Have any conspiracy theories ever been proven true?

[Newsenmum]

Does anyone know if any past ones have? What have some past ones been? I only know the more recent ones

also quite fancied a CT thread 😳

@scalt they also could find out who resists, as we pointed out to our colleague, 'they' want compliant populace, not resistant, so if 'they' wanted to kill off population as he claimed the vaccine was for then it makes sense to vaccinate the compliant then release a virus to kill off the resistant.

To what end? All these ideas that it was an experiment in how far the public can be made to cooperate with restrictions is based on the mysterious "them" being in charge and all wanting the same thing. The idea that there is one "them", this mysterious cabal of people who secretly control all governments and all politicians are of one mind is really very silly.

so you surely understand that dying with covid is not the same as dying from covid?
and that there were zero deaths from flu
Oh and how many beds were actually used for all the people dying from covid in those makeshift hospitals you set up?

So that the government knows what methods they have at their disposal when they really want or need to "persuade" the public, i.e. which ones really work. For all we know, they knew full well that Covid was not as bad they were telling us it was (hence they were not worrying about their mortality while they partied), but they saw it as a test of public obedience, in case of a worse future "emergency".

Even with my great cynicism about politics and politicians, which I have held since the day Tony Blair was elected, I don't believe in a "cabal" controlling all governments, and a "new world order"; I think that if such a thing had been true, it would all have been far more slick than the chaos we did have. But because of the chaotic way our government handled it, going from one extreme to the other: "it's nothing to worry about" followed very suddenly by "stay the fuck at home, and if you go out for more than an hour, you will kill Granny", constantly moving the goal posts from "reviewed in three weeks" to "we can turn this virus around in twelve weeks" to "normalish by Christmas" to "significant normality by Easter" to "irreversible roadmap to freedom in June, sorry, July", and the persistent use of the phrase "new normal", it very much felt like the government was trying to bring on a regime of permanent oppression by stealth, boiling the public like frogs, and this raised "conspiracy theorists" to red alert. If the government had instead acknowledged the harms of lockdowns and school closures, apologised for them (instead of Boris's staged grovel about 100,000 deaths), promised to keep lockdowns as short as they could, and admitted that lockdowns were only delaying the problem, not solving it, and causing far more problems of their own, then I and other "conspiracy theorists" might have had far more respect for measures to protect the public.

For what reason though?

It suits governments for us all to be earning and spending. More money in their pockets one way or another.

I second this.

But because of the chaotic way our government handled it, going from one extreme to the other: "it's nothing to worry about" followed very suddenly by "stay the fuck at home, and if you go out for more than an hour, you will kill Granny", constantly moving the goal posts from "reviewed in three weeks" to "we can turn this virus around in twelve weeks" to "normalish by Christmas" to "significant normality by Easter" to "irreversible roadmap to freedom in June, sorry, July", and the persistent use of the phrase "new normal", it very much felt like the government was trying to bring on a regime of permanent oppression by stealth,

Whereas to me all that looked like was a mixture of incompetence and an attempt to manage a complex situation with e er changing information.

The idea of it being a test of control is ridiculous. And still no idea to what end.

In any case we are all fairly compliant. Just a daft example but look at queuing - Schofield was roundly castigated for showing non-compliance.

As a society we are pretty passive. I mean the Tory government put through draconian laws around peaceful protest and no one really said anything (laws that have led to jailing of environmental protesters and concern from human rights activists and EU around democratic process). Where people did make a fuss and protested effectively they have been hemmed in by introduction of new law that most people seemed unconcerned by. Whether you side with JSO/XR is a moot point - its just to show that governments can handle dissent easily already with the power they have. No real need to experiment with lockdowns - how would that serve them? They were desperate to restart the economy with eat out to help out and all that nonsense.

Most people are so tied by work, family, shopping and debt they only move along the tram lines of life set out for them. The British rarely rebel seriously enough to cause concern amongst those at the top. Even when things like the NHS are purposefully run down, or education. We just politely shrug or say please stop doing that. Nobody is manning the barricades.

So…I heard this rumour the governments of the world want to control us so they released a killer virus that killed millions, then to make us even more afraid/compliant they concocted a bunch of vaccines with terrible side effects for similar ominous reasons. And if none of that is true, they took advantage and locked us down in order to destroy the economy/break us into more compliance for unknown but equally nefarious reasons.

blah blah blah blah blah blah

This is old news. If true to any extent we’ll never prove it, so what is the real actual point of debating this?

Here, here!

There is enough actual shit going on in the world - everything from from organised crime, to global warming and sewage being discharged illegally into rivers. People should focus on things we know are real and that we stand a chance of doing something about. Nefarious plots are a distraction to take our eyes of the real issues. There you go, a conspiracy theory about conspiracy theories!

If you dig deep into a lot of these conspiracy theories the mysterious "them" often end up being "The Jews". Sometimes it's space aliens or the literal devil, but more usually it's antisemitism.

Ooh, yes, and the Illuminati! This terribly secret, well-known organisation is the driving force behind the New World Order plot, run by Jews and/or Freemasons and/or a Kabbalistic, Zoroastrian, Catholic, Coptic or Satanist cult and/or actual demons.

True: Secret societies exist;
True: Freemasonry adopts some of the symbols and rituals from the Bavarian Illuminati (who existed), which were in turn borrowed from earlier groups;
True: Many societies call themselves illuminati; they aren't secret;
True: The American dollar features Illuminati-related symbols, with the words "A new Order For The Ages" in Latin;
True: The phrase "New World Order" was used to describe an idealised, co-operative world in which war would be redundant and trade would flow freely.

