Welcome login | signup
Language en es fr
OccupyForum

Forum Post: "Occupy Wall Street" IMPOSTER? A Troll?

Posted 7 years ago on Oct. 23, 2012, 12:47 a.m. EST by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC
This content is user submitted and not an official statement

Its probably nothing too serious, but I am curious about the "Occupy Corporatism" website and it's only writer - Susanne Posel.

Does anyone here know of her? Is she a OWS supporter? Does she post here at these forums?

Is she really working for the 99%??

Not that OWS agrees, or has to agree, on anything. I imagine there are a few OWS supporters who do not believe that "human caused global warming" is real, and I admit it is impossible to know for sure.

It did get me wondering about her wher I read her "Fake Climate Change studies" article where she repeating several of the discredited denier platforms. And then said "its not humanity's fault that the environment is a mess"

Here is her Occupy Corporatism website

http://occupycorporatism.com/author/admin/

Is she an IMPOSTER?

126 Comments

126 Comments


Read the Rules
[-] 3 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

It is true that it is impossible to know for sure whether "human caused global warming." I had and will forever have the uncertainty to be able to pin down whether it is the three or the two which caused their sum to exceed four. 3+2 = 5 > 4. Is it 3 or 2 that has "caused" the > ? Oh, by the way, I really need to get a PhD to do more mathematical research.

This uncertainty is actually pointing to opportunity. We can reduce either 3 or 2 or both to make their sum <= 4. Countries such as China, India, the U.S., corporations, and individuals endlessly point to the OTHERS as culprits. In fact, any and all of them can do something about the environmental degradation problem.

[-] 0 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 7 years ago

Well ya, there is correlations with CO2 and temperature, and the ocean acidification is another indication of increased CO2 [as the atmosphere and ocean surface waters maintain equilibrium of CO2 levels] ... but this threat is not about global warming,

This thread is about that uncertainty - uncertaintly that means that we here at OWS don't all agree on whether or not global warming is real and/or caused by human activity

... and so the point of this thread is that Susanne should not be claiming to speak for OWS on her website, as if she is some kind of official spokesperson of OWS.

[-] 2 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

I agree completely that Susanne should NOT be claiming to speak for OWS on her website. OWS as a group certainly can have divergent views on many things. Those people who understand what OWS is truly about will have NO problem at all dismissing Susanne as a "spokesperson" of OWS. Alas, some people can jump to conclusions as if they belong in the mental high-jump Olympic team and insidious people know it well and take full advantage of it.

[-] 1 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 7 years ago

Arrr, well said. Mental High Jump Olympic Team eh? lol, hilarious!! Lets see, what would I qualify for at the Mental Olympics...hmmm maybe the Mental Sprint team, only good for short bursts...or the Shot Put [lands with a thud]

Anyway, ya we seem to be getting a concensus here on Susanne the Imposter being "out of line" with her blog name. Thanks for your input.... whats your "mental sport" - archery [hitting the target?]

[-] 2 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

I like archery very much because it can hit the target and draw real blood but my admiration is reserved for the fleas which can not only high-jump beating all mental high-jumping Olympic athletes but actually lands on target on the dog-and-pony show and sucks their guts full from the beasts.

[-] -1 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

Bad metaphor. With science we will be able to determine what exactly caused Global Warming.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

The greatest discovery of modern science is that there ARE fundamental insurmountable limits to what we can determine. In your statement, you are falling under the illusion of the power and exactness of science. In quantum physics, there is Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. In classical physics, there is the Butterfly Effect. The premise that we can know the present state of the universe is plainly wrong. Causality is really an emergent phenomenon fabricated by our minds. The essence of reality is random phenomena.

[-] 0 points by Shule (2638) 7 years ago

And then there is the Peter Principle to which we all aspire.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

We do not need to aspire to the Peter Principle because the U.S. had already demonstrated well its adherence to it. It surfaced in practice in the Famed Bureau of Incompetence before 9/11/2001, FEMA in New Orleans 2005, and Gramm-Leach-Briley 1999 already.

[-] -1 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

It's possible to understand the properties of randomness in events. Giving the solution that a particle can be either in position a, b, or c is a solution just as viable as one where you would have one answer. Similarly, stating there is a 20% chance of rain on Tuesday is an answer just as worthy as saying there will be a 100% chance.

Understanding a system fully does not necessarily mean being able to know what each event and object of that system will do or where they will be at any given time. If a system has random properties, then understanding these properties is fully understanding the system.

Your thinking on a level which is much too low. Even though low level events on the scale of particles follow certain random patterns, the higher levels don't necessarily follow them. In any case, we can understand the low level random patterns of Quantum Physics, but we probably won't need to in order to understand Global Warming, just like we don't need to in order to understand many things in our universe.


Saying that causation is not a real part of our universe because of the Heisenberg Principle is like saying that these letters you are reading on the screen are not real because they are actually made from pixels which are coordinated by a binary computer system. You're confusing lower level and higher level of operation.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

Yes, we can understand randomness but only statistically. Any prediction beyond statistics is totally bogus. It is not possible nor even correct to say that any particle is anywhere until we have measured its position. Then we can say it was here or there, or over there when we measured it but where is it NOW? Almost for sure NOT where we measured it to be because of so-called "virtual particles."

According to the Butterfly Effect, sometimes it is plainly impossible to determine the cause of an outcome even in a fully deterministic system. It is futile to try to determine if it is the carbon dioxide that you breathed out that caused the drought in West Africa or it is the carbon dioxide that I breathed out. There are microscopic and macroscopic phenomena so by and large quantum ones are kept in the microscopic realms but this is NOT always true. Both quantum physics and classical physics allow quantum and microscopic phenomena to trigger macroscopic effects. Nature has a proverbial way of "going to the edge of the cliff."

It is indeed true that these letters on the screen are actually fabricated by our minds through cognitive processes and that is what made so many things difficult for computers and robots to do well. They can see the leaves and branches but they cannot piece them together easily to determine if they are seeing a bush or a tree.

No matter whether we can determine the true cause of Global Warming, there are ample evidences that it has taken place and anything to avert further warming can be helpful to preserving the status quo.

[-] -1 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

I simply don't agree that higher levels are less real than lower levels, and I feel you are failing to see the real complexity and magic by believing so.

Low level particles follow Quantum Physics rules of randomness, they create atoms which form the material of a computer, which in turn controls nearly 1 million individual pixels using software algorithms to display a comedy which makes you laugh, essentially triggering electricity in your brain.

The joke which is told in the movie is just as real as the functioning of the lowest particles known. They are simply on a different level of existence. Pure cause and effect do exist, but on a higher plane. They are very real.

To understand the reason for Global Warming you don't need to understand all the lower levels, just like you don't need to understand the functioning of Quantum Mechanics and how computers work to understand the joke in a comedy you watch on your laptop.

[-] 1 points by grapes (5232) 7 years ago

The higher level phenomena are real AND they are not real. When we forget where they came from, we forget that fundamentally we cannot really predict and fall into the trap set up by the money grubbers who want nothing better than to have us do endless studies to determine if your carbon dioxide or my carbon dioxide is the real cause of Global Warming so they can continue making their money and destroy our Earth's environment and that includes both you AND me.

[Removed]

[-] 2 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 7 years ago

Nice, simple and thoughtfull - even if AGW is not real, there are other reasons why we should be reducing CO2 emissions [ocean acidification, for one] and "reducing our use of fossil fuels" is a big part of reducing CO2 emissions .

"the solution to global warming is a good idea anyhow, so lets do it".

And yet, global CO2 emissions contnue to INCREASE every year...

[Removed]

[-] 0 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-29/hurricane-sandy-blows-us-election-off-course/4338632

US president Barack Obama's jittery campaign voiced fears that Hurricane Sandy could hurt his re-election chances, as the storm forced both candidates to cancel campaign stops.

Hundreds of thousands of people are being evacuated from low-lying areas of New York City as Hurricane Sandy threatens to merge with another storm front to create what could be the biggest storm ever to hit the United States.

Nine days out from the November 6 (US time) election, all eyes are on how the potentially catastrophic storm might play out on the neck-and-neck race for the White House.

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33801) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

But the news was quick to say that a 1st priority would be to get the power back on so that people could vote. I feel so much better now.

[-] 0 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

I don't know about the topography there, but when I storm that wide hits Australia, generally it turns into a rain depression, and localised flash flooding is the worst of it.

It's late Autumn, so getting pretty cold in that area, I'm assuming?

