21 votes

Anti-Conspiracy-Theorists = Thought Police

I don't think it can be stated any clearer than that.

Those of us here who are not scared to death of peer pressure should chime in on this subject. I'm concerned there are possibly some conspiracy theorists who are beginning to self-regulate what they say... such as disclaimers before saying it like "now I'm normally not a conspiracy theorist BUT this part really doesn't add up for me...."

Then instantly they are chastised by someone else for even suggesting an alternative theory to the "official story."

If the "official story" is true then GovCorp Inc has NOTHING TO HIDE and shouldn't have any problem answering all of our questions and DIS-PROVING all of our "conspiracy theories."

God forbid someone should construct a theory that better fits the evidence presented.

Constructing a theory about the possible truth when facts don't add up is not something "crackpots" do. It's something intelligent people who think for themselves - do. Thinking is not against the law but you could swear by the reactions of some people here that "thinking improperly" should be a crime.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
ecorob's picture

I wear the mantle...

proudly!

When you can back it up with evidence it becomes the truth and those that disagree are the liars/thought police, as you say.

its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
9/11 Truth.

They bring it upon themselves, in that.....

They have proven themselves untrustworthy and dishonorable. How then can they, or their parrots of thought policing expect that people won't question what has clearly become behavior against the best interests of those who's interests they are supposed to look out for? That is cognitive dissonance at its finest, and conspiracy FACT for those who seek.
For the holes in the meme they provide are large enough for drones to pas through, with information available in real time ( such as the DRILL announcement - Boston ) and people looking to discredit the already discredited even more so, we can expect an increase of theory of all types; for people are dissatisfied and are searching for the reasons why.

God Bless
Stēkō

Drew, by the very grace of GOD through the blood of Christ Jesus.
"there shall come after us men whom shall garner great wealth using our system, and having done so shall seek to slam the door of prosperity behind them." George Washington

A lot of these people

are government operatives working to gatekeep and control the discourse. Others are the mainstreamers who will believe all official pronouncements no matter how absurd.

You are right, as I have myself commented before: This is gatekeeping and suppression of intellectual inquiry.

ecorob's picture

Whoever you believe they are...

they are in the great MINORITY!

its 'cos I owe ya, my young friend...
Rockin' the FREE world in Tennessee since 1957!
9/11 Truth.

DIY-CSIer here; I am very

DIY-CSIer here;

I am very interested in finding photos of people around the first blast site near the finish line in the previous 15 minutes before the blast, to find the person who placed the bomb on the sidewalk.

An unattended bag sets off a red flag in many peoples mind from 9/11 conditioning and training, especially on a sidewalk with a lot of people around. No way an unattended bag could last very long there without people noticing it.

"Conspiracy theorist"

"Conspiracy theorist" conspiring to get people mad regardless of proof, violence for the sake of violence under the mistaken belief of doing good, or, your garden variety shill

Its a theory,
i dont have proof,
and in your own words,

"God forbid someone should construct a theory that better fits the evidence presented."

Even though, I HAVE NO EVIDENCE, it being generalized THEORY, should i treat it as such, ANYWAY?

Does that make you
1 hold your tongue, to get along
2 understanding a little of where we are coming from
3 critisize my theory, (you decide what that makes you)
4 or none of the above

Oh my god, not another one.....

I have had it with these group think posts. For a site that promotes individual liberty, we sure have a ton of users that stick people into groups.

Would you people, PLEASE, stop bickering about your petty differences and come together on the things (which are many) that you agree on?

Instead of spending your time dividing us, you should pick an issue that you agree with, form a committee and make something happen! We All Have Our Roles and we lack the number of people at city, district, and state, to fill them!

Even Ron Paul and Barney Frank found common ground on one issue last year. Why can't we, supposedly, individual free thinkers, do the same?

Conspiracy Theorist is often an unwarranted pejorative.

I have observed the same unfortunate tendency in many areas around the web, and the "conspiracy theorist" meme is increasing in frequency. These individuals throwing the term around will frequently accompany it with a logical fallacy, such as citing a Janet Napolitano denial as a reliable source of information.

Let's take one aspect of the JFK assassination "conspiracy theory" as it is far-removed from the present example. The hole in the windshield was observed by several independent eye-witnesses on record (motorcycle patrolman, reporter, medical student, etc.). The windshield was replaced after the assassination, as confirmed by Ford official George Whitaker (who also indicated that the hole was from front to back). Douglas Weldon has done extensive scholarly research confirming the hole, including photographic evidence. The hole was of course not acknowledged by the Warren Commission, as its' presence and position disproves the lone gunmen theory and indicates shots coming from the front. http://www.veteranstoday.com/2012/06/28/jfk-conspiracy-the-b... We have to either believe that the government lied in the Warren Commission, or that all of these eyewitnesses and scholars doing independent research for decades are lying. Which is more likely?

The "conspiracy theorist" label is being thrown around freely lately. If you look behind it, you will usually find someone who thinks that official government reports are always true. So then who is the one who believes in fairy tales?

Perhaps a list of DP approved acceptable conspiracies

Cause clearly this community is steeped in a rich tradition of conspiracy debate and debunking. Even the most critical members deriding this post are actively promoting or engaging in conspiracy in other threads. Almost all members of the DP have some sort of alternative theory about current or political events.

