What motivates True Believers? More thoughts from our readers

Yesterday’s post, in which we talked about Hoaxtead True Believers’ need to believe themselves personally, heroically, and above all exceptionally righteous and moral, touched off a number of very interesting discussions.

Satanic Views pointed out the invaluable role played by scapegoats, upon which various groups can hang their collective anger, hatred, and fear:

Who is the hubristic fool who came into our troubled society, who is different from us, who pulled all our psychological strings, all our hates, our fears and anger? After near three years of extreme distress, who shall become the Jesus who will carry all our anger, hate, fear and outrage upon their cross? The wickerman standing waiting on Hampstead Heath for them? Someone is going to fall, someone is going to get it. The opportunity for that moment is still to come. But we are all open to this human fault, them and us.

And building on that idea, Justin Sanity pointed out that the True Believers aren’t the only ones prone to projecting their anger, hatred, and fear onto “the other”. In fact, those of us on the side of rationality and evidence-based thinking are just as prone to creating scapegoats, and we shouldn’t try to fool ourselves into thinking we’re somehow immune.

It’s important to recognise in ourselves that same wish to be seen as the arbiters of moral authority, or at least the keepers of the rationalist keys to the kingdom. We’ve placed ourselves on that particular pedestal over and over on this blog, and while we believe we’re justified in doing so, we must beware of becoming smug and complacent. We must also beware the tendency to decide that this person or that one is the “true villain of the piece”. Yes, some people certainly seem to bear more culpability than others (coughAbeEllaBelindaSabinecough), while some are just plain objectionable human beings (coughAngieCharlotteShurtercough), but in taking a stand for what we believe is right, we mustn’t risk becoming just as ugly and offensive as those we oppose.

‘This is their pornography’

AVTM offered an interesting counter-analysis:

[Mr Clark’s] analysis is almost certainly valid when we’re considering the ‘more harmless’ bizarre tales that cross the blurry line between the ‘entertaining unexplained’ (i.e. modern folklore) and stupidly-childish fairy stories generated by the feeble-minded, which they present as some sort of reality – as opposed to the fiction a rational person might. But there is surely something further to be said about the ‘health’ and nature of the fantasies that people generate and embrace?

There are lines which, if crossed, indicate that the subject might be a danger to other people even if they are expressed as ‘just fantasies’.

For example, some years ago there was an individual – a computer expert – caught ‘PhotoShopping’ the heads of his friends and neighbours’ children onto images of children being abused, with his own face superimposed in the position of abuser. There is no evidence he actually physically harmed any child himself; and that was his argument in defence both online and in court. Of course, it didn’t wash and rightly so, he done time and lost his position in society. This individual was by no means unintelligent or uneducated, in fact the position they held in life was not only one of trust but required an advanced graduate level education.

Elsewhere, consider the self righteous claptrap of Nigel Leigh Oldfield as he (ab)uses his intellect to justify his disgusting and harmful agenda. The ‘tack’ taken by him being in many ways very similar to my first example. – Both claim to be ‘mere fantasists’ who had never actually harmed a child.

…And there’s the issue; fantasising about sexually abusing children; that’s the line.

We can easily find evidence of how those who do that thing seek to circumvent the law which prevents them making or possessing images of child abuse. These include the production of ‘textual’ material featuring child abuse. And, as noted by the judge in the Hampstead case, video material of these two children repeating these sick sexual fantasies is likely to have been found ‘stimulating’ to those of that particular bent.

Outside of law enforcement or clinical study, I can think of no legitimate situation where someone might dwell at length on the minutia of sexual abuse.

Therefore, rather than being any kind of ‘good person’ exhibiting sheep-like compliance with the party line of ‘good’, these people are far more likely to be wallowing in and obtaining ‘satisfaction’ from the fantasy itself. Which is one reason why they are so resistant to it being ‘killed off’ and so desperate to keep the pot boiling.

– This is their ‘pornography’.

This is absolutely correct: for many of the True Believers who’ve latched onto the Hampstead SRA hoax, the vivid descriptions of child sexual abuse do seem to represent a kind of pornography, from which they derive an illicit thrill. We’ve stated that on this blog many times in the past, and we still believe it’s true.

Rather than seeing the “Hoaxtead videos/textual material equals pornography” argument as in opposition to the “need to believe themselves to be what they think righteousness looks like” one, though, it’s entirely possible to see them as two sides of the same coin.

Those who get an illicit thrill from the descriptions of anal rape and child torture described in the Hoaxtead videos are arguably more in need of a compensatory sense of moral superiority than the rest of us. In old-fashioned Freudian terms, we could see this as a simple case of denial or compensation: a conscious or unconscious psychological strategy whereby one denies and covers up unacceptable desires and urges, substituting self-righteous indignation for fascination with child abuse images, for example. 

As conspiracy theories proliferate online, we think it’s becoming increasingly important to understand the mindset of those who, for example, would choose to align with people like Abraham Christie and Ella Draper or their ilk. Those of us who continue to stand on the side of evidence, rationality, and reality can only continue to do so if we have some kind of working theory of what motivates those on the other side. Otherwise, we will continue to find ourselves attempting to reason with a metaphorical brick wall.

Advertisements

17 thoughts on “What motivates True Believers? More thoughts from our readers

  1. The way I see it, is that Abe is a conspiracy theorist obsessed with CSA, SRA, Mind Control, Government Cover Up, Secret Societies, Elites and Cannabis cures, just like a lot of conspiracy theorists, You just have to look at the popularity of Pizzagate for proof. They believe in Abraham’s ideas, so the hoax perfectly caters to that audience and ticks all the right boxes.

    Liked by 2 people

    • I think there’s a lot of cross-pollination amongst the beliefs you’ve named—for example, SRA and mind control share many traits in common, and someone who believes in one can easily find common cause with someone who believes in the other.

      We’ve talked here about how Abe and Ella, with assistance from Belinda, created Hoaxtead specifically to appeal to certain groups, and in fact certain individuals, and I think it only makes sense that the same audience, which previously enjoyed the Hollie Greig hoax so thoroughly, would latch onto Pizzagate and the like. As a commenter here once said, this is the conspiritainment industry, and like the television and movie industries, “producers” and “directors” must know what appeals to their audiences.

      Like

  2. Madness, narcissist sociopath personalities, creepy desire to profit from false allegations? Who knows.
    This is one case in which the False Accuser Angela Power-Disney has relentlessly pursued and defamed an innocent man so many times no matter how often he is shown to be innocent.
    In these modern days of the internet and social media I really believe the crime of Criminal Defamation should be on the books.
    No person should have to suffer as those in Hampstead have or as this innocent irish cop has because a harridan like Power-Disney gets on their case. Even the taxpayer suffers because these false accusations eat up police & court time and a fortune in government funds when it all goes belly-up. Let the State deal with these liars & frauds as they do with other criminals.
    https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2017/0705/887918-disclosures-tribunal-brophy/
    “Judge suggests error caused ‘maximum trouble’ for garda whistleblower McCabe “

    Liked by 2 people

  3. Let’s talk about The Finders.

    Not that I really wish to, but exploitation of urban legends about The Finders by frauds and con artists seeking to legitimize their own fantasy narratives, seems to be rampant again at this time.

    You can find a reasonably coherent summary of the standard Finders conspiracy theory narrative, here:
    https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Document:Finders_Keepers
    to refresh your memory about the basic, alleged, “facts”.

    But after that, please continue to another essay tucked away on the same site:
    https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Document_talk:Finders_Keepers
    I will refer to both essays.

    It was 1987 and satanic panic was breaking out all over North America. One manifestation of this panic was the proliferation of lecture series and conferences purporting to provide “Cult & Occult Crime” training for law enforcement and other professionals. Run primarily by self-professed “investigators” and “experts”, a few of whom had legitimate background & experience in law enforcement but most of whom were at best unqualified “wanna bes” and at worst frauds, con artists or crazies, these highly profitable “training seminars” in fact consisted largely of urban legends, unsubstantiated rumors, blatant falsehoods propagated by fraudulent evangelical “ex-satanists” or “ex-witches”, ignorant and inaccurate interpretations of occult-related publications about the beliefs and practices of tiny religious minorities, etc.
    Most of the people who attended these seminars, who came from a broad spectrum of professions and fields of study, had no idea that the information presented to them was largely bogus. They took what was presented to them at face value, believed it, incorporated it into their perception of reality and took that perspective back to whatever social/professional community they belonged to. Those who worked in law enforcement related fields would come to be known as “Cult Cops”, and the story of their tragic impact on policing in the US was told brilliantly in Hick’s “In Pursuit of Satan: The Police and the Occult”.

    So…”The police had received an anonymous telephone call relative two well-dressed white men wearing suits and ties in Myers Park, (Tallahassee), apparently watching six dirty and unkempt children in the playground area. HOULIHAN and AMMERMAN were near a 1980 Blue Dodge van bearing Virginia license number XHW-557, the inside of which was later described as foul-smelling filled with maps, books, letters, with a mattress situated to the rear of the van which appeared as if it were used as a bed, and the overall appearance of the van gave the impression that all eight persons were living in it.
    “The children were covered with insect bites, were very dirty, most of the children were not wearing underwear and all of the children had not been bathed in many days.
    “The men were arrested and charged with multiple counts of child abuse and lodged in the Leon County Jail. Once in custody the men were somewhat evasive in their answers to the police regarding the children and stated only that they both were the children’s teachers and that all were enroute to Mexico to establish a school for brilliant children …”, relates Ramon J. Martinez, Special Agent, United States Customs Service.

    If you google “Michael HOULIHAN and Douglas AMMERMAN”, you will find a treasure trove of contemporary news reports about their “case”, most of which are never referenced in the conspiracy narratives – because they tell the story from a very different perspective than that of Ramon Martinez. Try it and see.
    The children were held in the custody of child welfare authorities and evaluated, but soon returned to their mothers who were all members or associates of Finders communes. They had not been kidnapped, they were never missing, they were never involved in intelligence agency experimentations. Charges against the men were dropped, legitimately, as they were not substantiated.

    Ramon Martinez said, in his report: “U.S. Customs was contacted because the police officers involved suspected the adults of being involved in child pornography and knew the Customs Service to have a network of child pornography investigators, and of the existence of the Child Pornography and Protection Unit. SS/A Krietlow stated the two adults were well dressed white males. They had custody of six white children (boys and girls), ages three to six years. The children were observed to be poorly dressed, bruised, dirty, and behaving like wild animals in a public park in Tallahassee” – again, reflecting his personal perspective on information passed to him by other investigators – a perspective those investigators didn’t necessarily share. But what he says, about how US Customs got involved in the case, is important.
    “…the police officers involved suspected the adults of being involved in child pornography and knew the Customs Service to have a network of child pornography investigators, and of the existence of the Child Pornography and Protection Unit’.
    The two men were “suspected of being involved in child pornography”, but clearly that suspicion – whatever it might have been based on, (we are never told) – could not be substantiated by Customs “network of child pornography investigators”. IF Houlihan and Ammerman or any of their associates were known to those investigators for involvement in pornography, or if any of the children they were travelling with had been identifiable victims of CSA images catalogued by those investigators, none of them would have been released when they were. The subsequent discovery of a few nude photos of Finders children, discovered in “family photo” type private albums and NOT in any form intended for publication or distribution, obviously failed to substantiate the pornography suspicions as well.

    This is no evidence, and there has never been any evidence, that any child living in Finder’s communes was a kidnap victim, a commercial CSA images victim, a child trafficking victim or a human sacrifice victim. There is no evidence that The Finders were ever suspects in historic unresolved missing child cases. If they were really involved in crimes against children, what are the names of those children?

    But some of the contemporary news reports DO describe The Finders as “some kind of satanic cult”.
    Why is that? Well…say hello to some Cult Cops eager to put their “training” to the test by uncovering such a thing through magical powers of “diagnosis”. Such as Scott Hunt “a spokesman for the Tallahassee Police Department”. You already know Ted Gunderson of course, who appears in some stories as “a source”.
    And certain US Customs agents quoted anonymously in news stories; “U.S. Customs agents who saw some of the photos Friday said they appeared to involve sexual activities between adults and children…”We’re not saying that it’s pornography, but it has all the earmarks,”, or in affidavits: “Affidavits filed in U.S. District Court here in support of search warrants executed last week at a Northwest duplex and a Northeast warehouse owned by Terrell described “satanism”…” and whose names were SS/A Ramon Martinez and SS/A Bob Harrold.

    The essay titled: “Customs agents links with right-wing extremists”, linked above, documents Ramon Martinez’ close association with certain Patriot militia zealots, who attended and ‘lectured’ at the same far-right conspiranoid seminars that Ted Gunderson was spreading extreme satanic panic misinformation through. Robert “Bob” Harrold’s blog, circa 2010 or so, documents that man’s post-retirement immersion in the same satanic panic spreading Patriot militia circles. Trust me, they didn’t develop such interests and associations, on a whim, last Tuesday. Martinez’ reports for US Customs reflect the deliberately biased perspective of a two man team of Cult Cops.

    What’s more, Martinez was disciplined by his superiors while working “internal affairs” investigations for US Customs. He was caught tipping off other SS/A’s who were under investigation! Too bad we don’t know the details of that matter, but here’s an intriguing coincidence.
    At the same time that The Finders were apparently not kidnapping children, but getting accused of doing so, the infamous FAYE YAGER and her network of satanic abuse cult True Believers really were kidnapping American children. Dozens of them, over time. Yager was involved in many of the most infamous cases of non-custodial parental kidnapping in US history. And in several cases, the kidnapping parents managed to slip out of the US with their child/children and travel overseas to Australia, the UK, etc. There must have been “sympathizers” within the US Customs agency, turning a blind eye to or actively facilitating these kidnappings. Distract attention from your own kidnapping cult, by having your colleagues falsely accuse some community of innocents?

    Liked by 4 people

    • Fascinating stuff, Justin. Thanks. I note that the Pizzagators have picked up the Finders/CIA allegations and woven them into their narrative as well. Some fairy-tales are just too good to abandon, it seems.

      Liked by 1 person

  4. “It’s important to recognise in ourselves that same wish to be seen as the arbiters of moral authority, or at least the keepers of the rationalist keys to the kingdom.”

    You know that is such an important truth EC that you need to start work on embroidering a cushion with that on it – and I am only half joking. I have seen the other side of that coin over the past few weeks- the hysterical reaction to someone even ‘conversing’ with the other side, never mind believing that they have a point in some areas.

    We need to stop building a wall between our ‘belief’ that we are the arbiters of moral authority versus ‘them’. There may be a grain of truth in some of their fantastical tales, and we must allow for it. We don’t hold the ‘flaming sword of truth’ versus ‘nonsense’. I had been so busy fending of the foam flecked bile and venom form the CSA campaigners, that I lost sight of the fact that some of them were actually very decent people. Admitting that they were and conversing with them has earned me nothing but foam flecked bile and venom from those who were allegedly on the same ‘side’ that I had been a leading figure of – it has been quite an education!

    One that I could have done with out at this stage in my life – but a valuable one all the same – and I hope others with look back at what has happened to me and learn a little from it. Perhaps I was chosen to live thorugh this lesson, because in my own blog, I always tried to be fair and see both sides of a story, to wit, that Karin Ward was more sinned against than sinner. There has always been more than a whiff of religious fanaticism around the whole CSA issue, but I think that is a red herring – it has more to do with a need in human beings to feel that they were on the side of moral relativism. You can even look at it in terms of football – where people support their ‘local’ team fanatically – even though they can see with their own eyes that every single player comes from all points west of Timbuktu and has as much to do with ‘local’ as strawberries in December!

    Liked by 2 people

    • Thanks, Anna. I actually have no gripe against most CSA campaigners, as I think child sexual abuse is an important issue that needs to be dealt with. One of my biggest complaints against the SRA/Hoaxtead pushers is that through their machinations and lies they deflect attention and create doubts about valid allegations.

      I’m not sure I’m ready to make football team comparisons, as I do think that what the Hoaxtead pushers and True Believers do is causing actual, quantifiable harm to innocent people.

      Liked by 2 people

  5. “As conspiracy theories proliferate online, we think it’s becoming increasingly important to understand the mindset of those who, for example, would choose to align with people like Abraham Christie and Ella Draper or their ilk. Those of us who continue to stand on the side of evidence, rationality, and reality can only continue to do so if we have some kind of working theory of what motivates those on the other side.”

    As an observation… There is a serious danger is conflating the term ‘conspiracy theory’ with madness and particularly with the sort of criminally culpable madness exploited and promoted by the sort of people you mention. – Not the least of which is that making the term pejorative is most convenient to those that might conspire against us.

    And conspire against us they do.

    Corruption (blatant, tacit, serious, trivial and every shade and combination of those things) in public service is endemic; look no further than Grenfell Tower or Hillsborough or any of the other ‘nose in the trough’ matters that render politicians lower than a snake’s belly in the public eye. It’s routine and ‘normal’. A game played by and for the benefit of the privileged.

    Grenfell (for instance) was clad to help ‘palatise’ the place where the great unwashed were stored for the convenience of the incoming chattering-class gentry. Money was saved because all that was of importance was appearance. And a killing was made by more than one person in more than one way. As subsequent investigations reveal; it’s not an uncommon pattern. – You only had to listen to some of the comments made immediately after it!

