Which Is It, "Conspiracy Theory", or "Conspiracy Fact"?

Originally posted by ModernAcademia
just wanted to throw in a quick two cents

I don't often like the label conspiracy theorist
the name is changing

it now usually means someone or group of people who just simply chose to think for themselves.

that's the new definition is it not?

Well, I still hear that name, "conspiracy theorist".

Whether we agree with that label or not.

We can survive in spite of it.

reply to post by LadySkadi



That was just beautiful, seriously, very accurate and very clear, now what is the science of conspiracy?, this adds to the mix quite a bit to think on.
S/S&F

Originally posted by Frankidealist35
A conspiracy theory is simply conjecture about what power a group or certain movers have. It's suspicion that's key. It may also just be a questioning of the official line of a story of events. In quite a few cases- conspiracy theories have evidence to back them up- in other cases, mega conspiracy theories have been shown to be a wrong way to analyze events and may be wrong, and when they're wrong we just have to move on.

You are right, or in other words, nothing is proven until proven.

Originally posted by Frankidealist35
A conspiracy fact is when a conspiracy theory has been proven true. Then it becomes an alternative fact- to be dismissed by official historians and to be downplayed in schools. Any mention of it is said to be revisionist history. Usually pro-state historians are unwilling to admit that the state has commited such acts of barbery that it did, so, it calls anyone critical of them a conspiracy theorist... and labels true facts conspiracy theories when in reality it just happens to be the truth.

Yes, and those people are usually shunned by people so blind to knowing the truth, they might as well be speaking to a brick wall.

I have seen the blank-eyed stare of those who know nothing about politics.

Let alone anything having to do with "conspiracy theories".

Originally posted by LadySkadi
To throw a kink in the general conversation... consider this...

Spartan talked about Conspiracy Theory vs Conspiracy Fact and defined the various definitions of "Conspiracy". However, there is yet, no definitions for (remember your science classes here) Hypothesis, Theory, Law (and the words "Fact" and "Proof").

Yes, hypothesis, theory, who, what, where, when, and why.

All important factors.

People often forget that word, hypothesis.

Originally posted by LadySkadi
So, if one falls back on the definitions of science: Hypothesis is an educated guess based on observation. It can be disproven, but cannot be proven to be true. Theory is a summary of Hypotheses that have been supported through testing. Theories are valid so long as there is no evidence to dispute or argue them, but they can still be disproven. They are basically good explanations. Law is to generalize a body of observations and there can be no exceptions to the body of observations at the time the Law was made. Laws explain things, but do not describe them.

Most people have forgotten their science knowledge.

Scientific theory was something I loved in school.

Making more than just a "theory" a theory and proving it.

A novel concept indeed.

Originally posted by LadySkadi
What is a Fact? In science, facts are indisputable observations.

So then, what is Proof? Is it to arrive at a logical conclusion based on the available facts or is it something that can never be wrong? Two very different ideas.

In science, there is no proof if the definition of proof, means absolute truth. There are only facts that have corroborating bodies of observations.

Can these definitions be applied to the definition of Conspiracy "Theory" vs Conspiracy "Fact" and if so, how does that change things?

Food for thought...






[edit on 1-2-2010 by LadySkadi]

Ah, LadySkadi, you do not disapoint.

Food for thought indeed, and I'm going back for a second helping.

I wondered if someone would point that out, as I've never forgotten it.

I think what has clearly been established so far, is that without a working definition of all the parts and pieces to Conspiracy, Theory, Fact and Proof, we will all be operating on our own understanding of said definitions and terms... those will not always match, might not even be similar...

reply to post by HappilyEverAfter

Thanks man, just here to help...

And you have just added more depth to the topic...

we now must come to an understanding of the Science of Conspiracy...

Love it. More food for thought...






[edit on 1-2-2010 by LadySkadi]

Originally posted by HappilyEverAfter
reply to post by LadySkadi

 

That was just beautiful, seriously, very accurate and very clear, now what is the science of conspiracy?, this adds to the mix quite a bit to think on.
S/S&F

HappilyEverAfter, how about that as children we were taught the fallacy of dinosaurs and that their bodies and bones were what crude oil was made from?

I remember that from 7th and 8th grade and thought it was complete crap.

Obviously, after a certain period of time, decomposing flesh is not going to make oil.

I never bought into that lie when it was taught and I just wish I still had those books.

