Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3
ali smack

Do Governments like Conspiracy Theories?

105 posts in this topic

They definitely do, the big players in the big industries, banks and government love it. While the insane theories are being thrown around all the sheep will ignore the ones that are actually true.

It's brilliant. It's why I personally think Alex Jones is a disinformationist used to create this air of nutjob around conspiracy theories.

The Fact is the world is run by bankers, oil companies, pharmaceutical companies and big money. They control most governments through money. It's not even a conspiracy theory, but nobody realises this because it's mixed in with some insane "out there" stuff.

Take the fact the government themselves cannot step foot in the federal reserve. Also the federal reserve is a private bank, not government run. So the fact is a private bank owns the Dollar. lol How is that a conspiracy theory really?

9 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coffey

Is it so, do you think that he really is an disinformationis ? I've always wondered if he was true or not . In that case that would mean that Ted Nugent and others are pretending too.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The governments are the biggest conspiracy theory starters out there.

6 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coffey

Is it so, do you think that he really is an disinformationis ? I've always wondered if he was true or not . In that case that would mean that Ted Nugent and others are pretending too.

I'm not 100% sure, I just find a few things weird about him. Like the fact the media give him the time of the day, how aggressive he gets, and being on TV like with Piers Morgan. Unless those in charge like laughing at him, I can't see why they would bother with him really. He might not be, maybe they just like him being around so they can make him out to be a nut case which will help control the sheep.

It's really hard to tell with him though, I mean I actually agree with a lot of what he says, but damn does he go about it the wrong way. Going on TV and claiming American need their guns while being really aggressive and hostile is not going to help your argument. Even when he completely owned Piers Morgan (Who i would love to take down a back ally way and beat to death with a rusty pipe and I'm a pacifist!!! lol) It didn't really count because he was so aggressive. So he makes people dislike him and makes himself appear to be nuts and in need of anger management. Passion is one thing, but learning when to use and control your anger is also very important.

5 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While everyone is listening to the chicken little's they take advantage of it I'm sure. Then the chicken little's find out about it and blow their cover.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

While everyone is listening to the chicken little's they take advantage of it I'm sure. Then the chicken little's find out about it and blow their cover.

Whats chicken little`s?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not 100% sure, I just find a few things weird about him. Like the fact the media give him the time of the day, how aggressive he gets, and being on TV like with Piers Morgan. Unless those in charge like laughing at him, I can't see why they would bother with him really. He might not be, maybe they just like him being around so they can make him out to be a nut case which will help control the sheep.

It's really hard to tell with him though, I mean I actually agree with a lot of what he says, but damn does he go about it the wrong way. Going on TV and claiming American need their guns while being really aggressive and hostile is not going to help your argument. Even when he completely owned Piers Morgan (Who i would love to take down a back ally way and beat to death with a rusty pipe and I'm a pacifist!!! lol) It didn't really count because he was so aggressive. So he makes people dislike him and makes himself appear to be nuts and in need of anger management. Passion is one thing, but learning when to use and control your anger is also very important.

Well, the aggressiveness he displays can be so for many reasons, his personality in general can be a factor of his upbringing. I really can't form a complete conclussion based on his more so past aggressive behavior to determine if indeed he is a fake or not. I've always wondered , still do, if he himself is an agent .Still not certain.

Piers Morgan just makes no sense to me , none at all. Also , it doesn't make sense to me either as to exactly why Alex Jones would go on T.V and speak with him, and in doing so, why would he react in the manner which he did? seemed to me to be fake , similar in feel as to the likeness of how fake wrestlers act when they put on a show.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not think Alex is working for the government, and I do not think Assange is working for the government.

But I do think the government loves to fan the flames of speculation in all directions. However if some get too close to the truth, even by accident, steps must be taken.

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Who doesn't like a good conspiracy theory? Usually they have zip to nil evidence to support themselves and the theorists usually end up fist fighting over details 'No! The planes were holograms!' 'Missiles and you know it!'

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Well, the aggressiveness he displays can be so for many reasons, his personality in general can be a factor of his upbringing. I really can't form a complete conclussion based on his more so past aggressive behavior to determine if indeed he is a fake or not. I've always wondered , still do, if he himself is an agent .Still not certain.

Piers Morgan just makes no sense to me , none at all. Also , it doesn't make sense to me either as to exactly why Alex Jones would go on T.V and speak with him, and in doing so, why would he react in the manner which he did? seemed to me to be fake , similar in feel as to the likeness of how fake wrestlers act when they put on a show.

Yeah I took it that way as well with the fake thing. I'm still undecided, just swaying towards him being another government tool. I could be completely wrong and would definitely admit that if I was. I usually try not to judge people with conspiracy theories as I've known the truth about something before when loads of people didn't believe me. Was a huge relief when the truth came out. I don't like calling them crazy etc. I call Alex Jones crazy more so because of his anger/hostility not because of what he actually says.

