nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Has a conspiracy ever been proven?

Hammer89

Like.........ever? When was the last a widespread conspiracy theory turned out to be true and blew people's socks off?

I'm not doubting the existence of cover-ups, but I am doubting that the orchestrators would leave a trail of breadcrumbs or easter eggs for nerds to follow in the future in the hope of uncovering some sort of plot.

Maybe that billionaire sex trafficker was murdered, or maybe he offed himself because he was facing 45 years in prison. Maybe he didn't fancy dying in jail and decided to go out on his terms.

Why were there no guards watching? Because humans are stupid who makes massive mistakes all the time. We know better than most just how truly negligent people can be after the smear test scandal.

Nothing to see here lads. It's just a horrible human being who capitalised on human negligence and chose suicide over 45 years confinement.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Guy:Incognito

Reisers wrote: »

You're nitpicking now

So every time someone tells a lie it's a conspiracy?

Reisers

....joke

Your Face

Hulk Hogan was the third man.

johnnysmack

Your Face wrote: »

Hulk Hogan was the third man.

Well let me tell you brother!

Moomoomacshoe

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

I had a quick skim on wiki. That's not a conspiracy. That's just some guy lying about murdering his family.

The conspiracy was that a child"s shadow could be seen in the cctv footage. Told you I wasnt explaining it well.:D

Guy:Incognito

Moomoomacshoe wrote: »

The conspiracy was that a child"s shadow could be seen in the cctv footage. Told you I wasnt explaining it well.:D

Unless you're saying the child is still secretly alive and was in on the murder of their mother and sibling, then again, no conspiracy. Just lies in the timeline or events of the murders by the father.

s7ryf3925pivug

Failed invasion of Cuba in the 60s.
Installation of Shah in Iran.
Sabotage of Iranian nuclear research by targeting centrifuges (sufficient evidence to place it beyond reasonable doubt)
Russian interference in American presidential election
Institutional gaslighting in East Germany
Weapons of Mass Destruction hoax to justify invasion of Iraq

ceadaoin.

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

I thought they took, already, infected men but treated them with “placebos” to study the effects? Either way, it was a shítty thing to do.

Not all of them were infected and none of them were told what the study was or that they were even being studied, just that they had been chosen to receive free healthcare. They didn't inform those infected that they had the disease so they weren't even aware of it and when penicillin became available as a cure they didn't offer it to them, instead opting to leave them unaware and untreated in order to study the effects of syphilis, leading to many of the men dying from a completely curable illness and their wives and children also being infected. And it went on for 30 or 40 years. Really ****ty thing to do

mikemac2

Chuck Stuart in Boston drove his pregnant wife to a quiet area and she was shot in the passenger seat. She died the next day but hospital staff successfully delivered the baby

Stuart was also shot and was so badly injured he spent six weeks in hospital and missed the funeral of his wife

He claimed a black guy did it and the media went into overdrive with headlines getting angrier by the day. The police hauled multiple black men in for questioning and racial tensions in the city went up

Turned out Chuck shot his wife to get life assurance and had to shot himself to stage it

He killed himself jumping into a river before he saw a courtroom. There was an excellent made for TV move on it

Junkyard Tom

Operation Mockingbird

An awful lot of so-called 'think tanks' are little more than propaganda dissemination vehicles funded by who-the-hell-knows - essence that's people conspiring to influence public opinion.

Peregrinus

mikemac2 wrote: »

Chuck Stuart in Boston drove his pregnant wife to a quiet area and she was shot in the passenger seat. She died the next day but hospital staff successfully delivered the baby

Stuart was also shot and was so badly injured he spent six weeks in hospital and missed the funeral of his wife

He claimed a black guy did it and the media went into overdrive with headlines getting angrier by the day. The police hauled multiple black men in for questioning and racial tensions in the city went up

Turned out Chuck shot his wife to get life assurance and had to shot himself to stage it

He killed himself jumping into a river before he saw a courtroom. There was an excellent made for TV move on it

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

An awful lot of so-called 'think tanks' are little more than propaganda dissemination vehicles funded by who-the-hell-knows - essence that's people conspiring to influence public opinion.

These are not conspiracies.

"Conspiracy" is not just another word for "deception". A conspiracy involves an agreement, which must be secret, to do something illegal.

So one person cannot perpetrate a conspiracy; it takes a minimum of two people. They must both intend to commit a crime. They must agree about this. And they must intend and attempt to keep the fact of their agreement a secret.

Chuck Stuart wasn't involved in a conspiracy because he acted alone; there was no agreement with anyone. Think tanks which exist to advocate for policies that will advance private interests are not conspiracies because there is no illegality; advocating for policies which are in your interest is not illegal.

Has a conspiracy ever been proven? Yes, lots of times. A bunch of people agree to rob a bank/commit burglary/run a scam/evade tax by smuggling goods a border/whatever. They get found out. They get prosecuted and convicted. Their conspiracy has been detected and proven. Happens all the time.

Junkyard Tom

Peregrinus wrote: »

A conspiracy involves an agreement, which must be secret, to do something illegal.

That's a criminal conspiracy.

Sprog 4

Deleted User wrote: »

USA infected people in Guatemala with numerous STDs.

That was just Clinton on holiday. He got a bit carried away and the government had to clean up his mess.

[Deleted User]

igCorcaigh wrote: »

Really?

