I think a big part of it is that it’s so damn confusing, and which my be by design. To really get a handle on this I’ve listened to likely 100 hours of audio and close to 1,000 pages of text.
It reminds me of the 2nd most disturbing conspiracy I know of, something that literally not a single conspiracy theorist I’ve ever met has even hear…
I think a big part of it is that it’s so damn confusing, and which my be by design. To really get a handle on this I’ve listened to likely 100 hours of audio and close to 1,000 pages of text.
It reminds me of the 2nd most disturbing conspiracy I know of, something that literally not a single conspiracy theorist I’ve ever met has even heard of, which is the Inslaw PROMIS affair, something so confusing that it wasn’t until I got Vicuna, the open source AI, to write a summary for me did I have a way to quickly explain what the hell I was talking about.
From all that I learned a valuable lesson: Real conspiracies are too crazy for normal people, not crazy enough for conspiracy theorists, and too confusing for both groups.
I have noticed this too. Conspiracy theorists like QAnon believe the most outlandish things and know nothing about concrete evidence like the Powell memo. My "favorite" is that nobody at all has heard about the King family winning a wrongful death suit about Martin's assassination. I read the trial transcript on the King family web site. About a dozen highly credible witnesses testified to an assassination conspiracy. It's very convincing. And nobody knows.
The term *"conspiracy theory" was used as a cudgel by the agency in an attempt to discredit serious, smart, and to them, extremely dangerous, assassination investigators like Mark Lane.
*the term existed prior, but it was weaponised by Langley.
**Whenever someone uses that term, I demand that they define with a working definition. They never do.
And to this day, all some fool has to say to you or me is, "Your a conspiracy theorist!", like that actually means something dispositive. When, of course, it does not. History is replete, stuffed, with actual conspiracies by large organisations and governments. To believe otherwise, is idiotic and uninformed.
Right now, today, we are seeing multiple interlocking conspiracies at work, the biggest and most dangerous being the conspiracy to destroy Russia and thereby gain global hegemony. (some people choke and gasp when I say this, "WHAT?")
This debate, between the execrable, but very smart, Bill Buckley, and Mark Lane is a classic. It's also something that you could never see on the teevee today.
As for the MLK thing, I do know about that one, saw a deep dive on that recently.
Ever notice that no conspiracy theorists bring that up? I fixate on Inslaw because it has hundreds of pages of court filings and congressional records, and GHWB even dodged a question on it, yet to my knowledge not even Alex Jones has mentioned it in his entire career.
If you want to get really paranoid, go to Wikipedia and look up the talk page on Inslaw. Find posts on “Rgr09”
This Wikipedia user somehow edits every single conspiracy theory that the CIA may have actually done. Notice, he never messes with 9/11, or the Moon landings, or QAnon. This user seems fine with those conspiracy theories (because they aren’t real) yet tries to purge everything related to Inslaw, and CIA drug smuggling, etc.
There are a number of entities who seem to do nothing but 'edit' wiki articles to make them conform with the false narratives of power. ChatGPT lies constantly too, and always in one direction.
""Philip Cross" has made hundreds of thousands of edits to Wikipedia pages. But in the process he's angered anti-war activists and critics of British and Western foreign policy, who claim he's been biased against them.
"Christmas Day, Eid day, Easter Day, Cup final day, early hours of the morning, in the middle of the night - this man is on my case," says George Galloway, the former Labour and Respect Party MP. "And it doesn't take an Einstein to work out he's not tending this garden with loving care or to make it look as nice as it can look. It's the opposite."
The subject of Galloway's ire is a prolific Wikipedia editor who goes by the name "Philip Cross". He's been the subject of a huge debate on the internet encyclopaedia - one of the world's most popular websites - and also on Twitter. And he's been accused of bias for interacting, sometimes negatively, with some of the people whose Wikipedia pages he's edited."
Now search for the P2 or Propaganda Due conspiracy. An actually well documented and massive Italian Masonic/Vatican Bank conspiracy from the 1970-80s. It’s mind blowing.
Everything that was going on in Europe around that time is very troubling: Propoganda Due, The Brabant Killers, everything related to Operation Gladio, etc. But the thing that always baffles me is that none of the “Wake up sheeple!” Crowd ever talks about them. Probably 10,000 times more green ink has been spilled about chemtrails than the actual dirty tricks the CIA pulled from 1949 to the end of the Cold War.