[-] 0 points by DKAtoday (33801) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

Temperature in my area ( north central USA ) has been fluctuating quite a bit. But now the east coast where this storm is expected to come aground is low area - near sea level - so they are hyping nasty storm surges.

[-] 0 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

I'll keep an eye on the news.

Not much happening here, except for drought in my state. Rain in the south.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33801) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

Drought has been real heavy across the USA this year - 2/3rd's in moderate to severe drought - lots of lost crops. But hey even though this year we busted thousands of high temperature records all across the USA - there are still those saying that the warming ended. Insane denying shitheads.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

I'm left wondering at the reason for supporting the insanity. Perhaps the marketing of green-leaning people (which I'm not, I'm just practical) as tree-huggers and simpering nancy-boys was successful.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33801) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

What has happened - is that green energy alternatives have been given practically no air time - and the extinction industry - um excuse - fossil fuel industry has not been called out on their lies - and they promise many jobs - ummmm - people - where were these multitudes of jobs before(?) you know before people began protesting the pollution and environmental destruction again. Hey???

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

Yes, and no mention of the political upheaval, and savagery of regime change instigated on the pretence of "liberating" the people. Let's not mention the fact that a million will die, and four million will flee the country due to "liberating" them.

Oh, they have oil, you say? Interesting. (sarc)

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33801) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

The people must be educated to understand that 99.9% of the war strife killing around the world - is for fossil fuel - and that we have real alternatives that could end that strife - as in - RIGHT NOW!!!!!

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

Yeah, in reply to your post below, re the multiple crops per year. I was doing several things at once when I did that maths. It was a conservative estimate to begin with, based on old growing techniques. We could easily double the output, effectively halving the land use, and with at least two crops per years, that's again halved the land use.

We still need to cut back on use of oil.

Like our young folk being trained to consume, all westerners have been trained to think of fuel as an infinite resource.

A lot of our foods are trained and trucked (and flown) all over the place before they hit our plates. There's plenty of ways to cut back on our use of this valuable resource.

I'm researching a novel about our pearling port of Broome. The boffins there used to ship their white tropical suits to Malaysia for laundering and ironing. One example of western excess and pomposity.

[-] 2 points by DKAtoday (33801) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

A change in style of transportation could make a huge difference in the amount of oil use - as well as recycling/reconditioning used oil could greatly reduce the need for new.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

Let's do the math.

Say there's a market for 100 million barrels of oil per day, round figures.

Conservative estimates for hempseed oil production are two barrels per acre on poorer soils, so the requirement would be 50 million acres of land under hemp production, for each day's usage needs.

The byproducts would easily account for another (conservative) 20% income, and no prime food-growing lands need to be converted to hemp growing.

So, fifty million times 350 (rounded off) gives 17,500,000,000 acres of arable land. Wow.

That's just too much land. Way too much.

[-] 1 points by DKAtoday (33801) from Coon Rapids, MN 7 years ago

Also hemp is fast growing and the remains of the harvest goes into feeding the ground again - basically no pesticides needed - depending on location - more than one crop per year. You got oil you got fiber you got plastics you got fabric you got medicine you got food you got building material you got paper - you can also harvest methane prior to harvesting for other use or recycling to the ground as fertilizer - so you also got the makings for recyclable packaging that can be spread on a field for fertilizer.

As for oil for lube or fuel there are other sources then fossil fuel or hemp.

[-] 1 points by zacherystaylor (243) 7 years ago

Thanks for pointing this out; I was looking at something else she wrote and wondering how credible she was. I don't know how close she is to the OWS movement but if it is a grass roots movement it will have to get used to different opinions even though I don't agree with her on climate change and presumably other issues I think the way to address it is to debunk the issues on subjects where she is wrong.

To the best of my knowledge no one should claim to speak for all of OWS, although it is tempting for many people and some will certainly do so, and I would expect there to be some elements in it that I won't agree with. But if you do see someone that is fringe or arguing for counterproductive movements then the way to deal with it is to refute as you are.

Thanks

[-] 1 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 7 years ago

Thanks for that vote of confidence. Ya, it is true, nobody should be using Occupy Wall Street to support their own opinions unless we are all in agreement.

[-] 1 points by bullfrogma (448) 7 years ago

Not humanities fault the environment is a mess, as if our excessive polution, like magic, doesn't count towards cause and effect?

All i know for sure is that we are being told only what the people making money want us to know. The corporate/whatever agenda is being followed no matter what, worse then ever now. Kenedy tried to stand up to them and all they had to do was kill him.

Take this forum for example. Why is it overflowing with regurgitated, corporate owned media? Because somebody doesn't want us having uncomplicated discussion about solving our problems. Our problems equal their luxury, the few who suck the life from everything else, who are so one dimensional they think it is wise.

Here's a great article somebody had posted here about the lack of science and democracy these days. http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=antiscience-beliefs-jeopardize-us-democracy

Here's a list that contains the names and details on 115 scientists who have died prematurely, as if being a scientist is a health hazard. http://worldtruth.tv/a-list-of-115-dead-scientists-assassinated/

Also, this video is 70 minutes and everyone should watch it. http://larouchepac.com/node/23995 It's not just an alternative to hyperinflation, or about thermonuclear war. It's also about everything else, and it's pretty damn good.

[-] 1 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 7 years ago

That is an eyeopener - I cant find it now but I was reading about how 80% or so of our thinking and doing is done on an sub-conscious level. We even talk without thinking - not a surprise if you had a Mom who said "THINK before you speak"... but people are not even aware that they are not aware.

And to back that up, I quote YOU : "All i know for sure is that we are being told only what the people making money want us to know." And, I happen to know one of "them", an executive of a major corporation, and I have seen that him and his peers hand each other reading material, enough to keep them busy enough that there isn't time to read the alternative view, the "alt news", the OWS forums, [wink] - THEY only know what THEY THINK they know!!

And it gets worse. Point out a problem that his industry is causing, and he denies it and says that "activists" are the ones causing all the problems - now we have to spend time figuring out how to get around those damned regulations!!

"Problems? What problems" he says, and then lists the "non - problems" -

  • the glaciers are growing, and not just those two or three, ALL of them are growing because the earth is cooling off rapidly. Ian Plimer said so.

  • used motor oil does not contaminate ground water, I drain my vehicle's old oil right into my hay field;

  • habitat destruction? What the fuck are you TALKING about? We spend a lot of money planting grass seed after we go through, and EVERY tree that is cut down in Alberta is replanted, every one {but a monoculture tree plantation is not a forest, I reply] and he starts speaking in tongues and throws his coffee cup against the fireplace and flames come out of his ears and nostrils, his hair is on end, and then he calmly gets another cup of coffee

  • it may be true that the ocean is acidifying, but just imagine if we had not volunteered to cut acid emissions back in the 1980s, its not a problem now, not anymore {but, I say, quiverring, ocean acidification is not about acid rain, it is about the interaction of CO2 in the air mixing with ocean surface waters as the oceans and the atmosphere allways try to attain equilibrium of CO2; the oceans have gone from 8.1 to 8.0, and will soon be at 7.8 where basically shellfish simply dissolve... I duck under the table].

But, he says, I will tell you ONE problem:

  • windmills go "whoosh whoosh" and so there it is, an unsolvable problem that dooms wind power forever.

{did you guess? he works in the oil industry].

[-] 1 points by bullfrogma (448) 7 years ago

I've seen denial cause parents to hurt their own children. It seems like humanity is culminating the intricacies of the individual, even paralleling a growth from childhood echoing selfishness and renaissance. I think you pretty much said it. It's not the fault of anyone for being who they are.

That's how it seems to work with addictions and conceptions. But life isn't what they say it is, this is limiting ourselves and our minds. We're at war between this animal we come from and something conscious which is developing a greater understanding. I think the bad news is that nature has to do everything very slowly...

I just want the dishonesty to end. There are better ways for everything, and we know it. Why are we allowing this twisted, consumer-overlord fantasy of tyrannic megalomania to continue? Honesty is bigger, better, faster and stronger, and not just because we would like it to be, but because of powerful math.

Maybe the solution has to do with forgiving the people who seem to be in the worst positions.

Blame nobody. Someone once told me it's like a mirror reflecting a mirror, how we see the world.