That way I could show them as examples of stupidity being taught in school.

reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas


Abiogenic oil theory, frankly I don't know. I do not possess the required expertise in the fields needed to make an informed decision about what I should believe. There seems to be evidence for both biogenic and abiogenic origins. The problem is my mind where my own ignorance of the intricate details makes me susceptible to suble persuation over hard evidence and these persuations in presence of said ignorance can make it difficult to discern which is persuation and which is evidence.

Surely I have to rely on some level of expert authority. I do not plan on pursuing a degree in all the needed fields.

It is certainly reasonable to hypothesize, based on human frailties, that anyone in control of a commodity would wish to present that commodity as being something of great value. Those washing machines sure gotta appear as though something you just gotta have and there's only limited quantities, so get yours now and it's worth the price; you won't regret it.

Politicizing a question that should be in the domain of curiosity and humble investigation is not the sign of an honest and mature species. The ones in control need the control and the ones not in control have a motive to exploit those in control for their own gain-- to control those who need a sense of control while making them think they have a handle on the truth. All the while an accurate answer to the question is clouded in the minds of those who must depend upon others for those answers. Neither exploiter really cares about doing good science beyond the returns it garners.

An answer that is within grasp on those not possessing arcane knowledge would be to find reserves on planets that conspicuously would not have harbored life. The presence of not only dinausaurs but huge amounts of vegetation is a confounding factor requiring use of more subtle techniques and application of knowledge less accessible to the layman. Sure, it could be a strawman put in place by those with financial interests but it's too late now.

[edit on 2/1/2010 by EnlightenUp]

Very thought provoking thread about the nature of the conspiracy. It is a tangled web, just as the topics we banter back and forth about on a daily basis, here on ATS. Now, as multifaceted as the phenomenon may be, it is still sometimes healthy to have that perception of the current scheme of things, and at other times in can be dangerous.

Sometimes, a conspiracy can have good intentions to show those the facts of a controversial issue that may have been overlooked or forgotten to further illuminate a topic that remains hazy or mysterious. As long as irrefutable facts are presented that can be verified by those posed with the evidence, and that they are compiled from accredited sources who practice and maintain objectivity; I see no harm in forming a conspiracy theory to try and offer an explanation for something that remains skewered and out-of-sync to rational perception.

As long as a conspiracy theory can be independently verified by the person being given the evidence, therefore allowing that person to have a healthy debate within through deductive reasoning; the concept can be very rewarding. Critical thinking should be applied to all aspects of our daily lives, whether, it be religion and its institution, government affairs, politics, science, finance, or any aspect in the wide tangled web in which we call reality. Sometimes, I think critical thinking has taken a backseat to forming judgments on impulse and passion among many of our brethren with out the simple acts of seeing both sides of a story, seeking the facts independently, and of at least questioning what we are told by authority figures, academics, theologians, and scientists. When it boils down, what makes you or I any different than the so called "masters of the universe," do we not have minds as they do to form conclusions ourselves?

Now, where I find conspiracy theories to be dangerous is when they are comprised to deceive and bring about a abrupt conclusion by stoking our primordial instincts rather than stimulating our rational minds. Some examples of where this method may have been used would have been the "Protocols of Zion," Adolf Hitler's indictment of Jews as the scourge to Germany's problems following the First World War which culminated into the Depression which racked the Weimar Republic, the recent Iraq War, and the Global Warming debate followed by other domestic and world affairs. It comes down to presentation, if a charge is made as long is it looks decent, and seems grounded in fact, people tend not to question it because it comes from the MSM, a politician, scientist, or theologian.

They use their own credentials and leadership or status within a population as the foundation to their claims, and with that, people tend to accept it rather than independently seeking the facts on their own to form a conclusion. That is why a level head is a terrible thing to waste, because when we rely on what we are told without at least looking at the information with a critical eye; it can lead to an outcome that can be dangerous to ourselves and others. Sometimes the road to hell is paved with good intentions. As said earlier, very thought provoking thread!

[edit on 2-2-2010 by Jakes51]

Conspiracy Theory or Fact you ask ?

Interesting question and until proven otherwise remains simply conspiracy theory.

In science we are constantly working with the foundation of proving of a theory, and once proven, it becomes a proof.

And every proof at one time was at one point in time, a theory.

As far as conspiracy is concerned.

Without providing pages of definitions, which only tend to obfuscate the simple clear meaning of the word.

Conspiracy, derived from the word conspire, which according to Websters is:
"to plan secretly, an unlawful act".

Do secret and unlawful acts exist ? Theory or otherwise ?

Yes.

