Conspiracy Theories

Unlike many, I support some conspiracy theories, but not all of them. So, I can name not only the ones I support (JFK assasination, 9/11 attacks) but also the ones I reject (global depopulation agenda, Moon hoax).
...

On the subject of 9/11, one of my conspiracy theorist Facebook friends posted a link to a report in a physics periodical. I found the original PDF and the article can be found on page 21. Personally, I don't follow CT's in any depth but a couple do seem worthy of a closer look.

Here is the conclusion from the article:

Conclusion

It bears repeating that fires have never caused the total collapse of a steel-framed high-rise before or since 9/11. Did we witness an unprecedented event three separate times on September 11, 2001? The NIST reports, which attempted to support that unlikely conclusion, fail to persuade a growing number of architects, engineers, and scientists. Instead, the evidence points overwhelmingly to the conclusion that all three buildings were destroyed by controlled demolition. Given the far-reaching impli- cations, it is morally imperative that this hypothesis be the subject of a truly scientific and impartial investigation by responsible authorities.
 
The model for comparison is not just fires in high rise buildings, but skyscrapers used as targets for airliners full of aviation fuel. The buildings fell in a way that looked like controlled demolition, but that doesn't mean they were. A conspiracy is possible, but not in my view the most likely scenario. The US did not require a mandate to pursue war in the middle east, no one was detected planting explosives, people of all political and religious affiliations died in the twin towers, people with known allegiances hijacked the planes - the list goes on.

The most telling point for me is that most theories hark back to a shadowy Illuminati style group, generally Zionists, seeking absolute control of international finance by covert means. There is no requirement for such a group, the Bilderberg have known aspirations and work in legal ways - whatever one thinks of the wisdom or morality of such ways - and in my view says more about the world view of the theorists than the conspirators. 9/11 most likely occurred because of failures in foreign policy by Western powers over many decades, not through the actions of Ian Fleming super-villains, though that is always a possibility.
 
The model for comparison is not just fires in high rise buildings, but skyscrapers used as targets for airliners full of aviation fuel.

The article has something to say about that ...

Because the only loads present on 9/11 after the impact of the airplanes were gravity and fire (there were no high winds that day), many engineers were surprised that the Twin Towers completely collapsed. The towers, in fact, had been designed specifically to withstand the impact of a jetliner, as the head structural engineer, John Skilling, explained in an interview with the Seattle Times following the 1993 World Trade Center bombing: "Our analysis indicated the biggest problem would be the fact that all the fuel (from the airplane) would dump into the building. There would be a horrendous fire. A lot of people would be killed," he said. "The building structure would still be there." Skilling went on to say he didn’t think a single 200-pound [90-kg] car bomb would topple or do major structural damage to either of the Twin Towers. "However," he added, "I'm not saying that properly applied explosives—shaped explosives—of that magnitude could not do a tremendous amount of damage.... I would imagine that if you took the top expert in that type of work and gave him the assignment of bringing these buildings down with explosives, I would bet that he could do it."

In other words, Skilling believed the only mechanism that could bring down the Twin Towers was controlled demolition.

I saw no mention of the Illuminati or Zionists. The article was from a Physics periodical, not a conspiracy website.
 
The article has something to say about that ...

I saw no mention of the Illuminati or Zionists. The article was from a Physics periodical, not a conspiracy website.
Structural engineers have repeatedly made these claims and they have never been comprehensively refuted, so there is still a case to answer. My point is web based conspiracy networks run with such information, mostly prematurely and to a similar end, at least those I've seen.
I recall seeing the towers fall and thinking Wow, I didn't know skyscrapers fell like that. While the engineering expertise is completely beyond my powers of discernment, I've seen enough of the CT approach to data to know studied disinterest is not the defining feature and a rush to judgement, usually with the same certainty as to the perpetrator, is.
 
There was a conspiracy and it's public knowledge whom the conspirators where and are. Remember this. The White House couldn't keep a bj a secrete.
 
The article has something to say about that ...

Yes, with the official story there is no reasonable explanation for a number of features of the demolitions of all three WTC towers. We have discussed many of them here in the 9/11 thread.

One of the most obvious ones is the pools of molten steel which require temperatures well over 1000 degrees F above the temperature of office fires. There is video of molten steel pouring out of a corner of WTC1 before collapse. There is firefighter testimony of molten steel in the wreckage that "looked like lava" and "like you were in a foundry" "with molten steel running down the channel rails." There were recovered from the debris large chunks of molten steel and concrete fused together at extremely high temps. There are photographs and recorded testimony of the cleanup crew pulling up dripping white hot beams days and weeks afterwards. There is satellite temperature data and IR readings taken by helicopter in the weeks afterwards showing temps exceeding those of normal office fires in the rubble of all three towers. A couple of specimens of structural steel examined and analyzed by NIST and FEMA showed evidence of melting and high temperature erosion/corrosion with inter granular sulfidation. Nevertheless NIST denies the existence of molten steel.

