Can only be seen from within Germany: May 13th 2018 "titel, thesen, temperamente" ARD (TV of public law) https://www.daserste.de/information...13-verschwoerungstheorien-video-100.html Curiously enough this broadcast claims that Donald Trump is a conspiracy theorist. Also, Wladimir Putin comes close to a conspiracy theorist. And guess, who is not a conspiracy theorist? The German public respectively the German government. They are only noble. This is hiding the fact that relating to the TV of public law it is understood: "Bundesrechtliche Vorschriften beziehen sich hauptsächlich auf technische Fragestellungen (Sendeanlagen) und Teilaspekte des Programms, insbesondere den Bereich der auswärtigen Angelegenheiten." (Eichhorn, Peter, Verwaltungslexikon, Baden-Baden 1991, page 725) "Federal provisions are relating mainly to technical issues (transmitters) and partial aspects of the program, especially in the field of foreign affairs." (Translated by Denglisch) If you look to the last snapshot below you may read a comment which really describes the problem to the whole discussion. [video:youtube]https://youtu.be/wQQbM605cJg[/video]
below: written before May 13th 2018 https://www.uni-tuebingen.de/fakult...office-hours/prof-dr-michael-butter.html http://www.cost.eu/about_cost/who/(type)/5/(wid)/52993 B.A. Thesis on "The Rise of the Tough Guy": Cultural Anxieties and Sexual Ambiguities in Raymond Chandler's Farewell, My Lovely M.A. Thesis on Fragile White Masculinities in 1990s American Film Work: "Cooperation and correspondence with 140 international researchers from 36 European countries" https://de.linkedin.com/in/marina-lieb-13a02299/de
"Subjects" making fun of their study "object": "BILDERBERG MEETING 30-01-2018 The next Action Meeting will take place from May 25 to 26, 2018 at the Hotel de Bilderberg, Oosterbeek, Netherlands. A preliminary program will be made available soon." https://conspiracytheories.eu/2018/01/30/bilderberg-meeting/
"Und Butter unternimmt den Versuch, die kritischen Recherchen hierzu mit einer dicken Decke von Wahnhaftigkeits-Schelte zuzudecken und zu ersticken." (Seite 7) Dipl.-Psych. Klaus Schlagmann "Butter makes a try, to cover up critical researches with a thick blanket of delusionality scolding and to suffocate them." (Page 7) (translated by Denglisch)
Dipl.-Psych. Schlagmann: "Ein durchsichtiges Manöver, um mit einem kleinen Scherz von der Ungeheuerlichkeit abzulenken, die er selbst mit seinem 'Interview' begeht: Es gibt unfassbare Vorgänge im politischen Raum, belegt durch eine Fülle offensichtlicher Indizien, durch das Internet immer leichter mit eigenen Augen, Ohren und Verstand in Sekunden nachzuvollziehen, von Fachleuten durchschaut." (Seite 7) "A transparent maneuver to distract from the monstrosity which he himself is committing with his 'Interview' with a little joke: There are incomprehensible events in the political sphere, proved by an abundancy of obvious clues, through the internet always easier accountable with own eyes, ears and sense within seconds, figured out by experts." (Page 7) (translated by Denglisch)
Psychologist (Master) Klaus Schlagmann, Saarbrücken, Saarland, Germany about an interview with Prof. Dr. Michael Butter regarding the topic "conspiracy theories". Schlagmann himself relates rather to the term "conspiracy hypothesis" than to the term "conspiracy theories". Butter states that there is a fragmentation in public opinion nowadays. He does not handle the truth value of the single fragments in public opinion as he has "no time" for that. His view to these fragments is that of a perspective as a cultural scientist.
This view tries to segregate perspectives beyond the traditional scheme to a milieu of a subculture - therefore the collective term of "conspiracy theory" for all kinds of unusual interpretations of reality. The collectivation of these distinctive interpretations of reality serves the purpose which is called in sociology "stratification". Websites like "Metabunk", "Psiram" or "Esowatch" and the like have the purpose to stratify these interpretations of reality to a collective group. All these artificially constructed group members have in common that they disturb the recycling intentions of established economic interests. The purpose is to disencourage any real discussion about the truth value of these unusual perspectives, although at least parts of them are in fact real science.
Instead of it these topics are rediculized in total. There is a refusal to discuss even objective facts (for example high values of Aluminum, Barium, Titanium or Strontium in rainwater). ( http://globalskywatch.com/chemtrails/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm&c=24#TestResults ) Thus, these facts don't have the chance to enter the realm of the scientific community as it is signaled to them that certain kinds of topics are tabooed and they are threatened to be psychiatrized and kicked out. ( Manuel Abegglen, MSc: PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERIZATION OF AIRCRAFT ENGINE EXHAUST PARTICLES http://globalskywatch.com/chemtrails/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=18158#Post18158 ) This threat of psychiatrization is real and not merely fiction as the German version of Wikipedia states itself: "Psychologisch lassen sich Verschwörungstheorien als krankhafte Paranoia deuten, wenngleich die Mehrzahl der Forscher den Anhängern von Verschwörungstheorien keine Geisteskrankheit unterstellt." https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verschwörungstheorie (Version of February 9th 2018) (("Psychologically conspiracy theories may be construed as irrational paranoia, though the majority of researchers doesn't imply a mental alienation to the proponents of conspiracy theories.") translated by Denglisch) Nevertheless, in public context the psychiatrization of proponents of certain topics is imminent as the following video broadcasted by the ZDF (TV of public law) shows:
ZDFinfo: Verschwörungstheorien - Leben im Wahn 11.12.2015 (ZDFinfo: Conspiracy theory - living in delirium - December 11th 2015, translated by Denglisch)
This Soviet strategy of exclusion is a relict of the cold war when members of the scientific community - such as Sacharov or others - were turned over to psychiatry trying to put them in line again or to quiet them down.
The background of this practice in the Soviet Union was the following: "Article 58-10 of the Stalin-era Criminal Code, 'Anti-Soviet agitation', was to a considerable degree preserved in the new 1958 RSFSR Criminal Code as Article 70 'Anti-Soviet agitation and propaganda'. In 1967, a weaker law, Article 190-1 'Dissemination of fabrications known to be false, which defame the Soviet political and social system', was added to the RSFSR Criminal Code. These laws were frequently applied in conjunction with the system of diagnosis for mental illness, developed by Academician Andrei Snezhnevsky. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrei_Snezhnevsky , Denglisch) Together they established a framework within which non-standard beliefs could easily be defined as a criminal offence and the basis, subsequently, for a psychiatric diagnosis.[7]" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_abuse_of_psychiatry_in_the_Soviet_Union
After 1953, there was a systemic need for a political replacement of the Gulag-system and as Nikita Sergejewitsch Khrushchev put it in the state newspaper "Pravda" (Truth) of May 24th 1959 page 2: "A crime is deviation from generally recognized standards of behaviour frequently caused by mental disorder. Can there be diseases, nervous disorders among certain people in a Communist society? Evidently, yes. If that is so, then there will be also be offences, which are characteristic of people with abnormal minds. Of those who might start calling for opposition to Communism on this basis, we can say that clearly their mental state is not normal." Quoted after: Knapp, Martin,McDaid, David,Mossialos, Elias, Mental health policy and practice across Europe : the future direction of mental health care, Maidenhead 2007, ISBN 0-335-21468-1, 978-0-335-21468-6, page 402 http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/748926629
As many abilities of the Soviet Union were put on the market after 1991 also this idea of strategic psychiatrization is used in the social engineering business of the west - not with the nowadays web meaning of "social engineering". The irony: the nowadays inclusion policy. First exclusion, then inclusion, like a module in software engineering. Of course, to lower wages.
Also, Dr. Thomas Grüter, MD, ( http://www.thomasgrueter.de/vitatg.html ) states the factual psychiatrization of proponents of so-called conspiracy theories by the media: "Grüter, so wird deutlich, betrachtet Verschwörungstheorien mit Skepsis, warnt aber zugleich vor einer Psychiatrisierung derjenigen, die eine Verschwörungstheorie vertreten, wie es mitunter in den Medien durch Journalisten vorgenommen wird." https://www.heise.de/tp/features/Wa...erungsverdacht-glaubwuerdig-3395562.html "Grüter, it becomes clear, looks at conspiracy theories with skepticism, at the same time he is warning before the psychiatrization of those who are proposing a conspiracy theory, how it is being done by journalists in the media." (translated by Denglisch)
The usage of psychiatrization as a political weapon is not that far away as the statement of the German judge Rudolf Heindl shows:
But again, also this judge - living and working in the Bavarian province - had to live with the "sprachregelung" Conspiracy theory: "Rudolf Heindl hat sich durch seine Kritik an der bayerischen Justiz, wobei er auch vor Verschwörungstheorien nicht Halt machte, bis zum Schluss auch viel Ärger eingehandelt." https://n-land.de/news/lauf/rudolf-heindl "Rudolf Heindl has made with his criticism around the Bavarian judicial system himself a lot of trouble whereas he did not hesitate to use conspiracy theories for it." (translated by Denglisch) For the uninformed: Heindl was arrested himself by the police and brought to the closed psychiatric department of the local hospital where the psychiatrists refused the signature of a prepared examination paper of the state authorities in Munich.
As we know from Jack Nicholson's role this topic of legal insecurity by potential threats of getting in touch with psychiatrics is not just a German or a Soviet problem, it's a problem of relationship between the government and the individual:
Two perspective are clashing: The one side calls it conspiracy theory the other side calls it political abuse.
One may suspect that the main theoretical force of psychiatrization of the topic of "conspiracy" - at least in Germany - is coming from a psychologist with the name Sebastian Bartoschek who got his PhD by writing his thesis "Bekanntheit von und Zustimmung zu Verschwörungstheorien" ( http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/902883419 ) "Prominence of and approval to conspiracy theories" at the Westfälischen Wilhelms-University in Münster, Northrhine-Westfalia, Germany. One thing - he did - is the introduction of the concept of transliminality into the German public discussion for giving systemic amunition in public justification for the mere theorizing of conspiracies instead of their investigations. The concept of transliminality was developed by the Australian Michael Thalbournes. "High degrees of this trait have been shown by Thalbourne to be associated with increased tendency to mystical experience, greater creativity, and greater belief in the paranormal, but Thalbourne has also found evidence that transliminality may be positively correlated with psychoticism." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transliminality
Psychoticism is one main center of attention of psychiatry. In fact, biologically seen you have only 0,5 % of the population which is schizophrenic. Schizophrenia includes the phenomenon of psychosis. What Andrei Snezhnevsky did in the Soviet Union was the introduction of the term "sluggish schizophrenia". "The prevalence of Snezhnevsky’s theories directly led to a broadening of the boundaries of disease such that even the mildest behavioral change could be interpreted as indication of mental disorder.[8]:40" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrei_Snezhnevsky That way you - seen from the point of view as a government - are able to define a broader part of the populace as schizophrenic if it is politically opportune.
But you may also get psychotic when your environment is that sick that it makes you sick. This was stated in a judicial decision of the Oberlandesgericht (regional appeal court) Hamm, Northrhine-Westfalia in the year 1977 which had to deal with a person who survived Auschwitz.
When Bartoschek introduces this kind of method into the discussion of phenomenons he is not interested in disputing about the origins of the white stripes in the sky or about rain water tests, soil tests, drinking water tests, hair tests, blood tests and the like. For him these facts are fake facts ( http://globalskywatch.com/chemtrails/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=18144#Post18144 ) and the efforts to investigate these phenomenons are an expression of psychosis. There is not even a common discussion about the methods of these tests. There is no interest in discussing this subject with seriosity and with the chance to disprove in one way or the other the seriosity of these tests. The refusal of serious discussion says it pretty much all. And: if persons are refusing to investigate facts with the method of claiming that these facts are fake facts without proving that these facts are fake facts because they don't have enough personell capacity (Butter: "No time.") to investigate around the claimed "fake facts" why are they starting such a discussion without solid background at the first place? They themselves are basing their claims on pure belief. But a belief is not a fact.
This is obviously forgotten or by purpose of a new book "Die informierte Gesellschaft und ihre Feinde: Warum die Digitalisierung unsere Demokratie gefährdet" ("The informed society and its enemies: Why the digitalization is endangering our democracy") by Stephan Russ-Mohl. ( http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/990782280 ) The title of the book was derived from Poppers famous work "The Open Society and its enemies". This is obvious. In difference to Popper Russ-Mohls central topic is Fake News. And as we know from the documentary "Overcast" ( http://globalskywatch.com/chemtrails/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=19497#Post19497 ) and others the official point of view by the governmental authorities is that geoengineering is actually not existing already. Therefore, any news about it would be degraded to "Fake news". Russ-Mohl obviously does not know anything about Poppers point of view accepting the existence of conspiracies. Nevertheless, he calls his book "The informed society and its enemies" negating the existence of already ongoing geoengineering by supporting the term "Fake news" which is nothing else but a battle cry. In fact, Russ-Mohl is depending on the oligopolistic structures within the media economy and is satisfying a market created by this same media economy. Therefore it can't be objective. Right now, there are one million persons in the air - every day worldwide. ( https://vimeo.com/240441628 ) The air traffic industry is strategically more powerful than the auto industry as we have seen it with the Diesel affair. Ecological Problems around this air traffic industry are tabooed as we see it with cabin air problems ( http://globalskywatch.com/chemtrails/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=12328#Post12328 ) or the widespread usage of air flights by voters of the green party ( http://www.spiegel.de/wirtschaft/un...ten-rekord-bei-flugreisen-a-1002376.html ) obviously not being conscious of the contradiction in their own behaviour. This contradiction is even higher if you look to the political goal of the Greens. This goal leads to the abolition of the combustion engine in the auto industry while the voters of the Green party are still using the combustion engine of airplanes massively. And who is paying for this change from combustion engine to other kinds of drive form?
Russ-Mohl respects his economic dependency. The creation of a label with the name "Fake news" creates a structure of a ban on thinking. The propaganda around this term is strengthening this ban. The term creation has mainly the purpose to preserve economic structures of the media markets. "Journalism" is treated as a brand for protecting itself from unpleasant questions within the "freeworld". In direct dictatorships the ruler may express his view and everybody is knuckling under to him afterwards. In democracies the direct tortious interference is little bit more difficult. Instead of it there are other mechanisms to work with. The economics at the first place.
If you compare the number of people, who are asking themselves what is going on, with the worldwide average occurrence of schizophrenia within the world population one may ask him- or herself if Bartoschek himself has reached meanwhile the point of no return as a victim of exogenous psychosis as there are so many asking themselves what is going on and have therefore a different perception than he has.
In other words: journalists like Bartoschek are working unscientifically and are merely using their mainstream media might to look at these from the mainstream distinct opinions. Probably they can't act in a different way as they are not able to counter the arguments of the divergent opinion. They are just not informed enough to discuss the content what geoengineering consists of. It is energetically much easier to discredit the topic by utilization of the common media impact.
