What is a Conspiracy Theorist?

"Gee, isn't this fun? Next, we get to go play in the desert! Oh, boy!" (Photo credits: see below)
"Gee, isn't this fun? Next, we get to go play in the desert! Oh, boy!" (Photo credits: see below)

Doesn't the corporate media lump many things under the pejorative label -- "conspiracy theorist?" The following are considered a part of this:

  • People who have facts about a catastrophe which logically suggest the official story is false.
  • People who ask probing questions about a catastrophe.
  • People who suspect that others have conspired to do harm for personal gain.
  • People who are paranoid about one or more possibilities.
  • People who wear tinfoil hats to prevent aliens from interfering with their minds.

As you can see, there are a wide range of "types" included under this umbrella term. But why are all of these included? Why, for instance, are those who "merely have questions," being associated with those who "wear the tinfoil hats?" One might think that someone (the media, the government?) had something to hide. Now, there's a conspiracy theory for you! Nebulous, indistinct and easily dismissed.

But ask yourself:

  • Has there ever been a conspiracy in the history of humanity?
  • Has anyone ever committed murder for personal gain?
  • Has a banker ever been greedy?
  • Has any government ever lied to its citizens?

I don't think I'd be going out too far on a limb to suggest that all of these require a "yes" answer. So, if some conspiracies have occurred, where does one draw the line between the valid target of the pejorative term and blatant mislabeling?

I had one writer tell me that all 9/11 conspiracy theories had been thoroughly debunked and yet he couldn't tell me any of the details. When pressed on the issue, he said he didn't have time to research the topic. Ah! He didn't know and was merely stating an opinion not based upon fact. He also made it clear that he would never change his opinion just as he was sure I would never change mine. That is an interesting attitude considering the fact that I had only recently changed my opinion. It seems the writer had been living quite happily in his own delusion. Damn the facts; his head was going to remain buried in sand and nothing could force him to look.

Conspiracy Theory
Conspiracy Theory

Mel Gibson plays the consummate conspiracy theorist, but there's a dark secret behind his apparent lunacy.

 

Conspiracy Theory, the Movie

In this 1997 movie, Jerry Fletcher (Mel Gibson) is a paranoid New York cab driver who publishes a conspiracy theory newsletter. He also has a crush on the lovely Alice Sutton (Julia Roberts), a Justice Department employee. When one of his theories turns out to be accurate, Jerry finds himself in trouble with the CIA's Dr. Jonas (Patrick Stewart). Alice finds herself embroiled in a game that's bigger than she could've imagined and that Dr. Jonas and Jerry have had a past relationship that could have dire consequences.

At the start of the film, Jerry fits the perfect stereotype of conspiracy theorist, but that image of him eventually falls apart. In the movie, there are some who would wish to keep the stereotype intact. You see, there is a certain power in generalizations that deflects the light of truth. Critical thought cuts right through that diversion. Generalities usually are a subversion and a distraction from the real issues. Many leaders have used this technique to sway the minds of the masses. All who question the official theory are unpatriotic. All who are against the war are disrespecting our soldiers. Wow! Lies and more lies buried behind generalities.

Four-star General Lyman L. Lemnitzer, US Army. Chief of Staff of the Army, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Supreme Allied Commander, Europe. Author of Operation Northwoods.
Four-star General Lyman L. Lemnitzer, US Army. Chief of Staff of the Army, Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Supreme Allied Commander, Europe. Author of Operation Northwoods. | Source

False Flag Operations

March 13, 1962, General Lyman Lemnitzer, then chairman of the military Joint Chiefs of Staff, signed a document which had remained classified for more than 35 years. In fact, the nature of the document was so inflammatory, Lemnitzer had ordered the destruction of it and many other documents which could be used to hold him and others criminally liable. What was this wonderful document?

It was called "Operation Northwoods." In it, the Joint Chiefs suggested murdering American citizens in order to provoke sufficient public outrage to have Congress demand war with Cuba. America's own military would attack America, but then blame it on Cuba. They would create terrorist acts in Florida and Washington, DC. They would hijack planes and crash them. They would destroy military installations, killing their own soldiers.

Facts versus Theories

The sad fact is that theories, despite the corporate media spin, can be a good thing when they are based upon facts. Scientists do this all the time. They also use the word "hypothesis."

Facts that seem puzzling raise questions. The researcher formulates a theory (hypothesis) to explain the facts and then goes about testing the hypothesis to see if it can be disproven.

The last two presidents (Bush and Obama) have made a point to caution people against entertaining conspiracy theories. This fact alone should raise a red flag. Why would any president say anything to suppress open and honest inquiry? What if the "conspiracy theorist" fits under the category, "People who have facts about a catastrophe which logically suggest the official story is false?" Here we're dealing not with nut cases or mentally unstable individuals; we're dealing with facts and honest questions. Do these two presidents have something to hide?

When President Bush, Jr. was asked by a reporter for his opinion about someone else's accusation that he had prior knowledge of 9/11, the president was suddenly caught off guard. For a few not-so-brief moments, he babbled as if his mind were locked in fear. This looked every bit like the "kid with their hand caught in the cookie jar" syndrome. While far from proof of wrong doing, it has to raise a question in the viewer's mind: What's going on, here?

If George Bush had prior knowledge of 9/11, would he admit it to anyone in the public eye? Probably not. From a public presence standpoint, George W. Bush was a bit of a klutz. His Bushisms had long been the grist of the comedy mills. At least Obama proved to be the consummate "silver-tongued devil." Obama gave a pretty speech, but repeatedly failed to deliver on his campaign promises, and successfully turned tyrannical measures into patriotic necessities.

General Lemnitzer's ring appears to have been that of a Freemason.
General Lemnitzer's ring appears to have been that of a Freemason. | Source

Theories Over the Edge?

There is a category of conspiracy theories that pushes the envelope of credulity. Those theories may well contain a great deal of truth, but the foundation of fact supporting them remains weak at best. It should be pointed out, however, that the lack of proof does not disprove anything; it only means that proof is not yet available, if ever.

Here's an example. No doubt an ardent conspiracy theorist would make a big deal out of the fact that the Lyman Lemnitzer photograph seems to show him wearing a Masonic ring.

Freemasonry has several million members worldwide. For the most part, it seems to be merely a fraternal organization. Some conspiracy theorists, however, paint Freemasonry with a somewhat more sinister palette. To them, the inner circle of Freemasonry make up the world's evil elite who plan wars and are actively working toward the eventual New World Order—a one-world government run by those very same elite.

The fact that Lemnitzer appears to have been a Freemason and that he helped to author Operation Northwoods, which recommended murdering his own citizens to forward military and political goals can only add to the fervor of this kind of suspicion.

There are many false parallels in life. People always look for patterns. The "face on Mars" is but one example of the pattern-happy conspiracy theorist mentality. But scientists also look for patterns. It can be a seductive activity, but any scientist will tell you that restraint is the better part of curiosity.

New World and Old World cacti are another example. These two species of plants look very similar, but they remain a case of parallel evolution. Similar conditions forced two widely separated species to develop along similar lines. The similarity between them was only superficial and did not mean close, biological kinship.

