Conspiracy Theories That You Actually Believe 📡

Jun 2, 2012
394
1
0
The Empyrean
#1
Unlike most black people, I don't think the government or a of cabal evil white and Jewish guys meet quarterly under the carousal in Central Park to hatch these malevolent plans for world domination and to keep minorities, (especially black people oppressed. However there are certain conspiracy theories I do give credence to.

The Kennedy Assasination

Even though I've never read it, I don't believe the Warren Commission's report on the Kennedy assassination. I have a VERY HARD TIME believing that Lee Harvey Oswald simply decided on day to take a rifle to the sixth floor of the school book depository building, and spill Jack's brain all over that cute lil pink suit Jackie wearing that November afternoon.

I believe the Kennedy assassination was a mob hit ordered by Sam Giancana with logistical support provided by J. Edgar Hoover and rogue elements with in the F.B.I. and possibly the Secret Service.

I have no way of quantifying this, but my theory is this. The 1960 presidential election was a very close race decided by only 112,827 votes, of the 68,832,482 that were cast. In Illinois, Kennedy's margin of victory was only 8,858 votes. If you go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election,_1960 look at the break down of the voting by county, Nixon won every damn every county in Illinois, the important exception is Cook County. The same happens in New York, but Jack's margin of victory in New York is a little bit bigger.

It's alleged that Papa Joe was connected and he was involved in bootlegging whiskey during Prohibition. I believe (and this is purely conjecture on my part,) that Papa Joe may have called in "a favor," to some "friends of his," in the Chi and NYC. Also, Peter Lawford was married to Patricia Kennedy (and we all know that Peter Lawford was in the Rat Pack,) So probably in the days and weeks, and Election Day 1960, Papa Joe and Sinatra were using those mob ties with the unions and Cook County Board of elections to run some shenanigans.

Once in office, Jack appoints his little brother Bobby AG, and Bobby is with the shit and starts going after the Mob. The wiseguys are probably like, "What the fuck? We get this mick bastard's kid elected president and his other kid is hitting us with indictments and having testifying at Congressional hearings. AWWW HELL NAW!" Add in Hoover's dislike for the Kennedys and the shit goes down. Mind you, Jack Ruby, (the dude who popped Lee Harvey Oswald,) had ties to the Chicago syndicate. He supposedly bodies Lee Harvey Oswald to spare Jackie a trial and to show that "Jews had guts," but Ruby later dies of cancer in the Feds. If you do your research, a lot of people connected to the Kennedy assassination died under "mysterious," circumstances.

Then there's hit on Bobby in '68 which I think was tied into his brother's murder. Fuck Sirhan Sirhan's excuse about Bobby's support of Israel, that was an orchestrated hit to keep Bobby from becoming president so that he wouldn't re-open a new investigation into his and probably Dr. King's assassination. Speaking of which, I also believe that government was involved in Dr. King's and Malcolm X's murder too.
 

Meddatron

I am what I am
Apr 19, 2011
11,383
5
0
45
York, Pa
s1193.photobucket.com
#5
I believe our government as well as other governments have information/proof of alien existence. I believe the proof is on the moon as well. The fact that the moon has reverberated both times we crashed something into it is a red flag that something isn't right. Only hollow things reverberate and the moon did it for well over an hour the first time and twice as long the second. It's crust has titanium in it as well as Iron that does not rust. Heavier elements are on the outside. That is different from any other object in our solar system. The moon has moonquakes that science cannot figure out why. The rocks are magnetic yet it has no magnetism itself. All very odd to me.
 

The Ewokhunter

Crazyass Cracker
Mar 14, 2011
10,566
3
0
45
thingsatwistedewokwouldsay.blogspot.com
#6
add to the fact that to this day where our technology is far superior to that of the 60s, we haven't been back. We didn't explore it long enough to know everything about it.

If sending humans is a risk, why not a rover? shouldn't take long to get there and we could actually retrieve it.

of course this all leads to the conspiracy of whether or not we actually landed on there.
 

Giga Bread

Mega Calories!
Aug 20, 2011
6,214
6
38
39
#7
I think you're on the right track about the mafia putting a hit on the president. I just can't pin it on San Giacana when everyone of the NY families were screwed over by JFK. I also don't think they needed logistics from the FBI. Like with 9-11, I think some savvy person capitalized on it. This time by purposefully leaving the door open to put pressure on the Soviets.

