160

Can the Progressive / “Conspiracy” Divide be Bridged?

John Kirby

People from a variety of advocacy communities who tackle issues ranging from the assassinations of the 1960’s to vaccine safety are rightly upset by a recent NBC News.com op-ed authored by Lynn Parramore, a progressive journalist known for her insightful pieces for Alternet and other outlets.

In the article, Parramore argues that those who espouse “conspiracy theories” might be displaying “narcissistic personality traits,” suffer from “low self-esteem,” and share a “negative view of humanity.” Various studies are cited in support of this claim.

As a filmmaker acquainted both with the author of the op-ed as well as a number of people from the communities under fire, I hope it’s possible to dispel some of the misconceptions on all sides and even find some common ground.

At the outset, it should be acknowledged that Parramore’s piece is an uncharacteristically harsh ad hominem smear, taking its place in a long line of similar attacks on people who have dared question—sometimes at great personal cost—a whole range of suspect official narratives over many years.

But Parramore and many journalists like her are neither assets of an intelligence service nor unthinking tools of big media; she is fully conscious of the ways in which power and wealth can be used collusively (one might even say conspiratorially) to deceive and abuse the public.

So what accounts for a piece like this one?  Why does it rankle a progressive like Parramore so intensely when she hears someone mention that the U.S. military-industrial complex had the most to gain from the September 11th attacks, or that Big Pharma may be applying the same racketeering techniques to the ever-expanding vaccination schedule she discovered at play in the opioid crisis?

Those of us who have labored long to publicize state crimes against democracy have our own list of the psychological, political, and economic factors that may be preventing smart people from seeing evidence that we regard as overwhelming.

The primary difficulty may lie in just how smart and thoroughly educated many of these writers are: no one who has spent a lifetime looking into the way the world works wants to think they might have missed something big.

And as Noam Chomsky has pointed out, the more educated we are, the more we are a target for state-corporate propaganda. Even journalists outside the mainstream may internalize establishment values and prejudices.

Which brings us to Parramore’s embrace of the term “conspiracy theory.”   Once a neutral and little-used phrase, “conspiracy theory” was infamously weaponized in 1967 by a memo from the CIA to its station chiefs worldwide.

Troubled by growing mass disbelief in the “lone nut” theory of President Kennedy’s assassination, and concerned that “[c]onspiracy theories have frequently thrown suspicion on our organization,” the agency directed its officers to “discuss the publicity problem with friendly and elite contacts (especially politicians and editors)” and to “employ propaganda assets to answer and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose.”

As Kevin Ryan writes, and various analyses have shown:

In the 45 years before the CIA memo came out, the phrase ‘conspiracy theory’ appeared in the Washington Post and New York Times only 50 times, or about once per year. In the 45 years after the CIA memo, the phrase appeared 2,630 times, or about once per week.”

While it turns out that Parramore knows something about this hugely successful propaganda drive, she chose in her NBC piece to deploy the phrase as the government has come to define it, i.e., as “something that requires no consideration because it is obviously not true.”  This embeds a fallacy in her argument which only spreads as she goes on.

Likewise, the authors of the studies she cites, who attempt to connect belief in >em>“conspiracy theories” to “narcissistic personality traits,” are not immune to efforts to manipulate the wider culture. Studies are only as good as the assumptions from which they proceed; in this case, the assumption was provided by an interested Federal agency.

And what of their suggested diagnosis?

The DSM-5’s criteria for narcissism include “a pervasive pattern of grandiosity…a need for admiration and lack of empathy.”  My experience in talking to writers and advocates who—to mention a few of the subjects Parramore cites—seek justice in the cases of the political murders of the Sixties, have profound concerns about vaccine safety, or reject the official conspiracy theory of 9/11, does not align with that characterization.

On the contrary, most of the people I know who hold these varied (and not always shared) views are deeply empathic, courageously humble, and resigned to a life on the margins of official discourse, even as they doggedly seek to publicize what they have learned.

A number of them have arrived at their views through painful, direct experience, like the loss of a friend or the illness of a child, but far from having a “negative view of humanity,” as Parramore writes, most hold a deep and abiding faith in the power of regular people to see injustice and peacefully oppose it.

In that regard, they share a great deal in common with writers like Parramore: ultimately, we all want what’s best for our children, and none of us want a world ruled by unaccountable political-economic interests.

If we want to achieve that world, then we should work together to promote speech that is free from personal attacks on all sides. Even more importantly, we should all be troubled by efforts to shut down content and discussions labeled “false and misleading” on major social media platforms.

Who will decide what is false and what is true? 

In the case of vaccines, there is actually no scientific consensus that they are safe—only a state-media consensus, emanating from groups like the CDC, which act as sales agents for Big Pharma. 

A terrible precedent is being set, and both unfettered scientific inquiry and free speech are suffering greatly. Today it is vaccines and “conspiracy theories” that are being banned and labeled “dangerous” by the FBI. What will we be prevented, scared, or shamed away from discussing tomorrow?

President Kennedy said:

a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.”

Perhaps we should take a closer look at ideas that so frighten the powers-that-be. Far from inviting our ridicule, the people who insist that we look in these forbidden places may one day deserve our thanks.

John Kirby is a documentary filmmaker. His latest project, Four Died Trying, examines what John Kennedy, Malcolm X, Martin Luther King and Robert Kennedy were doing in the last years of their lives which may have led to their deaths.

can you spare $1.00 a month to support independent media

Unlike the Guardian we are NOT funded by Bill & Melinda Gates, or any other NGO or government. So a few coins in our jar to help us keep going are always appreciated.

Our Bitcoin JTR code is: 1JR1whUa3G24wXpDyqMKpieckMGGW2u2VX

0 0 vote
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
160 Comments
newest
oldest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
TFS
TFS
Aug 11, 2019 3:38 PM

Of course when the Conpiracy Theorist debunkers turn up, one question would be to ask:

1) So are you suggesting, the Government has NEVER been party to a SINGLE CONSPIRACY…….NOT ONE?

Guy
Guy
Aug 11, 2019 1:26 AM

To be honest I have not been following the NBC, much less Paramour but I get the gist of her article and so typical of those so called reporters to drivel for the corporate line .
The real conspiracies are the ones authored by our own so-called governments,be it in the UK or the US these days.

Thom Prentice
Thom Prentice
Aug 10, 2019 1:22 AM

Paramour is the poster child herself for narcissistic personality disorder and for twisting and manipulating reality to fit a deranged psyche’s world view. There just has been something “not right” about her writing and thinking for s long time. I sure would not call her progressive. Fake progressive perhaps.

Mucho
Mucho
Aug 7, 2019 11:54 AM

Easily one of the best, well researched online resources for 9/11 is http://www.bollyn.com

Christopher Bollyn’s work is crucial as it is mainly focused on the who was behind the attacks, rather than endless ivestigations into the physics of the event. Physics is an important part of the 9/11 puzzle, but the players involved are of far more importance.

Here is one of his presentations, condensing some of his work into a seminar:

Christopher Bollyn DC 9/11/2017 “The War on Terror among Truth Seekers”

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 7, 2019 12:23 PM
Reply to  Mucho

It was the Israelis… Who knew?

Guy
Guy
Aug 11, 2019 1:41 AM
Reply to  Mucho

Christopher Bollyn deserves an award for the work he has done through the years at the expense of his and his family’s safety for naming the ones that are responsible for this 9/11 terrorist event.

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 7, 2019 11:33 AM

@TFS

Is Dr Ceril Wecht not an expert in his field?

Yes, but there were eight other ‘experts in their field’, why would you give credence to the one supporting your conspiracy theory, if it were not for confirmation bias.

He was also a dissenting voice in the investigation into the death of Elvis Presley.

Are you getting it now?

TFS
TFS
Aug 7, 2019 11:51 AM

What eight other experts, in what fields?

So, tell me the No.1 question he has, and why is hasn’t been answered.

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 7, 2019 12:21 PM
Reply to  TFS

In 1978, he testified before the House Select Committee on Assassinations as the lone dissenter on a nine-member forensic pathology panel re-examining the assassination of John F. Kennedy, which had concurred with the Warren Commission conclusions and single bullet theory

TFS
TFS
Aug 7, 2019 1:44 PM

I think this settles your questions

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 7, 2019 2:27 PM
Reply to  TFS

The irony…. YouTube is censored where I live. I bet they’d subscribe to whatever nonsense you posted as well….

TFS
TFS
Aug 7, 2019 6:30 PM

Really? so Dr Cyril Wechts explanations are rubbish?

I’m sure he would feel overwhelmed by the imense amount of reasoned intellect to any argument you would have with him, but i’m guessing he’d be asleep.

TFS
TFS
Aug 7, 2019 1:45 PM

Good try but doesn’t answer the question he has on the SBT.

All you have to do is prove what they are saying. It been 50yrs.

TFS
TFS
Aug 7, 2019 6:27 PM

In related news a dissenting voice making a presentation to esteemed dcotors (many who walked out of the presentation in disgust) outlined that bacteria where actually in fact in the gut and that he could cure Stomach Ulcers.

Having being the dessenting voice against the qualified and overwelming opinion of his peers that he was talking out of his arse, he proceeded to give himself a stomach ulcer in full view of his students and then proceed to administer drugs to cure himself.

http://discovermagazine.com/2010/mar/07-dr-drank-broth-gave-ulcer-solved-medical-mystery.

Do you Feel Me?

TFS
TFS
Aug 7, 2019 1:43 PM

TFS
TFS
Aug 7, 2019 4:18 PM

In related news a dissenting voice making a presentation to esteemed dcotors (many who walked out of the presentation in disgust) outlined that bacteria where actually in fact in the gut and that he could cure Stomach Ulcers.