Uncomfortable Facts About 9/11

Updated 2013:1002

The collapses of 3 WTC buildings in New York were caused by controlled demolition. That much is a proven fact (Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth).

The events of 9/11 resulted from a large series of incompetence and yet no one was chastised, demoted or fired. Curious. In fact, it seems that the military officers responsible for the massive security failures on 9/11 all received promotions, instead of courts martial. Why would incompetence be rewarded? That, in itself, is either incompetence, or evidence of intent. What intent? Could it be part of the payoff for cover-up? Do you have any better ideas?

Mayor Rudy Giuliani, America's "Mayor," committed a blatant felony by destroying crime scene evidence more than a year before the official investigation began. Was he arrested for his crime? The news media lauded him for his "bravery." The New York fire department members condemned Giuliani for his political cowardice in not helping them get better equipment which might have saved their brothers who died on 9/11. If this former federal prosecutor can get away with a major felony, what's going on? More incompetence? Or more cover-up?

It takes weeks to prepare buildings of the size of all 3 WTC structures. The Bush family security company which oversaw the World Trade Center should have known that tons of material were being delivered to the three buildings and placed in sensitive areas. If they didn't know, was this another case of convenient incompetence?

In the military center where Vice President Dick Cheney and Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta were witnessing the anti-terrorist drills being performed on 9/11, one soldier noted that an airplane was approaching the secure and sensitive space around the Pentagon. Cheney told the soldier that the order still stands. But what was that order? The fact that they had the chance to stop the airplane, but did nothing is a stunning revelation. Incredible!

What is more interesting is that the Citizen Investigation Team interviewed many of the witnesses who saw the airplane approach the Pentagon. Those witnesses corroborate each other's stories that the plane could not have taken the path given by the official story. In fact, one witness saw an airplane lifting away from the Pentagon directly after the explosion! If the one airplane did not hit the Pentagon, then what did?

Perhaps the most stunning piece of evidence that proves the government lied, and also proves controlled demolition in New York on 9/11, involves the third building to collapse on that day. World Trade Center 7 (WTC7) collapsed about 5:20 PM on 9/11. It collapsed at perfect free fall for the first 8 floors!

Now, for those of you who flunked high school physics or don't remember it too clearly, here's a few tips to help you understand the significance of this fact.

  • WTC7 collapsed at perfect free fall for 8 floors. (See NIST final report on WTC7, and David Chandler's 3 video series on WTC7 free fall.)
  • Free fall means that the supports in the building offered ZERO resistance. They were effectively "air." Since when does a building's support become "air?"
  • Solid steel (the framework of WTC7) NEVER offers Zero resistance. If you don't believe this, then try smashing your fist through a solid steel beam. Ouch!

Office fires never melt steel beams. Jet fuel fires never melt steel beams. Why would NIST scientists lie about this and try to rewrite the laws of physics? Incompetence, again? With so much incompetence going around before, during and after 9/11, you'd think there was an epidemic.

Reality Check

If a conspiracy theorist is someone who asks questions about puzzling events, then count me amongst the legions of conspiracy theorists. Certainly, I have plenty of hypotheses about 9/11, but not enough facts to prove many of them. What is needed is a non-governmental, independent investigation into 9/11. Is such a thing possible? If someone or some group is pushing the buttons of government to perpetrate such evil, no telling what they might do to stop someone from shining a light on their dark secrets.

More by this Author


Comments 80 comments

mindyjgirl profile image

mindyjgirl 4 years ago from Cottage Grove, Oregon

Interesting read :)


aguasilver profile image

aguasilver 4 years ago from Malaga, Spain

Good read Carl, related to this, an FBI agent who attended Flight 93 (the Pennsylvania site) writes that when she attended the site as first response, she saw 'legions' of angels standing there.

But more relevantly she confirms that the crime scene was eerie, as there were no bodies to see.

No bodies? - crazy

Ever heard of an air crash with no bodies?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2168337/Li...

Even more chilling, if there were no bodies on the plane, where did all the passengers go?


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

@mindyjgirl, thanks for the input.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

Thanks, John. The linked article was a good read, too.

What happened to the bodies? Great question. Angels? I love it.

This merely raises tons more questions.

Could it have been:

* The passengers were disposed of in an unmarked grave in a different state?

* Could God merely have plucked the victims from the site before the plane crashed (like Enoch or Elijah, neither of whom saw death)?

So much was staged that day. We could theorize all day long and likely not come up with the truth.

I like the idea of forcing an independent investigation with sufficient teeth to chew their way through any roadblocks. I would like to see such an investigative body free of conflicts of interest and bias. If it gets too close, though, what would Goldman-Sachs, CIA, Rockefellers and their gang do about it? Would they use multiple techniques to "disappear" the members of the investigative team? Would the unluckiness of the team members make others unwilling to replace those who were lost?

As you can see, I'm not entirely optimistic about the chances of such an investigation getting to the bottom of it all. But it could serve another, far more important purpose.

It seems clear that the only satisfaction we will ever get from this is from God the Father. If the Rockefellers and their gang think they can escape His judgement, then they're headed for a rude awakening. Owner of the Entire Universe against puny little them? I know for a fact that I'm not yet worthy. I would merely like to help others wake up so they're ready for Judgement when it comes, and I hope I can be ready, too.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

Ask yourself:

Can more than one person keep a secret?

Has anyone at all come forward to describe their first-hand involvement in the wiring of the towers?

Has anyone come come forward to describe their first-hand involvement in providing the tons of materials that (you claim) were delivered to the towers?

The answer to all these questions: no.


aguasilver profile image

aguasilver 4 years ago from Malaga, Spain

Ask yourself....

If you were involved in the operation, that killed 3000+ people, do you think you would come forward to disclose the secret, knowing that you and your family would be killed to protect the guilty parties?

Try to find a living witness that made a report about the grassy knoll killers after the Kennedy hit.

Your assumptions are reasonable for a rational mans thinking, but we are not dealing with rational men, we are dealing with fascist conspirators who will kill you if you represent any threat to them, and sleep well each night having done so.

People cannot keep secrets, I agree, but equally dead me do not speak.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

"If you were involved in the operation, that killed 3000+ people, do you think you would come forward to disclose the secret, knowing that you and your family would be killed to protect the guilty parties?"

Yes. There would be numerous people willing to speak to NBC,CBS,ABC,MoveOn.Org, Frontline, and anyone else who would listen. Nobody can point to a manifest, to a truck driver, to any physical evidence of any materials of labor provided to wire the buildings. No one wrote a letter to be read after their death. No one has a photograph, a xerox copy, or a first-hand account of being there.

And to suggest that your ostensibly irrational fascist conspirators might rational enough to organize such a massive effort and somehow manage to suppress everyone involved....


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

Thank you, @nicomp, for engaging in this conversation.

I hope you will add to the conversation by an honest and open dialog. I look forward to it. I suspect you're passionate about your viewpoint, and that's good (up to a point). I hope you're as passion about searching for truth.

I continue to change (and refine) my mind on things as I learn from others. John (aguasilver), here, helped me to wake up on certain topics about a year ago, perhaps because he was there, but just as importantly, because I was hungry for truth (not stroking my own ego). I hope that applies to you, as well.

