Has there ever been a Conspiracy Theory that was in fact true?

[Travis]

Of course one man's conspiracy is another man's reasonable political and economic maneuver, but the cigarette thing is pretty ridiculous. Dontcha' think so Greg?.......

The stats are beyond grim;


1) Around 5.4 million deaths a year are caused by tobacco.

2) Smoking is set to kill 6.5 million people in 2015 and 8.3 million humans in 2030, with the biggest rise in low-and middle-income countries.

3) Every 6.5 seconds a current or former smoker dies, according to the World Health Organization (WHO).

4) An estimated 1.3 billion people are smokers worldwide (WHO).

5) Over 443,000 Americans (over 18 percent of all deaths) die because of smoking each year. Secondhand smoke kills about 50,000 of them.

6) 1.2 million people in China die because of smoking each year. That's 2,000 people a day.

7) Tobacco use will kill 1 billion people in the 21st century if current smoking trends continue.

8) 33 percent to 50 percent of all smokers are killed by their habit.

9) Smokers die on average 15 years sooner than nonsmokers.

Sometimes the conspirators don't congregate and plot in smoked filled rooms, rather, they simply pretend nothing is going on. Some are so stupid like the members of the US Congress/US Senate. They did/do not even realize their actions, in this case subsidizing the tobacco industry, resulted in so many American deaths.

And those poor poor poor farmers, needing all that subsidizing, and then the buyout to boot(buyout occurred in 2004), growing cyanide as it were, and here we didn't know cigarettes were deadly until the 1950s. That's not much warning now is it?

Now how many Americans was it that died in the Civil War? 625,000.... somptin' like that. WWI 117,000, WWII 400,000, Korea 36,000 Vietnam 58,000......Total American deaths due to war since 1775 2,500,000.

So let's see there, 400,000 cigarette related deaths in the US a year, so every six years roughly stoggies kill as many Americans as all US wars combined did. Every three years stoggies killed as many Americans as did the Civil War, WWI, WWII, the Korean War, the war in Vietnam. Pretty dang good population control on the part of the US senate wouldn't ya' say?

Yeah, it did start to get pretty dang obvious, the "murder pays" MO as it related to cigarettes, so eventually taking the show on the road did make eminent sense......


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/national/longterm/tobacco/stories/asia.htm

Maybe we outta' seal up the windows and doors of the Capitol building during a joint sessions and pump it full of tobacco smoke and not open the front door 'til Nancy Peolsi has coughed her face into an expression that at least approximates that of a real person.....

What is your point here? That the government should ban tobacco? Where exactly is the conspiracy?

 

[Scott Sommers]

...

 

[Scott Sommers]

Your points are good......though I would suggest much went on that we do not know of in terms of NATO sponsored murder of innocent European civilians and the framing of law abiding communists.

I am very disturbed by what goes on in "non white countries". Here in San Francisco we are quite non white as a group. That said, your point is OUTSTANDING about the selectiveness of outrage. Great post!!!!!

Thank you. This was not the answer I was expecting. I appreciate very much that you understand my concern.

That selective outrage is simply a psychological mechanism.

As they used to say in journalism school: to determine the importance of a story, divide the distance through the number of casualties.

We feel stronger about people who are geographically closer. Or more accurately, more like us.

It took me a second reading to understand this, but when I did, I realized this is the problem that drives me crazy with conspiracy theory. It's not about people. It's just a perverted version of their image of the USA.

 

[Patrick1000]

"Conspiracies", as I see them, as I view them in the context of JRandi....

What is your point here? That the government should ban tobacco? Where exactly is the conspiracy?

"Conspiracies", as I see them, as I view them in the context of JRandi forum participation deal with events or collections of events that play out in a moment's time, or over an extended period of time in which a group seeks to take advantage of an individual or group of individuals through various mechanisms of deception.

Critical to my definition of a conspiracy is that the individual or group so gamed and taken advantage of, not to mention THE PUBLIC AT LARGE, are fooled into thinking something else entirely is going on.

