I'm a paragraph. Click here to add your own text and edit me. It's easy.
I'm a paragraph. Click here to add your own text and edit me. It's easy.
I'm a paragraph. Click here to add your own text and edit me. It's easy.
Conspiracies
03 - Legitimate Conspiracies
These aren't conspiracies because I say they are. This is an important distinction. These are conspiracies because they have been proven to be conspiracies by provable or reputable evidence.
By definition according to the Cambridge Dictionary, a conspiracy is:
"a secret plan made by two or more people to do something bad, illegal, or against someone’s wishes"
This conspiracy is pretty disgusting and shows the lengths that the chief of staff of the Army in 1962 was willing to go to in order to justify military intervention in Cuba. This redacted document is the full redacted document gained by the National Security Archive with a freedom of information act.
What makes this a legitimate conspiracy is that there is evidence. You have the redacted document above. This plan was never enacted, but the intention was still there and fits the definition of a conspiracy.
This document is signed by L.L.Lemnitzer. From the Joint Chief of Staff's own website on Lemnitzer:
"In July 1957 he became Vice Chief of Staff of the Army and two years later it's Chief of Staff. Appointed by President Eisenhower, Lemnitzer became the fourth Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff on 1 October 1960."
"General Lemnitzer’s tenure as Chairman ended on 30 September 1962. He became Commander in Chief of the US European Command (CINCEUR) on 1 November 1962 and SACEUR on 1 January 1963."
The source above is quite convincing, but it's worth checking the validity of it. This document was signed: 13th March 1962. We can factually verify with evidence that the person who signed this document was the Chief of Staff for the army during the time of this document's signing.
According to The department of justice documents automatically get declassified after 25 years. The National Security Archive published these documents in 2001. Given the time frame, the nature of declassification, and by verifying the authenticity of the signature, we can quite safely assume these are legitimate documents.
I will not summarise anything in this document but instead, show you little snippets to read for yourself. I encourage you to read the full document.
From these pages, you can see the level of conspiracy
those people in government and high places of power
are capable of considering.
The plan wasn't used, but could you imagine seriously
considering this?
This is the definition of a false flag operation.
The term false flag comes from naval warfare, where
ships would fly the flags of their enemy to lure
them in, then switch colours (flags) and launch a
surprise attack.
False flags have been used throughout history by
governments and monarchs to further their grip
on power and invade other countries.
Now, it's important to note that not everything that
seems fishy can now be a false flag.
What separates the conspiracies from the conspiracy
theories, are that conspiracies are provable with
sufficient evidence. The greater the claim, the greater
the evidence needed to prove it.
What we have here, is an official redacted and
declassified document submitted to the secretary
of defence, signed by the chief of staff of the army.
When we talk about the evidence required, this is the
level of evidence we mean.
This is a pretty well known double conspiracy that happened on the tail of WWII. Operation Paperclip was the process of the CIA enlisting Nazi scientists and engineers to aid them against the Soviet Union after the defeat of Germany. Keep in mind, this is after the Nazis have exterminated millions of Jews in horrific and inhumane ways in concentration camps. These people supported Hitler and the genocide of Jews and others in the war.
I'm not great on history, but that's the gist of it. It didn't take much time to find evidence of this. The information confirming this came from nonother than the CIA itself. Why would the CIA discuss a study accounting for an operation if it didn't exist? They wouldn't.
There is a 600-page report from the Department of Justice called "The Office of Special Investigations: Striving For Accountability In the Aftermath of the Holocaust." Operation paperclip starts on page 331. It's a scan and not text-based so I can't quote it, so I will provide a screenshot.
MKUltra came off of the back of this. It was an attempt by the CIA to attain some kind of mind control by using various drugs on prisoners and others, some of whom didn't know they were being experimented on. From the CIA's own website:
"In 1949, the CIA created the Office of Scientific Intelligence. Its first director, Dr. Willard Machle, traveled to Germany to set up a special program to interrogate Soviet spies. The CIA believed the Russians had developed mind-control programs and wanted to know how US spies would hold up against this capability if caught. He also aimed to explore the feasibility of creating a “Manchurian candidate” through behavioral modification. Thus, Operation Bluebird was born. Bluebird, later called MKULTRA, was a research activity experimenting in behavioral engineering of humans."
"During this program, Dr. Frank Olson, a US Army biological weapons researcher, was given the drug LSD without his knowledge, leading to his death by leaping from a building. DCI Richard Helms ordered much of the documentation destroyed, and the circumstances of his demise remain controversial to this day."
For documents relating to this:
Here's a newspaper clipping from 1982 describing the court cases of a lawyer fighting the CIA on behalf of some experimentees.
Here is a newspaper archive scan from the CIA's website on the same topic.
Most compelling of all (other than the CIA website providing some of this) is the record of the actual court case on February 14th, 1983. District Judge Richard C. Freeman oversaw this case, and the record can be found on the Justia US Law website. CIA Transcript.
Here's a little snippet:
"Between 1955 and 1961, the Central Intelligence Agency (hereinafter "CIA") of the United States Government conducted an "umbrella project" known as Project MKULTRA, under which various subprojects were funded. MKULTRA was "concerned with the research and development of chemical, biological, and radiological materials capable of employment in clandestine operations to control human behavior."
"Subsequently, Dr. Pfeiffer contacted the United States Bureau of Prisons to request permission to conduct the study under the auspices of the United States Public Health Service (hereinafter "PHS") and Emory University at the United States Penitentiary in Atlanta, Georgia.[3] Permission was granted and, in 1956, the study commenced."
Put simply, the CIA experimented on prisoners to try and find a way to influence behaviour, or to put it a cruder way: mind control.
What are the criteria for a genuine conspiracy?
Firstly - It has to be possible in its premise. This is the most obvious thing and most conspiracy theories rely only on this. Is it possible that aliens have visited our planet? Of course. Does that mean they absolutely have? No.
Secondly - It has to be possible in practice. You could call this plausibility. This is a big one. It has to be possible practically. Using the 5G conspiracy as an example. Is it possible for radio and microwave radiation to inflict damage to biology? Yes, it is. However, is the application of 5G at its current application capable of that? The testing and science say no.
Thirdly - It should have evidence in favour of it so strong, that it isn't possible to argue against it with an equal or greater counter-claim. A good example is the 9/11 conspiracy theory claim of "jet fuel can't melt steel beams." That's true, but it can heat it so much that it loses all its strength, and there are examples you can see online of this. The counterclaim is a plausible and quite logical refutal to that singular claim.
I will also finish on this thought:
Refuting one point in a conspiracy doesn't disprove the whole theory, in the same way, that one claim in a conspiracy theory being right doesn't validate the entire conspiracy either.
Take these on a claim by claim basis.
To the alternative-thinkers reading this:
-Something being possible doesn't mean it's plausible.
-Work from point 1, to point 2, and then point 3.
-If you can't defend your claim with plausibility in light of science or fact and have no concrete evidence, then don't defend it.
To those who want to help push back against conspiracy theories:
-Work on a claim by claim basis. You can't disprove a conspiracy theory, you have to defeat each claim one at a time.
-When the alternative-thinker is right on something, or you agree, let them know. Show them you aren't being difficult.
-As you would expect a good quality of evidence, you yourself must also provide it when you can.
That about wraps things up! The remainder of this website will be devoted to dispelling conspiracy theories and providing some supplementary information. I will also include more legitimate conspiracies when and if I decide to look more up.
Who knows what else this website will include, but for now I hope you enjoyed reading it, and I greatly appreciate your time.
You can find the rest of the material in the "Conspiracy Theory Archive" where I will dispel conspiracy theories claim by claim with evidence and plausible counter-claims. You can also check out the Further Reading section for links to advocates for logic, reason, and science, as well as other cool content.
Also, the Further Information section will provide resources for your viewing and reading pleasure which includes:
-YouTube channels for science and philosophy + some debunking
-Social media pages advocating for science and reason
-My old conspiracy posts annotated now after knowing what I know
-Other people's stories who woke up to waking up