Do those guilty of committing these unlawful acts, planned in secret, attempt to maintain their secrecy by discrediting those that question their unlawful acts planned in secret ?

Yes

As a big believer in history repeating itself, I enjoy
Taking a look back at our history, as well as the history of conspiracies and the original conspiracy theorist.

One needs to look no further than a look at the book published in 1798, entitled, Proofs of a Conspiracy, by John Robison.

This book is long out of print, for obvious reasons, but it can be found online.

Proofs of a conspiracy describes the formation of the Illuminati and it's infiltration into the Masonic organization. The Illuminati (or enlightened) and their orchestrating the overthrow of the monarchical system of governance of Europe in the 18th century, beginning with the French Revolution.

Fast forward to today...

What have we today in the United States ?
A partial Dissolution of the United States and it's original system of governance, which was based upon the US Constitution.

Interesting in that the term " Wild Conspiracy Theories", as stated by none other than GW Bush, a known member of a modern day subset or faction of the Illuminati, The Skull and Bones society.

George W Bush, Who also has been quoted as having said" The Constitution is nothing but a God Dammed piece of paper".

These are the words originating from a known member of a "secret" society whom also initiated the promotion of the well known label, by implied Presidential Authority IMA, of "Conspiracy Theorists", as a group confined to the lunatic fringe.

So the question one might ask is, all labels aside, if an unlawful act hasn't been planned and orchestrated by a secret organization, Then why the obfuscation ?

Obfuscation by none other than an individual who's father and Grandfather has also held membership in these secret elitist organizations and coincidentally won their Presidential election by questionable means in the state of Florida. The state of Florida where his own brother, Jeb Bush was Governor ?

The same individual who after being warned of the terrorist threat by FBI director John O'Neil, brought us 9/11 as well as the Patriot Act ? And not to mention two wars for HW Bush's Carlyle Group to profit from ?

John O'Neil , the FBI agent, top counter terrorism expert and executive director of the FBI, who after discovering the truth about Osama Bin Laden and after resigning from the FBI, as a result of his 6 years of investigations into the terrorists were blocked by GW Bush, was killed at his new job as head of security at Kroll associates in the WTC on 9/11 ?

Coincidence, fate or conspiracy ?

All facts originate as theories.
This theory and conspiracy has yet to be proven as fact, but in time, it will.

Originally posted by LadySkadi
reply to post by HappilyEverAfter

 

Thanks man, just here to help...

And you have just added more depth to the topic...

we now must come to an understanding of the Science of Conspiracy...

Love it. More food for thought...






[edit on 1-2-2010 by LadySkadi]

(we have an)
Observation= is an activity of a living being (such as a human), consisting of receiving knowledge of the outside world through the senses.

(we draw from our)
Experience =as a general concept comprises knowledge of or skill in or observation of some thing or some event gained through involvement in or exposure to that thing or event.

(we utilize)
Knowledge= is defined by the Oxford English Dictionary as (i) expertise, and skills acquired by a person through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject.

(we're hindered by)
Ignorance= is the state in which one lacks knowledge, is unaware of something or chooses to subjectively ignore information.

(we travel to)
Parsimony= is the use of the simplest or most frugal route of explanation available.

(we subscribe to a)
Belief= is the psychological state in which an individual holds a proposition or premise to be true.

(some fall victim to)
Delusion = , in everyday language, is a fixed belief that is either false, fanciful, or derived from deception.

(everything is subject to)
Verificationism= is the idea that a statement or question only has meaning if there is some way to determine if the statement is true, or what the answer to the question is.
For example, a claim that the world came into existence a short time ago exactly as it is today (with misleading apparent traces of a longer past) would be judged meaningless by a verificationist because there is no way to tell if it is true or not.

(there are those that inject)
Deception=, beguilement, deceit, bluff, mystification, and subterfuge are acts to propagate beliefs that are not true, or not the whole truth (as in half-truths or omission). Deception can involve dissimulation, propaganda, sleight of hand. It can employ distraction, camouflage or concealment. There is also self-deception.

(there is or isnt)
Acceptance =usually refers to cases where a person experiences a situation or condition (often a negative or uncomfortable situation) without attempting to change it, protest, or exit

(enter the status of)
Doubt= , a status between belief and disbelief.

(enhanced by the feeling of)
Mistrust =is the act of believing that a particular party has a hidden agenda or ulterior motive.

(despite the use or omission of)
Fact =can refer to, depending on context, a detail concerning circumstances past or present, a claim corresponding to objective reality, a provably true concept, or a synonym for reality.