Irene Neverla - Professor for journalistic and communication at the University of Hamburg - states that journalism is a "cultural producer". (Lilienthal, Volker; Neverla, Irene; Lügenpresse, Köln 2017, page 32 ( http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1009126871 )) The culture is produced by "Agenda Setting" and "Framing".
Therefore, the claim of journalists to represent the common populace when they are doing their work is just a myth of a "public lie". THEY respective the owners of the media are selecting the topics to be dealt with in public AND they - at the same time - are doing the interpretation of the found facts of the selected topics into the cultural context.
In fact, once a professor for political science (Cologne, Germany) - Thomas Jäger ( https://www.wiso.uni-koeln.de/de/forschung/find-an-expert/experts/prof-dr-thomas-jaeger/ ) - invited to the TV-broadcaster PHOENIX (TV of public law), stated that the "public" can only stand six topics at the same time. Jäger is editor of the book "Sicherheit und Medien". ("Security and media") ( http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/465341262 ) Therefore, he looks with his description through the eyes of the security state. And if you look yourself to the reality you may confirm that Jäger is describing the reality with his analysis.
This amount of only six topics being handled with at the same time in the mass media is not really much. But this statement shows how efficient the "published opinion" is working. But who is deciding that enough is enough regarding to the number of topics dealt with at the same time?
The media represented by the journalists - whereas many of them are not journalists anymore but infotainers - decides what is on the agenda and what is not.
"Kommunikationswissenschaftlich ausgedrückt hieße dies, dass die Funktion des 'Agenda Settings' - die Themenwahl und Priorisierung bestimmter Themen - und die Funktion des 'Framings' - die Rahmen von Problemlagen und der Meinungsvermittlung - vom Journalismus unzureichend erfüllt würden." (Lilienthal, Volker; Neverla, Irena; Page 34) "Communication scientifically expressed this means that the function of the 'agenda setting' - the selection of topics and the priorization of determined topics - and the function of the 'framing' - the frame of problem situations and the opinion mediation - would be fulfilled inadequately." (Translated by Denglisch)
Quite the opposite of the claim of power by the mass media when they are telling the public that they are representing the populace by asking politician about issues as Marietta Slomka of the ZDF (TV of public law) did for example one month after the last parliamentary elections.
In reality, the mass media is not representing the populace. They are merely producing news for anonymous markets.
In this context it is of interest what Dirk Müller - Nickname: Mr. Dax (German stock exchange indice) - is telling in Minute: 16 Second: 33:
He is refering to Richard Nikolaus Graf Coudenhove-Kalergi - one of the founder of the EU - who wrote - according to Müller - that in reality we don't have a democracy but a plutocracy. If such a plutocracy is real, it is plausible that the media business is the first address of influence of the upper class.
But not only Coudenhove-Kalergi told the truth. The French Socialist Jean Monnet was publicly and openly against democratic structures for the European Union being afraid of the impossibility to unite Europe through democratic structures.
Now, we have at least 70 percent new German laws coming from undemo-cratic structures within the EU which get only democratized by rubber-stamping of the German Parliaments "Bundestag" and "Bundesrat".
For the reason of market making the psychiatrization, criminalization of the divergent opinions as extremists or the creation of news terms like "echo spaces" are serving the purpose to preserve the markets of the media industry and to keep their markets on line.
Nevertheless, there is a certain success in the effort to get a grip on the "objectification" - seen from the view of those who try to investigate the phenomenon of "Geoengineering" - of the conspiracy "problem" (as seen from the perspective of the upper class) through the mixture of single topics under an umbrella term through hierarchization. The umbrella term - in this case the term "conspiracy theory" - takes in the positive as well as the negative emotional tensions of the single topics below. You only have to include more topics with more negative emotional tensions to lower the attractivity of a determined topic.
For that reason there is now an effort to cultivate the successes of public discussion of geoengineering into a form of a mixture with other topics which are less successful in objectification of their topics to a sociological stratum of "conspiracy theorists" which is excluded from a scientific approach. This exclusion mirrors the economic reality within the scientific community as they get their money from companies and the government. The latter one is - at the same time - also dependent of the economic development and as representative of the state dependent from the stability of that same state.
Therefore the effort of the European Union to get a hand on that topic as many European countries respectively their governments have the problem of the distribution of policy-"destabilizing" unpleasant ideas. Politician as publicly known stakeholders of policies are only media workers in reality. The real work of policymaking is done by ministerial bureaucracies which are doing their job according to the motto: "We don't care who is our boss under our rule." as the example of democratically not legitimized General Secretary Martin Selmayr - grandson of the military generals Josef Selmayr und Heinz Gaedcke - shows. (Compare the article "Die Steilvorlage" of "DIE ZEIT", March 15th 2018, page 12) ( http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/879708189 ) An example for a scientific bureaucrat - who is taking "responsibility" - is given by Ulrike Niemeier of the Max-Planck-Institute for Meteorology ( http://globalskywatch.com/chemtrails/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=19880#Post19880 ). But who gave her the authority and the legal legitimization of taking "responsibility"?
As the members of the a little bit (this means that the representation of the populace within the EU is not given) more democratic European Parliament are under pressure themselves ( http://globalskywatch.com/chemtrails/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=19154#Post19154 ) this kind of project (Michael Butter) shows that the EU-project above - Comparative Analysis of Conspiracy Theories(COMPACT) - can be originated in the undemocratic European Council which hardly appears in public but has in reality the real power within the European Union. The single European national governments don't know how to treat the topic of Chemtrails or other realistic "Conspiracy theories" beyond the usual media channels.
And it is not by random that persons like Schipowski or Butter - both with an academic grade as or working as a "cultural scientist" - are put on the topic of "Chemtrails" professionally. Truth or not Truth is not their topic. It would be better for the truth that this question ought to be dealt with physicists who have didactic abilities for proving the untruth of the made assumptions in the sky. Instead this topic is made to be a topic of cultural hegemony. As it has to be prevented to discuss the topic by facts you achieve this goal of cultural hegemony only by cultural war. And this - in fact - is the opposite of the "Open Society" of Sir Karl Raimund Popper who invented originally the term "conspiracy theory" in the year 1945. This classification of "Geoengineering" as a topic of "cultural war" is the equivalence to its security sensitivity we have learnt from Prof. Thomas Jäger (Cologne) with his "Six-topics"-assumption.
On the one hand "Popper acknowledged that genuine conspiracies do exist,[69]" on the other hand he "argued that totalitarianism was founded on 'conspiracy theories' which drew on imaginary plots driven by paranoid scenarios predicated on tribalism, chauvinism, or racism". ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_theory ) The Open Society and Its Enemies Volume 2: The High Tide of Prophecy: Hegel, Marx and the Aftermath" by Karl Raimund Popper (Originally published 1945) http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/864097443
In other words the aura of the great and influential thinker Karl Popper of the post-war world is being used through his terminology to fight a cultural war against dissident thinking. Popper stated: "(...) I do not wish to imply that conspiracies never happen. On the contrary, they are typical social phenomena. (...)" http://lachlan.bluehaze.com.au/books/popper_open_society.html A typical social phenomena does not mean that it occurs often. It means out of many social phenomena there is one social phenomenon which occurs at least that often that it is being categorized. The conclusion: The real world does not consist only of conspiracies but conspiracies occur that often that they are one category in social contexts out of many and one has to take in account the possibility of a social phenomenon as a conspiracy. The categorization as a conspiracy does not say anything about the likeliness of the social phenomenon "conspiracy".
Karl Popper - A talk (1974)
Karl Popper - Das Prinzip Kritik in der Offenen Gesellschaft (Gespräch)
The assumption of the possibility of the existence of a conspiracy is similiar to the mathematical assumption of probabilities. In the assessment of situations as probable or not probable you use mathematics which give you exact results but saying at the same time that the next event in a set of equally structured possible events is only equally possible as the other equally structured possible events may occur. In reality, mathematics give you the information that you don't know nothing exactly about the future. Only the possibility that this mathematically investigated event may occur. The only truth into this insight is, that you are not allowed to say that this specifically looked at event can not happen. At least, this tiny information is an information.
Similiar the social phenomenon "conspiracy": "Conspiracies occur, it must be admitted. But the striking fact which, in spite of their occurrence, disproved the conspiracy theory is that few of these conspiracies are ultimately successful." (Karl Popper) http://lachlan.bluehaze.com.au/books/popper_open_society.html This statement of Popper is indeed interesting. It includes the opinion that many - the limit is the category "typical" - conspiracies may occur in reality. BUT not every conspiracy is successful. In fact, not even the majority of them is successful. And the number of occuring conspiracies is that high that you may tell a conspirator: "Nice try." - because conspiracies are "typical".
You need only little to recognize that "conspiring" is part of human nature. In the U.S. the state gives the "conspiracy" even an official status of being possible as the penal code knows the criminal offence of "conspiracy". ( https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/371 , https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/conspiracy , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_(criminal) , https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conspiracy_against_rights ) Therefore, the U.S.-american lawmaker - including the U.S.-President - is a "conspiracy theorist" as he or she had adopted this law. Admitting that a "conspiracy" is generally possible but will be sanctioned by society.
And as there is so much fighting by the mass media against the assumption of the existence of "conspiracies" one may suspect that there are - to the contrary - conspiracies in reality, right now. You just don't know where they are and when they are occuring. This is because of the nature of the secrecy which is inherent to every conspiracy.
It is similiar to Donald Rumsfeld's preemptive thinking in terms of terrorism: "Reports that say that something hasn't happened are always interesting to me, because as we know, there are known knowns; there are things we know we know. We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns – the ones we don't know we don't know. And if one looks throughout the history of our country and other free countries, it is the latter category that tend to be the difficult ones.[1]" DoD News Briefing - Secretary Rumsfeld and Gen. Myers Presenter: Secretary of Defense Donald H. Rumsfeld February 12, 2002 11:30 AM EDT http://archive.defense.gov/Transcripts/Transcript.aspx?TranscriptID=2636 Ultimately, this kind of thinking comes from the treaty of Rio de Janeiro, where the foundation was laid down for the CO²-tourism for the government bureaucracies worldwide.
Such a thing like the existence of regular weather modification can only be argued for in the kind of plausible assumptions. And one plausible reason for weather modification is its military advantage.
You may compare this kind of governmental conduct of negligence of and fighting against topics with the policy of opaque atomic states ( http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/474892652 ) which are running this kind of policy for the purpose of being protected as Israels One-atomic-bomb-state goal is or India who claims its global status this way and trying to prevent an atomic arms race on the Indian subcontinent at the same time.
If there was an "opaque" policy regarding nuclear weapons why should there not be an "opaque" policy of weather modification?
Opaqueness has diverse advantages. And one or more advantages of this kind of governmental policy were the reason(s) of the opaqueness of these weather modifications or other programs.
If these assumptions are being ignored publicly you may only conclude that this ignorance is probably part of the assumed conspiracy. What else one may conclude if a rational discussion of plausible observations is being refused? The prestigious psychologist Prof. Dr. Hans-Jürgen Eysenck had a similiar problem at his times: http://globalskywatch.com/chemtrails/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=19906#Post19906 And the discussion about this described phenomenon is still being refused.
Diplom-Psychologe (official title) Klaus Schlagmann with own psychotherapeutic practice - a youtube document as an impression of his person:
In 2012 Prof. Dr. Gertrud Höhler (Professor in Literature Science) published a book named "Die Patin" (The Godmother). Höhler describes in this book her view of Merkel's policymaking. Among other things Höhler accuses Merkel to rebuild Germany in a way to abolish the democracy in Germany.
The development of the relationship between Merkel and Höhler is therefore of interest as Höhler was clearly part of the German political establishment.
Now, after the year 2012, Prof. Dr. Gertrud Höhler has not been appearing in German TV of public law. Obviously, there is a ban on Gertrud Höhler now.
Höhler did not claim any political ambitions for herself as she has preferred her "freedom" already during the Kohl-period.
The reaction of Merkel towards the person Höhler shows the truth value of Höhler's analysis of Merkel's conduct is. Obviously, Höhler has hit Merkel right in her heart.
Gertrud Höhler Sistema Merkel : come la cancelliera mette in pericolo la Germania e l'Europa Roma : Castelvecchi, 2012. http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/898680896
Roth, Jürgen Der stille Putsch Wie eine geheime Elite aus Wirtschaft und Politik sich Europa und unser Land unter den Nagel reißt München Heyne, W 2016 http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/932020320
"Gaius Cassius Longinus Marcus Junius Brutus Servius Sulpicius Galba Quintus Ligarius Lucius Minucius Basilus Gaius Servilius Casca (brother of Publius Servilius Casca Longus) Publius Servilius Casca Longus (brother of Gaius Servilius Casca and the one responsible for the first stab) Decimus Junius Brutus Albinus Lucius Tillius Cimber Gaius Trebonius Lucius Cassius Longinus (brother of Gaius Cassius Longinus) Gaius Cassius Parmensis Caecilius (brother of Bucolianus) Bucolianus (brother of Caecilius) Rubrius Ruga Marcus Spurius Publius Sextius Naso Lucius Pontius Aquila Petronius Decimus Turullius Pacuvius Antistius Labeo Lucius Cornelius Cinna (son of 4 time consul of the same name)" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assassination_of_Julius_Caesar
"Verschwörung, geheimer Plan, geheime Verbindung mehrerer, bes. gegen den Staat(=Geheimbündelei, -> Komplott)" Dtv Lexikon : ein Konversationslexikon in 20 Bänden. München 1973 Volume 19, Page 198 (with the permission of F.A. Brockhaus, Wiesbaden) München : Deutscher Taschenbuch Verlag, 1966-1968 http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/896674400
"Conspiracy, secret plan, secret connection of several persons, especially against the state(conspiracy, secret societies, -> complot)" (Translated by Denglisch)
This definition of the year 1973 has the value that it is not burdened by the nowadays public discussions. You may guess that this kind of definition is valuefree - at least for the situation of today.
According to this definition of "Conspiracy" a conspiracy is usually not directed against the people of the state but against the organization of the state which we normally understand as the "government".
Today, in the exercise of the mass media the word "Conspiracy" is used - in connection with the term "Conspiracy theory" - as suspected secret conduct of the organization of the state (government) toward its state people which a state is constituted of as public policies to the people are being suspected to harm - not enhancing - the populace. That way public policies get the connotation of a "conspiracy". But as we know a "conspiracy" is by definition mainly directed towards the organisation of the state - the government. This reframing of the meaning of public policies into the meaning of a "conspiratorial" conduct of the government distracts the attention of the public from the fact that many public policies - mainly done by the unelected "deep state" - are against the interests of many persons. To avoid public discussion of these public policies they have to be blocked psychologically. And the method of doing so is the accusation of discoverers of secrets as "Conspiracy theorists".
