Jump to content

Which Conspiracy Theories Do You Believe In and Why?


Gorn

Recommended Posts

99% of conspiracy theories on the Internet are garbage which can be easily refuted with science and verifiable historical facts. However, there is also that 1% where common-sense logic and additional evidence make the theories far more likely to be true than the "official" version.

Here are some that I'm personally at least 90% certain are true.

1. Lee Harvey Oswald wasn't acting alone.

The "second shooter" theory has been refuted, but the official story of JFK assassination still stinks and fails the "common sense" criteria. Reason? Jack Ruby. An organized crime associate (who at the same time wasn't so closely connected to be immediately suspicious) in an out-of-character display of patriotism kills the presidential assassin while entering through mysteriously unlocked and unguarded stairwell. Oh, and he later asks the Warren commission to transfer him to Washington DC because he "wants to tell the truth" and "his life is in danger". And then dies from eight separate tumors which were not previously diagnosed. Hmmm.

2. 1999 Russian apartment bombings were carried out by FSB and organized by Putin and Yeltsin.

I normally ignore "false flag" theories and was dismissive of this one the first dozen times I heard it, but after I started reading about it, I changed my mind. It is the only one on the list that I'm 100% convinced about, because there are so many red flags:

- Three months before the bombings, journalist Alexander Zilin warned about terrorist attacks in Moscow organized by the government;

- After two bombings, Achemez Gochiyayev realized he was being framed and informed the police about two other locations where explosives were found;

- After the Ryazan bombing was foiled and evidence started leading towards FSB, they released a story about "exercise" (with real explosives);

- A parliament member spoke of "Volgodonsk bombing" during a session three days before it actually happened;

- Two parliament commission members investigating the bombings were assassinated, and a third was first assaulted, and later died after a car accident;

- Litvinenko and Politkovskaya, who both investigated the bombings, were both assassinated;

- Basayev and Ibn Khattab both denied involvement, even though they were both quick to claim responsibility for other terrorist attacks.

3. Nicholas Deak was killed by the CIA.

Since this one is a little obscure, here's some background: Nicholas Deak was a former CIA agent and Wall Street financier was accused, among other things, of laundering money for Latin American drug traffickers. Soon after that, an insane homeless woman walked into his Wall Street and killed him in a random act of violence. Hmmm. Here's a good article about it: https://www.salon.com/2012/12/02/better_than_bourne_who_really_killed_nick_deak/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Gorn said:

1. Lee Harvey Oswald wasn't acting alone.

The "second shooter" theory has been refuted, but the official story of JFK assassination still stinks and fails the "common sense" criteria. Reason? Jack Ruby. An organized crime associate (who at the same time wasn't so closely connected to be immediately suspicious) in an out-of-character display of patriotism kills the presidential assassin while entering through mysteriously unlocked and unguarded stairwell. Oh, and he later asks the Warren commission to transfer him to Washington DC because he "wants to tell the truth" and "his life is in danger". And then dies from eight separate tumors which were not previously diagnosed. Hmmm.

I'm not really familiar with the basis of the conspiracy in general, so can you clarify what you mean? Who is Jack Ruby, according to your theory? The alleged other shooter?

Also, before you decided that this version of events was more convincing, what were the issues you found with the official narrative of President Kennedy getting shot? And why this particular murder? It's sad, but murders of high-profile politicians are hardly unique, and while they're uncommon in the USA, they're not unprecedented.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Yukle said:

I'm not really familiar with the basis of the conspiracy in general, so can you clarify what you mean? Who is Jack Ruby, according to your theory? The alleged other shooter?

Also, before you decided that this version of events was more convincing, what were the issues you found with the official narrative of President Kennedy getting shot? And why this particular murder? It's sad, but murders of high-profile politicians are hardly unique, and while they're uncommon in the USA, they're not unprecedented.

No, he's the man who killed Lee Harvey Oswald: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Ruby

Nothing alleged about that part, since he did it in front of cameras and was convicted of it in court.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jack Ruby told an FBI contact to "enjoy the fireworks" the day before the assassination, which immediately makes people go huh?

Conspiracies and false flags have more credence than they should because of TV and film narratives. In reality, the addition of each person to a top-secret conspiracy results in an exponential increase in the threat that the conspiracy will leak to outsiders. Bill Clinton couldn't keep what happened between him an intern secret, Watergate collapsed faster than a deck of cards because the investigators simply picked people off until they found those willing to talk, a similar thing is happening in the Trump situation and so on. The Kennedy assassination has a little more credence as a conspiracy because you could keep the numbers down to a semi-manageable level and the capacity for finding an electronics or paper trail in 1963 was very limited. 9/11, on the other hand, would require thousands of people to be in on the false flag conspiracy so it is, in essence, impossible (the level of involvement of the Saudi government or assets in the attack is another question, however).