[-] 1 points by ericweiss (575) 7 years ago

"Take this forum for example. Why is it overflowing with regurgitated, corporate owned media?"
and you post from that disreputable corporate owned
Scientific American

[-] 2 points by bullfrogma (448) 7 years ago

Nice. I've been pretty disgruntled lately. I had people enter my life, mess with my head and threaten to bury me, for just making a website. It's pretty easy for me to think anything is a conspiracy now. Sorry if i've taken it out on the forum.

[-] 1 points by ericweiss (575) 7 years ago

peace!
here is "my" website [ actually OWS working group ]
http://corporationsarenotpeople.webuda.com

[-] 1 points by hchc (3297) from Tampa, FL 7 years ago

Thats good. Have you gotten any politicians to sign the pledge?

[-] 0 points by Renneye (3874) 7 years ago

If you have a website up and running, could we get a link please.

[-] 1 points by bullfrogma (448) 7 years ago

It's free hosting so feel free to ignore the advertisements.

http://jerniwerks.angelfire.com/

I think what pissed someone off was The Cancer Of Logic poem/essay. It's a rough draft i was trying out for a logic proof that we don't need money for anything. You know how they are about money.

And thanks for your link, Eric. Money is not speech, very cool.

[Removed]

[-] -2 points by Grimreaper2 (-318) 7 years ago

Oh my gods! It MUST be Thrasy!

[+] -5 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

Occupy has always been friendly with conspiracy theories. Why, I don't know? Many here defend them. Personally, I don't think we can build a better world on top of lies. We must use science and logic to identify the real problems. Conspiracy theories are dangerous because they blur the line between reality and fiction. You can't build anything of worth with them.

The site you linked looks like a conspiracy theory website. For example, it has an article which blames the US government for the creations of the AIDS/HIV virus in a plan to depopulate the earth. A lot of conspiracy theory mumbo jumbo.

America is riddled with conspiracy theory type thinking and analysis. For that reason, I don't think a newer and better government system will come from US. It most likely will come from Europe where people are not deluded by conspiracy theories as much.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

So Mike, what do you think about someone like Gordon Duff, who is really not a conspiracy theorist, but rather a conspiracy professional in that he has extensive experience as a US Marine in intelligence analysis, counter insurgency and surveillance technology. Duff is also the Senior Editor of "Veterans Today":

http://www.veteranstoday.com/author/gordonduff/

If you go to the site, you'll see articles there about secret societies, mind control, and even UFOs, typical stuff a conspiracy theorist would talk about, but there it appears on a site overseen by a true conspiracy professional. According to you, are we simply to write him off as illogical or a liar?

And by the way, it may interest you to know that conspiracy theory goes way back in America; our first third party, for example, was the Anti-Masonic Party, which featured the membership of such luminaries as John Quincy Adams, one of the few truly great American presidents, whose views did in fact define the basic principles of America.

Even George Washinginton was known to have written about the Illuminati, as is indicated in one of his letters kept in the Library of Congress, saying:

"It was not my intention to doubt that, the Doctrines of the Illuminati, and principles of Jacobinism had not spread in the United States. On the contrary, no one is more truly satisfied of this fact than I am."

http://consciouslifenews.com/library-congress-confirms-george-washington-aware-nefarious-illuminati/1122149/

Are we to take it that our founding forefathers were simply liars and illogical simply because you say so?

[-] -2 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

If someone has strong evidence for whatever he claims that he acquired through serious research methods, then let that someone share his research with scholars so that it can be analyzed in a serious way. There's nothing wrong with that, in fact, it's what I promote.

The problem is with conspiracy theorists. They make claims before showing evidence. They do not believe in innocent before being proved guilty, and they don't use serious research methods.

It doesn't matter what credentials that person might have. They need to provide evidence for their claims, appeal by authority is a logical fallacy.

The Illuminati is a conspiracy theory and has been debunked time and time again. Don't trust me, read the debunkers. There was a group called the Bavarian Illuminati a few hundred years ago, but they were just intellectuals that met to discuss various issues. Sort of like Mensa today. There is no proof for the claims of conspiracy theorists who say that this group never died, still exists today, and is made up of people who work to control the world and it's resources.

"The Illuminati (plural of Latin illuminatus, "enlightened") is a name given to several groups, both real (historical) and fictitious. Historically the name refers to the Bavarian Illuminati, an Enlightenment-era secret society founded on May 1, 1776. In more modern contexts the name refers to a purported conspiratorial organization which is alleged to mastermind events and control world affairs through governments and corporations to establish a New World Order. In this context the Illuminati are usually represented as a modern version or continuation of the Bavarian Illuminati."

Washington his talking about the Bavarian Illuminati, not the modern fictitious group created by conspiracy theorists like Alex Jones and David Icke. The fictitious group was invented after Washington was already dead.


If you go to the site, you'll see articles there about secret societies, mind control, and even UFOs, typical stuff a conspiracy theorist would talk about, but there it appears on a site overseen by a true conspiracy professional. According to you, are we simply to write him off as illogical or a liar?

Yes, we must write them off if they don't provide strong evidence for their claims. It does not matter how famous or educated the person or people making the claims are, appeal to authority is a logical fallacy. Authority can not replace evidence.

[-] 2 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

Hi Mike, I know you have been asking me for one piece of evidence regarding the Illuminati, and I've been reluctant to give you one because I felt that you would just dismiss it without due consideration.

But let me provide you with one document, I've shown this to you before, and while I don't think it is black and white proof of the existence of the Illuminati, I'd like to hear your opinion anyway. I'm trying to discuss this with you in a civil way, so there's no need to get insulting if you disagree.

This is the Greenbaum speech, it was given by one of America's premier experts on dissociative disorder, or multiple personalities. It was given quite a while ago, but I don't see why that would detract from its credibility.

Greenbaum sees clients with multiple personalities and claims that they were brainwashed as part of a conspiracy. This speech was given to a group of psychotherapists from throughout the US, who claim to have had similar experience with their clients:

http://www.whale.to/b/greenbaum.html

[-] 0 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

Hypnosis is a phenomenon that has been known for years. What does this have to do with the Illuminati? Nothing.

[-] 2 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

So are you saying that there is a conspiracy of psychotherapists to provide false evidence that this is happening? Or are they just spontaneously making it up? Or are they copy cats?

Here is an example of another study: A national survey of 2,709 clinical psychologists with memberships in the American Psychological Association showed that 70% denied and 30% acknowledged seeing at least one case of “ritualistic or religion-related abuse since January 1, 1980” (Bottoms, Shaver, &Goodman, 1991, p. 6). The authors also found that among the psychologists who had worked with at least one individual with allegations of ritual abuse, 93% believed that the harm had actually occurred.

From this study with this limited population alone, that means that over 800 psychologists responded positively. Do you think these people with licenses and PhDs are all just lying?

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

Read the debunkers you say? Sorry, but I think I would find George Washington and John Quincy Adams more credible. The history of our country is pretty much the evidence. It just depends on how you read it.

So is it true than that you really think that George Washington and John Quincy Adams were somehow mentally impaired?

[-] -1 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

Read the debunkers you say? Sorry, but I think I would find George Washington and John Quincy Adams more credible.

  1. It should not matter who you think it more credible. Appel to authority is a logical fallacy. You should care about the evidence, and only that.

  2. Washington is talking about the Bavarian Illuminati, an old group of intellectuals that would meet up and exchange ideas, like Mensa today. He is not talking about the fictitious Illuminati group created by conspiracy theorists in modern times (that fictitious group did not even exist during Washington's life.)


So is it true than that you really think that George Washington and John Quincy Adams were somehow mentally impaired?

I never said this, and the fact that you are trying to use such a lame logical fallacy against me shows what kind of person you are. Next time, try using arguments, instead of making up what you adversary is stating. Ad hominems are lame. Do you have any evidence that the modern Illuminati which are said to be a group trying to rule the world with the New World Order exists? If so, show it. Stop wasting everyone's time with lame attacks.

[-] 0 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

Just trying to be clear on what you were saying Mike. You said that conspiracy theorists were liars and illogical, and I just wanted to be sure whether you really meant that about our founding forefathers or not.

Just trying to determine if you are anti-American or what, because you can see that much of our history has to do with conspiracies, facts and theories about them. Even JFK gave a speech about secret societies.

In that letter from Washington, you do see that he is talking about the Illuminati in relation to Jacobinism, the movement responsible for the most bloody elements of the French Revolution? Doesn't seem like he's talking about Mensa to me, but rather an organization that was rumored to have been managed by British secret societies for overthrowing the French government.

You don't think that Washington, being the main leader of the American revolution against the British would speak lightly about such a thing, do you?

