-11 votes

Delysid's Guide to Thinking and Debating Like a (bad) 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.




Comment viewing options

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

Anti-GM fanatics are using this system as well.

Any scientific that defends the safety of genetic engineering is immediately rejected without consideration. Mainstream media reports about GMOs are spammed everywhere. When government authorities, who are essentially universally incompetent and scientifically illiterate, ban the technology, they are cheered.

A perfect example is the claim that "GM crops are killing the bees."

Evidence supporting this accusation is scant and weak. Contrary to this, there are dozens of independent studies that consistently demonstrate genetic modification and major herbicides as posing no threat to bee colonies.

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18183296

Of course if you only read alternative media you would think the claim is the most undeniable fact in existence because of hw often the anti-GM propaganda is repeated.

People who post obvious observations like "widespread colony collapses were documented decades before the use of pesticides and over a century before genetic engineering" and "colony collapse is occurring in GMO free regions" are downvoted to oblivion.

WHEN COMMON SENSE CONTRADICTS CONSPIRACY SPECULATION THE USE OF COMMON SENSE MUST BE STOPPED

Dude, did you just cite a Monsanto study?

I truly would like to see the independent studies you speak of. It might really help your case to get a post up with links to all of them so that we may go and evaluate them.

The first thing I do when I evaluate a study is look to see who the author is, and where they got their funding. Was it from a foundation who has stated goals to socially engineer and/or reduce the human population? If so, how does their research benefit them in those goals?

The link you just gave has the following as the authors:

A meta-analysis of effects of Bt crops on honey bees (Hymenoptera: Apidae).
Duan JJ, Marvier M, Huesing J, Dively G, Huang ZY.
Source
Ecological Technology Center, Monsanto Company, St. Louis, Missouri, USA.

So Monsanto says that it's multi-billion dollar patented seed industry is safe for bees because its says so, huh? I'm sure they're as honest as the day is long (roflol).

Look at the studies in the meta-analysis.

Do you prefer studies funded by GreenPeace? (seralini). Do you trust studies by the EPA and FDA?

Monsanto sells genetically modified crops that depend on bee pollination. They sell herbicides (which are not being implicated colony collapse.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pesticide_toxicity_to_bees

I would only be able to

I would only be able to upvote this topic once if not for the fact that I'm a paid shill disinfo agent sent to upvote neocon topics. Because of that, I can have my co-minions at the cointelpro office upvote this all day.

hehehe...I love this.

I knew it was all over when my FoxWatchingUncle starting referring to people that didn't agree with his FOXNews perspective as "The Sheeples".

Very creative Delysid. :-)

hm.

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

Epic reply

I totally get the cut of your jib. After spending the last three years reading verifiable, but untaught and unpublicized history, I agree that you've got to be naive to assume whatever the MSM (owned by six corporations whose directorships overlap ... anyway) media says is the gospel truth. Alternately, you can't believe everything you hear on the internet, a take off on what my dad used to tell me -- just because it's in a book, doesn't mean it's true.

Nothing quite rocked my world like the Antony Sutton Wall Street trilogy. Right down to the receipts and the State Dept cables, he shows how JP Morgan and pals used our government infrastructure as their mule. Pancho Villa was a paid provacateur.

Also very enlightening was the Reece Committee hearings, which illustrate how the Elite pass their money for social engineering and their own brand of "science" through their foundations. This model is still in operation and instructive for those wishing to gain a mature understanding of the way our country is truly run and where the influence of us ordinary citizens actually lies.

I think a lot of people really do get excited when they've uncovered or think they have anyway, some of this stuff on their researching journey. Like you said, some people are into pop culture, others are into what the real bottom line on history and politics really is. We can't help it that these power hungry psychos are into super weird stuff that you couldn't make up if you tried.

why thank you;o)

All children should be so lucky to have such an informed parent, as per your avatar's eponymous sakes.O)

Because sources cited and discussions prompted on this list: http://therepublicanmother.blogspot.com/p/my-own-personal-x-...

are absolutely awesome. you've laid it out pretty brilliantly!

Which is why, it's all the more saddening to see the latest batch of 'dividers' be they real or trolls, here at DP of all places, whom obviously have not done as much real research as you've exhibited, attempting to 'purge' ridicule/shame/guilt other members in a feckless, futile attempt at getting them to abandon questioning anything outside of the MSM narrative; AS IF, people who come to the conclusion about the Evils of the Corporatist State, who've researched long and deep enough to realize the reality of what their mechanism of control, the Federal Reserve, and mass social engineering projects, are all about, would be so shallow and pathetic as to be 'guilted' into abandoning geopolitical worldviews/realizations that each individual has evolved to learn, after much internal reflections, catharses, and examining various personal awakening along the way, in getting to that point.

Frankly, I hate to say it, but a lot of people here whom I used to consider 'awake' reacted the exact same way with the Boston bombing, the way that many of my friends did in NYC, ON 9/11; I was watching it across the Hudson on that day; I could smell the overwhelming 'aroma' of burnt flesh, mixed in with debris dust.

Because when an event is not merely an 'event,' but you become part of the event, it hits home 'too close for comfort,' for those who live in close proximity to/near by, and/or with family/friends/coworkers nearby, the immediate overwhelming impact of being at or near 'ground zero,' the psychological expediency to maintain a semblance of normalcy outweigh their traditional critical thinking operative paradigm.

When I saw WTC7 fall, LIVE on TV, in the afternoon of 9/11, after public knowledge that no plane hit WTC7, I KNEW it was 100% controlled implosion!