Having being the dessenting voice against the qualified and overwelming opinion of his peers that he was talking out of his arse, he proceeded to give himself a stomach ulcer in full view of his students and then proceed to administer drugs to cure himself.

http://discovermagazine.com/2010/mar/07-dr-drank-broth-gave-ulcer-solved-medical-mystery.

Do you Feel Me?

George
George
Aug 7, 2019 5:31 PM

I am responding to an earlier comment you made because, for some reason, I cannot reply to it in the proper place.

“The old adage ‘two men can keep a secret, if one of them is dead’ applies here.”

Wrong: secrets can be uncovered even if both of them are dead.

“The conspiracies we know about are exposed because someone talks, or a computer gets hacked.”

Conspiracies can be found out by many different ways e.g. documents uncovered, discrepancies, evidence that contradicts what has been claimed etc.

“A two decade old CT, like 9/11, or worse, one six decades old (the JFK assassination), are false because they would have involved too many people–someone would have blown the whistle, if only on their deathbed.”

Always a bad sign when you start to repeat “would have”. Lots of presumption here.

“No new facts have emerged because the only people who knew anything are long dead, taking the reasons to their graves…..”

New facts can emerge all the time even regarding the most ancient of events.

“….or in the case of 9/11, because there was no great conspiracy, beyond the one reported.”

So you now have godlike omniscience?

“A propensity for subscribing to conspiracy theories, is, sad to say, indicative of mental inadequacy……”

There’s no point in going much further here. You now devolve into psychobabble which, as always, is based on the dogmatic assertion that you are right. (cf. the formerly mentioned godlike omniscience)

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 7, 2019 6:11 PM
Reply to  George

I am responding to an earlier comment you made because, for some reason, I cannot reply to it in the proper place.

You cannot reply, because those examplars of free speech, Off Guardian closed the discussion down. Now there’s a conspiracy theory worth discussing….

I’m not going to respond to deeply, beyond saying that the American legal system, encouraging ‘expert opinion’, for hire feeds the conspiracy theory industry, To whit: Laughing boy, TFS, quoting an expert for hire on the JFK case, and completely forgetting to mention that eight equally qualified experts held the opposite opinion.

I am not a historian, thank christ, but what little I do know about the (in)discipline is that you only respect primary sources. For the JFK case, as all others, that means people at least contemporary to the event, and preferably, the protagonists. It
excludes those years later, wanking off on YouTube, for money.

Admin1
Admin
Admin1
Aug 7, 2019 6:32 PM

You have unprecedented freedom here to spam your repetitive, wildly unoriginal and frequently abusive opinions.

We don’t expect any grace from you in return, but please refrain from accusing us of censoring you!

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 7, 2019 6:58 PM
Reply to  Admin1

Can you explain why George can’t reply to my original comment? I don’t spam anyone, BTW.

Abusive opinions, when you have commentators openly trying to rehabilitate war criminals?

I will try and be more respectful, to you my host, despite the fact that you have referred to me as a psychopath. Thanks for that.

George
George
Aug 7, 2019 9:02 PM

You obviously have no respect for history. No surprise there then. And plenty of people “contemporary to the event” were suspicious about the quickly arrived-at conclusion that JFK was assassinated by a “lone nut”. Indeed you have unwittingly revealed yourself when you say that “preferably, the protagonists” should supply the sources. The protagonists, i.e. the main actors, of the JFK assassination should be the ones to trust?

And if you want to wank off to YouTube, that’s your business.

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 7, 2019 6:36 PM
Reply to  George

I am responding to an earlier comment you made because, for some reason, I cannot reply to it in the proper place

You cannot reply because those champions of free speech, Off Guardian, closed down the previous discussion. Now there’s a conspiracy theory worthy of your (I want to say ‘talent’, but ‘diagnosis’ seems more apt)

New facts can emerge all the time even regarding the most ancient of events

I’m not a historian, Thank christ, but what little I do know about the (in)discipline is that you prioritise, and give maximum credence to primary sources. Given that both the man accused of killing Kennedy, and the guy who shot him are both long dead, all you have now is people (if you’ll excuse the crudity), wanking off on youtube.

To what end you associate yourself with that laughable scholarship, the American propensity for ‘expert opinion for hire’ is up to you. Your dry cleaning bills are your own affair.

Ragnar
Ragnar
Aug 7, 2019 7:42 AM

I don’t think the progressive-conspiracy divide can be bridged. This probably is true for a variety of reasons. Putting it simply, it’s because the progressives are after power, and the conspiracy theorists are basically just looking for ‘truth’. Both camps want to reveal the corruption of the establishment. The progressives, only some of it, in order to get “the people” to join the causes that the self-elected leadership has defined for them. They work top-down and want to lead and be in control. They are collectivists. They want to gather in their flock of progressive sheep. They are on a mission. The progressives hope one day to be in power and if they succeed in this, they don’t want to be governing a populace that is sceptical to the new progressive establishment. The conspiracy theorists, however, are a really mixed bag of people. They are individualists, they don’t want to be ruled. They don’t want to go along with any power. They want to reveal all of the corruption, not just some of it. They simply want “the truth”. All of it. Goals as irreconcilable as this, can certainly not be bridged, plus, the people of each side of it simply are too different for that ever to happen.

George
George
Aug 7, 2019 4:57 PM
Reply to  Ragnar

Actually progressives want to achieve something other than a lot of “brave individualists” feeling smug about how much truth they have managed to gather. And achieving something means actually banding together into that much dreaded “collective” that bothers you so much. But we have all been indoctrinated into sneering at “collectives” so that we remain impotent.

Ragnar
Ragnar
Aug 7, 2019 6:01 PM
Reply to  George

George, you’re wrong about my feeling “smug”, but right about the necessity of working together to achieve a common goal. What does bother me however is the authoritarianism. It certainly would be better to find a happy medium here. -Now, what’s this about “brave individualits”? I don’t see them that way. Some of the conspiracy theorists are not very well trained in analytical thinking and are inclined to believe a lot of nonsense. They keep saying they want “the truth”, but I rather think many of them would be unhappy with it if they found it. They might prefer their own beliefs rather than facing the facts. So there you are! It really is a bit complicated, I would say.

George
George
Aug 7, 2019 8:51 PM
Reply to  Ragnar

Fair enough. I was just reacting to that familiar trope of Western propaganda which emphasises the lone individual as colourful iconoclast while demonizing all group activity as a “soulless collective”. This necessarily leads, on the one hand, to the cult of the glamorous individual who makes an impressive entrance but who, being isolated, cannot achieve anything other than to rack up sales figures and, on the other hand, to a sense of hopeless impotence in the masses who are reduced to spectators coughing up the cash to see the aforementioned glamourous individual.

I see this as very much part of that bourgeois capitalist notion of the bold entrepreneur against the bovine masses. It’s a notion that once again performs two tasks at once: it encourages the lone competitive dog-eat-dog mentality while also discouraging groups from forming against the bosses.

I will certainly grant that what passes for the “Left” these days has been assimilated into the overall system of control. Divide-and-rule is, as always, the basic tactic. An unnatural split has been effected between Marxist economic theory and conspiracy theory so that the latter is then projected onto “the Right”. And so you can have an economic/systemic analysis OR you can indulge in conspiracy theory but you’re not allowed to do both. Quite a brilliant manoeuvre. Just as those who see the current anti-Semitism as a deliberately whipped up confidence trick are tagged with being “neo-Nazi” i.e. again on “the Right”. After all, it is “the Left” who are supposed to constantly make accusations of anti-Semitism.

Ragnar
Ragnar
Aug 7, 2019 10:23 PM
Reply to  George

“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.” These words are attributed to Joseph Goebbels. -So, George, it would hardly make a difference whether the State is Marxist or Capitalist. It’s either power or truth. They are inherently different and can not be reconciled. Ultimately, there is no bridge possible. However, so-called “common” goals are of a lower order and cooperation here is possible, temporarily. These relationships are unstable and prone to breaking up precisely because they’re ultimately not common at all. The principle are different and the personalities too. Ships Passing In The Night, like. -See?

George
George
Aug 7, 2019 11:22 PM
Reply to  Ragnar

We all have common goals. Basically the goals of life and health. And these are hardly goals “of a lower order”. If that was true then we must be living in a state of “postmodernist relativity” where anyone can decide arbitrarily what matters. And that would certainly lead to your ships-passing-in-the-night scenario i.e. the ultimate divide-and-rule vision.

As for power, the late Marxist writer Ellen Meiksins Wood noted that, in modern times, we have an unprecedented degree of political freedom. But the reason for that is that power no longer lies in politics. It lies in economics. What is the point of having formal rights when your livelihood is gone?

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 7, 2019 4:09 AM

The old adage ‘two men can keep a secret, if one of them is dead’ applies here.

The conspiracies we know about are exposed because someone talks, or a computer gets hacked. A two decade old CT, like 9/11, or worse, one six decades old (the JFK assassination), are false because they would have involved too many people–someone would have blown the whistle, if only on their deathbed. No new facts have emerged because the only people who knew anything are long dead, taking the reasons to their graves, or in the case of 9/11, because there was no great conspiracy, beyond the one reported.

A propensity for subscribing to conspiracy theories, is, sad to say, indicative of mental inadequacy. Such people are unable to deal with the complexities of the world as it is, and therefore seek to make it a world of black and white, good and evil, heroes and villains. The internet, with its blurring of fantasy and fact enables them. This is why discussions like this get so polarised.

TFS
TFS
Aug 7, 2019 10:08 AM

1. 9/11 and JFK are false because WILLIAM HBonney has declared it so.

Boom, thanks for watching kids.

2. In other news, some Conspiracy Theorists Imagined 747-E4Bs above Washington at the time of 9/11 and 25+second delay introduced into the Air Traffic Control System but the Official Conspiracy Account of 9/11 didn’t discuss it because there was nothing to see.

3. In related news, HWB wack jobs go on one…

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2019/07/no_author/new-york-fire-commissioners-call-for-new-9-11-investigation-about-pre-planted-explosives/

4. Corbett, goes off on one:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HXYswf3lzU8

5. And again, Corbett goes even more mental.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mWLis-TVB2w

6. But it’s ok kidz, because HWB wack jobs, like first responders, police, fire personnel architects, physicists, former military personnel, pilots, Nobel Peace Prixe winners, medical experts, etc etc all collectively asertained that the Official Conspiracy Theory of 9/11 is about as usefull as the Warren Commission Report.

7. HOWEVER, HWB THINKS YOU’RE A WACK JOB.

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 7, 2019 10:42 AM
Reply to  TFS

Unless you are very old, the Kennedy Assassination is out of living memory. One has to ask, where is your conspiracy theory about Thermopylae?

As for 9/11, it was a national humiliation for the US, akin to allowing St. Paul’s to be destroyed by terrorists.

You will always be able to find like minded cretins on the internet, but that doesn’t equate to evidence. Once again, don’t be f****** stupid.

TFS
TFS
Aug 7, 2019 11:16 AM

Shush now Troll.

Already in your first sentance you shown you ignorance and a disdain for a dicusssion on subject areas YOU have raised.

Here: Is Dr Ceril Wecht not an expert in his field?

You’ve being asked, and always you fail to respond in any adequate manner.

You wallow in your ignorance, comforted in your own self aggrandizement that you are in actual fact knowledgeable………..ABOUT EVERYTHING. On the subject areas you speak off, its safe to say, by your responses that you have nothing in the tank.

You profess something backed by knowledge yet when challenged you change tack and fail to answer the question, by ducking and diving.

Your responses are that of a child.

You have been Watched, Judged and Found Wanting.

Feel free to continue. This website has now amassed a trove of material on you, should anyone be in any doubt. My job is done……TROLL

TFS
TFS
Aug 7, 2019 10:17 AM

In related news, that well known Conspiracist Susan Lindaeur really didn’t nearly get chemically lobotomised by the state for her knowledge in relation to 9/11.

Nope. She nearly got what she served because she is one of HWB, Wack Jobs.

r. rebar
r. rebar
Aug 7, 2019 1:49 AM

unless & until someone goes to jail — there are no conspiracies & as silence is — like any commodity — only as good as the price paid to maintain it — those who know have a real vested interest in not talking (it’s not a secret if you tell someone)…

roger morris
roger morris
Aug 7, 2019 12:40 AM

Ms Parramore is doing nothing more than her profession and tenure demands. Witting or un-witting.
This co-ordinated and global media attack on the ‘Conspiracy Theorist’ is co-ordinated and Global for good reason. It is the ‘Great Wurlitzer’ at full throat coinciding with extraordinary reductions in internet freedoms of information flow. The determination of international deepstate to make illegal any question or recognition of it under guise of ‘Conspiracy theorist=domestic terrorist/anti-semite/anti-Zionist/BDS/trump supporting white supremacist(etc)’- conflating those ULTRA memes with growing awareness of the Anglo/Yankee/zionist PSYOPS underway globally, mean we are entering a choke point in progression of reason, truth and beauty.

A read of the Cass Sunstein/Cornelius Adrian Comstock Vermeule Paper describing ‘Conspiracy theory’ as a ‘crippled Epistemology’ and determining ‘COINTELPRO’ type strategies to counter the danger of their truth becoming certainty, will enlighten those in the dark of IIO methodology and expose Ms Parramore as a true MOCKINGBIRD.
The danger of the conspiracy theorist to the present world order, is that most of the BIG ones, the nasty ones, are true. And CIA operation Mockingbirds’ job (Quote) ‘is to Guard against the illicit Transformation of Probability into Certainty,” that they are .

mathias alexand
mathias alexand
Aug 6, 2019 7:30 PM

Try this for conspiracy thinking

https://lorenzoae.wordpress.com/2016/05/31/part-2/

George
George
Aug 6, 2019 9:49 PM

Good link. I like this bit:

“Ultimately, the average conspiracy theorist has a better grasp of how the world works than the average liberal. Even the most outlandish “conspiracy theory” in existence—that people like George W. Bush and Queen Elizabeth are shape-shifting, extra-dimensional reptilians—is closer to the truth than what liberals believe. The reality is that the ruling class and its public servants really do have a parasitic and predatory relationship to the vast majority of humanity…”

I’ve often felt there is a lot of (metaphorical!) truth in David Icke’s ravings, although the reptile image is unfortunate in that actual reptiles are amongst the most sedate and peaceful creatures.

Joe
Joe
Aug 6, 2019 11:24 PM
Reply to  George

Except maybe for crocodiles….

George
George
Aug 7, 2019 8:09 AM
Reply to  Joe

Well yes – I was going to put in a disclaimer there. But most reptiles are sedate to the point of being boring. On a holiday in Greece I woke up to see a little lizard above me and I wasn’t sure if it was real or a decoration. Actually – I’m still not sure. Perhaps it was watching me to report back to its masters?

(By the way, it was me that voted your comment down. That was an accident as I was meaning to hit the “reply” button. Sorry!)

George
George
Aug 7, 2019 8:11 AM
Reply to  George

I just voted your comment up and the down one disappeared. I didn’t know I could do that!

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 7, 2019 11:16 AM
Reply to  George

This is how ‘vote down’ works. No need to thank me.

George
George
Aug 7, 2019 4:59 PM

Nevertheless I thank you, Billy. It’s always a pleasure to get voted down by you.

DunGroanin
DunGroanin
Aug 7, 2019 6:07 PM
Reply to  Joe

Hey! Leave that kindda ignorant speciest talk out of this.

I’ve seen crocodile ‘farms’ from Venezuela to Siem Reap that would make you weep with what we have done to these pre-mammalian Earthlings – just for evil shoes and belts!
We don’t even eat them for food.

Ok!

(Not completely tongue in cheek 😈

mark
mark
Aug 8, 2019 5:57 PM
Reply to  DunGroanin

When I was in Africa, local people didn’t eat crocodiles. This surprised me because they only earned about £30 a month. They seemed to revere crocodiles, like cows in India.

In Florida, however, people ate fried alligator like fried chicken, though they were obviously much better off.

Molloy
Molloy
Aug 6, 2019 5:29 PM

Eichmann and today’s useful idiots; Hannah Arendt

(start Arendt quote)
Despite all the efforts of the prosecution, everybody could see that this man was not a “monster,” but it was difficult indeed not to suspect that he was a clown. And since this suspicion would have been fatal to the whole enterprise, and was also rather hard to sustain, in view of the sufferings he and his like had caused so many millions of people, his worst clowneries were hardly noticed. What could you do with a man who first declared, with great emphasis, that the one thing he had learned in an ill-spent life was that one should never take an oath (“Today no man, no judge could ever persuade me to make a sworn statement. I refuse it; I refuse it for moral reasons. Since my experience tells me that if one is loyal to his oath, one day he has to take the consequences, I have made up my mind once and for all that no judge in the world or other authority will ever be capable of making me swear an oath, to give sworn testimony. I won’t do it voluntarily and no one will be able to force me”), and then, after being told explicitly that if he wished to testify in his own defense he might “do so under oath or without an oath,” declared without further ado that he would prefer to testify under oath? Or who, repeatedly and with a great show of feeling, assured the court, as he had assured the police examiner, that the worst thing he could do would be to try to escape his true responsibilities, to fight for his neck, to plead for mercy—and then, upon instruction of his counsel, submitted a handwritten document that contained a plea for mercy? As far as Eichmann was concerned, these were questions of changing moods, not of inconsistencies, and as long as he was capable of finding, either in his memory or on the spur of the moment, an elating stock phrase to go with them, he was quite content.
(end quote)

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/1963/02/16/eichmann-in-jerusalem-i

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 7, 2019 6:41 AM
Reply to  Molloy

While you are at it, are there any other ‘Adolfs’ you aspire to rehabilitate?

mark
mark
Aug 8, 2019 6:01 PM
Reply to  Molloy

The subject of this grisly Zionist show trial farce had been tortured and brainwashed and prepped for months before he was produced to perform for the cameras.

There is significant doubt about who he actually was. He may have been some stooge chosen more or less at random to play the part.

Molloy
Molloy
Aug 6, 2019 5:16 PM

The vaguely gaslighting discourse of a salaried agitator unable to understand Arendt and State sponsored criminal conduct !!!
“No point making comments on a public forum if you don’t want a debate.”
Better understand than be hanged.

Molloy
Molloy
Aug 6, 2019 4:17 PM

Chomsky dealing with the indoctrinated.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLcpcytUnWU&app=desktop

Why it is important to call out the so-called ‘Global Elite’ facilitators on here.
And why it is essential to understand what Eichmann was facilitating (and the madness that morphed into the same apartheid bigotry in the 21st century).

Better understand than be hanged.

ZigZag Wanderer
ZigZag Wanderer
Aug 6, 2019 3:41 PM

Presumably Lynn Parramore will give us her opinion as to why dozens of trustworthy medical professionals inexplicably and en masse turned into compulsive liars at Parkland Memorial Hospital Dallas November ’63.
Or why hundreds of NYFD firefighters displayed the same behaviour in New York September 2001.

This narcissism thing needs to be nipped in the bud before someone gets hurt.

Gary Weglarz
Gary Weglarz
Aug 6, 2019 3:36 PM

I appreciate the article, but the sentence below is offered with no logical or rational support – it is simply an evidence free assertion:

(“But Parramore and many journalists like her are neither assets of an intelligence service nor unthinking tools of big media; ) – really?