By Powell memo, I assume you are referring to Lewis Powell memo to the US Chamber of Commerce.
It's interesting that you mention that. I'm lucky enough to have a supervisor at work who is voracious a reader as I am. We were just discussing the current movement of censorship on college campuses this past Monday when he mentioned the Powell memo, which I had read long ago. After he left my office I poked around the internet and found an article written only two days ago, published in "Inside Higher Ed."
It's a rather amusing, if not maddening piece, about how the real goal of conservative attacks on higher ed really have nothing to do with first amendment issues, or as fronts against "ideological indoctrination" (from the article). The author, Linda Stomato, proffers that the real reason for these attacks is conservative efforts are to "obscure a less visible motive: to support free market ideas (like that's a bad thing) and advance corporate interests and those of other powerful market actors." She uses the Powell memo as the foundation of her opinion. The thrust of her piece is that these attempts by conservatives are nothing more than an attempt at silencing the voices of subject matter experts who may have views hostile to the free market.
I find it amusing that she laments these attempts as basically an affront to the idea of free expression on college campuses, without realizing the irony of her efforts to silence conservative criticisms on college campuses.
This is what I'm finding in a disproportionate number of journals and periodicals. The concepts she's espousing have been so ingrained and pushed since the 60's. In my opinion, there is no way to combat that at this juncture. We just have to hold on, rage against the dying of the light as long as we can, and retreat to our bunkers when the proverbial scat starts flying in earnest.
Link provided if you wish to peruse the piece. It's a quick read.
Note to Linda Stomato (to paraphrase Obama): the 60's and 70's are calling and they want the economic policies back...
No one can reasonably question the conclusion that it is the left that is focused on advancing corporate interests and those of other powerful actors - for that is the route to near absolute power. Kinetic military force as a path to power is SO old school.
The HUGE difference is that in the 70's and 80's, Democrats controlled both houses. And the Dems are now actually doing something with their power - it's malevolent, but it is action. The Repubs are always "all talk and no action".
I wanted to create some small infographics to make it easy for people to understand. But to do that I have to have a deep understanding of this. And like you, I've spent hundreds of hours reading, listening and uncovering more complexity. It's nice to see other people doing the same, I often feel alone in this.
Yeah trying to have it be small probably wouldn’t work, there’s just too much going on, too many threads. I’ve found open source AI can be excellent at summarizing stuff if you use the correct prompts, for example I got a really good concise summary of John Brennan’s role in Russiagate that someone unfamiliar with who he even was could quickly understand, but the problem is the training data for those isn’t updated in real time, and this is an emerging story. The only AI’s that are kept up to date are Bing/Sydney and Google Bard, but the various paywalls would block them from making an accurate summary.
If you find it of interest, I’d suggest following what the open source community has been cooking up. Yannic Kilcher on Youtube is pretty revered among those who want AI to be free, his channel is definitely worth checking out. To all worried that AI will just be used for control by government or large corporations, a memo was leaked from Google that said their AI competitor wasn’t Microsoft, it was the open source machine learning community, and the executive suggested Google work with them, not against them. Clearly I’m a guy who loves AI and of all the things related to the CIC, I’m actually least worried about the AI aspect. The deep state doesn’t have direct access to Deepmind or uncensored GPT. If they did, they literally could have seized the entire internet already.
The legal basis for the fight against the Censorship Industrial Complex can be confusing, too. You need to understand the First Amendment, and then you need to understand that the government is making an end-run around it by using its regulatory muscle to force big tech to bend to its wishes. In effect, they are outsourcing First Amendment violations to private entities. If the evidence from the Twitter Files wasn't so specific and overtly blunt, there might not even be a legal challenge like Missouri v. Biden.
Agreed. Keep them spinning. To add insult to injury, I tripped over this ( link below) a few minutes ago connecting with others about a mutual friend/physician who passed suddenly in his mid 50’s.
I think a big part of it is that it’s so damn confusing, and which my be by design. To really get a handle on this I’ve listened to likely 100 hours of audio and close to 1,000 pages of text.
It reminds me of the 2nd most disturbing conspiracy I know of, something that literally not a single conspiracy theorist I’ve ever met has even heard of, which is the Inslaw PROMIS affair, something so confusing that it wasn’t until I got Vicuna, the open source AI, to write a summary for me did I have a way to quickly explain what the hell I was talking about.