[-] -1 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

Washington was not talking about a conspiracy theory. He was talking about a real group called the Bavarian Illuminati. These "secret" societies were not really secret. They existed in various British empires.

You're making all kinds of assumptions and trying to put words in my mouth. You made the connection from conspiracy theorists to the founding fathers, not I. You imply that I am anti-American, not what I wrote. I only wrote against conspiracy theories. They are dangerous, and by the way you discuss issues it seems they might have affected your mind. Stop throwing logical fallacies around, I note the use of ad hominem, red herrings, appeal to authority, etc... in your comments. It's seems that's all they contain.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

Lots of impressive terminology there Mike, red herrings and what not. Can't say that I put the words "illogical" or "liar" in your mouth though, I think you just didn't realize when you said them that you might be talking about some of our founding fathers.

So I guess you're not openly denouncing George Washington or John Quincy Adams as you say. You just think that the ideas that they believed in are some how ridiculous. I don't know how many times you've mentioned the Illuminati here Mike, and then when George Washington talks about them you just say that its a different thing.

Well, that's ok if you don't agree with our founding forefathers, for all I know, you're not even an American. You may be off on some Fiji island somewhere, living the globalist dream, creating a virtual world out of your own imagination.

But me, personally, I think there's something to what they said Mike, and I guess you're getting the idea that a number of people here in this forum, and throughout America as a whole for that matter, think so too.

[-] -2 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

I think you just didn't realize when you said them that you might be talking about some of our founding fathers.

I never died talk about or imply anything about the founding fathers. You're the one who is confused about the difference between the Bavarian Illuminati, and the fictitious Illuminati group of modern times depicted by conspiracy theorists. Not me.


If the modern version of the Illuminati existed, the fictitious one created by conspiracy theorists in which the illuminati have plans to dominate the world, you should present evidence about this. Instead, you confuse this idea with the Bavarian Illuminati which existed over 200 hundred years ago. If I ask someone to provide evidence for the existence of cars, he should show me a modern car, and not a car that's a hundred years old.

The fact that you rely on the confusion between the Bavarian Illuminati, a Mensa like society which existed more than two hundred years ago, and the modern conspiracy theory version of the Illuminati doesn't do much for your case. Instead, it shows you are pretty desperate.

Even if we confuse these two groups like you do, and believe the Bavarian Illuminati is like the group in modern times depicted by conspiracy theorists, it still is no proof that they still exist.

Show evidence for 2012, and stop relying on claims made hundreds of years ago to prove the existence of a group supposed to operate in modern times.

[-] 0 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

What I meant to say Mike is that you apparently weren't aware that some of the most important people in American history were "conspiracy theorists".

What about John Quincy Adams? You haven't mentioned him yet. He was an important member of the anti-Masonic party, which originally was formed in response to the murder of William Morgan by Freemasons, who had been about to publish a book exposing their conspiracies. Do you think Adams was illogical and a liar?

You keep suggesting that the Illuminati of the past were a group like Mensa, but Washington clearly associates them with the Jacobins, which even Wikipedia claims were notorious for the implementation of the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution. Doesn't sound like they were just taking IQ tests to me Mike.

You clearly discard Washington's association of the Illuminati with the Jacobins, is that because you consider him to be illogical and a liar as well?

I don't see what good its going to do me to provide you with any evidence about the present day Illuminati if you want to insist on living in denial of what's clearly documented historically.

[-] -2 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

You like to throw the appeal to authority fallacy around. A conspiracy theory is a conspiracy theory. It doesn't matter if the smartest person in the world doesn't think it is. What matters is evidence, not authority. You're throwing all kinds of red herrings around, blaming me for things I did not say, etc...

If you have evidence for the modern fictitious version of the Illuminati painted by conspiracy theorists, show us the evidence. Don't waste my time talking about what some men say 250 years ago.

I don't see what good its going to do me to provide you with any evidence about the present day Illuminati if you want to insist on living in denial of what's clearly documented historically.

Another lame red herring. Stop making excuses and present your case with evidence. The only thing you do is avoid a real discussion by throwing logical fallacies all over the place.

I don't think you have any evidence, and that's why you are doing everything you can to avoid presenting it, like trying to confuse matters by bringing up what men said 250 years ago.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

Oh well, don't get mad Mike, we were just having a conversation.

[-] -2 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

I'm not mad at all. You simply don't address the points I made, so it's worthless to discuss them. If you stopped throwing red herrings around by bringing up people from 200 hundreds years ago who were talking about something unrelated to conspiracy theories, then we might have something to talk about.

[-] 2 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

Isn't that the purpose of war in general, to reduce the population? Kill a bunch of people off, then you get to take their stuff. Nothing fantastic about that, its been going on throughout recorded history.

That's generally what happens in genocide right? Just like the Jews in WWII, wipe them out then take their property. We've already been there and done that. When will people learn?

And how many wars do you think happen just by accident? Its not that easy to get people to kill each other in large numbers. Generally speaking, powerful people with clear intentions make war happen.

You never did say what you would expect as proof of a conspiracy anyway. Is that because you are living in denial and are afraid to face reality? Nothing wrong with being afraid, I think we should all be afraid. But I don't think we should live in denial.

Keep browsing the web for news on a nuclear WWIII, you'll see it is growing.

[-] -1 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

The purpose of war is to take territory or resources in order for the population waging war to prosper. Furthermore, the number of people killed in wars has declined drastically over the years. Do some research.

You never did say what you would expect as proof of a conspiracy anyway. Is that because you are living in denial and are afraid to face reality?

There is nothing to deny because you have shown nothing to be. Show me evidence that the Illuminati as depicted by conspiracy theorists are real. You haven't done that. It could be any type of evidence. Documents naming people and showing what their plans are. Anything. You haven't been able to provide one thing, you only provide assumptions based on what some people said about other groups 200+ years ago. That's not even close to being evidence. You have nothing. Ziltch. What you are doing is wasting everybody's time with your delusions. You should attack real problems instead.

[-] 2 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

What does it matter what you call them? It is a group trying to establish a one world government, that is to usurp the sovereignty of all nations. That's what the great threat is to all people these days.

What is it that you are expecting regarding proof anyway? What do you want to see, the official registration of some group called the Illunminati in some book.

It will probably happen in your life time, if not the near future that either a one world government will be established, or the conspirators will be overthrown, perhaps by the US military combined with a popular revolt. If those things happen, you'll have your proof. Until then, there's not much more I can offer you.

[-] 0 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

Take your meds and learn to form proper arguments when you are sober.

[-] 2 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

You asked regarding a group seeking to establish a new world order or one world government. There have been groups doing that all through recorded history, I see no reason to think that this would have stopped in modern times.

Empires rise and fall just like Rome did, they collapse because they over consume their resources through greed, we are in the midst of that right now.

[-] -1 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

I asked evidence for the Illuminati which conspiracy theorists talk about. You have provided no evidence. You cannot provide evidence because the Illuminati is fantasy.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

The point was to show you that conspiracy theorists do believe that the Illuminati are central figures in empire building. It seemed that you were unaware of this.

And what do you say about the psychological study? Do you really think that hundreds if not thousands of psychologists across the US are risking their careers to lie about patients claiming to have experienced ritualized abuse?

[-] 1 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

I don't get your point about ritual abuses. There are hundreds of religious sects in US, of course there is ritual abuse there. What does this have to do with the Illuminati I really don't know. You want to believe in the Illuminati so much, but because you have no evidence, you make all kinds of assumptions and try to connect everything to them even it if it's totally unrelated.

Of course the Illuminati and the New World Order are painted as a group wanting to form an empire, but they are also painted very differently than any other empire that has come before. They are painted as a secret society controlling things form backstage using all kinds of conspiracies. It's complete fantasy. You argument is like saying that the facts birds exist is evidence for the idea that prehistoric gigantic birds still roam the earth. It's a logical fallacy.

