Good long read about conspiracy theories

soulsinging · February 2008

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

WE HAVE THE quoteS THAT PROVE IT
is basicaly what i'm trying to say.

CFR is EVERYWHERE and Rockefeller is CONFESSED.

what the hell do quotes prove? that there are a lot of ambitious people who want as much power, money, and influence as they can get? by god, you've won me.

what cfr? the only ones i see when i google are a bank and a diplomatic entity.

what did rockefeller confess to?

soulsinging · February 2008

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

I like the self-defeating cycle where frustrated "conspiracy theorists" have to start yelling information while screaming "read this! its proof!" because the readers REFUSE to actualy digest information and would much rather focus on their opponents superficial faults ... like their writing style or personal disposition.

the reason i've given up on TRYING to digest the information is that on numerous occasions i have read it. and you know what? it ISNT proof. it's coincidence and conjecture, strung together to provide a damning picture with scant substance. it's like a michael moore movie. pick your position, select any fact that looks bad, ignore any fact that doesn't support it, and dismiss any skepticism with claims of naivete.

im with OOB on this. the problem is not conspiracy theories per se. certainly, powerful people band together to benefit themselves often. certainly there are conspiracies. the problem is that too often conspiracy theorists overreach themselves. nothing EVER happens by chance or accident. everything is coordinated and controlled by an evil syndicate always working in concert. bad things never happen just becos sometimes people are fucked up and do shitty things sometimes. there is ALWAYS a lex luthor-style criminal mastermind behind it. just as to a religious person, satan is always behind it. they are both equally nonsense views.

DriftingByTheStorm · February 2008

soulsinging wrote:

the reason i've given up on TRYING to digest the information is that on numerous occasions i have read it. and you know what? it ISNT proof. it's coincidence and conjecture, strung together to provide a damning picture with scant substance. it's like a michael moore movie. pick your position, select any fact that looks bad, ignore any fact that doesn't support it, and dismiss any skepticism with claims of naivete.

im with OOB on this. the problem is not conspiracy theories per se. certainly, powerful people band together to benefit themselves often. certainly there are conspiracies. the problem is that too often conspiracy theorists overreach themselves. nothing EVER happens by chance or accident. everything is coordinated and controlled by an evil syndicate always working in concert. bad things never happen just becos sometimes people are fucked up and do shitty things sometimes. there is ALWAYS a lex luthor-style criminal mastermind behind it. just as to a religious person, satan is always behind it. they are both equally nonsense views.

You say you have read and looked in to this stuff, yet one post above you say "What CFR?" and seemingly acknowledge you do not even know what the organization is or what it does (and what its REAL goals are).

Council on Foreign Relations.
Look it up.
It was founded by Rockefeller interests with the aim of achieving significant CONTROL over US "foreign" policy ... although the reality is they affect nearly ALL policy decisions facing our government, in that they are behind every president and much of the legislature.

Now.
Did i stop reading OOBs article?
Yes.
Is that hypocritical?
Yes.

But we're talking about a MOUNTAIN of information presented here to show that there IS something incredibly f*@#!D up going on, and all we get back is one article written by, as OOB likes to say, "obviously biased sources with agendas".

And if we want to start weighing who has the bigger agenda, The Internationalist Elite, or Alex Jones, give me a fucking break. One guy (AJ) openly talks about liberty and clearly supports the ideals our republic was founded on, and screams about it on a daily basis ... in fact his ENTIRE livelyhood is based on (wether you agree with his sensationalism or not) raising awareness and defending freedom from tyrany ...

AND ON THE OTHER HAND ... you have the Rockefeller\CFR\Globalist elite ... whose STATED INTENTION IS GLOBAL POLITICAL CONTROL... and who ADMIT IN THEIR OWN PUBLISHED MEMOIRS that this is the case, and that it is done in defiance of US interests.

ONCE AGAIN. THE quote:

David Rockefeller, himself wrote:

"Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure---one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." --David Rockefeller, MEMOIRS, page 405

NOW NOW NOW.
I'm so fucking sick of this shit.
Best i can make, OOB's article is based ENTIRELY on personal opinion and bullshit ...

on the contrast, despite his assumptions about where a pile of evidence is pointing in the future, Alex Jones has hours of video, hundreds of hours of radio, and scores of documents PROVING, FACTUALY SHOWING that there are a bunch of people out there, usualy working in some concert, TO EXERT MASSIVE COLLECTIVE CONTROL over not only the US political structure, but the very fabric of "reality" ...