Obviously the real question here is NOT what thoughts or questions are acceptable. Rather does stifling the ability to broach complicated and confusing issues with ridicule and opprobrium help us get closer to the truth or push us further away ?

I think the answer ULTIMATELY is the latter.

Why not create a post that deals only with this issue of the bombing victims being actors. Allow everyone with evidence for or against said theory to present it there and only there and see what happens. As long as everyone is polite and respectful the theory should be debunked with logic and reason zip zap. Then this all goes away and the culture of free thinking at the DP is preserved, no ?

That is why the title of this thread is appropriate.

Labeling something "conspiracy theory" is not helpful or descriptive. It only serves to intimidate people gathering information and to reinforce those who feel they are above any fringe theory and/or don't want to leave their comfort zones. Clearly there are those who are putting out disinformation in the general public, just as the government does. One must use principles of logic and research to reach the most likely conclusion. If we are speaking of the Boston incident, we are still in the information-gathering stage and perhaps moving into the hypothesis-forming stage. We aren't ready to automatically throw out premises without investigation.

Wouldn't we all

LOVE to be able to accept the mainstream narrative and move on with our lives ? How many times have you heard the statement "once you wake up there is no going back" or something to that effect on here ? I think life would be a lot less stressful if we could doo-lee-do through our days without the affliction we have come to know as the search for truth.

How can a proper "hypothesis-forming stage" occur if there are components of or pieces of information that are considered taboo. What kind of conclusion can be made if said conclusion was made with out taking everything into consideration. Again, it is laughable that this community of all places does not understand that.

Powerful words...

It only serves to intimidate people gathering information and to reinforce those who feel they are above any fringe theory and/or don't want to leave their comfort zones.

Wouldn't we all LOVE to be able to accept the mainstream narrative and move on with our lives?

I've been listening to the radio a bit lately and giving the internet a break. A few hours ago there was something about Newtown and that it was the "worst mass school killing in American history" which is completely false.

You HAVE TO wonder how the useful idiots are getting their information. There is obviously - OBVIOUSLY - SOME KIND OF hidden agenda on the part of GovCorp Inc... it is also quite obvious that those who work for that company have never had the American people's best interests in mind.

We should just go ahead and set up an actual government of the people and FIRE THIS CORPORATION that has done a really bad job ON PURPOSE (if you know about the Federal Reserve you can't possibly argue that the destruction of America is NOT on purpose).

How to think and debate like a "conspiracy theorist."

Step 1: Start with the premise that any tragic incident is a massive, intricate government conspiracy.

Step 2: Denounce any information presented by a mainstream, non-conspiracy source that directly counters the predetermined conspiracy narrative as corrupt and part of the conspiracy.

Step 3: Monitor these same mainstream sources for information that supports the predetermined conspiracy narrative, even if only remotely. Mainstream media reporting mistakes that support your conspiracy (or any conspiracy really) must be treated as rare moments of truth, glimpses inside the Matrix. Any mainstream media reports in favor of the conspiracy should be treated like the word of God. Spam that information everywhere.

Step 4: Imagination is the same thing as undeniable fact. There is nothing wrong with manipulating Youtube videos and using Photoshop to edit information to make it more obvious for the stupid sheeple to understand.

Step 5: Reject the skeptics to the conspiracy theories aggressively. Call them out for being sheep, shills, Cointelpro, paid agents, et cetera. Do not ever doubt yourself, because if you think they are any of these nouns, then it is undeniably true. After all, the conspiracy theory you are trying to wake the world up to is a fact. Only a sheep would think otherwise.

Step 6: Bring up the founding of the Federal Reserve, the Bay of Pigs, The Gulf of Tonkin, and other well known deceptive schemes by the government often (every conversation if need be.) These actions were confessed by government, therefore every other conspiracy theory is true!

Step 7: Cite declassified documents often, as they are invaluable. If the government reports that a secret program was started and ended 60 years ago- DO NOT BELIEVE THEM. The secret programs for sure are still occurring and are now more massive, sinister, and successful than before.

Step 8: Remember that most of witnesses and victims involved in conspiracy event are actors. Medical examiners, emergency responders, the police, reporters, they are almost all in on it. The innocent people caught up in the conspiracy were either killed or have been threatened by the conspirators and are too afraid to come forward (or they possibly never existed to begin with.)

Step 9: Blitz the world with the truth until everyone deletes you on Facebook or you are banned from your favorite web sites. Lay low for a period, regroup at your favorite alternative web sites, get encouragement and reinforcement from the other awakened truth seekers, and start the process all over again with a new conspiracy.

Let's debunk the static step by step shall we?

Step 1: Start with the premise that any tragic incident is a massive, intricate government conspiracy.

Guilty as charged. When you have researched for as many hours as I have, starting with GovCorp is probably hiding something and/or complicit is a pretty safe bet.

Step 2: Denounce any information presented by a mainstream, non-conspiracy source that directly counters the predetermined conspiracy narrative as corrupt and part of the conspiracy.

You left out a very important part of this step. I denounce any kind of LAME stream information that is baseless, source-less or in some way sourced ANONYMOUSLY. If you take LAME stream information as fact in any other case: YOU'RE A SHEEPLE!