(which can open the thoughts of)
A conspiracy theory =alleges an event and/or events to be secretly influenced by a premeditated group and/or groups of powerful people or organizations working together.

(and then all the horses run wild with, or are managed with)
Imagination = , also called the faculty of imagining, is the ability of forming mental images, sensations and concepts, in a moment when they are not perceived through sight, hearing or other senses. Imagination helps provide meaning to experience and understanding to knowledge; it is a fundamental facility through which people make sense of the world.

(providing or ignoring)
Proof
1. evidence sufficient to establish a thing as true, or to produce belief in its truth.
2. anything serving as such evidence: What proof do you have?
3. the act of testing or making trial of anything; test; trial: to put a thing to the proof.
4. the establishment of the truth of anything; demonstration.
5. Law. (in judicial proceedings) evidence having probative weight.
6. the effect of evidence in convincing the mind.


(all in the quest to find or suppress the)
The Truth
1. the true or actual state of a matter: He tried to find out the truth.
2. conformity with fact or reality; verity: the truth of a statement.
3. a verified or indisputable fact, proposition, principle, or the like: mathematical truths.
4. the state or character of being true.
5. actuality or actual existence.
6. an obvious or accepted fact; truism; platitude.
7. honesty; integrity; truthfulness.

Originally posted by EnlightenUp
reply to post by SpartanKingLeonidas

 

Abiogenic oil theory, frankly I don't know. I do not possess the required expertise in the fields needed to make an informed decision about what I should believe. There seems to be evidence for both biogenic and abiogenic origins. The problem is my mind where my own ignorance of the intricate details makes me susceptible to suble persuation over hard evidence and these persuations in presence of said ignorance can make it difficult to discern which is persuation and which is evidence.

While I concur with your logic, I know as a child and teenager, reading voraciously, this hogwash school was trying to pass off as education did not sit well with me, because I was always reading, researching, and refining my knowledge because of an almost unquenchable thirst for knowledge, and I was rarely able to slake my thirst.

Originally posted by EnlightenUp
Surely I have to rely on some level of expert authority. I do not plan on pursuing a degree in all the needed fields.

I do see your point and while I do not plan on pursuing all of the degrees to back up my knowledge, I do see that I can go find the resources, as I did in my youth when I went to both the school library and three local public libraries, and now I go the three local libraries often, local book stores, and cross-reference all of this online as necessary or desired.

Personally, while I understand and respect people seeking higher learning through college, I as well see it as a huge waste of money because it does not guarantee you a job, and guarantees nothing but a huge bill in the hopes of finding a job because of the sought knowledge.

I can find the same knowledge without the cost, without the hassle of classrooms, and without spending my time on mediocre colleges which jack up a price verses actual cost, just to make a profit.

At a minimal cost I can drive or even walk to my library, peruse books at the local used book store, and or Barnes and Noble.

Going To Your Public Library, Gathering Open Source Intelligence, and Surviving

Originally posted by EnlightenUp
It is certainly reasonable to hypothesize, based on human frailties, that anyone in control of a commodity would wish to present that commodity as being something of great value. Those washing machines sure gotta appear as though something you just gotta have and there's only limited quantities, so get yours now and it's worth the price; you won't regret it.

Ah, supply and demand, and the easily distorted figures in a ledger with bait and switch tactics.

Easily seen through even for the most rudimentary individual if they only seek out the knowledge for themselves, to get past those education levels that are set as low standards.

That is of course if they are not those who only think learning is a requirement of school.

Learning and education is the foundation of our knowledge and should always be built upon daily.

Originally posted by EnlightenUp
Politicizing a question that should be in the domain of curiosity and humble investigation is not the sign of an honest and mature species. The ones in control need the control and the ones not in control have a motive to exploit those in control for their own gain-- to control those who need a sense of control while making them think they have a handle on the truth. All the while an accurate answer to the question is clouded in the minds of those who must depend upon others for those answers. Neither exploiter really cares about doing good science beyond the returns it garners.

That which you have postulated reminds me of one scene from a particular movie, "A Few Good Men”.

A Few Good Man "You Can't Handle the Truth"


And the lines about showing the Code Red in the book verses an implied rule over a written set of rules.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/09bcf3aa11b8.jpg[/atsimg]

It reminds me as well of Oliver North and how I knew he was lying in order to be the scapegoat to fall, impaled upon his own metaphorical sword, to allow Reagan to maintain the office of the President.