Now, the deceivers need not operate in direct cahoots with one another. They need not meet in a smoke filled room and discuss how it is exactly they are about to screw people, and when in the process, how exactly it is that they are indeed screwing people. There need not be a "boss". There need not be a "road map". Rather, a conspiracy begins with a state of vulnerability that one and then more greedy and immoral people see as exploitable.

As time goes on, the vulnerable are exploited unless they themselves find a way to defend themselves, or a responsible party such as government steps in to help them, even save them as need be.

The bad guys often times work indirectly with one another, not necessarily as an obvious "team". They come to the conspiracy at times from different places, approach the vulnerable from different points of weakness without there ever having been any intention to begin with of cooperation. This coordination, this cooperation, is often times informal, indirect and not overtly intentional. It develops organically out of the social conditions relevant to the circumstances of any given conspiracy.

Such is the case with the atrocities perpetrated by the tobacco industry, killing better than 100,000,000 people in the 20th century, more than were murdered in all of the century's wars combined!

Advertisers participated, portraying smoking as fashionable, sexy, sophisticated and so forth. Hollywood/popular media did the same. The medical arm of American government would learn of tobacco's lethality in the 1950s, and yet the legislative arm of the American government acted only to place warning labels on packages of cigarettes. This, instead of government functioning as it should have by way of withdrawing all support from farmers growing smokable cyanide, and coming out with firm, clear, and unequivocal statements that this activity, smoking, will KILL YOU and in no way do we condone the growing of tobacco, or the use of these products. The legislative arm of American government continued to support the industry until 2004 when they "bought out" the farmers/growers with taxpayer money. This is without question the most incredibly ludicrous thing ever perpetrated by government on the American taxpayer, using OUR MONEY TO BUY OUT PEOPLE THAT MURDERED MANY OF US.

Many legislators over the years have benefitted monetarily and in other ways(reelection!) from this heinous U.S. Federal Government/tobacco industry/tobacco lobby relationship.

One can argue the smokers chose to smoke and that is true to a point. Importantly however, had the industry not been so well supported by the United States government, how many millions of Americans would still be alive today? How many Americans would not have died tobacco related deaths? How many great people would have enjoyed more time on our planet?

The tobacco industry itself along with advertisers, media/Hollywood, government, participated in the complex conspiracy, the complex group activity of inflicting great harm, death, in this unintentionally semi-coordinated loathsome effort.

The biggest screw job in the history of the United States, right there my friends. And it was all out in the open!, another great point. "Conspiracies" need not be literally covert, just activities where the major players can dope people up with insidious denial, denial that creeps through the culture like sic-fi movie invisible poison gas.

Can you believe that roughly 20% of adult Americans still smoke ? ! That is 44 million people!!!! These people will DIE! Where even now is the strong message called for by government ? ! ? ! ? ! The reality of the public health threat needs to be hammered......

 

[Robrob]

Can you believe that roughly 20% of adult Americans still smoke ? ! That is 44 million people!!!! These people will DIE! Where even now is the strong message called for by government ? ! ? ! ? ! The reality of the public health threat needs to be hammered......

I'm not sure what you mean "where is the strong message from the government?" Have you paid attention to the warnings on the cigarette packages, to the taxes levied on smoking, to the laws against smoking indoors, to the massive legal payouts from tobacco companies, etc...?

Like most of the other proposed CT here, tobacco fails from a significant lack of scapegoats and ninjas.

 

[Patrick1000]

I beg your pardon.....

I'm not sure what you mean "where is the strong message from the government?" Have you paid attention to the warnings on the cigarette packages, to the taxes levied on smoking, to the laws against smoking indoors, to the massive legal payouts from tobacco companies, etc...?

Like most of the other proposed CT here, tobacco fails from a significant lack of scapegoats and ninjas.

I beg your pardon Robrob.....

