People are making a lot of money out of conspiracy theories

Monty Burnz

People are making a lot of money out of conspiracy theories: discuss.

whiteonion

Monty Burnz wrote: »

People are making a lot of money out of conspiracy theories: discuss.

How much money is Alex Jones making out of Prisonplanet and Infowars? If anyone is making money it would be him.

namloc1980

Monty Burnz wrote: »

People are making a lot of money out of conspiracy theories: discuss.

Ok, I'll ask the question......can you provide EVIDENCE to support your claim?

Monty Burnz

namloc1980 wrote: »

Ok, I'll ask the question......can you provide EVIDENCE to support your claim?

Dammit. Foiled again.

joebucks

Interesting topic MB. It would be very interesting to find out how much sites like prisonplanet earn from advertising Colloidal Silver on the site. Or how much David Icke earns from book sales. Surely these guys have to declare all of their revenue like any other business. I wonder would the likes of Icke avoid paying tax due to declaring himself either a sovereign or look for an artists exemption.

Monty Burnz

There is certainly money being made by authors on CT topics - this was the original source of money back in the olden days, pre-internet. Well that and lecture tours I guess. Erich Von Daniken and guys like that writing very entertaining books about ancient aliens etc.

In fact, you could probably trace this right back to the books about faeries and such back in the 19th century and the early conspiracy theories about Jews or other out-groups. Going that far back, I guess things become more related to the occult.

Or, to look at it another way, a tradition that existed of occult organisations and books on such subjects became more secular in the 20th century. The hidden knowledge became less concerned with religion and magic and more concerned with money and materialist issues (oil, power etc.).

I'm sure there's an interesting point in there somewhere, but it's late here and I'm off to bed

Jeboa Safari

joebucks wrote: »

Interesting topic MB. It would be very interesting to find out how much sites like prisonplanet earn from advertising Colloidal Silver on the site. Or how much David Icke earns from book sales. Surely these guys have to declare all of their revenue like any other business. I wonder would the likes of Icke avoid paying tax due to declaring himself either a sovereign or look for an artists exemption.

Looking of David Ickes site, he has a talk in Sweden with tickets priced at 55e. It says there are 700+ seats, so assuming it sells out thats 38500 min. Not sure how much costs are, but sounds like a nice bit of money for a days work.

joebucks

Jeboa Safari wrote: »

Looking of David Ickes site, he has a talk in Sweden with tickets priced at 55e. It says there are 700+ seats, so assuming it sells out thats 38500 min. Not sure how much costs are, but sounds like a nice bit of money for a days work.

Yeah for sure. Throw on about about 150-200 book sales on top of that at around €20 per book and you got another few grand. Then whatever he pulls in from advertising on his forum. His forum sees serious traffic and the majority of the contributors would be posting for free so it's a brilliant business model he has going. What part of his income does he declare and where? Does he avail of offshore loopholes etc.

The question you gotta ask though: is it Icke himself behind this or is he a disinfo agent fronting for the Illuminati/Lizards/Jesuits/ Zionists?!?;)

nullzero

I'm looking at David Ickes forums now http://forum.davidicke.com/ , and to be honest the ad's I'm seeing are very small and right at the bottom of the pages.
Not only that they're all ad's for other CT related sites etc... Natural remedies that sort of stuff.
I'm not sure how much money this flagrant commercialism is making David Icke but judging by the fact that these ads I'm seeing are promoting what I'm asuming from having looked at the links, are small companies or other CT heads trying to promote thier own material, I'd be surprised if it was a lot.

If the David Icke forum was sponsored by Coca Cola or Mc Donalds I'm sure he could make a few quid to say the least, but then how many of his forums users would stand for it?
I'm sure David Icke and Alex Jones are making money, but seeing how many people are most probably getting their hands on these peoples info for free, the plans for retiring to Barbados on the CT money might have to be put on hold for a while.