[atsimg]http://files.abovetopsecret.com/images/member/ab5e2c8cddec.jpg[/atsimg]

Having a former Vietnam era Marine as a stepfather sure helped seeing through the ruse.

Originally posted by EnlightenUp

An answer that is within grasp on those not possessing arcane knowledge would be to find reserves on planets that conspicuously would not have harbored life. The presence of not only dinausaurs but huge amounts of vegetation is a confounding factor requiring use of more subtle techniques and application of knowledge less accessible to the layman. Sure, it could be a strawman put in place by those with financial interests but it's too late now.

[edit on 2/1/2010 by EnlightenUp]

Yes, I am sure that this ”straw man” tactic works against lesser intelligent individuals.

I had to learn to see this fallacy and the Paper Tiger is yet another metaphor for the same thing.

Odd is it not that this charade works to begin with because of people’s basic lack of understanding?


[edit on 2-2-2010 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

Originally posted by Jakes51
Very thought provoking thread about the nature of the conspiracy. It is a tangled web, just as the topics we banter back and forth about on a daily basis, here on ATS. Now, as multifaceted as the phenomenon may be, it is still sometimes healthy to have that perception of the current scheme of things, and at other times in can be dangerous.

Thank you, Jake51.

I can concur with you about that with a healthy knowledge of the underlying theme we must as well maintain a healthy skepticism, because being too closed-minded, and as well too open-minded causes one to be forced into a fixed position of ignorance.

Being pigeonholed into one way of thinking is about as ignorant to me as people only seeing they have two choices in the matter, with the two-sided coin we call life, head or tails, do not forget there is as well the third side of the coin, the serrated edge, which can cut like a knife and slit your throat if you’re not paying attention, and that there are those among us, usually in places of power, who will use a two-headed coin.

My meaning is of course that the outcome of a certain situation may seem easy to see where two choices are available, but where the game itself is rigged against us.

An example being a Presidential election.

Originally posted by Jakes51
Sometimes, a conspiracy can have good intentions to show those the facts of a controversial issue that may have been overlooked or forgotten to further illuminate a topic that remains hazy or mysterious. As long as irrefutable facts are presented that can be verified by those posed with the evidence, and that they are compiled from accredited sources who practice and maintain objectivity; I see no harm in forming a conspiracy theory to try and offer an explanation for something that remains skewered and out-of-sync to rational perception.

Yes, I agree, but therein lies the rub, as the bard tells us, sometimes we are damned if we do, and sometimes we are damned if we don’t.

Supplying facts sometimes gains us kudos but if we supply too much I have seen it backfire on many people here on ATS who get accused of being an insider, with the agenda of disinformation.

I have to laugh every time I see it because either people are so distrusting as to kick another poster in the teeth who may very well be telling them something they actually need to know, or the person claiming ”disinformation” is of such low pedigree as to take the low end road and sully the field by instead kicking someone in the proverbial nuts, in the ”conspiracy theory” genre.

Originally posted by Jakes51
As long as a conspiracy theory can be independently verified by the person being given the evidence, therefore allowing that person to have a healthy debate within through deductive reasoning; the concept can be very rewarding. Critical thinking should be applied to all aspects of our daily lives, whether, it be religion and its institution, government affairs, politics, science, finance, or any aspect in the wide tangled web in which we call reality. Sometimes, I think critical thinking has taken a backseat to forming judgments on impulse and passion among many of our brethren with out the simple acts of seeing both sides of a story, seeking the facts independently, and of at least questioning what we are told by authority figures, academics, theologians, and scientists. When it boils down, what makes you or I any different than the so called "masters of the universe," do we not have minds as they do to form conclusions ourselves?

Critical thinking seems to be a dieing art because even basic common sense is dieing.

A basic and rudimentary understanding of Government is necessary prior to being able to see into the ”conspiracy theory” world, whether a ”theory” or a ”fact”, most miss the one part of the formula most important, that Government employees are human beings, just like them, and that as human beings, those in power make mistakes, have agendas, and or allegiances we never know about and that a lot of people who see through the veil of lies see what they see because they are plugged in somehow, not in the ”Inside Man” sense but because of some rudimentary knowledge from family, a historical knowledge they remembered fondly, or because of the eye to spot a lie.

Most however do not understand the basic tenets of a ”conspiracy”, and slip instead into ”theory”.

When they need to focus on facts they fall to conjecture and postulating, when they know better.