It is quite clear that if someone “is” (an asset of an intelligence service) that they will certainly not be broadcasting this fact to the world or to friends and family. And for someone to assert that “conspiracies” don’t exist in the real world requires a level of credulity that most intelligent and rational people the least bit familiar with the historical record would find rather difficult to muster up. I dare say it would be much easier in fact to prove the assertion that our Western history is simply the “history of conspiracies” given the oligarchic control of Western populations for millennia. This is hardly “rocket science” as they say. We do have a rather well documented historical record to fall back on to show the endless scheming of Western oligarchy behind the backs of Western populations.

Tim Jenkins
Tim Jenkins
Aug 6, 2019 1:02 PM

Well done, John Kirby: serious definitive & analytical journalism, once again @OffG …

different frank
different frank
Aug 6, 2019 1:00 PM

There is one conspiracy theory that is complete nonsense.
Four young men blew themselves up on 3 underground trains and one bus on July 7, 2005.

different frank
different frank
Aug 6, 2019 2:16 PM

Do people not get what I said?

vexarb
vexarb
Aug 6, 2019 2:54 PM

Yes, Frank, you are saying that UK77 has a “special relationship” with U$911. Publicly pre-scripted, public mock exercise ordered by UK and U$ regimes on same day as they committed their terrorist atrocity, and involvement of Muslim “terrorists” Israeli “transport security” company in both atrocities.

vexarb
vexarb
Aug 6, 2019 3:16 PM
Reply to  vexarb

PS. That video is a gem. However, both regimes are deeply dug in subterranean defenses against Truth Bombs. They don`t call it The Deep State for nothing.

Maggie
Maggie
Aug 6, 2019 2:36 PM

OMG Frank, THREE people marked you down for this post. Not one of them having watched this video which proves without a shadow of doubt that the official narrative was LIES!!!! And that there are three crippled sliders here.

Maggie
Maggie
Aug 6, 2019 3:23 PM
Reply to  Maggie

Frank, your link doesn’t open.. but this one does:
https://archive.org/details/7-7_Ripple_Effect

Guess what: it was disclosed on PANORAMA…

This film is also quite telling:
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245887/Four-Lions-Controversial-Chris-Morris-jihadist-comedy-bumbling-suicide-bombers-premieres.html

Frank Speaker
Frank Speaker
Aug 6, 2019 9:22 PM

FFS, as if they’d plan it out on a TV programme! What the hell are some of you taking? Your minds are so open that you allow any old shit to pour in unfiltered!

It’s far more logical that this programme was watched and copied by the bad guys. This is what happens when the media (Hollywood) are chasing viewing figures and profits, create sensationalised output, then we all scratch our heads when the nutjobs go and emulate some of this stuff!

No, it’s not a conspiracy, it’s lack of common sense, responsiblity and accountability across our media and society in general, a degenerate society where we accept that “anything goes”.

What we are seeing are the inevitable harvest of the seeds we sow. Claiming this and others are a conspiracy is just downright lazy and escapist get-out clauses.

Frank Speaker
Frank Speaker
Aug 6, 2019 9:23 PM
Reply to  Frank Speaker

I meant to write:
when the media (and Hollywood)

Mucho
Mucho
Aug 7, 2019 11:58 AM

Here is some pretty good research into 7/7 from WideshutUK

7-7 What Did They Know? (77 London Bombings Documentary)

wardropper
wardropper
Aug 6, 2019 12:26 PM

I like Michael Moore’s response when asked if he believed the conspiracy theories which were floating about at the time:

“Just the ones that are true”…

John Thatcher
John Thatcher
Aug 6, 2019 12:13 PM

A conspiracy theory, like any theory is as strong as the evidence put forward to support it.Often people offer as fact conspiracies that only as yet exist as theories,with greater or lesser amounts of evidence to support.I have no doubt that interested parties who are the accused in these theories,will mount efforts to discredit any theory mounted against them or those they represent.One of the ways they will do this is to plant “evidence” purporting to support the theory,but easily disproved by easily available information.Unfortunately,it is a sad fact that far too many “conspiracy theorists” readily accept and share along with genuine evidence,this planted “evidence” to the wider internet,thereby undermining the solid evidence of a conspiracy,by associating it with the easily disprovable nonsense.

Harry Stotle
Harry Stotle
Aug 6, 2019 10:33 AM

Isn’t it high time we had a term to describe those who always accept the official version of events after controversial political incidents no matter how implausible this account might be?

For example, after the attack on the WTC Kissinger was appointed to the head the 9/11 commission (before stepping down).

‘Conspiracy theorists’ would have thought – why are necons appointing a mass-murdering neocon to investigate an event that might have involved neocons (raising obvious credibility issues) – whereas those who regard conspiracy theorists as dribbling fruitcakes would have welcomed the appointment of the nobel peace prize winner.

Anyway, here’s a clip of Henry – the believers in everything the government say would never have considered the objections raised in the film – such questions are tantamount to mental illness according to these ‘progressives’.

Mucho
Mucho
Aug 6, 2019 4:57 PM
Reply to  Harry Stotle

The permanent POTUS

Mucho
Mucho
Aug 6, 2019 4:58 PM
Reply to  Mucho

lol

Harry Stotle
Harry Stotle
Aug 6, 2019 5:25 PM
Reply to  Mucho

Surely Dr Strangelove, sorry I meant Henry Kissinger heading the ‘independent’ commission was a kick in the teeth to mentally unstable conspiracy theorists?

As a matter of interest I wonder who Parramore would have chosen to lead the commission assuming she felt such a tedious process was required to determine why 3 sky-scrappers decided to disobey the laws of physics o nthe same day – for some trusting progressives such matters are little more than a mere trifle that can easily be explained by compromised scientists.

In fact some progressives’ even go so far as to advocate taking what Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld say at face value because its not like they have anything to hide, or would tell lies about WMDs, or Saddams purported links to Al-Qaeda – leave that sort of stuff to paranoid conspiracy nuts seems to be their general rule of thumb.

Frank Speaker
Frank Speaker
Aug 6, 2019 9:26 PM
Reply to  Harry Stotle

Harry, whilst we are doing that, isn’t it also high time that we had a term to describe those who always see a conspiracy in absolutely every major event?

George
George
Aug 6, 2019 9:38 PM
Reply to  Frank Speaker

Straw man. Harry is talking about those who see conspiracies where there are reasons to see conspiracies.

GRAFT
GRAFT
Aug 6, 2019 9:16 AM

This is a new example of controlled opposition she was spouting ever so slightly socialisty lefty lingo but never really hits hard then get as many if the people they had on there side to break away with them when it’s there time to split the left again. This isn’t a naive woman this is an intelligence asset plain and simple whether you like it or not everyday you are exposed to news that has the hands of the CIA/MI5/6/MOSSAD etc all over it and they have their shill lackeys designed to hoover up people wanting change and then directing them at critical times to follow the establishment viewpoint and it works a lot

crank
crank
Aug 6, 2019 9:15 AM

This article and the one it is responding to are of a type – they could have been written thirty, forty or even fifty years ago.
The generous side of me thinks, “well there are always new people coming to the realisation that we live in a world of political myth making”, but my more cynical side thinks, “Too many have not moved beyond first base on all this. To still be discussing whether ‘conspiracy theories’ are a consequence of psychological pathologies in 2019 is akin to questioning how useful was the invention of the wheel”.

George
George
Aug 6, 2019 8:30 AM

The Parramore article is a compendium of conspiracy-phobia tropes.

First, the linking of “conspiracy theory” to “celebrities” i.e. it’s those rich uppity folk who indulge in this. Not common folk like you and (ahem!) me.

Then there’s the indiscriminate list of “conspiracy theories” – 9/11 inside job, JFK assassination, moon landing hoax, lizard people, the world is flat, etc. – although strangely she doesn’t mention Al Qaeda dunnit, Russian cyber warfare.

And the reference to “experts” to assure us that all this (indiscriminate and undefined) conspiracy theorising is an indication of mental illness. Always good to have a bit of self-help blather to reassure us.

And then she brings us common folk into it by telling us half of all Americans believe at least one conspiracy theory. Actually ALL Americans and ALL people everywhere believe at least one. The question is whether they believe one that the government is pumping out.

Then we get more of what “studies show” and a sneer about “survivalist methods for the masses”. (Yes – but you and I are above all that!)

Then we get a curious bit about “groups working together to wreak havoc on the public”. Well – isn’t THAT a “conspiracy”? Let’s see: “Conspiracy theories breed partly because modern systems and institutions can seem so opaque and unaccountable. Sometimes, people really do collude to dupe and harm us — and sometimes they get away with it.” So is THIS a “conspiracy” then? Or is there some kind of magical line demarcating “conspiracies” from “oh something else that isn’t really a conspiracy but looks like one but we can’t call it conspiracy because we want you to swallow it or we’ll just sort of allow it”?

Well seemingly so because next up we get a reference to the flat Earth – and we don’t want to be associated with THOSE loonies!

After this, more psychobabble: low self esteem blah blah narcissistic tendencies blah blah…
But what’s this?:

“People with narcissistic traits also spend a lot of time comparing themselves to others, a tendency that suggests some underlying uncertainty about their abilities.”

Don’t we all constantly compare ourselves to others. Isn’t that called socialising?

After this – pretty much psychobabble till the end, although with an emphasis on “celebrity culture” which reassures us that it’s not us common everyday folk who are the problem. It’s THEM – those big ones lording it over us.

There you are then. A by-the-number exercise in mind steering.

DunGroanin
DunGroanin
Aug 6, 2019 10:31 AM
Reply to  George

Cheers for that G, i really didn’t want to have to read it myself… there is plenty of guff being daily accelerated out of their mills – it is an escalation to a wartime mentality, as a means of self preservation, as the masses (ye olde peasants) are begining to revolt and marching towards the castles.

Todays Graun interview with Sturgeon is headlined as an attack on Corbyn for example!

TFS
TFS
Aug 6, 2019 8:24 AM

The problem with the term ‘Conspiracy Theory’ is that it is usually used to Demonise those that question.