Step 3: Monitor these same mainstream sources for information that supports the predetermined conspiracy narrative, even if only remotely. Mainstream media reporting mistakes that support your conspiracy (or any conspiracy really) must be treated as rare moments of truth, glimpses inside the Matrix. Any mainstream media reports in favor of the conspiracy should be treated like the word of God. Spam that information everywhere.

When "mistakes" by "journalists" are made to the degree of, for example, there were 2 handguns, no 4 handguns, no he used an "assault riffle" but the "assault riffle" was found later in the CAR? It tends to get pretty old and downright predictable after a while. There's a definite pattern. If you you have your eyes wide open you can see it.

Step 4: Imagination is the same thing as undeniable fact. There is nothing wrong with manipulating Youtube videos and using Photoshop to edit information to make it more obvious for the stupid sheeple to understand.

This is just a blatent attack. This is absolutely false. Anyone who does this is not welcome in my camp and will be called out by ME AND HAS BEEN CALLED OUT BY ME MANY TIMES right here on this site!

Step 5: Reject the skeptics to the conspiracy theories aggressively. Call them out for being sheep, shills, Cointelpro, paid agents, et cetera. Do not ever doubt yourself, because if you think they are any of these nouns, then it is undeniably true. After all, the conspiracy theory you are trying to wake the world up to is a fact. Only a sheep would think otherwise.

Guilty as charged. You shills and sheep all sing the same tune. Not one of you has a shred of originality to what you say... not only that... but many of you are DIE HARD APOLOGISTS for GovCorp Inc and it's downright REPULSIVE!

Step 6: Bring up the founding of the Federal Reserve, the Bay of Pigs, The Gulf of Tonkin, and other well known deceptive schemes by the government often (every conversation if need be.) These actions were confessed by government, therefore every other conspiracy theory is true!

Amazing how you completely vault over reason yet still sound somewhat logical. No this is false. We frequently bring up these ADMITTED conspiracies to prove that GovCorp Inc has done "things like such and such" in the past. Your wide stretch to "every other conspiracy" is laughable - I really hope nobody was actually fooled by it.

Step 7: Cite declassified documents often, as they are invaluable. If the government reports that a secret program was started and ended 60 years ago- DO NOT BELIEVE THEM. The secret programs for sure are still occurring and are now more massive, sinister, and successful than before.

This is just idiocy. Where are you getting this garbage? When EVIDENCE arises that conflicts with the OFFICIAL STORY that these programs ended - we wonder why... is that okay with you? Apparently not. In your UTOPIA you would decide how people are to think... and what questions they are allowed to ask.

Step 8: Remember that most of witnesses and victims involved in conspiracy event are actors. Medical examiners, emergency responders, the police, reporters, they are almost all in on it. The innocent people caught up in the conspiracy were either killed or have been threatened by the conspirators and are too afraid to come forward (or they possibly never existed to begin with.)

Everything is compartmentalized. It all runs on the FEDERAL RESERVE NOTE. You are paid to do x, someone else is paid to do y... etc etc... with a pyramid hierarchy pretty much any large corporation can guide a mass of people to do a dirty deed and they would never know they did it. Just look at all the auto recalls for example because car makers wanted to cut corners and skirt safety to save money. Surely EVERYONE who was on that production line for that particular make and model were "in on it" right?

Step 9: Blitz the world with the truth until everyone deletes you on Facebook or you are banned from your favorite web sites. Lay low for a period, regroup at your favorite alternative web sites, get encouragement and reinforcement from the other awakened truth seekers, and start the process all over again with a new conspiracy.

Yes you definitely don't want people saying the word "truth" right? Since it's like Kryptonite to folks like you.

I gotta hand it to you though... this list is a stroke of genius... EVIL genius however. The sheep oughta eat this right up!

This one's for you Del.

I feel your pain Delysid.

That said, all the points you've brought up could equally apply to you, or anyone, or any ____________.

Step 1: Start with the premise that any tragic incident is a massive, intricate government conspiracy.

But the counter would be to assume everything, or majority aspects of some State-benefiting event are NOT a massive, intricate govt/corporatist Ruling Class conspiracy, a-priori. Which, is equally as presumptuous as assuming everything is a conspiracy.

If one lived in a vacuum of non-existent verifiable history of such? Perhaps, you may have a better position to argue from. But frankly, at this point in history, not to be intellectually lazy, but whenever an event that occurs with odd 'coincidental/circumstantial' timing, that arouses massive 'qui bono?', all the while MSM & Gvt responding to the event constantly change their narratives, obvious omissions, it'd be daft for any critical thinker to start off not suspecting a historically guilty party, aka. corporatists/govt, and exonerate them, a-priori.

I still find it odd, that govt/corporatists are still automatically deserved far more benefit of the doubt than ANY of us, when considering who/what they are, and what they've done, factually, and historically verifiably.

No one gets (or at least should be deserved) any brownie pts. for asserting that govt/corporatists/MSM/sycophants shouldn't be scrutinized, as if to overtly, extremely take a public position that they shouldn't 'automatically be presumed guilty.'

That would be, kinda like if one were to go out of his/her way to presume that a repeat pedophile/rapist/torturer/murderer should NOT be not suspected.

Sure, even the worst among us shouldn't automatically be accused, even with a verifiably bad, bad, baddie, bad, bad history. But, just as in any investigation, it always starts with circumstantial evidence pointing in one direction or another.