Is there something you misunderstood there Robrob about Dianne Feinstein taking my money, the money I work my livin' rump off for, and then giving it to tobacco farmers so they could help to make people super sick, or even within a high degree of probability kill them, and then take my money again to pay for the health care of those with emphysema and lung cancer to deal with this and that before they check out, and then take my money again to pay for the idiotic tobacco farmer buyout in 2004?

Is Dianne Feinstein a bad scapegoat Robrob, or should I blame another complete legislative stooge for taking my money and throwing it away on the most incredibly stupid RIP OFF and MURDER RAMPAGE of all time?

 

[Travis]

I'm sorry but we live in a country that is absolutely inundated with messages on how bad tobacco is. We won't allow them to advertise on TV but will allow PSA's on how awful it is. And we tax the hell out of it to pay for this.

But you think it's a conspiracy because a few people choose to engage in it despite the warnings?

 

[Patrick1000]

You miss the point entirely....

I'm sorry but we live in a country that is absolutely inundated with messages on how bad tobacco is. We won't allow them to advertise on TV but will allow PSA's on how awful it is. And we tax the hell out of it to pay for this.

But you think it's a conspiracy because a few people choose to engage in it despite the warnings?

The MESSAGE that should have been sent in 1960 that wasn't sent, the MESSAGE, the main part, should have been "NO MONEY FOR YOU SICK JERKS, NO MONEY FOR TOBACCO FARMERS". THIS WAS THE RELEVANT MESSAGE. That is/was the gist of the appropriate message, a message that was never sent.

 

[Travis]

Who should have sent that message and how?

 

[Tomtomkent]

Smoking is bad. It's terrible. It's nasty and horrible and I don't like it.

But the "message" that would have been sent is a bit of a myth. The science was good, people knew the science was good, but they wouldn't believe the science was good. For exactly the same reasons that despite all the evidence there are people who refuse to believe that climate change is real, or that carbon in the atmosphere is a factor. It's an old story. The message was sent, it was not believed, and took time to filter through.

You know what. You could make the same argument about the dangers of booze. Prohibition sent a loud and clear message on that one. How did it work out? Is the fact that beer and scotch are freely available in most countries evidence of a conspiracy too?

 

[Patrick1000]

You too are missing the point my friend.....

Smoking is bad. It's terrible. It's nasty and horrible and I don't like it.

But the "message" that would have been sent is a bit of a myth. The science was good, people knew the science was good, but they wouldn't believe the science was good. For exactly the same reasons that despite all the evidence there are people who refuse to believe that climate change is real, or that carbon in the atmosphere is a factor. It's an old story. The message was sent, it was not believed, and took time to filter through.

You know what. You could make the same argument about the dangers of booze. Prohibition sent a loud and clear message on that one. How did it work out? Is the fact that beer and scotch are freely available in most countries evidence of a conspiracy too?

You too are missing the point my friend.....

Everybody would believe the science was good, there would be no question as to the air tight validity of the science, were the US Congress and US Senate to simply not pay/give the tobacco farmers a friggin' DIME. By subsidizing the tobacco industry in a huge way with a massive monetary reward, denial becomes credible.

This is what I mean when I say these people, US Senators, US Congresspersons, are average, marginally capable. The action called for is to say the subsidies stop, 1960 say, whenever, the exact date is not important, and you make a clear statement to the American public why. AS THE LEGISLATIVE BODY OF THIS NATION, WE DO NOT SUPPORT MURDER ON YOUR BEHALF WITH YOUR MONEY, YOU THE AMERICAN PEOPLE.

This is far from complicated and would not have been difficult. Sure people would have been furious, but who should care what the furious think? Let them freak out, smoke a carton of Camels a day and commit suicide over it if they do not like it. I could not care less what they do.......

 

[Robrob]

I beg your pardon Robrob.....

Is there something you misunderstood there Robrob about Dianne Feinstein taking my money, the money I work my livin' rump off for, and then giving it to tobacco farmers so they could help to make people super sick, or even within a high degree of probability kill them, and then take my money again to pay for the health care of those with emphysema and lung cancer to deal with this and that before they check out, and then take my money again to pay for the idiotic tobacco farmer buyout in 2004?