I've never heard of that.

http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2010/07/the-american-government-once-intentionally-poisoned-certain-alcohol-supplies-resulting-in-the-death-of-over-10000-american-citizens/

There is a not too short not too long round up of the history of it there.

Peregrinus

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

That's a criminal conspiracy.

It's pretty much any kind of conspiracy, if you change "illegal" to something like "wrongful" or "immoral". A group of people may make a secret plan together to throw me a surprise birthday party, but nobody would call that a conspiracy. It has to involve a secret agreement to do something wrong.

Not all covert action is a conspiracy.

Peregrinus

Deleted User wrote: »

http://www.todayifoundout.com/index.php/2010/07/the-american-government-once-intentionally-poisoned-certain-alcohol-supplies-resulting-in-the-death-of-over-10000-american-citizens/

There is a not too short not too long round up of the history of it there.

Doesn't look like that was a conspiracy either, since there is no claim that the government secretly used toxic denaturing agents. The practice was "hotly debated in Congress", after all. Indeed, if the point was to deter people from drinking denatured alcohol, the more people that knew it was poisonous the more effective the practice would be.

So I think this one falls at the "secrecy" hurdle.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

This thread, useful to begin with, has gone off track.

I think we should stick to government or corporate level conspiracies which is clearly what the op wants.

PsychoPete

It's been clearly debunked that the olsen twins are just one person the move across the screen so quick, your eyes don't even notice

Potatoeman

The Watergate conspiracy.

odyssey06

Maybe the Iran-Contra affair? There was a conspiracy, but I'm not sure if it fits the bill for a conspiracy theory.

Similar to Watergate, the story was broken by internal leaks to a news publication; there was no trail of breadcrumbs for the general public to discover.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

Potatoeman wrote: »

The Watergate conspiracy.

I don’t think that fits the bill as something that was believed only by conspiracy theorists to begin with.

The op is clearly cynical about Epstein’s killing being a conspiracy and seems to doubt that there could be anything afoot here except incompetence. I think in the balance of probabilities incompetence is very unlikely.

donaghs

ILoveYourVibes wrote: »

During prohibition the US govt did poison alcohol.

Not really a conspiracy. When it went ahead it was reported in the papers. people publicly argued for and against the decision.

"Not everyone thought it was a good idea to make alcohol deadly, when making it illegal hadn’t stopped drinkers, and New Jersey Senator Edward I. Edwards called it “legalized murder.” However, the Anti-Saloon League persisted, arguing that legal alcohol had killed many more in its day than denatured alcohol would kill during the transition to a teetotaling world. “The Government is under no obligation to furnish the people with alcohol that is drinkable when the Constitution prohibits it,” said advocate Wayne B. Wheeler. “The person who drinks this industrial alcohol is a deliberate suicide… To root out a bad habit costs many lives and long years of effort…”

The government made no attempt to pretend that increasing the denaturing formula wouldn’t lead to deaths. Later that year, Seymour M. Lowman, Assistant Secretary of the Treasury in charge of Prohibition, even told citizens that the fringes of society that drink were “dying off fast from poison ‘hooch'” and that if the result was a sober America, “a good job will have been done.”"

Stop moaning ffs

Britain doesn’t actually want to take control of its border back

Ok not a conspiracy but still

smurfjed

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

Psi programs were tried but didn’t work.

Did you ever read Memoirs of a Psychic Spy by Joseph McMoneagle? He might disagree with your statement.

Potatoeman

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

I don’t think that fits the bill as something that was believed only by conspiracy theorists to begin with.

The op is clearly cynical about Epstein’s killing being a conspiracy and seems to doubt that there could be anything afoot here except incompetence. I think in the balance of probabilities incompetence is very unlikely.

There are already conflicting reports so if it becomes suspicious it won’t be a really conspiracy anyway by those standards. The problem with it being unearthed by a theorist is that it has to be after any investigation and it’s very hard to prove that far after the fact.
Any good conspiracy theory is believable but hard to prove or disprove. So realistically it will just go nowhere.

topnotch

Volkswagen Emissions Scandal.

Franz Von Peppercorn II

smurfjed wrote: »

Did you ever read Memoirs of a Psychic Spy by Joseph McMoneagle? He might disagree with your statement.

I haven’t. If I did I wouldn’t believe it because psychic stuff is nonsense.

That’s part of the problem with conspiracy theory - the true stuff of which there is many can be drowned out by nonsense.

magic_murph

Del2005 wrote: »

Which corporations have paid billions in fines?

Facebook
All banks
Multiple telecoms companies.

begbysback

Michelle De Bruine - sure anyone can grow fins & and have whiskey in their urine

CrankyHaus

For years CIA links to drug smuggling, particularly facilitation and support of Nicaraguan Contra linked cocaine smuggling into the US, were denied. In fact Journalist Gary Webb was ridiculed from all quarters for reporting it, suffered professional disgrace as a result and eventually took his own life in 2004. Nowadays its broadly accepted that CIA links were present, though their extent remains contested.

After WW2 the Allies sold captured Enigma machines to other (mainly developing) countries, on the assumption that the code remained unbreakable. Obviously this gave them the Diplomatic, Strategic and Economic benefit of free access to SIGINT from these countries, most of which were ostensibly their allies or neutral to them.

For this reason the Ultra code-breaking of the Enigma system was kept secret until the 1970s, after the usefulness of the sold machines as a source of SIGINT expired (because independent breaking of the code was demonstrated, in the 1960s by the Swiss I think).