Somewhat related, but perhaps on a smaller scale. I wonder sometimes if there are elements that are put into place to distract conspiracy theorists from what they should be focused on and keep the debate about other things that are tangentially related.

Take 9/11 for example. In my opinion, there are far more inconsistencies in the "official story" that should lead to more conversation and debate regarding the Pentagon and the crashed flight (93, I think? On my phone, don't feel like googling). Yet the conversation 99% of the time revolves around what happened in New York City. There are people on both sides are making money by keeping this conversation - about the wrong stuff - going.

There are other examples I could mention, but I think this is the most obvious.

To be clear, I'll reiterate that this is my opinion, and I am certainly not claiming this to be anything I can provide any falsifiable evidence for.

yep, I'm kind of assuming it's all part of a ploy to trick people and distract them, because it's all really obvious.

this is for the people who "wake up" from the total-soul-control program being run here in our society - once it was run using religion, now it's more complex but basically works the same.

''They'' are providing a problem - eventually ''they''(the builders of the world) will provide a solution.

Not trying to be disrespectful, but I don't personally buy into any of the pseudo-spiritual great awakening, third eye opening, soul control, mysterious evil force / entity controlling (or trying to control) everything stuff. You're certainly entitled to hold your own opinions on that sort of stuff, but I certainly won't have anything beneficial to add to that kind of conversation.

k bud, 'soul control' is another way of saying mind control only on a deeper level - because it does go much deeper than just 'mind control' as there is a system of culture in place that directs people for entire lifetimes without their realization of it, people literally serve this system and give their lives away to it without ever taking responsibility for themselves, hence the term "soul-control" program.

That's fine. I appreciate the clarification, but it's still not something that I'm convinced is happening in this manner.

A false flag to what?

I didn't read your content. I admit, I'm being lazy.

...but conspiracies are themselves a false flag? What? Wanna give me a tldr wrap up to what you mean?

if you didn't read the 'content', why would I repeat it for you here? Your question is answered in the post you didn't read. All of this is part of a new 'problem/reaction/solution' game being played on people. This whole "truth movement", all of it, the conspiracy theories, the obvious games being played, it's all meant to be seen, to create distrust/conflict/desire for a new system in the minds of the people - while keeping them satisfied enough to control them until the builders(of the world and societies) are ready to provide them with a new system.

if you didn't explain the 'content'

First of all, I didn't "explain" it. I didn't read it is what I didn't do.

why would I repeat it for you here?

Because there may be (and likely are) others like myself that not only didn't bother reading the content of your OP, but that also don't understand your OP heading, and would like to know what you mean WITHOUT having to read your wall of text.

Your question is answered in the post you didn't read.

Okay. So then I guess I'll never find out what sense you were trying to make. Meh.

All of this is part of a new 'problem/reaction/solution' game being played on people.

All of what? Conspiracy theories? And if so, HOW is it that conspiracy theories in general are themselves a problem reaction solution false flag?

This whole "truth movement", all of it, the conspiracy theories, the obvious games being played, it's all meant to be seen.

Okay...But to what purpose? What's the end game that would somehow play right into the hands of TPTB or whoever's pulling the strings on the supposed false flag? How would conspiracy theories be a false flag in the rouge? That's my question.

First of all, I didn't "explain" it. I didn't read it is what I didn't do.

go reread the most instead of being petty and argumentative, you mongoloid, stfu - if what you came looking for was a way to use me to feel good about yourself by finding a mistype or error in grammar, then you're on the wrong mental wavelength for me to care to invest any more time or energy on you.

Because there may be (and likely are) others like myself that not only didn't bother reading the content of your OP,

that would be because they're mongoloids like you who want a short-cut in anything and everything to the point of trying to be critical of others while you come into the thread and go "durr, I didn't read any of this, can you retype it for me in a comment?"? "200 words was too difficult 4 me, can u help plz tldr".. no, none of this is meant for you or your type of mind. Go back to facebook or something, sorry, I can't help you. All of your questions were answered in the post you didn't read, which could have been read and re-read in the time it took you to make this post I'm responding to now.

go reread the most instead of being petty and argumentative, you mongoloid, stfu

Wow. Didn't even get past that "insightful" statement on your part.

I tell you what. I'll let you keep thinking you're making sense and just leave this post.

lol. You're useless, man. Sad.

