It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Symphony of Conspiracies and Why It's Important to be "Anti-American" (Op/Ed)

page: 5
6
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 09:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043


Conspiracy theory is doing America real harm. Long incubating underground, it has grown into the greatest enslaver of human minds since communism. It irrationalizes thinking on every issue. It kills. It turns millions of Americans against their own country. It undermines foreign policy by vilifying our government's every effort.

- Ira Straus
Christian Science Monitor


I remember that. But I believe it's from "long ago", mid-1990's if I'm correct.

A lot has changed since then... including many "conspiracy theories" coming to pass over the past few years. I wonder what Ira would think today?




posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 09:27 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

I remember that. But I believe it's from "long ago", mid-1990's if I'm correct.


Yes you are right Is from 1996, but the sentiments against conspiracies has not change much.



A lot has changed since then... including many "conspiracy theories" coming to pass over the past few years. I wonder what Ira would think today?


I will like to find out what Mr. Ira is doing right now.



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis

Sadly Grim, I have no argument there.


Yet there is Hope, the conservative ideal is founded and based, for me, on the long standing true American ethic. When men wore hats and their word was good enough.

Please though Grim, don't get me wrong, I am not "for" violence. I just believe that as long as there are evil people out there willing to do violence, that there must be those willing to meet that with violence. Yes, in other words me. But that is my profession after all.

But there has to be more republicans out there. Where are you my brothers?? Oh where are you? HAHAHAHA
Thanks for the support my friend.
Semper


Well I just find it hypocritical of a republican to support violence when violence is being done to them, but then call Malcolm X wrong. I am all for self defense, gun control is stupid. But lets be honest for a moment, how hypocritical are we going to be. America has many acts of hypocracy which need to be corrected. We cannot act suprised if our enemy is merely acting because we acted on them. We may not have done it on purpose but we did act on them. I feel that if any person is at risk for their life, they have every right to defend.

That in no way means I am for pre emptive action. I dont believe a war that is out to get the terrorist before they can commit the act is a just war. Conservative ideals are based in the defense of a nation. We have had our greedy leaders twist it to make us think they meant that we can invade other nations first. The hypocracy now is obvious. I no longer believe the government is the bad guys, they are all puppets now. Corporations are the bad guys. They run this country, and thats why we dont see any changes after we vote, because we aren't attacking the heart of our problems.

I think its not a matter of democrat and republican, but if your in the system or if your a victim of it. You me grover muaddib jsobecky, we are all numbers on a statistic page, so we arent so different after all are we?



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 10:21 AM
link   
I just want to point out clearly that the Us vs Them mindset that is sometimes discussed is really:

Side 1 - Critical of this administration
Side 2 - Not critical of this administration

It's incorrect to assume that Side 1 is 'liberal' and Side 2 is 'conservative'. That's not always true.

I'm hoping to gain confirmation of this statement by taking a poll of ATS members:

politics.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 10:44 AM
link   
Actually I was kind of wrong with my previous post.

The term being used in the title of this Post - Anti-American - is kind of exactly what the Global Elite are looking for! They want to create this giant Divide. They want people to start to endlessly debate this topic, what does anti-american mean, like the majority people in here.

But the Reality is far more Sinister.

For example:


Let's Talk Sense

"Bill Gates is not the 'richest man in the world' by a long shot. His 50 billion dollar fortune (give or take) is virtually nothing compared to the wealth and economic power of the House of Rothschild. Baron Jacob Rothschild (who controls the Rothschild banking dynasty) is owed approximately half of the U.S. national debt (which is now some 6 trillion dollars) because the privately-owned Rothschild Bank and its proxies have a 51 percent ownership and controlling interest in the U.S. Federal Reserve System; and this 3 trillion dollar amount obviously does not even include the debt that many other nations ultimately owe to the Rothschild banking network. The interest payments alone provide the Rothschild Bank with 100 billion dollars per year. The reason that the Rothschild dynasty remains generally obscure to the public is because virtually all of their assets are privately-owned and they are very carefully protected from public scrutiny by various ways and means. It has been estimated that the House of Rothschild, directly or indirectly, controls a very substantial portion of the 35 trillion dollars in total overall spending power that exists in the world today."

So - it looks like to me, that Baron Jacob OWNS America.

I think people of America should start to become Anti-Rothchild.

Again we come to MONEY.

Money rules this world - not America.