From all that I learned a valuable lesson: Real conspiracies are too crazy for normal people, not crazy enough for conspiracy theorists, and too confusing for both groups.
I have noticed this too. Conspiracy theorists like QAnon believe the most outlandish things and know nothing about concrete evidence like the Powell memo. My "favorite" is that nobody at all has heard about the King family winning a wrongful death suit about Martin's assassination. I read the trial transcript on the King family web site. About a dozen highly credible witnesses testified to an assassination conspiracy. It's very convincing. And nobody knows.
The term *"conspiracy theory" was used as a cudgel by the agency in an attempt to discredit serious, smart, and to them, extremely dangerous, assassination investigators like Mark Lane.
*the term existed prior, but it was weaponised by Langley.
**Whenever someone uses that term, I demand that they define with a working definition. They never do.
And to this day, all some fool has to say to you or me is, "Your a conspiracy theorist!", like that actually means something dispositive. When, of course, it does not. History is replete, stuffed, with actual conspiracies by large organisations and governments. To believe otherwise, is idiotic and uninformed.
Right now, today, we are seeing multiple interlocking conspiracies at work, the biggest and most dangerous being the conspiracy to destroy Russia and thereby gain global hegemony. (some people choke and gasp when I say this, "WHAT?")
This debate, between the execrable, but very smart, Bill Buckley, and Mark Lane is a classic. It's also something that you could never see on the teevee today.
As for the MLK thing, I do know about that one, saw a deep dive on that recently.
Ever notice that no conspiracy theorists bring that up? I fixate on Inslaw because it has hundreds of pages of court filings and congressional records, and GHWB even dodged a question on it, yet to my knowledge not even Alex Jones has mentioned it in his entire career.
If you want to get really paranoid, go to Wikipedia and look up the talk page on Inslaw. Find posts on “Rgr09”
This Wikipedia user somehow edits every single conspiracy theory that the CIA may have actually done. Notice, he never messes with 9/11, or the Moon landings, or QAnon. This user seems fine with those conspiracy theories (because they aren’t real) yet tries to purge everything related to Inslaw, and CIA drug smuggling, etc.
There are a number of entities who seem to do nothing but 'edit' wiki articles to make them conform with the false narratives of power. ChatGPT lies constantly too, and always in one direction.
""Philip Cross" has made hundreds of thousands of edits to Wikipedia pages. But in the process he's angered anti-war activists and critics of British and Western foreign policy, who claim he's been biased against them.
"Christmas Day, Eid day, Easter Day, Cup final day, early hours of the morning, in the middle of the night - this man is on my case," says George Galloway, the former Labour and Respect Party MP. "And it doesn't take an Einstein to work out he's not tending this garden with loving care or to make it look as nice as it can look. It's the opposite."
The subject of Galloway's ire is a prolific Wikipedia editor who goes by the name "Philip Cross". He's been the subject of a huge debate on the internet encyclopaedia - one of the world's most popular websites - and also on Twitter. And he's been accused of bias for interacting, sometimes negatively, with some of the people whose Wikipedia pages he's edited."
https://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-trending-44495696
Jimmy Wales BLOCKED me on Twitter for talking about Cross and many other issues I have with Ministry of Truth edits there.
Now search for the P2 or Propaganda Due conspiracy. An actually well documented and massive Italian Masonic/Vatican Bank conspiracy from the 1970-80s. It’s mind blowing.
Everything that was going on in Europe around that time is very troubling: Propoganda Due, The Brabant Killers, everything related to Operation Gladio, etc. But the thing that always baffles me is that none of the “Wake up sheeple!” Crowd ever talks about them. Probably 10,000 times more green ink has been spilled about chemtrails than the actual dirty tricks the CIA pulled from 1949 to the end of the Cold War.
By Powell memo, I assume you are referring to Lewis Powell memo to the US Chamber of Commerce.
It's interesting that you mention that. I'm lucky enough to have a supervisor at work who is voracious a reader as I am. We were just discussing the current movement of censorship on college campuses this past Monday when he mentioned the Powell memo, which I had read long ago. After he left my office I poked around the internet and found an article written only two days ago, published in "Inside Higher Ed."