As Prof. Winfried Schuhn, Wehrwissenschaftliches Institut für Schutztechnologien ( https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wehrwissenschaftliches_Institut_für_Schutztechnologien_–_ABC-Schutz longlink.com ), explains the value of "secrets":
Minute: 0 Second: 45
"Wenn wir heute alles offenlegen würden, hätten wir den Schaden, was die Bundeswehr kann, aber nicht den Nutzen, daß kein Geheimnis mehr dahinter gewittert würde." "If we would disclose anything today, we had the damage, that it is known what the 'Bundeswehr' is able to do, but would not receive the benefit of the insecurity through secrecy." (Translated by Denglisch)
The concept of "conspiracy" is valuable because this kind of "reality" creates the insecurity needed to benefit from secrets.
The inversion of the original meaning of the word "conspiracy" - as this original meaning of the word "conspiracy" is being changed into the meaning that the organisation of the state - the government - is conspiring against its people - has the purpose of confusion. It is not possible for the government by definition of the word "conspiracy" to conspire against its people - at least in democratic states. The reframing of the original meaning of the word "conspiracy" has led to a consciousness that not groups of the populace - who are still nevertheless silently conspiring against the state (for example the European Roundtables and the like) - are conspiring against the state but the state itself via its policies is conspiring against its people. This impossibility by definition produces psychological tensions which are quieting down any attempt of public discussion.
The change in the usage of the word of "conspiracy" has two effects: First: You forget to discuss that parts of the people (whoever it may be) are conspiring against the state, because the psychological efficacy of the original meaning of "conspiracy" is still working. Second: A conspiracy of the organisation of the state against its state people sounds unbelievable preposterous as it is controlled by elections. Therefore people who think that way must be mentally ill. And nobody wants to be mentally ill! Therefore the common man develops a psychological blockade even to think about it.
And therefore the constant reiteration of the language regime "Conspiracy theory" in the mass media.
"Verschwörung die, geheime Verbindung mehrerer Personen, bes. gegen den Staat oder seine Einrichtungen; kann die Tatbestände des -> Hochverrats oder der Staatsgefährdung oder der ->Geheimbünde erfüllen."
"Conspiracy, the, secret connection of several persons, especially against the state or its institutions; it can fulfil the statement of facts of ->high treason or threat to the security of the state or secret societies." (Translation by Denglisch)
(1) Wer es unternimmt, mit Gewalt oder durch Drohung mit Gewalt 1. den Bestand der Bundesrepublik Deutschland zu beeinträchtigen oder 2. die auf dem Grundgesetz der Bundesrepublik Deutschland beruhende verfassungsmäßige Ordnung zu ändern,
wird mit lebenslanger Freiheitsstrafe oder mit Freiheitsstrafe nicht unter zehn Jahren bestraft.
(1) Who is undertaking, with violence or by threatening with violence 1. to impair the existence of the Federal Republic of Germany or 2. to change the constitutional order of the "basic law" (Grundgesetz) of the Federal Republic of Germany
will be punished with lifelong custodial sentence not under ten years.
(2) In minor hard cases the penalty of custodial sentence is between one year up to ten years." (Translation by Denglisch)
If you put the term "Conspiracy" in connection with the real meaning within the judicial context, a "Conspiracy Theorist" is a contradiction in itself. Because according to the above definition of being a "Conspirator" you are not allowed just to theorize as a "Conspirator". As a real "Conspirator" in the judicial sense you have to "threaten" to do real actions or act in a certain manner. If you don't do one of these two conducts you are not a "Conspirator" at all. At least not for the reason of "High Treason". Thus persons who suspect that there are "conspiracies" are not subject of the law at all. And "Conspirators" themselves have to "threaten" at least to be subject of the law. ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intimidation )
A mere theorist of conspiracies - as he is an observer - has no problems with the penal code at all. To the contrary the conspiracy theorist is the guardian of the law. This quality of the conspiracy theorist is even more valuable as factual conspirators in the sense of the penal code are awaiting such a long custodial sentence. The conspiracy theorist gives only the hint other people are no able to give or don't want to give. If this is so one has to ask oneself why there is such a trouble around the creative language regime of "Conspiracy theory". For obvious reasons informal groups like the "European Round Table" are scheming something. And obviously this something has in fact the judicial quality of a "Conspiracy" as they try to hide their "informal" activities. As "conspiracies" are usually handled in secrecy the public denial of the existence of "conspiracies" creates suspicion.
There is a refusal to discuss the stripes in the sky public.
These stripes may be explained differently from how these stripes are explained by the sky observers. But(!) they are ignored at all. They are not even subject of discussion. This is suspicious.
And in fact these stripes are violent because of their content in nano size although they don't appear violent at the first glimpse at all. Thus the creators of such stripes are subject of the law above. The insurance industry refuse to give coverage on contexts with nano materials.
What would you do if you would be subject to this law?
Rossum, Walter van Die Tagesshow : wie man in 15 Minuten die Welt unbegreiflich macht Köln 2007 ISBN 978-3-462-03951-1 http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/254231196
As the internet is originally mainly created by American culture it is obvious that its different aspects penetrate the global public consciousness produced by the internet.
In that way the word "Conspiracy" in connection with the term "Conspiracy theory" experienced a career in public discussions.
For that reason it is useful to objectify this meanwhile commonly used term by showing its historical and cultural background.
One point to be made is that the same word has different impacts within different cultural contexts as criminal law shows the extent of each society to marginalize determined circumstances from commonly as useful recognized goods.
One marginalized good in Anglo-Saxon jurisdiction is "Conspiracy". Therefore, this word is emotionally loaded because it is being defined as criminal.
You don't have this kind of emotional charge of the word "conspiracy" in the European continental jurisdiction.
Nevertheless, it is being used in the public controversy over different topics to marginalize single persons as weirdos. That way the word "Conspiracy" became a way to marginalize people without criminalizing them.
To the opposite: it has even a stronger effect in the public discussion as the psychiatrization of people makes them even more unacceptable in a public discussion than criminals. A criminal is at least being admitted to have a common sense. But this is not the case with "weirdos".
In the public use of the term "conspiracy theory" a - as a "Conspiracy theorist" qualified - "weirdo" has only theories about an alleged conspiracy. The term "Conspiracy Theory" disqualifies to use juridical methods for qualification of a statement of facts although it is usually societal recognized to use circumstantial facts in court proceedings.
Therefore commonly speaking the sprachregelung of publicly discussed topics has the political function of the kind of consciousness of being allowed in public.
The prevention of developing a consciousness beyond the politically wished imagination of the world is the method to marginalize persons who are asking uncomfortable questions.
The politically wrong consciousness leads to politically "wrong" consequences.
The criminal meaning of the word "Conspiracy" from the Anlo-Saxon jurisdiction is used to marginalize any "Conspiracy theory" from public discourse as the meaning of the word "theory" is psychologically infected by the criminal meaning of its foreword.
If you analyze this context this kind of public consciousness formation is a contradiction in itself as the scientific meaning of the word "theory" is completely absorbed because of its criminalization through its foreword. In addition to it the word "Theory" appears to be squishy like a cloud for common man as it is not empirical yet. There is nothing tangible with a theory although - scientifically used - the development of a theory is the precondition for establishing consolidated science. This and the described contradiction before create the ban on thinking needed to use the term "Conspiracy theory" in the way politcally needed.
Therefore the impossibility to investigate a conspiracy theoretically by using the juridical method of circumstantial facts.
That way you exclude whole topical areas from being negotiated within the political system and publicly.
"Eine SZ Cinemathek 'Die hohe Kunst der Verschwörung', zwölf Politthriller um Intrigen, Machtspiele und geheime Verbindungen. Mit George Clooney, Meryl Streep, Alain Delon, Julia Roberts, u. v. a. , ausgewählt von der Kinoredaktion der Süddeutschen Zeitung." http://www.sueddeutsche.de/wissen/preisraetsel-verirrte-formation-1.571882
Well, that is only fiction. But what about the reality?
"COST"? Nomen est omen. Dafür, daß vermeintliche "Verschwörungstheoretiker" angeblich phantasieren, verwendet man aber viel Energie auf das Thema. Sie sind offensichtlich ein Angstgegner für die Herrschenden und werden als "Gefahr für die Demokratie" oder "Extremisten" dämonisiert oder können "Spannungen zwischen Nationen fördern". Und "Vertrauen" in die herrschenden Institutionen und Medien vermindern. Ganz schön potent, diese verrückten Spinner.
Die Begriffe "Verschwörungstheorien" und "Verschwörungstheoretiker" sind doch nur wirklichkeitsfremde Neusprech-Wortneuerfindungen, die nichts beschreiben, das in der Realität tatsächlich existiert. Früher hätte man dazu "Lügen" und "Unsinn" gesagt.
Es gibt gar keine "Verschwörungstheorien", außer in den Köpfen derer, die das Wort benutzen, um Menschen in den Schmutz zu ziehen, die Kriminalität entlarven.
Neusprech ist nur dazu da, die Realität zu entstellen und bewußt von den echten Problemen und den Schuldigen abzulenken. Das gesamte Neusprech ist suggestiv, soll die Realität, die Andersdenkenden und Angefeindeten umdefinieren, und besteht aus Phantasiebegriffen. Das ergibt ein einziges wahnhaftes und krankmachendes Lügengebilde. Die Erfinder und Benutzer von Neusprech belügen sich selbst. Wenn sie das glauben, dann ist das Neudenk. Außerdem ist Neusprech voll von Projektionen. Der Begriff "Theorie" ist bekanntlich Bestandteil der sozialistischen Herrschaftsideologie und Teil des Mantras, auf das ihre Anhänger fixiert sind.
Das IPG-Journal mit Butter: Man gibt sich intellektuell und liefert Schmierenjournallie. Und schon wieder ein Globus als Symbol...
zur Frage 1: die Behauptung, die Redaktion werde von Leuten angerufen, die mit Mikrowellen oder Sendern traktiert werden, halte ich für unwahr. Wenn es solche Leute gäbe, würden die nicht beim IPG-Journal anrufen. Und das wären auch keine "Ängste", sondern Behauptungen. Herr Butter pathologisiert politisch Andersdenkende und definiert ihr Gefühlsleben. (er soll doch "Amerikanist" sein, was für eine Arroganz)
Frage 2: seine Definition von "VT" beschreibt die Mafia. (Die existiert dann wohl nur in den Köpfen von Menschen mit pathologischen Ängsten, wir können aufatmen.)
Frage 3: "Hinweise" auf irgendein "Handeln" sind verbale Blasen, das ist wieder suggestives Neusprech. Woher kennt Herr Butter den Geschichtsverlauf von "VT"? Außerdem gibt ein "VT-Bericht" Tatsachen wieder, das ist die Definition von "Bericht". Herr Butter benutzt Wörter im Plural, die es nur im Singular gibt, das ist wieder Neusprech ("Öffentlichkeiten"). Er definiert das Denken Andersdenkender; und die Formulierung "die ganzen V, die die ganzen VT" ist schlechtes Deutsch, das haben wir schon in der Grundschule gelernt.
Frage 4: "Man" soll Andersdenkende also ernstnehmen, und "man" will Andersdenkende aufklären - was für eine Arroganz. Gleichzeitig wird politisches Andersdenken in die Nähe von Religion gerückt, und jetzt geht es mit den Projektionen los: "Religionsersatz" und "Erklärungsangebot" beschreiben die sozialistische Ideologie und die Psychotherapie, beides Herrschaftssysteme, deren Anhänger Kontrolle ausüben wollen. Herr Butter definiert "VT" als Angst vor Kontrollverlust, typisch für Kontrollfreaks. Er behauptet, Andersdenkene wollten sich über die breite Masse erheben, typisch für Menschen mit Machtstreben. Er behauptet, Andersdenkende brauchen einen Sündenbock, typisch für Schuldige. Er behauptet, Andersdenkende fühlten sich machtlos, typisch für Kontrollfreaks.
Dann bringt er das mit Politik in Verbindung und definiert wieder, was andere Menschen denken und tun, und er suggeriert Unwahrheit ("wenn"): Pegida-Anhänger protestieren nicht gegen "alles was sich in diesem Land verändert", oder dagegen, daß "die Leute auf der Straße nicht mehr alle weiß sind". Und er tut so, als wären nicht Menschen, also er und seine Gesinnungsgenossen, für ihre eigene Politik verantwortlich.
Frage 5: Wovon reden die eigentlich? Wenn Argumente nicht widerlegbar sind, bedeutet das, der Argumentierende hat Recht. Was für empirische Forschungen sollen das sein?
Frage 6: Schon wieder eine Projektion: die Vermischung des Glaubens an eine politische Ideologie mit der eigenen Identität findet man bei Anhängern der Linken, ebenso die Abwehrmechanismen bei Konfrontation mit der Realität. (Beweismittel A: die Transgender-Philosophie)
Frage 7: siehe oben, Butter bringt noch die Wörter "Klimawandel" und "Impfungen" ins Spiel und projeziert die eigene Irrationalität auf Menschen, die rationaler Denken als er selbst und seine Genossen. Und er will ihr Denken ändern, "an sie herankommen", also Kontrolle ausüben.
Frage 10: Butter dämonisiert Andersdenkende als "rassisitisch, sexistisch, antisemitisch", bringt das in Verbindung mit "VT" und entscheidet, daß es Grenzen gäbe, was "sagbar" sei, also daß die freie Meinungsäußerung Andersdenkender einzuschränken sei.
Er bekommt also Post von Leuten, die ihn konvertieren wollen, und er hat keine Zeit, sich mit Details auseinanderzusetzen. Und schon wieder die Absicht, das Denken anderer zu verändern, und diese Arroganz. Und eine Projektion: "Realitätsverzerrung". Er legt Grenzen für das Denken anderer Menschen fest: "nicht die Schwelle zur VT überschreiten". Das ist kontrollierendes Verhalten.
Frage 12: ohne Nazikeule geht es wohl nicht
Frage 13: Herr Butter scheint sich nicht dessen bewußt zu sein, daß das Gequassel von "Reptiloiden" seine eigene Seriosität in Zweifel zieht.
Offensichtlich ist der Begriff "VT-tiker" der Versuch, politische Dissidenten als geisteskrank hinzustellen oder zu dämonisieren. Die Pathologisierung und Dämonisierung sind auch Projektionen. Unterdrücker definieren Menschen und Wirklichkeit immer so, wie es ihnen dient. Die Realität kommt dabei nicht vor. Die gegenwärtig Herrschenden unterstellen Andersdenkenden Angst, und auch das ist eine Projektion. Siehe "COST". Die haben wirklich Angst, daß ihre Utopie zusammenbricht. Die Angst ist echt, da mit ihrer Scheinidentität verknüpft. Leute mit solchem Charakter können sehr gefährlich und gewalttätig werden, wenn sie einen Machtverlust erleben.
Ich kann diese Neusprechwortschöpfungen nicht mehr hören, und vielleicht ist die Beschäftigung damit Zeitverschwendung. Man sollte die auch nicht verwenden, sonst verstärkt man das Problem. Man sollte bewußt Begriffe verwenden, welche die Realität wiedergeben, um dem was entgegenzusetzen.
Grüße, froggy
##############################################
"COST"? Nomen est omen. They spend much energy on that subject despite they believe so-called "conspiracy-theorists" are delusional. Obviously the government is afraid of them and demonizes them as "threat to democracy", "extremists", "fuel for tensions between nations", and they could "diminish trust in government institutions and media". They seem to be very powerful, those crazy conspiracy cranks.
The terms "conspiracy theory" or "conspiracy theorist" are newly invented Newspeak terms far off from reality, and they describe nothing which exists in reality for a fact. In the past people would have called them a "lie" and "nonsense".
In fact, there are no "conspiracy theories", except in the minds of the people who use the term to drag others through the mud who expose criminal behaviour.
Newspeak is designed to warp reality and to distract our perception from the real problems and the culprits. The complete Newspeak is suggestive and its purpose is to redefine reality, the dissenters and the targeted individuals, and it is constructed of imaginary words. This results in a huge delusional and sickening structure of lies. Those who invent and use it lie to themselves. When they believe it, it's Newthink.
Besides, Newspeak is full of projections. The term "theory" is an important part of the socialistic ideology of dominance and is part of the mantra its supporters are fixated on.
The IPG-Journal with Butter: Pretending to be intellectual and producing bullshit. And again a globe for a symbol...
To Question 1: They say the editors get calls from people who say they were tortured with microwaves and transmitters. I think that's not true. Such people wouldn't call the IPG-Journal. And it would be "claims" instead of "fears". Mr Butter pathologizes political dissenters and defines their feelings. (what an arrogance, he is supposed to be "americanicist")
To question 2: His definition of "conspiracy theory" describes the mafia. (Then the mafia does only exist in the minds of people with pathological anxiety, we can breathe freely)
To question 3: "Hints" of some kind of "action" are verbal bubbles, that is suggestive Newspeak again. How does Mr Butter know the history of "conspiracy theories"? Besides, a "conspiracy theory report" tells facts, that's the definition of "report". Mr Butter uses words in plural which only exist in singular ("publics"), that is Newspeak again. He defines the way of thinking of dissenters; and the wording "the whole conspiracies, the whole conspiracy theorists" is bad language; we learned this in elementary school.
To question 4: "One" should take dissenters seriously, and "one" wants to enlighten dissenters - what an arrogance. At the same time, political dissenting is drawn near to religion, and now the projections are starting: "Religion surrogate" and "explanation offer" describe the socialistic ideology and psychotherapy, both systems of dominance, whose supporters want to exert control over other people. Mr Butter defines "conspiracy theories" as fear of loss of control, that is typical for control freaks. He says, dissenters want to rise above others, that is typical for people with greed for power. He says, dissenters need a scapegoat, that is typical for culprits. He says, dissenters feel powerless, that is typical for control freaks.
Then he relates that to politics, defines again the thinking and acting of other people, and he lies in a suggestive way ("if"): Pegida-supporters don't protest against "everything that changes in this country" and against "that the people on the street are not all white anymore". And he pretends that he and his comrades are not being responsible for their own politics.
To question 5: What are they talking about? If arguments are irrefutable, then they are facts. What empirical research could that be?
To question 6: A projection again: mixing up the belief in a political ideology with one's own identity can be found in the ranks of the socialists, and the defense mechanisms when being confronted with reality, too. (Evidence A: the transgender-philosophy)
Question 7: like above; additionally, Butter throws in the terms "climate change" and "vaccinations" and projects his own irrationality on people who think more rationally than he and his comrades. And he wants to change their minds, "get near to them", that means, he wants to exert control over them.
Question 10: Butter demonizes dissenters as "racist, sexist, anti-semitic", relates that to "conspiracy theories" and decides that there have to be limits for freedom of speech for dissenters.
So, he gets mail from people who want to convert him, but has no time to deal with the details. And again his will to change the way of thinking of other people, and the arrogance. And a projection: "Reality warping". He sets boundaries for the freedom of thought of other people : "not overstep the threshhold of conspiracy theory"; that is controlling behaviour.
Question 12: he can't skip the "nazi-club"
Question 13: Mr Butter seems to be unaware of the fact that the mentioning of "reptiloids" calls in question his own seriosity.
Obviously the term "conspiracy theorist" serves the purpose to define political dissenters as mentally ill or to demonize them. The pathologizing and demonization are projections also. Oppressors always define people and reality as it serves them. Without relation to reality. The ruling people impute fear to dissenters, and that's a projection also. Look at "COST". They really fear their utopia could collapse. Their fear is real, because it is connected to their illusory identity. People with that mindset can become very dangerous and violent when they feel a loss of power.
I can't stand the use of these Newspeak terms anymore, and maybe it's a waste of time thinking about them. We shouldn't use them either, because otherwise we enforce the problem. We should use terms that mirror reality to counter that.
Greetings froggy [/font][font:Times New Roman][size:11pt][/size]
Es gibt gar keine "Verschwörungstheorien", außer in den Köpfen derer, die das Wort benutzen, um Menschen in den Schmutz zu ziehen, die Kriminalität entlarven.
Das ist der eigentliche Grund für die Marginalisierung von Andersdenkenden. Es fehlt aber dabei noch ein anderer Begriff: die Psychiatrisierung.
Die Psychiatrisierung hat den Vorteil, sich inhaltlich mit den Betroffenen gar nicht erst auseinandersetzen zu müssen. Deshalb auch das Brimborium um den Begriff der Verschwörungstheorie. Bei einer Kriminalisierung läuft dagegen ein Wenn-dann-Schema ab, was energieaufwändiger zu behandeln ist. Bei der Psychiatrisierung braucht man nur auf die Gleichförmigkeit der Medien zu achten, die ihre Nestbe-schmutzer selbst bewachen.
Der Mainstream soll sozialpsychologisch gar nicht erst auf die Idee kommen, sich mit den Argumenten auseinanderzusetzen.
Affekte sind das tragende Moment der Psychiatrisierung.
Sie führen zu Denkverboten und damit zur Bewußtseinsbildung.
Die Auseinandersetzung mag zwar nerven, ist jedoch notwendig, um nicht den systemischen Meinungsbildnern das Feld zu überlassen. Butter ist ja lediglich ein Funktionsträger, dessen Tätigkeit dazu dient, die soziologische Grundlage für die Psychiatrisierung zu liefern.
Methodisch geht man ähnlich wie bei der CO²-Geschichte vor: Einhämmern, einhämmern, einhämmern - bis es in den Köpfen ist.
Da die Universität Tübingen ein hohes Renomee hat, kommt es nicht unbedingt auf den Wahrheitsgehalt der gemachten Annahmen an, sondern lediglich auf den Effekt, den die Arbeit von Butter haben soll. Darüberhinaus sollte man auch nicht den korrumptiven Aspekt wirtschaftlicher Abhängigkeit vergessen. Das wissenschaftliche Prinzip wird also umgekehrt und die Medien sorgen dann dafür, daß Butters Arbeit als Wahrheit wahrgenommen wird. Die Medien sind also die wahren "Truther", wobei sie aufgrund ihrer selbst aufgestellten Denkzäune die Wahrheit nicht finden (wollen).
Und dann ist es auch nicht mehr davon weit entfernt, mittels der neugeschaffenen "Truth" Abweichler für wahrnehmungsunfähig zu halten.
English:
Originally Posted by froggy
In fact, there are no "conspiracy theories", except in the minds of the people who use the term to drag others through the mud who expose criminal behaviour.
That is the real reason for the marginalization of dissenters. But thereby there is still a another term missing: the psychiatrization.
The psychiatrization has the advantage not to have to deal with the arguments of the persons involved by content. Therefore also the mumbo-jumbo around the term of "Conspiracy theory". By contrast thru a criminalization it's going along a IF-THEN pattern, what needs more energy to handle a circumstance. In the way of psychiatrization one needs only to pay attention to the conformity of the media, which are guarding their own people fouling their own nest.
Social-psychologically the mainstream shall not come up with the idea to grapple with the arguments.
Emotions are the underpinning fact of the psychiatrization.
They are leading to bans of thinking and subsequently to public awareness.
The examination may be nerving nevertheless it is necessary to not let the field alone to the systemic opinion creator. Butter (English: Butter) is just a functionary whose occupation is serving the purpose to deliver the sociological basics for the psychiatrization.
One proceeds in a similiar way like with the CO² story: Hammering into the head, hammering into the head, hammering into the head - until the story IS in the head.
It doesn't really depend on the truth content of the made assumptions (by Butter) because the university of Tübingen has a high reputation. In reality, what matters is the effect which the work of Butter shall have. Beside that one shall not forget the corruptive aspect of economical dependency. The scientific principles are therefore being reversed and the media have to make sure that the research paper of Butter will be percepted as truth. In reality, therefore the media are the real "truthers" (German word for searchers for so called postfacts), whereby they don't (want to) find really the truth because of their own erected thinking fences.
That way you are also not far away anymore to hold - through the newly created "truth" - deviators for being perception incapable.
Die Psychiatrisierung ist besonders gefährlich, weil die Psychiatrie sich nicht im Land des Meßbaren und Nachweisbaren bewegt, sondern im Land des Subjektiven, der Interpretation und der Bewertung durch selbsternannte "Autoritäten". Kriminalisierung Andersdenkender würde wenigsten so etwas wie Beweise erfordern. Obwohl man darüber ja auch schon hinaus ist.
Aber wenn die breite Masse nicht nachdenkt, ist sie selber schuld.
Bezüglich des Einhämmerns: Wieso manipulieren die uns so plump, daß wir es merken, anstatt wie früher auf die nette Art? Würde doch viel besser funktionieren. Die Überdosis führt dazu, daß es unverdaut wieder rauskommt. Man kann das doch gar nicht mehr ertragen. Die Fälschungen von alten Bildern mit neuen Chemtrails sind ja auch so offensichtlich, daß man es sieht. Wir sollen wissen, daß man uns verschaukelt. Aber wieso? Wollen die uns testen?
Aber wenn die breite Masse nicht nachdenkt, ist sie selber schuld.
Das mag zwar sein. Ist aber nicht nützlich.
Es gibt Dinge, die kann man selbst beeinflussen. Es gibt aber eben auch Dinge, bei denen ist man von anderen abhängig.
Man kann zwar versuchen, seine Abhängigkeit zu reduzieren, aber zum einen ist man sozialisiert, d.h. man hat bestimmte Fähigkeiten, aber leider eben auch Unfähigkeiten. Aus meiner Sicht ist das menschlich. Zum anderen versperren sich im Lauf der Zeit Möglichkeiten.
Und wenn man die Konsequenzen zuendedenkt, die aus den Chemtrails herrühren, ist es logisch, daß jeder durch diese Partikel belastet wird.
Wie dem auch sei, spätestens seit Hiroshima ist wohl klar geworden, daß jeder selbst in der Wildnis von den Aktivitäten anderer beeinflußt werden kann.
Man braucht nicht einmal an Hiroshima denken, nehme einfach einen Konzern wie Nestle, der mitten in der Wildnis von Maine riesige Mengen Wasser in Flaschen abfüllt. Soviel daß die betroffene Kommune auf die Barrikaden geht.
Das heißt im Klartext: Man muß sich mit den Eigenarten der anderen auseinandersetzen, ob einen diese Eigenarten gefallen oder nicht.
Bezogen auf die Schuldfrage wird aufgrund der wechselseitigen Abhängigkeit klar, daß Aufklärung sinnvoll ist, damit man die Dummheit der anderen reduziert, um selbst davon zu profitieren.
Originally Posted by froggy
Bezüglich des Einhämmerns: Wieso manipulieren die uns so plump, daß wir es merken, anstatt wie früher auf die nette Art?
Aber Nudging funktioniert ja eher im eigenen kontrollierbareren Bereich. Da kann man souverän sein und auch einmal nachgeben.
Chemtrails sind jenseits der eigenen Vorstellungswelt, daß man - sobald man es kapiert - die damit verbundene ungeheure Tragweite des Geschehens versteht. Chemtrails an sich sind die Verkörperung (in Form der Nanomaterialien) von Macht. Da man nun Nanomaterialien nur - wenn überhaupt - mittels Werkzeugen sichtbar machen kann und sie Teil von einem selbst sind, gibt es natürlich ein Problem der Visualisierung dieser Macht. Dies ist allgemein kaum zu akzeptieren. Dieser Zwiespalt wird ausgenutzt, um das Bewußtsein von dieser Ungeheuerlichkeit wegzuführen.
Originally Posted by froggy
Wir sollen wissen, daß man uns verschaukelt. Aber wieso? Wollen die uns testen?
Machtdemonstration?
Deutlich machen, daß Widerstand zwecklos ist.
Widerstandsprobe?
Austesten, ob es noch Widerstandsnester gibt, um die Indoktrination gezielter vornehmen zu können.
Denke an das Konzept "mitarbeiterorientiert", "kundenorientiert", "mitarbeiter-zentriert", "kundenzentriert".
Letzlich läuft ja wohl im Hintergrund eine entsprechende Maschinerie, die man personell eben auch ausstatten muß.
Social Engineering läuft heute vor allem in der Internet-Welt ab. Social Engineering gab es aber bereits vor dieser Zeit. Und das lief vor allem mittels der Anwendung von Psychotechniken ab. Und zwar zu dieser Zeit nicht im Internet, sondern im Alltag. Letzlich ist man in Bezug auf die Chemtrails so etwas wie eine Laborratte. Und neben Wettertechnologie sind sicherlich noch eine Reihe anderer Technologien mit den Chemtrails in Verbindung zu bringen. Man denke nur an das Photo der Fribourger Professorin mit dem mit Nanopartikeln beschmutzten Blutplättchen. So ein Blutplättchen überwindet dann auch problemlos die Blut-Hirn-Schranke, die ja sowieso schon durch die Handystrahlung ständig unter Attacke steht. Oder die Über-den-Horizont-Radartechnologie für die Militärs.
Russ Tanner hat ja das Ganze auch als Normalisierung beschrieben. D.h. die Integration von Chemtrails als ganz normales Alltagsereignis.
Originally Posted by froggy
If most people don't think, it's their own fault.
Quite possibly. But it is not useful.
There are things which can be influenced by yourself. But there are also things likewise where you are dependent from others.
You can try though to reduce your dependency but for one thing you are socialized in one way or the other that means you have certain abilities but unfortunately also inabilities. From my point of view this is human. For another thing as time passes opportunities are locked up.
And if you realize what consequences Chemtrails have it is logical that everyone is burdened by these particles.
However that be it has been clear at the latest since Hiroshima that everybody can be influenced by the activities of others even if you live in the wilderness.
You don't have to think even of Hiroshima just take a big company like Nestle which is embottling huge amounts of water of Maine in the midst of the wilderness. That much that the affected village is going to the barricades.
That means in cleartext: One has to quarrel with the idiosyncrasies of the others if you like them or not.
Because of the interdependency of each other it is - Relating to question of guilt - clear now, that enlightenment is a suggestive method of choice for reducing the ignorance of the others and for profiting yourselve by the enlightenment of the others.
Originally Posted by froggy
Related to the hammering: Why do they manipulate us so grossly, so we notice it, instead of nicely, like they did in the past?
But Nudging is working rather in your own more controlable field. There you may be sovereign and you may back down once in a while.
Chemtrails are that beyond your own imagination that one understands - as soon as one captured it - the therewith connected tremendous moment of the events. Chemtrails by themselves are the epitome (in the shape of nano materials) of power. There is a problem with the visualisation of this power because one can make nano materials only observable - if any - by tools and they are parts of oneself. This is generally hardly to accept. This discrepancy is being used to lead the consciousness away from this monstrosity.
Originally Posted by froggy
They want us to know that they manipulate us. But why? Do they test us?
Manifestation of power?
Emphasizing that resistance does not serve any purpose.
Resistance test?
Checking out if there are still pockets of resistance to be able to take measurements for indoctrination more accurately.
Think to the concept of "employee oriented", "customer oriented", "employee centered", "customer centered".
Eventually there is surely a corresponding machinery running in the background which has to be provided with personnel likewise.
Nowadays social engineering is running mainly in the realm of the web. But social engineering has existed already before this time. And this passed off in the way of application of psycho technics. At that time not in the Internet but in everday life. Eventually relating to Chemtrails one is something like laboratory rat. And besides weather technology there are certainly still a number of other technologies in the game connected to Chemtrails. You have just to think about the photo of Fribourg professor with the with nano particles polluted thrombocytes. Such a thrombocytes is breaking down the blood-brain barrier without any problems. This barrier is anyway already constantly under attack by mobile phone radiation. Or the Over-the-horizon-radar technology for the military.
Russ Tanner has described this (social engineering relating to Chemtrails) as normalization. This means the integration of Chemtrails as quite a normal thing.
The psychiatrisation is especially dangerous because psychiatry does not dwell in the realm of measurable, provable facts, but in the realm of subjectivity, interpretation and valuating by self-announced "authorities." Criminalisation of dissenters would demand evidence, but they have overcome that already. If most people don't think, it's their own fault. Related to the hammering: Why do they manipulate us so grossly, so we notice it, instead of nicely, like they did in the past? That would work more efficiently. The overdose leaves the brain unresorbed. It is unbearable. The forgery of old images with new chemtrails is very obvious, too. They want us to know that they manipulate us. But why? Do they test us?
At least chemtrails ARE visible if one wants to notice them, and normally there would be no necessity to debate their existence. Much abuse of power is invisible, and one has to experience structural difficulties and to see through this abuse. Then we learn when it is too late. It seems we face a huge monstrosity with many facets. How could it become so big? Why do most people seem to support it? Not everybody gains profit from it. For example, we know about environmental problems for a long time, like pesticides or animal protection, citizens are aware and politicians, but still they use the first and omit the second, but they talk about it regularly. Every single individual can decide what he does, but the world doesn't seem to learn or to change. It improves only in small steps. Mankind seems to learn slowly. If everybody would notice chemtrails as a problem, that wouldn't stop them. People still smoke, despite they know it's wrong.
Did it ever happen in human history, that a people somewhere deprived a tyranny successfully?
It seems we face a huge monstrosity with many facets. How could it become so big?
Hypnotic techniques. Psychological (not political) Conservatism. Awe. Select Strategy of measurements of low impact (Salami tactics). Mass media. Slow change. Frog cooking. Repeating positive statements. Exclusion by talking of inclusion. And so on.
Originally Posted by froggy
Why do most people seem to support it?
They don't support it. They are feeling helpless. They are scared if they defend themselves that it will get worse. They suffer under supression. They don't know better. They are immunized by TV. They are immunized by games. Tittytainment. Missing common consciousness. They are overstimulated.
Did it ever happen in human history, that a people somewhere deprived a tyranny successfully?
Sure. But only for a relative short time. Apathy leads to interhuman relations of high and low. After a time leaders forget that not only their people are dependent from their decisions but that they need their people to be leaders. Then, competition between leaders leads often to war which is the essence of tyranny. Domestic wars, foreign wars. Power is like a drug which produces the need of more power which can only be achieved by supression of the people. The satisfaction of power is the opposite part of the exploitation of those who are granting the power. In other words those who are exploited don't want any power. Because of exhaustion? By those in power?
They score people in Germany already, the "health insurance" does, they said that in Deutschlandfunk (German government broadcasting, paid by taxes; horrible, but telltale). We get "existence entitlement points". (that's my name for that)
They plan euthanasia obviously; they legalized forced medication outside of psychiatry, and medical research on humans without informed consent and knowledge already, they said that in DLF, too. Physicians are allowed to even incapacitate a relative of a patient, if the relative doesn't submit to their will, they tried that already.
Talking about dying is one of the favourite topics in German government media, and about "assisted suicide" and "dying aid", and they tell us that WE want it desperately. And they give the nurses a heavy workload for years, I assume that is to create a mindset which leads to acceptance of removing the people who have "outlived their lives", a term they used in DLF, too, and people, whom they attest a bad prognosis. It is not only for deadly ill patients, they told that in DLF. Normally that would be unethical murder, but they are only concerned of efficiency now. It doesn't count that we pay tons of money for "health insurance". There was a serial killer male nurse caught recently, who presumably killed 106 patients, some presumably with the knowledge of colleagues and physicians. (Niels Högel)
The medical system in Germany is one of the big systems of abuse of power.
It seems that THEY create a division in society between the rulers and their servants, like nurses, police, soldiers on one side, and the suppressed people on the other. THEY need a huge amount of people who serve them willingly to exert their power, THEY depend on that.
People are not all the same, some have a stronger need for freedom an independence, and other feel attracted by systems of power and make themselves servants for them. And then the results of the Milgram experiment come into play.
How can we solve our tiny little problem with the chemtrails?
Why does nobody found a political party, which goes against aerosol operations and for the interests of people, which nobody else seem to support, and get that elected? Did anyone try that already? What becomes of such political parties? Theoretically, that is assumed to work, in a pretended democracy. Why do most of the people elect always the same parties? Are they all that satisfied? Bought with money of some kind?
they said that in DLF, too. they told that in DLF.
Greetings, froggy
Do you have a source?
Originally Posted by froggy
There was a serial killer male nurse caught recently, who presumably killed 106 patients, some presumably with the knowledge of colleagues and physicians. (Niels Högel)
I have heard of it. It is said that he got out of reach because of the feeling to have power over people.
Originally Posted by froggy
And they give the nurses a heavy workload for years,
I think it is just money. But you are right about the creation of a mindset of indifference and hardening by that workload.
Originally Posted by froggy
How can we solve our tiny little problem with the chemtrails?
Why does nobody found a political party, which goes against aerosol operations and for the interests of people, which nobody else seem to support, and get that elected?
The Big Media rules over the politicians. If you don't have any relevant media in the back it is useless to make efforts in that direction.
If you go around what do you see? Big companies.
There is no milkman around the corner anymore. Or a corner shop. There are only big companies. It is easy to say "why does nobody". It is difficult to get even through to the minds of people.
I know that chemtrails are not a tiny problem, that was meant ironically.
Originally Posted by Denglisch
Originally Posted by froggy
they said that in Deutschlandfunk
they said that in DLF, too. they told that in DLF.
Greetings, froggy
Do you have a source?
The scoring was mentioned by a Gerd Gigerenzer. He didn't tell more of it. I guess it's about the payment morals of a person, but as I am pessimistic about the whole system I assume it's to get a foot in the door for more.
The thing with forced medication of non-psychiatric patients and research on patients without knowledge and informed consent was told in their news or some kind of news and was related to Alzheimer's condition. They define them as "not being able to decide". They want a "guardian" to decide with the physician, what the patient "would want to". I guess if one googles new German laws then it will show up somewhere. It was some months or a year ago.
They told also, on another occasion, that politicians and physicians plan or have already made a law for de-personification persons with Alzheimer's condition. They said in fact "den Personenstatus aberkennen". I think it was Deutschlandradio, a year ago or maybe longer, I didn't record it.
The thing with "having outlived their lives" and "assisted suicide" for not deadly ill patients was a report about an elderly couple, who wanted "assisted suicide" because they had "outlived their lives", (original citation): "ihr Leben ausgelebt", but were not deadly ill. I heard the preview only, but I think they will repeat that report some time, because they repeat much.
[quote=Denglisch
The Big Media rules over the politicians. If you don't have any relevant media in the back it is useless to make efforts in that direction.
There is no milkman around the corner anymore. Or a corner shop. There are only big companies. It is easy to say "why does nobody". It is difficult to get even through to the minds of people.
[/quote]
Why would a grassroots movement need mainstream media? And Die Partei is not serious. Around here are many independent shops. Sorry, I'm not a very political person, just wondering.
The scoring was mentioned by a Gerd Gigerenzer. He didn't tell more of it. I guess it's about the payment morals of a person, but as I am pessimistic about the whole system I assume it's to get a foot in the door for more.
The thing with forced medication of non-psychiatric patients and research on patients without knowledge and informed consent was told in their news or some kind of news and was related to Alzheimer's condition. They define them as "not being able to decide". They want a "guardian" to decide with the physician, what the patient "would want to". I guess if one googles new German laws then it will show up somewhere. It was some months or a year ago.
They told also, on another occasion, that politicians and physicians plan or have already made a law for de-personification persons with Alzheimer's condition. They said in fact "den Personenstatus aberkennen". I think it was Deutschlandradio, a year ago or maybe longer, I didn't record it.
It is difficult to discuss something when you don't know what it is about exactly.
Regarding the "tiny" problem I could not evaluate that it was meant ironically.
I googled "Gerd Gigerenzer" "Deutschlandfunk" "Alzheimer" and I did not get anything regarding to what you said.
I googled "Gerd Gigerenzer" "Alzheimer" and I got an article written by Gigerenzer in the "Neue Zürcher Zeitung" online where he mentioned once Alzheimer.
Originally Posted by froggy
Why would a grassroots movement need mainstream media?
Well, where is a grassroots movement?
Originally Posted by froggy
And Die Partei is not serious.
That is right. They are making fun of everything. But: At least they used the topic of "Chemtrails". This means - as they intend to provoke - that they - too - are thinking that "Chemtrails" are relevant. They - too - are thinking that it is noticeable that the mainstream media is ignoring and fighting the topic of "Chemtrails". Therefore "Die Partei" has its value. They are making it public. In other words: They have a political message about the topic of "Chemtrails".
And if you look beyond the business scene you can look also to products.
For example cheese: thirty years ago you could differentiate kinds of cheese by taste and smell. Today, they tasting and smelling pretty much the same. I remember, when I went to the milk man and I ordered some cheese in slices with the name "Tilsiter" this "Tilsiter" was tasting as it was smelling: awfully good.
Originally Posted by froggy
Sorry, I'm not a very political person, just wondering.
An independent shop is a shop owing only the rent, or not even that, to anyone. There are so many of them around here, that I can't count them. They can get their merchandise from wherever they want.
One of the problems of our society is, there is no grassroots movement. And I am beginning to understand, why.
Well, they are part of the private health insurance sector.
Indeed, they are scoring.
The private insurance company "Generali" gives you a special offer by having your body values constantly scanned with your smart phone.
You don't have to be privately health insured. You may go to the legal insurance companies ruled by public law. Too, they are problematic as they claim - when you are self-employed - that you are supposed to have an income which you don't have and tax you on that base. That way you keep people outside economic activities. ( http://www.mdr.de/nachrichten/wirtschaft/inland/krankenkassen-beitragsschulden-100.html )
I don't know of any scoring done by public legal insurance companies. To the opposite they are obligated to take members although they don't want them.
As I know of only your stays in a hospital and psychotherapies are registered by the public legal health insurance companies. That's it.
Private health insurance companies have advantages but also disadvantages. When you are young, you pay less, when you grow older, it is the opposite. When you are an official you know that when you decide to become an official. And you get "Beihilfe" by the government.
If you give your bill from the MD to a private health insurance company in Germany they know what your problem is.
If you have Alzheimer, they can assess that by the kind of bills coming in.
If they are using data from the private health insurance company for a decision making of the value of life, it is time to forbid these kind of companies.
But the problem is, that we still don't have a source of Gerd Gigerenzer in the Deutschlandfunk to discuss this thoroughly and founded. It is still not known what he really said. Therefore, it is too superficial to discuss such a topic seriously.
Originally Posted by froggy
An independent shop is a shop owing only the rent, or not even that, to anyone. There are so many of them around here, that I can't count them. They can get their merchandise from wherever they want.
Are you living in a swarm city? Well, go outside your area in another federal state you will see something different: REWE, LIDL, EDEKA, ALDI, NETTO, PENNY. That's about it. If you go to the shopping centers you see the same brands again and again. For example: Konditoreien. (Cake shops) Where are they? Again store chains.
Another example: "Einerseits beklagen Sie eine „Sprinterisierung“, andererseits lehnen Sie den Lang-Lkw ab." "On the one side you mourn of a 'Sprinterization', on the other side you refuse Giga-Liner." in: "Interviewfragen der Verbände des Verkehrsgewerbes in Baden-Württemberg an Minister Hermann:" "Questions for an interview between the associations of the transport industry in the federal state of Baden-Württemberg and the Minister Hermann:" http://archiv.vv-suedbaden.de//anlagen-2012/anlage-interview-minister-hermann/download-8.html Page 3 For the uninformed: The "Sprinterization" is a word creation as a symbol for the waiting "Sprinter"s in the streets in residential areas delivering goods ordered online. Thus, the "sprinterization" is a description of indoor lifestyle.
Another example: Ikea invested massively in their store chain. Why? Because a business study a long time ago showed that people will stay more inside and therefore their homes will be more important.
There is another clue for Indoor lifestyles: high UVC levels on the ground: http://www.geoengineeringwatch.org/?s=UVC Look to Sauberer Himmel or to Werner Altnickel. Why are they treated with hostility instead of explaining in public where all the heavy metals in the probes were coming from? ( http://globalskywatch.com/v/tests ) Then you will understand that there are taboo topics. But some topics are that essential that you have to break the taboo because the taboo topic is a base.
"Konspiration bedeutet in der Sprache der Geheimdienste (hier: nach dem Glossar zeitgenössischer nachrichtendienstlicher Begriffe in den nachrichtendienstlichen Begriffsbestimmungen der „Organisation Gehlen“ und des frühen Bundesnachrichtendienstes (BND) der fünfziger und sechziger Jahre) „die Zusammenarbeit mehrerer Personen unter einheitlicher Zielsetzung und bewusster Ausschaltung fremden oder öffentlichen Einblicks“,[1] wodurch ihr Ziel und ihre Identität verborgen bleiben.[2] Die Dekonspiration ist die Enttarnung oder Offenbarung der Konspiration infolge von Fehlern im eigenen Handeln, gegnerischer Tätigkeit oder eigenem Entschluss eines Beteiligten.[3]" https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Konspiration
English translation: "Conspiration in the language of the secret agencies (here: according to the glossary contemporary intelligence terms in the intelligence definition of the 'Organization Gehlen' and the early 'Federal Intelligence Service Agency' (BND) of the fifties and sixties) 'the collaboration of multiple persons under the coherent aim and the wilful suppression of external or public view', [1] whereby their goal and their identity stay concealed.[2] The deconspiration is the exposure or disclosure of the conspiracy because of mistakes in own action, adversarial operations or own determination of one of the parties.[3]" (Translation by Denglisch)
In the seventies and also eighties West-Germany was a location of terrorism by the RAF. RAF did not stand for the "Royal Air Force" but for the "Rote Armee Fraktion". This acronym was pictured by a poster with many male and female suspected terrorists which hung in every police station and other government agencies in West-Germany. The RAF derived from the leftist civil rights movement of the year 1968 fighting also against the Vietnam war. The RAF was only a small part of the 68-movement in West-Germany. This RAF-group - an now there is a connection to the topic - had many so called "konspirative Wohnungen" (conspirative apartments) around West-Germany but also in West-Berlin.