Those conspiracy theories which turned out to be true are generally those where we could see they were true at the time but no-one really cared or they found it politically expedient to not say anything: the invasion of Iraq for oil and neo-con ideological principles, the Nazi invasion of Poland in response to "provocations" on the border which no-one believed (the Germans didn't really try to sell it) or Caesar trying to seize power in Rome when he kept protesting he didn't want to do that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Spocky,

The "Phoenix Lights" were flares from a Fighter jet.  FYI.  :)

Can't tell if you're being serious or not, Scot, but that's a ridiculous assertion. These lights were seen by thousands of people, over hundreds of miles.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Oswald not acting alone is just about the only real conspiracy theory I subscribe to.  In terms of 60s assassinations, I guess I also think it's possible the FBI and/or CIA aided the shootings of Malcolm X and MLK in some fashion (perhaps without the perpetrators even knowing it).  In terms of the OP, I'm not too familiar with the Russian bombing; as for the third one, what's a Nicholas Deak?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

Can't tell if you're being serious or not, Scot, but that's a ridiculous assertion. These lights were seen by thousands of people, over hundreds of miles.

They are phosphorus flares.  They're really hot and bright.  They are designed to create an alternate heat source for heat seeking missiles.  They can and are seen over very long distances.

The flares disappear individually as they fall below the line of sight created by the distant mountain range:
 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

They are phosphorus flares.  They're really hot and bright.  They are designed to create an alternate heat source for heat seeking missiles.  They can and are seen over very long distances.

The flares disappear individually as they fall below the line of sight created by the distant mountain range:
 

 

Flares were the cover story, which the former Governor of Arizona, Fife Symington (a witness to the event who also happens to be a former USAF pilot), has described as total bunk. Also, the flares explanation in no way accounts for the sightings that took place right across the state of Arizona.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Spockydog said:

Flares were the cover story, which the former Governor of Arizona, Fife Symington (a witness to the event who also happens to be a former USAF pilot), has described as total bunk. Also, the flares explanation in no way accounts for the sightings that took place right across the state of Arizona.

 

Okay.  :Walks away slowly and carefully:

:P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Werthead said:

Jack Ruby told an FBI contact to "enjoy the fireworks" the day before the assassination, which immediately makes people go huh?

Conspiracies and false flags have more credence than they should because of TV and film narratives. In reality, the addition of each person to a top-secret conspiracy results in an exponential increase in the threat that the conspiracy will leak to outsiders. Bill Clinton couldn't keep what happened between him an intern secret, Watergate collapsed faster than a deck of cards because the investigators simply picked people off until they found those willing to talk, a similar thing is happening in the Trump situation and so on. The Kennedy assassination has a little more credence as a conspiracy because you could keep the numbers down to a semi-manageable level and the capacity for finding an electronics or paper trail in 1963 was very limited. 9/11, on the other hand, would require thousands of people to be in on the false flag conspiracy so it is, in essence, impossible (the level of involvement of the Saudi government or assets in the attack is another question, however).

Those conspiracy theories which turned out to be true are generally those where we could see they were true at the time but no-one really cared or they found it politically expedient to not say anything: the invasion of Iraq for oil and neo-con ideological principles, the Nazi invasion of Poland in response to "provocations" on the border which no-one believed (the Germans didn't really try to sell it) or Caesar trying to seize power in Rome when he kept protesting he didn't want to do that.

This is more or less my stance as well.  Benjamin Franklin said that , "Three may keep a secret, if two of them are dead."  While I think Ben was engaging in a little bit of hyperbole there, that statement really isn't too far off the mark and it contains a fundamental truth about humanity.   Any conspiracy theory that requires the broad collaboration of numerous people and long-term secrecy is almost certainly bullshit, imo.  Sandy Hook, 9/11 false flag, Fake Moon Landing, Flat Earth, Government cover-up of aliens, etc, etc.  All of that stuff relies on the perpetual secrecy of dozens, if not hundreds or thousands of people and I just don't think there's enough hush money or ominous, threatening voicemail's in the world to keep that stuff under wraps for very long, let alone forever.  

The other thing that always amuses me about conspiracy theorists is that they tend to be the type to bemoan the incompetent state of government, yet credit them with accomplishing amazing feats of fraud requiring amazing levels of coordination, secrecy, and competence.  

I am sure that there are a lot of things that my government (or any government, really) has been involved in that are not common public knowledge.  But with the really big stuff where there's a ton of public scrutiny the official line is probably closer to the truth than the conspiracies.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Ser Scot A Ellison said:

Okay.  :Walks away slowly and carefully:

:P

Those brilliant aliens -- brought to Earth via their FTL drives and then essentially mooned Arizona one night.. and then... uh ... profit?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...