I'm done with our conversation. It's a waste of time for me since you have provided no evidence at all, and you will always believe what you want to believe that is what conspiracy theorists do. They believe instead of knowing because they don't care about facts and evidence.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

This is according to Henry Makow:

"These families constitute a financier oligarchy; they are the power behind the Windsor throne. They view themselves as the heirs to the Venetian oligarchy, which infiltrated and subverted England from the period 1509-1715, and established a new, more virulent, Anglo-Dutch-Swiss strain of the oligarchic system of imperial Babylon, Persia, Rome, and Byzantium.... "

[-] 2 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

Your point? Again, evidence please? Anybody can say anything. Why are you so gullible that you accept everything people say without demanding evidence? Here, let me write a paragraph on you so people know where you come from:

"Arturo, an American citizen who has forsaken his homeland, lives in China where he helps the underworld prepare for WWIII. By taking part in secret societies, he insures that chinese forces have a permanent link to American intelligence. Arturo comes from a long line of international spies that started during the Mayan empire. He is a man of legend. But, unfortunately, he has a genetic medical condition that has been passed down in his family for centuries. He is hyper gullible and will believe anything people say. Luckily, there is Lithium in modern times, and arturo can keep his schizophrenia at bay by taking a small blue pill every morning."

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

Gee, that's pretty pathetic, you can't even think of an original insult.

In any event, I suggest you try to keep more abreast of whats happening in the world. Already there are threats of a nuclear WWIII, intended to reduce the world's population, and stun the remaining few into accepting a world government.

Thinks its just a conspiracy theory? Even researchers at Stanford University are recognizing the immediate threat of a nuclear war:

"Last week two separate studies warned that China and the United States are pursuing military strategies and implementing defense policies that could lead to a nuclear war.

John Lewis and Xue Litai of Stanford University concluded a detailed exposition of China's nuclear war plans with a very sober warning."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gregory-kulacki/the-risk-of-nuclear-war-w_b_1903336.html

[-] 1 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

Yes, the idea of a WWIII intended to reduce the world's population is a conspiracy theory.

Your quotes say nothing about a nefarious plan to reduce the world's population. You're deluded. You take someones quote, misinterpret it, then believe it means whatever you want it to mean. Typical case of delusion. You need medication.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

Well, we know that there are people who have been trying to establish empires for thousands of years, since the Babylonian empire. To me, the events of today are consistent with that.

These days, we do indeed observe supranational entities trying to assert an increasing degree of dominance over nation states.

[-] -1 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

Provide evidence. It does not matter if it happened in the past, provide evidence for it happening now. Show us that this Illuminati and New World Order demon is real. Put the evidence on the table, or change your tune and start talking about real problems that are tangible and can be fixed.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

I guess that the only way that could be proved, to you at least, is if a new world order were indeed established, or the system broke down, like the fall of the Soviet Union, and the files of various secret agencies, secret societies, bankers and what not were made public.

Both of those things could happen. I used to tell people that an economic collapse was coming, and they didn't believe me, but sure enough it happened. And the Soviet Union did indeed fall, its files were made available, and journalists like Juri Lina wrote books about the involvement of the Illuminati in the establishment of the Soviet Union:

"The Author pursues the history of the communist ideology from the Illuminati of the 18th century, to Moses Hess and his disciples Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. The Illuminati movement was founded on the 1st of May 1776 in Ingolstadt, Bavaria. The book describes the role of the Illuminati in the French "Revolution". It then goes on to examine the so-called Russian Revolutions in 1917. Juri Lina shows how the events in Russia between 1917 and 1991 still affect the fate of the world."

http://www.jyrilina.com/index.php?page=under-the-sign-of-the-scorpion--the-rise-and-fall-of-the-soviet-empire

And by the way, I'm sure you know that empires have existed for thousands of years. Aren't these nothing more than organizations that are trying to establish world governments, or their own new world orders? Why should we be so surprised that such an organization would exist in our times?

[-] -1 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

It's not because something could exist (Note: I don't think the concept of the Illuminati is possible) that it does exist. And, it doesn't matter if we would or wouldn't be surprised by its existence. If you want to talk about it, then bring evidence to the table. Stop running around in circles using flawed logic and creating a castle made up of one assumption over another.

There are a lot of real problems that need to be solved, conspiracy theorists detract from that. They act as a decoy to waste our time with nonsense that is not even proven to be. Let's deal with real stuff.

You should get off your LaRouche site. It's not healthy to have one source of information. Get away from conspiracy theorists and their websites, they'll make your brain into gooey slop.

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

Well, you asked me about my background and I told you. You know that there are organizations these days that are thought of more or less as secret societies, like the Freemasons, and you may have heard about the Rosicrucians, so you shouldn't be surprised that other organizations exist that you wouldn't be aware of.

Than I told you about two examples of occult, secretive crime organizations that are generally recognized as existing or having existed. I pretty much told you what you asked to hear.

[-] 0 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

None of this is evidence for the modern conspiracy theory version of the Illuminati said to aim for a New World Order. You need to learn the BIG difference between putting assumptions one on top of another to arrive at a conclusion as opposed to doing serious research using proper evidence.

[-] 0 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

According to Greenbaum and others like him, the victims of government mind control programs became perpetrators of abuse, something which occurs naturally in victims of abuse. That psychological report lends credibility to his assertion.

Regarding secret societies past and present, Nesta Webster wrote an entire book about it:

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/19104/19104-h/19104-h.htm

In one section, she discusses how the Iranians, after being conquered by Arab Muslims, formed secret societies to overthrow their conquerors and form their own empires. She also explains how their techniques were adopted by more modern secret societies:

"To link together into one body the vanquished and the conquerors; to unite in the form of a vast secret society with many degrees of initiation free-thinkers--who regarded religion only as a curb for the people--and bigots of all sects; to make tools of believers in order to give power to sceptics; to induce conquerors to overturn the empires they had founded; to build up a party, numerous, compact, and disciplined, which in due time would give the throne, if not to himself, at least to his descendants, such was Abdullah ibn Maymūn's general aim--an extraordinary conception which he worked out with marvellous tact, incomparable skill, and a profound knowledge of the human heart. The means which he adopted were devised with diabolical cunning....

It was ... not among the Shi-ites that he sought his true supporters, but among the Ghebers, the Manicheans, the pagans of Harran, and the students of Greek philosophy; on the last alone could he rely, to them alone could he gradually unfold the final mystery, and reveal that Imams, religions, and morality were nothing but an imposture and an absurdity. The rest of mankind--the "asses," as Abdullah called them--were incapable of understanding such doctrines. But to gain his end he by no means disdained their aid; on the contrary, he solicited it, but he took care to initiate devout and lowly souls only in the first grades of the sect. His missionaries, who were inculcated with the idea that their first duty was to conceal their true sentiments and adapt themselves to the views of their auditors, appeared in many guises, and spoke, as it were, in a different language to each class. They won over the ignorant vulgar by feats of legerdemain which passed for miracles, or excited their curiosity by enigmatical discourse. In the presence of the devout they assumed the mask of virtue and piety. With mystics they were mystical, and unfolded the inner meanings of phenomena, or explained allegories and the figurative sense of the allegories themselves....

By means such as these the extraordinary result was brought about that a multitude of men of diverse beliefs were all working together for an object known only to a few of them....

I quote this passage at length because it is of immense importance in throwing a light on the organization of modern secret societies. It does not matter what the end may be, whether political, social, or religious, the system remains the same--the setting in motion of a vast number of people and making them work in a cause unknown to them. That this was the method adopted by Weishaupt in organizing the Illuminati and that it came to him from the East will be shown later on. We shall now see how the system of the philosopher Abdullah paved the way for bloodshed by the most terrible sect the world had ever seen."

http://www.gutenberg.org/files/19104/19104-h/19104-h.htm#ch02

[-] 0 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

That genocidal wars decrease population is not conspiracy theory. They don't happen every day but they've certainly happened. There were also famines perpetrated by the East India Company, for example, that killed millions in India.

Regarding imperialism, conspiracy theorists most definitely do think of Illuminati as being imperialists, or empire builders. Many CTs say that we first recognize Illuminism in the Babylonian and empire, and from there it was passed down through the mystery religions to the Roman empire.

After that, its thought to have migrated to the Venetian empire and from there on as Freemasonry to the British empire. Secret societies are thought to have functioned as secret agencies before modern governments existed.

[-] 2 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

You are seriously messed up.

[-] 0 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

War has declined drastically since the last world war I suppose, but I don't think we will be so lucky for the next world war, if it happens.

The Illuminati as depicted by conspiracy theorists are imperialists, they want to rule the world as imperialists always have. The evidence for that is the constant concentration of wealth and power into fewer and fewer hands. If that doesn't mean anything to you, I don't think I can provide you with any single document or piece of evidence that will.

As, I've mentioned, the solution to the real problem of today is passing Glass Steagall, nothing else really matters much until that is done. I donate generously to a political organization every month that has this as its main objective, and have been doing so for between five and ten years now.