I have done it as I am sure you have as well and I have often stepped back to wonder why I was attacked for only sharing what I knew of the events, but I often am reminded not everyone has the same education level or the ability to see the smaller picture and the bigger picture simultaneously.

Originally posted by Jakes51
Now, where I find conspiracy theories to be dangerous is when they are comprised to deceive and bring about a abrupt conclusion by stoking our primordial instincts rather than stimulating our rational minds. Some examples of where this method may have been used would have been the "Protocols of Zion," Adolf Hitler's indictment of Jews as the scourge to Germany's problems following the First World War which culminated into the Depression which racked the Weimar Republic, the recent Iraq War, and the Global Warming debate followed by other domestic and world affairs. It comes down to presentation, if a charge is made as long is it looks decent, and seems grounded in fact, people tend not to question it because it comes from the MSM, a politician, scientist, or theologian.

I find I have to rely more on instincts, intuitive knowledge, and behind the scenes knowledge, and when it comes time to explain it I have to dumb down what I post about, or I am speaking over other people’s heads.

And remembering how those in power often use their knowledge to manipulate others into action, I have to step back and consider how to word what I want to say in order for others to want to seek out the knowledge and corroboration for themselves, because I am a leader who seeks no flock, and does not want to lead with blind followers but with intelligent design towards people actually questioning.

To me it is our inherent responsibility to question those in power lest they lead us astray and we wind up in another situation between F.D.R. and Hitler, something I never want to see happen again, but where I see it is heading regardless because of the Bilderberg Group and their desire to maintain the future ”F.D.R.” and ”Hitler” is there puppet if there will be another one.

So, if there is another ”Holocaust” they want to be in charge of it, and know about it.

To me this is as absurd as a parent telling their child it’s okay if you kill the neighbor boy, as long as you let me plan it and guide you into how to commit it.

Originally posted by Jakes51
They use their own credentials and leadership or status within a population as the foundation to their claims, and with that, people tend to accept it rather than independently seeking the facts on their own to form a conclusion. That is why a level head is a terrible thing to waste, because when we rely on what we are told without at least looking at the information with a critical eye; it can lead to an outcome that can be dangerous to ourselves and others. Sometimes the road to hell is paved with good intentions. As said earlier, very thought provoking thread!

[edit on 2-2-2010 by Jakes51]

I was taught to always and forever question authority because if we do not we are going to find ourselves forced into the basic premise of thinking only one way or another, and when two choices are given, none are in actuality there to begin with because both choices can still lead us to the slaughterhouse.

It is merely which path is the quickest and which path is the best known to the butcher.

I think inside the box, outside the box, and sometimes smash the box and start over.

This is why I never leave a stone unturned when it comes to ”conspiracy theory” or ”conspiracy fact”.

Until you prove it is a fact it is nothing more than a theory, and theory does not lead one to finding facts, unless properly applied through investigative techniques like ”Scientific Theory” through using the hypothesis to not only lay the groundwork, but to use the evidence to prove that theory is more than vague conjecture and indeed, a fact.

[edit on 2-2-2010 by SpartanKingLeonidas]

Originally posted by nh_ee

Conspiracy Theory or Fact you ask ?

Interesting question and until proven otherwise remains simply conspiracy theory.

In science we are constantly working with the foundation of proving of a theory, and once proven, it becomes a proof.

Of course, but often we find people on ATS as well as offline who refute this very idea.

Most of the time I find those people are the ones with the blank-eyed stare because they know nothing of actual politics, other than going to a voting booth, like a sheep going to the slaughter, and their rudimentary knowledge goes above nothing other than caring about the cost of gasoline and milk and taxes.

The rest of the time those are the same people who complain, whine, and bitch about politics and decry foul play because they voted one way or the other, and forget that their responsibility does not end at the voting booth but only begins there.

Originally posted by nh_ee
And every proof at one time was at one point in time, a theory.

As far as conspiracy is concerned.

Without providing pages of definitions, which only tend to obfuscate the simple clear meaning of the word.

Of course, and the more we as humans try to explain, the more puzzling looks we get.

People are often sitting in school as children thinking they have to be in school as a requirement, and lack the understanding that this is their basic and underlying theme about how life will eventually become through understanding those history books, Social Studies, or even science, they can learn many things other than just basic knowledge.

Whether to learn how to spot a conspiracy or not, their learning should be something they profoundly look forward to, and I remember when the other kids would groan when we had to open our books and read.

Usually I found I was already reading ahead by a chapter.

