What Is A Conspiracy, Anyway?
Even though the word conspiracy gets bandied about on a regular basis in our establishment mass media, most people do not have the faintest idea of what the word actually means.
KENTROVERSY COMMENT: Throughout the document below, I am going to add my own comments, as they relate to specifics mentioned in the text, right under the text itself. This way, you don't have to remember what it is that I am referring to, as it will be right there, above my comment!
Defining Conspiracy (Encarta World English Dictionary, pg. 388):
con•spir•a•cy [con•spear•a•see] (plural: con•spir•a•cies) noun
- plan to commit illegal act together: a plan or agreement between two or more people to commit an illegal or subversive action.
- agreement among conspirators: the making of an agreement or plot to commit an illegal or subversive action.
- group of conspirators: a group of conspirators.
[14th century, via Anglo-Norman conspiracie from, ultimately, Latin conspirat-, the past participle stem of conspirare (see conspire).]
Encarta™ World English Dictionary
©® 1998-2002 Microsoft Corporation.
All rights reserved. Used with permission.
Developed by Bloomsbury Publishing, PLC.
So What Is A Conspiracy, Anyway?
To begin our understanding of the CORRECT meaning of the word CONSPIRACY, I have included the definition from the dictionary that sits on the shelf here in my office, which is shown immediately above. In this definition, we find that there are three conditions that must be met before something may be properly called a conspiracy.
However, when we examine the definition, we discover that the first two of the three meanings are saying the same exact thing, but in slightly different words. The third meaning says little, and it is immediately clear that there is a deliberate attempt to change the meaning of this word, which we will see evidence of this later on in this very essay.
Just as we seen with the word TERRORISM, there was a deliberate attempt to change the meaning of the word over time, which is one of the hallmarks of PROPAGANDA. Because of this, I feel that I have to disqualify the dictionary definition, simply for a lack of substance.
The next definition of conspiracy actually gives the reader some reliable data, and this was because Professor Antony C. Sutton took a scholarly approach to the subject matter. Just look at the DIFFERENCE between what Encarta lists as the definition, versus what Professor Sutton offers.
Here is what HE had to say in his book on Skull and Bones, a book which appears on the KENTROVERSY PAPERS BOOKSHELF:
Defining Conspiracy - Antony C. Sutton (America's Secret Establishment, pg. 3)
Proof of conspiracy requires specific types of evidence, as below:
- There must be secret meetings of the participants and efforts made to conceal joint actions.
- Those meetings must jointly agree to take a course of action.
- This action must be illegal.
Notice here that there is no mention of any of the silliness involving UFO's, the pejorative CONSPIRACY THEORY and CONSPIRACY THEORIST, or anything else that might discredit the definition itself. But, what Professor Sutton did manage to accomplish with this definition, was to state in a matter-of-fact way what a conspiracy IS and by omission, what it IS NOT.
Taken in the manner above, it then becomes clear that most everything that the Bush Crime Family has done could be considered a CONSPIRACY. Just the secrecy issue alone is cause for deep concern, as I had written on Monday, September 5, 2005, in a article entitled 'Government Secrecy Grows Under Bush Crime Family.' Additionally, Bush Crime Family associates who belong to Bohemian Grove, Council On Foreign Relations, Bilderberg Group, Trilateral Commission, and the Illuminati are also taking part in SECRET MEETINGS that have great detriment to America, and her national interests.
Then, there is the matter of a book entitled A CULTURE OF CONSPIRACY by Michael Barkun, a professor of political science at Syracuse University. His book was nothing more than a look into how the establishment looks upon conspiracies, and the folks that hypothesize about them. His book was highly insulting to those of us who spend hundreds of hours each year researching and backing up our narratives with hard-core data and FACTS.
Barkun also equates conspiracy belief with anti-Semitism, which is very troubling because of the reasons he gives, that some members of the Illuminati are Jewish, so therefore, any theories involving the Illuminati must be anti-Semitic. This is complete nonsense, especially given the fact that most writers who cover true government crime and conspiracies go out of their way to mention that their writing has NOTHING to do with a hatred of anyone.
What it is that we write about are provable crimes committed by our government against its' own people. The problem we have with these people is that they are CRIMINALS, and not because some of them happen to also be Jewish. The fact that Barkun went out of his way to do this, forces me to label his entire book as disinformation.
