This Week in Conspiracy (3 August 2011)

Yep. You heard right. There are even more conspiracies this week. I thought that we were full up, that every permutation of wacky had been tried. Apparently, however, there is no fixed quota of b.s. that conspiracists are trying to fill. So we dive back in.

  • It’s Genetic Farmageddon! When an article starts, “An arrogant scientific elite has divorced themselves from common sense, morality, and the rest of the human species in their quest for full spectrum scientific domination,” you know you have objective reporting. You left out them twisting their evil mustachios, Daniel. Somehow, he ends up at “super-intelligent A.I. may lead to a devastating world war that could kill billions of people.”
  • I’m sorry, I meant, “Electronic Armageddon!
  • Susan Lindauer says that there are videotapes missing from the World Trade Center. As a bit of background, she was arrested for spying for the Iraqis and found mentally incompetent to contribute to her own defense. Also, if you read this, she offers no source or evidence, just a story, and then she thinks that there is something suspicious about there being no video of this. Funk dat. Oh wait, she says she has a “high level State Department source with a top security clearance.” Well, that settles it. She was also found to have classic delusions of grandeur, I believe, by her defense team.
  • A little 9/11 analysis. “11 Reasons Why The 9/11 Fable is So Popular.” On their list: 1) “The bigness of the lie” followed by immediate self-Godwining, 2) “Mythical archetype of Osama Bin Laden and Islamic terrorists,” 3) “Most people are children who are easily controlled by fear,” 4) “Peer pressure, and the fear of mockery and ridicule” (it’s true, if you don’t want to be mocked, don’t become a Truther), 5) makes no sense, 6) the “financial- terrorism- media- military- industrial- Zionist- congressional complex” (their term, not mine), 7) “Mass social, cultural, and political brainwashing,” 8) “A lack of knowledge of history,” 9) “A lack of skepticism, curiosity and a sense of wonder,” 10) “A lack of humility to admit ignorance” (AHAHHAHAHAAHAHAHAHA! ahem. AAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAH!), 11) “The 9/11 lie is sacred.” There you have it. The worst analysis of anything ever. Notice, “we might, just possibly, be wrong” doesn’t occur to them. Also, I’m rather annoyed that their title does not use the word fable correctly, but that’s the English major in me, played in my fable by a knowledgeable, avuncular owl.
  • Is the above “financial- terrorism- media- military- industrial- Zionist- congressional complex” related to Mike Adams’ “Chemical- agra- medical- pharma industrial complex business“?
  • An interesting pairing provided by FederalJack, who I endorse for the entertainment value. First, “It’s Official, We Live in a Police State.” Less than an hour later: “Federal officials are circulating to all 18,000 U.S. law enforcement agencies a… civil rights video??!!” Nice f’ing police state. Here’s officer Lyons, the face of totalitarianism:
  • Sam Blumenfield examines “ The Hegelian Statist Virus in the Republican Party”.
  • Fag judges may be fag-enabling fags. From the ever-delightful couple Charlie “Butts” and “Peter” LaBarbera.
  • Let’s give Vigilant Citizen a shout out, eh wot? Be careful, fellas. That first model is actually a man.
  • Moon base or volcano? You decide. Your answer will depend on whether or not you are already on the moon, however.
  • Is Jewish Ex-Congressman Weiner’s Devout Muslim Wife, Working For Hillary Clinton, A Spy? This author is a horrid person. This is evidencelessness embodied. Just guilt by racist association, a new type of logical fallacy.
  • Is someone at Above Top Secret actually thinking about inner-Earth-dwelling UFOs? Be still, my beating heart.
  • I’ll let you decipher this: “Hoagland weaves together an intense eye-opener which connects Comet Elenin with September 11, the original masonic message, the bombing in Norway and the secret space program.”
  • Here’s a bit of uncritical thinking: “Only a domestic terror attack can rescue Brand Obama.” How about growing a ball? That might help.
  • Here’s one that was popular in the deliberately-misrepresent-o-sphere this week. My Pet Goat aficionado George W. Bush basically admitted that he was deliberately slow to move on 9/11, basically allowing it to happen on purpose, in order to not freak out a bunch of kids. I hate conspiracy theorists who make me defend Bush. Lots.
  • New World Order’s favorite band? Megadeath.
  • NaturalNews is positively soiling itself over what I will dub murder-weeds.
  • Here’s a new one. They are no longer conspiracy theorists. They are “disinformation specialists.” Boy, do they ever not have irony.
  • A UFO at the bottom of the Baltic Sea?
  • The ADL on Sovereign Citizens, who actually scare me.
  • This is interesting. The title is “Tea Party Pawns of the Illuminati,” but only a minority of people who read Before It’s News and vote on the veracity of the story think that’s a fact. I’m not going to say it’s because they are reasonable, but because a lot of them probably like the Tea Party. The funny thing about this is that Dick Armey, former House leader, if I remember correctly, helped fund the Tea Party through FreedomWorks. If you think that the Republicans are in the thrall of the Illuminati, why would you assume that the Tea Party wasn’t? I merely ask.
  • Are UFOs controlling our ICBMs? Robert Hastings thinks so. Hear him not laughed out of a conversation:
  • KXAS, a television station in Texas, captures a bug on camera, calls in UFO investigatiors. Why do they not call IIG? We look at this sort of thing all of the time! Decide for yourself:

Norway:

I figure a Michael Barkun reference is a good note to end on. It’s back into the trenches. Toodle-pip!