How can people argue that they don't have their hand deeply embedded in Politics, Money Supply, Educational System, Industrial Capital, and Social Fabric?

THAT IS CONTROL.
IT IS MANIPULATIVE.
MUCH OF IT IS DONE IN A "SHADOWY" MANNER.

What more do you fucking need to show there are people who want to control the world and are actively seeking to do so?

Again, David Rockefeller, SAME GUY THAT HEAPS ENDLESS PRAISE AT CHAIRMAN MAO ... says what he did in China is the greatest fucking thing since sliced bread ... ADMITEDLY running his "game" AGAINST US INTEREST ...

and he has his hand in EVERYTHING.
The CFR IS David Rockefeller.
Bilderberg IS to a large extent, David Rockefeller.

It's not JUST him, but he EMBODIES the "Globalist movement" ...

and people like him have been working since at LEAST the turn of the century to bring a good few seemingly independent quadrants of reality together to form a NEW reality ... eugenics, monitary policy, political manipulation, industrial control ... etc ... those things SEEM independent but they can ALL be manipulated to the same end.

EVERYTHING Alex Jones says (that i have ever looked in to, which is a LOT of it) checks out to the fucking T.

And if you connec the dots you get an ugly fucking picture of reality.

These people control the government, they create wars for profit and control, they bought up the media in the late 20th century, and replaced the educational structure in the mid 1900's in order to CHANGE THE WAY PEOPLE THINK ... to dumb them down, to make them more malleable, passive, accepting, resigned ... to deliberately feed them erroneous, misleading, unproductive information ... to KEEP THEM IN LINE.

You may not see it coming.
But the Elite have a VERY real desire to institute something approximating what Alex Jones terms, "the control grid", and it benefits them immensely to have an altered reality where those with the guns (military and police) are too stupid, violent, and sheeplike to question their orders ... and to have a public that is too stupid, placid, and sheeplike to question the authority with which their lives are ruled ... and when you ACHIEVE such control structure, rebellion is OUT OF THE QUESTION.

At least, that is the ruling belief these people have.
Unfortunately (for them, though a cornered wild animal is scary!), like AJ has stated, they are about 5 years behind in their game plan, currently. Someone shot down Flight 93 (unless you believe the "lets roll" story that involves, per flight log statistics, the passengers charging the cockpit while the plane was upside down in a nosedive) and stopped it from plowing into either the Capitol or the White House (who knows, but it was most likely headed towards Washington) and giving "them" a clear reason to implement Marshal Law ... and it would have given them an excuse to unleash clear financial armageddon as well ...

instead they got this hodgepodge Post-911 reality where the people are just jaded, and they didn't have the right situation to get what they wanted ...

Ask yourself what would have happened if Flight 93 had reached its target. There WOULD have been Marshal Law, it is nearly unquestionable. They would have had the legal grounds to do so.

In any event.
I'm seriously tired of this.
You guys say we have no evidence, but it is presented time and time again. Ya'll just dismiss it as from "biased sources" ... yet ya'll come back with NOTHING but opinion and bullshit yellow journalism and you say that it negates document after document and historical incident after historical incident.

:(

MasterFramer · February 2008

Jesus is a myth...

soulsinging · February 2008

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

You say you have read and looked in to this stuff, yet one post above you say "What CFR?" and seemingly acknowledge you do not even know what the organization is or what it does (and what its REAL goals are).

Council on Foreign Relations.
Look it up.
It was founded by Rockefeller interests with the aim of achieving significant CONTROL over US "foreign" policy ... although the reality is they affect nearly ALL policy decisions facing our government, in that they are behind every president and much of the legislature.

i asked to confirm that we were talking about the same organization. becos you talk about the cfr like it's the league of shadows.

