Difference between revisions of "Conspiracy"
m (reword disambig)
|(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)|
|Line 1:||Line 1:|
|Line 8:||Line 7:|
A '''conspiracy''' is a secret agreement
A '''conspiracy''' is a secret agreement a group of people (termed "conspirators") to carry out a nefarious act.
Latest revision as of 16:01, 1 December 2021
|Interest of||• William Cooper|
• Kris Millegan
• Scientism/Invisible College
|Secret agreements to commit illegal acts.|
A conspiracy is a secret agreement among a group of people (termed "conspirators") to carry out a nefarious act.
Conspiracies, when groups of people secretly arrange to commit illegal acts, do happen. See this website for a large number of such event. Many however, are steadfastly denied by the keepers of the official narrative, and are minimized with the pejorative "conspiracy theory". The word "conspiracy" by contrast is rarely applied to acts by establishment groups, even when it applies.
With or without conspirators?
Karel van Wolferen draws a distinction between conspiracies which are localised in time and space, with [identifiable] conspirators, and more nebulous, ingrained conspiracies, inseparable from a broad culture of systemic corruption. The latter he terms conspiracies without conspirators.
Usage by corporate media
CNN has used the word "Conspiracy" as an abbreviation for "Conspiracy theory", as for example in the headline Trump uses IG report to spread 'deep state' conspiracy. The single quotes around "deep state" reflect its ongoing refusal to admit the reality of the US deep state. Its equation of conspiracy with conspiracy theory, although grossly inaccurate, reflects corporate media policy as advised by the CIA memo Countering Criticism of the Warren Report, which encouraged its media assets to ridicule anyone questioning the good faith of the US government.
Usage by government agencies
Most of the deep events on Wikispooks are conspiracies - coordinated illegal acts with multiple perpetrators. All the False Flag Attacks and assassinations could be described as such, but the examples listed below are acts which aren't well described by other substantives.
George H. W. Bush
Khalid bin Mahfouz
|A drug trafficking/weapons smuggling operation carried out in the 1980s with the approval of the top of the US government.|
|2001 Mexican legislative assembly attack||Saar Noam Ben Zvi|
Salvador Gersson Smeck
|Two Israelis caught with false passports grenades, explosives and guns in the Mexican parliament a month after 9-11. Later released without charge. Western corporate media uninterested.|
|Dallas occupy plot||US/Deep state||A plot to assassinate leaders of Occupy Houston. Although the FBI knew about it, no arrests have been made. Tellingly, although documentary evidence exists, the corporate media has said almost nothing about it.|
|October surprise||George H. W. Bush|
|A secret deal which offered the Iranians weapons in return for their preventing the release of the US embassy hostages before the 1980 US presidential election.|
|"Lone nut"||“Nor, for example, is there any reason to interpret the 'lone assassin' verdict, which emerged immediately after the assassination as itself an indicator of the conspiracy at work. On the perspective I am suggesting, almost before Kennedy's heart stopped beating the one thing which everyone involved would have agreed upon, without discussion, never mind coercion, was that a 'lone nut' verdict had to emerge. The 'truth' was not an issue: in politics the 'truth' is simply a tool.<a href="#cite_note-7"></a> The point about the 'lone nut' is that it was then, and remains (cf Hinckley) the only safe explanation for political assassination within America. 'Disney America'<a href="#cite_note-8"></a>, the fantasy pluralist democracy described in the textbooks on the American political system, cannot accommodate planned political assassination.<a href="#cite_note-9"></a>”||Robin Ramsay||1983|
|"National security"||“Human nature being what it is, the MICC comprises avaricious individuals who seek to gain private benefit at public cost. But the idea that all the players knowingly conspire to mastermind so intricate a system is difficult to prove, and unnecessary. Instead corruption among defence contractors, Representatives in Congress and the military brass is standard operating procedure camouflaged by an incestuous labyrinthine system and the primacy of 'national security'. Not only do the corrupt actors need to be held to account but, as importantly, the system needs to be untangled.<a href="#cite_note-10"></a>|
To further understand this entanglement. I met Chuck Spinney, a life-long Pentagon insider who experienced this labyrinth on a daily basis for over two decades. He produced a vast body of work explaining how the Pentagon really operates. His efforts culminated in the wrath of all the participants in the MICC but saw him featured on the cover of Time magazine.”
An official example
|Secret Elite||An early 20th century UK deep state. The pseudonym was coined by Jim Macgregor and Gerry Docherty for their 2013 book Hidden History to describe the people who effectively controlled UK foreign policy from about 1890 into the decade following World War I|
Convicted of Conspiracy
|Hüseyin Baybaşin||25 December 1956||Drug trafficker|
Deep state actor
|A druglord with close and acknowledged ties to Turkish government leaders, who also worked as an informer for UK Customs & Excise. Now in prison|
|Manuel Contreras||4 May 1929||7 August 2015||Chile||Spook||Chilean spymaster.|