Not to mention, the fact that I've been questioning all morning and leading into the afternoon of WTC7's fall, how two of the tallest buildings in the world could also implode onto its footprint perfectly, almost at freefall when Jr. High School Physics 101 dictates that accumulating debris with each ensuing floor would 100% slow the rate of fall.

But what truly 'hit me'-hit me that day, to prove to me beyond a shadow of a doubt that a full-on PsyOp were unfolding before my eyes, in Amerika?

There was one burly, trying-too-hard-to-come-off-like-a-'typical all American 'biker' dude' who came off the street to be 'interviewed' on FakeNews, who literally looked like a FBI cut-out pretending to go undercover; he wore a black T-shirt with Harley Davidson written on it, but incredibly decided he was a controlled demolition expert, without substantiating any professional bona fides nor any specialty expertise gravitas whatsoever, he immediately posited on camera, no kidding, paraphrased almost word for word:

Well, you know the building must have fallen like that so smoothly, because you know: obviously due to office fire, and each floor must have collapsed like pancake!

That, was immediately after the building fell, and one douchebag comes off a Manhattan street, on FakeNews and regurgitates the ENTIRE 100% govt propaganda line of "pancaking" collapse, before there ever were a press conference pushing the meme?

Like seriously??

They expect me to believe that, that was 100% coincidence and NOT an obvious attempt at front-loading a PsyOps meme via NLP on TV for the world to see when the 'peons' are scared to death, especially emotionally charged/heightened-state looking for any and all reasons to explain away what they're seeing/what they're watchinging unfold LIVE on their TV??

Right.

Then I actually remembered the X-Files spin-off The Lone Gunmen pilot episode, of the same exact drill.

I was like: 'You've got to be shiiting me! I can't be the only one who could spot something this obvious! Americans will NEVER fall for something this obvious, especially not after JFK!'

Boy, was I wrong. Though, to be fair, the expectant percentage of population that will always be awake, no matter during what epoch, during what era, no matter how good or terrible: the 10%+ of any given population, does seem to be catching up.

Of course in my most loftiest moments of innocent optimism, I hope (for whatever that's worth) about 30 million Americans are awake. When I truly day dream though, I hope that number balloons to 35% of the 310 million American souls. LOL... hey, but you never know.

As a saying made famous by A Tale of Two Cities goes, indeed:

It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness, it was the epoch of belief, it was the epoch of incredulity, it was the season of Light, it was the season of Darkness, it was the spring of hope, it was the winter of despair...

Calm before the Storm... Phase 3??

So...which exit ramp will the Human species willfully choose to take? Stay tuned... .o)

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

Well said!

Thank you for taking the time write this response.

quite

welcome.

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

Thanks for the long response.

I read this 3 times trying to decipher the point(s)you were trying to make, and frankly it just made me confused and my headache worse. I understand and agree with most of your sentiments in the second half of this response, but you made so many incorrect assumptions about my beliefs in your critique of my post that I can't/won't break them down.

I was mocking the paranoid lunatics who take every situation and turn it into an alarmist conspiracy theory. My mockery of their behavior does not mean that I am the polar opposite. I despise the government and the media conglomerates. I do not trust them nor take their side (pretty much ever). I am just an individual trying to counter the ridiculous fallacies I'm observing on all fronts.

why thank you,

as for: " but you made so many incorrect assumptions about my beliefs in your critique of my post that I can't/won't break them down. "

If you read my reply, with a "narrative flow" in mind, I'm not stating or asserting that you ARE saying x, y, z. However, what I was trying to communicate was that within the context of a given narrative flow and examples given, where I speak AS IF you're saying x, y, z, premised upon the initial point of contention as you asserted in your "9 steps," and thus based on my counterpoint to your points, I proceed to extrapolate within the line of same logic used to make your assertions, as cited in your '9 steps.

LOL...er...yeah, that makes perfect sense to me, too! xD


http://youtu.be/TexL-eyZHzo

Yup, but no worries. Tell me about it; the forum's reply format and my writing style is such, EVEN I have to read my own verbosity multiple times to keep track of it, and to clarify my own train of thought!

it's a verbal jungle in there, man!

but I hear ya, I know exactly where you're coming from.

"I was mocking the paranoid lunatics who take every situation and turn it into an alarmist conspiracy theory. My mockery of their behavior does not mean that I am the polar opposite."

- and I agree, that is exactly the 'sense' I had of your thread.

But frankly, the way I see it, at this juncture in history, I see no historical evidence to NOT assume govt/corporatists to be guilty, until proven 100% innocent. Even as bad as any presumptive dialectic posture maybe though, assuming anything, is usually a bad debate posture.

I just see way too much ridiculously unequal 'benefit of the doubt' given to the Ruling Class side, vs. whenever any of us, 'mere peons' who go on to state or assert based on historical evidence to the contrary.

To me, whenever I now even hear the term "government," can't help but to be reminded of an image of a sociopathic nerd guild of a bunch of thieves, assaulters, kidnappers, pedophiles, rapists, torturers, and murders.

'tis all, folks!

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

I posted this guide as a comment in frustration.

I thought it deserved a thread for itself.

You nailed it! And they

You nailed it! And they wonder why they annoy the living hell out of us "sheeple". Debunk something once in a while! I really enjoyed the part about imagination=truth... most CT's like to believe they are the most "critical thinkers" when in reality they are just reaching for what they want to find, and every time they do that their credibility goes down a few more notches. Great post man!

A nation of sheep breeds a government of wolves.