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

And if we want to start weighing who has the bigger agenda, The Internationalist Elite, or Alex Jones, give me a fucking break. One guy (AJ) openly talks about liberty and clearly supports the ideals our republic was founded on, and screams about it on a daily basis ... in fact his ENTIRE livelyhood is based on (wether you agree with his sensationalism or not) raising awareness and defending freedom from tyrany ...

to save space, ill just quote this rather than the 10 paragraphs after. i am not in the least surprised that rich people are plotting to get richer. and that is how i read the quote you posted. not that these guys are in some sense banding together to keep everyone else in the world down, that it is some sort of brotherhood of conspiracy or unified moral ideology. that they are businessmen who want to get richer. sure, what they do is disgusting. but they are only allies in the sense that their selfish goals happen to require the same action, not in that they have a shared worldview that they are trying to impose. they are all trying to get rich and the second one of them feels there are better ways to do it, they would do it even if it cruched the rest of them. conspiracy implies they are all willing to make sacrifices for each other to achieve some vision at the end. that isn't the case. they are only working together now becos it is profitable.

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

At least, that is the ruling belief these people have.
Unfortunately (for them, though a cornered wild animal is scary!), like AJ has stated, they are about 5 years behind in their game plan, currently. Someone shot down Flight 93 (unless you believe the "lets roll" story that involves, per flight log statistics, the passengers charging the cockpit while the plane was upside down in a nosedive) and stopped it from plowing into either the Capitol or the White House (who knows, but it was most likely headed towards Washington) and giving "them" a clear reason to implement Marshal Law ... and it would have given them an excuse to unleash clear financial armageddon as well ...

instead they got this hodgepodge Post-911 reality where the people are just jaded, and they didn't have the right situation to get what they wanted ...

Ask yourself what would have happened if Flight 93 had reached its target. There WOULD have been Marshal Law, it is nearly unquestionable. They would have had the legal grounds to do so.

In any event.
I'm seriously tired of this.
You guys say we have no evidence, but it is presented time and time again. Ya'll just dismiss it as from "biased sources" ... yet ya'll come back with NOTHING but opinion and bullshit yellow journalism and you say that it negates document after document and historical incident after historical incident.

this is exactly what i am talking about. you offer this as evidence? this is not evidence, this is pure supposition and speculation. you have no proof, no smoking gun, that 9/11 was plotted to achieve martial law. furthermore, the fact that you don't understand the import of the terms you use, indicates the lack of depth in your grasp of these issues. marshal law? what is that? it's not a typo, becos you repeat it consistently. it is martial law. the fact that you are ignorant of even the correct term for what is central to your entire theory shows that you are willing to accept even the most superficial theories if they sound good.

DriftingByTheStorm · February 2008

soulsinging wrote:

i asked to confirm that we were talking about the same organization. becos you talk about the cfr like it's the league of shadows.

You know what?
You're right.
I did misspell Martial Law.
:rolleyes:

And "the proof" is not me babbling about Flight 93.
I fully recognize that is suposition.
All though its hardly much of one.
Had it hit any political target within DC, the legal grounds to institute Marshal Law (

) would have been reached.

ANYHOW,
that you are unwilling to acknowledge that Rockefeller himself is ADMITTED regarding this "conspiracy", is beyond comprehension.

I could understand if it was ONLY a quote, but it is quote supported by nearly 100 years of action and historical fact to back it.

Lets try this one more time, just look at the quote and then we'll move on:

again wrote:

"Some even believe we (the Rockefeller family) are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure---one world, if you will. If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it." --David Rockefeller, MEMOIRS, page 405

What part of
"I FUCKING ADMIT I AM PART OF A SECRET CABAL WORKING AGAINST THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE UNITED STATES"

"I AM AN INTERNATIONALIST LOOKING TO 'INTEGRATE' THE GLOBAL POLITICAL STRUCTURE IN TO 'ONE WORLD' "

and

"I AM GUILTY"

Don't make sense in the context of all the evidence pointing towards that?

HERE. READ THIS

What part of this don't you understand?

The Rockefellers are THE family that was behind the push towards eugenics. They started the movement for all practical purposes. They funded the everloving fucking out of it. They are responsible for elevating the man that helped make mass murder a reality for hitler.

AND

The Rockefeller family, by way of the Standard Oil (original wealth for the Rockefellers stems from their Standard Oil company) IG Farben connection ... THEY WERE RESPONSIBLE FOR ZYKLON B FOR FUCKS SAKE!

Here is a great quote from a senator at the time of WWII:

Senator LaFollette wrote:

After the United States entered the war, Standard’s cooperation with I.G. Farben became a scandal. In Senate hearings, Senator Robert LaFollette of Wisconsin was blunt in his criticism of the company. Standard Oil, he said, “was found by the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice to be conspiring with I.G. Farben … of Germany. I.G. Farben, through its maze of international patent agreements, is the spear-head of Nazi economic warfare.”

-source

Thats pretty fucking clear and to the point.
I just don't understand how people can deny this.

This is like denying that George Bush's grandfathers were Nazis. The George Herbert Walker, Prescott Bush, Harriman\Thyssen connection is ROCK SOLID HISTORIC FACT.

How much shit do you have to fucking tie together?

These people were involved in EVERYTHING bad in the 20th century, by and large.

Where in that is there no conspiracy?

They want unadulterated power and control, and they want to LITERALY change the face of reality to achieve it ... and they ARE ... ask the average american how they feel about a gold standard, and they will probably tell you "its a stupid idea" ... that is pretty undeniable. The elite have achieved their goal of making the people accept their fate as something GOOD.

Its like the Nazi's charging the Jews a train fare to their doom. Pathetic.

LaterDays · February 2008

Wow. It's like listening to UFO enthusiasts speak about Roswell.

Concerning the article, my favorite part was:

"Just as with a True Believer in religion, the True Believer in a conspiracy can be notoriously difficult to reason with and convince that there exists even the possibility that they might be mistaken. Those who raise skeptical questions are quickly labeled as "uninformed," "lacking insight" or worse still, actually aiding the forces of darkness. Faith is a virtue, skepticism a sin. Those who see the truth of the conspiracy come to believe that they alone bear the true light of history - and religion. The value of such attitudes for the ego are clear, but it is also just as clear that these same attitudes alienate a person from others who might be able to provide a moderating influence. Isolation unfortunately has a habit of slowing reinforcing radical and paranoid ideologies."

soulsinging · February 2008

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

You know what?
You're right.
I did misspell Martial Law.
:rolleyes:

you didnt "misspell" it. you were ignorant of the actual term that is central to your entire theory.

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

What part of
"I FUCKING ADMIT I AM PART OF A SECRET CABAL WORKING AGAINST THE BEST INTERESTS OF THE UNITED STATES"

"I AM AN INTERNATIONALIST LOOKING TO 'INTEGRATE' THE GLOBAL POLITICAL STRUCTURE IN TO 'ONE WORLD' "

and

"I AM GUILTY"

the part where he draws the distinction between what he does and how people characterize it. that is the classic political technique of trying to point out how unfair a label is by accepting the facts. i'll use an example:

"some people label me a fascist communist based on my view that everyone in american should have free guaranteed access to health care... of that i am guilty."

as to the nazi thing, a lot of americans and international businessmen had dealings with the nazis. they were good for profit. unfortunately, racism and anti-semitism were also all too common in the world. the world has rejected that view and it is slowly dying. that alone is proof that the rockefellers do NOT control the world, if so we would not be outraged by holocaust becos we could never resist their all-powerful influence. they may try to influence every corner of it, but they cannot always succeed. you seem to be strongly opposed to profiteering. all well and good. but americans seem to be ok with it. they rejected rockefeller's genocide, but accept his view on global markets and capitalism. the world is against it, and just as the world united against nazism when it was deemed unconscionable, once the injustice of capitalistic profiteering resonates with enough people (as has already begun), he and those like him will fall.

kenny olav · February 2008

gawwwdaam, driftingbythestorm, your posts are making my ears ring! chill, man, chill!

i think one thing we can all agree on is that most people in the world do not have any power over world events. and the people who have power like to stay in power, and don't like their power challenged. so i think the power structure lends itself to abuse of authority.

for sure, there are some conspiracy theorists, like David Icke, Jeff Rense, Lyndon LaRouche and to a lesser extent, Alex Jones, who are religious in their communication and propose ludicrous, albeit entertaining ideas about world leaders. but most people believe in either Islam, Christianity, Hinduism and Mormonism and what not, so why is believing in the Illuminati and Reptilians any less, um, normal?

but when you take the religious or religious-like conspiracies out of the equation, and you're left with the fact that there are private groups like the Bilderbergers, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Carlyle Group, and other groups that have tremendous influence and are not accountable to the public, and that both the "neoliberal" and "neoconservative" economic policies they are successful in establishing serve nobody but themselves and their allies (funders)... well... how can a person not theorize, or at least hypothesize, that these groups have conspired against the rest of us? and dammit, no one has answered why WTC7 went down like that.

Abookamongstthemany · February 2008

OutOfBreath wrote:

Well certainly. Conspiracies happen. I just tend to disregard the "total" brand which has the world all figured out and has evil men responsible for all ills. There are no random events, seems to be the motto.

And I dont know if you've been around often lately, but most threads tend to be hijacked by the conspiracy-crowd these days. It gets old, and the backing they have is often flimsy. Which is why they might get shot down quickly these days in here.

And I'm all for asking questions, but these folks have answers that they do the net equivalent of yelling in your ear, while being completely impervious to questions going against their answer.

That's what rubs me the wrong way about them, and that's some of what is adressed in the links i posted.

Peace
Dan

I definitely get where you are coming from and I tend to dismiss things myself once it's starting in the 'evil/darkness' direction. I only posted what I did because I've seen how people here, who were only posting to engage in a serious discussion about things that concerned them and with valid points, were immediately ridiculed 'just because' and their points ignored. I don't understand why it is sooo hard for people to express their disagreement without being so nasty about it. If they believe so strongly against these theories, it shouldn't be a problem for them to say why and back it up with what they know.

But I have seen some posts that are definitely over the top and stretching way too far. I can't stand the whole 'you're just blind and ignorant for not seeing this' mentality I've noticed in some threads. It's a close minded approach that's not going to change anyone's mind. And I don't have a problem if those are shot down as long as it's civil and done with facts not personal attacks.

So basicly I was just letting both sides be shown in this thread. This 'in your face', highly aggrivated and paranoid of everything approach rubs me the wrong way, too. I think it would serve those posters well to tone it down and chill out a bit. I haven't gotten around to reading the stuff in your links yet, I was hoping to be able to get to that tonight. I can definitely see the comparison to religion, though. Religion is not open to changes in thought, being proved wrong and often leads to fanaticism which in turn leads to anger and clouds rationality. There is most certainly a cross section of society that follows these conspiracies in much the same way.

DriftingByTheStorm · February 2008

soulsinging wrote:

that alone is proof that the rockefellers do NOT control the world,[...]once the injustice of capitalistic profiteering resonates with enough people [...]he and those like him will fall.

Wow.
I don't even know how to start.

Here goes:

1. The elite have spent at least the last 200 years (but arguably the study goes back to Rome or farther) trying to figure out the best way to "control" the masses, the wealth, the political climate and the future of that control.

2. The elite have come to a consensus since post-WWII that SOCIALISM is the BEST MEANS of achieving their aims.

3. The argument before WWII was between the socialist\communist model of control that spread through social and political manpiulation of the masses and the fascist method which achieved that same goal through brute force and repression.

4. Yes, Rockefellers involvement in WWII was, IN PART, motivated by sheer profit, but alternatively he CLEARLY supported the GOALS of nazism (and was hedging his bets on BOTH sides of the Communist\Fascist divide) ... which was to reduce the "less desirable" population of the world, while spreading global political control held by a anglofied elite.

5. Yes, the world was pretty quick to realize they didn't want to be brutaly repressed by a dictator.

6. No, the world is pretty slow to catch on to the fact that the new chosen government is based on the Bave New World \ Mao Tse Tsung\"Peoples Republic" form of rule. Which, i would like to hear your opinions on, by the way. You like that? Is it the utopian part about the 6 year olds playing naked together? hehe

7. Rockefeller himself openly lauds Mao:

Rockefeller wrote:

"Whatever the price of the Chinese Revolution, it has obviously succeeded not only in producing more efficient and dedicated administration, but also in fostering high morale and community of purpose. The social experiment in China under Chairman Mao's leadership is one of the most important and successful in human history."

---David Rockefeller, statement about Mao Tse-tung in The New York Times, August 10, 1973

Care to explain away that quote?