    …’Was it time tower blocks were considered unsuitable for social housing’? …Chimed a cut crystal female from Broadcasting House! ‘This wouldn’t have happened in a mansion block’ squawked her Hooray-Henry counterpart from elsewhere in the ether… They have sprinklers you see! Apparently the great unwashed are not to be trusted with matches; and god forbid that a safety standard should apply to all the places where humans are housed. – It’s not so much the (thoughtless and empty-headed) comments themselves as the attitudes and mentalities that underpin them.

    And that is just one facet of one thing… Watching the social cleansing of London over these past thirty years has been a saddening and bizarre thing to observe. You can be fairly sure that the survivors of the Grenfell disaster will have the dirty done on them. – They’re already U-turning on the promise not to leverage the disaster as an excuse to try and deport people.

    Another example; monies paid over by taxpayers to meet the needs of the sick, elderly and dying is instead funnelled into the coffers of companies run by the well-connected few; the ‘service’ they deliver is to inflict unwarranted and unspeakable cruelties upon the needy, nothing else. There have been credible reports of people in 21st century Britain dying of starvation and people on their deathbed being declared ‘fit to work’ in one of the many imaginary jobs that really don’t exist for them to go to.

    The taxpayer is not relieved of any financial burden, the sick get sicker the poor get poorer the fatcats line their pockets and the burden on society gets greater. The overall effect is to restore standards of GeoVictWardian misery and inequality. And we sit here like frogs in a pan simmering away helpless.

    If that isn’t a conspiracy what is? It’s certainly no accident!

    The very fact that politicians openly employ professional liars – Spin Doctors – to twist reality is in itself a conspiracy to pervert the course of reality. As Twain observed in a letter to Jules Hart in December 1901;

    “When politics enter into municipal government, nothing resulting therefrom in the way of crimes and infamies is then incredible. It actually enables one to accept and believe the impossible… “

    It’s quite convenient for the corrupt in our society to have the facility to ignore persistent complainants, even though what they might be saying is perfectly valid, on the basis they are vexatious ‘conspiracy theorists.

    And on that subject, what of the apparent failures of justice surrounding this and other cases? Court orders that have as much legal force as the stern order to wash one’s hands on the bottom of a sheet of course toilet paper! – Individuals that can ride coach and horses at full speed through the statutes yet remain prosecution free?

    Anna mentioned ‘grains of truth’. Flushing them away in a tide of nonsense seems to be becoming a standard practice. – By rights there is no way the likes of Christie, McNeill and in particular McKenzie should be able to get away with a fraction of the things they do. And yet they do. And they are just small examples of what goes on.

    We might (quite rightly) be drawn to debunk conspiracy hoaxes like Hampstead because of their ludicrous and criminal nature and the damage they do to innocent people. But are we also being caused – deliberately manipulated – into a situation where we are quite happy to dismiss each and every wolf cry right up to and including the point where we ourselves are devoured?

    Liked by 3 people

    • I agree completely, AVTM. I think it’s important to recognise that conspiracies can and do exist: in addition to the ones you’ve named, one thinks of American examples like Watergate; the Iran-Contra affair; MK ULTRA (yes, it was a real thing, just not in the way conspiranoids believe today); even COINTELPRO, which was set up in the late 1960s to monitor the activities of American activists like Abbie Hoffman.

      I’m also inclined to believe that Hoaxtead itself represents a criminal conspiracy on the part of a number of people, aimed at one individual as well as an entire community. Does believing that make me a “conspiracy theorist”? I don’t think it does, at least not in the way we generally construe that term.

      I think it’s important to distinguish between “true conspiracies” and conspiracy hoaxes, as you say. And I believe you’re right when you say we’re being manipulated into a position in which we tend to automatically dismiss all conspiracies, rather than taking the time to dig about for the truth.

      Whether that manipulation is wholly deliberate, wholly inadvertent, or a combination of the two will probably be a matter for historians to decipher. For now, I think the best we can do is fact-check to the best of our ability, and collectively attempt to teach those around us to apply critical thinking and a healthy degree of scepticism to the information with which we’re constantly bombarded.

      Liked by 1 person

      • @coyote – wise words, yet again.

