IS AE911 On The Ropes ???

a reply to: mrthumpy

In fact, what was some of the earliest speculation or rumors on Jack the Ripper.

Cultures have different mannerisms on how they speak. Thinking you are going to find the exact therm “conspiracy theory” from culture to culture, from age to age, is absurd.

I think “rumored” and “latest gossip” for their time could draw parallels to conspiracy theory as it applies today.

Insane 19th Century Conspiracy Theories That People Believed

m.ranker.com... www.google.com%2F

Conspiracies about Freemasons controlling the world were as popular in the 19th century as they were in the 20th and still are today. Much of this anger was kicked off by the murder of New York resident William Morgan, who had announced his plan to publish a book that would break the Masonic conspiracy wide open.

Himself a former Mason, Morgan’s book Illustrations of Masonry would expose the group’s secrets and rituals for all to see – except he disappeared, never to be found. Various stories have Morgan either paid off by the Masons to leave the country, or kidnapped and drowned by Masons, with his body washing up on a shore a few years later. Others claim that his body was found decades later, buried in an unmarked grave.

Anti-Masonic fervor exploded in the aftermath of Morgan's vanishing act and Illustrations of Masonry being published – even drawing in prospective presidential candidates. Virtually everything in the book itself was made up by Morgan.

a reply to: Salander

Please research.....

en.m.wikipedia.org...(physicist)

Proofs of a Conspiracy against all the Religions and Governments of Europe, carried on in the Secret Meetings of Free-Masons, Illuminati and Reading Societies, etc., collected from good authorities, Edinburgh, 1797; 2nd ed. London, T. Cadell & W. Davies, 1797

[/quotes]

a reply to: mrthumpy


It must be too complicated for you to understand, and certainly part of that is because of my inadequate posts here.

If you really want to understand how it came to pass, read deHaven-Smith's book, Conspiracy Theory in America.

These posts on the internet cannot explain all things. The weaponization of the term began after the public failed to embrace the findings of the Warren Commission. It has been a very useful propaganda tool in the years since.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: mrthumpy


It must be too complicated for you to understand, and certainly part of that is because of my inadequate posts here.

If you really want to understand how it came to pass, read deHaven-Smith's book, Conspiracy Theory in America.

These posts on the internet cannot explain all things. The weaponization of the term began after the public failed to embrace the findings of the Warren Commission. It has been a very useful propaganda tool in the years since.

Really, just going to ignore the history of conspiracy, lies, rumors, and false allegations throughout history. I just posted a link on a conspiracy theory from the late 1700’s on how the masons and Illuminati were manipulating governments and religion.

Do you base anything on reality?

a reply to: neutronflux


No NF, I'm not ignoring history, I am studying it.

What I am at least attempting to ignore is YOU and your crazy posts. I wish the software here would make that a bit easier.

a reply to: Salander

The the book titled “proofs of conspiracy” from the 1700’s?

Definition of proof....

www.merriam-webster.com...

1 a :the cogency of evidence that compels acceptance by the mind of a truth or a fact
b :the process or an instance of establishing the validity of a statement especially by derivation from other statements in accordance with principles of reasoning.

Definition of theory...

www.merriam-webster.com...

1 :a plausible or scientifically acceptable general principle or body of principles offered to explain phenomena

a reply to: Salander

There are contemporary theories dataing back to the 1700’s concerning the masons and Illuminati?

Is that a false statement?

a reply to: Salander

I would say the 1700’s term “proof of conspiracy” is more accurate and a better term than “conspiracy theory” concerning things not sciences based. As in false flag operations, 9/11 insurance scams, the struggle of the “new world order” to control the truth at any cost (other the the contradictory examples of ATS members freely posting the “truth“ on the NWO at will), media lies........

a reply to: neutronflux


Your steady effort to change the subject was noted a long time ago, and has some meaning. I wish ATS had the 'ignore' function.

The case made by deHaven-Smith and Attkisson is far more persuasive than your pathetic efforts at defending the lies told by government.

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: neutronflux


Your steady effort to change the subject was noted a long time ago, and has some meaning. I wish ATS had the 'ignore' function.

The case made by deHaven-Smith and Attkisson is far more persuasive than your pathetic efforts at defending the lies told by government.

What, you cannot handle that “conspiracy theory” was even a contemporary thing involving the free-masons and illuminate from the 1700’s? Some how conspiracy is a new thing. Your total biased view, lack of understanding history, and your biased views are showing.