RJB

Advertisements

7 Responses to This Week in Conspiracy (3 August 2011)

  1. IntrepidSol says:

    What is your opinion on Building 7’s implosion? Don’t you think it’s odd that such as robust structure could dismember itself due to basic office fires? Isn’t it a bit odd that it housed financial data associated with the Enron and Worldcom court cases, all of which was conveniently destroyed? Are you skeptical of any aspect of the government’s version of events on 9/11?

    Have you seen this? What do you have to say to the experts featured who have forensic evidence that was completely ignored and omitted by the 9/11 commission report? Please give a thorough explanation as to how you disagree with their arguments.

    Thank you

    -Intrepid Sol

    • Bob says:

      Sorry your comment did not go straight. Apparently the filter dumps comments with videos into the spam folder, and I rarely check it because I find the contents so depressing! 🙂

      “What is your opinion on Building 7′s implosion? Don’t you think it’s odd that such as robust structure could dismember itself due to basic office fires?”

      No. And you mischaracterize the fire. It went unfought all afternoon, becoming one of the largest office fires in history. Also, a design peculiarity, namely that it was build above and around a power substation, contributed to the collapse. The dozen labs that studied aspects of the collapse independently of one another found that the design feature was a design flaw and should not be repeated. Each of those elements was unprecedented, together, they contributed to a catastrophic collapse.

      “Isn’t it a bit odd that it housed financial data associated with the Enron and Worldcom court cases, all of which was conveniently destroyed?”

      Nope, not if they were being investigated by the same office. It would be odd if you could show me a document that showed someone from WorldCom/Enron giving the order to blow up the building. And don’t give me that Silverstein “pull” bull, which is a transparent misunderstanding of what he meant in context.

      “Are you skeptical of any aspect of the government’s version of events on 9/11?”

      The story told by the science hangs together. Remember, no one group examined all of the evidence. They broke down the complex analysis into manageable problems for different labs. And when the info came together, the labs agreed. None of the labs have objected that their work or conclusions have been misused or misinterpreted (except when it has been by Truthers). Why should I?

      “Have you seen this? What do you have to say to the experts featured who have forensic evidence that was completely ignored and omitted by the 9/11 commission report? Please give a thorough explanation as to how you disagree with their arguments.”

      I have things to do, so I’ll keep it brief and point you to Ryan Mackey’s white paper, which you need to read. It is more thorough and exquisite and careful and clear than anything that I could ever write. In short, the microspheres paper came from a pay to play journal and the editor quit when she found it was published b/c she never signed off on it and nobody cites it. Not a good journal. The chain of custody of samples was unproven–and how would we show that they were even representative of the dust as a whole? The paper never bothered to distinguish the iron of thermite from the iron that would have been in every single piece of paper that had been printed by a laser printer and burned in the attack (which, coincidentally, better fits the relatively uniform size of the iron–the process of the industrial process of making toner). When I asked Richard Gage why not a directed energy weapon, he laughed. There’s no evidence, he said. But he doesn’t seem to notice that instead of an unproven secret highly energetic military weapon that has never been used in demolition that he gave me…an unproven secret highly energetic military weapon that has never been used in demolition. You might as well posit fairy dust. And this is me not even trying.

      Go ahead and read Mackey. Then I’ll be happy to talk. Don’t just read the critiques of him, read the actual paper.

      RJB

  2. Ken says:

    Somehow, he ends up at “super-intelligent A.I. may lead to a devastating world war that could kill billions of people.”

    Yeah, I saw that in a movie once.

    I’ve seen a number of conspiracies that seem to be lifted wholesale from movies, though sometimes it’s hard to be sure, since many of the conspiracy assumptions (“the government is the bad guys”) have become tropes and provide ready-made background for lazy writers. There may be some kind of feedback loop operating here, where seeing it on screen reinforces the willingness to believe it in reality.

  3. Andie says:

    What do you think about the site endthelie.com? Hard to tell if it is bs conspiracy theory or what

  4. […] Last night, a person at FederalJack.com who goes by the name Popeye “called me out” to debate him on his radio(? internet?) show over my most recent “This Week in Conspiracy.” […]

  5. Bob says:

    Look at endthelie,com and after about 2.5 seconds saw that it is a run-of-the-mill conspiracy theory site.

  6. Pacal says:

    Alex Jones interviewing LaRouche yeah that is iondeed a meeting in the 10th circle of hell. No doubt LaRouche spouted off the usual nonsense about the Queen controling the international drug trade. With as per usual zero evidence.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: