope some of the readers here will join in. I think we could use this thread to organize a lot of presently-chaotic consciousness about who committed the acts of 911, and why, and who benefitted.

Before I bring up some questions asked of me by Edison_Carter, and attempt to answer them, please allow me to first set the stage for my personal perspective. Let's take a look at our mentality, just briefly, and then let's go way back in time....

~

Okay, I'm teaching to myself here, but I'm doing so by speaking with you, as I imagine that you are external to "me" and are therefore real. Given that you are you and I am me, I'll ask for your forgiveness right up front. I'm sorry I feel that I must use you to teach myself.
 
The mind is something, as I presume all possessed of one might agree. Whatever it is, our five carnal senses cannot apprehend it, and that is despite the belief that a mind owns a body which cannot prove that its owner, the mind, exists. Can't smell or hear a mind, nor feel it nor see it nor taste it. Can't take out a loan on it, trade it, rent it (well, maybe rent it..... ) weigh it, displace water with it, or any other useful commerce in which our bodily existence marks its days and ways
 
The mind is said to possess the potential for a "sixth sense", be that via inspiration, intuition, or a lifespan's experiential summation. That is what some people say. I enjoy using my mind as something other than a "sense", such as any "body" might possess. To call my mind a mere "sense", like the sense of hearing or tasting, would be to place the template of finite pronouncement upon what was intrinsically the infinite; in other words, it would be an attempt to define the infinite.  Definition and infinition exist as poles of the same spectrum, do they not?
 
Personally, I think the mind is simply the sum of its contents, comprising itself of thoughts, psychegies, emotions, memory, imagery, and a sublime associative process which conceptualizes, as an example and among other manifest things, the root of figurative language.

To understand anything, to "know" anything, we rely upon our minds. But the "set" of the mind has much to do with our perception, and that is important as we try to unravel the contradictions we've been given in the government's explanations of 911. For instance, if I were to say to you that an organized, structured conspiracy to take over the U.S. Federal government has existed for a long time in this country, your pre-911 consciousness would tend to object to such a "conspiracy theory". I don't blame you, as I myself have long resisted succumbing to the tempting idea of a conspiracy.

The terrorists don't have armies, yet we send forth our armies to conquer them. Pray, how can an army shoot, blow up, gas or bomb a hatred which exists in the minds of the targeted people? Why do we not consider approaching the war on terror from a platform of intelligence, (and here I do not mean CIA-type "intelligence", but genuine intelligence unmotivated by greed or quest), a platform featuring that plank which states: hatred is an invisible enemy which must be approached through the correct use of the mind instead of by the arraying of tanks and bombs and military police tactics upon innocent people.
 
But we can't *afford* to think that way, not up on the Hill in DC or over at the Pentagon or down at Langley; not even on Wall Street, which itself now is dependant upon the others' combined functions and operations. I'm guessing that when Colin Powell leaves or is disposed of in the coming Presidential cycle, he shall have a view from the top of the U.S. State Department stored neatly inside his mind, and I'll guess further that after a respectable lapse of months or maybe even a few years Colin Powell shall issue commentary relative to my statement, that we can't *afford* to cease with the military and its umbilically outsourced dependents, the Defense Contractors. You know that I mean here the coat-and-tie crowd, the important cats who make the bombs and the stuff that goes boom in the night, and the anthrax and unspeakable bio/chem wmds and the domestic police "research and development", and worse like DARPA contractors and "policy think tanks" and NGOs and etc and etc.  
 
Cut all that money-flow out of the Wall Street charts and the banks will go bust overnight and we all know it. It is a mechanism with momentum, and that momentum is achieving quantum acceleration as we speak.  
 
Yet we know that the mechanism was built with deliberation, that it was planned, charted, graphed, projected, implemented, deployed, managed, even guarded every step of the way since dating back from the American Revolution and the birth of this sovereign nation-state.
 
And we know that if the mechanism requires its own unique and primary infrastructure for the strongest extension of its enforceable authority, that infrastructure itself has to be managed.
 
Question: Who are the managers who planned Western policy while they were being thrown out of this country by George Washington's troops not so long ago? Who called Thomas Jefferson's inaugural speech "radical usurpation"? Who had the ties with British banking and commerce whilst establishing this nation's collegiate community? Who resisted the Revolution and remained loyal to the British crown? And who ran the Clipper ship fleets for England's opium trade into China?
 
There were many Loyalists within the ranks of the Tory Party at the founding of this nation. Some of them did not take well to defeat by a rag-tag band of rebellious misfits who, as thought by the loyalists and Tories, should have gotten along with the King's law, the King's economy, the King's taxes, the King's security forces. Either love the Colonies or leave 'em. Rebelling against the law of the land, the order of the day, the very throne which sustained the immigrations into America, was treasonous, wickedly evil, and totally unnecessary. Besides, it could greatly harm the profitability of long-established business connections back in England. So let's have none of this revolution talk!  
 
I note that mood simply to indicate that the Tory Party of the early 1800s had a conscious logic as their mindset, and that logic was a loyalty to the King, who buttered their bread. Such businesses as held fast to British ties even after the Revolution included the Russell Company of Boston, prime jewel of the Russell family, themselves New England Tories.  
 
Questions: Could the elite of the New England Tory families, families such as the Lows, Pierponts, Edwards, Delanos, all of them, have, in defeat but not resignation, gone "underground" by using their British wealth to found the American university system? Could they from there have moved their sons and fellow Loyalists into seats of State and Federal governance? Could their wealth be applied to enterprising American banking? Could their wealth have found leverage on Wall Street? Could they have set in motion a gradual, incremental assault upon George Washington's and Thomas Jefferson's America -- from *within*? Could that assault be poised now, a mere two centuries later, to announce its ownership of the United States Government?
 
Question: Could an infrastructure of banking, finance, trade, industry, and business present the potential of influence through lobbying the Federal Government? And if these social institutions and others unmentioned can be shown to be inter-related through family interaction and relationships for two centuries, while lobbying the Federal Government, can we not correctly state that it is "possible" that within the legacy of American history exists, to this day, the plot of the Tory Loyalists of New England to re-take what Washington's and Jefferson's Revolution had ripped in violence from the throne of England?
 
Question: If so, does there not at least exist the *possibility*, however remote or seemingly unlikely, of a conspiracy?

~

Okay. This is a place where anyone is welcome to voice one's ideas on "conspiracy theories". I'll get my tinfoil hat out and dust it off and will try to keep the thread contained to conspiracies which may have affected "terrorism" in general. Let's have some fun here, before the guys with the white coats come to take me away....

:)

Elias
 
Logged
"Heirs to self-knowledge shed gently their fears..."

Basil Fishbone

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2091
    • http://
Conspiracy Theory
« Reply #1 on: October 07, 2004, 12:45:11 pm »

It's been said the Constitution amounted to a coup against the Articles of Confederation on the part of the Federalists.  Hamilton and his cronies.  What they were working toward was an imposition of the British mercantilist economic system on American soil.  This became a decades-long attempt to engineer this transformation away from Jeffersonian ideals, throughout the first half of the 1800s, by people such as John Quincy Adams, Henry Clay, and Abraham Lincoln.  I wouldn't be surprised if advocates of Clay's "American System" of high tariffs, and "internal improvements" (subsidies to private canal, road and railroad companies) had links to the Tory banking interests Elias mentioned. (Any info on this, Elias?)

It seems clear there must be an inter-generational program to consolidate power in the hands of central government institutions and favored corporations.  I know there is an enormous literature devoted to ferreting out the details.   The problem is so pervasive and deep-rooted one wonders what it would take to return to Jeffersonian ideals, and even to eradicate all forms of coercive authority.   Something like plowing the ground and sowing it with salt, I'm afraid.

Basil Fishbone
Logged

penguinsscareme

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4920
  • Keeper of the red button
Conspiracy Theory
« Reply #2 on: October 07, 2004, 03:34:27 pm »

This quote from a pastor friend of mine.
Quote
The leaders of the developing world-state aren't conducting a conspiracy.  They've stated their goals, and they outline the steps, in regular public forums.[italics mine] Yesterday, on C-Span, Geraald Levin, the CEO of Time Warner...said, in essence, Well, we've got to maintain control of Information Technology, which is now going through a revolution. If we don't, you'll have amoral machines running the show, and just look at the move "Matrix" and you'll see the result of what  that would be like.

Hmmm. Thanks Gerry, for telling me what message you were trying to instill in the populace with the movie "Matrix". Very good approach. You can't trust amoral machines, so us "folks" who are running the world-state will have to maintain personal control of IT in the new globalism...
[skipping ahead]
There has to be an absolute Interpol controlled by the world-state. No nuts riding the rails incognito and killing and eating nice folks whose houses happen to front on rail lines. I like that one  too. (Gadzooks, folks, I like every single idea the globalists can come up with for the necessity of globalism. The more they talk the more it sounds like commons sense and the less it sounds like conspiracy.) Of course,  that also means the world-state has to track ME around (and YOU) just to  make sure we're not some of those nutcases, international terrorists, or
what-not.