First statement, out of the gate, big fail! "Can more than one person keep a secret?" You better believe it! The answer is a resounding "yes!" The fact that you answer, "no," make me suspicious of everything you write after this. But, as a seeker of truth, I long to have you redeem yourself. Like I said, I value truth over ego. I've eaten enough crow in my short 62 years to make that species endangered.

You imply that there has never been a kept secret in the history of humanity. Wow! I know of several that were kept for many years. Writers continue to crank out best sellers based on secrets uncovered after centuries! Unless you happen to be omniscient, you cannot say there are no secrets being kept right now. If you insist on this, my insistence that we have a logical conversation requires that I beg out and let you keep your delusion.

Since your next 2 questions depend heavily on the first, they fail, too. But you bring up valuable points.

Why would anyone keep a secret? Patriotism? Greed? Fear? Some motivations are more effective. If the ones keeping the secret are in agreement with the purposes of the secrets being kept, then those secrets are likely better kept. CIA agents, for example.

For 35 years, the US government kept the secret of Operation Northwoods. We now have proof of government plans to murder its own citizens for political and military gain. We now know for a fact that our government can consider doing such evil. And what secrets will be kept for a century? A millennium? Or forever? As long as we don't know about them, we cannot say.

Now, as far as wiring the towers with tons of explosives and cutter charges, we know for a fact that this was done. How? The physics of the collapses of all 3 buildings tell us that it could not be anything except controlled demolitions (or magic). Do you believe in magic? I believe in miracles, but this doesn't strike me as a miracle.

I cover these details of physics and physical evidence in another hub (almost finished at this point), so I won't belabor them, here. I will say this: The original PE of each building was insufficient, by a factor of 50, for all the work (KE) performed on each building. If you don't know what that means, you need to brush up on your high school physics.

You're a bit thin on logic when you talk about "ostensibly irrational fascist conspirators" not being rational enough to organize such a massive effort. These are your labels, not mine. And you seem to have them defined in your own mind to possess certain constraints -- constraints of which I would disagree.

There was one individual who blabbed about this secret in advance of its occurrence. He didn't mention details of the event itself, but he did speak at length about the fallout from the event -- the desired results.

Before his death, Hollywood producer, Aaron Russo told Alex Jones in an interview about his brief friendship with Nicholas Rockefeller of the infamous Rockefeller family. During one of their meetings, October, 2000, Rockefeller told Russo that there was an upcoming event that would allow "us" to take over Iraq and Afghanistan, to create a never-ending war on terror and which would have us looking in caves for terrorists. All of these familiar details would not have been familiar in October, 2000 -- eleven months before 9/11.

@nicomp, if you cannot see the tyranny America has fallen into, then you are indeed blind and need to wake up. Having lived 5 years outside of the USA, I've been cured of my addiction to the Corporate Party media kool-aid. But it took @aguasilver to help wake me up to what was really going on.

Certainly there are some kookie ideas floating around. Not every conspiracy theory has merit, and some have more than others. Those based upon more fact have greater believability, but even some of the more bizarre need to be investigated, because they could be true and if true have dire consequences for all of humanity if left unchecked. Of course, those devoid of fact we can ignore, until and if any facts can be found to support them.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

Thanks, John. Sane and ethical men cannot keep insane and criminal secrets, I agree. But some agents of chaos are robots. Others are merely greedy and quite happy to keep secrets to protect that greed. Shadows are their friends. Secrets are their weapons.

In one book I recently learned about, David Rockefeller thanked the owners of the big newspapers for their help in keeping the proceedings of the Bilderberg Group a secret for all these years, without which they would not have been able to proceed with their plans. Those plans would have proved impossible to pursue if under the spotlight of public scrutiny.

Secrets? Yes, many have been kept, but those who keep evil secrets will find the debt they have to pay steep indeed. Come judgment day, even I have a big debt and uncertain I can love Christ enough by then. I'm still working on it.

I need to follow Christ and give up my love of this world. The more I clean, the more attachments to this world I find.


aguasilver profile image

aguasilver 4 years ago from Malaga, Spain

Dealing with things that God brings to our minds after salvation is more akin to improving your postal address in the Kingdom than a balancing point for whether one is saved.

We either are or we are not, if we are then ALL our sins past, present and future have been forgiven, we still need to avoid deliberate sin, and repent quickly, until we reach the point of contrition, whereupon our actions will be less likely to have us sin as much!

But yes I agree that as we mature, we become more sin conscious and revolted by some of our past actions, in that previous life we led.

Thanks for the compliments Carl, undeserved I am sure, but delighted you view our relationship to have progressed you even a little, likewise you have exposed my thinking to alternative thoughts over the last year.

That seems to be what it is all about, exploring, expelling the lies and deception and gleaning what truth we can from the data received.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

"Now, as far as wiring the towers with tons of explosives and cutter charges, we know for a fact that this was done. How? The physics of the collapses of all 3 buildings tell us that it could not be anything except controlled demolitions (or magic). Do you believe in magic? I believe in miracles, but this doesn't strike me as a miracle."

You evidently do believe in magic because the explosives magically appeared, and installed themselves. There's no other way the building could have been wired. You conveniently ignore the independent third-party demolition experts asserting that it's a long and laborious project to implode a building. You don't do it overnight after the janitors have gone home.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

Thanks, John. I appreciate your words of wisdom.

I see, even now, new things. I see that even the tiniest shred of doubt can be sin. Doubt is of this world. In the realm of creation, there is no room for doubt or dichotomy.

I continue to grow.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

@nicomp, you are extremely creative -- telling me what I believe and knowing that which I have ignored. Clever! I see you believe yourself to be omniscient. Good luck with that.


aguasilver profile image

aguasilver 4 years ago from Malaga, Spain

nicomp, please look at the following and then explain it away.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obri8HFGBl8

Look around 9 minutes in if you are short of time!


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

Good video, John. The elevator upgrades are covered a bit more in the Architects and Engineers "Blueprint" documentary where they cover the unassailable fact that all 3 buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. That is no longer a question. The question now is how did they do it? The elevator upgrades is certainly one possibility and may have been part of the overall strategy. At least it gives us "opportunity." And there were many other lesser opportunities -- evidence of construction, security system shut-downs, and other unusual activities.

For anyone with a more scientific bent, there are several papers at the http://www.ae911truth.org website and also a favorite of mine at,

http://journalof911studies.com/volume/200704/NISTa...


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

@aguasilver : OK, I watched the entire thing. So what?

It was couched as a news show, like many infomercials. No science was presented. No eye witnesses were brought forward. It was two guys sitting in a studio.

If you want to accept everything Richard Gage says without applying your critical thinking skills, feel free.

If you listen a little closer, you will hear him say things like "I've heard that..." and "clearly, by any definition..." and "everybody knows..."

If you want to discuss this rationally, let me know. I can help you think critically about this video.


aguasilver profile image

aguasilver 4 years ago from Malaga, Spain

1600 architects who confirm that what happened was a controlled demolition, speak for themselves, those are people who KNOW structural engineering backward, not some infomercial.

There is plenty of 'science' out there, if you can be bothered to look.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

@nicomp, you ask, so what? You make ludicrous statements and then say you can help with thinking critically? That's pretty brave of you. And perhaps a bit ironic, if not downright hilarious.