And people who are critical towards America, are actually kind of wrong, since she is only but a Tool, a Vessel of the Global Elite, the Big Banking Lords and Barons, who own basicly hald of the planet - the 450 richest people in the world have financial assets equal to the combined wealth of the 3 billion poorest; half of all humanity.

Is that OKEY?


Napoleon

"When a government is dependent upon bankers for money, they and not the leaders of the government control the situation, since the hand that gives is above the hand that takes...Money has no motherland; financiers are without patriotism and without decency; their sole object is gain."

Ineed - Money has NO Motherland; and Bankers and Global Elite have no Moral Values whatsoever! They just care about making More Money and increasing their Profits.

So -

Be Anti-Rothchild!

Be Anti-Rockafeller!

Be Anti-Bilderberg!

Be Anti-Trilateral Commision!

Be Anti-Council for Foreign Relations!

Be Anti-J.P.Morgan!

For they are creating and forming US politics and the politics of the Entire World!

They are the Master-Manipulators, which have been doing that for a Long time!

They have key elements in their pockest: Money and Power.


Thomas Jefferson

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. Already they have raised up a moneyed aristocracy that has set the government at defiance. The issuing power (of money) should be taken away from the banks and restored to the people to whom it properly belongs."

Corporations RUN Everything!

Federal Reserve Bank of America is a PRIVATE CORPORATION!

They are not a Government institution!

And they are MOST Corrupt in the World!

Be ANTI-FRB!

The system is private, conducted for the sole purpose of obtaining the greatest possible profits from the use of other people's money.

Who's Money?

MONEY OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE - the TAXPAYERS!

Only few man run the Show.

As mister Joseph Kennedy, father of John F. Kennedy said:

"Fifty men have run America, and that's a high figure."



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 12:52 PM
link   
Souljah

So true, we in our fight with each others ideologies and believes forget most of the time that that is the way it has been played to make us forget who really play the game and moves the pieces around.

Is nothing done in this world that is not for the benefit of some and not the majority.



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 01:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I just want to point out clearly that the Us vs Them mindset that is sometimes discussed is really:

Side 1 - Critical of this administration
Side 2 - Not critical of this administration


I disagree. While almost everyone is critical of the administration at some given point ro on some issue, there are a number of posters who lump the American people in with the administration, and who actively advocate violence against both. I have provided quotes from my most recent encounter.

Whatever America's many foreign relations screwups, those advocating harm on the average American citizen are simply *wrong*. And not too many people seem to be standing up and making that assertion.

DE



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by DeusEx
there are a number of posters who lump the American people in with the administration, and who actively advocate violence against both.


Yes, these people exist also, but that's not what I was talking about. Those people are few here and they have a right to say what they think. I'm talking about the branding of American citizens as "anti-American" because they don't support the current administration.

I'm not sure what you disagree with, as I don't deny that true anti-Americanism exists.



Whatever America's many foreign relations screwups, those advocating harm on the average American citizen are simply *wrong*. And not too many people seem to be standing up and making that assertion.


Well, I actually don't think it's wrong to hate other people or wish harm on them. That by itself is harmless. It's just thoughts, emotions, wishes. It can't really hurt anyone. But when it turns to action, I do think it's wrong.

Just like the actions taken because of the hatred of Saddam have caused many Iraqis to be harmed and killed and the actions taken because of the hatred and fear of Ahmadinejad will cause many Iranians to be hurt and killed.

And... how many times have we seen advocating of nuking the entire Middle East? Or Iran? Or Israel? It's just talk and feelings. People have a right to it. We may disagree, but that doesn't make it wrong.

And I would never advocate hurting innocent citizens of any nation, but after what's happened over the past 3 years, I can understand why some people feel this way.



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 09:09 PM
link   
I am sick of all this fighting this and fighting that, how about working for something positive instead.



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 09:29 PM
link   
I'm with you Grover.

Too much fighting going on and it really is counter productive.



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 10:16 PM
link   
Newspeak


Originally posted by marg6043
Yes you are right Is from 1996, but the sentiments against conspiracies has not change much.

That's because marginalizing conspiracy theorists is a convenient way to vilify dissent and discourage honest inquiry.

If you don't trust the government, you must be a conspiracy theorist.

And if you're a conspiracy theorist, you must be a psychotic wacko who thinks everyone is out to get you, lives on MREs and civil defense crackers and buys twenty copies of The Catcher In The Rye every time you move to a new neighborhood.

Thus good citizens who are sane and rational don't question the government because if they did, they would have to be crazy.

So let's all be good citizens and never question authority, because that would be un-American.