I do also love the video where he completely tears into the FBI agent about Waco though. lol

Who doesn't like a good conspiracy theory? Usually they have zip to nil evidence to support themselves and the theorists usually end up fist fighting over details 'No! The planes were holograms!' 'Missiles and you know it!'

I really don't get that no planes thing.

I believe there was something not right about 9/11, but i know damn fine planes hit the 2 towers.

Edited by Coffey
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Coffee he's probably not an agent . I've wondered about that too. For him to continue on openly takes a certian kind of individual to do so. I don't know all that he has uncovered about some of them , he says they're evil and he seems to really be real in expressing that. .

If everything he shared is pretty accurate in truth , and even so , some people still won't believe him ,.Could it be maybe because they have faith in governemnt or bankers that own the country that the government is in the pockets of . Someone shared with me tonight that they've done black ops stuff before , a lot of it . He did some really strange things , things people wouldn't even suspect think or believe.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

They definitely do, the big players in the big industries, banks and government love it. While the insane theories are being thrown around all the sheep will ignore the ones that are actually true.

It's brilliant. It's why I personally think Alex Jones is a disinformationist used to create this air of nutjob around conspiracy theories.

The Fact is the world is run by bankers, oil companies, pharmaceutical companies and big money. They control most governments through money. It's not even a conspiracy theory, but nobody realises this because it's mixed in with some insane "out there" stuff.

Take the fact the government themselves cannot step foot in the federal reserve. Also the federal reserve is a private bank, not government run. So the fact is a private bank owns the Dollar. lol How is that a conspiracy theory really?

Seeming as big business runs the economy, and the President/PM whatever has to balance to economy, it seems rather logical that they would have quite a say? Would that not be more considered "democracy"? If the end result is supposed to benefit every person in some way? Admittedly some benefit more, but by the same token, some deserve more.

It's mining running our economy down here.

LINK - Rio Tinto warns Gillard over carbon tax

MULTINATIONAL miner Rio Tinto has intensified its opposition to Australia's carbon tax, urging Prime Minister Julia Gillard to go back to the drawing board and start again on carbon policy.

In the latest of a series of public attacks on the controversial carbon plan, Rio's Australian general manager, David Peever, said the government had not adapted to the geopolitical landscape that had emerged since the failed Copenhagen climate talks of 2009.

Doesn't Bill Gates have more money than the US?

image.jpg

I think Alex Jones just keeps lining his own pockets. Lets face it, conspiracies are a lucrative market.

Edited by psyche101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seeming as big business runs the economy, and the President/PM whatever has to balance to economy, it seems rather logical that they would have quite a say? Would that not be more considered "democracy"? If the end result is supposed to benefit every person in some way? Admittedly some benefit more, but by the same token, some deserve more.

It's mining running our economy down here.

LINK - Rio Tinto warns Gillard over carbon tax

MULTINATIONAL miner Rio Tinto has intensified its opposition to Australia's carbon tax, urging Prime Minister Julia Gillard to go back to the drawing board and start again on carbon policy.

In the latest of a series of public attacks on the controversial carbon plan, Rio's Australian general manager, David Peever, said the government had not adapted to the geopolitical landscape that had emerged since the failed Copenhagen climate talks of 2009.

Doesn't Bill Gates have more money than the US?

image.jpg

I think Alex Jones just keeps lining his own pockets. Lets face it, conspiracies are a lucrative market.

I think the Monsanto thing just now is the clearest and best example of this corrupt system, it definitely benefits a few over the majority. It's a health concern for the general public.

I actually don't know much about Australia politics wise or industrial wise. I should really look into it more.

It depends what you mean by the US? The Federal reserve is not the US, it's a private bank so the dollar is not owned by the US. (The federal reserve is also part of a world banking system, so they own most of the currencies int he world, can't really be richer than having the power to print money) The US is actually in debt to the federal reserve and always will be. So you and me have more money really. lol (I know it doesn't work that way completely, just found the idea of it funny) Bill gates doesn't control everyone's money, that puts the Bankers in charge.

I agree with that, it puts me off when they are making money from it. The government or whatever would have locked them down in some way if they where really a threat or problem. That's the problem with anything like CT's, UFO's, ET, religious, spiritual and Crypto. You have people trying to make money who don't even believe what they are saying and people who just want to troll everyone. Make sit a lot harder to find the truth when you have loads of BS to filter. They make the problem with CT's especially more difficult, the government etc must love them.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am thinking if Alex Jones and David Icke, and Andy Basiago are Disinfo Agents myself.

All three come out with the most nonsensical stuff but also mix fact with fiction.

So by mixing true stuff with nonsense it makes people think all theories are crazy,

when in reality that's not true. Some theories are real!