In other words, once again, in order to achieve this worthy goal I absolutely MUST willingly surrender my personal freedom in order to guarantee my security. How can they track me? Well, lots of ways.  The best would simply be to take my personal data and put it on file for comparison. My personal data includes some of the following and more: fingerprints, cornea prints, palm and footprints, DNA, as well as various electronic data. If and when they come and ask for this, for the good of  all mankind, I'm going to give it willingly, aren't you? Since I'm  not on the verge of murdering anyone, eating anyone, raping anyone, or  even blowing up a building owned by my favorite government, I have no particular reason to say no. At that point the personal-freedom folks will simply look silly.
I should point out that this was written in 2000 when none of us knew what 911 or the Patriot Act meant.  I should also point out that his tone is one of irony -- he's not in favor of this!
If it's a conspiracy then it's a dreadfully botched one, since laypeople such as us know so much about it.
Logged
O Lord,
Thine Ocean is so great,
And my boat is so small.

Sportos, motorheads, dweebies, wastoids...they think he's a righteous dude.

The utter waste of our $2,000,000,000 a day military-industrial machine was never demonstrated more vividly than on 9/11.

You do what works.

Basil Fishbone

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2091
    • http://
Conspiracy Theory
« Reply #3 on: October 07, 2004, 04:01:43 pm »

Quote
If it's a conspiracy then it's a dreadfully botched one, since laypeople such as us know so much about it.

They don't particularly try to hide it.  They assume that the unwashed are not going to be reading Foreign Affairs (a journal put out by the Council on Foreign Relations) or listening to NPR, for instance.  Those who do, are assumed to be sufficiently enlightened that they will approve and understand that this is the natural course of events.  Anyone who disapproves is labelled a "right wing conspiracy theorist" or otherwise denigrated.  Most of the managerial elites who have been processed through elite universities have been pretty well indoctrinated by elite social class expectations and assumptions, to understand and accept that the nation state is on the way out, in favor of "world governance".  I have actually heard the term "new world order" used approvingly on NPR more than once as if, of course educated and enlightened people understand that it's a done deal, and we assume you are all on board.

Unfortunately for them, awareness is growing at an entirely unacceptable rate because of uncontrolled information flow.

Basil Fishbone
Logged

penguinsscareme

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4920
  • Keeper of the red button
Conspiracy Theory
« Reply #4 on: October 07, 2004, 04:47:02 pm »

I don't think it is unfortunate for them.
The same means which enable us to express opposition enable them to spread their propoganda.  The thing is, most people want it.  The neighbors who snitch on people for having anti-government bumper stickers, the teeming hordes who think guns are inherently evil...these are not shady politicians in smoky back rooms doing sinister deals under the table, they are the mainstream.  It's so out in the open that it's the dominant feature on the landscape.  Watch MTV, VH1, Comedy Central.  Read Rolling Stone or Time magazine.
Logged
O Lord,
Thine Ocean is so great,
And my boat is so small.

Sportos, motorheads, dweebies, wastoids...they think he's a righteous dude.

The utter waste of our $2,000,000,000 a day military-industrial machine was never demonstrated more vividly than on 9/11.

You do what works.

Junker

  • Guest
Conspiracy Theory
« Reply #5 on: October 07, 2004, 05:52:45 pm »

It seems a goodly number of the constitution writers were involved with big money. Particularly Hamilton and a New York group. Details have long since vanished from my pourous skull. I'll see what I can dig up and watch for the flow twixt Boston and NY.

Some evidence is more likely to be social. They've been an intermarrying, dynastic group. For instance, J.P married into the New York Dutch big money. There just a "Who was who" will be helpful (and quite a bit of research time). I'll post details of what I work on at
The Eeecks! Files: The Great American Conspiracy.

Others are welcome if they get the urge.

 
Logged

Junker

  • Guest
Conspiracy Theory
« Reply #6 on: October 08, 2004, 07:55:43 pm »

Constitutional Convention Delegates (55)

Lawyers 45%
Politicians 31%

Occupation with Public Security Interests, Lending and Investments, or Real Estate & Land Speculation 78%

Graduates of Yale, Harvard, or Princeton 38%

- - -

But, why expect anything different?
Logged

Lark

  • Guest
Conspiracy Theory
« Reply #7 on: October 11, 2004, 09:57:06 am »

Conspiracy implies that it is rogue elements at work,

I dont think it is and I dont think anyone who has read things like the Project for a New American Century, think that's the proper title, can have any doubt, if your declared aims are American state domination of all fields, cloaked in the flag and old time religion, then I dont think there is any level or low that you wont stoop to,

it's ironic, you guys used to be so sharp to this kind of thing, subverting anglo world hegemony long after the revolution but then when you all became to hegemons everything changed, oh well, power corrupts,

Lark
Logged

penguinsscareme

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4920
  • Keeper of the red button
Conspiracy Theory
« Reply #8 on: October 11, 2004, 10:17:59 am »

Quote
Conspiracy implies that it is rogue elements at work,
Then I guess we are the conspiracy.  Call it the Liberty Conspiracy.
Logged
O Lord,
Thine Ocean is so great,
And my boat is so small.

Sportos, motorheads, dweebies, wastoids...they think he's a righteous dude.