When I was switched from public school because of the violent and barbaric nature of school, into home school, I leaped weeks ahead of where I was supposed to be because of my unquenchable thirst for knowledge.

Originally posted by nh_ee
Conspiracy, derived from the word conspire, which according to Websters is:
"to plan secretly, an unlawful act".

Do secret and unlawful acts exist ? Theory or otherwise ?

Yes.

Do those guilty of committing these unlawful acts, planned in secret, attempt to maintain their secrecy by discrediting those that question their unlawful acts planned in secret ?

Yes

Yes, very much so, on both counts.

Originally posted by nh_ee
As a big believer in history repeating itself, I enjoy
Taking a look back at our history, as well as the history of conspiracies and the original conspiracy theorist.

One needs to look no further than a look at the book published in 1798, entitled, Proofs of a Conspiracy, by John Robison.

This book is long out of print, for obvious reasons, but it can be found online.

I thank you for providing a book name because I am always seeking out new and interesting books.
In this case of course, it sounds as if it is an old and interesting book.
I recommend to you a new book along the same lines about Presidential power.
The Cult of the Presidency: America's Dangerous Devotion to Executive Power

Amazon Review : The Bush years have given rise to fears of a resurgent Imperial Presidency.

Those fears are justified, but the problem cannot be solved simply by bringing a new administration to power.

In his provocative new book, The Cult of the Presidency, Gene Healy argues that the fault lies not in our leaders but in ourselves.

When our scholars lionize presidents who break free from constitutional restraints, when our columnists and talking heads repeatedly call upon the "commander in chief " to dream great dreams and seek the power to achieve them--when voters look to the president for salvation from all problems great and small--should we really be surprised that the presidency has burst its constitutional bonds and grown powerful enough to threaten American liberty?

The Cult of the Presidency takes a step back from the ongoing red team/blue team combat and shows that, at bottom, conservatives and liberals agree on the boundless nature of presidential responsibility.

For both camps, it is the president's job to grow the economy, teach our children well, provide seamless protection from terrorist threats, and rescue Americans from spiritual malaise.

Very few Americans seem to think it odd, says Healy, "when presidential candidates talk as if they're running for a job that's a combination of guardian angel, shaman, and supreme warlord of the earth."

Healy takes aim at that unconfined conception of presidential responsibility, identifying it as the source of much of our political woe and some of the gravest threats to our liberties.

If the public expects the president to heal everything that ails us, the president is going to demand--or seize--the power necessary to handle that responsibility.

Interweaving historical scholarship, legal analysis, and trenchant cultural commentary, The Cult of the Presidency traces America's decades-long drift from the Framers' vision for the presidency: a constitutionally constrained chief magistrate charged with faithful execution of the laws.

Restoring that vision will require a Congress and a Court willing to check executive power, but Healy emphasizes that there is no simple legislative or judicial "fix" to the problems of the presidency.

Unless Americans change what we ask of the office--no longer demanding what we should not want and cannot have--we'll get what, in a sense, we deserve.

I realize it is a brand new book but to me is not just ancient history we learn from but from all genres of history.

Originally posted by nh_ee
Proofs of a conspiracy describes the formation of the Illuminati and it's infiltration into the Masonic organization. The Illuminati (or enlightened) and their orchestrating the overthrow of the monarchical system of governance of Europe in the 18th century, beginning with the French Revolution.

Fast forward to today...

What have we today in the United States ?
A partial Dissolution of the United States and it's original system of governance, which was based upon the US Constitution.

History repeats itself and for those who remember not history they are doomed to repeat it blindly.

I would much rather see what is coming down the pike then not know and be blindly consumed.

When my parents spoke of the boogeyman I did not hide under my covers but held a baseball bat at the ready to beat his malicious head in.

Originally posted by nh_ee
Interesting in that the term " Wild Conspiracy Theories", as stated by none other than GW Bush, a known member of a modern day subset or faction of the Illuminati, The Skull and Bones society.

George W Bush, Who also has been quoted as having said" The Constitution is nothing but a God Dammed piece of paper".

These are the words originating from a known member of a "secret" society whom also initiated the promotion of the well known label, by implied Presidential Authority IMA, of "Conspiracy Theorists", as a group confined to the lunatic fringe.

Are You "Right-Wing Fringe", or "Left-Wing Fringe" and How Will They Push You

Personally, I believe Bush stated what he did, intentionally, knowing he would irritate and agitate those upon the fringes.

If you know you can agitate someone because of your words and you are corrupt then it makes sense.