And as such, these events? Kinda always seem to involve the Ruling Class, and what benefits 'them.' So why WOULD it be absurd to withhold from them, the benefit of the doubt?

Step 2: Denounce any information presented by a mainstream, non-conspiracy source that directly counters the predetermined conspiracy narrative as corrupt and part of the conspiracy.

Name one MSM that is a "non-conspiracy source."

Oh you mean the more-opinionated-than-Faux'News' 'news network' MSDNC, the 51% owned by one of the largest military industrial complex contractors, and massive Federal Reserve 0% interest-'borrowing' beneficiary, GE? Rupert Murdoch's FakeNews empire? The AIPAC whorehouse that is Viacom empire? Post Knight-Ridder collapse-McClatchy? The de facto WhiteHouse organ WashingtonPost? Yellowcake Uranium-selling NYT? Gun-hating TribuneEmpire's LAT? Moonie's WasthingtonTimes & UPI? Euro-trash Thompson-Reuters? Election stealing-AP? Neocon WSJ? Ford-foundation lackey Amy Goodman/Democracy Now? The not-so-Pravda, but Pravda RT?

Sorry, who exactly were you thinking of when you stated a "non-conspiracy source"???

Credibility. Kinda high barometer for whom you assess to be trustworthy, no?

So, I'd ask you: what credibility does govt & MSM have at this point?
Even vs. Alex Jones' InfoWars, if assessed truly accurately, 80% of which is nothing more than linking to MSM headlines and exposing their own con via exposing their own narratives.

No, seriously, I'd ask you: what credibility does govt & MSM have at this point?

Step 3: Monitor these same mainstream sources for information that supports the predetermined conspiracy narrative, even if only remotely. Mainstream media reporting mistakes that support your conspiracy (or any conspiracy really) must be treated as rare moments of truth, glimpses inside the Matrix. Any mainstream media reports in favor of the conspiracy should be treated like the word of God. Spam that information everywhere.

So when you look to the same very "mainstream sources" to support your a-priori position that it ISN'T a 'conspiracy,' you mean, you're not doing the same exact thing that you're accusing others of?

So should I assume all your counterpoints, because in essence you're simply sick and tired of listening to others scrutinizing MSM & govt's ridiculous narratives, and whenever you rebut others' statements and claims that you personally feel are wrong, should I characterize your rebuttal as "spam," too?

Step 4: Imagination is the same thing as undeniable fact. There is nothing wrong with manipulating Youtube videos and using Photoshop to edit information to make it more obvious for the stupid sheeple to understand.

Oh, so you mean MSM never photoshop not just to enhance the quality of the image, but the narrative as well? Wow. I must have missed that parallel reality.

What are those "undeniable" facts that MSM & Gvt have offered?

IR pix from MA policestate chopper?

That's just an image of someone caught on their surveillance grid, nothing more; doesn't automatically prove guilt, or should be considered an evidence of guilt.

The dark grainy smartphone pictures that they're now claiming to "clearly" show that the younger one drove over his own brother, when there are countless witnesses claiming that the cops themselves ran him over. To most hilariously, now, the cops claiming that they used an empty SUV to "fool" them.

LOL. Now, we've officially entered the Monty Python-dom. And they (and you and others here) wonder why many of us don't believe ANYTHING that the corporstists/govt/MSM say??

No, really, you mean that "undeniable" unintelligible, grainy, lo-res, constantly narrative changing photos? Those 'evidence'??

Same for arrests. MSM cameras catching a fellow citizen in handcuffs does not equate guilt. Hey, if so, that ricin mailer must too be guilty, no? Oh right, they just cleared him, after ruining his life publicly, forever.

So, you presuming majority of ensuing govt and MSM 'reports' as "undeniable fact," is not "imagining"??

You're simply accepting one type of imagination to be real, while assuming others' assertions to be not.

It's only a matter of perspective on two equally subjective assertions that you personally, nor any of us, have any way of verifying in person, first hand.

So, we're down to assessing what entity has earned a public reputation to be credible and/or trustworthy. And if corporatist Govt or MSM is on that list, one has utter absence of any discernment to speak of, whatsoever.

So what exactly is the difference between what you're countering with, with what you assume others are doing to be the same?

Step 5: Reject the skeptics to the conspiracy theories aggressively. Call them out for being sheep, shills, Cointelpro, paid agents, et cetera. Do not ever doubt yourself, because if you think they are any of these nouns, then it is undeniably true. After all, the conspiracy theory you are trying to wake the world up to is a fact. Only a sheep would think otherwise.

Because all BS need to be scrutinized aggressively. No different than what you believe is BS, too.

So, what's the difference between what you're doing, and what you claim others are doing? It's just one faction thinking you're telling BS, and the other faction telling you to be doing the same.

Step 6: Bring up the founding of the Federal Reserve, the Bay of Pigs, The Gulf of Tonkin, and other well known deceptive schemes by the government often (every conversation if need be.) These actions were confessed by government, therefore every other conspiracy theory is true!

Yes, let's ignore historical facts. Why not? And, let's ridicule the fact that someone would dare bring up historical fact of govt-sponsored false flags and diversions as a pretext for more sinister ensuing events, to make a factually based premise to start debating from. Because you know, one has far more credibility if one DOESN'T cite historical basis to make his/her assertions. Yup, that makes so much more sense than citing actual verifiable historical fact as a starting point of discussion.