Therefore, conspirative thinking is not that far away from human nature.
Bülles, Egbert; Spilcker, Axel Deutschland, Verbrecherland? Mein Einsatz gegen die organisierte Kriminalität Berlin Ullstein Taschenbuch Verlag 2015 http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/879877616 longlink.com
Westdeutscher Rundfunk (WDR) (TV of Public Law) https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Egbert_Bülles
Zweites Deutsches Fernsehen (ZDF) (TV of Public Law)
You don't have to agree with everything Bülles tells but it is obvious that politics don't have really the power to change the situation in the one or the other way. People who claim that THEY will change the situation are also not trustworthy as they don't explain whereto they want to change the direction of the boat.
The political function of the media is that of the function of a collective psychotherapy - not more.
Even average common people - as shown by the nurse in "Nachtcafé" (SWR)(TV of Public Law): "Oh oh oh oh" (her words as expression of the public excitement after a scandal) - are beginning to recognize that the media gives only the publicity where the politicians have to react on publicly without changing the situation itself.
The European Union is destroying national structures without replacing them by any meaningful new structures. Persons within the "Commission" want even more "liberalization" which is nothing more but the destruction of functioning national structures.
Therefore, in reality the real power lies in the hands of the media and nobody knows really who controls them.
PhD Constanze Paffrath Macht und Eigentum : die Enteignungen 1945-1949 im Prozess der deutschen Wiedervereinigung Köln : Böhlau, 2004. http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/607179167
Minute: 36 Second: 50 "(...) Es hat über das Da-und-Dort natürlich auch schon kleinere Konspirationen vor dem Jahr '89 gegeben. (...)" "(...) There has been around the here and there also already smaller conspiracies before the year '89. (...)"
In other words: conspiracies are part of political business.
German law does not know a statement of facts for "conspiracy".
The U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions wants to limit the possibilities to travel for Winterkorn as Germany does not extradite its citizens.
It would be better if the U.S. Attorney General Jeff Sessions would put a file against Winterkorn within in the German judicial system and its laws. This would be a judicial innovation and would have a judicial impact in the international arena.
"Unless there is a gigantic conspiracy involving some thirty University departments all over the world, and several hundred highly respected scientists in various fields, many of them originally hostile to the claims of the psychical researchers, the only conclusion the unbiased observer can come to must be that there does exist a small number of people who obtain knowledge existing either in other people's minds, or in the outer world, by means as yet unknown to science. This should not be interpreted as giving any support to such notions as survival after death, philosophical idealism, or anything else..." Eysenck, Hans-Jürgen Sense and Nonsense in Psychology (Pelican), Middlesex 1957, page 131/132 http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/968063896
Hello Global Skywatch members - I'm new to this forum and found this thread really to the point as i'm trying to inform myself on the European project to study conspiracy theory - Comparative Analysis of Conspiracy Theories aka COMPACT. - As is mentionned already in this thread, the COMPACT project is EU funded through its auxiliary COST, the European Cooperation in Science and Technology who in turn is backed by the Horizon 2020 framework (Horizon 2020 is a 7 year 80 billion € project). - The project started in 2016 quite humourously the 1st of April with a meeting in Brussels*. There are 120 researchers from 33 european countries engaged in the research on conspiracy theory in Europe, and the funding is somewhat obscure - around 180.000€ per year in the 2016-2020 period. - The COMPACT program now has its own website* with more details about their activity. - The finality of the COMPACT program is by the commissions own words to "generate the thorough comprehension of the history, politics, sociology, rhetoric and psychology of conspiracy theories needed to counter their often harmful effects on democratic values. Conspiracy theories have so far not at all been studied as comprehensively as their manifest importance demands" - The term and use of "conspiracy" and "conspiracy theory" has been brilliantly exposed by Denglisch in this forum thread, and i definately have learned from the discussion in this thread - especially on conspiracies despite i am also aware of Chemtrails and other "conspiracies" that are not merely theory.. - It is of importance that the use of conspiracy theory is fairly recent and is an integral part of a strategy by the intelligence community to silence dissent, uncomfortable facts, free expression and above all with COMPAC : to identify the individuals who persist against all winds to do independant investigative work*. === *COMPACT Work & Budget Plan 2018-2019 http://allunreal.com/CA15101-Grant-Agreement-Period-3.pdf.zip - *COMPACT program website https://conspiracytheories.eu - *COMPACT 1st Meeting resumé here https://conspiracytheories.eu/_wpx/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/2016_01-CA15101-MCM1_Minutes_final.pdf - *Controlled Academic Opposition http://allunreal.com/2018/08/controlled-academic-opposition
The entire 'Comparative Analysis of Conspiracy Theories' Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) ===
Aim/primary Objective
generate the thorough comprehension of the history, politics, sociology, rhetoric and psychology of conspiracy theories needed to counter their often harmful effects on democratic values. Conspiracy theories have so far not at all been studied as comprehensively as their manifest importance demands
Secondary objectives
01. The Action aims at putting a spotlight on research in conspiracy theory by coordinating disparate studies into a coherent field of inquiry. While there is an increasing body of work on the topic, conspiracy theory studies is not yet such a recognised field. 02. The Action aims at moving beyond restricting disciplinary approaches by creating dialogue and collaboration between scholars employing different methodologies. The Action will collate a large body of empirical and theoretical insights to produce a much richer and more robust account than has been possible to date. 03. With English as the common working language, this Action will advance knowledge by enabling scholars to integrate findings that they have so far been unaware of because the research was conducted in an unfamiliar language. 04. By bringing together scholars whose individual research focuses on different aspects of the topic (manifestations in different countries, time periods etc.), the Action aims at producing a comparative analysis of conspiracy theories that answers overarching and important questions that scholarship so far has not or only unsatisfactorily tackled. 05. The Action aims at constructing new research questions and projects of transnational and transdisciplinary nature. Moreover, it is to be expected that these projects will move beyond the scope covered by the Action and, for example, address conspiracy theories in Africa and Asia. 06. The Action aims at equipping the major stakeholders with robust knowledge and strategies to understand and counter accusations of conspiracy directed against them or others. It thus will reach out and collaborate with scientists, politicians, journalists, NGOs and educators. 07. The Action aims at sustaining the collaboration of its members beyond its lifetime. This will be achieved by establishing close working relationships and promoting the formation of international and transdisciplinary research teams that formulate new research programmes and apply for national and international funding to conduct the research. 08. The Action will also help to train a new generation of scholars in this area of inquiry: by actively involving ECIs; by prioritising STSMs for ECIs at established centres of excellence; by offering placements with stakeholder organisations; and by organising two summer schools for MA and PhD students. 09. The measures taken to involve stakeholders will lead to close working relationships between academics and non-academics that will continue after the end of the Action. 10. The grant-holding university will provide funds to maintain the project website after the end of the Action. The bibliography will be regularly updated, as will be the database of experts who participated in the Action. Stakeholders will thus be able to identify and contact experts for the foreseeable future.
These are good contributions to broaden the knowledge about the efforts to silence any real discussion about any subjects labeled with the code word "Conspiracy Theory".
That way you can take any subject - even the obvious reality right besides - to scare the public and silence that way any subject politically or commercially wished.
Thank you for the welcome (Denglisch) - You are exactly right about how "conspiracy theory" is being used, it is a weapon against critical thinking and pursuit of difficult topics. - In comments above you refer to "conspiracy theory" being first employed by Karl Poppe in 1945 in his book "The Open Society and Its Enemies". This is quite recent and not so distant from when the entire field of "conspiracy theory" was developped as Roswell UFO incident happened in 1947 which clearly was a highpoint of intelligence directed operations in conspiracy culture. - In the texts from COMPACT it is insinuated that the same type of study that is now conducted in Europe have been done before - which means that Academia in the USA already have been down the roads Peter Knight will take the ‘Comparative Analysis of Conspiracy Theories in Europe‘. Interestingly, the president of COMPAC Peter Knight have written an encyclopedia* of "conspiracy theories in American History". - The emergence of a great number of American style terror events in Europe is clearly not happenstance in the growing European Academic interest in Conspiracy theory. - From the COMPACT MoU above i find that particularly the intention to help "stakeholders" to counter accusations of conspiracy particularly ooffensive as the commission tries to neutral in as much as they do not judge if a conspiracy is real or not, while they indiscrimately intend to defend the possible conspirators against any accusation of the sort. - In the UK they have a special unit at Goldsmiths that has held lectures on Conspiracy Theory as a psychological condition : the Goldsmiths Anomalistic Psychology Unit* headed by Professor Chris French since 2000, former editor of The Skeptic Magazine. Current members of the COMPACT comission has held lectures at Goldsmiths such as Dr Dan Jolley, Professor Karen Douglas and also Robert Brotherton (American author*). - https://youtu.be/1Yx3E1G9IMc Karen Douglas* On Conspiracy Theories Humanists UK – 10 Jan 2012 – 59:34 (mm:ss) — *Conspiracy Theories in American History: An Encyclopedia by Peter Knight https://books.google.fr/books/about/Conspiracy_Theories_in_American_History.html - *Goldsmiths Anomalistic Psychology Research Unit Invited Speaker Series https://www.gold.ac.uk/apru/speakers-archive/ - *Suspicious Minds: Why We Believe Conspiracy Theories by Robert Brotherton https://conspiracypsychology.com/2015/11/02/suspicious-minds-why-we-believe-conspiracy-theories/ - *Professor Karen M Douglas CREST Conspiracy Theory research database https://www.kent.ac.uk/psychology/people/douglask/crest-database-latest.xlsx
In the Conspiracy Theory Database elaborated by Karen Douglas for CREST* there are only refenced 16 books relevant to Conspiracy Theory before the 1970's and they seem to have missed Karl Poppe's 1945 book but referenced him for his 1966 second volume === •The psychology of rumor , Allport 1947 •The authoritarian personality, Adorno 1950 •The Sociology of Georg Simmel, Simmel 1950 •The functions of social conflict, Coser 1956 •The Democratic and the Authoritarian State: Essays in Political and Legal Theory, Marcuse 1957 •The Semisovereign People: A Realist's View of Democracy in America, Schattschneider 1960 •Intergroup Conflict and Cooperation: The Robbers Cave Experiment, Sherif 1961 •Anti-intellectualism in American life, Hofstadter 1963 •The standard edition of the complete psychological works of Sigmund Freud, Freud 1964 •The paranoid style in American politics, and other essays, Hofstadter 1964 •Conflict and the Web of Group-Affiliations, Simmel 1964 •Considerations on the Causes of the Romans and Thier Decline, Montesquieu 1965 •The crisis of the early Italian renaissance: Civic humanism and republican liberty in an age of classicism and tyranny, Baron 1966 •The Open Society and Its Enemies, Vol. 2: The High Tide of Profecy: Hegel, Marx, and the Aftermath, Popper 1966 •The ideological origins of the American Revolution, Bailyn 1967 •The slave power conspiracy and the paranoid style, Davis 1969 === *CREST is the Centre for Research and Evidence on Security Threats and is “partly” intelligence funded by their own admission..
- In the texts from COMPACT it is insinuated that the same type of study that is now conducted in Europe have been done before - which means that Academia in the USA already have been down the roads Peter Knight will take the ‘Comparative Analysis of Conspiracy Theories in Europe‘. Interestingly, the president of COMPAC Peter Knight have written an encyclopedia* of "conspiracy theories in American History". -
To be specific about chemtrails, i see them and also notice how they change even films to make us believe they were always present. I wonder what purpose they serve and why an intel operative* like G Edwards Griffin is promoting them, as anything he might say must be scrutinized two-fold. - The most fascinating part about anything that happens far away from direct human observation is that we are lied to and shepherded towards phony 'experts' who will give us an alternate theory that often is weaponised as well. A good exemple might be the 'Secret Space Program' fantasies that explains why all the footage of the Apollo Moon landing is fake - but that we have been to the Moon and even Mars.. - Yes indeed - in a free and democratic society, no topic should be prohibited. When some topic is cornered off, we already have to suspect there is something to hide. And when we procede with such logic - we soon will have to expect there is not one person alone that can control any particular topic or event, but rather several interested parties, who would then constitute a conspiracy... - In the way "theory" softens the nature of our sucpicions of a conspiracy, and that by doing research we often have at least circumstantial evidence - what expression would best describe our activity as amateur researchers? — *the article 'The Conspiracy Conspiracy' lays out how the entire field of conspiracy theory might be an Intellligence creation from the get-go http://allunreal.com/2018/07/the-conspiracy-conspiracy
The author information that figures in your (Denglish) attachment is from the Hungarian 'Critique and Humanism Journal' issue 48* - apparently available only in Hungarian. The contents of this issue on the 'Conspiratorial Mind' is available here. - The editor of the 'Critique and Humanism Journal' is 'Human and Social Studies Foundation (HSSF) and claims to be an 'independent non-governmental organization' founded in 1990 as 'Critique and Humanism' as an Association for disseminating scientific knowledge. It was re-registered as HSSF in 2002. Could be an Intel operation... One of the three Editors of the Journal is also a member of COMPACT (Todor Hristov)... - As you have noted, Butter & Knight together sign the article 'Bridging the Great Divide: Conspiracy Theory Research for the 21st Century' which can be downloaded here: http://www.academia.edu/20040327/Br...acy_Theory_Research_for_the_21st_Century — Critique & Humanism, Vol. 48, No. 2/2017 - ISSN:0861-1718 CONSPIRATORIAL MIND AND SOCIAL IMAGINATION Editorial: Lea Vajsova, Mila Mineva, Todor Hristov
In my case, I researched about Conspiracy Theories only because of the threat it has to public discussions like that of Chemtrails.
Butter etc. are taking a position: "Well, there is phenomenon. Let's observe and describe it."
By observation and description they start to classify the observed phenomenons as Popper did it.
They claim not to take a position in any way to the observed topic and sell themselves as scientific observers.
But: At that time as they start to observe and evaluate the observation they are starting to take a stand. A stand which is not scientifical because they don't deal with the content of this phenomenon.
It's like in a zoo observing the monkeys in a style: "Well, let's see what they are doing." "Really nice, these monkey. Interesting."
When any public individual are able to break the heavy programming we are subjected to through public education and MainStream Media, it will probably always be of a particular reason throught a topical subject that represent a personal interest. - In the pursuit of detailed information of any kind on problematic topics, the public will at some point run into walls of secrecy and face obstacles of protection for apparently no good reason. - Chemtrails is definately a particular topic where detailed documentation and public information is lacking, even moreso than with Chemtrails "big brother" : Global Warming, now sold short as just 'Climate Change'. - Many may consider Chemtrails a public discussion by the fact it is a part of the larger topic of Geoengineering and thus Global Warming, the Chemtrail issue is nevertheless commonly presented as a "conspiracy theory" and a fringe topic. - Climate change is itself under attack by the recent Academic efforts to marginalise and diagnose any form of conspiricist thought with unrational and obsessive behavior. -
David Runciman - A Climate of Conspiracy (Suspect Science: Climate Change, Epidemics, and Questions of Conspiracy) CRASSH Cambridge - 25 Sep 2015 - 43:12 (mm:ss) - Professor Runciman is one of the directors of the £1.5 million pound Leverhulme-funded project 'Conspiracy and Democracy', based at Cambridge University. Out of the six researchers that constitute this UK 'Conspiracy Theory' project, there are two that also are part of COMPACT (Andrew McKenzie-McHarg and Alfred Moore) - As you hint at, the attempts by Academia to "study" Conspiracy Theory skillfully avoid to adress any of the topics themselves in whatever scientific or rigourous manner. These commissions politics and rhetoric is to generalize and cherrypick examples that suit their real purpose which i suspect is to do detailed surveys of the conspiracy theory public, their psychological profiles* and who/where they are. - My impression of the Academic effort to obtain the means and manpower to study 'Conspiracy Theory' is that it is premeditated in its intention to not do any in-depth, objective study of the topics they now villify with selected appeal to popularity argumants on topics such as Climate Change, Chemtrails or Vaccinations. In other words, these commissions are themselves part of the conspiracy that cause such things as Chemtrails and they are well aware of their roles. - Another point that is speculative, but nevertheless worth to keep in mind, is that the most savory arguments the do-good-proffessors of Academic Conspiracy Theory commissions will use, they often come from exagerrated points of view that appear construed in the first place. As mentionned, the fact that G Edward Griffin was one of the main figures* in alerting the public to chemtrails should in itself be a warning sign for the whole movement that has followed. — *some researchers even will or have already conducted "live studies" of conspiracy communities, meaning they read and comment on conspiracy culture forums and websites. - *"Red Pill EXPO is the major annual event of Red Pill University, founded in 2017 to help truth seekers better understand how the world really works – contrary, in many cases, to commonly held illusions. The visionary behind the University is G. Edward Griffin..." https://redpillexpo.org https://redpilluniversity.org[b][/b]
To be specific about chemtrails, i see them and also notice how they change even films to make us believe they were always present. I wonder what purpose they serve and why an intel operative* like G Edwards Griffin is promoting them, as anything he might say must be scrutinized two-fold.
I would like to know more about G Edwards Griffin as an intel operative*.
David Runciman - A Climate of Conspiracy (Suspect Science: Climate Change, Epidemics, and Questions of Conspiracy) CRASSH Cambridge - 25 Sep 2015 - 43:12 (mm:ss) -
Runciman claims that we live in a "conspiracist age" - promoting his own research project that way - he embezzles at the same time that after the break-down of communism - even in capitalist China - we live in an age of financial capitalism which is forcing to exploit more and more areas which have not been exploited before. Globally, we have 80 trillion US$ assets in the real economy versus 300 trillion US$ assets in the financial economy (virtual economy): http://www.visualcapitalist.com/74-trillion-global-economy-one-chart/
The rich and the powerful people: who is governing Germany - Unequalcountry (Ungleichland - artificial word) (3/3): Power | WDR Documentation Minute: 27 Second: 56
Minute: 21 Second: 17
This means that there is an enormous pressure coming from the financial economy part of the total economy towards the real economy to development ever more profiting chances out of areas which had not been exploited until now.
If David Runciman is wondering that there are so many "conspiracist" moments in the field of the topic of climate change I am not wondering at all. He admits even that there is only small antisemitic drive or "Nazi stuff" in those "conspiracy theories".
For me, the reason is clear. "Just follow the money."
Runciman himself claims that the mindset of "Just follow the money." is a conspiracy theory in itself - protecting that way capitalism as the only, ultimate and holy truth - making it objective that way. And again Runciman embezzles that way that he has to live from something - and obviously the topic "climate change" is to be the runner to keep the economy going. Many investments were already made and 1.4 million British Pounds seems to be cheap to keep ideologically the myth of climate change running.
As they don't have any idea or knowledge of the topic they are researching in they have to deal with the topic only from the point of view with a theory of ideas which is not backed by any hard science. Of course, with the establishment in the back they can also ignore the logarithmic decreasing of the glashouse effect of CO². The unscientifical approach of as an mere "idea" discredit the whole climate change debate even further as the only political function of the COMPACT project is to regain and stabilize the superiority in public opinion.
As other "conspiracy theories" don't play that kind of role in the public arena the topic "climate change" IS THE topic. And this needs a ideological foundation.
Below you may look at a pure Jeff Koon Life Style:
If David Runciman is wondering that there are so many "conspiracist" moments in the field of the topic of climate change I am not wondering at all. He admits even that there is only small antisemitic drive or "Nazi stuff" in those "conspiracy theories".
For me, the reason is clear. "Just follow the money."
There is so much wrong about how "Climate Change" is researched and promoted, and the term itself has become overly general and nonsensical. - The base assumption behind Climate Change is that human activity can cause the weather to change, which in itself appears to be reasonable. But is it ? Would we live in a world with constant temperatures and nice weather without flooding and earthquakes if humans were not around ? - Climate is by nature changing and the catastrophes we deem to come from human activity are not in any way unnatural or endangering nature itself but rather part of a vast natural ecosystem. - But for humans, climate has always been a threat to our survival as we are such a small part of the Earth’s ecosystem. The Climate has therefore always been a fearsome aspect to civilization and this natural fear is what seems to be exploited in favor of government taxation of the public. - What is particularly interesting in this scenario is that the Elite do seem to be very interested in controlling the natural Climate. With the scale of nature being what it is, the human effort to influence weather would require a massive enterprise (ie chemtrails) and investment. - So, when you (Denglish) talk about following the money, do you speak of who makes the profits from controlling weather or who finances the research and means required to control it ?
Originally Posted by Denglisch
I would like to know more about G Edwards Griffin as an intel operative*. I have never heard of that.
Just as with weather, the Elite are obsessed with control. Any official activity or politics will unmistakably be met with opposition and if you do not control this basic dialectic - you have no control. This is of course a very basic observation, but it is important as it means that the Elite cannot plan just their actions and politics but they also have to plan the opposition to their implemented actions and politics in order to maintain control. - It is not common that "Conspiracy Theory and Theorists" are considered part of the Elite effort to control official actions and politics as this type of "opposition" is considered "grass-roots" and natural. - My opinion* is that Conspiracy Theory & Theorists are indeed a well planned and organised intelligence controlled opposition to official actions and politics, and that the major figures of any conspiracy theory are intelligence operatives with heavy funding - enough to fund numerous films, documentaries and conferences as is the case with G Edward Griffin ( wikipedia, Imdb ). === G Edward Griffin films & documentaries = 1966 Anarchy U.S.A. 1969 The Capitalist Conspiracy 1974 World Without Cancer 1982 No Place to Hide: The Strategy and Tactics of Terrorism 1985 The Red Reality in Central America 1993 The Discovery of Noah's Ark 1994 The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve 2004 Invisible Ballots 2010 What in the World Are They Spraying? 2015 The New Science of Age Reversal 2015 Freedom in One Lesson: A Discourse 2016 The science of seed-based nutrition 2017 Red Pill Expo 2017 2017 Global Warming: An Inconvenient Lie 2017 Red Pill Expo 2017 === - Griffin has espoused a number of Conspiracy Theories over the years and has been a proponent in Conspiracy Theories on the UN, Federal Reserve, Cancer, Aids, Noah's Ark and finally Chemtrails. - All these subjects fall in line with important Elite actions and Griffin goes after these topics with apparently an important network, budgets and promotional campaigns. Now this could be natural - but i do not find the trails Griffin leave behind any more natural than the persistent trails planes leave in the sky. - The reason Conspiracy Theories have become a "thing" is because the Elite is promoting these theories. And the Elite would only logically promote these theories because they control the message & messengers in the first place - as imo is the case with Griffin. - The Red Pill EXPO is the major annual event of Red Pill University, founded in 2017 by G Edward Griffin — *more on why Conspiracy theories and theorists probably are part of secretly controlled opposition the article 'The Conspiracy Conspiracy' http://allunreal.com/2018/07/the-conspiracy-conspiracy
So, when you (Denglish) talk about following the money, do you speak of who makes the profits from controlling weather or who finances the research and means required to control it ?
As you have put it yourself: Control.
Following the money does not mean only to find somebody who gets the profits but also to find someone who controls the profit structure and who is developing a profit structure.
An example: the transfer from a fossile fueled economy to a CO²-free economy means that there will be less employees to run the economy. An E-car has a motor with less parts in it. The added value is lower and therefore less difficult to be produced which means fewer profits in each production step. The profit structure to produce a car will be changed.
But who is running the CO²-campaign? Who has the power to bring this topic into the minds of the masses again and again? Who has the power to change the profit structure by scaring a whole populace?`
The same with the planned cashless society which will enslave everybody. These are long-term strategies as David Keith put it himself: The values within the populace change only in the long run.
"In David Rockefeller's book 'Memoirs' he admits he is part of a secret cabal working to destroy the United States and create a new world order.Here is the direct quote from his book, pg 405:
| Some even believe we [Rockefeller family] are part of a secret cabal working against the best interests of the United States, characterizing my family and me as 'internationalists' and of conspiring with others around the world to build a more integrated global political and economic structure - One World, if you will.If that's the charge, I stand guilty, and I am proud of it |
Berlin - Die Szene der sogenannten Reichsbürger in Deutschland wächst enorm. Die Zahl stieg binnen des vergangenen Jahres um 50 Prozent an - auf 15600 in diesem Januar, wie das Magazin Focus unter Berufung auf die Verfassungsschutzämter der Länder berichtet. Anfang 2017 gingen die Sicherheitsbehörden noch von etwa 10000 Reichsbürgern aus. Das Bundesamt für Verfassungsschutz wollte die Angaben am Freitag nicht bewerten und verwies auf die mit Stand Ende September veröffentlichte Zahl von 15000 Anhängern. Eine bewaffnete Gruppe innerhalb der Szene plant Focus zufolge offenbar den Aufbau einer eigenen 'Armee'. Entsprechende Bestrebungen hätten Verfassungsschutzämter in Ostdeutschland registriert. Sicherheitskreise hätten bestätigt, dass sich Reichsbürger bei einem konspirativen Treffen mit dem Aufbau einer militärischen Organisation befasst hätten. Reichsbürger erkennen die Bundesrepublik nicht als Staat an". "Süddeutsche Zeitung" (SZ), January 13th/14th 2018, Page 7
"Evermore 'Reichsbürger'
Berlin - The scene of the so called Reichsbürger in Germany is growing enormously. The number rose within the last year around 50 percent - to a 15600 this january, as the magazine Focus referring to the State Offices for the Protection of the Constitution (domestic secret service, Denglisch) of the (federal, Denglisch) states is reporting. In the beginning of 2017 the security authorities sprang from a number of about 10000 Reichsbürger. The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution (domestic secret service on the national level, Denglisch) did not want to evaluate the statement on friday and indicated the number of 15000 proponents published at end of september. An armed group within the scene is obviously planning - according to Focus the buildup of an own 'army'. Corresponding aspirations were registered by State Offices for the Protection of the Constitution in Eastgermany. Security sources had confirmed that Reichsbürger considered a buildup of a military organisation during a conspirative meeting. Reichsbürger are not acknowledging the Federal Republic as a state". (Translation bei Denglisch)
As there were "conspirative apartments" of the RAF (Rote Armee Fraktion (Red Army Fraction)) (extreme left terrorist group) and their organizations afterwards in the seventies and eighties there are now "conspirative meetings" of a group with the name "Reichsbürger". As the "Süddeutsche Zeitung" is a main stream daily newspaper in Munich, Bavaria it is of interest to note in what context the word "conspiracy" is used.
Usually - as it is noted already in one of the posts above - a conspiracy is organized clandestinely. Of course, that way nobody knows anything about a conspirative intention - except those who are consciously participating in such an intention. Unfortunately, in this small news note of the SZ there is no information who was participating in such an alleged meeting. The reasons of noinformation are in the open: It would endanger the source(s) of information. On the other side the reader is forced by such a method of news to believe it. But why should he or she do so, if other kinds of information are called a conspiracy theory although every information ought to be investigated seperately from its origin as true or not true? Who has the oligopoly or monopoly of interpretation of an information as a "conspiracy theory"? As we all know: secret services have special rights. And we know that members of the secret services are only human. And as humans in a secret service organization they may fail as other humans outside do also. In this context the "Süddeutsche Zeitung" declares a circumstance as a conspiracy and in others not. As the "Süddeutsche Zeitung" claims to be an investigative newspaper it is difficult to understand why it is not investigating obvious proofs like this: http://globalskywatch.com/chemtrails/ubbthreads.php?ubb=cfrm&c=24#TestResults . It is even worse. They are not just not investigating such proofs but they are actively refusing to investigate such links. In the end it declares a topic like this to a theory. And because of the refusal of perception of such a topic the conclusion can only be that it is assumed by the SZ as a nonreality. It does not exist. The consequence: these proofs must be a theory of a conspiracy as these proofs are not existing. A conspiracy because there are people who are insisting in investigating a circumstance that does not "exist". So, what are the motives of insistance by these people to investigate something which does not exist? It can only be a conspiracy which hides a deeper reason for inventing such tests. Inherent to this assumption is that a conspiracy is a secretive arrangement to reach a certain goal. Although this goal is plausible - namely to prove that there are elements in the atmosphere where they are not supposed to be - it is assumed that it has a deeper - other - meaning which is conspired about. Secretive arrangement? Who knows about it? Nobody except to the participants of such a suspected arrangement. And they are keeping presumably their mouth shut.
Now, where is the legal proof for such an alleged conspiracy without witnesses of this guessed secretive arrangement to invent such test results? Well, it is difficult to find a legal proof in a context with a guessed secretive arrangement. But it is much simpler to deal with this matter: Why should some hundred tests be such a threat to exclude them from the public discourse? Why should it be purposeful to discredit quite a bit of people who are insisting in dealing with this matter as "strange"?
The answer is easy: It is threatening the postdemocracy.
And to make it a little bit more plausible: the impetus of the reality weakening term "conspiracy" is even more weakened by the introduction of a "theory" to the term "conspiracy".
A theory has certain qualifications to be a theory. Usually, it is an plausible imagination about how a difficult-to-understand reality might work.
