Conspiracy Theories

Tools    





minds his own damn business
Some fresh steamy theorizing right there.
__________________



Gotta keep up with the latest conspiracy theory firmware my man.

Remember, everyone who believes in even one fewer layer of conspiracy than you is an uneducated sheep who's swallowing the official narrative, or something.



minds his own damn business
Remember, everyone who believes in even one fewer layer of conspiracy than you is an uneducated sheep who's swallowing the official narrative, or something.
I think that it's important not to expect anyone to take my word on anything, and any of the notions that I offer (many of which I'm not fully 100% about) are at least predicated on information that anyone can seek out elsewhere.


To get more fun on the Epstein thing, there's a number of really out-there theories that I wouldn't normally entertain and wouldn't expect anyone else to take seriously. There's a theory that Epstein, who was greatly interested in cloning technology, had a duplicate of himself arrested and killed in his place. Then there's the strange temple on Epstein's private island...





....which has a lot of occultish features almost tailor-made for spurring conspiratorial ravings. (Apparently, the temple was sound-proofed and could only be locked from the outside ) The Eyes Wide Shut theories are not far behind, although it's just as likely that Epstein himself was emulating the film rather than visa versa, the same way that since 1999, there've been numerous Fidelio-inspired sex clubs sprouting up in major cities. From here to adrenochrome harvesting (a joke by Hunter Thompson that some people took seriously) to Alex Jones' interdimensional child molesting demons is precariously effortless.


It's been noted (albeit anonymously) that Epstein had once mentioned an obscure paperback as his life's inspiration.







Here, "O.R.G.Y" stands for the Organization for the Rational Guidance of Youth. It involves the sexual grooming of children to become sex slaves for the elite. The book was from 1965, basically a James Bond rip-off. (Slappy White starred in the film ) Anyone familiar with Thomas Pynchon's classic Crying of Lot 47 will understand the allure of finding seemingly secret clues in otherwise banal, disposable culture, all the better to fly under the radar of authorities.


This leads us to the enigmatic theory known as Project Monarch, supposedly a mind-control off-shoot of MK-Ultra (and anyone with a dabbling of conspiracy reading knows that everything is somehow an off-shoot of MK-Ultra; see Jim Morrison ) which grooms women, but usually little girls, into 'sex kittens' for the entertainment industry, using a similar regimine of torture, rape, degradation, drugs and psychological dissociation. There's countless youtube videos disclosing these automatons in pop culture, usually at the behest of the nebulous Illuminati, and the majority of these clips seem to be from deeply religious sources, from evangelical culture warriors to the more superstituous Black church groups. A number of pop stars have quite obviously appropriated a lot of this imagery, similar to how metal groups appropriated Satanic imagery in the 80s, in order to give themselves a sheen of danger and diabolical naughtiness that sheltered church kids, in particular, eat up like hot ham.


So the problem is clear that although we can rule out most of the supernatural aspects of these kinds of things, we can be certain of one persistent human truth: people are crazy. Is it hard to believe that some bored rich souls in the maws of Hollywood have taken enough cocaine and ketamine to think it might be a good idea to enage in these kinds of practices? As surely as it is for any of the stoned podunks in Tulsa (or wherever) reciting their first Crowley mantras. Would the idle rich take the time to indulge in delusional histrionics?








Who am I to judge? But unfortunately, people like Epstein shows that there's a market in this world for boutique strange, and there's certainly no shortage of incidents of abuse and psychological degradation in the entertainment industry, especially of women, and especially of children.


One last thing. It's also interesting that even prior to Jeffery Epstein becoming a household name, there's been an explicit connection made in conspiracy circles tying this Monarch programming to Victoria's Secret (which remains the only known Epstein client). That's not unusual considering its status as an elite modeling opportunity. The more unusual event was in 2001 when a top VS model, Karen Mulder, spontaneously revealed on French television that she had endured a lot of sexual assault in her career, including by the notorious philanderer Prince Albert of Monaco (who has just had yet another accusation against him this year). This wouldn't be quite so bizarre, except that the segment was never aired, in fact the tape was destroyed, "the studio audience was sworn to secrecy", however word inevitably got out. Mulder was then committed to psychiatric care against her will. Despite a suicide attempt, Mulder is currently living in anonymous retirement.


Like Stieg Larrson's Men Who Hate Women, this is why these conspiracies are all too plausible, at least concerning the tangible evidence of sexual abuse, with whatever hokum pokum masked chicanery sprinkled on for flavor. It's a communion of our culture's worst lusts.



I'd say that Kennedy announcing that he was going to pull troops from Vietnam at the conclusion of his tour got him killed. I believe "I am just a patsy" were words spoken in truth.
Yes, itís been proven at this point. I think most of America would agree there was more than one person involved. There is so much evidence that there was a planned plot that goes deeper than just Oswald. Oswald did not act alone .