NOT.

All of this comes down to credibility and a societal delusion and faith in institutional liars, thieves, and murderers.

So... why SHOULDN'T reminding people of past documented events that illuminate who the real culprits were/are, be a starting premise to doubt those very institutional actors?

On any other subject matter, that would be called applying common sense, based on historical realities. No?

It's called prudence, and often jurisprudence.

Step 7: Cite declassified documents often, as they are invaluable. If the government reports that a secret program was started and ended 60 years ago- DO NOT BELIEVE THEM. The secret programs for sure are still occurring and are now more massive, sinister, and successful than before.

Again, credibility.

What credibility do murderers, rapists, and thieves have?

You'd actually be foolish to assume that they ARE telling the truth.

So why would you merely accept them at their word when they claim the likes of COINTELPRO, Op. Mockingbird, and MKULTRA has ended, when we're frankly drowning it its aftereffects, even now?

You mean you don't know that SPLC is the de facto privatized arm of FBI's COINTELPRO? You mean you honestly don't know that MSM still have govt minders on their editorial staff, and often an anchor, as in the case of Anderson Cooper, Mr. CIA himself? You do know that he actually graduated from the Farm, right?

With time things evolve and get fine-tuned. So, why wouldn't anyone at least weigh the possibility that such programs are "now more massive, sinister, and successful than before," especially when we live in a reality where DoD 'loses' $2.4 TRILLION into BlackOps/off-books budget, and CIA traffics drugs to fund their operation?

Why yes, it'd be prudent to assume they've stopped funding and fine-tuning those programs. Because that makes so much more historically plausible sense, than NOT assuming they used all those stolen funds to shore up their age-old programs.

Um, no.

So if you're assuming anyway, either way, while it'd be prudent to not assume at all, but if one were to logically extrapolate, wouldn't a clearly more likely historically proven trajectory be the more intelligent geopolitical assessment?

Step 8: Remember that most of witnesses and victims involved in conspiracy event are actors. Medical examiners, emergency responders, the police, reporters, they are almost all in on it. The innocent people caught up in the conspiracy were either killed or have been threatened by the conspirators and are too afraid to come forward (or they possibly never existed to begin with.)

Now this one, I whole-heartedly agree with you on. This current phenomena of calling everyone and anyone an 'actor' has a SINGLE point of origin: DallasGoldBug, aka WellAware, aka, convicted felon Ed Chiarini, an 'Anti-NWO Johnny-come-lately.'

But sometimes, crisis 'actors' are, crisis actors, ie. E. Howard Hunt.

Step 9: Blitz the world with the truth until everyone deletes you on Facebook or you are banned from your favorite web sites. Lay low for a period, regroup at your favorite alternative web sites, get encouragement and reinforcement from the other awakened truth seekers, and start the process all over again with a new conspiracy.

Never done it, don't have FaceBook, nor ever posted on it, so don't care, and personally wouldn't know.

But, how is that unlike anything most internet users do on social-media, again?

It all basically comes down to, WHAT topic one likes/prefers to spend time on, or approves of.

Granted, the level of 'evangelism' and fervor may differ on non-geopolitical matters, but how is that any different than anyone wanting to spread a meme, that 'evangelizing' individual likes, be a new movie, some 'great' new brand of tooth brush, good eats, great restaurants, particular gun model, cars, girls, tv series, etc.?

I personally find that most people I've encountered on or offline only apply 'annoyance-quotient' on non-pop culture items, to the level of degree that some express to detest.

I doubt you'd respond with the same level of public declaration of annoyance, if someone commented "Game of Thrones SUCKS!" on your FaceBook account repeatedly, even to the point of being banned.

LOL. Then again, since I don't know you personally, perhaps you would.

Well I assert that, only because pop-culture items are of pure individual subjectivity and preferences.

The issues maligned as "conspiracy theories" have real-world geopolitical consequences, and often personal, when it comes to the post-9/11 policestate policies, and something that locally entropy like the UN Agenda 21, and the ever ubiquitous Federal Reserve.

Personally, the fact that many do in fact have an almost autonomic visceral repulsion response to discussing some of these type of topics (that one would almost never observe equal displeasure with equal severity as expressed on irrelevant pop-culture topics), has always been a source of personal bemusement for me.

But, I 'get' it: ALL geopolitics and politics are, in fact, personal.

Whatever the response, it says more about the person reacting, than the person who merely posits a question, or a public query; like all political and geopolitical issues, people do not take kindly to, what they perceived to be, attacking their own personal worldviews.

So, in essence, I posit that you're not really pissed off that you deem some here to be incessantly blindly spamming you with nonsense, unproven, presumptuous 'conspiracy theories.' You're simply annoyed that you subconsciously believe that they're attacking your own worldviews. Otherwise, why the 'need' to overtly project your displeasure, so strongly, so publicly?

But, to be honest, I don't blame you: if I felt strongly about something, I may publicly do the same, just as I AM doing already, by replying you pt. by pt, in rather somewhat long-winded verbose manner! LOL ;O)

So, I gather that deep down, you may believe that the 'conspiracy theorists' are attacking your worldview, just as ANYONE outside of the R3VOLution would feel, when we discuss or bring up topics of concern most commonly debated here, on 'their turf,' like at the astroturf-'libertarian' portals like Glenn Beck's the Blaze, or Fcuker Carlson's TheDailyCaller.