        “Et tu, Brute?”
        Conspiring with others, to achieve a common goal, could perhaps be seen as a basic human behavioural trait.
        If you have sufficient information & evidence, then your hypothesis would be a conspiracy fact rather than a theory. If you don’t, and you have to fill in gaps with speculation, supposition, rumors, fantasies or falsehoods to make your dots connect, then your hypothesis can only be called a theory about a conspiracy. In my opinion, such theorizing contributes next to nothing to resolving problems or issues, and frequently serves only to obscure realities and provide excuses for not bothering to get involved in a concrete manner.

        I gave up trying to discuss and act upon most social justice issues, online or offline, in the wake of 9/11 – because it seemed every discussion would inevitably be forcibly hijacked by conspiracy theory obsessives, determined to turn all discussion into a discussion of their pet theories.

        Liked by 3 people

        • Justin Sanity. “I gave up trying to discuss and act upon most social justice issues, online or offline, in the wake of 9/11 – because it seemed every discussion would inevitably be forcibly hijacked by conspiracy theory obsessives, determined to turn all discussion into a discussion of their pet theories.”
          The comments section on here proves your point entirely, https://youtu.be/noF75abiMLs

          Like

        • “If you have sufficient information & evidence, then your hypothesis would be a conspiracy fact rather than a theory. If you don’t, and you have to fill in gaps with speculation, supposition, rumors, fantasies or falsehoods to make your dots connect, then your hypothesis can only be called a theory about a conspiracy.”

          To be a fact it would need to be proven. To reach a point of proof you need to start with a hypothesis. That’s how science and engineering works at least and as far as I know justice too. Speculation and supposition are reasonable steps here, fantasy and falsehoods aren’t. For sure, theorising that involves the latter progresses nothing but then can that legitimately be called theorising? I don’t think so. Let’s just recall for a moment that Einstein’s theory of general relativity remains just that, it has not been disproven, that’s all. But that hasn’t caused us to travel any direction but forwards. The devil here, and the point made I think, is in the detail of how this phrase is being misappropriated to downplay and misdirect people away from legitimate concern and independent protest.

          Liked by 1 person

        • “Et tu, Brute?” Hardly…

          Alfred is essentially correct. By their nature theories are not proven. Rather they stand up to attempts at being disproved. Along that road facts emerge that support realities. But I’m not sure I could cite a solitary example of completely, truly, unassailable theory (in science for instance) that was beyond any challenge; for at that point all exploration and learning must cease surely? Are we really at a point in our development as a species where we can say we know everything about anything?

          “Conspiring with others, to achieve a common goal, could perhaps be seen as a basic human behavioural trait.”

          Collaborating with other certainly is. Conspiracy, by its very definition is the act of secretly planning with other people to do something harmful or illegal. – Unless one wished also to argue that dishonesty is a basic human trait and should therefore be validated as ‘normal’ or ‘acceptable’ behaviour, then the tendency to indulge in conspiracy can only be viewed as a regressive sociopathic trait.

          With due deference to Alfred, speculating, supposing, exploring rumour – even extrapolating from available information (i.e. using imagination) are indeed all perfectly valid thought processes when engaged in fact finding. With all due respect to you Justin, and with no offence intended, you seem to be conflating this with the dishonesty of misrepresenting fantasy and falsehood as if they were facts.

          That is not, by any valid definition, theorising…

          Indeed, it is this conflation that I rail against – it’s very convenient for those that do conspire against society to project the notion that those who seek to call them out in their dishonesty are the conspirators.

          When one theorises legitimately one travels a straight and narrow path to discover the facts which, ultimately, will lead you to journey’s end. When you deviate from the straight and narrow you actually cease to theorise and begin to fantasise and present falsehood in place of the facts. Where you involve another person in that exercise it becomes a conspiracy in its own right.

          I cited some (relatively) tame and domestic events which do, I think, indicate where various factions conspire against the very people they should be humble servants to. EC cited some of the more ‘popular’ conspiracies that have been taken up by those that seek to twist them into some other dishonest thing. One set is real and present, whilst the other is historical and being woven into fiction. Neither are unreal. And it remains most convenient for those that do conspire to paint others that might point out their dishonesty as fools.

          Operation Mockingbird was another real-life conspiracy on the part of the American authorities which is worthy of study. One does sometimes wonder of it was rolled out in other places and might still be going on.

          Liked by 1 person

  6. I like this angle: it gives me a stronger feeling of confidence that equilibrating the harm being done is realistic. Know your enemy?

    Like

We welcome comments!

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