Other than that, the only real conspiracy I believe is that the government loves conspiracy theories because it makes them appear a lot more scarier and powerful. It probably has caused a few countries and terrorist cells to think twice before executing an act against us.
 

Meddatron

I am what I am
Apr 19, 2011
11,383
5
0
45
York, Pa
s1193.photobucket.com
#9
add to the fact that to this day where our technology is far superior to that of the 60s, we haven't been back. We didn't explore it long enough to know everything about it.

If sending humans is a risk, why not a rover? shouldn't take long to get there and we could actually retrieve it.

of course this all leads to the conspiracy of whether or not we actually landed on there.
That and each and every photo of the moon has been altered. They flip the photos before releasing, They always release them only in black and white, they make false horizons. All of which has no logic behind it. If they didn't black everything out we would see stars behind it when they photo it from space, but guess what, no stars are ever present. If the moon was truly colorless, it would still be black and white. Why a different camera for the moon than anywhere else? Why such extremes to doctor pictures?
On two early occasions the moon has had reddish glow emit from it and were caught by a soviet astronomer and the Lowell Observatory. Now they see it every year. It happens each and every time the moon moves slightly closer to the Earth. They are identical each and every time and can be predicted. If the moon is " geologically dead" this is an impossibility.
The moon's orbit is almost a perfect circle, The moon’s center of mass is about 6000 feet closer to the Earth than its geometric center, which should cause wobbling, but the moon’s bulge is on the far side of the moon, away from the Earth. No wobble occurs. The Earth's bulge is towards the moon.
There is a 12 mile bridge that goes across a crater on the moon that was found in 1953 and verified by other astronomers.
There are 3 Obelisk looking objects that perfectly match the pyramids of Giza and mayan pyramids in spacing. (also observed on Mars) where the Sphinx would be is a 5 mile high rock.
All of those observations when you go to Nasa's website to see on the Lunar Survey map are blurred out. Every single thing on the moon that has questions about it is blurred. Why? From 1940 to 1957 Nasa reported seeing over 570 light flashes on the moon.
It is exactly the right size to produce a total eclipse. Its size ratio to the distance of the sun make them equal sizes as seen from Earth. perfectly equal!

I'm just gonna say it. The moon is the alien craft. Man's early gods reside there. A Death Star!
 
Last edited:

Meddatron

I am what I am
Apr 19, 2011
11,383
5
0
45
York, Pa
s1193.photobucket.com
#10
also, when they say that the reason they have not sent rovers is that there is nothing of importance, I say bullshit. The titanium on the moon is identical to the titanium we use in our military Subs. There is also a Uranium and Neptonium elements that cannot be found on Earth. You tell me the military doesn't want that Uranium.

The moon rocks were dated older than the Earth? The dirt under them was dated as even older. Earth is 4.6 billion years old, the moon is 5.3. How did it come first? If it was first and positioned where it is than the earth would not been able to form. It would have gotten bigger and became the planet.
 

Meddatron

I am what I am
Apr 19, 2011
11,383
5
0
45
York, Pa
s1193.photobucket.com
#12
if those metals are there, then mayhaps we HAVE been going back. Not sure how, but maybe we are working up there somehow and we don't want the rest of the world to know.
I could see that as possible. Especially since the first reverberations lasted an hour when we first went there. Than last year's lasted for 3 hours. That makes one believe it is more hollow today than in the 1969. On march 17th this year a flash of light (explosion from a small rock Nasa says) was so bright you could see the flash with your naked eye. http://science.nasa.gov/science-news/science-at-nasa/2013/16may_lunarimpact/
could been a mining explosion. Also note, in that article, Nasa once again admits to filming in black and white, than colorizing.
 
Last edited:

The Ewokhunter

Crazyass Cracker
Mar 14, 2011
10,566
3
0
45
thingsatwistedewokwouldsay.blogspot.com
#13
Another thing to think about, we cut back funding to NASA and have to hitchhike rides from Russia to the station. What if that was a public coverup to the fact they are using Russia to launch us up there for mining purposes? Heck, if we can dock a space shuttle up there, who's to say we don't have a craft designed to go to and from the station to do work?
 

Meddatron

I am what I am
Apr 19, 2011
11,383
5
0
45
York, Pa
s1193.photobucket.com
#14
add to that, every country that can is racing to get there again. Japan has a huge mission planned. On pace to be there in 2020 and have a base set up by 2030. China plans/planned on going this year, 2015, and 2017. Russia 2014 and 2015. For more than 30 years no nation cared, now all of a sudden, these new objects on the moon get leaked and every country wants to go. Sounds to me they don't believe they are as natural as Nasa states they are.