Structural engineers have repeatedly made these claims and they have never been comprehensively refuted, so there is still a case to answer. My point is web based conspiracy networks run with such information, mostly prematurely and to a similar end, at least those I've seen.

I hope you'll do more than a casual perusal of these things on the web before coming to a conclusion about how likely the official story is to be true.

I recall seeing the towers fall and thinking Wow, I didn't know skyscrapers fell like that. While the engineering expertise is completely beyond my powers of discernment, I've seen enough of the CT approach to data to know studied disinterest is not the defining feature and a rush to judgement, usually with the same certainty as to the perpetrator, is.

Have you checked out AE911TRUTH.org or scholarsfor911truth.org or read anything by Peter Dale Scott or David Ray Griffin?

Towers don't fall like that unless they are carefully rigged for demolition. I'm a licensed professional engineer and an early signer of the ae911truth.org petition for architects and engineers. Please check out the 9/11 truth thread here.
 
I hope you'll do more than a casual perusal of these things on the web before coming to a conclusion about how likely the official story is to be true.
How do you know the truth when you find it? CTs are based on the idea that the official explanation can never be true, but that really isn't any help.
 
How do you know the truth when you find it? CTs are based on the idea that the official explanation can never be true, but that really isn't any help.

That's a good point but it works in both directions. While I agree that CT's generally need to be taken with a bucket of salt, there are some that give me greater pause than others. Those include JFK, 911 and Princess Diana.
 
Just to add a little context to my previous post, I think it is important to separate the evidence from the speculation - especially speculation about motives and the identity of conspirators.
 
The US did not require a mandate to pursue war in the middle east,

But they did. Bush ran on an anti-war platform and promised we would stop being the world's police force. People were fed up with Clintons thugging around in the Balkans and Sudan. PNAC, the Project for the New American Century, a Neocon think tank publication published just prior to 9/11 specifically stated that a "catalyzing event" a "new Pearl Harbor" was necessary in order to gain popular support for the continued projection of military power abroad.

no one was detected planting explosives,

Tenants of WTC 1 and 2 reported having numerous power outages in the weeks before 9/11 and reported loud construction noises particularly on the reinforced service floors, they reported seeing workers with large spools of cable coming in reportedly running new network cable throughout the entire building. A renovation of the elevators was done months prior and access to the elevator shaft would be necessary for rigging. Also new fireproofing was sprayed on the beams. All of this could have allowed access to critical structure and it is possible the fire-proofing they sprayed on was actually thermitic paint. We can't know for sure with out a real investigation, but there were multiple opportunities for rigging under these various cover projects. The buildings needed to be demolished anyways. They were outdated, struggling to keep tenants, and full of asbestos insulation that would have been enormously expensive to remedy

As for WTC7, tenants included the SEC and CIA so you probably wouldn't hear anything from them.

people of all political and religious affiliations died in the twin towers,

I'm not sure what that has to do with anything?

people with known allegiances hijacked the planes - the list goes on.

...People on the CIA payroll. We created Al-Qaeda. Osama was a paid and trained CIA asset. This is all well known. We had numerous opportunities to take him out and never did. He was in a hospital in Dubai on dialysis for failing kidneys in July 2001 where he was visited by the local CIA station chief. The hijackers originated from our wahabist ally and terrorist training center, Saudi Arabia, and were funded through the Saudi Ambassador, Bandar "Bush" nicknamed for his ultra close relationship with George. The Bush family was also business partners with the bin Laden family through the Carlisle group. This is why the 9/11 commission was discouraged from investigating the funding sources of the hijackers and only 29 pages were devoted to that subject which were formerly classified.

The most telling point for me is that most theories hark back to a shadowy Illuminati style group, generally Zionists, seeking absolute control of international finance by covert means.

Secret societies have always existed and have had prominent influence on the power plays around the world for ages. They have at times preserved knowledge and uplifted humanity. At times they have been sources of oppression. I think in most of them their core goals are noble: to initiate a person into the topics and philosophies we're interested in here at Skeptiko and to create the conditions for a person to have a mystical transformative experience in which one becomes the master of his own consciousness and then to go on and shape the evolution of the consciousness of humanity as a whole.