Worse yet, it is a libelous smear against Internet research-journalists, the ones with pure hearts are tireless, and take a scholarly approach.
In nearly all of my own essays and research white papers, I list numerous sources, and whenever possible, I also provide a website link for reader verification. Therefore, people like Barkun cannot attack me on my impeccable research, so he will begin to employ 'ad hominem' attacks, and implement the 'straw man' rhetoric, both of which immediately discredit the attacker and their logic.
Defining Conspiracy - Michael Barkun:
“I would regard a conspiracy as the belief that there is some organization operating covertly to reach evil or malevolent ends. I think that we need to make a distinction between conspiracies on the one hand, and other forms of joint action on the other [hand] --- collusion, cooperation, and [conflict of interest]. I would like to reserve a term like conspiracy for activities that are both highly organized and intentional.”
--- Michael Barkun, author of the book ‘A Culture of Conspiracy,’ on Washington Journal with Brian Lamb, March 12, 2004 (CSPAN).
KENTROVERSY COMMENT: The definition that Professor Barkun is trying to sell to his readers doesn't at all match the other definitions, does it? Right here, we are given a clue as to the authors' hidden agenda, which is to act as an authority whose job it is to tell the reader that those who proffer conspiracy theories are misguided, anti-Semitic, lonely, paranoid, prone to delusions and flights of fancy, and other such colorful language.
It almost seems that he is setting up the pretext for the emergence of a new mental illness, which is to be given a name such as Delusional Paranoid Conspiracy Syndrome.
People like Barkun exist for one reason, and one reason alone. And it is to attempt to discredit in some way, the entire matter of conspiracy. One other matter that Barkun takes on, is to be highly insulting towards Internet journalists. Personally, I do a MINIMUM of four hours per day of research, and this comes out to 1,500 hours annually. Stretched out over the twenty-six years I have been doing this research, and one comes up with 39,000 hours.
While THAT number does not feel right, I have done a minimum of 25,000 hours, once the days off are considered. And judging by the level of positive feedback I have been getting from you the readers, the time spent familiarizing myself with these subjects, was well worth it.
Defining Conspiracy – Michael Barkun (A Culture of Conspiracy, pgs. 3-6)
“Despite the frequency with which conspiracy beliefs have been discussed at the end of the second millennium, the term conspiracy itself has often been left undefined, as though its’ meaning were self-evident.
The essence of conspiracy beliefs lies in attempts to delineate and explain evil. At their broadest, conspiracy theories “view history as controlled by massive, demonic forces.” The locus of this evil lies outside the true community, in some “other, defined as foreign or barbarian, though often… disguised as innocent and upright.” The result is a worldview characterized by a sharp division between the realms of good and evil.
For our purposes, a conspiracy belief is the belief that an organization made up of individuals or groups was or is acting covertly to achieve some malevolent end.
A conspiracist worldview implies a universe governed by design rather than by randomness. The emphasis on design manifests itself in three principles found in virtually every conspiracy theory:
- Nothing happens by accident. Conspiracy implies a world based on intentionality, from which accident and coincidence have been removed. Anything that happens occurs because it has been willed. At its’ most extreme, the result is a “fantasy [world] … far more coherent than the real world.”
- Nothing is as it seems. Appearances are deceptive, because conspirators wish to deceive in order to disguise their identities or their activities. Thus the appearance of innocence is deemed to be no guarantee that an individual or group is benign.
- Everything is connected. Because the conspiracists’ world has no room for accident, pattern is believed to be everywhere, albeit hidden from plain view. Hence the conspiracy theorist must engage in a constant process of linkage and correlation in order to map the hidden connections.
In an odd way, the conspiracy theorist’s view is both frightening and reassuring. It is frightening because it magnifies the power of evil, leading in some cases to an outright dualism in which light and darkness struggle for cosmic supremacy. At the same time however, it is reassuring, for it promises a world that is meaningful rather than arbitrary. Not only are its’ events nonrandom, but the clear identification of evil gives the conspiracist a definable enemy against which to struggle, endowing life with purpose.