It's interesting to see the comments made here about how conspiracy theories are sprouting some sort of cottage industry.
Seeing that the physical media this industry would be dependant on are all being out moded by the interent where the majority of people interested in CT's will find their info for free I'd be surprised if even the major players in the CT world are making huge amounts of cash.

I'm sure there is money to be made from CT's, books and DVD's will continue to sell, but seeing the info is available online and the video's are all on youtube and the likes, you don't have to put your hand in your pocket to be up to date with what's going on in the world of CT's, beyond what you spend on your PC and internet connection.

It would be very interesting to know exactly how much the big guns in the CT world are making, although the fact that they are writing books and making DVD's and then asking people to pay for them shouldn't instantly invalidate their arguments, not when they put the same info/videos on the net free of charge.

It's becoming a tired argument form the sceptic side in this forum at this stage; "Oh but that person is selling their books for money, now anything they say is instantly a lie, and aren't you a gullible fool for being taken in by some hypocrite who accepts money in exchange for goods and services?"

CiaranMT

nullzero wrote: »

It's becoming a tired argument form the sceptic side in this forum at this stage; "Oh but that person is selling their books for money, now anything they say is instantly a lie, and aren't you a gullible fool for being taken in by some hypocrite who accepts money in exchange for goods and services?"

There's a difference between this, and calling shill on say, Lord Monckton.

Di0genes

nullzero wrote: »

I'm looking at David Ickes forums now http://forum.davidicke.com/ , and to be honest the ad's I'm seeing are very small and right at the bottom of the pages.
Not only that they're all ad's for other CT related sites etc... Natural remedies that sort of stuff.

Vitamins, natural remedies and that sort of stuff is a $50 billion a year industry. :rolleyes:

Di0genes

Oh and Judy Woods (star wars beam weapons destroyed the towers) new book, where did the towers go, is $39.95 for 500 pages. :eek:

nullzero

Di0genes wrote: »

Vitamins, natural remedies and that sort of stuff is a $50 billion a year industry. :rolleyes:

I'm sure it makes money, but I'd say their advertising bill is low compared to a lrgae or even medium sized pharmaceuticals company.

And what's with the roll eyes?

Does your stating that an industry make money completely invalidate the site on which these companies adverise?

You're going to have to try harder than that if you're going to continue to be condescending.

nullzero

Di0genes wrote: »

Oh and Judy Woods (star wars beam weapons destroyed the towers) new book, where did the towers go, is $39.95 for 500 pages. :eek:

Fools and their money etc...

There's a big difference between alternative ideas and completely inplausable ones as I'd assume you're aware.

nullzero

CiaranMT wrote: »

There's a difference between this, and calling shill on say, Lord Monckton.

I'm not sure who Lord Monckton is making money for or how he's doing it on any grand scale but if I'm honest I have reservations about him myself.

King Mob

nullzero wrote: »

It's becoming a tired argument form the sceptic side in this forum at this stage; "Oh but that person is selling their books for money, now anything they say is instantly a lie, and aren't you a gullible fool for being taken in by some hypocrite who accepts money in exchange for goods and services?"

Usually when I use the point that there's money to be made from conspiracy theories, it's because someone is making the point that real doctors/scientists are untrustworthy because they stand to profit from their work.

So I don't use it to say their stuff is invalid or that everything they say is a lie, just that it's inconsistent to mistrust one and not the other based on that reasoning.

Di0genes

nullzero wrote: »

I'm sure it makes money, but I'd say their advertising bill is low compared to a lrgae or even medium sized pharmaceuticals company.

Meaning that Natural News et all are big companies.

And no, there advertising bill is massive compared to pharmaceutical company.

In the 1990s the main offenders in the Vitamin industry were forced to pay a 1.5 billion dollar fine for price fixing.

Claiming that you're sure they don't have a massive budget, is a sign of your gullibility being a one way street.

And what's with the roll eyes?