The problem with some secret societies is in their hierarchical nature and their networks with power. Power and hierarchy always filter psychopaths to the top. So in time, secret societies, like governments or religions of any other hierarchical organization become corrupt. The illuminati was apparently a thread of corrupt nihilist psychos who intended to infiltrate the Freemasons and other organizations taking them over and using the networks for nefarious purposes.

Judaism and Zionism are tied in to this for various reasons. Inherent in Judaism is the idea that Jews are racially superior to the Goyim (Gentiles) and God has promised that the other nations will serve them. Modern Christianity has spiritualized and allegorized the racism, xenophobia, and genocide in the OT, and so does not view these elements of Jewish ideology as threatening. Modern Judaism is more of an allegiance to a race of people than to a deity and his commands.

I must stress that there are good and bad aspects of all religions including Judaism and obviously many Jews are good people. All religions typically provided some spiritual help the common man while their hierarchical nature necessitates that a few psychos will rise to the top and use the same religion or its name to oppress and exercise power.

So I have nothing against Jewish people in general. In fact my dad recently converted to Judaism from Christianity and in some ways I think it's been really good for him.

One cannot really talk openly about the Jewish element of nefarious globalism because a mass brainwashing has succeeded in programming people to react emotionally against any criticism of Judaism. All critical thought is immediately shut down with cries of "anti-Semite!" and "holocaust denier!" and "Hitler!" Also, it is generally not productive to attack the globalists on an underlying Jewish ideology as they can use this to superficially divide people along race. Those who get wise to the Jewish role in globalism are steered into other racist organizations like white nationalists or Neo-nazis or merely associated with them to discredit them. Look at the hell they've put Mel Gibson through. Martin Luther, founder of Protestantism was also strongly anti-Jewish. Some authors of the New Testament were anti-Jewish.

It is much more effective in my opinion to ignore the fact that a great many of the leading globalists and power players are Jews and focus on discrediting their globalist policies and eugenics ideology.

There is a lot of ancient esoteric wisdom hidden in Judaism and many traditions draw from it so it would be foolish to have a flat one-sided view of Judaism based on the actions of elite Jews.

It seems that another reason Jews became heavily associated with finance and the quest for global domination is that the Talmud permitted them to lend with interest (usury) to "the Goyim". Meanwhile Christianity forbade the practice of usury to anyone. So the Jews happily met the demand for credit thereby enriching their families in Europe and becoming embedded in banking and finance.

So it is not a monolithic system, but a network of systems along with regular self-interest in which various ideologies including nihilism, materialism, and Zionist Judaism feature prominently.

All three Abrahamic Faiths believe that one day their Christ or Meshiach or Mahdi will rule the world while the outsiders or those who refuse to worship will be ruled "with a rod of iron". All three Faith's have sects within them that believe this goal is to be acheived by the organized efforts of followers to infiltrate the existing systems of government and finance, and this ideology can be dangerous and oppressive.

There is no requirement for such a group, the Bilderberg have known aspirations and work in legal ways - whatever one thinks of the wisdom or morality of such ways - and in my view says more about the world view of the theorists than the conspirators.

The legality is dubious at best. At least in the US the Logan act prevents such secret meetings of state officials.

9/11 most likely occurred because of failures in foreign policy by Western powers over many decades, not through the actions of Ian Fleming super-villains, though that is always a possibility.

His novels are closer to reality than you might think. http://m.strategic-culture.org/news/2012/11/27/a-true-to-life-james-bond-villain.html
 
Last edited:
How do you know the truth when you find it? CTs are based on the idea that the official explanation can never be true, but that really isn't any help.

The same way you put together any puzzle: take a look at all the pieces and keep test fitting until a clear and coherent picture emerges. When a picture emerges but the pieces are jammed together in a way that clearly doesn't fit, let go of any emotional attachment to the picture that was forming and re-test until the pieces fit.
 
It may not be sensible, but might be more rewarding. Materialists don't have much time for love, and none at all for happiness. They're only interested in The Truth, whatever the hell that is. I think most of us recognise a suitable dreamscape when we see one, and a symbolic map that resonates deep down. We can easily fill our time worrying about the known unknowns without getting into the unknown unknowns of Rumsfeldia.

Let's add some known knowns about Rumsfeld:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...links-drug-company-Tamiflu.html#axzz2K6zkQwpa
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/robbie-gennet/donald-rumsfeld-and-the-s_b_805581.html


We may want to see what the goats are up to.
 