Here you go, son. Learn something.

you're just trying to use me to feel good about yourself on a petty/personal/egotistical level - come back here in about 5 years when you're a grown up and you've stopped interacting with others on the basis of 'trying to feel good about yourself through them without actually being good' or 'trying to feel smart without actually being smart', etc.

Ohhh. I get it. You actually think I read what you just posted. Okay.

Relevant.

you're still just trying to use me to feel good about yourself and you can't do that by actually interacting with me, so you need to instead "tell me how you're not effected and not reading what I post"

congrats on wasting your time and mine while being petty/childish/egotistical - go back to facebook where you belong.

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/36giws/what_if_the_entire_field_of_conspiracy_theories/crdtdd3

see how you keep needing to do that? it's because everything I say about you is true - so thanks for repeatedly demonstrating how insightful i am.

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/36giws/what_if_the_entire_field_of_conspiracy_theories/crdte78

Do you seriously not have the attention span required to read a couple paragraphs?

It's not that I don't have the attention span. What I don't have is the interest to read THIS particular post. So what? I read a lot of other posts. I'm just not interested enough to read this one. If you or OP can't explain the point simply and concisely enough, then perhaps it's just as well that I didn't waste my time on it.

Lol okay sorry that people can't dumb things down quite enough for you.

If you can't handle reading something a few paragraphs long you shouldn't comment and bullshit about it like you understand what's going on.

As if something not being interesting enough for someone means they're "dumb". Wow. That's just...some really brainless, unthinking logic. smfh big time.

Says the guy who's too stupid to read a few paragraphs.

You're so funny and predictable with your need to keep coming back with your cute little comebacks. I bet you feel all nice and special inside, eh?

Okay, little one. You've done well for the evening. Try another one if you need to keep making yourself feel relevant.

Lel

So, there's real corruption, and because we're noticing it and concerned about it, this means we're falling for it, and it's working like a charm. This corruption is addressed by legitimate authorities, but they're ignored and publicized.

Are you ok?

[deleted]

[citation needed]

[deleted]

[citation still needed]

"apocalyptic cult" isn't anywhere in that wikipedia article

[deleted]

[citation still needed]

the wikipedia article doesn't say anything about the vulcans being involved in any way with the perpetration of 9/11

[deleted]

that's not how citations work as there is nothing to cite. i read the article and what you claim isn't in there.

you are the one making a claim, therefore, you have the burden of proof to back it up with factual information. the article you linked provides no information with regard to what you have stated. but maybe i missed it, care to point out the part that substantiates your claim?

in other words, as i already said [citation still needed]

[deleted]

i never said you made that claim in those words.

i said you claimed they were involved in it, which is a reasonable conclusion to reach based on the statements you have made here and the similar claims you made in your post yesterday.

if this wasn't the case, then you wouldn't have posted the vulcans wikipedia article as an attempted citation when asked about your initial post here, in which the claim was made.

at least yesterday you were honest enough to admit you made it up. though i now see you deleted all of your comments from that post. i wonder why you'd do that, but i'm not the type to jump to conclusions that aren't based on factual evidence.

[deleted]

why do you keep insisting on a dodge when clearly a citation is still needed for your initial claim?

you're the one making assumptions here, as you're the one who has claimed the vulcans masterminded (which would count as being involved in the perpetration of) 9/11 but have not provided a single scrap of evidence to maintain that claim.

ps - you should probably stop saying things are true when you can't provide evidence for them

[deleted]

your memory needs work

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

boo hoo

fabrications being touted as facts are not worthy of respect, nor are those dishonest individuals who perpetuate ignorance by creating or repeating them

are you even serious about what you think?

do you seriously believe any of that? "can God be defeated?" durrp derp derp, "can they defeat god"?

Don't you think if these "apocalyptic cults" you're talking about existed in the way you think they do, and they believe in "God" the way you do - that they would be serving that deity? You think "they know a god exists and they're 'trying to defeat the god'? LOL. That doesn't even make sense.

If you think these people know there's a god, what the fuck do you think they're thinking "trying to defeat it" while you also believe all of this is "pre-ordained and the creation of an omnipotent creator god who had infinite foresight when he created every single thing and wrote the rules to the whole game before anything existed to begin with"?