You state, "You conveniently ignore the independent third-party demolition experts asserting that it's a long and laborious project to implode a building."

Nothing ignored! Anyone who makes such a statement without knowing the facts, is clearly not thinking critically. Yes, I've considered the statements of demolition experts. That's the point. The buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. That's a fact. What we don't know, and why we need a new, independent investigation, is to find out how and why.

Did you miss the part in the video about the elevator upgrades? Or did you "conveniently" ignore that fact. The elevators run right next to the core support beams. An elevator upgrade can be used to mask the planting of explosives. And elevators don't have windows, so no one is going to see those explosives over the following months.

Did you read the paper debunking the NIST "resource?"

Now, I have to agree that generalities like "everybody knows" is the worst kind of language in a discussion or a debate. But your own language ("You evidently do believe..." and "You conveniently ignore..."), especially when the statements are false, are far from adequate language, as well. Not indicative of critical thinking.

Your original implication with, "Can more than one person keep a secret?" -- that people can't keep secrets is fallacious and illogical. Care to comment? Or do you ignore the battles you lose and hope no one notices?


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

You can't say that 1600 architects confirm what happened. They simply signed a petition, supposedly. As the MC said in your 'report', the architects are not demolition experts. The 'expert' admitted to that, if I remember correctly.

Your response was what I expected from you: you told me to go look for some science. That's typical.

You presented me with a made-for-tv video that only tells one side of the story and then you blew me off when I offered to help you apply critical thinking to it. No problem. Have fun with your conspiracy.

Your closed-minded attitude is no problem for me but I am insulted by your portrayal of George Bush in your childish photo. I don't know President Bush, but I have friends that do: to suggest that he had anything to do with this tragedy is an indication of possible mental instability on your part. With all due respect, go outside and play


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

"The buildings were brought down by controlled demolition. That's a fact"

No, it's not a fact. You have flimsy circumstantial evidence that no court would accept. No one has come forward to admit attaching even one nano-particle of any incendiary material to any building. Elevator technicians are not trained to wire buildings for destruction. Find me even one elevator technician who worked that building and admits to participating in the destruction. Just one.

All you have is hearsay and supposition. Have fun with that.

When you're ready to distinguish facts from assumptions , let me know. I can help you think critically.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

"Did you miss the part in the video about the elevator upgrades?"

No, I watched it twice out of respect for your viewpoint. Elevator technicians are not demolition experts. Somehow they would have had to interconnect all their nano-particle charges, probably not a daily chore for an elevator technician. All the engineers that oversaw the upgrades noticed nothing untoward, right? All the building inspectors were in on it. All the technicians went home every day for several months and never told anyone they were wiring a building to explode. Sure.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

"Your original implication with, "Can more than one person keep a secret?" -- that people can't keep secrets is fallacious and illogical. Care to comment? Or do you ignore the battles you lose and hope no one notices?"

Still true. More than one person, especially a battalion of elevator technicians, engineers, and building inspectors not trained in building demolition, can't keep that kind of secret.


aguasilver profile image

aguasilver 4 years ago from Malaga, Spain

I think you either underestimate the power and abilities of Americas dark ops people, or are a shill presenting the party line on command.

Have fun, it's possible GWB was kept in the dark about what was about to happen, but I doubt it, the Bush family have been playing dark games for a long tome now, from funding the Nazi war machine right through to today, they have been working on the dark side. GWB knew what was going down (his body language alone showed that) and is a pretty bad liar, he signals when he is hearing it from the earpiece, rather than mucking it up himself.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

@nicomp, you may very know what critical thinking is. I concede that that is a possibility, but better than 90% of what you have written betrays that knowledge, if it really exists.

You make assumptions as if they're fact. Dumb! Example: "They simply signed a petition, supposedly." Do you care to find out before making such statements? Are you always so incredibly lazy? Some of these petition signers performed experiments, wrote papers on the subject analyzing the data, and some gave video interviews for another documentary giving their verbal analysis of the 9/11 problem.

You get your facts wrong. Example: "1600 architects." Certainly architects are included in the batch, but not all of them are architects. There are also many engineers and scientists.

On YouTube, I've seen two demolition experts who said without any reservation that the collapses were control demolitions. But I didn't take this as the whole of my evidence.

I'm no demolition expert, but the details of the evidence presented certainly shows a preponderance of support for controlled demolition and nearly zero support for collapse by collision and fire.

The fact that you said, "Your closed-minded attitude," shows me that you pay very little attention to details and lose yourself in your own fantasy. I already said that I continue to change my mind on things, refining my viewpoint. Until about a year ago, I believed the Bush conspiracy theory. Now, if anyone has a closed mind, here, it seems more likely you. I'm happy to discuss things with you if there is some give and take, by you're all one-sided. You continue to offer up "bile" and call it "nectar." I'm still waiting for something to thrill me and my intellect. As an award-winning essayist, Hollywood artist with screen credit, software engineer with bachelors degree summa cum laude, published author, creator of 3D astronomy software, scientist, and IQ of 139, I do have a modicum of intellect. I don't doubt you do too, but you have not shared any of it, yet.

I'm from Texas and I was embarrassed when Bush became president. He was the brunt of an unusually prolific volume of comedy routines from his Bushisms. And the first few months on the job, he was on vacation, down on the ranch! What a guy! He was from Midland? I was from Odessa, just a hop skip and a jump across the Llano Estacado.

You're insulted? You should be! The trashing of the Constitution of the United States is a crime of Treason! Got that? Simple enough for you? And all the while, the Bush family was raking in the profits from this little murder spree. A year ago, I didn't know this. A year ago, I hadn't looked at the mountain of evidence.

I find it incredibly inane when someone uses the phrase "with all due respect," but shows none at all.

When someone uses so many non sequitur, ad hominem, arguments to ignorance and other logical fallacies and then claims to "think critically," I too suspect someone's mental stability.

"Go outside and play?" Gag!

I'm getting the impression that you don't think our government could murder its own citizens to forward political and military goals. And yet we have Operation Northwoods as documented proof that the American government can do just that. With a different president than JFK, this plan might well have been implemented, just as Operation 9/11 was implemented.

I've been waiting for you to prove that you are not close-minded, but haven't seen any evidence to the contrary.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

Good points, John. It's possible you've seen the following video.

I wonder if our friend from Ohio (@nicomp) would be interested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VCvqXXnxLZw

(Bush body language when asked about prior knowledge of 9/11.)


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

"You make assumptions as if they're fact. Dumb! Example: "They simply signed a petition, supposedly." Do you care to find out before making such statements? Are you always so incredibly lazy?"

I'm simply reacting to your video. You asked me to watch it. :)


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

Hey, this has been a little fun but we are on different planets. Enjoy your conspiracy. Wake me if anyone admits to wiring the buildings.


aguasilver profile image

aguasilver 4 years ago from Malaga, Spain

Hi Carl,

Think our shill for the Rothschild's has left the building, they normally do when exposed, the art of a shill is to spread propaganda and confusion, once they have been identified, they need to quit the conversation quickly, or the 'cause' is exposed and they lose their efficiency.

Our friend has tried to plant the seeds of doubt, in the attempt to cloud the evidence of certainty.