Last edited:
But they did. Bush ran on an anti-war platform and promised we would stop being the world's police force. People were fed up with Clintons thugging around in the Balkans and Sudan. PNAC, the Project for the New American Century, a Neocon think tank publication published just prior to 9/11 specifically stated that a "catalyzing event" a "new Pearl Harbor" was necessary in order to gain popular support for the continued projection of military power abroad.



Tenants of WTC 1 and 2 reported having numerous power outages in the weeks before 9/11 and reported loud construction noises particularly on the reinforced service floors, they reported seeing workers with large spools of cable coming in reportedly running new network cable throughout the entire building. A renovation of the elevators was done months prior and access to the elevator shaft would be necessary for rigging. Also new fireproofing was sprayed on the beams. All of this could have allowed access to critical structure and it is possible the fire-proofing they sprayed on was actually thermitic paint. We can't know for sure with out a real investigation, but there were multiple opportunities for rigging under these various cover projects. The buildings needed to be demolished anyways. They were outdated, struggling to keep tenants, and full of asbestos insulation that would have been enormously expensive to remedy

As for WTC7, tenants included the SEC and CIA so you probably wouldn't hear anything from them.



I'm not sure what that has to do with anything?



...People on the CIA payroll. We created Al-Qaeda. Osama was a paid and trained CIA asset. This is all well known. We had numerous opportunities to take him out and never did. He was in a hospital in Dubai on dialysis for failing kidneys in July 2001 where he was visited by the local CIA station chief. The hijackers originated from our wahabist ally and terrorist training center, Saudi Arabia, and were funded through the Saudi Ambassador, Bandar "Bush" nicknamed for his ultra close relationship with George. The Bush family was also business partners with the bin Laden family through the Carlisle group. This is why the 9/11 commission was discouraged from investigating the funding sources of the hijackers and only 29 pages were devoted to that subject which were formerly classified.



Secret societies have always existed and have had prominent influence on the power plays around the world for ages. They have at times preserved knowledge and uplifted humanity. At times they have been sources of oppression. I think in most of them their core goals are noble: to initiate a person into the topics and philosophies we're interested in here at Skeptiko and to create the conditions for a person to have a mystical transformative experience in which one becomes the master of his own consciousness and then to go on and shape the evolution of the consciousness of humanity as a whole.

The problem with some secret societies is in their hierarchical nature and their networks with power. Power and hierarchy always filter psychopaths to the top. So in time, secret societies, like governments or religions of any other hierarchical organization become corrupt. The illuminati was apparently a thread of corrupt nihilist psychos who intended to infiltrate the Freemasons and other organizations taking them over and using the networks for nefarious purposes.

Judaism and Zionism are tied in to this for various reasons. Inherent in Judaism is the idea that Jews are racially superior to the Goyim (Gentiles) and God has promised that the other nations will serve them. Modern Christianity has spiritualized and allegorized the racism, xenophobia, and genocide in the OT, and so does not view these elements of Jewish ideology as threatening. Modern Judaism is more of an allegiance to a race of people than to a deity and his commands.

I must stress that there are good and bad aspects of all religions including Judaism and obviously many Jews are good people. All religions typically provided some spiritual help the common man while their hierarchical nature necessitates that a few psychos will rise to the top and use the same religion or its name to oppress and exercise power.

So I have nothing against Jewish people in general. In fact my dad recently converted to Judaism from Christianity and in some ways I think it's been really good for him.

One cannot really talk openly about the Jewish element of nefarious globalism because a mass brainwashing has succeeded in programming people to react emotionally against any criticism of Judaism. All critical thought is immediately shut down with cries of "anti-Semite!" and "holocaust denier!" and "Hitler!" Also, it is generally not productive to attack the globalists on an underlying Jewish ideology as they can use this to superficially divide people along race. Those who get wise to the Jewish role in globalism are steered into other racist organizations like white nationalists or Neo-nazis or merely associated with them to discredit them. Look at the hell they've put Mel Gibson through. Martin Luther, founder of Protestantism was also strongly anti-Jewish. Some authors of the New Testament were anti-Jewish.

It is much more effective in my opinion to ignore the fact that a great many of the leading globalists and power players are Jews and focus on discrediting their globalist policies and eugenics ideology.

There is a lot of ancient esoteric wisdom hidden in Judaism and many traditions draw from it so it would be foolish to have a flat one-sided view of Judaism based on the actions of elite Jews.

It seems that another reason Jews became heavily associated with finance and the quest for global domination is that the Talmud permitted them to lend with interest (usury) to "the Goyim". Meanwhile Christianity forbade the practice of usury to anyone. So the Jews happily met the demand for credit thereby enriching their families in Europe and becoming embedded in banking and finance.