Oswald really was a patsy. They played him like a pawn, even if he did pull one of the triggers. There were multiple shooters.

Lots of interesting books written about the subject, and with solid, proven evidence. Too much evidence to go into here. I think Oliver Stoneís film was alright, but it only scratched the surface compared to some of the books.

The mafia also wanted to kill JFK because JFK said he would crack down on organized crime. This was especially disrespectful to the mafia as they were the ones who helped JFK become president due to ties with JFKís father who was involved in bootlegging / organized crime during prohibition, and the mafia believed JFK backstabbed them.

JFKís tension with Cuba also did not help the situation as itís alleged some Cuban assassins may have been involved in the shooting.

Itís really crazy how deep it goes, if you look into the number of witnesses who were there in Dallas that day who died of murder or mysterious circumstances a few years after the assasination. People forget that the famous JFK assasination video was not released until close to 10 years after the assasination took place, meaning the people responsible thought if they could eliminate the witnesses then nobody would find out the truth.

Then Jack Ruby was put into a trance by MK Ultra to kill Oswald. Then he was assigned an MK ultra doctor before trial who made Ruby go insane, even though Ruby had no previous history of mental illness.



minds his own damn business
Then Jack Ruby was put into a trance by MK Ultra to kill Oswald. Then he was assigned an MK ultra doctor before trial who made Ruby go insane, even though Ruby had no previous history of mental illness.
The worst kept secret about MK-Ultra is that it was a complete failure at mind control. It fried a lot of unfortunate minds, but it never produced a Manchurian Candidate. The documented history of its failure won't stop youtube sophomores from associating it with every twitch from normality that has occurred in world since then. It's up there with Mandela Effect, and I'm sure someone has found a way to rope in both as some sort of temporal CIA hack gone wrong. You might as well try staring at a goat.


The more plausible explanation is that Jack Ruby's club was 'protected' by Chicago mobster Sam Giancana, who had been contracted by the CIA to help with the assassination of Fidel Castro. (These details would remain largely unknown until the Church Committee amd Rockefeller Committee over a decade later.) Whether or not Oswald acted alone is irrelevant. The fact that he definitely knew and intimately interacted with people involved in this CIA-Mafia-Cuban exile triage would be sufficient enough to have him silenced, and the CIA deliberately used the Warren Commission to specifically obfuscate this relationship from becoming public. Of course, all three of these principals had some amount of their own separate motives to assassinate Kennedy, and also Oswald had a certain narcissistic grand delusion about his own mission in history and likely thought that these connections would give him cover. But as far as Ruby is concerned, he simply did what he was told.



The worst kept secret about MK-Ultra is that it was a complete failure at mind control. It fried a lot of unfortunate minds, but it never produced a Manchurian Candidate
Haha, oh really? And who told you that, the government? Just more CIA disinformation.

Dig a little deeper brother. MK Ultra and Manchurian Candidates have been fully operational for years now. If you donít understand that, I dont even know what to say to you at his point, because there is so much information out there.

By no means am I a psychologist or an expert in ďmind controlĒ but according to those familiar with the program, the human mind is very fragile and incredibly susceptible.

Dont even get me started about JFK Jr.



minds his own damn business
Haha, oh really? And who told you that, the government?
Ax-shully, I think that Martin A. Lee and Bruce Sclain's seminal Acid Dreams book remains the definitive source on the subject. It's still respected enough to be frequently cited by MK-Ultra conspiracists, apparently under the assumption that their youtube dupes won't bother to read it, because it makes it very clear, using something called 'journalism' and FOIA documents, that MK-Ultra was a dud in terms of achieving any success in mind control, and really only managed to produce some highly unethical and illegal behavior by certain CIA agents ("Operation Midnight Climax") and, once these drugs began to circulate among the generation's more influential intellectuals, inadvertantly spawning the more libertine artistic renaissance of the 60s. And if you think that the CIA had intentionally designed the anti-war and free love cultural movements, whose leaders the CIA then deemed necessary to illegally surveil, well then you just might be an idiot.

If you donít understand that, I dont even know what to say to you at his point
You certainly don't seem to know how to point me to anything substantial.


By no means am I a psychologist or an expert in ďmind controlĒ but according to those familiar with the program, the human mind is very fragile and incredibly susceptible.
I appreciate your personal demonstration.

Dont even get me started about JFK Jr.
Last thing I'd want.