We have an extremely quiet space race happening right now.

Once out of Earth's gravity, a lawnmower engine would get us to the moon. A ship built in space would easily do it and fast.
 
Last edited:

Meddatron

I am what I am
Apr 19, 2011
11,383
5
0
45
York, Pa
s1193.photobucket.com
#16
The Outer Space Treaty does not ban mining for any purpose, no sending WMD's into space, testing/using military weapons (WMD's), No orbiting WMD's, no conducting military exercises, can't build military bases, no one can lay claim to anything, but mining for metals for any use on Earth for any reason is not covered. As long as said military weapon/vehicle does not go into space or built in space, they can do it.
 
Last edited:

Giga Bread

Mega Calories!
Aug 20, 2011
6,214
6
38
39
#19
The treaty was more connected to the nuclear arms race but it still exists.

Whenever there's a new resource on a piece of unclaimed property, everyone tries to claim it and always leads to massive conflict
 

Meddatron

I am what I am
Apr 19, 2011
11,383
5
0
45
York, Pa
s1193.photobucket.com
#24
Is Bigfoot a conspiracy theory?...either, that thing is real!...just a hard bugger to find
I'm not sure I believe he exists, but wouldn't be surprised if he did. Giant Squids were once a myth. Not any more. That huge ass ocean shark (megladon) was said to be extinct, but recently they found a skeleton piece in a shallow inlet that is not very old at all. 10,000 years I think they said. Previous fossils were over a million years old. If it has lasted 990,000 years longer than previous thought, what's another ten thousand years with a stable climate and no predators. It very well could still be in deep ass water like the Giant Squid.
 

Meddatron

I am what I am
Apr 19, 2011
11,383
5
0
45
York, Pa
s1193.photobucket.com
#26
That's not true, Humans only occupy 2% of the Earth. 90% of the population occupies 3% of the land. 29% of the Earth is land, we occupy only 3% of that. That gives 26% of the Earth that is land that we don't inhabit. Plenty of room for creatures we don't know about.
 

The Ewokhunter

Crazyass Cracker
Mar 14, 2011
10,566
3
0
45
thingsatwistedewokwouldsay.blogspot.com
#27
That's not true, Humans only occupy 2% of the Earth. 90% of the population occupies 3% of the land. 29% of the Earth is land, we occupy only 3% of that. That gives 26% of the Earth that is land that we don't inhabit. Plenty of room for creatures we don't know about.
just an hour in walmart can net you many creatures we didn't know about
 

pcsguy88

Number 2
Staff member
Mar 14, 2011
11,206
341
83
KC
www.fighting118th.com
#29
That and each and every photo of the moon has been altered. They flip the photos before releasing, They always release them only in black and white, they make false horizons. All of which has no logic behind it. If they didn't black everything out we would see stars behind it when they photo it from space, but guess what, no stars are ever present. If the moon was truly colorless, it would still be black and white. Why a different camera for the moon than anywhere else? Why such extremes to doctor pictures?
On two early occasions the moon has had reddish glow emit from it and were caught by a soviet astronomer and the Lowell Observatory. Now they see it every year. It happens each and every time the moon moves slightly closer to the Earth. They are identical each and every time and can be predicted. If the moon is " geologically dead" this is an impossibility.
The moon's orbit is almost a perfect circle, The moon’s center of mass is about 6000 feet closer to the Earth than its geometric center, which should cause wobbling, but the moon’s bulge is on the far side of the moon, away from the Earth. No wobble occurs. The Earth's bulge is towards the moon.
There is a 12 mile bridge that goes across a crater on the moon that was found in 1953 and verified by other astronomers.
There are 3 Obelisk looking objects that perfectly match the pyramids of Giza and mayan pyramids in spacing. (also observed on Mars) where the Sphinx would be is a 5 mile high rock.
All of those observations when you go to Nasa's website to see on the Lunar Survey map are blurred out. Every single thing on the moon that has questions about it is blurred. Why? From 1940 to 1957 Nasa reported seeing over 570 light flashes on the moon.
It is exactly the right size to produce a total eclipse. Its size ratio to the distance of the sun make them equal sizes as seen from Earth. perfectly equal!

