Yes, my remark was

Yes, my remark was tongue-in-cheek. Sort of.

However, it illustrates your point, Alabaster Jones 71, that some people see monsters under every bed and bogy men (sorry, make that bogy-persons) in every shadow. Without evidence compelling enough to make the reasonable person agree with them, these theories lack credibility and become subjects of ridicule, just as you say.

And yes, this applies to the Chief Illiniwek controversy, so I’m really not going off topic.

There is a small group within the University of Illinois community who has generated hysteria about the Chief. They have convinced themselves the Chief and the university are responsible for acts of racism and ill treatment toward Native Americans. Yes, these events did occur and are regrettable. No, the University of Illinois, the UI Marching Band, UI athletes, UI students, UI Alumni and the Chief had nothing to do with this unfortunate part of U.S. history. As one would turn to stone when looking upon Medusa, the conspiracy has it that one will turn into a racist bigot when looking upon the Chief Logo or watching the Chief dance at halftime. Evidence? Look at “The Next Dance” emails sent by the Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs’ office a couple years ago. Robert Warrior senses “danger, hatred, and genocidal perspective” in the Chief tradition. William Berry claims to know peoples' racial prejudices simply by watching them walk through The Assembly Hall’s front door. Other correspondence by Steven Kaufman equates the Chief logo with a swastika. In forty-two years in this community, I haven’t seen any evidence of danger, hatred or genocide against Native Americans. This is just my opinion, but I don’t see it happening here in the foreseeable future. If there really is such conspiracy against Native Americans, Ms. Romano, Ms. Gonzalez, Mr. Berry, Mr. Warrior, Steven Kaufman and the other anti-Chief activists are doing a darn poor job of exposing it. I think the third paragraph of your open letter and the first sentence of your eighth paragraph hit this particular nail right on the head.

Now, as far as me being a “sheeple,” I’ve found The Government you distrust so much has, all things considered, been pretty reasonable. My father toured many of the Pacific Islands risking his life for it almost seventy years ago. As a result, I can spend an hour writing my opinions for the local newspaper, either agreeing or disagreeing with The Man, as I choose, without fear of reprisal. I can get all militant and let the red mist of activism fuel inflammatory rhetoric. Or not. That's my choice. Sure, U.S. politics is going down the toilet now, but that’s because of partisan polarization and left/right extremism. The paranoia they provoke contributes to conspiracy theories.

I fully realize the U.S. does not provide a Utopian society or governance. Fully open, no. Crappy stuff going on, you bet. But I would challenge you to find more than a very small handful of places (on this planet, at least) that are anywhere near as tolerant of public scrutiny, to both the sitting powers and the opposition, as we are. In what other countries or cultures could you go to such lengths to profess governmental wrong doings (real or imaginary) without suffering consequences?

Press on with your investigations, and good luck. But please don’t forget how fortunate you are that you can do so, and with impunity.

My two cents.

Conspiracy Realists. It is

Conspiracy Realists.

It is amazing how personal attacks can take so many forms. In this case it comes cloaked in the generality of a group deemed to be somehow outside societies norm, an implied nefarious activity by individuals lacking mental normality.

Of course these charges are always made by those who rarely if ever by their own admission, fully review the materials presented or debate the specifics of a subject presented. In justifying their refusal to peer review submitted subject matter, they cite the lack of “authoritative” sources as justification in the outright rejection of alternative considerations.

I for one debated long and hard as to whether a reply should be provided, as this type of wasted effort becomes extremely tiresome, taking valuable time away from further research, review and writing, which is probably why Buz has not responded, since we have covered this same ground over and over and over again throughout these threads.

For no other reason than that of posterity, I present the following.

Alabaster,

Since you posted some points ON SUBJECT instead of simple “says-you”, I will respond in kind and to make things a little easier to follow, we’ll go through in chronological order, covering the points you’ve presented "par".

For hundreds of years our colleges and universities have been the archives and centers of learning. An open source of study and debate, relating to all issues associated with mans endeavors, be it work, home or religion. This synergy of understanding and study has now been radically breached through the introduction of digital technology that now begins to drain the power from those who once significantly molded the thoughts and beliefs of mankind.

A breach growing larger every day, as the digital pipeline of knowledge called the internet, flows ever faster between the collective intelligence of the world-wide community of man, a collective matrix that can now bypass the imperial fortress of educated inbreeding and media filtration.

So when someone like Michael Barkun becomes the poster child for discrediting those who look behind the curtain of the socio-political play, my first response as an ol’farm-boy is to question who he is and why. Who determines what he says is valid and what gives him the right over any one else, to define what is truth?

Now there are those who will argue that his degrees, work with the government and many published books give him validation, but do they? Do you believe that all college professors who consultant and write books should be listened to and unquestioned in all that they say?

As for “dividing the world sharply between the forces of light and the forces of darkness”, it’s done by billions of religious people ever day in every aspect of their lives. Attend any church in America on Sunday and all you will hear are the various lessons on recognizing and dealing with the daily yin and yang battles of life. Battles waged in all things, with “grey area“ thinking denounced as heresy, battles waged with single authors directing both sides.