No matter which dark ops organisation was behind this, the truth needs to come out, however we will probably never see it exposed for the next 100 years.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

"Think our shill for the Rothschild's has left the building, they normally do when exposed,"

lol. Forgive me for thinking critically. I gotta go cash my paycheck from Dick Cheney.

"Our friend has tried to plant the seeds of doubt, in the attempt to cloud the evidence of certainty."

No, I tried, unsuccessfully, to plant the seeds of critical thinking. My bad.

"No matter which dark ops organisation was behind this, the truth needs to come out, however we will probably never see it exposed for the next 100 years."

In all sincerity. Go outside and play. Wear the tinfoil hat if you must, but leave the house. Go hiking. Ride a bike. We won't bite, promise.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

Good points, John. If this @nicomp loved America half as much as I, they'd be more serious in investigating this. Shill? I don't know. Maybe. The persistence of inanities makes me seriously consider that possibility, though ego can be damaging enough to someone's critical thinking.

Amazing how someone can persist in thinking that they know "critical thinking" and yet continue to spout all manner of illogics. The arrogance of the ant, thinking that they'll take the human back to the nest. Gotta give'em credit for persistence, but persistence in doing the wrong thing won't change the results.

I had forgotten all about the Dick Cheney shooting of Mr. Whittington in 2006. I just saw a video that proves Dick Cheney lied to the police.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A21W3gsfyM0

Just another nail in the coffin of their unsavory nature (Bush and Cheney). Reading the Wikipedia article on the shooting, it struck me as odd that Whitting apologized to the VP, but he was the one shot! Could he have been apologizing for some inflammatory remark to which Cheney reacted by shooting him? If so, then it was attempted murder -- not accident. The shooting, it seems, was not from 90', but more like 15-18' -- roughly 0ne-sixth the distance Cheney claimed. Wow! What a liar!

The rich and powerful may think they're above the law, but I hate the idea of another revolution like that held in France 200 years ago. I don't wish Bush, Cheney or anyone else to be beheaded for their crimes, whether imagined or real.

I've given my guest plenty of opportunity to play nice and to contribute something of value to the discussion, but diminished capacity, ego, greed (from being a shill), or some other impediment prevents them from being so nice.

Frankly, I don't have time for any more such nonsense. I've seen some debunker's videos that actually add value to the discussion, though they treat their claims as absolute (and they're not), but this putative shill will be summarily ignored if they continue with their statements devoid of logic and civility.


ThinkFree 4 years ago

I think you got a bit side tracked there! You didn't really answer the question in the title. For what it's worth, you could get a half decent answer by combining some or all of the following:

Conspiracy theory is:

A suggestion/premise/proposition/theory/supposition/hypothesis which differs from or questions the ‘official’ explanation of what, how and why things happened widely promoted in the popular media and commonly accepted without question by the majority.

Or

Is widely perceived as a crackpot idea that the government (and/or other widely trusted organizations) is/was secretly committing criminal acts to further an agenda,which - if known to the public - would cause absolute outrage and calls for the imprisonment (or worse) of those responsible.

Or

An explanation of what, how and why things happened which - if shown to be true - would mean that those responsible would be guilty of perpetrating serious criminal acts, perverting the course of justice and/or treason.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

Thanks, @ThinkFree, for your own definitions. Nicely done.

But if you'll look at the bullet points at the start of the article, I cover similar points. Certainly it's an important topic and certainly a lot of good material is slandered by false association -- "tin foil hats" with serious questions.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

"Reading the Wikipedia article on the shooting, it struck me as odd that Whitting apologized to the VP, but he was the one shot!"

Wikipedia? Seriously?


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

"Good points, John. If this @nicomp loved America half as much as I, they'd be more serious in investigating this."

My critical thinking skillz and an appalling lack of first-hand evidence tell me to stop investigating. As I keep saying, wake me when someone comes forward and admits to wiring the building. Let me know when one single solitary demolition engineer admits to planning the job. Alert me when a sentient human cops to selling/buying/delivering/configuring/installing the thermite.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

Thanks Nicomp for stopping by again. I'm still waiting for some of your "critical thinking" to rub off.

Wikipedia? Yes, it does have sources, sometimes. And sometimes those sources are accurate. But even I have found errors there and corrected them. But heck, I've found errors in textbooks, newspaper articles and more. No one is perfect. Right?

Policies, economics and military intervention for the last decade were all borne out of 9/11. That makes 9/11 very, very important -- worldwide. Our Constitution has been trashed repeatedly by Bush and Obama -- all blamed on 9/11. But both of these presidents don't want people to question the official "conspiracy theory."

Is it important to you that America is losing what made it unique and important in the history of humanity? Is it important to you that America is becoming a Socialist tyranny -- very similar to what Khrushchev wanted for us in the 50s and 60s?

Skillz? Creative spelling?

You still haven't answered my critical thinking challenge: you think no one can hold a secret, but there have been many secrets held for varying lengths of time. And likely the best kept secrets have been kept forever, so we'll never find out about them. Duh! What you say doesn't sound like critical thinking to me. That sounds more like denial or delusion.

Have you read Operation Northwoods? That was held secret for 35 years! And yet you still insist that secrets cannot be kept? Brother! What are you smoking?

That the Joint Chiefs of Staff can write up a plan to murder innocent American citizens and their own troops to elicit war with another country goes to show that our government can do evil things. And if you don't think murdering your own citizens for political or military gain is wrong, then you're in the wrong country.

@Nicomp, if you find tons of evidence that there was a controlled demolition, then there must have been a controlled demolition. The fact that no one has come forward to admit that they were guilty of treason has no bearing on the evidence of controlled demolition.

Frankly, your brand of "critical thinking" is something I never want to taste. Too much Corporate Party media kool-aid -- delusion and denial.

If you were part of a False Flag Black Ops, would you come forward to admit that you had committed mass murder and treason?

But I suppose you live in a world where things like Operation Northwoods, hit men, false flag operations and Hitler never happen. Must be nice.


aguasilver profile image

aguasilver 4 years ago from Malaga, Spain

Learned Helplessness: The War On You

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnUKu_7CFz8&feature...

Take a look Nicomp, may help clear your head a little....


ThinkFree 4 years ago

Hey Nicomp,

Good thing you're not a detective! You could never get a paedophile or murderer convicted unless they knocked on your office door and handed themselves in with a signed confession and full explanation of how they did it and why. I bet even then you would probably be explaining it all away!

Talk about eyes wide shut!

Ever watched Columbo? It looks like a straightforward suicide but Columbo notices a small detail that doesn't make sense. So he is curious. He is also awake and diligent enough to look deeper - more and more doesn't make sense about the 'official story'. He questions, he probes......eventually uncovering the truth of what really happened. With a lazy acceptance of what are perceived to be the facts, it looks like suicide - just the way the murderer intended it to look.

But examining more closely, the crime is uncovered. And you will notice that the perpetrator of the crime always tries to hide his dirty deed by arranging things to look like something else. And the perpetrator is usually a highly respected pillar of society that you would never suspect capable of doing such a thing. And the motive is, more often than not, covetousness of one form or another. And of course, the perpetrator NEVER confesses his crime at Columbo's first couple of questions. He ducks and dives and continues his pretense of charm and respectability until investigator Columbo uncovers so many inconsistencies followed by lies.......and finally motive that the perpetrator can only accept that he has been caught out and has no choice but to assume the position before being led away in handcuffs.

