I think its just another element designed to reinforce a state of fear.

• Terrorist attacks
• Passenger jets getting blown up
• Wars breaking out everywhere
• ebola scares
• global warming
• great recessions
• School shootings

The media hypes the shit out of all these things as a means of making people more and more afraid of the world around them. They want to create a mentality in the population where people say "OMG, how is the government going to protect us from the scary world around us?"

Which is the mentality the government needs in order to do the things it would otherwise never be allowed to do.

I mean, think of how much media coverage the ebola thing has gotten and not a single person in the US has gotten sick on US soil. I'm not saying it wasn't a story but it was blown WAY out of proportion simply to reinforce this ongoing narrative of scaring the public.

This is a theory I haven't put enough thought into yet to really put it out there, but what if this is all an attempt to run a project monarch-like disruption on the public pysche? To control someone they have to first expose them to extreme trauma and then when their psyche is so messed up and jumbled from the trauma they swoop in and give direction to the victim.

It's as if they are trying this on a national scale.

this is exactly what they are doing. The easiest way to dominate a people is for said people to turn over their freedom to you. The only time people will do that is if they are scared and poor.

If they are self sufficient (ie. have money) and aren't scared, why in the world would they turn over their freedom to someone else?

You need them desperate (ie. poor) and scared... this creates a yurning for someone to "save them"... that's when you can step in and take away all their freedoms and they will actually thank you for it.

The scary thing is if this happens on a global scale. If most of the major national banks get in deep water in the next big crash we'll have people like the IMF stepping up to play hero and 'save' us all. And the public will welcome them with open arms.

One world government is a forgone conclusion in my opinion. The only question is whether it will be a coallition of the willing or whether one country will rule over all.

Right now the US wants to rule over all. Which isn't a surprise, since the US has so much debt that they can never pay back. If they can disperse that debt across the world, they can then manage it.

The creation of the brics bank suggests that we might ultimate have a two-world government, with Russia, China ruling over one half and the USA ruling over the other.

But there is zero question in my mind that the game being played right now is one of world dominance and spheres of influence.

Agreed, good analysis.

Would you prefer it if we were shielded from all negative news around the world?

No, but its the quantity and frequency of the 'scary' news and the LACK of coverage of other topics. They present a very tailored news narrative and its not by mistake.

We get 100s of hours of news about ebola (which is next to no threat to anyone in the US) and we get hardly any coverage on stuff like the CIA spying on the congress.

The focus is on generating fear in the public, NOT on the wrong doings of government (which might spark activism among the public).

I bet you a bunch of imaginary dollars that if they were keeping hush on this Ebola thing you'd be asking why they're being so quiet.

The focus is on generating fear in the public, NOT on the wrong doings of government (which might spark activism among the public).

You must have a short memory. When Snowden blew his whistle the government were cast in a very bad light. Or what about SOPA? Occupy Wall St?

[deleted]

By presenting the people with spooky stories, they will seek comfort and defence - Of which the government can provide.

But if they present the people with reasons to distrust the government, then the people wouldn't seek comfort there.

Are these strategic steps toward a world government?

If people keep getting lied to by their leaders, they're not going to suddenly trust leaders on a global scale.

By presenting the public stories about Snowden, SOPA, Occupy etc. These things erode the public trust in authority figures. It doesn't make any sense for the government to want to do that.

[deleted]

Please reacquaint yourself with our rules.

Personal attacks are not allowed here. Any future violations of /r/conspiracy's rules will result in your ban.

wow... so this guy trolls and you threaten to ban me?

I'm not trolling.

[deleted]

You should read the rules dude.

Well, for people only watching mainstream TV news, they are fed the narrative that results in them saying, on Occupy: "Ugh, dirty, spoiled hippies." Tea Party: "Ugh, weird old racist white people." And with the Palestinians, "Ugh, terrorists." On SOPA: "What's SOPA?" On Snowden: "Spying is what intelligence agencies are supposed to doooo. Snowden's a traitor anyway."

Thank gods for the Internet, but we still have a lot of people only getting their news from mainstream sources. When I have a conversation with a lot of people in the real world about what's going on in the world, I get a lot of the old "Ugh, $stereotype-I've-been-fed. Where are you getting this stuff, anyway? I haven't heard that."

Did you happen to catch the latest executive order?

http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-signs-executive-order-to-detain-americans-with-respiratory-illnesses.html

http://www.shtfplan.com/headline-news/map-of-ebola-quarantine-stations-heres-where-theyll-send-those-suspected-of-ebola-or-respiratory-illnesses_08012014

They're doing anything they can to draw the public's attention away from Gaza since their usual propaganda tactics just aren't cutting it this time around.

You are being distracted from whatever local matter you should be involved in.

it's right in front of you. The fact that there is some "wonder drug" for Ebola that doctors apparently felt was worth trying on humans without much trial and all it took was two Americans getting Ebola for it to become public. Think about all the people in West Africa dying, but just because these two people (who are incredibly brave and honorable for going to Africa to try and fight the outbreak, don't get me wrong) happen to have been born in the USA, they get access to it. If it's safe enough to risk putting it into two American citizens without a trial or control subjects, it's safe enough to be in West Africa.

The Ebola threat is real. It was probably manufactured in a bioweapons lab and released deliberately.

[deleted]

Wow. Theres conspiracies, and then there are people who are so ignorant they think everything is a conspiracy. 932 people have died while doctors are risking their lives to save others and you think this is a diversion? Wow. Let some shit into your head for once. Youre not always right.

No one is saying that the Ebola virus is a conspiracy. But that doesn't mean that the media and government aren't hyping up the "threat" in order to create fear

No one is saying that the Ebola virus is a conspiracy.

Though I don't believe it to be the case, it certainly is a possibility. Just not likely.

Oh absolutely. That's what scares me about them bringing American Ebola patients back to the US... So easy for an "accident" to happen.

[deleted]

When im feeling insecure ill come to you for advice. You should feel honored

What if it's actually true and ebola is actually on it's global attack mission? Did no on here see the movie contagion? Predictive programming anyone?

Could be legit, who knows. But everything is a distraction from economics.

So "all of this Ebola crap" may not actually be a diversion. It could be completely legit. What is important, essential in fact is that we actually ask these kind of questions. We are constantly being manipulated. Its like the "magician" or mentalist who uses slight of hand or more sophisticated techniques to fool the audience ( Google Derren Brown). We need to always ask not am I being manipulated but rather how am I being manipulated.

Could be to control flights even more and increase security at airports which means more guards and more unessecary checks.