So unlikely as to be laughable: Any international group of people (or demons, lol) would have the power to dictate what the world's governments and corporations do, as and when instructed. The idealistic NWO fell apart when it became clear that nations would not put aside their own interests for the sake of world peace. The conspiracy NWO wants to turn the entire global population into slaves, which makes fuck all economic sense.

True: Economic inequality is growing alarmingly fast, much of it driven by a handful of international businesses;
True: The global balance of economic power is changing. Empires rise and fall. Falling empires don't like it.

Mistaken: To look at the changes we're living through and decide it's all the work of evil Jews/demons/Masons/etc. It makes for exciting stories but keeps you politically ignorant.

Some posters mention ‘conspiracy theories’ like ‘ Prince Philip had affairs’. These are rumours and cover-ups.
So-called conspiracy theories are far more far-fetched and dramatic; like the death of P.Diana. So, a group of powerful people met secretly and all agreed to arrange her death. Who the hell were they supposed to be? Then they organised a car crash in a particular spot, despite changed arrangements during the evening etc etc. And to what end? Who benefited? Bonkers.
Some people demand big answers to big incidents and don’t accept that a tragic accident is a tragic accident. IME they are not particularly bright but they think they know the answers that the rest of are too thick to understand.
Very tiresome people.

…terribly secret, well-known organisation…
lol 😀. Made me smile. You make some excellent points 👍

Chem trails

Do you mean chemtrails as in "there have been a few small-scale experiments at cloud-seeding to trigger rainfall", or chemtrails as in "massive conspiracy to equip some/most/all airliners with huge tanks that pump out chemicals whenever they fly to cause cloudy weather and that's what you're seeing when you look up and see long trails behind aircraft"?

Along with 'psychotic bastards, don't want us to have summer/ trying to make us ill/ spraying with mind control chemicals'

I don’t believe “Chemtrails are a conspiracy to make it rain”; after all, if they (yes I know, “they”) wanted us to believe in global warming, and that flying is killing the planet, why would they make it rain, and send up extra aircraft for this purpose?

But you do have to wonder about a clear sky suddenly being criss-crossed with the trails, in minutes. Occasional ones maybe, if the weather is right, but what’s going on when it’s a whole lattice of them?

As for darling Greta, I have sometimes wondered if there is an adult (and I mean one older than her) telling her what to say, and when to say it. I think it’s a bit odd that she was mostly silent during lockdown; I’m surprised she didn’t pop up like a jack in the box say “you see, it’s not so bad staying at home, is it?”.

I had to laugh at a radio 4 sketch when Jeremy Corbin announced he was stepping down for a “period of reflection”:
”this is Jeremy corbyn’s voice mail, leave a message after the period of reflection”.
”Mr Corbyn, it’s Greta. For years, I have been spreading despair among young people, but you managed to spread despair among millions of young people in one night! How do you do it, will you teach me?”

You seem surprised that, with the huge amount of air traffic we have these days, you see contrails in the sky?

Have a look on https://www.flightradar24.com and zoom in to see just how many aircraft are flying over the UK right now. There are literally thousands of flights to/from the UK every day, and most of those are during daylight hours. Plus the thousands of flights that fly over but that don't land here - if you're going to North America from quite a lot of Europe or the near east, you'll probably fly over the UK.

So, yes, when the atmospheric conditions are right you'll see a lot of contrails.

Yes, Hancock, Gove, Johnson, Raab, that incredible team putting together such a cunning plan, with no hint of an official document leak. So clever, I’m in awe.

Even if there was no strategy beyond "frighten the pants off the public as much as we can, lock down, hope for the best, and the next government can think about the economic and mental health apocalypse", there was and is plenty of time to analyse the public response to the chaotic fear porn: that is the opportunity I am referring to.

It need not be the hard-of-thinking politicians doing it, but the unseen behavioural scientists, who are probably hard at work observing how the public responded, noting their surprise at how easily the public believed all the fear that was thrown at them, and working out how such methods could be used again, perhaps for a totally different cause, and not even one by the government. This is the "golden opportunity" to which I am referring. And there need not be any official record of a politician thinking "wow, the public are believing everything we are telling them, even though I don't believe a word of it".

I mean yes, psychologists probably have been studying public reactions to rapidly changing public health policy. It would be weird if they weren't. It's the idea that's there's a significant group of people (scientists now apparently) reading that research and gleefully running their hands working out how they can next use those reactions for some undefined nefarious end that's silly.

Literally nobody I know was scared anyway. We were all fairly blasé about it. Following the sensible concepts of keeping away from others for a while, not doing any of the OTT washing groceries, moaning a bit a masks especially when it got warmer and feeling a bit daft queueing outside Tesco but understanding they were measures that were probably sensible at this unprecedented time.

I can well believe that behavioural scientists were watching how people reacted. I don't believe that behavioural scientists were influencing the government's response as part of some bizarre experiment to see how far they can push a population.

That benzodiazepines are addictive and hell to get off.

Well, if thats what you think, fine.
I struggle to believe that the unseen Machiavellian behavioural ancients hell-bent on, er, what? would be capable of influencing politicians whose natural inclination is to do nothing. Even detailed epidemiological data and forecasting failed to convince our politicians to take the pandemic seriously. But you believe in conspiracies, I believe in cock-ups.