a reply to: Astyanax
Pardon the delay in responding. Frankly, I will admit to some skepticism about the nature of your repeated request. I suspect there is a sophistic
play at work, and I find it an unnecessary trapping in a real discussion.
What you ask for is, in my humble understanding, a theory which includes a conspiracy... but that there can be no proof; no antecedents, no
correlations... A simple conspiracy theory.... well here's one for you. You.
It's smarmy and pedantic, I know, but you have insisted for a response and I propose that you set out to use this idea of someone offering up any
theory which was identified as a conspiracy theory..., but there can be no one alleging anything or corroborating anything - because that would be
proof of a conspiracy, and thus the theory was not a theory but was instead a fact, thus there was no conspiracy theory
This, I believe is the idea I feel you propose.
A young misguided soldier was entrusted in his duty to secure classified information, he found the information conspiratorial and alarming, so he
"leaked it." His leaked information did shake up some bad folks, but in the end, it mattered not. His was a conspiracy theory; which may or may
not have been true. Does the implied fact that there was no resolution for the conspirators mean there was no theory?
Now, of course, I would have been tempted to comment on the so-called Chemtrail conspiracy, or UFO coverups, or heaven forfend, the Illuminati... just
for the exercise itself... but I don't know that you are actually interested in a discussion of that nature... I just don't get that 'feel' from
In closing, I would urge you to accept that this is not meant as malice, or a nasty thing to say; but to presume that all conspiracy is hatched deep
and dark in some bubble, and isn't observed by anyone prior to it's public discovery seems idealistic and argumentative.