8. WORLD Government is a fucking horrible idea.
I know some people just don't fucking get it, and they think eveyone can be happy together if we just drop our borders and focus on eachother. Hey, COMMUNISM SOUNDS GREAT IN THEORY! But here in the real world, uniting everyone under ONE GOVERNMENT is the STUPIDEST THING I HAVE EVER HEARD. How many MILLIONS UPON MILLIONS have to die at the hands of the state for you to realize that having ONE STATE means that NO ONE CAN REBEL!

What will you do if and when there is a global government, "America" decides it is getting the shaft and wants to fight back? The global government will send in troops from China and Russia who will GLADLY slaughter us in the streets so they can have the better "global" share of OUR wealth.

Do you really not see the problem here?

Just because the world rejected Nazism doesn't mean that the elite (yes, largely spearheaded by ole Rockefeller, again, do you deny that the CFR has MASSIVE control in the US? Or that he and his ilk are all behind the WORLD Bank, the WORLD Trade Organization, UNITED Nations) will continue to plot to collectively subserve the constitution of America and try to dumb its people down and intergrate them with a global structure that strips them of their rights?

In closing,
i'd just like to say that the elite are EXCEPTIONALY skilled at frauding the public into willfully swallowing ideas that are directly adverse to their real long term health and security. You should know the list by now, fiat money (owned and issued as debt by the Federal Reserve), the educational system (implements and manipulated by and for the benefit of the elite), the government system (expressly manipulated by CFR), the media system (give me a break if you don't think this is true) ... etc.

To deny that THAT IS control is just silly.
As much as "control" can exist in this world, that is it.

And if they end up with GLOBAL GOVERNMENT that WILL be "control".

How do you deny that?

And again, i'd like you to look at that quote by Rockefeller on Mao, if nothing else.

That has NOTHING to do with profiteering.
The guy flat out says that Mao is the best thing since sliced bread, and the social "reform" that he brought about was absolutely worth the price of the blood of millions of innocents!

???

[edit:

oh. one more thing that IS directly (i think) on topic to your OP on conspiracy and RELIGION, though i know you will just run wild with the back half of this quote, because so clearly rockefeller is a nice guy and realy wants the world to be a "a better place", but again, REGARDLESS of the MEANS necessary to achieve it...

... check in to something called the "Interchurch World Movement" of which the younger Rockefeller said, "I do not think we can overestimate the importance of this Movement. As I see it, it is capable of having a much more far-reaching influence than the League of Nations in bringing about peace, contentment, goodwill and prosperity among the people of the earth." and then asked his daddy to give him 100-200 MILLION dollars to fund it. Again, if you think the "Moral Majority" is offensive ... think about a GLOBLAL ORGANIZED RELIGION that makes Catholicism look like chump change ... 100-200 million dollars to fund it in the mid-20'th century was a SHIT TON. ??? What about THAT ??? You really think the guy is interested in peace so much as power? More far reaching influence than League of Nations? Hmm wow!

Speaking of getting peace by ANY MEANS necessary. HOW BOUT OUR BUDDY KISSINGER:

"...The outcome in Iraq will depend on something that a German philosopher, Immanuel Kant said... someday there will be universal peace. The only question is whether it comes about through human insight, or whether it comes about... through a series of catastrophes of such a magnitude that people are so exhausted that they have no other choice." - Henry Kissinger, On May 31, 2007, speaking in Istanbul Turkey at a conference organized by Akbank

HUH?
WHAT THE FUCK !!??!!

Nevermind · February 2008

"We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries." -David Rockefeeler speaking at a meeting with the Trilateral Commision.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw&feature=related
Total proof bombs were planted in the buildings.

DriftingByTheStorm · February 2008

Nevermind wrote:

"We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries." -David Rockefeeler speaking at a meeting with the Trilateral Commision.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw&feature=related
Total proof bombs were planted in the buildings.

I'll just go ahead and spare you the agony of having one of "them" saying it:

1. Quotes don't prove anything. Nothing. Get over it. Its just words.

2. That video proves nothing. Any idiot can post on youtube. I didn't even watch it, but its stupid. All those people are just confused. It was traumatic. The word "explosion" has a lot of meanings. It was probably just laundry machines, and 2x4s breaking. Who knows. No one will know. You don't know. Put on your tinfoil hat.