That, is really the source of your annoyance, and the point of departure for your derision, no?

Be that as it may, I find it more troubling that these 'pro/anti-conspiracy theorist' discussions even NEED to be had, at the Daily Paul of all places...5yrs+ later, at this juncture in history.o(

In simplest terms, we ALL are individually a Cargo Cultist...about some things, some of the time (not excluding myself).

Humans are inherently subjective beings; none of us can 100% factually state that we're being objective, about anything.

I'd submit that diversity and range of an individual's experiences/encounters/interactions with various professions/other professionals/works/other individuals, life's lessons learned, various catharses, discernment skills honed, are some of what determine how we respond, analyze or look forward/extrapolate based on all those factors.

That said, I do not discount the depth of the legitimacy of the origin of your personal sentiments and displeasure, as expressed here.

Also, the part of your reason maybe that, as I too hold DailyPaul dear, you don't want to see DP go in a direction you feel uncomfortable with.

Ditto that.

But, what or who (other than the proprietor Mayor Nystrom) determines what that said range of 'comfortable direction' may be, when everything here always seems to be in flux, and topics discussed here range widely (as all spontaneous order tend to do), as diverse as the DailyPaul and R3VOLutionaries themselves?

In closing, I'd posit that it may just be the fact that this site began around a specific political campaign of Dr. Paul whose supporters views already encompassed a wide range of geopolitical and cultural topics, but it's become less topical of what may be interpreted as 'Dr. Paul's issues of concern,' to more reflective of diversity of ours.

I don't believe I'd be wrong to argue that the Daily Paul began, initially, to help get Dr. Paul elected in 2008, and spread relevant ideas as widely as possible with activism at the core.

And, frankly post-TWO election cycles, yes, the site does seem to have been consumed with other current events. And, for now, the one that seems to be on everyone's mind is the Boston Bombing, for all the obvious reasons: uh, like it happened last Monday, and as we've seen post-9/11 and Sandy Hook, govt a-holes always exploit such to bring forth and 'legitimize' more daily policestate tyranny.

Now, just imagine, if DailyPaul started on September 1st, 2001: you'll be drowning in 'conspiracy theories'!!! LOL. In fact, you won't be able to escape it!

Frankly, a lot of us have always put politics as a tool and platform, in context. But now, NOT out of apathy, but as a not-so-grand-catharsis, and not-so-unobvious-realization: many of us do not view politics as ANY engine of change, other than as Dr. Paul himself displayed so elegantly, a platform to amplify great ideas that were not heard broadly, previously.

It's only a tool, not a goal.

I do 'get' that while Dr. Paul has many voluntaryist philosophical leanings, along with many colleagues and friends who ARE voluntaryists, he himself is not an AnCap, yet.

Ironically though, even having followed his work since 2003~2004, I actually BECAME a voluntaryist, BECAUSE of Dr. Paul, post-2007! LOL!

So, my dearest Gray Champ, Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul, Dr. Paul the Elder, it's ALL your 'fault!'

LOL.

Personally I see no 'saving' anything.

I honestly used to think there was a chance that we can 'restore' the Republic, in the interim.

But, as currently observed, if continued on current Federal Reserve and domestic policestate and international warfare trajectory, a global currency collapse is a mathematical inevitability, period. As if, most of us don't know that, already. Well, at least I'd like to think most here are aware of that.

Besides, if we the R3VOLutionaries really were concerned as to move in some voluntarily agreed upon 'cohesive' direction, I'd posit that one of the best SOLUTIONS out of this mess, would be to focus on figuring out and applying daily to get there, what I personally call "thriving" post-collapse, ie. all the vibrant agorist leaning movements already being discussed heavily here: perma-culture, survival techniques, prepping, honing/living with/applying daily tactical and survival skills, alternative currency/barter, parallel econ models, renaissance of the soul, etc.

Speaking, again, personally, I just see all publicly expressed displeasure and qualms with this current set of 'conspiracy theories' as you label it, as a timely focus: simply because that is what is happening now.

That said, while it may simply be part and parcel of growing pains, I'm personally saddened and dismayed: I just don't see WHY all of this dissension among us have to spin out of control to the point of almost being vindictive.

I'm not accusing you of being vindictive with this thread, because it really isn't, but as a whole, there have been some recent nasty exchanges between many members here; I personally just don't like seeing brothers and sisters and cousins and other relatives and friends fighting at family picnic, with such venom .o(

Years ago, I've never seen even an iota of name calling like "you're a moron! Idiot! Asshat!" The worst I ever observed were calling someone a "TROLL!" But now, I just see way too much vindictive name-calling. Granted, some truly do deserve it, and I've done my share when such mommy-basement dweller's level of name calling was first initiated against me, but never would I ever personally initiate name-calling those who disagree with me, and never vindictively (unless rarely truly warranted, just enough for P0wnage to make a point, for them to stop).

Worse, a couple months ago a new breed of noobs joined to initiate unnecessary, uncalled for, vindictive cycle of infighting among libertarians and Constitutionalist, when we ALL got along just fine before, as if 'libertarianism' itself is some ghastly idea, of all places here at DP.