It's a rather amusing, if not maddening piece, about how the real goal of conservative attacks on higher ed really have nothing to do with first amendment issues, or as fronts against "ideological indoctrination" (from the article). The author, Linda Stomato, proffers that the real reason for these attacks is conservative efforts are to "obscure a less visible motive: to support free market ideas (like that's a bad thing) and advance corporate interests and those of other powerful market actors." She uses the Powell memo as the foundation of her opinion. The thrust of her piece is that these attempts by conservatives are nothing more than an attempt at silencing the voices of subject matter experts who may have views hostile to the free market.
I find it amusing that she laments these attempts as basically an affront to the idea of free expression on college campuses, without realizing the irony of her efforts to silence conservative criticisms on college campuses.
This is what I'm finding in a disproportionate number of journals and periodicals. The concepts she's espousing have been so ingrained and pushed since the 60's. In my opinion, there is no way to combat that at this juncture. We just have to hold on, rage against the dying of the light as long as we can, and retreat to our bunkers when the proverbial scat starts flying in earnest.
Link provided if you wish to peruse the piece. It's a quick read.
https://www.insidehighered.com/opinion/views/2023/05/09/launch-long-game
Note to Linda Stomato (to paraphrase Obama): the 60's and 70's are calling and they want the economic policies back...
No one can reasonably question the conclusion that it is the left that is focused on advancing corporate interests and those of other powerful actors - for that is the route to near absolute power. Kinetic military force as a path to power is SO old school.
How is see it?
Today's democrats are the Republicans of the 70's and 80's.
or...today's Republicans are the Democrats of the 70's and 80's.
The HUGE difference is that in the 70's and 80's, Democrats controlled both houses. And the Dems are now actually doing something with their power - it's malevolent, but it is action. The Repubs are always "all talk and no action".
The current crop of republicans have fully demonstrated that they are nothing more than a gaggle of gutless turds.
The defenders of the narrative love to conflate anyone not agreeing with them with flat-earthers and the like.
Chat GPT is CIA. LOL
Conspiracy theory is just a pejorative, it's a meaningless term.
I wanted to create some small infographics to make it easy for people to understand. But to do that I have to have a deep understanding of this. And like you, I've spent hundreds of hours reading, listening and uncovering more complexity. It's nice to see other people doing the same, I often feel alone in this.
Yeah trying to have it be small probably wouldn’t work, there’s just too much going on, too many threads. I’ve found open source AI can be excellent at summarizing stuff if you use the correct prompts, for example I got a really good concise summary of John Brennan’s role in Russiagate that someone unfamiliar with who he even was could quickly understand, but the problem is the training data for those isn’t updated in real time, and this is an emerging story. The only AI’s that are kept up to date are Bing/Sydney and Google Bard, but the various paywalls would block them from making an accurate summary.
This is interesting because I’ve been using ai in my research but also as part of my research becasue we haven’t unpacked it’s role in all of this.
If you find it of interest, I’d suggest following what the open source community has been cooking up. Yannic Kilcher on Youtube is pretty revered among those who want AI to be free, his channel is definitely worth checking out. To all worried that AI will just be used for control by government or large corporations, a memo was leaked from Google that said their AI competitor wasn’t Microsoft, it was the open source machine learning community, and the executive suggested Google work with them, not against them. Clearly I’m a guy who loves AI and of all the things related to the CIC, I’m actually least worried about the AI aspect. The deep state doesn’t have direct access to Deepmind or uncensored GPT. If they did, they literally could have seized the entire internet already.
Wow. Thank you for this.
Yes, very complex.
Which is the way the CIC keeps most people out.
They are just simply too self absorbed to put any real thought into this.
The legal basis for the fight against the Censorship Industrial Complex can be confusing, too. You need to understand the First Amendment, and then you need to understand that the government is making an end-run around it by using its regulatory muscle to force big tech to bend to its wishes. In effect, they are outsourcing First Amendment violations to private entities. If the evidence from the Twitter Files wasn't so specific and overtly blunt, there might not even be a legal challenge like Missouri v. Biden.
Agreed. Keep them spinning. To add insult to injury, I tripped over this ( link below) a few minutes ago connecting with others about a mutual friend/physician who passed suddenly in his mid 50’s.
https://substack.com/@petermcculloughmd
“Influence and Perception Management” a new office in the DoD???!!!
By JOHN LEAKE
It suggests this is an old DoD euphemism for psychological warfare and deception.
Have I stepped into a spy novel???
My face is starting to get blotchy... not good.
And my chin is numbing ... uh-oh .. oh man, I really get why people drink heavily.