DriftingByTheStorm · February 2008

Nevermind wrote:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8n-nT-luFIw&feature=related

Wow.
8:30 mark ...

Explain THAT.

I've heard a lot of bullshit in my life.
And i fully believe 911 was an "inside job", but i've been skeptical about the "bombs in the building" ... but c'mon ...
plane crashes 80 floors up, and then "i was down in the basement. All of a sudden we heard a loud bang. The elevator doors BLEW open. Some guy was burnt up. So i grabbed him out. His skin was all hanging off."

That is the 3rd first hand account of video documentary i've seen of BASEMENT explosions (one of the others is at 9:40, and then there is that hispanic janitor on another video), coupled with the weird melting and angled charge cuts on the base of the support columns, i'm sold. If the basement "explosions" were just colums splitting by force of downwards pressure from the crash, EXPLAIN THE SKIN HANGING OFF???

Fucking bullshit.

SilverSeed · February 2008

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

This is like denying that George Bush's grandfathers were Nazis. The George Herbert Walker, Prescott Bush, Harriman\Thyssen connection is ROCK SOLID HISTORIC FACT.

My great grandfather was in the Sinn Fein. Should it be assumed I'm an Irish terrorist?

Not that I want to get into this, because it's fucking crazy. But how can you sit there and rant rant rant about how nobody listens to you or pays attention to you, and then ignore their arguments or links? And you need to understand that AJ is not a credible news source. Each video that I've actually seen reviewed (I can't watch youtube here) points out that it's spliced together clips with interjections that are loosely based in fact. I have never seen this argument taken on by the CTs.

The point is, I don't think anyone disagrees that corruption exists, that evil exists, and that the super wealthy will flex any muscle they can to secure and grow that wealth. But to go from that, and add quotes from a few people in the last century, to a worldwide conspiracy is far fetched to anyone who sees daylight each day.

Commy · February 2008

Think Chomsky put it best, to paraphrase, 'conspiracy is a term used to discredit institutional analysis'.

It is a general term used to discredit anyone that questions the status quo, to dismiss them without having to deal with the information they present.

DriftingByTheStorm · February 2008

double postin jive.
get to postin, mother fucker.

look DOWN,
cause i got
no more
patience,
man.

DriftingByTheStorm · February 2008

SilverSeed wrote:

Each video that I've actually seen reviewed (I can't watch youtube here) points out that it's spliced together clips with interjections that are loosely based in fact. I have never seen this argument taken on by the CTs.

FYI.
That is what ANY media is.
Pieces of INFORMATION (ie. FACT) presented and interstitched with commentary, analysis, and supposition.

Thats how humans communicate.

"Hey here is some shit that happened, here is what i think about it."

Why is it any less credible coming from alex jones.

Most people don't have a problem with "scientific theories" and they operate much the same way. They extrapolate real world data and interpret it based on best information, hypothesis and analysis.

Heres a test.
Find me one thing Alex Jones says, specificaly, that you can prove to NOT be true.

Just try it.

soulsinging · February 2008

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

In closing,

i got so excited, and then...

DriftingByTheStorm wrote:

i'd just like to say that the elite are EXCEPTIONALY skilled at frauding the public into willfully swallowing ideas that are directly adverse to their real long term health and security. You should know the list by now, fiat money (owned and issued as debt by the Federal Reserve), the educational system (implements and manipulated by and for the benefit of the elite), the government system (expressly manipulated by CFR), the media system (give me a break if you don't think this is true) ... etc.

To deny that THAT IS control is just silly.
As much as "control" can exist in this world, that is it.

And if they end up with GLOBAL GOVERNMENT that WILL be "control".

How do you deny that?

And again, i'd like you to look at that quote by Rockefeller on Mao, if nothing else.

That has NOTHING to do with profiteering.
The guy flat out says that Mao is the best thing since sliced bread, and the social "reform" that he brought about was absolutely worth the price of the blood of millions of innocents!

???

[edit:

oh. one more thing that IS directly (i think) on topic to your OP on conspiracy and RELIGION, though i know you will just run wild with the back half of this quote, because so clearly rockefeller is a nice guy and realy wants the world to be a "a better place", but again, REGARDLESS of the MEANS necessary to achieve it...