Yes there have always been those who “are often presented as special, secret knowledge unknown or unappreciated by others”. Join any fraternal organization and you will be one of those people. The Masons are a prime example and one of the most powerful in the world, with virtually all western capitals sporting countless Masonic symbols, with even the statue of liberty proclaiming dozens of Masonic numerological and symbolic signs. An organization deeply ingrained throughout the world, whose members control vast portions of our business, political and social constructs.

Don’t you find it odd, that the very things that most people perceive as being something positive, is used as a negative in discrediting others? Well there’s a good reason why.

In these things that we have just covered, explains in full, the daily illusions perpetrated upon the un-initiated. You need to understand and be aware that “evil” is always in reverse, where white is black and black is white, where to be fully illuminated you must learn to walk, talk and write backwards.

This core theological foundation means that to take what is general perceived as good, such as high degrees, the understanding of “good and evil” and “secret knowledge”, can be easily used to discredit those who try and educate others, about what seems to be but is not. Especially vulnerable to discrediting, are those who are not in positions of power and prestige, citing their lack of being properly “accredited”, accusations that insinuate and validate the common mans training that to be believable and “intelligent” requires a degree.

When you stated that “I view conspiracy theorists as a confusing fallacy”, it seemed to indicate a complete rejection of all alternative thought, yet you went on in some detail as to agree with at least one key event (that of the JFK assassination) which highlights just how easily manipulated the population and society can be.

As in all things, confusion of the novice is inherent to the learning process. One has to study, practice and ask appropriate questions in order to learn and become aware of any given subject. Only after opening ones self to the learning process and allowing others more experienced to help you, can you begin to build insight and expertise of your own.

One of the things you need to understand about people like Buz and myself is that we do not “cherry pick information”. Our presentation of information is based upon years of study and research, watching closely a wide variety of sources that when combined and filtered for content present a clearer picture.

In my case it ranges from local, regional, national and international news organizations, a wide variety of magazines and corporate press releases that provide a benchmark in determining the structure of events. To then connect the dots and fill in the background of these many times superfluous stories by mainstream media, internet personal blogs and known to be always accurate writers are used in triangulating these stories and providing a full picture.

All are sources that let me see and question events such as the alleged bin Laden kill. An American altering event where one international media sources said only once early on that “no dialysis machine was found in the compound and all the other national US media outlets repeating the man never left the compound – impossible for someone on dialysis wouldn’t you say? An event widely believed throughout the Muslim world to be staged, because they all knew he had been dead for some time. So is that cherry picking?

“I agree that corporate owned media conglomorates usually are much more interested in their bottom lines… as opposed to… ethically report the news.” In this we could not be more in agreement, however it goes far beyond their interest as a corporate mouthpiece and are propaganda social-manipulation machines of the first magnitude.

As in any criminal activity, all you have to do is follow the money. Just look at who owns the media empires within America, look at who owns them, who manages them and who the staff and reporters are and you will see a terribly troubling pattern.

These are mass media institutions owned by a handful of people that not only manipulate the view of the news but filter it on a daily basis, with the latest filtering being the nationally hyped Iowa Straw Caucus.

And just what did you hear in the days after the poll? That a certain female candidate who has made a good living all her life from government monies had won, and that the third place candidate dropped out. No mention that she had won by a margin of 1% over the second place finisher who won nearly every straw poll in the 08 elections. And why?

Because the American people are on a need to know basis and they don’t need to know who that second place finisher is - a presidential candidate blackballed from the media and debates in 08. Just watch - the once hyped straw polls will disappear from the news cycle as he wins the other 49 straw polls, just like before.

Yes we refer to sheeple, because most of American’s are - and the above is just one example why. Do you brush your teeth with a dab of toothpaste the size of a pencil eraser? Do you wash dishes with just a few bubbles in the water? Probably not, because Americans are trained through thousands of hours of subliminal product training to use larger amounts, and those are the simplest areas of concern for the ruling elite.

“I view your sources to be unreliable for exactly the same reason I view the mainstream, corporate owned media to be reliable”. There is a huge difference between the mainstream media and the low-profit or non-profit groups and individuals from which “some” of our information comes from. The first has massive vested interest in maintaining the illusions, the others risk much in exposing the truth. Who do you think would be more incline to tell the truth?

“personally attached to conspiracy theories, since that fact alone makes you appear biased and unreliable.” Herein lay one of the primary obstacles in the general population being able to open their eyes. Any time a radical idea is presented, such as the Earth being round, evolution, etc, the messengers are attacked as being heretics’. Looking back across virtually all of these threads and those of the old All Around Danville and you will find virtually nothing that address specific points by those opposing our words and always boils down to personal character attacks.