Good job Columbo isn't fooled by a person's high social standing or apparent charm!

Good job some nincompoop, eyes wide shut detective wasn't assigned the case - otherwise the murderer would walk every time!! Guaranteed!


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

"Have you read Operation Northwoods? That was held secret for 35 years! And yet you still insist that secrets cannot be kept? Brother! What are you smoking?"

Wow. Even Wikipedia confirms that Op Northwoods was 'a series of proposals' that were not acted upon. You are really reaching.

"The fact that no one has come forward to admit that they were guilty of treason has no bearing on the evidence of controlled demolition."

Sure! Hundreds of people colluded to murder thousands of innocent civilians but those conspirators are averse to admitting to treason. That's logical.

"Ever watched Columbo? It looks like a straightforward suicide but Columbo notices a small detail that doesn't make sense. "

Um.... that's TV. It's a story written back-to-front and designed to be solved in 45 minutes. Ever watch Walking Dead? Ever watch Futurama?


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

John, that was an awesome video. The full "teacher" video adds a few more points of interest on the mechanics of learned helplessness.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gFmFOmprTt0

The events of 9/11 certainly helped us into that state of "learned helplessness." The media did everything it could to guide our thoughts through repetition -- "terrorism," "Osama bin Laden," and the like. And also through an Orwellian "New Speak" kind of twist -- calling tyranny the "Patriot Act." There was nothing patriotic about it; only the assaulted and brutalized mind being led toward chains and slavery.

Living in America during most of the decade after 9/11, I couldn't see this. Living in the Philippines for 5 years, I started to wake up and to think critically about it.

(Oops, yes Nicomp, I can think critically. My career in software engineering was based on it. But we each have certain vectors of conceptual blindness, where critical thinking is blocked. And it takes awareness to kick ourselves out of that funk. Arrogance, resentment and bruised egos only block that awakening.)


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

@ThinkFree, a delightful comparison. It would be nice to put Columbo on the trail of the 9/11 culprits and the culprits behind the culprits.


ThinkFree 4 years ago

Nicomp said: "Um... that's TV".

And what is the most powerful and emotive means (audio and visual) that the public has to gain knowledge and interpretation of what is happening - and has happened - in this world? CNN, ABC, FOX, BBC, SKY NEWS etc etc etc

"Um... that's TV". It's a programme (no coincidence that) written and designed to be digested (absorbed) in about the same time as all the other programmes.

Of course, in the case of the modern rolling news, the programme is repeated continuously throughout the day - much more effective that!


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

"And what is the most powerful and emotive means (audio and visual) that the public has to gain knowledge and interpretation of what is happening - and has happened - in this world? CNN, ABC, FOX, BBC, SKY NEWS etc etc etc"

Ummm... again... an episode of Columbo is not / was not / will never be mistaken for hard news... hopefully!

You see, news reporting on TV is, ostensibly, a sliver of what actually happened in the real world. Columbo episodes were contrived by script writers for *entertainment* purposes. The difference is significant.

You do yourself and your cause no favors by invoking TV detectives to buttress your points.


ThinkFree 4 years ago

I recommend reading "The gentleman's guide to forum spies (spooks, feds, etc).

A few of the interesting strategies exposed there:

"......No matter what evidence or logical argument is offered, avoid discussing issues except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect".

"Enigmas have no solution. Drawing upon the overall umbrella of events surrounding the crime and the multitude of players and events, paint the entire affair as too complex to solve".

"Demand complete solutions. Avoid the issues by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely".

"If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance, but even if their emotional response addresses the issue, you can further avoid the issues by then focusing on how 'sensitive they are to criticism.' "

I think I've seen some of those strategies here?

You can read the whole thing here:

cryptome.org/2012/07/gent-forum-spies.htm


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

@nicomp, I don't understand you. The point was not that Operation Northwoods never went live; the point was that it was ever proposed to begin with. The point was that they held a secret for 35 years. Gee, you're dense! Sorry if that hurts your feelings, but I hope it helps to wake up your denial. Your "critical thinking" is slipping.

You make a claim that people cannot hold secrets, I give you an example of a secret held for 35 years, and you divert attention to the fact that the plan was never carried out. Non sequitur logical fallacy!

Did Hitler's group of thugs admit to burning the Reichstag? We didn't learn the real culprits for 12 years. That's how long they kept their secret.

And how about the Gulf of Tonkin incident? The government lied so they could make Vietnam a full-fledged war. How many tens of thousands of Americans died because of that lie? How many billions did the greedy military industrial complex make off of their deaths? Wake up, @Nicomp! America has blood on its hands -- blood of the innocents. And 9/11 was no different.

TV? I guess metaphor, analogy and "art mimicking life" are concepts that blow right past you. A real-life Columbo would have a field day with 9/11, but who can ask the president questions about this, when the "national security" barrier is thrown up to block the truth. That's why we need a more thorough investigation with full subpoena power. I think America is worth it.

Help us legalize the Constitution, again.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

"A real-life Columbo would have a field day with 9/11, but who can ask the president questions about this, when the "national security" barrier is thrown up to block the truth."

A real-life Columbo would be in jail for obstruction of justice, tampering with evidence, practicing law without a license...


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

"Did Hitler's group of thugs admit to burning the Reichstag? "

Yes.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

"Gee, you're dense! Sorry if that hurts your feelings, but I hope it helps to wake up your denial. Your "critical thinking" is slipping."

No offense taken. Those who can't make their points often resort to insults.


ThinkFree 4 years ago

"..............AVOID DISCUSSING ISSUES except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect....."

nicomp - what time does your shift end? :-)

You say that Hitler's thugs admitted to burning down the Reichstag - did they do that the next morning?

Or when it no longer mattered because the job was done?


ThinkFree 4 years ago

nicomp doth protesteth too much, methinks.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

""..............AVOID DISCUSSING ISSUES except with denials they have any credibility, make any sense, provide any proof, contain or make a point, have logic, or support a conclusion. Mix well for maximum effect.....""

Ummm... we are all still waiting for you to produce a real human who wired the building, designed the demolition plan, or purchased/provided/delivered/configured the Thermite.

I keep asking, you keep obfuscating. It's the conspiracy theorist's playbook. Well played!


ThinkFree 4 years ago

From "The gentleman's guide to forum spies (spooks, feds, etc)" - as mentioned in an earlier post:

"Demand complete solutions. AVOID THE ISSUES by requiring opponents to solve the crime at hand completely".

Oh dear, nicomp. Your not very good at this.......is it your first day?

The only things you have offered to date are that (i) secrets can't be kept by a group of people (ii) a criminal will not try to cover his tracks and make it appear that no crime has been committed (iii) if there is no confession there cannot have been a crime.

All of which are patently ridiculous!!

You've been well and truly owned. Back to spook school for you, my boy!


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

"You've been well and truly owned. Back to spook school for you, my boy!"

... still waiting for first person evidence of wiring the building, designing the demolition of the building, or obtaining/purchasing/ordering/delivering/configuring the Thermite. Let me know when a qualified technician/engineer/architect comes forward with personal experience of this obviously massive effort to fell two towers that were so big they had their own zip code.