The utter waste of our $2,000,000,000 a day military-industrial machine was never demonstrated more vividly than on 9/11.

You do what works.

Alton Speers

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1850
Conspiracy Theory
« Reply #9 on: October 11, 2004, 10:29:00 am »

Quote
Quote
Conspiracy implies that it is rogue elements at work,
Then I guess we are the conspiracy.  Call it the Liberty Conspiracy.
Why... you rogue! :D

Alton
Logged

Elias Alias

  • Administrator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4721
  • TMM
Conspiracy Theory
« Reply #10 on: October 11, 2004, 12:42:49 pm »


 
 
Quote
Conspiracy implies that it is rogue elements at work,

 
Yes, at this time I agree that "conspiracy" denotes/connotes rogue elements at work.
 
Quote
I dont think it is and I dont think anyone who has read things like the Project for a New American Century, think that's the proper title, can have any doubt, if your declared aims are American state domination of all fields, cloaked in the flag and old time religion, then I dont think there is any level or low that you wont stoop to,

 
Okay, please allow me to make my perspective, my "hypothesis" clear. I have read a noteworthy portion of the PNAC's website, and I've read Zbigniew Brzezinski's "The Grand Chessboard", among other readings. My hypothesis inludes the *possibility* that a few "elite" manipulators have quietly, clandestinely, taken over the U.S. government and are using that government, in conjunction with the United Nations, to establish a global Empire. My hypothesis also includes the idea that to accomplish this the elite few who've stolen our government are deliberately removing our Constitution and Bill of Rights, to accomplish what Brzezinski calls the fashioning of "a consensus on matters of U.S. foreign policy". [my paraphrase from his book.] Please understand that the current Federal government is NOT reflecting the interests, desires, wishes, or needs of the American people, that our government is out of the people's control, and that all "foreign policy" of the past Century has been influenced by men who have a common plan, a conspiracy if you will, a secret agenda. The purpose of this thread is to look into that and related items of interest.
 
 
Quote
it's ironic, you guys used to be so sharp to this kind of thing, subverting anglo world hegemony long after the revolution but then when you all became to hegemons everything changed, oh well, power corrupts,

 
The only thing I'm trying to subvert is dishonesty, secrecy, falsehood, deception, and the lies of the U.S. Federal government. Truth be known, I suspect, we're going to learn that British and German financiers have done more subverting of the American experience than  Americans have to British hegemony. I look forward to getting into all this with you and others on this thread.  
 
My basic position is that "government" itself is not good for individual liberty.  
 
I have spent some hours composing posts for this thread, but none of them are at this time ready to post-up here. They will be ready to post shortly. My apologies for taking too much time.
 
Salute!
Elias
Logged
"Heirs to self-knowledge shed gently their fears..."

Junker

  • Guest
Conspiracy Theory
« Reply #11 on: October 11, 2004, 12:54:15 pm »

If you might have time, Elias, I would appreciate a short list (~10) of players in the 1600-1900 range if you could quickly/easily post such a list.

~1900: Morgan, Rockefeller, Dupont, other names already well known-- so I suppose I might be looking for earlier actors on this stage. Sorry I'm so vague, but you might still be able to target what I'm looking for.
Logged

Pitchfork

  • Guest
Conspiracy Theory
« Reply #12 on: October 11, 2004, 03:40:02 pm »

The most dangerous conspiracies, are those that aren't even considered too be conspiracies.
Logged

Loxosceles_Reclusa

  • Guest
Conspiracy Theory
« Reply #13 on: October 11, 2004, 04:51:31 pm »


 I don't believe the Bush administration, for all its faults, was in any way complicit in the September 11 hijackings/attacks.

 That being said, I do get annoyed when people use the word "conspiracy" to mean something imaginary, like a superstion.

 If there is no such thing as a conspiracy, then somebody better let about 40-some-odd percent of all the convicts out of prison, since about 40-some-odd percent of them are in prison for one or another sort of *conspiracy."

 Lox
Logged

EconGeek

  • Guest
Conspiracy Theory
« Reply #14 on: October 12, 2004, 02:44:46 am »



I am certain that the bush administration was complicit-- they were clearly negligent.

I suspect that they were involved and deliberately wanted to see it happen.

But I do not believe that this is the case.


Let me restate that with emphasis:

I am <b>certain</b> that the bush administration was complicit-- they were clearly negligent.

I <b>suspect</b> that they were involved and deliberately wanted to see it happen.

But I do not <b>believe</b> that this is the case.


I also do not <b>believe</b> that it is not the case.

This is the thing about conspiracy theories-- those debunking them, and those proposing them, often fail to keep track of the level what is being stated.  Asking a question implies no belief.  Expressing a suspicion doesn't either-- it merely indicates that you do not have sufficient evidence to believe it to be the case, but think that it might be, or think that it might even likely be, the case.

 
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 26   Go Up