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dunno if they 'like' them as such. But do they use them and benefit from them? Hells yes.

Look at Area 51.

A51 (or Dreamland or Groom Lake) is there. Everyone knows it's there, everyone knows it's pretty secretive. It's pretty easy to find out that in the past U2 bombers and various other Lockheed planes were tested there (amongst others). It's probably still being used for the testing of aircraft. New, fancy-pants aircraft that the US Military don't want various countries knowing about. It helps a lot I imagine that every time they test a new plane, along with a few people describing it perfectly. There's dozens describing it as a 'gosh-darn flyin' saucer'. It's a great smokescreen, they'd be silly not to take advantage. Do they plant stories? I don't see why not. Basic misdirection. If I worked at Area 51, and something was taking off that they didn't want people to see, I'd have some Alien bodies made up and carried by people in hazmat suits to an unmarked van, and send that van on a 3 hour excursion to another secretive base. What would make the news/internet? The takeoff or the alien bodies?

I'm certain there's something odd about 9/11, but I'm also certain that there's 2 or 3 stories that have been allowed to propagate to obscure the facts.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well...

I know they like to worship 30 ft. high wooden owls, wear hooded cloaks, and stage mock sacrifices of children.

Need I say more than that?

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am thinking if Alex Jones and David Icke, and Andy Basiago are Disinfo Agents myself.

All three come out with the most nonsensical stuff but also mix fact with fiction.

So by mixing true stuff with nonsense it makes people think all theories are crazy,

when in reality that's not true. Some theories are real!

If they are disinfo agents it's not because anyone asked them to be or are paying them to be, it is because they are looney tune level crazy who can grab a factoid (piece of truth) and make a dog's breakfast out of it in a nano second.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm certain there's something odd about 9/11, but I'm also certain that there's 2 or 3 stories that have been allowed to propagate to obscure the facts.

It shouldn't have been odd considering the number of warnings issued from around the world on terrorist intentions.. After all, the Philippine government had warned the United States back in 1995 that terrorist had plans to fly an aircraft into CIA headquarters, and use airliners to kill thousands of innocent people. Just prior to the 911 attacks, warnings began flowing in from around the world that terrorist was planning to attack the United States and some of those warnings mentioned the use of aircraft as missiles. The French broke up one terrorist attempt to fly an airliner into the Eiffel Tower. Check it out.

Air France Flight 8969

Air France Flight 8969 was an Air France flight that was hijacked on 24 December 1994 by the Armed Islamic Group (GIA) at Algiers, where they killed three passengers, with the intention to blow up the plane over the Eiffel Tower in Paris. When the aircraft reached Marseille, the GIGN, an intervention group of the French National Gendarmerie, stormed the plane and killed all four hijackers.

The GIA's plan appeared to foreshadow the September 11 attacks. Thomas Sancton of TIME magazine described the event as "one of the most successful anti-terrorist operations in history."

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,163487,00.html

And remember the Bojinka Plot.

The Bojinka Plot

Project Bojinka, also known as Opplan Bojinka, was a massive, complex plot hatched by Ramzi Yousef following the truck bombing of the World Trade Center in 1993. The term Bojinka is Serbian for "loud bang." Based in Manila, Yousef and his associates began work on a series of bombs and timing devices for use aboard airplanes and in public places.

According to Abdul Hakim Murad, who capture foiled the plot, Yousef chose Manila as his base of operations because of the low standard of living there.

Yousef's primary target was up a dozen transpacific airliners. Plotters would sneak bomb parts and liquid explosives onto planes and assemble the bombs while on board. They would get off at an intermediate stop and leave the bombs to explode via timers while en route to their final destination in the United States. This appears to be the most mature part of Bojinka: Specific flights were targeted, and Yousef himself performed a "test run" on a Philippines Airlines flight to Tokyo that left one man dead. This aspect of the plot is similar to the transatlantic airliners plot disrupted by British authorities in 2006.

Other targets included Pope John Paul II and President Clinton during separate visits to Manila; the U.S. Consular Office in Karachi, Pakistan; nuclear power plants in the United Kingdom, France and the United States; U.S. cargo planes; and CIA headquarters in McLean, Virginia. Murad proposed crashing a hijacked airliner into the building. It is thought this may be the inspiration for Khalid Shaikh Mohammed and 9-11.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/profiles/project_bojinka.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bojinka_plot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When the people catch on there will be no military force to stop the revolt. Media+government will only work so far and the very rich better build bigger walls as they take away the rights of the people and allow private industry to control government. The future as I predict will be assaults mass assults on financial institutions that fund corrupt governments 17 trillion in debt.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It shouldn't have been odd considering the number of warnings issued from around the world on terrorist intentions.. After all, the Philippine government had warned the United States back in 1995 that terrorist had plans to fly an aircraft into CIA headquarters, and use airliners to kill thousands of innocent people. Just prior to the 911 attacks, warnings began flowing in from around the world that terrorist was planning to attack the United States and some of those warnings mentioned the use of aircraft as missiles.