:rolleyes:

Does your stating that an industry make money completely invalidate the site on which these companies adverise?

You're going to have to try harder than that if you're going to continue to be condescending.

These alternative medicines are big business, and they target their market, just because they're not Nike or Mc Donalds doesn't mean they dont pay well for targeted marketing.

Di0genes

nullzero wrote: »

Fools and their money etc...

There's a big difference between alternative ideas and completely inplausable ones as I'd assume you're aware.

No please elaborate further.

Explain the difference.

Monty Burnz

nullzero wrote: »

I'm not sure who Lord Monckton is making money for...

I'd assume he's a paid lobbyist? i.e. he makes money for himself.

nullzero

King Mob wrote: »

Usually when I use the point that there's money to be made from conspiracy theories, it's because someone is making the point that real doctors/scientists are untrustworthy because they stand to profit from their work.

So I don't use it to say their stuff is invalid or that everything they say is a lie, just that it's inconsistent to mistrust one and not the other based on that reasoning.

To be fair I know I've never employed those double standards, as for other users here you'd have to ask them personally or look over their posting history.

I feel that people are free to choose to do whatever they want.
Be that choosing alternative medicnes or conventional ones.
Or believeing the weirdest theories imaginable or more or holding more mainstream views.

I personally couldn't care less what anyone elses thinks, one of the few things that drives me fvcking crazy is condescending pr1cks (I'm not singling anyone out when I say this) insisting on everyone agreeing with them, be they Sceptics or CTer's.

nullzero

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I'd assume he's a paid lobbyist? i.e. he makes money for himself.

Thanks for not quoting my full post and making the statement look unreasonable.

Here's the full post...http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=72065695&postcount=15

Your point is noted but I'm sure he gets more of a boost to his ego than to his wallet from his lectures, the man was already quite wealthy before he started talking (somewhat questionably) about climate change.

nullzero

Di0genes wrote: »

No please elaborate further.

Explain the difference.

An alternative theory about how an event happened. Like saying one group might ot have had a greater level of involvment than offically recognised.
Opinions and accepted logic come head to head and a discussion based on some sort of logic can take place.

As for an inplausable theory, I'd point towards magical beams of light destroying the WTC on 9-11 for instance.

nullzero

Di0genes wrote: »

Meaning that Natural News et all are big companies.

And no, there advertising bill is massive compared to pharmaceutical company.

In the 1990s the main offenders in the Vitamin industry were forced to pay a 1.5 billion dollar fine for price fixing.

Claiming that you're sure they don't have a massive budget, is a sign of your gullibility being a one way street.




:rolleyes:



These alternative medicines are big business, and they target their market, just because they're not Nike or Mc Donalds doesn't mean they dont pay well for targeted marketing.

If you can provide some documentation to back up your claims I'll happily read trough it.
Thanks for sharing your opinions thus far.

The rolleyes are annoying however, less of them would be nice thanks.

King Mob

nullzero wrote: »

To be fair I know I've never employed those double standards, as for other users here you'd have to ask them personally or look over their posting history.

That's great and all, but some do that's why I and other sometimes use this point.
It's how a discussion works.

Monty Burnz

nullzero wrote: »

The rolleyes are annoying however, less of them would be nice thanks.

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:





lol - you can only post 15 images, this is the message I got on my first attempt:

You have included 291 images in your message. You are limited to using 15 images so please go back and correct the problem and then continue again.

nullzero

King Mob wrote: »

That's great and all, but some do that's why I and other sometimes use this point.
It's how a discussion works.

Please don't condescend to me.

I can only speak for myself, you quoted a post I wrote so I had a right to correct any misinformed opinion you may have had of me.

As for what "some do", that's their problem and if you want to argue with them until you're blue in the face and they are likewise thats your problem.
I am under no obligation to join in.

nullzero

Monty Burnz wrote: »

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:





lol - you can only post 15 images, this is the message I got on my first attempt:

You have included 291 images in your message. You are limited to using 15 images so please go back and correct the problem and then continue again.