Funny you never cite sources or research.....

a reply to: Salander

How about we go back to the 1500’s?

The Prince (Italian: Il Principe [il ˈprintʃipe]) is a 16th-century political treatise by the Italian diplomat and political theorist Niccolò Machiavelli.

en.m.wikipedia.org...

Moreover, it is impossible for the prince to satisfy everybody's expectations. Inevitably, he will disappoint some of his followers. Therefore, a prince must have the means to force his supporters to keep supporting him even when they start having second thoughts, otherwise he will lose his power. Only armed prophets, like Moses, succeed in bringing lasting change. Machiavelli claims that Moses killed uncountable numbers of his own people in order to enforce his will.

Or, also from Machiavelli's the Price.....

Conquests by “criminal virtue” (Chapter 8) Edit
Conquests by "criminal virtue" are ones in which the new prince secures his power through cruel, immoral deeds, such as the execution of political rivals. Machiavelli advises that a prince should carefully calculate all the wicked deeds he needs to do to secure his power, and then execute them all in one stroke, such that he need not commit any more wickedness for the rest of his reign. In this way, his subjects will slowly forget his cruel deeds and his reputation can recover. Princes who fail to do this, who hesitate in their ruthlessness, find that their problems mushroom over time and they are forced to commit wicked deeds throughout their reign. Thus they continuously mar their reputations and alienate their people.

Machiavelli's case study is Agathocles of Syracuse. After Agathocles became Praetor of Syracuse, he called a meeting of the city's elite. At his signal, his soldiers killed all the senators and the wealthiest citizens, completely destroying the old oligarchy. He declared himself ruler with no opposition. So secure was his power that he could afford to absent himself to go off on military campaigns in Africa.

a reply to: Salander

Soooooo....

You have John Robison in the late 1700’s and Proofs of a Conspiracy against all the Religions and Governments of Europe, carried on in the Secret Meetings of Free-Masons, Illuminati and Reading Societies, etc.


And you have Machiavelli in the 1500’s outling what you accuse the modern US government conducting on 9/11. From the book the Prince, the chapter ‘“Conquests by “criminal virtue”’. A booked banned by the Catholic Church? How is that for conspiracy?

Why do I get the impression this 911 stuff is a competition that must be won at any cost rather than facts being distributed evenly?
If ae911 or whoever stands up to dispute the facts its because they have conviction in their bones to do so.

a reply to: loveguy

rather than facts being distributed evenly

There are two different sides of facts.
It's just one side cannot find reputable experts to back their 'facts'.

a reply to: samkent

I had the pentagon 5 frame bit in mind as I wrote the above.

originally posted by: loveguy
Why do I get the impression this 911 stuff is a competition that must be won at any cost rather than facts being distributed evenly?
If ae911 or whoever stands up to dispute the facts its because they have conviction in their bones to do so.

The impression you get is very easy to understand if one is aware of Goebbels's general theories. 1) The bigger the lie, the more people will believe it. 2) If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth. 3) An attempt to convince must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over. Persistence is the first and most important requirement for success.

originally posted by: Salander

originally posted by: loveguy
Why do I get the impression this 911 stuff is a competition that must be won at any cost rather than facts being distributed evenly?
If ae911 or whoever stands up to dispute the facts its because they have conviction in their bones to do so.

The impression you get is very easy to understand if one is aware of Goebbels's general theories. 1) The bigger the lie, the more people will believe it. 2) If you repeat a lie often enough, it becomes the truth. 3) An attempt to convince must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over. Persistence is the first and most important requirement for success.

Pretty much sums up AE 9/11 Truth. Have any evidence the twin Towers were brought down by CD. Any?

The towers fell at the rate of free fall. Lie.

The Towers fell in their own footprint. Lie.

The towers fell through the path of greatest resistance. Lie. The core columns were last to tumbled.

Then to make the bigger lie, AE 9/11 Truth had to make the false claim the Plasco building collapse in Tehran was a CD.

Thanks for enabling those that exploit 9/11 for profit.

a reply to: Salander

Let’s go with the “Goebbels's“ thing? If the US government is as all controlling and diabolical as you claim to pull off your false 9/11 narratives, what prevented the US government from infiltrating and dictating ever aspect of the truth movement from the get go? Shhhhhh trust no one.......

originally posted by: Salander
a reply to: mrthumpy


The weaponization of the term began after the public failed to embrace the findings of the Warren Commission.

Would you like a hand with those goalposts? They look heavy