... check in to something called the "Interchurch World Movement" of which the younger Rockefeller said, "I do not think we can overestimate the importance of this Movement. As I see it, it is capable of having a much more far-reaching influence than the League of Nations in bringing about peace, contentment, goodwill and prosperity among the people of the earth." and then asked his daddy to give him 100-200 MILLION dollars to fund it. Again, if you think the "Moral Majority" is offensive ... think about a GLOBLAL ORGANIZED RELIGION that makes Catholicism look like chump change ... 100-200 million dollars to fund it in the mid-20'th century was a SHIT TON. ??? What about THAT ??? You really think the guy is interested in peace so much as power? More far reaching influence than League of Nations? Hmm wow!

Speaking of getting peace by ANY MEANS necessary. HOW BOUT OUR BUDDY KISSINGER:

"...The outcome in Iraq will depend on something that a German philosopher, Immanuel Kant said... someday there will be universal peace. The only question is whether it comes about through human insight, or whether it comes about... through a series of catastrophes of such a magnitude that people are so exhausted that they have no other choice." - Henry Kissinger, On May 31, 2007, speaking in Istanbul Turkey at a conference organized by Akbank

HUH?
WHAT THE FUCK !!??!!

that's closing?

i don't have time for this nonsense. i don't know what children playing naked in the streets has to do with anything.

globalization is not an elitist choice, it is an inevitable outgrowth of our progress. in the age of the internet, and satellite communication, and so on, there is NO WAY to stop it. those guys could all retire tomorrow and open up ice cream stands in their childhood hometown and globalization would proceed.

i don't know what socialism or brave new world crap you refer to. the US is a LONG way from socialism and is damn near the world's ONLY hold out with respect to globalization. the US has the lowest participation in international initiatives out there. we do a lot of dirty work, but we also sure as hell are not letting the UN or anyone else tell us what to do. even if this was true, just becos the world has been slow to catch on doesn't mean they won't. we were a bit late on the nazi extermination program too. furthermore, what is your point? you say it goes back to rome. rome fell. so did the spanish armada. the british empire. maybe in a century the american one will to. then a few centuries after that, the chinese dynasty will also. rome was rules by an elite group of emperors and senators. britain and spain by monarchs and the church. america by welathy capitalists. so what? humans ALWAYS have classism. we're primates. it's how we organize socially... like a silverback dominating a group.

history is full of the rise and fall of imperial civilizations, and through it all, the common people and the human species just keep on truckin. sometimes it's better, sometimes it's worse. what exactly are you fighting for? what are you so afraid of? survival? america? your bank account? not having the satisfaction of being recognized as a misunderstood genius? i dont understand what sort o cataclysm you think is happening that is no novel or dangerous to the world. you talk about the cfr like it's the anti-christ and the possibility of globalization as if it is the revelations apocalypse. it means nothing. it's just a potential for the dawning of a new era in human history. you may fear the death of the old ways of nationalism and clannish behavior. to the rest of us, it's all a mixed bag anyway.

as to the interworld church, is that the thing alex jones claims he witnessed in person by sneaking into the redwood forest and videotaping a bunch of world leaders in robes chanting around a fire? as to what i think of it, i think it was a waste of his money. it doesn't seem to be working.

DriftingByTheStorm · February 2008

soulsinging wrote:

i don't have time for this nonsense. i don't know what children playing naked in the streets has to do with anything.

that was one chapter of brave new world, which spoke about sexual acceptance being integral to the new society, and the new social planners agenda.

If you can't put the two together, the social planners agenda, the globalist world view, with reality as it is forming, then that is something you need to look in to.

I would start with maybe reading the books, Brave New World, and 1984 that roughly outline the two dualing views of how to shape the "new world order".

Brave New World being the prefered model, because it relies less on force and more on coercision of thought. 1984 relying primarily on fear, force, and manipulation.

Of course, they use bits and pieces of both right now. There sure as hell is plenty of "doublespeak" going on. WTF is "Federal Reserve", for example. Is it "Federal"? Does it have "Resevers"?

Do your homework,
come back grasshoper.

We'll talk more.
I'm about to be late to work.

TTFN.

Good long read about conspiracy theories

Comments

Categories