Types of Conspiracy Theories:
Although all conspiracy theories share the generic characteristics described earlier in this chapter, they may be distinguished, principally by their scope. They range from those directed at explaining some single, limited occurrence to those so broad that they constitute the worldviews of those who hold them. They may be categorized, in ascending order of breadth, as follows:
- Event conspiracies. Here the conspiracy is held to be responsible for a limited, discrete event or set of events. The best-known example in the recent past is the Kennedy assassination conspiracy literature, though similar material exists concerning the crash of TWA flight 800, the spread of AIDS in the black community, and the burning of black churches in the 1990’s. In all of these cases, the conspiratorial forces are alleged to have focused their energies on a limited, well-defined objective.
- Systemic conspiracies. At this level, the conspiracy is believed to have broad goals, usually conceived as securing control over a country, a region, or even the entire world. While the goals are sweeping, the conspiratorial machinery is generally simple: a single, evil organization implements a plan to infiltrate and subvert existing institutions. This is a common scenario in conspiracy theories that focus on the alleged machinations of Jews, Masons, and the Catholic Church, as well as theories centered on communism or international capitalists.
- Superconspiracies. This term refers to conspiratorial constructs in which multiple conspiracies are believed to be linked together hierarchically. Event and systemic conspiracies are joined in complex ways, so that conspiracies come to be nested within one another. At the summit of the conspiratorial hierarchy is a distant but all-powerful evil force manipulating lesser lesser conspiratorial actors. These master conspirators are almost always of the Type I variety --- groups both invisible and operating in secrecy. Superconspiracies have enjoyed particular growth since the 1980’s, in the work of such people as David Icke, Valdamar Valerian, and William Cooper (discussed in chapters 5 and 6).
Collins Sociological Dictionary – Conspiracy Theory:
According to Collins Sociological Dictionary, a ‘conspiracy’ theory is only to be considered suspect or reprehensible, if it is:
- Delivered in an outlandish, irrational manner.
- Delivered without decent evidence.
David Icke Talks About Conspiracy Theories:
“First of all, most of this, like ninety percent, is no theory --- it’s supported by the evidence. Secondly, I am NOT talking about a conspiracy. It’s NOT a conspiracy --- it’s an agenda!”
--- David Icke, March 25, 2000 from “Ruled By The Gods” – part 5 (29:41 – 30:03)
David Icke – Three Common Threads In Many Conspiracies:
The “Biggest Secret” is the conspiracy to take over the world and turn it into a global fascist state, ruled by the royal bloodlines of the Black Nobility:
The implementation of this agenda has three parts:
- Conspiring to remove those people and organizations that are a threat to that agenda becoming reality.
- Conspiring to place into power, politically and financially, those who will make the agenda a reality.
- Conspiring to create events in the world like wars and Oklahoma [City], to manipulate the population through Problem-Reaction-Solution to demand the agenda becomes reality, or see it as the only solution to the problems they are faced with.
--- David Icke, March 25, 2000 from “Ruled By The Gods” – part 5 (30:14 – 31:00)
Kentroversy Mathematical Model of Conspiracy Theories:
If something is documented, provable, and supported by verifiable evidence; it goes from “theory” to “fact.”
Conspiracy “THEORY” (or Hypothesis)
+ Documentation of Provable and Verifiable Facts
= Conspiracy “FACT” (or "PROOF" of a Conspiracy)
One of the first objections people use when discussing whether some act rises to the level of conspiracy is the “you weren’t there, so you couldn’t know” argument. What people forget is that there is always a secretary being asked to copy some papers, or some other person making copies of maps, and so forth. If one of these people has their heart and mind in the right place, they will make copies and either sit on them or pass them off rather quickly, so the offending materials are not discovered.
In the case of documents that arrive on the researcher’s doorstep, they are usually just sitting in between the inside and outside doors, or on the front porch in a position where they can be seen easily enough.
Here is an example of something that actually happened:
I was having dinner with some friends, and the conversation turned to the “anyone can grow up to be President” subject. I mentioned that it is very peculiar that as many as 34 of the 43 men who have been President of the USA are related --- distant cousins, if you will. When my friend demanded proof, I asked if he thought a family tree genealogical chart would be acceptable. He replied that it would be. I also mentioned the book “Families of the Presidents of the United States” by the esteemed British genealogical research group Burke’s Peerage, which had been the principal source of this information.