I would say OffGuardian/The Canary/Jimmy Dore/Caitlin Johnstone/ and other in the alternative media have the oppourtnity to lance this boil once for all, and use the term add infinitum against any peace MSM publishes.

andyoldlabour
andyoldlabour
Aug 6, 2019 8:16 AM

What is a “conspiracy theory”?

1) It is a fantastic story, dreamed up to provide an alternative view of some easily proven fact.

2) Conspiracy theory, is a term used by the media/government/security services, to rubbish a theory which comes very close to explaining something which the aforesaid organisations would rather we do not know the truth about.

mathias alexand
mathias alexand
Aug 6, 2019 6:43 AM

“In the article, Parramore argues that those who espouse “conspiracy theories” might be displaying “narcissistic personality traits,” suffer from “low self-esteem,” and share a “negative view of humanity.”

Does Parramore go on to explain hoe these things affect the likelyhood of people being right or wrong?

GRAFT
GRAFT
Aug 6, 2019 6:39 AM

So yet another “progressive” shows their true compromised colours? No surprise there then

different frank
different frank
Aug 6, 2019 6:27 AM

False Flags For Dummies – How to Create a False Flag in 10 Easy Steps

GRAFT
GRAFT
Aug 6, 2019 6:41 AM

The problem with videos like is the illuminati nonsense and the religious undertones and the constant appeals to fearing Stalin

Martin Usher
Martin Usher
Aug 6, 2019 4:17 AM

I think this might be a smokescreen designed to taint all unapproved comment and speculation as the work of cranks and deviants. I’m not a great fan of conspiracy theories but the most powerful argument for them is the combination of a long memory and the British 50 year rule — you match what was said and written about politics in the UK during the Thatcher years with what was really going on behind the scenes in government and you realize that the only thing wrong with the conspiracy theories of those times is that they weren’t radical enough. (This allows one to interpolate forward…..keeping a sense of proportion, of course.)

Its worth bearing in mind that the Boltons and Pomperos of today were the Stephen Millers of the 1980s. These people don’t just pop out of the woodwork, they tend to leave a trail which is easy to pick up once you know what you’re looking for. (The Internet doesn’t forget which is why its being attacked at the moment — its the consolidation of information combined with corporate liability that will eventually do what traditional censorship cannot.)(Its why I don’t believe in censoring things like 8chan — you want this stuff out in the open, on the record, for future reference.)

Maggie
Maggie
Aug 6, 2019 11:21 AM
Reply to  Martin Usher

ANY ‘PLOT’ that is designed between two or more people in secret IS A CONSPIRACY..

When that plot is discovered and discussed by people like us it becomes a CONSPIRACY THEORY.

When the TRUTH is discovered by us, then the presstitutes and shills are ordered to ridicule us. But it no longer works for a majority of us.. and this is causing wide spread panic, and is the reason they want to close down free speech…

People have been propagandised and manipulated for hundreds of years.. for example, as a child I was brainwashed to believe that the American Indians were evil, and that they wanted nothing more than to rape and murder the whites… For 70 years… we were bombarded with Hollywood (propaganda) movies that completely convinced us this was so.
When in fact the opposite was true.
This was a Conspiracy Theory.

Question This
Question This
Aug 6, 2019 2:12 PM
Reply to  Maggie

Conspiracies are really just day to day life, ‘Realpolitik’ we need to focus on the bigger picture the corruption of the system itself.

US PacificNukes
US PacificNukes
Aug 6, 2019 3:58 AM

This character Parramore is implying that war criminals and the butchers of Washington, like the Boltons and the Cheneys, are now the picture of [mental] health.

Has she been nominated to the Noble peace prize by any chance?
She could well be nominated to the Creative Physics prize as well!

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 6, 2019 2:50 AM

Lynn Parramore is correct in this. It isn’t that no one in power ever conspires, it is the frequency, and intricacy of said theories.

Nothing ever happens in the world without the shadowy black hand of these illuminati like figures, but strangely, they are never Russian, Chinese, North Korean….

Conspiracists are always American/Israeli/British.

different frank
different frank
Aug 6, 2019 4:47 AM

comment image?v=1491262695

Tim Jenkins
Tim Jenkins
Aug 6, 2019 1:06 PM

Bwahahahaha … roaring laughter: G’teed all day long & tonight 😉

Question This
Question This
Aug 6, 2019 2:18 PM

Your posts are funny, WHB does rankle, but its beginning to look more like bullying now than fair comment. Everyone’s entitled to air their opinion they shouldn’t be ostracized or driven out for saying what they believe even if they are trolls. Anyway this forum would be a boring place if everyone agreed with each other.

Molloy
Molloy
Aug 6, 2019 2:30 PM
Reply to  Question This

Not when based in Cheltenham and committing unlawful acts against the 99%.

Question This
Question This
Aug 6, 2019 2:34 PM
Reply to  Molloy

Evidence?

Molloy
Molloy
Aug 6, 2019 2:42 PM
Reply to  Question This

Mrs Fitzsimmons?

Question This
Question This
Aug 6, 2019 3:29 PM
Reply to  Molloy

Mrs Fitzsimmons

Sorry not with you?

I’m not defending WHB opinions by any means, mine are the polar opposite to his values, but you know the saying two wrongs don’t make a right.

By all means correct people & defend your beliefs. just do it with civility, its getting a little tasteless & immature, just saying.

Molloy
Molloy
Aug 6, 2019 4:07 PM
Reply to  Question This

Eichmann; Hannah Arendt. Might explain things for you.
(No reply no debate invited, btw.)

Question This
Question This
Aug 6, 2019 4:34 PM
Reply to  Molloy

No point making comments on a public forum if you don’t want a debate.

Molloy
Molloy
Aug 6, 2019 5:35 PM
Reply to  Molloy

QT? Please see my later main posts.
Apparently. Deleting perfectly reasonable posts by other people is inclined to give the game away.
Let’s debate facilitators and enablers. The real issue.

Question This
Question This
Aug 6, 2019 5:49 PM
Reply to  Molloy

Sounds like there’s history, which is fair enough, i don’t know about that. But its not always about the other persons conduct, if we behave like them, how are we different to them?

Live & let live, treat others the way you would like to be treated blah blah. If someone believes in what they say then they have equal right to give their opinion who are we to chose who should & shouldn’t have that right. We don’t have to agree with them, but we can disagree with dignity.

After all we let liberals tell us what they think every day, there really should be a law against that.

Molloy
Molloy
Aug 6, 2019 5:39 PM
Reply to  Question This

Please see my main posts. e.g


(start Arendt quote)
Despite all the efforts of the prosecution, everybody could see that this man was not a “monster,” but it was difficult indeed not to suspect that he was a clown.

different frank
different frank
Aug 6, 2019 3:42 PM
Reply to  Question This

If you want to engage a troll, you can.
I will make fun of it

Admin1
Admin
Admin1
Aug 6, 2019 3:50 PM

No more picture posts like these please. We encourage articulacy, fact-based refutations and a minimum of politeness.

mathias alexand
mathias alexand
Aug 6, 2019 6:49 AM

Parramore proposes a world view in which things that have aleady been admited to could not happen.

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 6, 2019 7:16 AM

Parramore proposes a world view in which things that have aleady been admited to could not happen.

Be specific…

‘Progressives’ are prone to giving credence to the most ludicrous conspiracy theories, if they should feed their prejudices. George Monbiots libelling of Leon Britten springs to mind.

Was it really credible that large numbers of parliamentarians were part of a paedophile ring?

TFS
TFS
Aug 7, 2019 11:29 AM

Having watched your responses

Are you:

1) Zionist?

George
George
Aug 6, 2019 7:29 AM

“It isn’t that no one in power ever conspires, it is the frequency, and intricacy of said theories.”

This means: It isn’t that no-one in power ever conspires, it is that no-one is supposed to think about it.

GRAFT
GRAFT
Aug 6, 2019 9:17 AM

The ziorats are here again

Israel coming second was very telling

Jerry Alatalo
Jerry Alatalo
Aug 6, 2019 2:12 AM

Dear OffGuardian readers,

Lynn Parramore is probably well aware of the following BOMBSHELL article posted at the Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth website, but, just in case she hasn’t yet read about it, please swamp her with the following link:

https://www.ae911truth.org/news/541-seeking-justice-for-9-11-heroes-an-interview-with-new-york-area-fire-commissioner-christopher-gioia

And, if you could consider doing a favor, – please tell Lynn Parramore she can kiss my a$$…

Thank you.

DunGroanin
DunGroanin
Aug 6, 2019 11:27 AM
Reply to  Jerry Alatalo

That is very excellent new development – it almost seems as if Parramore’s piece was inspired by it!

(i’m sure it is just a coincidence… not theorising a conspiracy)

Tim Jenkins
Tim Jenkins
Aug 6, 2019 1:18 PM
Reply to  Jerry Alatalo

Unfortunately Jerry, there are very few men & women who are not prepared to prostitute themselves, their principles & their morality and others, in this day & age of deceptions.
She can kiss my a$$, too & kowtow in any court of law or academic discussion 😉

Sounds like she needs a challenge 🙂

and a ‘Slapping’ Hitchens style, logic …

Fair dinkum
Fair dinkum
Aug 6, 2019 2:03 AM

Many journalists, like many scientists, see themselves as the new priesthood. They make their pronouncements from a position of self centred authority.
Truth only applies to Love, Life and God (whatever God is).
Everything else is either fact, information or deception.

mark
mark
Aug 5, 2019 11:22 PM

JFK was murdered because he was a threat to the Zionist WMD programme.
It just shows the arrogance of these people that they shot the US president down like dog in broad daylight with millions of people watching.
They didn’t even bother to disguise it as a poisoning, like Arafat and Chavez.
When they got away with this, it just emboldened them to do the USS Liberty and 9/11.
They know they have complete impunity to commit mass murder because it will just be covered up by their Fifth Column dual nationals who rule the roost in Washington.