Even this thread is all about discrediting the messengers and has virtually nothing to do about material subject or specific content. Never do you see anything in contrary to what I just wrote about the 50 straw polls that will soon have a media blackout. These attacks are a growing process that will soon go viral and national, as the crack-down has already begun on people like Buz and myself, using local resources and citizens in “targeting” those who are a threat to the Government by questioning what others are told. A process now outlined in a recent nine page Presidential position paper on the subject.

I for one have risked much in challenging the local illuminati and even more presenting what I do here. First hand experiences that even after taking a specific case to county leadership and local media, found it to be fruitless efforts that now places me at greater risk.

As for “bias and unreliable”, are you saying that anyone who has an in-depth and expansive working knowledge in a given subject is bias and therefore untrustworthy, and could you please point to even one post of Buz or myself, where you can prove the libel you have just leveled against us?

“I am a firm believer in not black and white thinking but in gray thinking”. What you are referring to is what is called “relativism” a philosophy promoted by those who wish to cloud the minds of the masses, institutionalized training initiated in the early part of the last century by a renowned Illuminist at the college level that has now permeated every aspect of our lives. A multi-generational implementation like most illuminati plans that compartmentalizes and keeps each new generation from seeing what came before and therefore the whole plan.

Relativism has now become a standard train of conciseness for most Americans, allowing for easy control of the population. That broad middle ground, easy road and comfortable trail most traveled by the masses, a wide place where the herd can be easily nudged either one way or the other, since nothing is of certain except the far sides of right or wrong that are believed to be out of bounds.

This training from infancy, enforced through early education and solidified in the forges of University Academia, provide the ruling elite with not only unquestioning working drones but unquestioning citizens, who will never challenge the authority of the state but will easily attack and report those who are perceived to be threats to the state because of their questioning of authority.

In short, truth can never be found in gray areas - truth either is or it is not. It is not relative nor can it ever be, for if something is not truth then it is not. To believe that truths can be relative is to completely reject the idea of truth, since it cannot exist as long as there are questions to its validity, thus making it a sans-truth.

I assume that we are on the same page and believe in the same thing when you stated; (the continuing takeover of the American people by greedy corporate interests). But it’s not just the corporate takeover but the elimination of our rights and the accelerating move by our federal powers in controlling the population that terrifies not only me but if you listen to any talk radio these days, millions of conservatives.

As for us, (twist it into something that is so simple that it can't be true.), why can’t it? Isn’t the most obvious always the most in-obvious, politicians all the time convince the voters that they are for them and yet rarely are. We have posted countless instances of things being in plain site and from what you would call “official” sources yet you refuse to acknowledge their purpose.

Furthermore I must object strongly to your statement that we “revert to the easiest possible solution.” What we present does not come easy by any means, it is complex and woven so tight that is has taken thousand of hours in research and reading, struggling with immense tombs of books and articles by countless authors and reporters to arrive at some of the truths we present.

At first glance it may look simple and if it were - more would understand. Even though we break things down and present them in the most basic way we can, relative thought keeps the mind clouded and eyes closed on what can easily be seen by those who have eyes to see.

In summary, it has been my observation that those who continue to attack our character and presentations, spend little time in actually following the events of which we speak. There is never an attempt to fully study or counter any specific point of information nor are any altering points presented, in turn we continue to provide countless angular points of reference to our posts from countless individuals who possess in-depth subject knowledge on a given subject who over years have provided consistent truths.

Over the last several years Buz and myself have posted thousands of posts on countless subjects. Perhaps only rarely have those who dismiss our work ever present counter points to the in-depth replies we present. This thread is just more of the same, never subject specific but generally dismissive of those who speak real truths.

But then - that is what relativism is all about, herding the masses down the broad lane of grey matter, telling them that the wolf will get them if they stray to far to the edges. Making sure groups like the Greens or Libertarians are kept along the edges, so the herd doesn’t get to close.

Yatiri - As for political ideology, what ideology would that be? Once again a sweeping statement with no specific point of reference, a cheep shot indeed and typical of those who challenge our presentations, as you will find virtually no political leanings in Buz or my work, other than liberty and freedoms, which have now become the enemy of the state we are in.

But the real irony in all of this is how virtually all “conspiracies” eventually turn out to be realities, from the killing of the democratically elected President of Iran by the CIA to continuing revelations about the Kennedy assassination, nearly every story that starts out as a conspiracy eventually ends up being a truth.

One great example are the reports coming out of Iraq at the beginning of the war, of urban battle aftermaths where vehicles were melted and bodies charred beyond recognition. The internet backwaters floated the “theory” that the US was using some sort of laser based or particle based weaponry – crazy hu? A few weeks back it was announced through “official media outlets” that the pentagon has now ordered laser beam weapons systems.

Just one more of those crazy conspiracy theories that became reality.

I share the frustration. My

I share the frustration. My way of dealing with it is that I just don't debate them.

When folks aren't committed to the truth and don't debate using facts and reason/logic, it is useless and meaningless to have a conversation.

Of interest is the partisan nature of the conspiracy theorist. Usually there is political ideology and it trumps the truth or reason in the conspiracist,