There is a difference between a conspiracy theory, and a conspiracy?

[Longcol]

Whatever............

 

Still wrong about Goldman Sachs running the banks in Ireland, Belgium, Germany, Italy, France and Greece.

[Anna B]

I personally do not have to worry about anything for the next few decades, as my stint in the treadmill secured my future. Prior to selling myself for the bag of silver, I knew the game of greed, and although it is a popular sport for the greedy to fleece the poor, I was fortunate enough to service the rich.

 

It is through seeing the bigger picture and how the little pieces are put together, slowly, stealth is the key, one does not grab lots of money but milk the struggling of significant figures, realising that there are million of struggling. So a thousand here or there, becomes a significant amount in a well designed scam involving potentially tens of millions of suckers..

 

When devising such a scam, its construction is a very careful concept. It can take a few years to put the pieces together, its not robbing a post office late at night. When one robs a bank one has always to make a getaway, as getting in, is relatively easy, and so it is with a well thought out scam. You start by covering your arse, thus intent becomes obsolete, and with clever lawyers, who are very expensive, if it all goes pear shaped, can be explained as a mistake, anywhere once it is put in action. So no crime at all, and no prosecutions either. Because this sort of scam pays billions, it is very complex, the average Joe will accept the sales pitch, which is basically hope and security, packaged in a wrapping of fears. So its mathematical, as well as psychological, as every avenue is worked out and every angle covered. As the end justifies the means, and greed makes one laugh at at eh suckers, while biting one’s tongue so to speak.

 

A scam of substance is not smash and grab, that’s for lower life forms, it has to run for at least a decade before some clever bas**d alerts people. Another decade of legal wrangling, and then capitulation, with no apology. Under duress one then offers to compensate the suckers, normally the money lost at most, normally its pennies in the pound. But there has been nearly two decades of using the suckers money, and the biggest joke of all, is that over 20 years it is worth a fraction of what it was, in buying power. So its really pence in the pound due to devaluation. Meanwhile the contributions which are in billion, have been churning away, paying what is known as dividends, which fortunately do not go to the suckers, who are often charged fees as well to manage their money. It makes taking sweets from babies seem like hard work, except those in on the scam have made tens to hundreds of millions for individauls, collectively a few billion.

 

One then takes a decade to slowly pay most of the suckers back while using their money all the time. Another add on is to create firms to help suckers to get their money back, thus turning them over again in fees. To construct such a scam, one uses the brightest people one can buy, and paying them 100's of thousands a year, to construct each section of the scam, it’s chicken feed, when compared to what their construction creates.

So a conspiracy is and can be dismissed as a theory, if you have the power of the money the opposition lacks. Your are fortunately dealing with an educationally challenged public, who has neither the skill, ability, or academic range to begin to understand the complexity of the scam. One can wipe the floor with critics for years, buying a meal or bribing journalist is par for the course, like politicians they are cheap. If someone plays the hero, we all know how fragile the human body can be, and accidents happen, people slip, fall, traffic is relentless, things catch fire, and families can be threatened. All done with threats, and who would not be persuaded through threats or bribes to reconsider their values? Children have accidents too, and backed by millions at the start of the scam, there are a lot of poor desperate people who will do a multitude of things of the price is right. A junkie can be persuaded to murder for a few pounds, when desperate for instance. Its called delegation, as who wants to get their hands dirty? There is never any connection, and bottom and there are so many desperate bottom feeders

 

So there are no conspiracies, and remember to say theory, thus making it clear its a joke, and not serious. Poking around, finding out facts of criminal intent can like smoking cigarettes shorten one's life. With money you can find anyone anywhere, and know where they are to the metre. What is surveillance for if not for the privileged to exploit? And of course most of this is fiction, a theory, a fantasy, imagination.

Knowledge is power, and not talking about knowing soap stars and celebrity pop culture, the circuses for the plebs! They need distractions, it lets the grown ups empty their pockets...

 

Excellent post.

[Cyclone]

Excellent if the intent is to demonstrate clinical paranoia.

[tinfoilhat]

Excellent if the intent is to demonstrate clinical paranoia.

 

I think that's quite a generous description.

 

Erebus, if you really believe this to be true, do you fear for life that you've just exposed it all ? Fires, druggies killing people for the higher ups, this is serious stuff you've blown the whistle on.

 

I couldn't live my life in the total misery you live in, waiting for the assassin. Or do you feel smug, safe in the knowledge you know all this goes on but some reason "The Man" let's you disseminate all these facts with impunity ?

[tinfoilhat]

Ooooh, a badass!

 

This stuff is great !!! He's comparing businessmen (who help make money for pensions and provide jobs for people amongst other things) with nazis !! He then goes on to say the nazis (I think we're back on the real nazis now) spent decades conducting psychological experiments !! Neat trick considering hitler was only in power from 1933. But lets not let facts get in the way, this mans got a vision - a vision where us sheeple finally know the truth.

 

Forum gold......

[Mr Prime]

I used to be like you.

 

Perhaps the spread of the internet accounts for the 'popularity' of 'conspiracy theories,' as we have more access to information from different points of view.

 

Of course there is also a lot of rubbish on the internet so it pays to be discerning, but now the evidence of the rotton heart at the centre of worldwide government, Banks and business is so overwhelming it's hard to deny for anyone with eyes to see.

 

So overwhelming is the evidence now, that what was once only to be found on the internet and therefore suspect, is finding its way into the mainstream media and comes from highly respected journalists and sources.

 

Tonight is a case in point: 3 different programmes on 3 different terrestrial channels - 8.0pm 'Where has your aid money gone?' Channel 4 Dispatches, about how British aid has been used in Rwanda.