Then, came pitting paleo-conservatives/Constitutionalists, then somewhere between Randpocalpyse/Mutt WRONGney-endorsement and Gary Johnson came the Jack Hunter/Austin Petersen/Rand Paul-Republicans pitting themselves against...well, what seemed like everyone else, here! LOL.

Then, a whole new breed of newbies wanting to purge AnCaps/voluntaryists/agorists .o(

Yikes!

And now, the 'I know Ron Paul used to be ridiculed by the sheeple, neoCons, and MSM as a "conspiracy theorist" for constantly talking about the Federal Reserve machinations for over 40yrs, to regularly citing CFR, John Birch Society, North American Union/Amero, and going on the Alex Jones Show almost once every month, like clockwork, for over 14yrs. But now that he's a household-name and with Rand's 2016 POTUS prospect looming, and because to a certain degree, now those ideas have already entered the populist political discourse, I don't want to 'make the liberty movement look bad' by talking about other "conspiracy theories" because I don't feel like having to explain myself, again, to a bunch of morons'-unnecessary guilt and self-policing, translated into wanting to purge the last 'extreme remnants' within the Ron Paul R3VOLution and the liberty movement as a whole: the "_________ Truthers"!!!

LOL, you guys kill me!

er...er...actually, you guys are killing me.o(

As the world's foremost philosopher Rodney King once said: Why can't we all just get along??

With Love and Peace, Del. With Love and Peace.

Predictions in due Time...
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zGDisyWkIBM

"Let it not be said that no one cared, that no one objected once it's realized that our liberties and wealth are in jeopardy." - Dr. Ronald Ernest Paul

You have accurately described GovCorp Inc

a repeat pedophile/rapist/torturer/murderer

Michael Nystrom's picture

The only thing I would change is the title

I would just add one word:

How to think and debate like a bad conspiracy theorist.

Otherwise, you pretty much hit the nail on the head.

conspiracy snobs

Vinceableworld (if that is really your name) I agree with you, is that shocking? Seriously, I applaud you for standing up and getting your ass kicked by everyone. I know it isn't much fun and you probably prefer to be doing something else.

First allow me to preface with- "I don't agree with much of the conspiracy talk on this site, I never have" Actually during Ron Paul's bid for the nomination I selfishly wished most of it would go away so I didn't have to endure the "tin foil hat wearing Paulbot" comments every time I demonstrated support for Ron Paul. If there was ever a time to censor conspiracy talk I might have understood that rational. Fortunately that did not happen then, unfortunately it is happening now.

What you are saying is spot on, many people here are essentially being shut down, or shutting themselves down because they are afraid of being attacked or worse banned. While I agree people should exercise a certain amount of sense when engaging in fantastical theory, I don't think members should be attacked for asking questions...or LOOKING FOR ANSWERS.

I think this site has proved that common sense does most times prevail. If an idea is too far out there it will die of attrition over time, organically.

We live in a crazy world where nothing is as it seems, suggesting that there are planes that crisscross our skies, dumping chemicals on us and blocking out the sun has for years been met with intentional ridicule. Most people refuse to even mention it for fear of being called a wacko bird...so it continues and we all suffer.

It's a crazy world. People are going to have crazy questions.

First off... I don't have a name :)

I choose to call myself "vinceableworld" when I'm online. My friends call me Vince or Vincent.

Seriously, I applaud you for standing up and getting your ass kicked by everyone. I know it isn't much fun and you probably prefer to be doing something else.

I get maybe one or two comments a year from people who are enlightened enough to actually see through the emotional crap and actually grasp what I'm after. The truth is not popular. One who searches for truth is not going to be very popular. I can't tell you how much it means to me that someone actually RECOGNIZES that sacrifice every once in a while instead of beating me up for it.

Yes I would prefer to be homeschooling my children on my farm someday growing food for people... I'd like to help give the homeless a hand up to get back on their feet.

You are SPOT ON this comment and I too was telling the truthers (I am a truther and still was then) to CHILL OUT so we could possibly get Ron into the White House. There were plenty of LAME stream things that we would be able to win on... just the FED information would have put us over the top.

I think we might have had a better chance if some were not selfishly focused on 9/11 and needing instant gratification instead of looking at the big picture and realizing if we don't get someone to follow the LAW elected then we can scream about 9/11 all we want and it won't do us any good... short of some PAG (Private Attorney General) stepping up in court and prosecuting the culprits themselves.

Just like Romney's campaign said "we can go right after the primaries" we the conspiracy theorists should be toning it down A LOT when we're backing up a potential candidate that could ACTUALLY GET US SOME ANSWERS IF ELECTED!

Vince if I may

I totally recognize your effort. Thank You.

Some peoples idea of proof is

Some peoples idea of proof is a pretty low bar. If someone starts a post off with "This is my theory and here is why I come to this conclusion" that can be respected as an opinion. When someone states I have proof (here is a blurry photo that I have no idea who took the photo or who has handled it before it got to me. That is a very low bar.

I really dislike when folks are accusing named people of being part of a crime with no proof or first hand knowledge. Please think twice before you spout off about another human. Saying the government did something is far different than naming individuals. Really in the end it takes creditability away from those crying wolf with know actual proof.

Michael Nystrom's picture

Excellent points

I fell victim to fingering the wrong person on Thursday night as the suspect. I had it right at the top, on the front page of the DP, that Sunil Tripahi was the bomber, and the shooter engaged in the firefight with police.