In the mean time, call me names and declare yourself the winner. It's all good. :)


aguasilver profile image

aguasilver 4 years ago from Malaga, Spain

I guess the 1500+ architects and engineers who all agree it was a controlled demolition don't count huh?

Nah, thought not....


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

"I guess the 1500+ architects and engineers who all agree it was a controlled demolition don't count huh?"

Nope. Doesn't count. Clear enough? It doesn't count because it's a red flag that you have no witnesses. If you had participants, you wouldn't need the third-party observers.

Now, focus on my simple request:

... we are all patiently waiting for first-person accounts of drilling holes in the building, wiring the building, connecting the wires, pressing the button that initiated the ostensible demolition, designing the demolition of the building, or obtaining/purchasing/ordering/delivering/configuring the Thermite.

Somebody did all that work. The building was not constructed with pre-drilled thermite holes. The miles of cabling and fuzing was not included in the original architectural plans.

Let me know when a qualified technician/engineer/architect comes forward with personal experience of this obviously massive effort to fell two towers that were so big they had their own zip code.


ThinkFree 4 years ago

Nicomp: It was good until I saw you go by on the merry-go-round of repetition of your straw man objections to considering the evidence for the third time.Then it got boring and futile.

Criminals don't normally confess their crimes when they're getting away with it. Governement agents who have been involved in covert operations keep their mouths shut to the grave. Their life, their loved ones and fat pensions to protect!

If you refuse to consider the mountains of evidence available, you shouldn't bother reading anything about 'conspiracy theories'.

Why would anybody want to invest so much time and energy on something they claim is all hogwash? (Rhetorical question).

But I'm glad you got something out of it!!


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

"Why would anybody want to invest so much time and energy on something they claim is all hogwash? (Rhetorical question)."

I agree, but it is entertaining to watch you repeat yourself and ignore my salient points. Find me some participants and we'll talk again. Enjoy your paranoia. :)

You have no proof, so you bluster. It's all in good fun.


ThinkFree 4 years ago

Plenty of evidence......no confessions.

You think this is fun? You should get out more! Can't you get yourself a girlfriend to have fun with? Oh........maybe not......but best of luck with that!


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

@Nicomp, you are an interesting character. You pretend to be logical, but then make the most inane claims.

You also pretend to play nice and make a big deal of me making insults. You've been making insults right from the start:

"irrational fascist conspirators"

"mental instability on your part. With all due respect, go outside and play"

"All you have is hearsay and supposition. Have fun with that. When you're ready to distinguish facts from assumptions , let me know. I can help you think critically."

But you even get your facts wrong. "I'm simply reacting to your video. You asked me to watch it. :)" You responded by my comment, but I never asked you to watch that video. Oops!

You said, "A real-life Columbo would be in jail for obstruction of justice, tampering with evidence, practicing law without a license..." And you call yourself logical? Columbo was a police office in the TV stories. Falsehoods! A real-life Columbo would have authority to investigate.

When I asked, "Did Hitler's group of thugs admit to burning the Reichstag?" you answered, "Yes." But you're wrong. They blamed it on the Communists. That's how they were able to force through their false flag operation to give Hitler more power. Perhaps you should study more history.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

@Nicomp, you're the one repeating themselves ad nauseum. Your salient points are interesting, but logically empty.

Yes, it would be nice if Hitler's thugs came right out and admitted burning the Reichstag the next day, instead of blaming it on the Communists. Yes, it would've been nice if the American military admitted the day after the Gulf of Tonkin incident that they had lied about a North Vietnamese attack -- 50,000 of my generation might still be alive.

You keep dodging my salient points and then blame others of dodging yours. I keep addressing yours with examples that prove your thesis wrong and you ignore these.

When you have a more meaningful response (something not ad hominem, non sequitur, falsehood, argument to ignorance or other logical fallacy), I'll be happy to discuss the issue with you.

In the meantime, enjoy some of the salient points of 9/11:

https://soapboxie.com/world-politics/Uncomfortable...


aguasilver profile image

aguasilver 4 years ago from Malaga, Spain

I think we have found a genuine 'sneaky beaky' funded propagandarist who just has to plug the 'official' version he has been given or be fired for not promoting the lies.

Which is interesting, as it shows they have decided that the truth needs to be obscured or the ordinary folk may actually wake up to what really happened.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnUKu_7CFz8&feature...


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

I feel a bit of cognitive dissonance actually finding such an operative commenting on this hub.

The guy seems to have interesting credentials -- MS in computer science. He should be able to think logically, but clearly he's not. Me? I only have a bachelors degree, summa cum laude and 20 years programming experience. Oh, well. When someone has a track record of logical achievement and spouts nonsense, then there is a hidden agenda involved, or they've lost their faculties and slipped into dementia, Alzheimers or worse.

The fact that he has friends who know George W. Bush personally suggests that he may be playing in the "big leagues" with the criminals themselves. I don't envy that lofty position one bit.


ThinkFree 4 years ago

lone77star and aguasilver.

I don't know whether you read "The gentleman's guide to forum spies" (it is only a few page scrolls long), but nicomp behaved EXACTLY according to those strategies.

He is a textbook internet spook! That's why I said he's not very good at it........because he didn't hide it very well.

lone77star; I understand exactly where your coming from when you started showing how he accuses others of doing exactly what he was doing himself.

"You keep dodging my salient points and then blame others of dodging yours. I keep addressing yours with examples that prove your thesis wrong and you ignore these".

"You also pretend to play nice and make a big deal of me making insults. You've been making insults right from the start:"

He knows exactly what he's doing because he's using strategies he has been trained to use!

Just look back through my exchanges with him. He tried exactly the same techniques with me.

The idea is to cause you to become angry and frustrated. They seek to draw you into a circular argument - so that eventually, all people are reading is a point scoring exercise between individuals - the original article being a hazy memory.

"Pretending to be nice" when it is clear that he is not is also a strategy. They know that this is a particularly obnoxious trait and that it angers people. So they use it!

Look back at my exchanges with him - he was doing the same to me.

This comment of his (to me) is an excellent example:

""Why would anybody want to invest so much time and energy on something they claim is all hogwash? (Rhetorical question)."

I agree, but it is entertaining to watch you repeat yourself and ignore my salient points. Find me some participants and we'll talk again. Enjoy your paranoia. :)

You have no proof, so you bluster. It's all in good fun".

Now if that isn't a clear example of him using strategies to achieve a goal, then I don't know what is!

He says he finds it entertaining to watch me. That is deliberately and openly being insulting and provocative.

Then, to attempt to anger me, he throws in what he finds particularly 'entertaining' - he says that I repeat myself and ignore his salient points. Well as you pointed out yourself, this is exactly what he was doing more than anybody else. But.....think about it.....they know that people find hypocrites revolting and infuriating. And this will often result in those people 'losing their reason' and reacting in anger. Which is exactly the desired effect.

From the article I mentioned:

""If you can't do anything else, chide and taunt your opponents and draw them into emotional responses which will tend to make them look foolish and overly motivated, and generally render their material somewhat less coherent. Not only will you avoid discussing the issues in the first instance.........."

