Are you a Conspiracy Theorist?

[Dahlia Babe Ailhad]

Conspiracy

1. The act of conspiring.

2. An evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secretly two or more persons; plot.

3. A combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose:
He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government.

4. Law. an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.

5. Any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.




Conspiracy Theory

1. A theory that explains an event as being the result of a plot by a covert group or organization; a belief that a particular unexplained event was caused by such a group.

2. The idea that many important political events or economic and social trends are the products of secret plots that are largely unknown to the general public.

[Dahlia Babe Ailhad]

youtube.com/watch?v=MZZklPnVs-Y

[Dahlia Babe Ailhad]

http://www.hungangels.com/vboard/sho...postcount=3627

[trish]

The term "new world order" has been used to refer to any new period of history evidencing a dramatic change in world political thought and the balance of power. Despite various interpretations of this term, it is primarily associated with the ideological notion of global governance only in the sense of new collective efforts to identify, understand, or address worldwide problems that go beyond the capacity of individual nation-states to solve.

New world order (politics) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Dahlia Babe Ailhad]

Hi trish,

When the Rockefellers and their high-powered billionaire "buddies" talk about a New World Order, i tend to lean my ears in that direction for a definition.

As a conspiracy theorist, myself, i would think that certain entries in the Wiki are misleading or they don't mention enough.

Rockefeller makes it perfectly clear, what it is.

Babe,
xoxo

[Dahlia Babe Ailhad]

youtube.com/watch?v=FuinaIm-kd4

Full interview here.
youtube.com/watch?v=N3NA17CCboA


youtube.com/watch?v=8f85mSQKq6w

[trish]

As a conspiracy theorist, myself, i would think that certain entries in the Wiki are misleading or they don't mention enough.

I apply the same caution to "certain" YouTube postings. It all depends on how one applies the "certain"-filter.

[Dahlia Babe Ailhad]

Hi trish,

I agree that some videos are really misleading - SOME videos.

However, in many youtube videos, we can see people using Mr Rockefeller's OWN book and they've underlined his own words - and in those quotes from the book, in youtube, we can read what the man has written about what he intends to do, or what they all have in store for us.

It's like having the book yourself.

I doubt we can call that sort of a video misleading or that it is a misrepresentation of what Mr Rockefeller says he wants to do.
Can't argue with the book that Rockefeller wrote - in English.

I hope you don't say that because the person quoting from the book on youtube in lying JUST because it's on youtube.

Babe,
xoxo

[broncofan]

The problem is that these quotes or admissions don't actually prove that what they assert is true. David Rockefeller could say he has been running one world government and it would not change the fact that no such institution exists. The only reason people find these quotes useful is because they think they're an admission against interest. But what one person says is not a substitute for the actual facts objectively confirming that what they say is true.

I can't tell you how many times I've seen people try to parse what some guy named Silverstein has said in an attempt to prove that he blew up the wtc for insurance money. If somebody has carried out something so dastardly and so elaborate, you'd think you'd have more than a few aspirational, perhaps misguided quotations to wrench out of context.

I don't doubt that Rockefeller thinks he and his friends know what's best for everyone and want their money to equal influence, which it does to some extent, but they are not puppeteers pulling the strings behind every governmental action by referendum. If he wants it to be the case, it doesn't make it the case. If he thinks it's the case, it also doesn't make it so.

[broncofan]

As a conclusion to that last post, let me say one more thing. A "confession" is very good circumstantial evidence of guilt when there are tangible and obvious consequences for committing the crime the person is confessing to. But when someone is admitting moral guilt without any consequence and speaking extemporaneously, their self-incriminatory statements do not provide any great assurance of truth.

Also, imagine that a man confesses to a crime but is known to be in another country at the time. What speaks more loudly, his words or his location? If someone is not speaking with his liberty at stake then what assurance is there that his statement is true? He is not making the statement in spite of the prospect of lifetime confinement...so what is the corroboration? The facts themselves speak louder than one man's words.