So it is not a monolithic system, but a network of systems along with regular self-interest in which various ideologies including nihilism, materialism, and Zionist Judaism feature prominently.

All three Abrahamic Faiths believe that one day their Christ or Meshiach or Mahdi will rule the world while the outsiders or those who refuse to worship will be ruled "with a rod of iron". All three Faith's have sects within them that believe this goal is to be acheived by the organized efforts of followers to infiltrate the existing systems of government and finance, and this ideology can be dangerous and oppressive.



The legality is dubious at best. At least in the US the Logan act prevents such secret meetings of state officials.



His novels are closer to reality than you might think. http://m.strategic-culture.org/news/2012/11/27/a-true-to-life-james-bond-villain.html
Well you certainly fulfilled my preconceptions with the anti-Jewish agenda. It's untrue in the case of Christianity that "All three Abrahamic Faiths believe that one day their Christ or Meshiach or Mahdi will rule the world while the outsiders or those who refuse to worship will be ruled "with a rod of iron"." You'd have to be an extreme fundamentalist to couch the Christian message in those terms.
 
That's a good point but it works in both directions. While I agree that CT's generally need to be taken with a bucket of salt, there are some that give me greater pause than others. Those include JFK, 911 and Princess Diana.
The CT signal to noise ratio means it's mostly guesswork. I think JFK was probably bumped off, 9/11 is so mired in accusation and counter accusation I doubt anyone will know short of a deathbed confession. Princess Di was an accident caused by pills and alcohol IMO, because driving into a wall must be the least efficient way known of killing a rear seat passenger. Unless a passenger killed her and the others in an incredibly inefficient way (she was alive when the emergency services arrived, and could have talked). There is no lower limit for a suitably motivated theorist to counter official evidence, including painting doubters as agents of disinformation and useful idiots. It's rabbit holes all the way down.
 
Just to add a little context to my previous post, I think it is important to separate the evidence from the speculation - especially speculation about motives and the identity of conspirators.

This is what I call "limits of evidential thought": we should always remember that technical evidence, such as one for 9/11 events:

prove beyond reasonable doubt - fallaciousness and inadequacy of offical theory;

support with the preponderance of the evidence - best alternative theory available (in case of 9/11 - controlled demolition).

But technical evidence, as and in itself, does not tell us who, or why, executed the attacks; it only tell us how they were executed (not in a way claimed by official sources). One have to analyse the bigger picture to make useful inferences.
 
Well you certainly fulfilled my preconceptions with the anti-Jewish agenda. It's untrue in the case of Christianity that "All three Abrahamic Faiths believe that one day their Christ or Meshiach or Mahdi will rule the world while the outsiders or those who refuse to worship will be ruled "with a rod of iron"." You'd have to be an extreme fundamentalist to couch the Christian message in those terms.

Bolded part ^^ exactly. There's quite a few out there. Many Christians believe they will rule and judge the world with Christ in a literal physical kingdom on Earth for a thousand years. "Every knee will bow and every tongue confess." "If any nation does not go down and make sacrifices they will have no rain." There are many passages about this future holy global government in the OT and NT and interpretations vary on a spectrum from allegorical to literal and past to future fulfillment. All I'm saying is that some sects of each religion interpret these passages literally and believe they have a mandate and justification for infiltrating power centers to exert influence in that direction. In Judaism the Talmud has become as or more important than the Torah, and I'm only beginning to get into learning about that.

I first began to question the official 9/11 story back around 2005 and stayed away from looking into the Zionist aspects of it until recently. I guess it took me that long to overcome my programming.

And I'm not anti-Jewish and don't have an anti-Jewish agenda. Like I said above, my own father has become Jewish and it seems to have been a positive thing for him.

Many would point to the Roman Catholic Church as a Christian form of global government, and many Christians would respond that there's nothing Christian about the RCC as it is a total corruption of the teachings of Christ. The same might be said of Zionism, the Talmud, and Judaism - that it is a total corruption of the Torah and true Orthodox Judaism. As Jesus said, "you are not the children of Abraham; you're sons of your father the devil!" And "you travel over land and sea to win a single convert then make him twice as much a son of hell as you are!"

In every religion there is a constant struggle between opposing forces of corruption and stagnation and entrenched orthodoxy and forces of renewal, reformation, and true seeking. That exists in Judaism like every other religion and the corrupt elements are just as bad as the corrupt elements of the other religions.

I will attempt to point out the errors in religions or ideologies wherever I see them whether in Christianity or Judaism or Islam or others.
 
Back
Top