[-] 1 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

Not that wars have decreased, but the number of victims in wars has decreased. There are less and less people on the front now. We use guided missiles and drones to hit precise targets. There are fewer and fewer casualties. Study the history of wars and you'll see what I mean. Your idea of wars being used to depopulate are nothing but a lame conspiracy theory based on lies.

The Illuminati depicted by conspiracy theorists are nothing like imperialist countries of before like Britain. It's a whole different ball game. They talk of a secret group operating behind the scenes which dates back from many many generations. It's ludicrous.

Anyhow, I'm not here to discuss your deluded fantasies. If you want to believe every nonsensical story you read on conspiracy theory websites that's your game. I don't want to play it. Just make sure you keep some meds in the fridge for your own safety. When you start believing in alien races living in the center of the earth, take them.

[-] 0 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

The evidence is everywhere, its the economic collapse. Its the corruption of politicians and society as a whole. There are thousands of pieces of evidence that a class of people does and has existed for thousands of years which has the ambition to rule the world.

Its not important to academically prove whether some group that one might call the Illuminati exists or not. But taking measures to stop the economic collapse, would bankrupt those people whom I would refer to as Illuminati, would take away their power to create wars and create economic collapse, and consolidation of power.

[-] 1 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

OK, you really are deluded if you think there is evidence for the Illuminati. Good luck with your fantasies.

[-] -1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

Well Mike, you just don't confront the evidence that I do provide. Not a single word about what Washington said on the Jacobins, not a single word about John Quincy Adams and the anti-Masonic party.

Unless when you say that "A conspiracy theory is a conspiracy theory" what you really mean is that Adams was illogical and a liar.

I could comb through the entire history of the US and provide you with thousands of pieces of evidence, but if you aren't willing to discuss the two pieces of evidence that I provide you, why should I waste my time?

[-] -3 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

Well Mike, you just don't confront the evidence that I do provide

I already did. You provided no evidence for the modern version of Illuminati. You simply brought up quotes by people who lived hundreds of years ago who were talking about the Bavarian Illuminati which has no relation to the modern Illuminati. The Bavarian Illuminati are not a conspiracy theory, they are a group which really existed.

Unless when you say that "A conspiracy theory is a conspiracy theory" what you really mean is that Adams was illogical and a liar.

If Adams believed in conspiracy theories, then, yes, he was illogical. Conspiracy theories, by definition, are when someone claims something without evidence. That is, the claims precede the evidence.


I don't understand why you confuse the Bavarian Illuminati with the modern version. Perhaps because you don't have a solid education in this background?

[-] -1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

Well, I do have some education in this area. I was a member of a secret society myself for over twenty years, and while its no secret today, in the past it surely was.

Secret societies have existed all throughout history, and its the style and the direction of the organization which leads me to think in terms of whether its Illuminized or not. I don't think of the Illuminati as one organization that had existed at one point in history. But more as like a class of people, such as the "elites" of a society.

I think of the Illuminati as a class of criminal elites who organize themselves into secret societies and include ritual as an essential aspect of their operation. An Illuminized secret society would be either criminal or subversive and I'll give you some examples.

I'm not trying to prove this to you here, because I don't think that would be possible, but I'll just tell a you a little about my opinion.

The Zetas, as you probably know, is a criminal drug gang in Mexico. They are a band of ritualistic criminals:

http://usopenborders.com/2012/04/evidence-that-los-zetas-use-satanic-symbols-to-mark-their-places/

And they have become large and powerful enough that they are publicly recognized in our media. Still, they have to operate with a high degree of secrecy in order to conduct their business. Drug deals make a lot of money, and they need to employ secrecy to protect themselves from the police and competitors.

They also have a major effect on society as a whole, through bribing and black mailing of government officials, as well as by flooding the US with dangerous drugs. So, since they combine occult activities with crime and secrecy, I tend to think of them as an Illuminized organization.

Another example would be the Masonic groups that acted as pirates during the opium wars. They were in the same kind of high stakes drug trafficking, so they used occult oaths and rituals to bind each other into secrecy, and conducted criminal activities which had effects on countries as big as China.

With their wealth from the opium wars, these pirates created families which became among the wealthiest in countries like America. The Bush family and the Roosevelt family are examples of this.

[-] -1 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

I don't care about your opinion, I care about evidence. You can talk about your personal experience with the Illuminati, bigfoot, aliens, reptilian overlords, fairies, etc... Unless you provide evidence I will not care. You are deluded and have lost touch with reality. You are a danger to yourself and those who buy in to our fantasies.

[-] 1 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 7 years ago

That clears it up a bit, thanks.

I love to read conspiracy theories, but I don't just accept them as truth unless more solid facts are found, and I don't bother trying to raise awareness of them because there are lots of other issues that are more or less black and white to deal with.

Thats not to say that conspiracies do not exist - and generally the evil deeds of governments and corporations ARE conspiracies, so that is why OWS gets interested. For example, The Official 9/11 Report cannot be true, we must refute it, but what the real story is, is unclear as yet. The whole big "global control by Elites and corporations controlling government" has a lot of truth to it too, we know something like that is going on, but the exact story is far too clouded as yet.

That sort of thing is why OWS gets into it eh?

With any issue, but especially conspiracy theories, it is so easy to "poison the well" because nobody knows enough about them to refute the "poison". And if a conspiracy theory is TRUE, and the guilty people want to refute it, this is how they do it.

“Poison the Well” definition - "Poisoning the well is a rhetorical device where adverse information about a target is preemptively presented to an audience, with the intention of discrediting or ridiculing everything that the target person is about to say."

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

Hi Karlin, you may wish to read my post above in response to MikeMcKeel, explaining a different perspective on conspiracy theories.

[-] 1 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 7 years ago

I had trouble figuring out who was replying to whom, but my post just above here goes wayyyy back up top to when Mike was talking about Susanne's "Occupy Corporatism"...

So I replied with the idea of ruining a good investigation into conspiracy theories with the tactic known as "poison the well", which is what Susanne might be doing....adding confusion, causing us to start arguing amongst ourselves, and generally getting us off track of that one theme was can all embrace - "UNFUCK THIS WORLD!!" lol, ha ha, love it eh?

For sure, she should not assume to speak for us all OWS supporters.

But that aside, arturo, "The Mysterious Arturo" !! .. care to tell more? no, it could be dangerous.... It sounds like you have had an interesting life, so far...

Yes of course there are conspiracies!! How could the banksters and big oil and government and military all be working towards the same end which is to make the wealthy ruling class even richer?

And the DRUG TRAFFICING - have you read the books "The Politics of Heroin"? or "The Cocaine Coup" ? - telling about how airplanes leased by the CIA were loaded with cocaine and given safe passage into the USA, over and over, many tons. It went on for a few years.... and WHY? - "to fund those covert activities that were too unsavoury for Congress to fund" where socialist organisations were hunted down and their leaders killed by these hired mercenaries, many of them Cuban exiles from Florida...

And REALLY, Mike Mike Mike, come ON - "no conspiracies'? If you need proof like having someone who was there come and tell you the story, well that kind of thing is difficult, but no impossible to come by - for starters, read those books I mentioned above. Some of those guys were there...

For now, we can forget Bigfoot and ET... and 100s of others that are unprovable... but the down-to-earth political/corporate/Bankers and Wealthy Elites are almost certainly conspiring", - why wouldn't they??

For Readers of good Conspiracy Theories, here is one: {{maybe arturo was in on this I don't know. :)} - "Coneheads" [the movie is not exactly like this, but look deeper maybe you will find something... it was just a comedy]. Anyhow, it seems that an ET, an alien,with a head shaped like a cone, came to earth about 20,000 years ago and mated with a human female and the offspring of that union was a "conehead" with advanced intelligence and he taught two things 1] - how to build pyramids with special cutting tools and an anti-gravity device, and 2] - "how to control an entire population of people while making them believe they are the most free people ever" - which is what the pyramid builders, and their families, believed... And that knowledge was given to the Elites of that era, and the information was passed down to Elites of our time... and THATS why Americans believe they are "the most free people ever, while actually enslaved to an economic system that has them all in debt after working hard for the past 60 years sine WWII ended.

Evidence? - There really are 100s of conehead skulls, in Mexican museums, and they are not at all like the "stretched skulls" that some tribes created.... And recently the DNA of the conehead skulls was analysed - it shows that the maternal DNA is of a human female.... and the "nuclear" DNA is "unknown origin, unlike any living thing on earth found so far.