Ax-shully, I think that Martin A. Lee and Bruce Sclain's seminal Acid Dreams book remains the definitive source on the subject. It's still respected enough to be frequently cited by MK-Ultra conspiracists, apparently under the assumption that their youtube dupes won't bother to read it, because it makes it very clear, using something called 'journalism' and FOIA documents, that MK-Ultra was a dud in terms of achieving any success in mind control, and really only managed to produce some highly unethical and illegal behavior by certain CIA agents ("Operation Midnight Climax") and, once these drugs began to circulate among the generation's more influential intellectuals, inadvertantly spawning the more libertine artistic renaissance of the 60s. And if you think that the CIA had intentionally designed the anti-war and free love cultural movements, whose leaders the CIA then deemed necessary to illegally surveil, well then you just might be an idiot..
First off, thereís no need for name calling and personal attacks, Iím having a civil conversation and you are deduced to childish behavior which says a lot about you and your mentality (Or lack there of).

If you really believe that MK Ultra was a failure and are basing this assumption solely on the account of a CIA employee (an organization whose primary tactics include releasing disinformation to the public) then it seems like you are projecting exactly what you are onto me. Talk about contradictions much ?

Also you have misquoted and failed to comprehend (no surprise there) my argument. I never claimed CIA designed the anti-war/ peace and love movements. Again, reading comprehension is not your strong suite. I said the exact opposite. The CIA were inserting their own operatives WITHIN the anti-war/ peace movement to counter that movement.

Itís not that difficult of a concept to comprehend, but apparently it is for you.



minds his own damn business
First off, thereís no need for name calling and personal attacks, Iím having a civil conversation and you are deduced to childish behavior which says a lot about you and your mentality (Or lack there of).
Name calling? You accused me of being a CIA dupe!


If you really believe that MK Ultra was a failure and are basing this assumption solely on the account of a CIA employee (an organization whose primary tactics include releasing disinformation to the public) then it seems like you are projecting exactly what you are onto me. Talk about contradictions much ?
Which CIA employee? I'm basing the failure of MK-Ultra as a mind control program on the journalism of a reporter who was one of the founders of Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting, which was based on thousands of documents and the results of the Church and Rockefeller Committees investigations. I could ask what information sources your assumptions are based on, but I have a feeling you would have mentioned them by now if they existed.


It's striking that it should be sufficient for the conspiracy-minded person to simply look at the facts of what is one of the most shameful programs of US government abuse, hundreds and maybe thousands of psychologically tortured and shattered individuals, and not consider that to be enough of an atrocity. Like maybe this wasn't an incompetent and sadistic excuse to find ways to torture people (and the Enhanced Interrogation Techniques are the true heir apparent of MK-Ultra), and that by releasing tons of evidence for this torture isn't enough of a stain on the American reputation. Oh no! Maybe the government must be hiding the totally not implausible truth that maybe they knew what they were doing the whole time and were actually highly successful at that! Because when I read about all of the hysterical shenanigans that went on during this MK-Ultra period, where CIA dudes were dosing each other unawares and shooting at cars in the street because they think the grills are teeth, obviously I think that these sound like the kind of competent people who can manage a secret army of automated assassins.


The CIA were inserting their own operatives WITHIN the anti-war/ peace movement to counter that movement.
Like which ones? In the context of MK-Ultra, with their supposedly effective mind-control serum, it would seem that the suggestion is that if the CIA wanted to, let's say, control the thoughts and opinions, and maybe even the behavior, of those in these movements, that it would be through the use of these same psychotropic substances that had proven so successful in the MK-Ultra laboratory. Or maybe these substances may have had the opposite effect, which might be why MK-Ultra was a failure at mind control, and why the CIA felt the need to infiltrate those who were ironically being heavily plied with these MK-Ultra mind-control serums?



First off, thereís no need for name calling and personal attacks, Iím having a civil conversation and you are deduced to childish behavior which says a lot about you and your mentality (Or lack there of).
You haven't been having civil conversations with anyone: you've just made assertions, and then tossed out disdain and condescension when someone's pushed back on any of it or asked for evidence. Here's a small sampling:

"drivel"
"Educate yourself"
"do some research"
"you donít have the capacity to consider an alternative perspective"

These kinds of things are, at best, insults with the thinnest veneer of civility. It's pure gaslighting to talk this way and then feign offense when somebody gives you the same treatment.

If you really believe that MK Ultra was a failure and are basing this assumption solely on the account of a CIA employee (an organization whose primary tactics include releasing disinformation to the public) then it seems like you are projecting exactly what you are onto me.
How predictable. This is the same pattern you've exhibited throughout the thread:

1. Make assertions.
2. Dismiss dissent with repetition and condescension.
3. Dismiss further dissent with accusation of "projection."

There really doesn't seem to be much behind the curtain here. If there was we'd have seen it by now.



Why, it's almost as if the contradictions are based less on facts and deduction and more on an emotional need to outflank everyone.
Iíve provided facts. And where are yours?

Oh thatís right youre just a guy whoÖ

Ö comments on a thread called ďconspiracy theoriesí yet doesnít actually believe any conspiracy theories

..and makes podcasts about movies he hates.