Di0genes

nullzero wrote: »

If you can provide some documentation to back up your claims I'll happily read trough it.
Thanks for sharing your opinions thus far.

WASHINGTON, D.C. -- A Swiss pharmaceutical giant, F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd today agreed to plead guilty and pay a record $500 million criminal fine for leading a worldwide conspiracy to raise and fix prices and allocate market shares for certain vitamins sold in the United States and elsewhere, the Department of Justice announced. A German firm, BASF Aktiengesellschaft, also will plead guilty and pay a $225 million fine for its role in the same antitrust conspiracy, the Department said.
In separate one-count criminal cases filed today in U.S. District Court in Dallas, the Department of Justice charged the corporations with conspiring to fix, raise, and maintain prices, and allocate the sales volumes of vitamins sold by them and other unnamed co-conspirator companies in the U.S. and elsewhere. The cases also allege that the companies allocated contracts for vitamin premixes for customers throughout the U.S. and rigged the bids for those contracts.
The conspiracy lasted from January 1990 into February 1999 and affected the vitamins most commonly used as nutritional supplements or to enrich human food and animal feed -- vitamins A, B2, B5, C, E, and Beta Carotene. Vitamin premixes, which are used to enrich breakfast cereals and numerous other processed foods were also affected by the conspiracy, the Department said.
"These prosecutions demonstrate that we will not allow international cartels to prey on American consumers in our globalized economy," said Attorney General Janet Reno. "Those currently engaged in or contemplating similar conduct should take note of the high cost of getting caught ñ $500 million is not only a record fine in an antitrust case, but it is the largest fine the Justice Department has ever obtained in any criminal case."
The Department today also charged Dr. Kuno Sommer, former Director of Worldwide Marketing, Hoffmann-La Roche Vitamins and Fine Chemicals Division, with participating in the vitamin cartel and for lying to Department investigators in 1997 in an attempt to cover-up the conspiracy. Dr. Sommer, a Swiss citizen, has agreed to submit to the jurisdiction of the U.S. District Court in Dallas, plead guilty to both charges, serve a four-month prison term, and pay a $100,000 fine.
"This conspiracy has affected more than five billion dollars of commerce in products found in every American household," said Joel I. Klein, Assistant Attorney General in charge of the Department's Antitrust Division. "During the life of the conspiracy, virtually every American consumer paid artificially inflated prices for vitamins and vitamin enriched foods in order to feed the greed of these defendants and their co-conspirators who reaped hundreds of millions of dollars in additional revenues."
Including today's cases, there have been nine prosecutions in the ongoing investigation of the worldwide vitamin industry and the latest in a series of international conspiracy cases filed by the Department's Antitrust Division in the last several years. Hoffmann-La Roche, BASF, and Sommer are cooperating with the investigation.
The Department also confirmed the announcement by Rhone-Poulenc, SA, the French Pharmaceutical Company, that it has been cooperating with the investigation under the Antitrust Division's Corporate Leniency Program. Under the Leniency Program, a company may qualify for protection from criminal prosecution if it voluntarily reports its involvement in a crime and satisfies certain other criteria.
"The cooperation of Rhone Poulenc, together with information being provided by others, led directly to the charges filed today and the decision of the defendants not to contest the charges and to cooperate with our investigation," said Gary R. Spratling, the Antitrust Division's Deputy Assistant Attorney General for criminal enforcement. "Rhone Poulenc conspired with Hoffmann-La Roche and BASF, but the information provided by Rhone Poulenc was what the Division needed to crack the largest antitrust conspiracy uncovered to date." Spratling also said that once Hoffmann-La Rouche and BASF decided to step forward and accept responsibility for their actions, they each provided a level of cooperation nothing less than exemplary.
According to the charges, Hoffmann-La Roche and BASF agreed with the world's other major vitamin manufacturers to suppress and eliminate competition in the U.S. and elsewhere. The criminal cases charge that Hoffmann-La Roche, BASF, and Sommer, with unnamed co- conspirators:

• Agreed to fix and raise prices on Vitamins A, B2, B5, C, E, Beta Carotene and vitamin premixes;
• Agreed to allocate the volume of sales and market shares of such vitamins;
• Agreed to divide contracts to supply vitamin premixes to customers in the U.S. by rigging the bids for those contracts; and
• Participated in meetings and conversations to monitor and enforce adherence to the agreed-upon prices and market shares.

The two-count criminal case against Sommer charges him with participating in the same vitamin conspiracy and lying to the Department of Justice by providing false, fictitious and fraudulent information to investigators when he was questioned about the vitamin conspiracy.
Klein said, "The prosecution of Dr. Sommer should send the message that foreign borders will not serve as a sanctuary from prosecution for individuals who conspire to steal from U.S. businesses and consumers. Those who lie, obstruct, and attempt to cover-up the truth in our investigations will be prosecuted and punished for those crimes as well."
The defendants in all three cases are charged with violating Section One of the Sherman Act, which carries a maximum fine of $10 million for corporations, and a maximum penalty of three years imprisonment and a $350,000 fine for individuals.
Sommer was also charged with providing false statements to a government official, a violation of 18 U.S.C. ß 1001, which carries a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment and a $250,000 fine.
The maximum fine for both corporations and individuals may be increased to twice the gain derived from the crime or twice the loss suffered by the victims of the crime, if either of those amounts is greater than the statutory maximum fine.
At sentencing, the court will determine the appropriate sentence to be imposed under the U.S. Sentencing Guidelines and whether to accept the plea agreements and impose the agreed- upon sentences. The dollars received from this fine will be deposited into the Crime Victims Fund, which is used to provide financial compensation and direct services to victims of crime and training and technical assistance for victim advocates, criminal justice professionals, and allied professionals across the country. The fund is supported by fines paid by federal criminal offenders, not taxpayers, and is administered by the Office for Victims of Crime (OVC).
The three cases are the result of an investigation conducted by the Antitrust Division's Dallas Field Office and the Federal Bureau of Investigation in Dallas.
/rochefine.html

http://www.quackwatch.org/02ConsumerProtection/rochefine.html

The rolleyes are annoying however, less of them would be nice thanks.

The Vitamin industry is worth billions and they spend as much if not more than pharmaceutical industries.

Brown Bomber

Di0genes wrote: »

http://www.quackwatch.org/02ConsumerProtection/rochefine.html



The Vitamin industry is worth billions and they spend as much if not more than pharmaceutical industries.

Your joking right...?

The two corporations that were fined - Roche and the Nazi enablers BASF are big-pharma giants,

nullzero

Di0genes wrote: »

http://www.quackwatch.org/02ConsumerProtection/rochefine.html



The Vitamin industry is worth billions and they spend as much if not more than pharmaceutical industries.

Thanks for digging up the info as requested, as you said, and as was I assume reasonably obvious, the industry built around vitamins etc is a very profitable one.

It is also true that "big pharma" corporations are also involved in this industry.

The story you posted the link to related to F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd, otherwise known as "Roche", a major pharmaceutical company, here's a link to their website...http://www.roche.com/index.htm

A link to a list of their pharmaceutical products... http://www.roche.com/products/product-list.htm?type=divpharma&id=Pharmaceuticals
One of their better known products would be Tamiflu.

Thanks for your response and from refraining from the rolleyes, it is nmuch appreciated.

Di0genes

Brown Bomber wrote: »

Your joking right...?

The two corporations that were fined - Roche and the Nazi enablers BASF are big-pharma giants,

All that it shows is that big+pharm and vitamins companies are one and the same

http://www.guardian.co.uk/money/2001/nov/21/personalfinancenews.europeanunion.