Antonym
Antonym
Aug 6, 2019 9:07 AM
Reply to  mark

JFK was murdered because he wanted to pull out of Vietnam after going ‘soft’ on Cuba.

Eisenhower pointed out the US military-industrial complex as holding the reigns in 1961, not Israel : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gg-jvHynP9Y
He was no big friend of Israel: he compelled them to evacuate the Sinai : http://www.danielpipes.org/610/eisenhower-and-israel-us-israeli-relations-1953-1960

George
George
Aug 5, 2019 11:22 PM

I am so sick of this psychobabble regarding “conspiracy theories”. All this stuff about e.g. “narcissistic personality traits” automatically presupposes that the theories espoused are wrong. Indeed – by focusing on the supposed mental defectiveness of the theorists, you are distracting attention away from the theories they are giving.

Furthermore, even if someone IS mentally ill, that doesn’t automatically mean they are wrong about everything. Indeed the truth may work the other way round i.e. it isn’t that people are mentally ill and the mental illness produces the conspiracy theory. It is that the world really IS that ugly and the ugliness created the mental illness. It is then hardly surprising that these “mad people” (really the ones who are sensitive and truthful enough to see what’s really going on) suffer from “low self-esteem,” and share a “negative view of humanity.”

In a world that is sick, mental illness is a rational response. It’s the “healthy” ones who are REALLY sick.

milosevic
milosevic
Aug 5, 2019 11:38 PM
Reply to  George

by focusing on the supposed mental defectiveness of the theorists, you are distracting attention away from the theories they are giving.

well, that’s the whole point, isn’t it.

it’s all in the script that these professional shills are fed by their establishment handlers.

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 6, 2019 3:00 AM
Reply to  George

I am so sick of this psychobabble regarding “conspiracy theories”. All this stuff about e.g. “narcissistic personality traits” automatically presupposes that the theories espoused are wrong.

Unless you are an eyewitness, and have seen something that wasn’t reported, there is no basis, whatsoever for developing one’s own narrative for events.

The Kennedy assassination, for instance, is pretty much out of living memory, those who espouse wild conspiracy theories do so not out of sympathy for the man, but hatred of America. Theories aren’t fact, and should never be defended with the vehemence often seen.

I would humbly suggest, those prone to ideas such as this, limit the number of conspiracy theories they subscribe to. Sometimes, the tobacconist, or petrol pump attendant is just that. They aren’t reporting to their controller as soon as you are out of sight.

different frank
different frank
Aug 6, 2019 4:49 AM
George
George
Aug 6, 2019 7:33 AM

Ah yes – keep us securely under the control of the designated priests. Keep ensuring that everyone is monitored and no-one developes actual critical faculties. Keep on accusing them of “Hatred for their own!” (This coming from the very parasites who couldn’t care less about “America” or “The West”) Baa-baa black sheep Billy boy.

Molloy
Molloy
Aug 6, 2019 2:25 PM
Reply to  George

“Man will never be free until the last king is strangled with the entrails of the last priest.” Denis Diderot

TFS
TFS
Aug 6, 2019 8:35 AM

‘The Kennedy assassination, for instance, is pretty much out of living memory, those who espouse wild conspiracy theories do so not out of sympathy for the man, but hatred of America.’

Jesus, HBonney, will you stop trying to win this years ”Arseholes, arsehole award for 2019′.

Yeah right. Mark Lane, Harold Weisberg and Dr Ceril Wecht are well know American Haters because of their views and expertise on the JFK assasination.

Answer me this:

How does a bullet from the rear (6th floor School Book Depository) cause the Preseidents head to go back and to the left?

Oh, and don’t forget to provide EVIDENCE of the this marvelous feat being recreated in the real world!

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 6, 2019 9:12 AM
Reply to  TFS

Yeah right. Mark Lane, Harold Weisberg and Dr Ceril Wecht are well know American Haters because of their views and expertise on the JFK assasination.

Answer me this:

How does a bullet from the rear (6th floor School Book Depository) cause the Preseidents head to go back and to the left?

Is it even possible to have ‘expertise’ in the Kennedy assassination?

As for your other point, it fairly demonstrates the narcissism of the conspiracy theorist. Forgive me if I don’t particularly rate your expertise at firearms ballistics, as applied to a 56 year old two dimensional piece of film.

An essential feature of the conspiracy theorist is the idea that only people they see the truth, everyone else is blind.

TFS
TFS
Aug 6, 2019 10:31 AM

1. What bell end. You don’t think Dr Ceril Wecht has the expertise?

2. Richard Lane is not a expert? Is that why he was denied the chance to be the adversarial lawyer protecting the interests of LHO and his mother during the farcical Warren Commission hearings?

3. ‘As for your other point, it fairly demonstrates the narcissism of the conspiracy theorist. Forgive me if I don’t particularly rate your expertise at firearms ballistics, as applied to a 56 year old two dimensional piece of film.’

Wow! Just fucking wow. I need zero fucking expertise in firearms. I do like your dodge in answering the question though.

Lets try again…….

Q) How does a bullet from the rear move the Presidents head back an too the left? Come on, even a mouthpiece as practiced as you in BS can point to at least ONE example of the evidence showing it COULD happen?

4. Oh, shit, I’m a narcissist, from a person unable to supply the answer to a simple question. Come on, point us all to the truth on this one. Some here might be off the opinion you bring nothing to the game.

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 6, 2019 12:21 PM
Reply to  TFS

It has been estimated that a total of 42 groups, 82 assassins, and 214 people have been accused in various Kennedy assassination conspiracy theories.

Which one is yours?

TFS
TFS
Aug 6, 2019 6:12 PM

I asked you a question and like all Trolls you divert rather than answer the question.

Come one ‘Back on too the left’. Provide your evidence or be quiet.

TFS
TFS
Aug 6, 2019 6:14 PM

Again HBonney, not answering the questions.

More diversons. Look over there.

Have you actually answered with anything of substance?

TFS
TFS
Aug 7, 2019 9:54 AM

1. So a link to this evidence you have gathered for us?
2. So are you gonna answer the question?
Harold Wiesberg, Richard Lane and Dr Ceril Wecht are not experts?

You do know the qualifications of Dr Ceril Wecht are, don’t you?

Maybe you could answer his question he has about the Magic Bullet?

I’m all ears, waiting with baited breadth to be entertained, by more distraction and slight of hand.

TFS
TFS
Aug 6, 2019 10:32 AM

Yeah, next you’ll be telling us Muslims learnt to fly in General Aviation aircraft and were then qualified to fly the planes on 9/11.

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 6, 2019 11:21 AM
Reply to  TFS

Yeah, next you’ll be telling us Muslims learnt to fly in General Aviation aircraft and were then qualified to fly the planes on 9/11.

How good at it do you need to be to kill everyone on board, and thousands that weren’t?

Admin1
Admin
Admin1
Aug 6, 2019 11:32 AM

Your ignorance, real or feigned, of the evidence in this case does nothing to advance your plausibility.

Do a little research and discover the many many professional airline pilots who have attested to the near impossibility of manoeuvring a large jet into the TTs and the Pentagon, even for a highly skilled pilot. If your opinion differs take it up with them but don’t clog up this thread with any more sub par trolling

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 6, 2019 12:02 PM
Reply to  Admin1

Do a little research and discover the many many professional airline pilots who have attested to the near impossibility of manoeuvring a large jet into the TTs and the Pentagon, even for a highly skilled pilot.

Bollocks. You find the Hudson, and fly South. Take of and landing are the difficult parts.

As for the flying, the hijackers didn’t do a brilliant job, one of them flew over the ‘never exceed’ speed and nearly pulled the wings off before reaching the Twin Towers. A professional wouldn’t have done that.

TFS
TFS
Aug 6, 2019 6:10 PM

WHBOnney, you do make us laugh, and nothing else.

George
George
Aug 6, 2019 6:34 PM

Sure Billy, you’ve done it yourself tons of times. Hell – every couple of weeks you’ve had a go at flying into the Pentagon. It’s a piece of cake.

Tim Jenkins
Tim Jenkins
Aug 6, 2019 1:31 PM
Reply to  Admin1

Why are you discussing such things with a scientifically proven sociopathic cowardly Fascist Troll, being abused by his Psychopathic Fascist Dictator bosses & their agenda ?

I’m not questioning what you say or have done, necessarily: I’m genuinely curious as to your reasoning behind permitting obviously paid trolling on the OffG website …

This interests me.
regards,
Tim

Molloy
Molloy
Aug 6, 2019 2:03 PM
Reply to  Admin1

Yes. Attempting to cause diversion and anxiety. This is Mrs Fitzsimmons, the Daily Mail Reader from Cheltenham.
The more attractive part of a very wealthy couple who are, in fact, both so utterly brainwashed that they believe it is acceptable that money taken from the 99% be used to deceive the same 99%. Money used to pay themselves, and to pay her underlings in Cheltenham.
Yes, they are both known to me.
Yes, there is a public duty to call out criminal conduct.

TFS
TFS
Aug 6, 2019 6:08 PM

As if on Queue, WHBonney fails to answer the question. Your are the master of bringing nothing to the party.

So, your Conspiracy Theory is that unskilled GA newbies were able to fly the jets on 9/11?

LMFAO!

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 6, 2019 6:46 PM
Reply to  TFS

So, your Conspiracy Theory is that unskilled GA newbies were able to fly the jets on 9/11?

You don’t have a clue, do you? There are no spare 767’s around for pilots to practise on. You learn on the job, as a co-pilot, after learning the basics on a smaller plane.

So, effectively, you are suggesting that the 9/11 hijackers were known airline pilots, with employment records, and logbooks? Don’t be so f****** stupid.