You are a walking, talking contradiction and somehow oblivious to the fact that you are a hypocrite which is quite comical.

I really hope you are a troll, for your own sake.



How about this new info on the plot to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer being some kind of FBI "sting" - with the entire thing having been set up and the plot itself even suggested by FBI agents to somehow entrap a couple rednecks and / or be a false-flag to impugn Republicans / Trump supporters before the last election?



Iíve provided facts.
In the purely literal sense of "I have provided a plural number of verifiable things," I guess? But about 95% of your posts are made up of flat assertions. More importantly, when they're challenged or questioned, you don't seem to have anything but more of the same.

And where are yours?
You mean like when you challenged me to read the Operation Northwoods memo, I directly quoted it to you, and all I got back was crickets?

Your procedure throughout, with me and others, is to make vague references to facts, but then completely avoid any granular discussion about them once they actually call your bluff.

Ö comments on a thread called ďconspiracy theoriesí yet doesnít actually believe any conspiracy theories
See, what's really interesting about this comment is that it implies that this is weird, which in turn implies that you think nobody should talk about conspiracy theories unless they're going to agree with them. Which in turn implies that you're deeply uncomfortable defending them.

..and makes podcasts about movies he hates.
Yeah, I already dismantled this silliness here. And of course, you didn't respond, since once you pull the "try to put them on the defensive with a weak attack" move, and they call it out, there's really nowhere left for you to go.

You are a walking, talking contradiction and somehow oblivious to the fact that you are a hypocrite which is quite comical.
I mean, I'd explain why there's no hypocrisy at all (in fact I have!), but I'm starting to suspect you don't even know what the word "contradiction" means, so maybe we should address that first.



Also, just gonna give myself a little report card here:

1. Make assertions.
"Iíve provided facts."

No elaboration or cite. Check.

2. Dismiss dissent with repetition and condescension.
"makes podcasts about movies he hates."

Repeated from earlier despite being addressed from several angles. Check.

3. Dismiss further dissent with accusation
"You are a walking, talking contradiction ... hypocrite ... troll ..."

Cheeeee-eck.



In the purely literal sense of "I have provided a plural number of verifiable things," I guess? But about 9% of your posts are made up of flat assertions. More importantly, when they're challenged or questioned, you don't seem to have anything but more of the same.


You mean like when you challenged me to read the Operation Northwoods memo, I directly quoted it to you, and all I got back was crickets?

Your procedure throughout, with me and others, is to make vague references to facts, but then completely avoid any granular discussion about them once they actually call your bluff.


See, what's really interesting about this comment is that it implies that this is weird, which in turn implies that you think nobody should talk about conspiracy theories unless they're going to agree with them. Which in turn implies that you're deeply uncomfortable defending them.


Yeah, I already dismantled this silliness here. And of course, you didn't respond, since once you pull the "try to put them on the defensive with a weak attack" move, and they call it out, there's really nowhere left for you to go.


I mean, I'd explain why there's no hypocrisy at all (in fact I have!), but I'm starting to suspect you don't even know what the word "contradiction" means, so maybe we should address that first.
LOL. Troll confirmed.



How about this new info on the plot to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer being some kind of FBI "sting" - with the entire thing having been set up and the plot itself even suggested by FBI agents to somehow entrap a couple rednecks and / or be a false-flag to impugn Republicans / Trump supporters before the last election?
Yes, very suspicious circumstance. When I, like most people, first heard about the so called ďattemptĒ it sounded very fishy.*

Makes sense that it was a false flag entrapment case. I think itís clear FBI wanted to bring down Trump supporters and get Trump out of office after the way Trump messed with the FBI.

You donít mess with the FBI without consequences.



Also, just gonna give myself a little report card here:


"Iíve provided facts."

No elaboration or cite. Check.


"makes podcasts about movies he hates."

Repeated from earlier despite being addressed from several angles. Check.


"You are a walking, talking contradiction ... hypocrite ... troll ..."

Cheeeee-eck.
One of (the many) things you fail to understand is that Iím not here to ďdefendĒ my viewpoints and spoon feed you all the information. Do your own research. And citations??? This is a freakin message board not a thesis! If you want me to educate you I charge tuition for that.

My time is valuable and Iím not wasting my time educating you in detail about something thatís over your head . Itís not my job to teach you. If you want an education go back to school.

Whether or not you agree I really donít care. If you donít believe, thatís up to you. As you can see I have not been ďdefendingĒ my position as you put it as Ireally donít care if you believe or not. Thatís your choice to make, not mine. And if you really did care you would research it for yourself.

And you are saying Iím not providing info? when Iíve provided way more information than you have. You are the one not providing info. You are just being negative and dismissing without providing any evidence to support a counter argument.

You answer to me, I donít answer to you. Itís up to you to disprove my argument. Not for me to further prove my already sound arguments