Believe, don't believe, but keep it in mind when the Elite's method of controlling people is finally announced!!!

Conehead skulls and the theory on video here

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=su8VFTg8Ps0

Really, arturo, check this out... were you ever an Anthropologist? And, do you really live in China [now, or ever have been, to the best of your recollection?} ha ha., just teasing!

[-] 1 points by arturo (3169) from Shanghai, Shanghai 7 years ago

That sounds pretty interesting. And actually, I am not all that mysterious, PM me if you want to know more.

[-] 1 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 7 years ago

ya, thats likely all it is, just an interesting idea to stretch minds...

I think I will do a PM, I have not tried such things yet... give me a couple days... and THANK YOU for the offer arturo.

[-] 0 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

And REALLY, Mike Mike Mike, come ON - "no conspiracies'?

I never said there were no conspiracies. I'm sure there are ton. What I said was that we need to use proper investigative methods if we want to learn the truth. Conspiracy theorists don't do that, they use logical fallacies to build mountains of lies.


Conehead skulls... That's a great example of conspiracy theory mumbo jumbo that will surely be supported by OWS and Builder.

BTW, the conehead things was debunked ages ago.

[-] 1 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 7 years ago

Well good so you keep an open mind then, there are some. Sorry if I misquoted you, but I could not find that specific post.

And for the 2nd time here you have emphatically stated that "that conspiracy theory was debunked years ago" [not an exact quote].,,, which begs a point be made, Mike, my commrade, fellow OWS supporter, buddy I don't want to "attack" or be unfriendly..... But the point is:

  • if it was debunked 20 years ago, they jumped the gun because the DNA analysis was just done in the past year or so.. DNA is good, solid, factual evidence. {Yes, it is true that I did not do the analysis myself, and then again with you beside me, which is what we really need in order to say we KNOW this is a fact.} - but they did have the DNA analysis report data there if you know how to read them.

Another point, albeit rhetorical, is that I often hear that this or that theory has been debunked on the basis of "not enough evidence", but really, "not enough evidence" means we don't know, so how could a debunker be any more certain that it is not true, than a proponent of the theory believes it is true, in the face of "very little evidence"? Even with no evidence a theory is still a theory.

So, is Susanne an imposter? Is she merely piggybacking on the good name of OWS to get "page views" that determine her ad revenues? Or is she a Tea Party Koch Bros. fan who is trying to create division within the OWS community? '

[-] 1 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

It's a conspiracy theory website designed to make OWS look bad.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

You want me to leave your shit alone, mikey, stop dragging me into it.

29 Real/confirmed conspiracies (Conspiracy Theory Literature)

A number of writings in CTL have started out branded as "conspiracy" without any mainstream credibility given them but eventually admitted by the U.S. government. Three notable examples:

  • radiation poisoning by the government of subjects in medical studies.
  • psychic research into "remote viewing" by the CIA.
  • the chemical poisoning of Gulf war veterans.

Read more: http://stason.org/TULARC/education-books/conspiracy-theory/29-Real-confirmed-conspiracies-Conspiracy-Theory-Literature.html#ixzz2APLSxL37

[-] -1 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

Do you believe in cone-head aliens from Peru?

You dragged me into your little world with penis talk a few weeks ago. Remember? Since then, you won't leave me alone. Ironically, your advice is that I ignore conspiracy theorists while you can't seem to ignore me!

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

Never heard of cone-heads.

Now answer my question, mikey;

Were Gulf war veterans poisoned by their own government?

[-] 0 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

I'm not sure. I haven't researched that one. I wouldn't be surprised if the American government did that, but I wouldn't believe it without proper evidence. I don't cling to anti-government stories just because they are anti-government. I always demand evidence, unlike Conspiracy Crusaders.

May I ask, why do you defend conspiracy theorists so vehemently? Do you think they contribute to OWS? It does not bother you that this site is becoming a David Icke website clone?

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

The first I've heard of Icke here is in your post.

[-] 0 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

All of arturo's and Renneye's nonsense comes from Icke. Learn about your enemies. Next thing you know they'll say your friend Cliff Young was an alien.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

Cliff was kinda surreal.

But alien? Aliens don't come here to farm potatoes, mikey.

They go to Idaho to do that.

[-] -3 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

"Conspiracy theory" is an expression which denotes a theory based on flawed logic in which a prominent evil power (usually the government) is at the root of a deep "secret" conspiracy to control the population. The Internet age has brought conspiracy theories in the spotlight because it gives people a way to feel like they have control over their lives. Young teenagers who don't understand the world, scan these conspiracy theory websites in the basement of their family homes and feel like they are part of a privilege group of people who understand the deepest "secrets" of the evil government. By it's very definition, conspiracy theories are always bogus.

A conspiracy which is properly researched is called investigative journalism, or historical analysis. This is in opposition to conspiracy theories which use flawed methods of research. A conspiracy theory uses the scientific method backwards, it makes a claim then tries to prove that it's true. For example, 911 was an inside job, now, how can we prove this is true. Investigative journalism would simply state that there might be something fishy about 911 so we'll try to gather some observations to see if we can get proper evidence to formulate a theory of what happened. In other words, investigative journalism doesn't start with far theories like "planes were holograms!" so where can we find evidence for this, instead is accumulates evidence before sketching out a theory.

Conspiracy theories are a virus. A vicious cancer which attacks and destroys logical thinking. So much time is wasted with this nonsense. People, like Renneye on this website, are deluded and confused. They live in a life between reality and fiction. The truth can never be found in such a setup.

As for the "Global Elite" controlling the governments of the world, etc.. this is utter nonsense. There's certainly no evidence for it. It's a given that big corporations can bribe and do bribe governments to pass laws which help them, there is research that shows this to be true, but conspiracy theories around this is a whole different story. Conspiracy theories claim that these corporations work together as some form of super organization that has all this planned to a "T". This is nonsense, and no evidence has been showed to support it. The problem is people like nicely packaged and all explaining solutions. It's annoying to understand that there is no organization that controls briberies, but that it is instead a chaotic mess of rich people each trying to bribe governments for their benefits. It's nicer to believe that they all work together in a perfectly organized group, which would mean it would also be easier to stop since you only need to unearth the secret group. This is why nonsense like the New World Order is so popular. The sad truth is that it is much more complicated than this, and you won't find a group that you can stop to make everything better.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

Pilots for 9/11 Truth is an organization of aviation professionals and pilots throughout the globe who have gathered together for one purpose. We are committed to seeking the truth surrounding the events of the 11th of September 2001. Our main focus concentrates on the four flights, maneuvers performed and the reported pilots. We do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time. However, we are focused on determining the truth of that fateful day based on solid data and facts -- since 9/11/2001 is the catalyst for many of the events shaping our world today -- and the United States Government doesn't seem to be very forthcoming with answers or facts.

We stand with the numerous other growing organizations of Firefighters, Medical Professionals, Lawyers, Scholars, Military Officers, Veterans, Religious and Political Leaders, along side Survivors, family members of the victims -- family members of soldiers who have made the ultimate sacrifice -- including the many Ground Zero workers who are now ill or have passed away, when we ask for a true, new independent investigation into the events of 9/11. We do not accept the 9/11 Commission Report and/or "hypothesis" as a satisfactory explanation for the sacrifice every American has made and continues to make -- some more than others. Thank you for taking the time to inform yourself.

[-] -3 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

Your point?

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

These people are not "Young teenagers who don't understand the world".

They are professionals who know there's shit going down that we, the people, are being kept from knowing, Mickey.

[-] -3 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

I never said they were. If their definition is correct, they certainly are not conspiracy theorists. In the definition it states - "We do not offer theory or point blame at this point in time." People who do not offer a theory cannot be conspiracy theorists. What their definition indicates is that they are doing investigative journalism, or historical analysis. This should be encouraged.

I have problems with conspiracy theorists, not people doing proper journalistic work. I respect them for not proposing a theory without sufficient evidence.


I'm surprised as to why you consider them conspiracy theorists?

[-] 3 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

You've made sweeping unfounded statements here before Mike, and my quoted text is from your post above mine. If you really want to make a statement about conspiracy theories, do some research. The jury is still out on Manhattan.

[-] -3 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

My text was against conspiracy theorists, and your reply defines investigative journalists. I still don't get your point. I am against conspiracy theorists. They are a danger to society. I'm certainly not against those who want to do proper research. I have said myself on numerous occasions that I prone the scientific method. These pilots seem to agree with me, and that is why they do not offer a theory until they have evidence for one, as they should.