I'm just gonna say it. The moon is the alien craft. Man's early gods reside there. A Death Star!
Links!!! I've read about the structures before, but would like to hear more.
 

Meddatron

I am what I am
Apr 19, 2011
11,383
5
0
45
York, Pa
s1193.photobucket.com
#30
Links!!! I've read about the structures before, but would like to hear more.
here's a fun site with all the mysteries in one spot.http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/luna/esp_luna_34.htm Scroll down for the images.

http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/480552main_naturalmoonbridge-1-labeled.jpg



Nasa has taken 1.8 million photos of the moon, over a million are classified.


Best moon conspiracy theories are here http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_luna.htm#inicio
They give you the nasa image number so you can go to nasa and verify its authenticity.
 
Last edited:

pcsguy88

Number 2
Staff member
Mar 14, 2011
11,206
341
83
KC
www.fighting118th.com
#33
here's a fun site with all the mysteries in one spot.http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/luna/esp_luna_34.htm Scroll down for the images.

http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/480552main_naturalmoonbridge-1-labeled.jpg



Nasa has taken 1.8 million photos of the moon, over a million are classified.


Best moon conspiracy theories are here http://www.bibliotecapleyades.net/esp_luna.htm#inicio
They give you the nasa image number so you can go to nasa and verify its authenticity.
Thanks! Diving in now. I find this shit so damn fascinating whether I believe it or not. Always good to hear alternate versions of the story.
 

PROVOST

Colonel in Chief
Officer Club
Jun 28, 2011
30,592
39
48
Terra Australis
#34
Dec 7,1941 - Pre to that a USN Captain who handled signals was aware of credible information crucial to intelligence gathering that was conducted by a Japanese spy (who was posing as a Diplomat) and he reported it to Washington and it was ignored.


USN had the majority of the fleet stationed @ Pearl Harbour moved out of the harbour not long before the attack on Dec 7.

US wanted in on WWII.
 

pcsguy88

Number 2
Staff member
Mar 14, 2011
11,206
341
83
KC
www.fighting118th.com
#36
Dec 7,1941 - Pre to that a USN Captain who handled signals was aware of credible information crucial to intelligence gathering that was conducted by a Japanese spy (who was posing as a Diplomat) and he reported it to Washington and it was ignored.


USN had the majority of the fleet stationed @ Pearl Harbour moved out of the harbour not long before the attack on Dec 7.

US wanted in on WWII.
Not sure this is theory at this point in time. Roosevelt was looking for a way to get public support and we had plenty of warnings. Our 4 carriers were out to sea for a reason.
 

K-Tiger

All solutions are final.
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
31,168
176
63
#37
Yeah, we'd been goading the Japanese for years. Unfortunately they fell for it and Roosevelt got his war.
 

PROVOST

Colonel in Chief
Officer Club
Jun 28, 2011
30,592
39
48
Terra Australis
#38
Not sure this is theory at this point in time. Roosevelt was looking for a way to get public support and we had plenty of warnings. Our 4 carriers were out to sea for a reason.
Yeah, we'd been goading the Japanese for years. Unfortunately they fell for it and Roosevelt got his war.
Oh so that particular set of facts back up a known acceptance of the "sacrifice" of military personnel dying @ the hands of Japanese forces?

All for getting the US people to support a war that the govt wanted to be in?

Well,that's a relief that it's known.

Poor sods @ Pearl Harbour having to die just cause the mass US populace had to have some "provocation"
 

The Ewokhunter

Crazyass Cracker
Mar 14, 2011
10,566
3
0
45
thingsatwistedewokwouldsay.blogspot.com
#39
Oh so that particular set of facts back up a known acceptance of the "sacrifice" of military personnel dying @ the hands of Japanese forces?

All for getting the US people to support a war that the govt wanted to be in?

Well,that's a relief that it's known.

Poor sods @ Pearl Harbour having to die just cause the mass US populace had to have some "provocation"
Same could be said of the current administration, many people have to die at the hands of the gov't just for gun control.
 

K-Tiger

All solutions are final.
Founder
Mar 14, 2011
31,168
176
63
#40
Oh so that particular set of facts back up a known acceptance of the "sacrifice" of military personnel dying @ the hands of Japanese forces?

All for getting the US people to support a war that the govt wanted to be in?

Well,that's a relief that it's known.

Poor sods @ Pearl Harbour having to die just cause the mass US populace had to have some "provocation"
It doesn't diminish the Pearl Harbor deaths, it makes them tragically criminal.