Newspeak is all about forcing false dichotomies on citizens and making alternative thought impossible.

And now, it seems, it is the official language of modern politics.

George Orwell was a freakin' prophet.



posted on Jun, 15 2006 @ 10:20 PM
link   
lol couldn't have said it better myself Majic, thanks.

Its true, the negative image given to anyone labeled "conspiracy theorist" says alot to the reasoning behind it. If they see you as worth labeling badly and negatively, you must be a threat to them. If your a threat, you must be on to something, thats why we are labeled crazies and paranoid.

Sane people arent paranoid, and only people who are paranoid question the governments intent.



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 04:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Valhall
jsobecky,

If you are calling people "anti-American" or unAmerican because they speak against a policy of the government, or against the administration that is driving that policy - you are not just asking for "both sides to be heard".

I hope you're speaking in the figurative here, Val, because you never heard me call anyone unAmerican just because they speak their piece.


The way "both sides are heard" is for some one to "speak the other side" - not accuse those they disagree with of being treacherous or unpatriotic.

I would love for someone to point out exactly where that is being said.

Back to my question from earlier: Do you not think that terrorists pose a threat to us?



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 04:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by SkepticOverlord

Originally posted by jsobecky
Do you disagree with his assessment? Do you think that terrorism is not a threat to our lives?

Keep in mind the context of where you're asking that question. At the risk of sounding like a "broken record" (over and over again), AboveTopSecret.com is primarily a conspiracy theory website (that has evolved to include a broad spectrum of alternative topics). The answer to that question will have a response here that is unlike the "mainstream" response.

Regardless of whether one is a conspiracy theorist or not, one must be able to state whether or not they think terrorism is a threat to us. Trying to mitigate that by saying that conspiracy theorists look at the world differently is just a cop out.


Our attention to the details of history has taught us that the American government has proven to have collaborated with terrorists, and has planned to pretend to be terrorists to kill innocents and start a war.

Why stop there? Why not acknowledge the fact that this has happened since the beginning of recorded time, and will continue well past our own demise? It's human nature, and railing against that realization won't change a thing.


Nobody is deterring anybody here. We are just asking that all positions be considered.



I'm sorry, but when it comes to critique and analysis of government policy and the speculation of scandal and conspiracy, you're not going to find balance on AboveTopSecret.com... it just won't happen.

Oh, believe me, I've found that to be very much the truth. And it's not limited to "analysis of government policy and the speculation of scandal and conspiracy" either.


The idea of "balance" is a fraud anyway. It continues promote the intellectual rape of this country through the divide and conquer tactics. It promotes the two-sided approach that implies we must pick one side over the other, then sit back and blame the other side for everything that is wrong, and withhold credit for everything that is right.

So, we should let the loudest voice prevail, then. Is that what you're saying? Is a two-sided approach a bad thing?



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 05:13 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
So, we should let the loudest voice prevail, then. Is that what you're saying? Is a two-sided approach a bad thing?


Why have a two-sided approach when we could have a three-sided one? Since when do us middlemen get left out? I don't understand why it is that just because I'm an Independent that I don't count as a side. I prefer to not choose a side other than my own. I like to be the one that encourages compromises on the things that matter.

Can't we all just get along?

TheBorg



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 07:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky
Trying to mitigate that by saying that conspiracy theorists look at the world differently is just a cop out

Not at all. Instead, it places rhetorical questions into the proper context. Asking members of this site what they think of the "terrorist threat" will result in very different answers than the "average person on the street."



Why not acknowledge the fact that this has happened since the beginning of recorded time

You're trying to trivialize and avoid a rather important point. Certainly governance bodies throughout history have a tendency to engage in secretive acts that the populace would not agree with. However, those were almost never "republics" that were founded "for the people and by the people" with aspirations to be different. Very recent history has proven to us that the current people in this administration have been involved with past cooperation with enemies of the state. Very recent history has proven that covert groups within the government have developed details plans to pose as terrorists and attack innocents. When examining our current high-profile clash with terrorist enemies, we cannot deny these very recent events and how they may relate to what's happening now.



So, we should let the loudest voice prevail, then. Is that what you're saying? Is a two-sided approach a bad thing?

No offense but it seems like you can't unwrap your head from the concept of "us versus them". It should certainly not be about the "loudest voice", it should be about all voices. The two-sided approach has been systematically used against us to create a population of equally divided opinion. Each side has been trained to habitually blame the other for anything and everything that is wrong, and withhold credit for anything that is right.