EXACTLY. So why did Bush, Rice and various others spend months after the event saying it was "inconceivable", and that they had no idea it even could happen.

The very idea that the US government and military, some of the most advanced in the world, had "no idea" is laughable. So why was the Government at the time not taken to task for outright lying about the deaths of thousands of people?

Several agencies had mentioned the possibility of planes as weapons to attack "US landmarks", several transmissions were intercepted in the weeks and days leading up to it, and still Bush, Chenney and the rest trot out the "We never knew, we never could have know." Utter crap.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

EXACTLY. So why did Bush, Rice and various others spend months after the event saying it was "inconceivable", and that they had no idea it even could happen.

They didn't believe it could happen in the United States. Even the FAA dismissed such an attack. Our intelligence services dropped the ball and the result was the 911 terrorist attack. I have mentioned that it was not the first time our intelligence services dropped the ball that eventually resulted in attacks. J. Edgar Hoover dismissed warnings from a double-agent on what the Japanese were doing prior to the attack on Pearl Harbor, which General Billy Mitchell predicted in 1924.

William 'Billy' Mitchell, the Man Who Predicted the Pearl Harbor Day Disaster

http://www.nationalmuseum.af.mil/factsheets/factsheet.asp?id=739

http://news.yahoo.com/william-billy-mitchell-man-predicted-pearl-harbor-day-191800923.html

The very idea that the US government and military, some of the most advanced in the world, had "no idea" is laughable.

They were aware of the warnings, but chose to disregard those warnings because they didn't think it could happen in the United States. How many times have you heard the old saying that goes like this?

Such things happen to other people, not me.

So why was the Government at the time not taken to task for outright lying about the deaths of thousands of people?

I blame Bush, Rice, and our intelligence services for dropping the ball and their incompetence and for living in a world of denial, which had nothing to do with a government conspiracy, but they all should be held accountable.

Several agencies had mentioned the possibility of planes as weapons to attack "US landmarks", several transmissions were intercepted in the weeks and days leading up to it, and still Bush, Chenney and the rest trot out the "We never knew, we never could have know." Utter crap.

They were aware of warnings that Muslim terrorist had planned to attack the United States, but they didn't think it could happen here, however, we did conduct many anti-terrorist warnings as a response to those warnings, and still, senior government officials didn't think it could happen.

One Philippine official was annoyed after the 911 attacks because the Philippine government had warned the United States in 1995 of terrorist intentions. One of those terrorist revealed by the Philippine government was none other than Ramzi Yousef, who built and detonated that huge bomb beheath WTC1 in 1993, and whose uncle was the mastermind of the 911 attacks. Youset wanted WTC1 to topple onto WTC2, but it didn't happen.

The 911 attack had nothing to do with a government conspiracy, but resulted from total incompetence and lack of common sense and foresight on the part of senior government officials and our intelligence services..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Skyeagle ,just wait until the next attack on America ,THe C.T`s will all said they told us so ! Do you see the trend here ? Insert Forest Gump quote "________ _ _ ____ _____ ____ "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Skyeagle ,just wait until the next attack on America ,THe C.T`s will all said they told us so ! Do you see the trend here ? Insert Forest Gump quote "________ _ _ ____ _____ ____ "

I heard that! :tu:

I can still remember when they said that because the fighters were out of place during the attacks, it was proof that the U.S. government was involved. That was an eye-opener for me, because I was once sent TDY to Andrews AFB for two weeks. The F-16 unit there was not trained to shoot down airliners nor familiar with air defense protocols.

In the case of the F-16s out of Langley AFB, they were not in a position to intercept any of the airliners because of confusion within ATC circles which had nothing to do with a conspiracy of any kind. An F-15 pilot stated for the record that even if he intercepted an airliner, he would not have shot it down, but at any point, no U.S. military pilot received orders to shoot down anything before United 93 crashed, and some commanders refused to forward the shoot-down order to their pilots for fear of shooting down the wrong airliner. How would they have known which airliner was a threat? An off-course airliner does not automatically translate into a direct threat.

Many aircraft are inadvertently flown off-course for one reason or another everyday and nothing to do with a direct threat to anyone, so if a pilot accidently shot down the wrong airliner, or an airliner that suffered from equipment malfunction, that pilot would have to live with that mistake for the rest of his or her life, a risk that some commanders did not want to experience and why some commanders refused to forward those orders to their pilots, yet 911 conspiracist decided to conjure up unfounded conspiracies because they did not bother to do their homework.

Edited by skyeagle409

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 3

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.