Nothing you think makes sense, sorry. This is not anything like you think it is (the world, "god", etc.)

god is inside you, and inside "them" (the "bad guys" - everyone in general) - the idea of religions is to stop you from realizing that by giving you the idea it's a magical old man living in the sky judging you who wants you to be stupid/dumb/weak and who will 'give you an eternal reward' if you just follow the teachings of some particular priest class instead of realizing your own power and responsibility as 'spirit in matter shaping yourself and the world'(which is what you are, and also what other people are - some recognize this and some don't and are instead basically just used as human resources who don't see the truth of anything, 'blind men/the walking dead/etc.').

the difference is between serving yourself as god/divinity, vs. using yourself to serve others and recognizing god & divinity & ''yourself'' in everyone and everything outside yourself. That's "evil vs. good". Not "jesus vs. devils", sorry dude, but maybe some day you will move past the simplistic view of the world that you have now to actual understanding and then have a good effect on the world and on yourself.

I think you guys and your anti-governments fervor

Sociopaths lead everything. That is the problem. Government is just a small part.

that's a pretty extreme over-simplification of what is happening today on earth, but you're not wrong.

I think it's the very heart of the matter. The top leaders of any system you can name lack any sort of compassion, conscience, empathy or remorse because those who most want to control others are the very ones who will do literally anything to get that power over others. They then use that power for their personal greed without consideration for any other variable.

Until we filter out the sociopaths and psychopaths from leadership positions where they do massive damage and always have, nothing will improve.

Humanity will devolve to the total destruction of civilization because greed eventually destroys all of the systems that constitute civilization.

As long as sociopaths still lead, nothing will really change when they get their new world government. Their personal greed will dictate every decision without regard for any other factor.

I think that you're wrong about them all being psychopaths, I think there are some, but that the people leading are thinking in a different way and they're not just serving themselves.

Look up "ted turner" and his talks/interviews on youtube. He owns CNN, he wants a new way of being/new form of civilization, he wants violence to end and to advance humanity.

I think they think they're advancing humanity and human civilization as a whole and using semi-brutal or fully brutal means to do it. I think it's much more complicated than you're thinking it is with your "they're all psychopaths thing".

There is no possible way for them to all be psychopaths. Have you ever met a sociopath? I have - they're extremely shallow people, they have no depth at all - they could not possibly manage civilization with nothing but their will to power/manipulate/gain for themselves. There is a philosophy behind all of this stuff going on and they all think they're serving a higher purpose for all mankind - a la freemasonry / esoteric philosophies - people are brought into 'the brotherhood'(of mankind) and they believe they're serving a higher purpose than just themselves - which is why they don't care about the things you think they should care about. They "can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs".

Beyond all of that, evolution of social structures in nature are violent and brutal naturally - the plants and animals fight for resources - the first single-celled organisms in the primordial slimepools fought each other until forming organized interlinked "cell groups" which co-operated for mutual benefit while fighting for resources with othr cellular groupings.

Then those 'groups of cells' eventually - after long periods of fighting with each other - naturally become interlinked as well, growing fibers which allow them to communicate via electronic signal transfer (a la 'the internet' or telecommunications) - and they begin becoming more interconnected until eventually they all become one organism built on individuals, all serving each other and themselves for mutual benefit.

This is what's happening to humanity right now in organizations/corporations/nations. It's obviously the same pattern of natural evolution repeating itself on a 'macro' level. Thinking "there's just psychopaths controlling everything" is wrong.

Ted turner is a eugenicist. He's a sociopath who only wants other sociopaths like himself to survive.

I meet sociopaths every day. Sociopaths only reward and encourage other sociopaths who can 'play ball'. Every person with a job has to at least somewhat emulate their boss. That creates more and more sociopaths. Greed is the overwhelming result along with any positive change being destroyed in the making.

The sociopath's higher calling is destruction of all feeling since they mostly cannot.

You're making my point very well. They don't care about anyone or anything other than killing and destroying anything and everything good.

There is a choice to be made now between good and evil. I see which one you have sided on but I choose the betterment of humanity and the optimization of a good and caring civilization instead.

Sociopaths have many useful qualities that they can contribute. Leadership of others is absolutely not one of them. They have no right just because of their inabilities to feel many common human feelings and experience actual love for others, to lead others to destruction.