The conspiracy theory writings of the Vietnam era noticed overt manipulative messaging that signaled the first real observations of this strategy. And since that time, it's been an unrelenting barrage... validating many early 1970's predications of an ultimately equally divided nation unable to focus on issues.

The two sided approach is fabricated. It diverts meaningful discussion away from actual issues and focuses attention on the perils of "the other side". In that respect and in this environment, "balance" only serves to perpetuate a fraud... constantly implying there are two distinct sides that need equal representation.

So when I remind people that ATS is primarily a "conspiracy theory" website, it's because there is a massive body of validated evidence and confirmed speculation from past "conspiracy theorists". These topics did not suddenly spring to life on 9/11. The scholarly "conspiracy theorists" of the past 40 years have generally predicted the kind of situation we find ourselves in now... from the divided populace to a mysterious external threat. We can't ignore that writings in our genre have seen this coming.


So with all that in mind... what do you think of Operation Northwoods and the Iran Contra Affair, and how both apply to current events?



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 07:23 AM
link   
Sorry SO,

But you can tell the victims families of the attack on 9/11 that it was a mysterious external threat. I just don't have that kind of gall.

Blaming everything and anything that "you" perceive as "bad", on the government is handy, but delusional. To imagine there is not an "external" threat out there that wants, needs to destroy our way of life is going to get a lot more people killed over here.

I hope it does not spread.

Semper



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 07:35 AM
link   
Actually the victims of 9/11 have every right to blame anybody for their lost while in grief . . . just like anybody that has lost a love one in Iraq in a war that was prepared, pre-planned and executed because interest groups wanted it.

Many people in this time after 3 years of Iraq still believe that was Saddam the one that did the 9/11 deed because that is how has been planned and drilled into American peoples head.

We are fighting a war on terror because 9/11 but how come people never has questioned how this war on terror ended in Iraq?

The greatest conspiracies of this new century so far and we are to stay sitting at home and wave our flags every time the administration claim a victory in Iraq, from creating a new government to killing man number two to killing memebers of an insurgency that was not there before invasion.


And many Americans still fall for it . . . is all in the name of fighting terror and be patriotic and trusting our government.



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 07:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
But you can tell the victims families of the attack on 9/11 that it was a mysterious external threat.

You don't need me... there are thousands of ATS members that have been working that angle for almost five years.


And the "mysterious external threat" is certainly no predictive claim I can hope to make. It's a concept that began in "conspiracy theory" circles soon after the end of the cold war, and was fed by the shift in current events thereafter. I believe the "mysterious" part refers to the nature of the "terrorist threat" as being generally presented as unorganized, decentralized, and exaggerated, rather than unseen or unheard.



Blaming everything and anything that "you" perceive as "bad", on the government is handy, but delusional.

Conspiracy aficionados have been dismissed that way for a long time. I think that my history of commentary on ATS proves I'm a relatively moderate nut, rarely subscribing to extreme theories and always skeptical of the mainstream story... blinders off, critical thinking turned on.

I'm just as convinced there really are Islamic extremists that desire our fiery death as I am that there are groups in our government either promoting that, or taking strategic advantage from that (likely both). History has shown us that the "conspiracy theories" proven to be factual contain key threads of truth and "mainstream story". Just like the very-much-related Northwoods and Iran Contra issues, key truths were manipulated in sweeping conspiracies that involved manipulation of, and cooperation with enemy terrorists.

The probability that is is happening again to some degree is very high. To think that such tendencies have been discarded by our government is just as delusional as it is to think that all conspiracies are true.



To imagine there is not an "external" threat out there that wants, needs to destroy our way of life is going to get a lot more people killed over here.

As you can tell from the above, it's clear I never said nor think that there isn't a dangerous threat "out there" somewhere. But I do think it's not as serious as represented, and the level of manipulated seriousness has been used for strategic gain by those in power.

You can't ignore history... you know what happens when you do.



posted on Jun, 16 2006 @ 08:01 AM
link   
And now there is that foul ho Mr. Ann Coulter smearing the widows of 9/11 all over the place in order sell her new book of bile....talk about shameless. It is people like her and micheal savage who give conservatives a bad name, with them about spewing their toxic wastes all over the place, us liberals don't even have to trash republicans. They may not be offical conservative/republican spokespeople but there are alot who hang on every word they say and it is pathetic and it is obscene. Those people would trash their own mothers and call them anti-american if they thought that they could make a buck from it.




top topics



 
6
<< 2  3  4    6  7  8 >>

log in

join