I find it laughable that he did it but it irritated me to no end, not because I was agitated, but because he did it intentionally as a distraction by relegating anyone who looked into his lies as a nutcase, up to and including not only the ”Conspiracy Theorists”, but as well those with Law Enforcement who actually tried to do their jobs like the many people who were silenced for finding many wrongdoings within the Bush Adminstration.

Originally posted by nh_ee
So the question one might ask is, all labels aside, if an unlawful act hasn't been planned and orchestrated by a secret organization, Then why the obfuscation ?

Obfuscation by none other than an individual who's father and Grandfather has also held membership in these secret elitist organizations and coincidentally won their Presidential election by questionable means in the state of Florida. The state of Florida where his own brother, Jeb Bush was Governor ?

The same individual who after being warned of the terrorist threat by FBI director John O'Neil, brought us 9/11 as well as the Patriot Act ? And not to mention two wars for HW Bush's Carlyle Group to profit from ?

I live in the state where Jeb Bush used to reside as Governor and I saw it as nothing more than a triangulated effort to steal the Presidential election between the Senior Bush, Dubya, and Jeb, because while the Secret Service is supposed to be apolitical, meaning no political ties, they are often called upon to do unsavory acts by those they are supposed to protect.

One of the many books I’ve read on them and I feel sorry for the Secret Service to being lowered to mere errand boys.

The Secret Service: The Hidden History of an Engimatic Agency

Amazon Review :

This new edition of the definitive history of the Secret Service lays bare the 2004 Bush campaign’s political uses of the agency and the new challenges it faces as a branch of the Homeland Security Department, in a post-9/11 world.

Acclaimed scholar of political violence and governmental secrecy Philip Melanson explores the long-hidden workings of the Secret Service since its inception in 1865 and through rigorous research and extensive interviews with former White House staffers and retired agents, uncovers startling facts about the Agency’s role in such traumatic national events as the assassination of JFK and the shooting of President Reagan.
Included, too, are revelations about presidential demands on the agency; the problems of alcoholism, divorce, and burnout among agents; and the Service’s inexplicable failure to develop profiles of potential assassins.

Up-to-date and explosive, this book assails the public image of the Secret Service as a highly professional apolitical organization, exposing the often-detrimental influence that politics exerts on the Agency.

About the Author :

Philp H. Melanson, Ph. D., an expert on political violence and governmental secrecy, has done original research into the JFK, RFK, and Martin Luther King assassinations, prompting appearances on CBS Evening News, BBC, History Channel, Discovery Channel, and C-SPAN.

He has served as a consultant to the (JFK) Assassinations-Records Review Board, and is coordinator of the RFK Assassination Archives at the University of Massachussetts Dartmouth. His last book was SECRECY WARS: NATIONAL SECURITY, PRIVACY, AND THE PUBLIC'S RIGHT TO KNOW. He lives in Marion, Massachussetts.

To me 9/11 was nothing more than one of the largest coups pulled off in history.

It is a shame too as I see the creation of the Homeland Security as nothing more than creating something that was never needed, and that the Secret Service deserves the position as the top dog, if they could only maintain that apolitical status and not become involved within those ”conspiracies”.

Instead they are relegated to a minor agency within the larger organizational structure of Government.

Originally posted by nh_ee
John O'Neil , the FBI agent, top counter terrorism expert and executive director of the FBI, who after discovering the truth about Osama Bin Laden and after resigning from the FBI, as a result of his 6 years of investigations into the terrorists were blocked by GW Bush, was killed at his new job as head of security at Kroll associates in the WTC on 9/11 ?

Coincidence, fate or conspiracy ?

All facts originate as theories.

This theory and conspiracy has yet to be proven as fact, but in time, it will.

I see that as a travesty because while I have my thoughts on Government and have a lack of trust in such, it is because of the conspiracies within, the counter-culture of Government if you will, and the cover-up mentality which is my thoughts on why I can never fully trust the Government.

The territorial nature is natural but the ”Do Anything To Get Ahead” stupidity is ignorant.

I understand Government has a time and place and a function but when that same organization which is supposed to protect and serve instead terrorizes its citizens, puts puppet dictators into place, and creates false wars for nothing more than greed, power, and business it is time that we as citizens question who is really to blame, those in power or us for putting them there and allowing them to get away with it.


I want so badly to trust in my Government but find it so hard to do when the examples I see is nothing more than double-speak, political obfuscation, and hidden agendas.

[edit on 2-2-2010 by SpartanKingLeonidas]