There is a choice to be made now between good and evil. I see which one you have sided on but I choose the betterment of humanity and the optimization of a good and caring civilization instead.

you're basically calling me evil because I didn't completely emulate you and "play ball" with you and "ditto" your view to validate you and make you feel smart/good about yourself

so you instead must see me as evil, because you're here serving yourself and not seeking understanding or "to better humanity or optimization of anything".

What YOU think IS what people like "ted turner" thinks as well. He thinks of other people as "evil" and himself as good, and you're having an extremely over-simplified view of everything which you think is very logical - just like he does.

the difference between 'good and evil' is 'service to self' vs. 'service to others', all of which serves creation in the greater scheme of things because every one individual unit is part of the same force/unity/creation(you're literally made of the same energy/particles everyone else is made of and connected with everything else) - so one choosing to "serve one's self" is, in the end, service to 'creation' - and will eventually be a valid part of the grand scheme of things - just as the psychopaths creating massive kingdoms eventually benefit and help others and shape civilization which enable opportunities for others. It's all service to others in the end.

If you agree with Ted Turner that most of us should die to make him feel better then you are correct. I think you have chosen evil. Most of us should live better, happier lives without Ted's tender mercies.

The survivors of the sociopathic kingdoms are far worse off for the experience. their fiery destruction is an experience that should be relegated to the past.

If you agree with Ted Turner that most of us should die to make him feel better then you are correct. I think you have chosen evil. Most of us should live better, happier lives without Ted's tender mercies.

you're making things up as you go along in order to try to feel good by being argumentative with me, while not being able to make simple distinctions in understanding using logic there, dude - nowhere did I say "I agree with ted turner", and you're being really stupid, so we're done here.

The survivors of the sociopathic kingdoms are far worse off for the experience. their fiery destruction is an experience that should be relegated to the past.

yep, that's basically exactly what "ted turner" has to say about war as well - maybe you and he would get along and you could think very highly of yourselves together by thinking of yourselves as good and everyone who disagrees with you as "evil" - you moron.

this subreddit is a pit of retards

You do agree with Ted Turner unless I'm too stupid to be able to read.

I don't need to embellish my side by making it dependent on your level of intelligence.

My argument is that we all in general would like a better future and the thing that stands in the way of that is leadership by sociopaths who don't care about a better future for anyone but themselves.

I say that it's a far better thing for the multitudes of us to all have better futures than for just the most uncaring and destructive to have their way without a care as to the overall functioning of nature or mankind.

Thanks for your demonstration of all of my points.

You do agree with Ted Turner unless I'm too stupid to be able to read.

not only are you 'too stupid to read', as you put it yourself - but you're too stupid to understand even when it's explained to you by the person you're talking about (me)

I don't need to embellish my side by making it dependent on your level of intelligence.

all you're doing with me right now is ignoring reality while trying to serve yourself (and your own idea/feeling about yourself - by trying to make yourself feel intelligent, using me, rather than having any actually meaningful communication with me).

My argument is that we all in general would like a better future and the thing that stands in the way of that is leadership by sociopaths who don't care about a better future for anyone but themselves.

the people you're talking about ("leaders") DO think they're "caring about a better future for anyone but themselves" - because "themselves" - you don't know this because you don't know enough about what you're talking about and you want to have an easy to disprove and simplistic view of the world like "the leaders are all just sociopaths" - when in reality, that's not truly what's happening.

Thanks for your demonstration of all of my points.

it's impossible to talk to someone who is just trying to use you(me) to make themselves feel smart - without really being smart.

The loser in any debate is the first one to call names or change the subject. It's their only option when all else fails.

You think your argument is helped by saying

this subreddit is a pit of retards

If that's all you have I'll be on my way. Have a nice life, Oh wait!

see how you keep just trying to use me to make yourself feel god about yourself?

you're "being evil" right now, and you've been "being evil" since you first started talking to me (self-obsessed, self-serving, self-absorbed, incapable of actually communicating with others) - you feel a need to resort to being petty non-stop, all the time, because you've run into someone who isn't emulating you or letting you feel good about yourself by "dittoing"(repeating) your own ideas back to you.

you're basically just here trying to use other people to serve your own ego - which is pretty much the definition of the word "evil" - and it's exactly what the "sociopaths/psychopaths" you talk about do - it's why I call them shallow/lacking any real depth and certainly lacking the ability or depth necessary to rule the world - just as you lack the depth necessary to have real communication with me, or discuss anything other than "using me to feel good about yourself by ignoring anything I say that doesn't validate your own beliefs".

you're being a very sad person.