8.30pm BBC1 Panorama, 'Undercover: How to avoid Tax,' an undercover investigation into corporate service providers - the people and companies who sell corporate anonymity and access to offshore tax havens.

And at 10.00pm BBC4 (channel 9) 'Why Poverty? Stealing Africa,' how the tax systems and tricks employed by a multinational corporation has impoverished Zambia. (methods used all over Africa.)

 

Any one of these programmes on its own was disturbing, but the effect of watching all three one after the other was truly devastating. No more will I question what is going to happen in the world. It is plain for anyone to see.

 

I suggest people watch them on iplayer. If anyone would like to defend the actions of those involved, I would be very interested to hear them try...

 

I don't count any of the above as conspiracy theories. I've just watched Panorama about the IPCC. Serious journalists have uncovered the kind of thing that anyone with nous knows is going on anyway.

 

I'm against rubbish like 911, Mi5 set up 7/7, The Illuminati/Opus Dei/Bilderberg control our lives and of course lizard rubbish. That's why I said conspiracy theories need to be seperated from proper investigative journalism.

[Vague_Boy]

Another example of a conspiracy theory that now seems validated is Gordon Brown's (yes, it's that man again) strange sell-off of the country's gold reserves.

 

For years, "goldbugs" were saying that he did it to bail out the private investment firms who were "short" gold. Firms like the "Vampire Squid" themselves, Goldman Sachs (odd how they keep cropping up).

 

Revealed: why Gordon Brown sold Britain's gold at a knock-down price

 

When Brown decided to dispose of almost 400 tonnes of gold between 1999 and 2002, he did two distinctly odd things.

 

First, he broke with convention and announced the sale well in advance, giving the market notice that it was shortly to be flooded and forcing down the spot price. This was apparently done in the interests of “open government”, but had the effect of sending the spot price of gold to a 20-year low, as implied by basic supply and demand theory.

 

Second, the Treasury elected to sell its gold via auction. Again, this broke with the standard model. The price of gold was usually determined at a morning and afternoon "fix" between representatives of big banks whose network of smaller bank clients and private orders allowed them to determine the exact price at which demand met with supply.

 

The auction system again frequently achieved a lower price than the equivalent fix price. The first auction saw an auction price of $10c less per ounce than was achieved at the morning fix. It also acted to depress the price of the afternoon fix which fell by nearly $4.

 

It seemed almost as if the Treasury was trying to achieve the lowest price possible for the public’s gold.

LINK

 

(I'll skip over the full details of Crash Gordon's treasonous incompetence in order to save time.)

 

 

One of the most popular trading plays of the late 1990s was the carry trade, particularly the gold carry trade.

 

In this a bank would borrow gold from another financial institution for a set period, and pay a token sum relative to the overall value of that gold for the privilege.

 

Once control of the gold had been passed over, the bank would then immediately sell it for its full market value. The proceeds would be invested in an alternative product which was predicted to generate a better return over the period than gold which was enduring a spell of relative price stability, even decline.

 

At the end of the allotted period, the bank would sell its investment and use the proceeds to buy back the amount of gold it had originally borrowed. This gold would be returned to the lender. The borrowing bank would trouser the difference between the two prices.

 

This plan worked brilliantly when gold fell and the other asset – for the bank at the heart of this case, yen-backed securities – rose. When the prices moved the other way, the banks were in trouble.

 

This is what had happened on an enormous scale by early 1999. One globally significant US bank in particular is understood to have been heavily short on two tonnes of gold, enough to call into question its solvency if redemption occurred at the prevailing price.

 

Goldman Sachs, which is not understood to have been significantly short on gold itself, is rumoured to have approached the Treasury to explain the situation through its then head of commodities Gavyn Davies, later chairman of the BBC and married to Sue Nye who ran Brown’s private office.

 

(We all remember Sue from the "Bigotgate" incident. )

 

 

“He [brown] was facing a problem that was a world scale problem where a number of financial institutions had become voluntarily short of gold to the extent that it was threatening the stability of the financial system and it was obvious that something had to be done.”

 

Thus the country's gold was sold off at a low, low price to bail out the bad bets of the investment banks.

 

Still, this was back in 1999. Just imagine if this kind of reckless financial gambling had been allowed to continue. It might have resulted in some sort of global financial crisis in about, oh, 2007 or thereabouts.

 

Thank goodness the lessons were learned in time.

[Anna B]

I don't count any of the above as conspiracy theories. I've just watched Panorama about the IPCC. Serious journalists have uncovered the kind of thing that anyone with nous knows is going on anyway.

 

I'm against rubbish like 911, Mi5 set up 7/7, The Illuminati/Opus Dei/Bilderberg control our lives and of course lizard rubbish. That's why I said conspiracy theories need to be seperated from proper investigative journalism.

 

Glad you've taken the time to watch it Mr Prime.

 

I hope you'll watch the 'Why poverty' one as well, as it proves that poverty is deliberately caused by big Business Corporations. The power these people have is frightening, and I believe they would stop at nothing to achieve their aims.

 

I'd be interested to hear what you think.

[andygardener]

Well quite. Every time I frequent a supermarket I always feel as if I'm basically one step away from herding the cashiers into a gas chamber.

 

Oh, wait, no I don't. Because that would be a really stupid comparison.

[Anna B]

Your life sounds so depressing. I can't imagine what it would be like to go around all day knowing that there are a group of super-powerful individuals deliberately plotting my individual downfall.

 

'Individual' downfall? i think you might find your included too. But you're right -it is depressing.