I'm still wondering why you use them as an example for conspiracy theorists when they are not. They say themselves they have made no theory.

[-] 2 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

Your post focussed upon the attack on the WTC in Manhattan. What part of my response are you having trouble understanding?

You basically stated that anyone who doesn't believe NIST's bullshit excuse is a conspiracy nutjob teenager living in their parents basement, believing anything that they come across on the three W's.

I showed you that many professional people from all walks of life, NOT living in the basement of their parent's house think NIST is full of shit. Am I getting through that titanium skull of yours, Mike?

[-] -3 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

I did not say people who do not believe in the government's version of 911 were deluded nutjobs. I specifically wrote about conspiracy theorists, i.e. people who make claims before acquiring sufficient evidence, claims which usually point the blame to some evil force, like the government. I then specifically talked about investigative journalists, and people doing historical analysis which are people who use a proper research method.

You replied by using the example of people doing proper investigative work. These pilots do not have a theory because they are not conspiracy theorists. They use a proper research method, something I advocated many times on this website. They are in the process of gathering evidence to find out what happened. This is good.

I would still like you to answer my question: Why do you consider these pilots as being conspiracy theorists when they clearly are not?

It seems to me you don't understand what a conspiracy theorist is. These are people who claim that the New World Order is controlling politics even though they have no evidence. They claim a secret group, the Illuminati, is behind the New World Order. They have no evidence because the supposed group is secret. They claim the planes that crashed in the towers were holograms, still they provide no evidence of worth.

If you ask a conspiracy theorist - "Do you believe the government is hiding evidence of the 911 events?"

They will reply - "Of course they are! The government is evil. They probably planned the whole thing using holograms or such other method. They blew up the towers themselves!"

If you ask the same question to serious researchers, they will say - "How could I know if the government is hiding evidence unless I saw it, at which point it would not be hidden. We don't agree with the findings of the government, and that is why we are conducting research into the matter. However, we have not acquired sufficient evidence to make a theory so we cannot claim anything at this moment."

The pilots you referred to are not conspiracy theorists. Again, they do not have a theory because they are conducting proper research.

Your point is moot and makes no sense because it stems from a misunderstanding of what conspiracy theorists are.

Look up your definitions.

[-] 1 points by bullfrogma (448) 7 years ago

To be honest i didn't read most of this conversation. I think we're being put in a tough position because we know (everything adds up) that something is very wrong, but it is also the same power that is in control of our information. Money is making all of this decision, they are only possesed.

You can only trust yourself when you can't trust anyone else, and our senses are telling us that this utterly processed life is crap, and even crashing. All we can do is speculate, and marval at the evidence which points to a generic evil cloud of corporate monopoly. We might never know the answer to certain things but we can progress at the sight of evil, and not allow it to stop that.

[-] -3 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

It's better to leave the space for an answer blank when you don't have enough evidence to properly answer. Else, you are doing something akin to a God of the Gaps argument.

There's nothing complicated at all. Conspiracy theorists are not interested in the truth. They are interested in showing "evidence" for whatever theory they want to be true. It's like the BigFoot "researchers" who want it to be true so much that they create fake footprints, and films like the Patterson film. Is that what we want to encourage as a society? Of course not. We need to encourage serious investigative work using proven research methods. We don't want to encourage the nonsense of conspiracy theorists.

In any case, Builder's reply made no sense. I attack conspiracy theorists, then he replies saying I stated serious researchers are conspiracy theorists. I don't understand what his point is. He seems mixed up, and doesn't understand what conspiracy theorists are. The pilots he brought up say themselves that they have not put forth a theory. They are doing serious research and will not propose anything before their evidence points to a real conclusion. Builder cannot see the difference between this, and guys who promoted ridiculous claims without backing them up with evidence. And, this is the sad part. Many people nowadays, like Builder, cannot differentiate between investigative journalism and conspiracy theory mumbo jumbo.

[-] 2 points by bullfrogma (448) 7 years ago

Weird, your post dosn't have a reply option, but about that pudding.

How about this. Maybe we can't prove that they have killed anyone or whatnot, but we can prove that their practices are screwing us over just by looking around.

I don't know. Some people should probably be hung for crimes we'll never even know about, but we have got to start by solving the problems we can see, i'm pretty sure that you agree.

[-] -3 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

We can find solutions to problems if we have evidence and if we use a proper research method. I have always agreed with this. I don't agree with using the flawed logic and methods of conspiracy theorists and of making up claims without any evidence. If there is no way to know the truth, then it is better to leave the space blank then to make up a story in order to fill the gap. Truth cannot be found by making up stuff.

[-] 2 points by bullfrogma (448) 7 years ago

Right. I don't believe we are capable of a serious investigation however. The people who have the money control everything, and control that information. You don't have to call it a conspiracy. Just call it a monopoly. But there's one thing they cannot hide, and that is the proof which is in the pudding.

[-] -3 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

I don't understand your analysis. First you say we are not capable of a serious investigation because the people who have the money control everything. Then you say that proof is in the pudding and they can't hide that. If proof is in the pudding, then that means we can analyze that proof and so we can create a serious investigation.

Without any evidence, you can't say that rich people are controlling the world. Either you have evidence to back up that claim or you don't.

[-] 1 points by bullfrogma (448) 7 years ago

For some reason your posts no longer have the reply option. This is going to get too confusing way too quickly and i think we have an understanding that trying to pass made up stories as truth is bad. That is the very core of deception, malfunction, my personal definition of evil, blind like a shark and the insanity of knowing absolutely.

[-] -2 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

Conspiracy theorists always use deception. That's their main goal. They want to sell books and prey on those that can't make the difference between strong arguments backed up by evidence, and logical fallacies.

There is a limit to the number of replies a thread can contain. When that limit is reached, the reply button disappears.

[-] 1 points by bullfrogma (448) 7 years ago

Builder's reply made sense. Everyone writes in poetry but reads like a lawyer. Everyone.

[-] -3 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

I don't see how his replied made sense. I was talking about conspiracy theorists, and he tried to rebuke my claims by posting what serious researchers were saying as if they were the conspiracy theorists I was talking about. The pilots themselves say they have made no theory. I support their research efforts because they are genuine, unlike those of conspiracy theorists. Builder is confused and doesn't understand what a conspiracy theorist is. Read our exchange.

[Removed]

[-] 1 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 7 years ago

It could be, it might be... for example, investigative journalism could be making it look like they are supporting a conspiracy idea, but really they are clouding the real issue behind the truth - and they did it because we were getting close to the truth.

Have you read any of the WikiLeaks reports? Those are real people actually conspiring, working together.

Oh, Oh!! Look at the conspiracy between the Big Oil Kochsuckers and various "think tanks" they secretly fund - well, we know it is true because the PLAN WAS EXPOSED !! Here> http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2012/may/08/conservative-thinktanks-obama-energy-plans {and in another thread in these forums.]

  • the plan is to get Americans to hate wind power - "oh that nasty whooshing sound, I prefer runaway global warming, more oil please".
[-] 0 points by MikeMcKeel (-109) 7 years ago

Sorry my friend, I am not as gullible as you, arturo, Renneye, and Builder. I don't believe stuff without proper evidence, especially far fetched extraordinary stories. You fall prey to nonsense simply by watching a youtube video. I don't.

How are your cone-head aliens from Peru doing. What a joke.

Are you paid to make OWS look bad? Like arturo, Renneye, and Builder?

[-] 1 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 7 years ago

I never said I believed ANY of it. I look at it, I take it in, roll in it, and wait for more evidence while I keep it in the back of my head. For gods sake Mike, you think I UTTERLY BELIEVE than Coneheads took over planet earth?? It is just an interesting IDEA that I follow.

I am fairly sure we are all stardust.... which makes us all connected... and now I appeal to you to stop trying to create false divisions between us. You are as a Troll in that regard.

Why are you even here? You might enjoy your time more at a nice little Tea Party.

You have finally got out the angry guns and fired off a round at me. Anger is not good Mike, please be kind to others... anger hurts us both.

I will not be replying to Mike anymore.

[-] 1 points by Builder (4202) 7 years ago

MickeyMouse is a cancer on this forum, Karlin.

No need to respond to this kind of garbage.

I'll handle the young tacker if you like.

[-] 2 points by Karlin (350) from Nelson, BC 7 years ago

Ya - Go for it Builder, I thrive on positive energy, so I will look elsewhere on these forums, there is lots, I love this place!