The only evidence I had was that everyone was saying it on twitter that night, and they said it came off the police scanner.

I put that at the top of the front page on Friday morning at 3:00am, and when I got up five hours later, everything had changed.

I feel pretty terrible about that. Here is an article about the family's anguish over that:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/sunil-tripa...

And today, they've pulled a body from the river that they think might be his:

http://www.boston.com/metrodesk/2013/04/23/providence-police...

Personally, I hope it is not - that that kid has 9 lives, and he's still alive.

But to go back to the points I made in other comments here:

- NOT ALL CONSPIRACY THEORIES ARE CREATED EQUAL
- TO COLLECTIVIZE ALL CONSPIRACY THEORIES / THEORISTS IS WRONG

What you say in your second paragraph is absolutely true, and I'm guilty of what you describe. Sometimes it takes making a mistake in order for one to see the horror of the error and its impact.

Thank you.

Just read it was Mr. Tripahi

Just read it was Mr. Tripahi in the water. RIP. Condolences to the family.

You never cease to amaze me Michael.

It takes a big man to admit a mistake.

I have your back to the bitter end (unless God forbid Bill Gates buys you off with a billion dollars to pushed forced vaccinations on us).

Aiding and Abetting

Lending moral and material support to the enemies of Liberty both foreign and domestic, is exactly what it is, even if those who do it choose to believe in the lies that cover it up.

As simple as can be said, competitively, so that even a child of 5 can understand:

A few people BORROW money from many people and then those few people claim that they have the legal power to LEND the money they just BORROWED, but that is not all, since those same few people then SPEND the stolen POWER, creating National Debt, and then the Lenders of Last Resort are convinced of their need to pay off that National Debt complete with National Interest compounded daily.

Now a child may have a hard time with that sentence in English.

Look in the mirror to find a child?

The combination of Conspiracy with Theory is a product invented by someone having an intent to employ that product to reach a goal.

Stupefy the targeted victims, and the targeted victims will remain victims.

An innocent child can see how lies work, as the liar on the playground demands a transfer of something held dearly in the hands of the innocent child, as the liar claims to own the thing held dearly in the hands of the innocent child.

Matter of fact.

The innocent child holds something dearly, and the liar arrives on the scene claiming to own the thing held dearly by the innocent child.

The innocent child knows it is wrong in fact.

"Give it to me, it is mine." The liar dictates the lie to the innocent child.

And these so called adults look in the mirror and find very well paid liars.

Good luck with that, as you continue to find whatever lies work to keep the power flowing from those who are innocent, those who actually produce anything worth stealing, to those who invent, produce, and maintain the lies, those same people who collect that National Debt.

And while you are at it, know that your gravy train ends, and it is your turn eventually, to return to that state of accurate perception, like the child on the playground, faced with the certain knowledge that it is evil to give the bully any more power, as that bully will certainly destroy all, innocence, anything of value, eventually, on that Long Black Train.

Joe

You didn't quite say the "T" word but I'll say it for you...

Aiding and Abetting

Lending moral and material support to the enemies of Liberty both foreign and domestic, is exactly what it is, even if those who do it choose to believe in the lies that cover it up.

...otherwise known as TREASON... but I wouldn't sweat to much about committing treason nowadays seeing as everyone is doing it...

My viewpoint

Probably not your viewpoint, but my viewpoint is such that there are at least two types of people that are generally constructed by those same people as those people think and act, and those thought and actions define these categories.

In other words, I do not place these people in these two general categories.

1.
Honest productive people

2.
Dishonest destructive people

The concept of TREASON, so named, is not the same concept according to those people who place themselves in the first group when compared to the concept of TREASON, as defined by those people who demonstrably volunteer to be in the second group.

An example of a definition of TREASON being defined by someone in the first group, to me, is found here:

http://www.lewrockwell.com/orig4/spooner1.html

Example:

"Moreover, no body of men, existing at any one time, have the power to create a perpetual corporation."

I hope that we two can negotiate an agreeable understanding of what is meant by that word TREASON.

Joe

Michael Nystrom's picture

Dumb post

I'm concerned there are possibly some conspiracy theorists who are beginning to self-regulate what they say

Good. They should. It doesn't do "conspiracy theorists" or anyone any good to spout off without self-regulating what they say.

Some 'conspiracy theories' are logical, intelligent and well thought out.

Others are hysterical, irrational, emotional, riddled with logical inconsistencies, and could be debunked by a child.

People would be wise to self regulate, and not spew the latter as "PROOF!" Conspiracy theorists would also do well not to call their theories - no matter well thought out - "proof." I applaud those who self regulate in this manner as well. Count me among the self regulators.

Not all theories are created equal. That being the case, self regulation is a virtue.

Michael Nystrom's picture

Another reason this is a dumb post

Again, you collectivize instead of looking at people as individuals. You lump all "conspiracy theorists" and "anti-conspiracy theorists" together.

As I said above, not all theories are created equal.

I am anti-dumb conspiracy theories. Some people are so paranoid here they see a conspiracy in everything, even when it is not there.

Don't collectivize.

I am far from the sharpest

I am far from the sharpest nail in the bucket yet, I can see, very clearly, how important Not grouping Individuals is to liberty. Ron Paul was able to pound that message through!

Off topic. Not sure you can speak about it. Did the lawsuit settle or end?