Taking off, landing, flying on instruments, flying in bad weather is etc. all take some mastering. Flying under VFR, on a sunny morning, when someone has already dyone the take off for you, is not beyond the wit of a hobby flier.

TFS
TFS
Aug 7, 2019 9:45 AM

LMFAO.

I heard some bollox is the past. Thanks for printing such drivel.

‘You don’t have a clue, do you? There are no spare 767’s around for pilots to practise on. You learn on the job, as a co-pilot, after learning the basics on a smaller plane.’

WTF.

1. You pass you GA certification, go onto duel engine stuff, night flying then
2. You go into a training programme and learn on 6DOF flight simulators and fininsh off on the real mccoy, where you start off in the right side.

So already, your retort at this point is that of a simpleton.

‘You learn on a smaller plane and then learn on the job’. Is that how Pilots for Jets are trained? I think Not!

TFS
TFS
Aug 7, 2019 9:50 AM

‘So, effectively, you are suggesting that the 9/11 hijackers were known airline pilots, with employment records, and logbooks? Don’t be so f****** stupid. ‘

Nope, your being stupid.

I’m asking you to provide me with evidence of the training the supposed hijackers received to fly those planes in the manner they did.

‘Flying under VFR, on a sunny morning, when someone has already dyone the take off for you, is not beyond the wit of a hobby flier.’

Sounds goods, for a super intelligent person like you, but prey tell.

1. Given the flights and your simplistic statement, let me know how and what exactly the Hobby Fliers did on that day? I’m suspecting the Black Boxes of the planes recovered show the contrary, that the Hobby Fliers were anything but.

But then, YOU’D HAVE TO BE WAY LESS IGNORANT.

GRAFT
GRAFT
Aug 6, 2019 9:20 AM

A shekel has been deposited into your account

Tim Jenkins
Tim Jenkins
Aug 6, 2019 1:24 PM
Reply to  George

“It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society” – J Krishnamurti.

Dr. DaDe rules 😉 , just one glance below and you’ll know what I mean, George: fine comment

Question This
Question This
Aug 5, 2019 9:45 PM

There’s two camps, the indoctrinated (followers & copiers) & Cynics (skeptics). The issue is both sides have extremists which leaves those more moderate who are just simply unhappy with the political status quo & want to find the truth to change things for the better.

The indoctrination starts with schools & continues with the MSM. It is the liberals that take things to the extreme, with their unfailing faith in the system. Then there’s the conspiracy fanatics, (this site seems to have a few) who see a conspiracy in everything. Its fair to say You tube does host some really remarkable conspiracy theories which really are just absurd, there seems to be just as many conspiracy theorist incapable of critical thought as brainwashed liberals.

The rub is the establishment doesn’t like it because it means more people are questioning their conduct, which is made more possible via the internet. When ever I hear the “tin foil hat” smear. I simply say look in any court to see numerous examples of conspiracies, the system doesn’t seem to so readily dismiss those.

But I wouldn’t take away the freedom from either to say what they think & believe. What we should all be united in is protecting that right to freedom of speech & critical thought, its our only protection from tyrannical government, that’s surely what most of us want?

Maggie
Maggie
Aug 6, 2019 11:42 AM
Reply to  Question This

Question This, ”The really remarkable conspiracy theories which really are absurd” are the ones created by the CIA/Mossad/MI5/6 etc to deflect attention and muddy the water.
By their very nature, they stand out like sore thumbs.. and anyone with a modicum of knowledge about said conspiracy, can spot them a mile away.
It is the duty of all of us to be hypervigilant and inform our fellow cave dwellers, and help them adjust to the light.
(Plato’s Cave? )

Question This
Question This
Aug 6, 2019 1:28 PM
Reply to  Maggie

Here’s my take on world politics & the horrendous mess the human race finds itself.

Yes of course groups of people conspire & collaborate to advance their own interests. Some are psychopaths & don’t care who or how many get hurt, like all good psychopaths (wanna be leaders) they manipulate those around them to thinking they care about them because they know that’s how social interaction works & its the best way to achieve their goals.

Homo sapiens are herd animals, they flock together for safety & comfort, they unite & form strong group following by holding similar values & principles & following one leader. Most Liberals believe in what they say & do, they feel safe being ruled by totalitarian authoritarianism. The negative side effect of liberal mentality is they wont accept any other world view or opinion, there’s only one way their way & they will not deviate. Science to liberals is a religion that has become twisted & corrupt to suit their objectives. The psychopaths (leaders) take advantage of this.

All of us are hunting the boogey man, the monster, the thing under the bed, for our own security. Some say the truth. But there is no despotic secretive anonymous elite group running the world, the system is a creation of a complex society that has slowly evolved. We are all the monsters, the thing under the bed, the boogey man. The system that we now fight against is the invention of our own collective minds, it is a system we all conspired collectively towards to protect ourselves from our own insecurities, but now the system no longer exists to simply protect us, its priority now is to protect itself from us. There are no one world order conspiracies by the likes of Rockefeller, there’s just groups of people fighting for their own survival lead by psychopaths, sure they conspire to do nasty shit, they are driven by greed & ego!

But the problem is the system is absolutely corrupt its a natural process, it is & always will be survival of the fittest but in the form of a Trojan horse to make it look fair, kind & civilized. There is no avoiding nature. Our only hope of change & survival is collapse of the system, but that would be very painful for majority of us & subconsciously we know it & we as individuals aren’t willing to give up our security & comfort.

I’m interested in the big picture not individual conspiracy theories, how many different theories are there for 911 or the JFK assassination, only one narrative can be true so by default the rest are BS based on fiction. But i do like a good story which is why I follow some. My waking point was Waco. That’s when it became clear to me that the politicians & liberals in particular are the biggest monsters of all & our only hope is individual freedom & liberty from their rule. Waco is something people rarely talk about & seems forgotten now, but it is the greatest example of the system being manipulated by elite politicians (pyscopaths) to please the masses, for their advancement, killing innocents simply because they were different, and the rule of law had to be enforced at any cost. When they realized the horror of what they had done, it was then covered up to save their own arses & hide the systems brutality. It is a perfect example of what we as a species are capable of & doing to ourselves, we conspire to harm ourselves, its evolution not conspiracy.

Maggie
Maggie
Aug 6, 2019 2:34 PM
Reply to  Question This

I have to agree with the majority of your post, and Waco was also my awakening. However.. I disagree that there is NO plan for a NWO.
Please forgive the length of this post, but I couldn’t decide what to leave out.

>>Most of the major wars, political upheavals, and economic depression/recessions of the past 100 years (and earlier) were carefully planned and instigated by the machinations of the NWO elites. They include The Spanish-American War, World War I and World War II; The Great Depression; the Bolshevik Revolution of 1917; the Rise of Nazi Germany; the Korean War; the Vietnam War; the 1989-91 “fall” of Soviet Communism; the 1991 Gulf War; the War in Kosovo; and the two Iraq wars. Even the French Revolution was orchestrated into existence.
http://www.threeworldwars.com/new-world-order.htm

The instigation of a trumped-up war as a cover for amassing fortunes, which can be dated back to at least the 12th Century when only a core group of nine members of the Knights Templar, kicked off the Crusades, that lasted for over a century and a half.
The core group mentioned above were reportedly the military arm of a secret society known as the ‘Priory of Zion’, but this was later proven to be a hoax, an obfuscation.

In 1307, the king of France, Philippe the Fair, coveted the wealth and was jealous of the Templars’ power. The French king set out to arrest all the Templars in France on October 13. While many Templars were seized and tortured, including their Grand Master, Jacques de Molay, many other Templars (who had been tipped off) escaped. They eventually resurfaced in Portugal, in Malta (as the Knights of Malta) and later in Scotland as The Scottish Rites of Freemasonry, with Albert Pike playing a key role in defining a plan for establishing a world government.
The acquisition and consolidation of ever greater wealth, natural resources, total political power, and control over others are the motivating forces which drive the decisions of the NWO leaders.
…The toll in human suffering and the loss of innocent lives, are non issues for these individuals, who are simply expendable collateral…

The following article is extracted from an excellent analysis of the New World Order by author Ken Adachi which can be found at…educate-yourself.org

The term New World Order (NWO) has been used by numerous politicians through the ages, and is a generic term used to refer to a worldwide conspiracy being orchestrated by an extremely powerful and influential group of genetically-related individuals (at least at the highest echelons) which include many of the world’s wealthiest people, top political leaders, and corporate elite, as well as members of the so-called Black Nobility of Europe (dominated by the British Crown,) whose goal is to create a One World (fascist) Government, stripped of nationalistic and regional boundaries, that is obedient to their agenda.

In 2008 A branch of the Freemasons secret society was formed by members of the Royal Household and police who protect the Royal Family.
But their decision to call it The Royal Household Lodge put them on a collision course with Buckingham Palace, as did their plan to co-opt the royal cipher EIIR for their regalia, to underline their connection to the Queen.
The Queen’s cousin, the Duke of Kent, is head of the secretive organisation.
He is Grand Master of the United Grand Lodge of England….
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti…nt-amused.html

Listen to the Zionist* banker, Paul Warburg:
“We will have a world government whether you like it or not. The only question is whether that government will be achieved by conquest or consent.” (February 17, 1950, as he testified before the US Senate).
Their intention is to effect complete and total control over every human being on the planet and to ”dramatically reduce the world’s population by two thirds.” (The Transgender Agenda will achieve this?)
While the name New World Order is the term most frequently used today to loosely refer to anyone involved

…The sheer magnitude and complex web of deceit surrounding the Individuals and Organizations involved in this conspiracy is mind boggling, even for the most astute among us.
Most people react with disbelief and scepticism towards the topic, unaware that they have been conditioned (brainwashed) to react with scepticism by institutional and media influences….
Author and de-programmer Fritz Springmeier (The Top 13 Illuminati Bloodlines) says that most people have built in “slides” that SHORT CIRCUIT THE MIND’S CRITICAL EXAMINATION PROCESS when it comes to certain sensitive topics.
“Slides”, is a CIA term for a ‘conditioned’ type of response which ‘dead ends’ a person’s thinking and terminates debate or examination of the topic at hand.
For example, the mention of the word “conspiracy” often solicits a slide response with many people.

