Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : The Epic American Credit and Bond Bubble Laboratory -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Little Joe who wrote (15895)	6/25/2004 4:55:28 PM
From: glenn_a	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 110194

Little Joe. ((The problem with conspiracies is that they involve more than one person and many more if what you claim is the case. You can't keep them quiet. People talk. No President in my lifetime has been able to stop leaks and no conspiracy involving a lot of people will remain secret.)) Understand your perspective I think LJ, but actually so-called "conspiracies" are not that difficult to keep under wraps providing the power structure is properly consolidated. The key thing is to have mechanisms of propaganda (i.e. mainstream media) in place to sow "storylines" that support the propaganda. It's not so much keeping conspiracies secret that's the challenge. Rather, it's really just keeping them out of the public dialogue so that the "official story" isn't sufficiently questioned in the official dialogue. As long as you have elite consensus at the higher echelons of power, this isn't difficult at all. Fortunately, with the non-hiearchical, flat communication structure of the Internet, it's much easier to challenge the "official narrative". Also, with Chomsky and other's uncovering much of the mechanims of psychlogical warfare and propaganda, it's more transparent to unravel because the "patterns" are typically very similar. I mean just pick a few so-called "conspiracy theories" (which BTW, the very term delegitimizes the phenomena, which is why I like Peter Dale Scott's "deep politics" as a better description, because rather than a political phenenomon on the "edge of reality", it reframes such episodes as really being a deeper substratum of legitimate politics) ... (i) Gary Webb's unraveling of weapons and drugs smuggling into the inner cities of Los Angeles and Californina in the early 1980's, connected to both the funding of the Contra Guerrillas and the CIA drug transport hub out of Mena Arkansas; (ii) the excellent "In God's Name" on the assassination of Pope John Paul I, (iii) needless to say, the enormous anomolies of the 9-11 bombing, and (iv) the JFK assissination, (v) the assassination of Swedish Prime Minister Olaf Palme - just to name a few (and we could go on and on ...). I mean, one of the most interesting things is that the cast of characters is often so similar - and there's almost always some connection back to "deep finance" or "black banking" (as in the case with the Vatican Bank in the assissination of Pope John Paul I). Or the fact that Alan Dulles sat on the Warren commission of the assassination of JFK. I mean Allan Dulles? That's hilarious. Very similar to the Bush administration picking Henry Kissinger as the first choice to condect the official 9-11 investigation. This is not to say that every single "conspiracy theory" is gospel truth. However, there is a definite "pattern" that once you look beneath the covers, reveals much more that the work of "lone wingnuts". Many, IMO, are just classic "black op" ops. JM2CW. Glenn

To: Little Joe who wrote (15895)	6/25/2004 6:06:43 PM
From: Steve Lokness	Respond to of 110194

Little Joe - is Nader's party a conspiracy? Neocons are NOT a conspiracy but a subset within the republican party that has specific ideas and philosophies - that hardly makes them a conspiracy. If you are a republican who blindly supports his party, I strongly suggest you do some research on this. I guess I also did not explain my thoughts of religion very well. There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with religion and nothing wrong with a President following his faith - but when leaders use religion to further a goal when that goal has nothing to do with the church, then that is wrong. Bin Laden has the same God as we do and prays to that God - does that mean his actions are therefore worthy and noble? steve