But this doesn't matter in this case as "theory" ought to have only a weakening function in the context with the term "conspiracy" which is because of the alleged secretive arrangement already reality weak by itself. A theory is not yet real science as it waits for its proof by the empirical evidence. But the scientific connotation of the word "theory" is used in such a way that it misses the needed empirical evidence. It is merely a thought of how things may work. But as these tests are not percepted as empirical evidence because they did not originated from postdemocratic structures "theory" can not be proven as correct. It is not even tried to find an alternative explanation for these test results. The reality value of the term "theory" stays in the negative field and confirms even more the negative reality value of the claimed "conspiracy". They are strengthening each other in their negative reality value. Now, we have a perfect label to confirm the own view of reality and discredit another view of reality as a "conspiracy theory". Thus, the term "conspiracy theory" gets ready for the realm of phantasy and by insistance of truthfulness of such a "theory" the phantasy claim is getting even stronger and is changed into delusionality as the insistance of this kind of "phantasy" as truth must be pathological.
And in this moment we have worked out the difference between "conspiracy" and "conspiracy". The first one is defined for public space and assumed as true. It serves the common good. The latter one is defined for private use in a colloquial meaning and assumed as pathological. The latter one does not serve the common good.
But after all this theorizing about the linguistic usage of the term "conspiracy theory" there is a question in the open: Is it really that way?
In the originary working space and the herein implicit projection fields of a state authority into the public space there can't be delusionality. The state is supposed to be the representative of the common good. But the common good is usually defined by those in power. But as we know from the time of Hitler this is obviously wrong. Hitler was THE state authority (Führer-principle) by itself and it shows that a state authority may be delusional, too. You even may take examples for state delusionality from today: Zimbabwe on the one side and Botswana on the other side.
The same may be the case with the claim of a conspirative meeting of the Reichsbürger. Why? Well, who told the State Offices for the Protection of the Constitution that there was such a meeting? One person? Then it compares to Hitler. As this information relies only to ONE person. Two or more persons? That was exactly the reason why the political party NPD (extreme right wing) was not abolished by the Federal Constitutional Court despite of such an application by the Federal Ministry of the Interior: The Federal Constitutional Court did not know who inside the NPD was really accountable to what NPD did politically. Too many undercover agents were working for the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution inside the NPD so that it was not clear who was the authentic voice of the NPD. The Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution or the few responsible persons not working for the Federal Office for the Protection of the Constitution. That way the application for prohibition of the NPD was delusional. Why? Because there was no REAL voice of the NPD and Federal Ministry of the Interior put an application for prohibition of its own personnel. A quite absurd situation. One may even suspect a PSYOP operation that the NPD even exists.
The latter examples - Hitler and the NPD - are showing that a state authority can be very well as delusional as small groups of people or a sole person.
How can we know that the "conspirative meeting" of the Reichsbürger was real if we don't know how many undercover agents are working inside the Reichsbürger? That way the claim of the state authority can be described as delusional and following that as a "conspiracy theory". In the case of the NPD the state authority had developed the scripts of its own conspiracy reality. This might be also the case with the Reichsbürger. We just don't know. Strangely enough the usage of the term "conspirative meeting" in this news note of the "Süddeutsche Zeitung" it is getting even stranger that the newspaper is using the word "militärisch" as this term is reserved for legally recognized states: "A military or an armed force is a professional organization formally authorized by a sovereign state to use lethal or deadly force and weapons to support the interests of the state." ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military ) A conspiracy theory? In German: " (...) Sie stehen unter einem einheitlichen Kommando, das dem Staat gegenüber für die Führung der Unterstellten verantwortlich ist, (...)" https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militär The "Süddeutsche Zeitung" is conceding that way the Reichbürger a status of state which they don't have but claim. The "Süddeutsche Zeitung" helps the Reichbürger to be enhanced. Will there be a future war "Federal Republic of Germany" versus "Deutsches Reich"? The behavior of the "Süddeutsche Zeitung" in this news note insinuates this.
Yes, as we may guess from the kind of behavior of this secret service towards the NPD we may assume that within the Reichsbürger there are also undercover agents. But nobody is telling us how many of them this authority has inside the Reichsbürger.
Of course, that is the way secret services are working. They might be right, but they might be also wrong. We just don't know.
And now the question: Why is the "Süddeutsche Zeitung" publishing a perhaps "conspiracy theory" of the State Offices for the Protection of the Constitution and not others contents of others alleged "conspiracy theories"?
As Israel's Mossad has captured the atomic archive of Iran it can be shown that the found double state structures had a purposeful clandestine character disguising and deceiving the reality:
1. the open civil part of the Iranian government 2. the clandestine part of the Iranian government
Of course, Israel has its own motifs to present such documents to the public: a publicly acceptable justification for a possible intervention. On the other hand the publication of such documents confirm only what populaces in the whole world are suspecting about their own governments anyways.
In the context of nuclear research this is not really new. There are and were so many states in the world who were and are wanting the nuclear bomb. The newest example North Korea. So, the news coming from Israel are not really new. And the nervosity around nuclear bombs neither.
What makes the case of the Iranian government so interesting is the fact that obviously - if the Israelian material is true - we have a black and white documentary proof, that there - at least - were clandestine and open structures organized by a state to deceive the public, the enemy or whoever in a conspirative way. We have protocols of discussions made in the top of the Iranian government showing the motifs of such conspirative plans.
In reality, Iran is the best proof that governments may conspire in general. Not only the state of Iran.
An excerpt from an article about this material:
"Explosive Daten aus Teheran Holger Stark (...) Die Sammlung reicht bis Ende der Neunzigerjahre zurück, in jene Zeit, als die iranische Staatsführung offenbar den Entschluss fasste, Uran nicht nur zu zivilen Zwecken anzureichern, sondern weiter zu gehen: bis zur Bombe. In einer Beschlussvorlage für den iranischen Rat für Hochtechnologie, dem das geistliche Oberhaupt Ajatollah Chamenei, der Verteidigungsminister sowie der heutige Präsident Ruhani angehörten, ist detailliiert aufgelistet, welche Schritte dafür nötig sind. Vorerst fünf Sprengsätze sollten die Techniker demnach zusammenschrauben, mit einer Sprengkraft von jeweils zehn Kilotonnen TNT - annähernd die Sprengkraft der Bombe von Hiroshima. Die Anweisung ist undatiert, vermutlich ist sie um Jahrtausendwende erteilt worden. Den Unterlagen zufolge genehmigte der Rat die Pläne. Für ein Nuklearprogramm braucht man, grob gesagt, eine effektive Urananreicherung, einen Zünder, der die Kettenreaktion auslöst, sowie die Implementierung in eine Rakete, die die Bombe später zu ihrem Ziel trägt. Die Dokumente, die nun vorliegen, erlauben einen Einblick, wie systematisch die Iraner zu all diesen Komplexen geforscht haben. Nach Angaben der Israelis sind die erbeuteten technischen Zeichnungen und Pläne so ausgefeilt, dass sie als minutiöse Anleitung zum Bau der Bombe dienen können. Zu den interessantesten Funden zählen Fotos und Dokumente zu einer bislang unbekannten Sprengkammer auf dem Militärstützpunkt Parchin, etwa 30 Kilometer südöstlich von Teheran gelegen. Der Stützpunkt ist der Internationalen Atomenergiebehörde IAEA, die im Iran seit vielen Jahren Inspektionen durchführt, seit Langem bekannt - aber wann auch immer die internationalen Experten vor Ort auftauchten, wirkte das Gelände überraschend aufgeräumt. Fotos zeigen nun, dass die Iraner dort eine spezielle Sprengkammer errichtet hatten, die aussah wie ein besonders gut isolierter Wassertank und offenbar dazu diente, den Zündmechanismus der Bombe zu erproben - und die immer dann demontiert wurde, wenn die IAEA-Inspektoren ihren Besuch ankündigten. Den erbeuteten Unterlagen zufolge testeten die Iraner in dieser Sprengkammer im Februar 2002 einen Sprengsatz, der dafür gedacht war, die Kettenreaktion im nuklearen Kern der Bombe auszulösen. Der Zünder, der auf iranischen Fotos zu sehen ist, hat etwa den Umfang eines Basketballs und glänzt silbern, als hätten ihn die Techniker gerade frisch poliert; außen an der Kammer waren Sensoren zur Überwachung installiert. 'Reguläre Tests in der Kammer sind ab sofort genehmigt', notierten die Iraner zufrieden in einem Vermerk. Bestandteil des Atomarchivs sind auch Tausende von Fotos, die iranische Wissenschaftler und Politiker bei der Arbeit zeigen, manche davon Selfies. Eine Bilderserie zeigt einen grau melierten Herrn in weißem Hemd, der mit Ohrschützern und einer Schutzbrille vor der Sprengkammer in Parchin steht und zufrieden lächelnd eine Testzündung verfolgt. Die Israelis wollen ihn als Mohammad Tehranchi identifiziert haben, einen prominenten iranischen Physiker, der heute Kanzler der Schahid-Beheschti-Universität in Teheran ist. Seine Einbindung zeigt, wie eng zivile und militärische Forschung miteinander verflochten waren. Im Sommer 2003, nachdem die amerikanische Armee den Irak erobert hatte, wurden die Mullahs allerdings nervös. Die markigen Reden des damaligen US-Präsidenten George W. Bush, der von einer 'Achse des Bösen' sprach, die neben dem Irak auch den Iran und Nordkorea umfasse, ließen sie fürchten, die Amerikaner seien bereit, von Bagdad aus bis nach Teheran weiterzumaschieren. Die Dokumente spiegeln die Diskussion wider, die damals innerhalb der iranischen Nomenklatura geführt wurde. In einer internen Anweisung des Verteidigungsministers hieß es beispielsweise, das Nuklearprogramm werde 'zweigeteilt: in einen offenen Teil mit einer regulären Struktur und einen klandestinen mit einer Geheimstruktur'. Es gehe darum, 'keine identifizierbaren Spuren zu hinterlassen'. In einem Mailwechsel von August und September 2003 tauschten sich mehrere iranische Atomwissenschaftler darüber aus, das 'offene Aktivitäten solche sind, die als Teil von etwas anderem erklärt werden können und nicht als Bestandteil eines Projekts, für das wir keine Erklärung haben'. Für die Forschung an Neutronen gebe es beispielsweise keine sinnvolle Erklärung, sie müsse verdeckt erfolgen. (...)" DIE ZEIT September 13th 2018, page 6 https://www.zeit.de/2018/38/iran-israel-atomprogramm-mossad
Translation: "When Minister of the Interior Sarkozy dwelled still on his conspiracy theories, it was ironacal enough a report of the secret service which put it differentiated straight."
Norman Dodd On Tax Exempt Foundations https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Dodd Norman Dodd was interviewed in 1982 by G. Edward Griffin regarding the time he spent as the head researcher for the Reece Committee.
Josef Trappel, Werner A. Meier, Klaus Schrape, Michaela Wölk Die gesellschaftlichen Folgen der Medienkonzentration Opladen 2002 http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/1026917737 https://link.springer.com/book/10.1007%2F978-3-663-09713-6 https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/bfm%3A978-3-663-09713-6%2F1.pdf
The public entity "Landesanstalt für Medien Nordrhein-Westfalen" of the federal state of Northrhine-Westfalia confirms with the publication of this book the basic background of the reasons of the uniformal public opinion regarding the topic of immigration in the years after 2014: the concentration of media. Only this concentration of media could make the uniformity of public opinion to this topic possible.
It means in argumentum e contrario that there is no free public opinion - at least in key topics.
So far to the objectivity of investigation in the media regarding the existence of "chemtrails".
"Flash Crash Das Komplott der Großinvestoren! Gastautor: Markus Fugmann | 12.02.2018, 11:38 | 2229 | 0 | 0 4
In der vergangenen Woche ist es an der New Yorker Aktienbörse mehrmals zu sogenannten „Flash-Crashs“ gekommen. Darunter versteht man extreme Kurseinbrüche, die nur wenige Minuten andauern und in deren Folge sich die Kurse zu einem beträchtlichen Teil wieder erholen. In den Massenmedien werden diese „Flash-Crashs“ oft als nicht vorhersehbare, urplötzlich eintretende Ereignisse dargestellt, die besonders die großen Marktteilnehmer mit ihren riesigen Einsätzen hart treffen.
English translation: "Flash Crash The conspiracy of big investors! guest author: Markus Fugmann | February 12th 2018, 11:38 | 2229 | 0 | 0 4
In the last week in the New York stock exchange there were repeatedly so called 'Flash-Crashs'. This means extreme sudden fall in prices which are lasting only a few minutes and which subsequently are considerably staging a rally again. In the mass media these "Flash-Crashs" are presented as often not foreseeable, very sudden joining events, which are hurting especially the big market participants with their huge stakes.
Exactly the opposite is the case in reality: Flash crashs can be achieved by purpose by the big market participants like hedgefonds and international big banks. The loosers of the game are the small investors."
Picture below:
"Markus Fugmann Chefanalyst, actior AG
Markus Fugmann ist Chefanalyst der actior AG und Redakteur bei www.finanzmarktwelt.de. Die actior AG bietet Selbsthändlern die Möglichkeit, an allen gängigen Märkten der Welt im Bereich CFDs, Futures, Aktien und Devisen zu Top-Konditionen zu handeln. Darüber hinaus erhalten Kunden kostenlose Informationsabende, Seminare, One-to-One Coaching, allgemeine Einführungen in die Handelsplattformen und Märkte."
English translation: "Markus Fugmann is chief analyst of the actior share society (AG) and editor at www.finanzmarktwelt.de . The actior AG is offering even dealers the possibility to trade at all established world markets in the field of CFDs, Futures, shares and forex to top conditions. Above the customers are receiving gratuitous information evenings, seminars, One-to-One Coaching, general introductions into the trading platforms and markets."
As we see: Conspiracies are normal in business.
" „Flash-Crash“ an den Börsen: Wie Großinvestoren Kleinanleger über den Tisch ziehen
(...) Das Ganze funktioniert folgendermaßen: Werfen ein oder mehrere Hedgefonds oder Großbanken gleichzeitig große Aktienpakete auf den Markt, dann bricht der Kurs der betreffenden Aktien blitzschnell kräftig ein. Viele Kleinanleger haben zum Schutz vor größeren Verlusten „Stop-Loss-Orders“ platziert, die dazu führen, dass ihre Aktien bei einem bestimmten Kursverlust automatisch verkauft werden. Meistens werden diese Orders bei einem Verlust von fünf Prozent aktiviert.
Hedgefonds-Betreiber müssen also nur dafür sorgen, dass es zu einem Kurssturz von mindestens fünf Prozent kommt. Dann können sie abwarten, bis eine Verkaufswelle der Kleinanleger mit Stop-Loss-Ordern einsetzt und den Kurs weiter in die Tiefe treibt. Sobald der Kursrückgang dann abebbt, können sie erneut einsteigen und die Kurse so wieder in die Höhe treiben. (...)" https://finanzmarktwelt.de/flash-cr...einanleger-ueber-den-tisch-ziehen-80997/
![[Linked Image]](http://hssfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/Broy-48_short-960x1238.png)
![[Linked Image]](https://i0.wp.com/allunreal.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/Red-Pill-expo-2017.jpg)