Grin.

that's another thing sociopaths do - they feel a need to "prove how unaffected and unmoved they are by the thoughts or feelings of others" - you're being exactly what you think other people are, you are how you judge others =/

There is nothing you have said that means that sociopaths don't run/ruin everything and that that is not the problem. You think the world is better because of their 'order'. They thrive on destroying order and efficiency.It feeds the greed.

All else is just name calling.

If you don't want a better future just go into the past. see ya'

you're literally ignoring everything I say to try to feel good about yourself without actually having to interact on a meaningful level with someone who is not exactly like you - so yeah, "see ya'".

I'm sorry you feel I didn't address your points.

It was hard to see any meaningful level among the insults. You might try more content and less personal attack. I don't matter in the great scheme of things.

I tried originally to put the most content into the fewest words and you called that simplistic. It was and that was the intent. The average attention span is, oops, too late it's gone.

I understand that you feel the situation will eventually end up being for the good of the universe. I contend that is is profoundly bad for humans and since, as far as we know, we are the most organized energy in the universe we will add to it only by choosing order over chaos thereby increasing the maximum universal level of energetic intricacy and organization. Exploding has already been done.

.

The universe is finely balanced in favor of chaos. Things come apart just a little easier than they are put together.Greed causes chaos so greed is to be avoided.

The sociopathic leadership we have, undoes the order that our more in tune minds create. They do it for the purpose of personal greed. Therefore they are the antithesis of the order you think is being created by them.

Let's just jump directly to a better ending rather than wait for more millennia for it to eventually develop on its own.

There are very few non-sociopathic leaders. For a leader that's not sociopathic I suggest Elon Musk.

All I'm saying is that to progress by design rather than haphazardly, we need more of him in leadership and various others like the late Carl Sagan and fewer like deranged sociopaths Dick Cheney, Christian Noyer and Henry Kissinger.

The conspiracies are real. they are committed for greed. They will not end until we change the qualities that we require of our leadership. It's just a decision that's to be made.

so one choosing to "serve one's self" is, in the end, service to 'creation' - and will eventually be a valid part of the grand scheme of things -

That's where you go wrong. Self interest is good and necessary. When you add lying, cheating, stealing or killing to leverage your self interest that's greed. Greed kills. Greed causes every war. Greed does NOT end up being all for the best.

Sure one should compete with their competitor but as Tanya Harding learned, you don't break your competitors kneecap. That's what a sociopath thinks is just normal competition. It isn't all just serving the universe. It's destroying our part of it though. Self interest should be what is pursued. Greed is just wanton destruction for personal gain.

We must change the kind of leadership we have in order to not completely destroy all of the gains that we have collectively worked for.

Sociopaths do not belong in leadership yet they are virtually all we have.

If you characterize me as a sociopath, fine, I don't seek to control anyone, just point the way.

go reread the most instead of being petty and argumentative, you mongoloid, stfu

Wow. Didn't even get past that "insightful" statement on your part.

I tell you what. I'll let you keep thinking you're making sense and just leave this post.

lol. You're useless, man. Sad.

Here you go, son. Learn something.

you're just trying to use me to feel good about yourself on a petty/personal/egotistical level - come back here in about 5 years when you're a grown up and you've stopped interacting with others on the basis of 'trying to feel good about yourself through them without actually being good' or 'trying to feel smart without actually being smart', etc.

i never said you made that claim in those words.

i said you claimed they were involved in it, which is a reasonable conclusion to reach based on the statements you have made here and the similar claims you made in your post yesterday.

if this wasn't the case, then you wouldn't have posted the vulcans wikipedia article as an attempted citation when asked about your initial post here, in which the claim was made.

at least yesterday you were honest enough to admit you made it up. though i now see you deleted all of your comments from that post. i wonder why you'd do that, but i'm not the type to jump to conclusions that aren't based on factual evidence.

boo hoo

fabrications being touted as facts are not worthy of respect, nor are those dishonest individuals who perpetuate ignorance by creating or repeating them