He knows exactly what he's doing - and these dark strategies generally work.......UNLESS you know of them and understand them!!

The next sentence of his comment to me was to find him somebody who has confessed to participating in the demolition. He knows I have addressed the fact that criminals do not confess their crimes - especially not crimes on this scale. Even unwitting accomplices would be scared to needlessly confess to having played a part - especially if somebody were to point out to them what would likely happen to them from a legal standpoint.....not to mention the bad affects on the health and wealth of them and their family. Like I say, I have already covered this - and he knows it. It's a dead argument he is offering up.....he just wants to draw me to anger and frustration.

Then he hts me with an open insult - further goading.

And finally, a smiley face to pretend that he is being nice - despite having just tried to mess my head up with hypocrisy, insults and other goading strategies.

Familiarise yourself with the strategies and you will spot them a mile off!

Now that you have experienced one operating, why not write a blog on the subject?

Incidentally, any information you receive from this character or that is on his profile is not necessarily true.

Prepare yourself for a shock: these people lie and have cover occupations and histories.

His indirect link with Bush could well be another strategy where they make an unverifiable claim to privileged knowledge, qualifications or connections in order to claim a superior position and thus authority for what he is saying.

As he said himself, he finds it fun doing what he is paid to do. He probably has a little chuckle to himself as he comments - knowing what reaction he is going to get and delighting in leading people by the nose to just where he wants them.

Learn from this - and teach others about it!

Get blogging!


ThinkFree 4 years ago

No, just some run-around, faceless, 10-a-penny stooge who gets a hard on at the thought of being a low-grade James Bond type.

Like I told you before, you've been well and truly owned. niNcompOOP!


aguasilver profile image

aguasilver 4 years ago from Malaga, Spain

Nincompoop, your celebrity has the same quality as a Big Brother contestant, a legend in their own lunch hour!

Your cover is blown, your masters should rethink your employment contract, you are so toasted you are burnt to a cinder.

But hey! someone has to work for the scumbags, and if you can squeeze a good income for your efforts, I congratulate you, and thank God I need not ever sit within your stench.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

@ThinkFree, thanks for the insights and the Guide. I think it's time we pull the plug on this guy.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 4 years ago from Ohio, USA

Wow, I never thought you'd censor me. George Bush would be proud of you.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

Well, @Nicomp. You were asked nicely and even invited to contribute something of value. Every point of substance I offered to you was ignored. And that's okay. But those who only disrupt are not invited to the party. If disruption is all you can add, then you are uninvited.

And yet the door will always remain open. If you ever decide to contribute something of value, a new invitation can be arranged, if you accompany your request with humility and contrition. Somehow, I suspect ego will prevent that.

You can still disagree, but if you do not respond to issues given and only attack non-issues and use ad hominem, then you will remain uninvited. It's that simple.

You censor yourself by your behavior.

(And more non sequitur? GW has nothing to do with this issue.)


ThinkFree 4 years ago

lone77star: very well summed up. The ass was still playing his game right to the last comment! Obviously doesn't know the meaning of 'your cover is blown, get outta there'! He really does need more training if he wants to continue in the dark crafts.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

Thanks, @ThinkFree. Whatever his motivation, it's sad to find such darkness lurking around. I've met people who were that delusional, but innocent. I had never met someone who wore such a pretense. And yet I have met people who were dark and made their darkness seem to be light -- hostility couched in friendliness -- closeness to cover the knife going in deep. It takes all kinds. And it looks as though we have a lot more of that kind of darkness up ahead. If I read the signs correctly, it looks like a storm of biblical proportions for all of us. Take care of yourself, and may God protect you and yours.


ThinkFree 4 years ago

".... If I read the signs correctly, it looks like a storm of biblical proportions for all of us. Take care of yourself, and may God protect you and yours......"

Now that could be a very interesting conversation! But I don't think I've got the energy for it.

But anyway, you take care too.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

Thanks, @ThinkFree.


Enlydia Listener profile image

Enlydia Listener 4 years ago from trailer in the country

Interesting.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 4 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

Thanks, @Enlydia. Good to see you after all this time.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 3 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

One of the commenters, here, defended Bush as if he was not some kind of war criminal. Personally, I feel he was an embarrassment to the office of president. He was a bumbling idiot, and I wonder if this was on purpose. If the Commander in Chief is a goofball, then his administration could certainly not have had anything to do with 9/11. That's the emotional response.

That's Normalcy Bias kicking in. And it seems to have worked. But then Bush lied about WMDs and had the audacity to make jokes about it at a fundraiser, while our troops continued to die over that lie. Not only is Bush insensitive, he's guilty of treason. Not only did he break his oath to defend the Constitution, according to one report, he had the gall to call it a worthless piece of paper.

One video I just saw sheds some more light on Bush's and now Obama's war crimes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eEIM-3GNGag

The take-away from all this is -- don't depend on government or the police to protect you. Over 200 years ago, liberty-minded people fought against the tyranny of the British government. Now, the tyranny is homegrown. Now, the tyranny is in our own Whitehouse.


mythbuster profile image

mythbuster 3 years ago from Utopia, Oz, You Decide

Nice article reminding us all to think critically before we believe that all conspiracy theorists are eventually going to put on tin foil hats!


nicomp profile image

nicomp 3 years ago from Ohio, USA

Not surprised to see this thread has withered since I was censored.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 3 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

Thanks, mythbuster. Succinctly and nicely put.

The pejorative use of "conspiracy theorist" seems to suggest that conspiracies have never occurred in the history of humanity. That in itself is an interesting delusion.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 3 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

@Nicomp, frankly I couldn't care less. Your sense of self-importance speaks volumes. Your lack of logic on certain points also speaks volumes. It shows bias.

Like I said before, if you want to contribute to a dialog, you're quite welcome, even if you voice opinions with which I disagree. But abusive behavior will not be tolerated. I thought you would understand that. But your tone of self-importance, here, convinces me that such understanding is thwarted by that same self-importance. Arrogance is blindness. Only with humility can anyone ever learn.

As I said before, "You were asked nicely..."

The door is still open. And I'm hungry to learn, even if it proves my prior understanding wrong. That's what real scientists do. They follow the evidence... not the ego.


nicomp profile image

nicomp 3 years ago from Ohio, USA

@lone77star , you seem scared of my words. It's just a little blog.


lone77star profile image

lone77star 3 years ago from Cebu, Philippines Author

@nicomp, thanks for the laugh. You seem to repeat yourself in blowing your own self-importance out of proportion. As I said before, that speaks volumes. I welcome intelligent discourse. I fear nothing, especially opinions that differ from my own; I relish them, because I learn from them. But your last 2 comments have contributed nothing to the discussion, here. The door is closing, again. Gee, and I thought you were smart.

Little blog? You state the obvious, but I'm curious about your motive. More self-importance? More ego? Thump your chest all you want. It's a bit amusing, but also sad. If this is such a small blog or article (and it is), why do you bother except to puff up your own importance?

If you value logic and critical thinking as much as you purport to, then I would expect you to be more logical and to think more critically. But you seem to be disproving your own putative talents. I'm curious if you will reply... and if you will reply more cordially and intelligently. But ego really is a tough master to shake off.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working