….What most people believe to be “Public Opinion” is in reality carefully crafted and scripted propaganda designed to elicit a desired behavioural response from the public. Public opinion polls are really taken with the intent of gauging the public’s acceptance of the New World Order’s ”PLANNED PROGRAMMES.”
A strong showing in the polls tells them that the programming is “taking”, while a poor showing tells the NWO manipulators that they have to recast or “tweak” the programming until the desired response is achieved.

Cognitive Dissonance
The theory of cognitive dissonance in social psychology proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance by altering existing cognitions, adding new ones to create a consistent belief system, or alternatively by reducing the importance of any one of the dissonant elements.
Cognitive dissonance is the distressing mental state that people feel when they “find themselves doing things that ‘don’t fit’ with what they know, or having opinions that do not fit with other opinions they hold.”
A key assumption is that people want their expectations to meet reality (that the establishment feeds them), creating a sense of equilibrium. Likewise, another assumption is that a person will ”avoid situations or information sources” that give rise to feelings of uneasiness, or dissonance….

Question This
Question This
Aug 6, 2019 2:55 PM
Reply to  Maggie

You misunderstood my point.

Yes groups of people do conspire, the individual objective is power, the motive greed & ego, its a survival instinct, evolution a natural process. Their are people that think they should rule the rest of us via tyrannical government. Liberals are authoritarian by nature & therefore facilitate these psychopaths.

But no one person could do so on their own, they do so with the majorities co-operation. We could stop it tomorrow if we desired but a majority (liberals) actually consent to this, for their own comfort & security. There is no one person its a collective effort. The NWO is code for American empire, what it may have meant in history is irrelevant.

There are no real secret societies as such, just groups of like minded people but they know & fear the masses collective power, which is why they have to manipulate us psychologically, “conspiracies” whats important is why they are doing it not how. People only believe what they want to hear & hear what they want to believe.

Our only way out is collapse of the system, but its not a vote winner.

DunGroanin
DunGroanin
Aug 7, 2019 6:52 PM
Reply to  Maggie

““We will have a world government whether you like it or not. The only question is whether that government will be achieved by conquest or consent.” (February 17, 1950, as he testified before the US Senate).”

It is selective crap like that which is designed to control the narrative by posts such as yours.

Anyone who accepts it as presented is in need of checking out the context where it was plucked from.

I won’t waste time and space discussing it here with anyone unless they have read through the whole set of representations that the quote is lifted from.

Here’s a link if you can’t be bothered to look for it
https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/James_Warburg_before_the_Subcommittee_on_Revision_of_the_United_Nations_Charter

HINT – it is now as it was then , all about… RUSSIA.

Jumpbean Max
Jumpbean Max
Aug 5, 2019 9:43 PM

The ridiculous thing about people like her is that they certainly believe in plenty of conspiracy theories themselves (at least I sure hope so): Watergate, COINTELPRO, mass surveillance, Tuskegee syphilis experiments, Catholic child abuse…these are commonly accepted as being absolutely true even by the most establishment people.

So does that mean her denigrating pysch profiles of people who believe in “conspiracy theories” also includes herself??

These morons operate on a “no true conspiracy theory”, where as you state “she chose in her NBC piece to deploy the phrase as the government has come to define it, i.e., as “something that requires no consideration because it is obviously not true.”

It’s like–all cryptozoologists are wrong and will always be wrong, because if/when an animal they describe is actually found it will be a legit zoological find now. Even if it’s just some banal tiny deer that the cryptos tout/ed as existing doing to local folklore.

Harry Stotle
Harry Stotle
Aug 5, 2019 9:38 PM

The article (linked to) seems to suggest not accepting official narratives is a sign of mental illness?

Personally I think the debate should be based on the evidence (on a case by vase basis) rather than cod psychology.

Such tactics were used against Julian Assange which resulted in people who had never met him labelling him a narcissist, or accusing him of other personality defects – this is simply outrageous, as well as completely irrelevant to the things he and Wiki revealed.

So take 9/11 – are those who doubt the ‘2 plane 3 tower’ version of events simply nuts – this is what Parramore seems to be suggesting.
Progressive or not this is plain bollocks.

Question This
Question This
Aug 5, 2019 9:55 PM
Reply to  Harry Stotle

You do have to have a pretty big ego to take on the worlds intelligence agencies, i admire what he did but from the verifiable facts i have seen he’s not someone i would want to spend time with.

But that shouldn’t matter, because its not about the messenger its about the message. That’s how the systems defenders deal with whistle blowers, discredit them with various types of scandal, usually sexual misconduct.

Increasing numbers of us simply see past it or just don’t care about the personality of the messenger.

Maggie
Maggie
Aug 6, 2019 12:00 PM
Reply to  Question This

QT QT QT… WHY do you go and spoil what you are saying by adding a judgment?
”You do have to have a pretty big ego to take on the worlds intelligence agencies, i admire what he did but from the verifiable facts i have seen he’s not someone i would want to spend time with.”
The strong verifiable facts??? From where???

Assange was a Journalist/Publisher, who flew too near the fire and got burned.
He made the mistake of exposing the CRIMINALS running the USA, and must be made an example of.
And the UK has been led by the nose into their trap. The UK was used to keep him under house arrest, and pressure is being levied for the UK to extradite him to the USA. The UK was used to impound the tanker in Gibraltar.
The USA are creating a coalition of the willing to go to war against IRAN which is EXACTLY what they did in the last wars.

Question This
Question This
Aug 6, 2019 12:32 PM
Reply to  Maggie

His personal sexual conduct is something i feel is disagreeable, no i don’t believe all the rape charge nonsense, just his promiscuity. But that doesn’t detract from his work.

Its a fact you have to have a BIG belief in yourself to go head to head with the intelligence agencies they were always going to catch up with him, so he must have thought he could smart them.

It wasn’t going to happen, imprisoning himself in the Ecuadorian embassy was really dumb he literally cornered himself. But he had no where to run, again a lack of foresight considering what he was doing & knew the net was closing the UK was the stupidest place to get caught, Even coming to the UK was lunacy.

Maggie
Maggie
Aug 6, 2019 1:16 PM
Reply to  Question This

QT, I can’t disagree with that.. however.. I have in the back of my mind that he might well have been a ”sacrificial lamb” working for the deep state establishment all along? Because he never attacks Israhell?
It is only a sneaky little thought.. which I would be interested to pursue, if anyone has any other ideas?

SharonM
SharonM
Aug 6, 2019 6:24 PM
Reply to  Maggie

You’re not alone, Maggie. Assange’s value for giving us real documents cannot be disputed, but not only is there the Israel problem, but also his own dismissal of journalists investigating 9/11. He never did any of those journalists any favours by calling them crazy conspiracy theorists.

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 6, 2019 1:33 PM
Reply to  Question This

His personal sexual conduct is something i feel is disagreeable

It made him vulnerable to the American security services. One conspiracy theory that does make sense.

TFS
TFS
Aug 6, 2019 6:17 PM
Reply to  Question This

There was no rape charge. He wasn’t interviewed at the request of the British Government and a Complicit Swedish government.

Question This
Question This
Aug 6, 2019 10:33 PM
Reply to  TFS

I believe in Sweden at least it is considered rape to have sex without a condom LOL like i said the rape NONSENSE wasn’t part of my consideration.

mark
mark
Aug 7, 2019 5:03 PM
Reply to  Question This

It’s a pity they can’t be as diligent in dealing with the tidal wave of rapes since their country was “enriched” by the mass invasion of third world rapefugees and gimmegrants.

Instead, they no longer bother even investigating violent rapes of very young children. They are simply swamped.

But they still have plenty of resources, apparently, to throw at the Assange “rape” allegations.

Robbobbobin
Robbobbobin
Aug 7, 2019 3:22 PM
Reply to  Question This

” i admire what he [Assange] did but from the verifiable facts i have seen he’s not someone i would want to spend time with.”

Moving on past the as yet and possibly forever unanswered question of whether he’d want to spend time with you, what verifiable facts have you seen? Extreme présis not a problem).\

Question This
Question This
Aug 7, 2019 3:33 PM
Reply to  Robbobbobin

whether he’d want to spend time with you

What an idiotic comment.

I suspect the feeling would be mutual, but we are unlikely to ever met as i don’t undertake criminal acts against the system and hes never going to see outside a prison cell.

William HBonney
William HBonney
Aug 7, 2019 4:07 PM
Reply to  Harry Stotle

Accepting Asssange deserves his freedom does not mean endorsing every fruitcake who sees him as a hero.

I give no credence to the Swedish allegations, but he did sell out western assets in the east. One might say that goes with the territory. I’d give him his freedom, and a first class ticket from whence he came.

Doctortrinate
Doctortrinate
Aug 5, 2019 9:35 PM

the Piracy Con – aye…. plundering, marauding privateers rule the currents, can bank on it….but dont think to Mutiny against these self proclaimed potentates – as that would be Sedition.

as President Kennedy said: …..”that zapruder film – now watch Jackie – nothing else – just Jackie”

SharonM
SharonM
Aug 5, 2019 8:57 PM

You’re much kinder than I, Mr. Kirby. I would just call Lynn Parramore a bought and paid-for establishment moron;)

milosevic
milosevic
Aug 5, 2019 11:41 PM
Reply to  SharonM

a more delicate way of putting it, would be to say that they are acutely sensitive to the question of on which side their bread is buttered.