When I showed him what Burke’s found when they looked into this, my friend looked for reasons to dispute the findings of Europe’s preeminent genealogical research firm. I told my friend that I didn’t blame him --- to find out that yes, America’s Presidential elections were just for show, and everything is predetermined. As researcher David Icke says America’s leaders are selected, and NOT elected!
Even the act of showing the proof can be overwhelming for some people.
Here is what THE BIGGEST SECRET says about this, with this book having been published in February 1999:
“At least 33 of the first 42 Presidents of the United States have been related to England’s King Alfred The Great (849-899) and Charlemagne (742-814), the famous monarch of France, and 19 Presidents are related to England’s King Edward III (1312-1377), who has a thousand blood connections to Prince Charles. George Bush and Barbara Bush are both from the same aristocratic line, among others I have noted. They come from the Pierce bloodline, which changed its’ name from Percy after fleeing England in the wake of the Gunpowder Plot to blow up the English parliament. The Bushes married for genetics, as the Eastern Establishment families in the States have always done in line with their fellow royal and aristocratic blood relatives in Europe.
Even Bill Clinton and Bob Dole, who ‘opposed’ each other at the 1996 election, are distant cousins. They can trace their ancestry to England’s King Henry III, who reigned from 1227 to 1273, and US Presidents William Henry and Benjamin Harrison. This information comes from the publication, Burke’s Peerage, which traces the lineage of royal and aristocratic families. Clinton has far more royal blood than Dole and is directly descended from the same bloodline as the House of Windsor, every Scottish monarch, and King Robert I of France. This is why he was the Brotherhood’s choice.”
Harold Brooks-Baker, the publishing director of Burke’s Peerage said:
“The Presidential candidate with the greatest number of royal genes has always been the victor, without exception, since George Washington.”
(The Biggest Secret – pgs. 191 & 192)
For Those Who Still Refuse To Accept Reality:
For those who are still trying to maintain deniability concerning true and verifiable CONSPIRACY; here are SEVEN CONSPIRACIES that have been proven to involve all three clauses of the definition. Please look these up for more details for SEVEN instances where the U.S. government was involved in criminal acts:
- 1950's to 1970's - COINTELPRO
- March 12, 1962 - Operation Northwoods memo is send to the Joint Chiefs of Staff, by General Lemnitzer.
- March 21, 1973 to August 8, 1974 - Watergate leads to Nixon resignation.
- 1974-1996 - Dark Alliance; Gary Webb's exposé on the crack cocaine epidemic in the inner city of Los Angeles. It was proven that the origin of this cocaine was the CIA. On December 10, 2004, Gary Webb was 'suicided' by agents of the new world order.
- November 18, 1978 - Jonestown mass suicide kills 900 in Guyana.
- March 1982 to October 1991 - INSLAW / PROMIS theft of intellectual property valued at $3 billion dollars, from Bill and Nancy Hamilton.
- December 1983 to May 1987 - Iran-Contra scandal.
I hope that within the scope of this document, I have succeeded in helping the reader to learn the TRUE definition of the word CONSPIRACY. For a bit of perspective, I have given a definition of conspiracy that doesn't fit, and there I am referring to Professor Barkun. I watched this guy on CSPAN'S Washington Journal, and as he purported to lay down the law regarding the Illuminati and conspiracies in general, he sat on camera for the entire interview, twisting his hands into all sorts of contortions that are known freemasonic and mystery school grips and signs.
Now that you have been supplied with the proper definition of conspiracy, feel free to take this definition and apply it to your daily news, and see if your world doesn't begin to look a little different, in the process.
© 2006 Kentroversy Papers
All rights reserved. Used with permission.
The following sources were used in the creation of this Kentroversy Paper . . .
Syracuse University - Michael Barkun webpage
Michael Barkun - A Culture of Conspiracy
David Icke - The Biggest Secret
David Icke, March 25, 2000 from “Ruled By The Gods” – part 5 (30:14 – 31:00)
Burke's Peerage - Elite Geneaology of U.S. Presidential Families
Wikipedia - Conspiracy Definition
Collins Sociological Dictionary (April 1991)
Council On Foreign Relations