Is Dianne Feinstein a bad scapegoat Robrob, or should I blame another complete legislative stooge for taking my money and throwing it away on the most incredibly stupid RIP OFF and MURDER RAMPAGE of all time?

Who was the scapegoat for the Great Tobacco Conspiracy?

How did the Great Tobacco Conspiracy use ninjas?

How is the Great Tobacco Conspiracy in any way similar to CT such as 9/11 or the Moon Landing?

You are confusing a straightforward and mundane conspiracy to hide medical results so some companies could make profits with the international Illuminati CT we are trying to discuss. Remember, a couple of guys planning a bank robbery is a conspiracy - it's just not 9/11, the Moon Landing, JFK, etc...

 

[Patrick1000]

I think that I did a fairly good job in #124 of pointing out.....

Who was the scapegoat for the Great Tobacco Conspiracy?

How did the Great Tobacco Conspiracy use ninjas?

How is the Great Tobacco Conspiracy in any way similar to CT such as 9/11 or the Moon Landing?

You are confusing a straightforward and mundane conspiracy to hide medical results so some companies could make profits with the international Illuminati CT we are trying to discuss. Remember, a couple of guys planning a bank robbery is a conspiracy - it's just not 9/11, the Moon Landing, JFK, etc...

I think that I did a fairly good job in #124 of pointing out that conspiracies are not necessarily covert in an overt way. It's kind of like the Adolph Hitler thang, you know, "The bigger the lie, the more the idiots in the public at large, Joe Citizen types, are apt to buy in a be fooled".

So bad people conspire in doing great harm to others often times fairly openly, fairly publicly. In such cases as is true with the Big Tobacco scam, sometimes overt governmental support serves to help hide the truth.

Since one role of government's is to help provide for public safety, public protection, public health, then when government comes out and SUPPORTS AN ENTITY LIKE BIG TOBACCO, WHY SHOULD WE KNOW ANY BETTER AND NOT BELIEVE ALL IS OK? It is in this crazy scheme that the truth is hidden, hidden right under our noses. DIABOLICAL!!!!!!!!!

 

[Scott Sommers]

I think that I did a fairly good job in #124 of pointing out that conspiracies are not necessarily covert in an overt way. It's kind of like the Adolph Hitler thang, you know, "The bigger the lie, the more the idiots in the public at large, Joe Citizen types, are apt to buy in a be fooled".

So bad people conspire in doing great harm to others often times fairly openly, fairly publicly. In such cases as is true with the Big Tobacco scam, sometimes overt governmental support serves to help hide the truth.

Since one role of government's is to help provide for public safety, public protection, public health, then when government comes out and SUPPORTS AN ENTITY LIKE BIG TOBACCO, WHY SHOULD WE KNOW ANY BETTER AND NOT BELIEVE ALL IS OK? It is in this crazy scheme that the truth is hidden, hidden right under our noses. DIABOLICAL!!!!!!!!!

After all those kind words, I feel compelled to only say nice things back. But I do disagree with this. In fact, it resembles the John Birch Society discourse about conspiracy - all history is a conspiracy, they are all around us and in the open, if only we look closely.

If this a 'conspiracy', then it doesn't have much relationship with the concept of conspiracy as it is used in everyday language. This kind of conspiracy happens all the time. It so common place that the problem is not finding them, but finding out where their limits are. The example I gave of someone's wife and her credit card problem makes this point. While your definition of a conspiracy seems to work for tobacco, it could also work for all those marriages being split up by the financial freedom caused by the conspiracy between credit card companies, the legal system and women. Where do we stop? How do we know it is a 'conspiracy' or just something else? What could this something else be? Could the credit card companies and the legal system being conspire to give women financial freedom? And if so, what point is there using a term that lumps the struggle for women's rights in with 9/11 Truth and the New World Order?

 

[Patrick1000]

Of course it is not a conspiracy Scott..........

After all those kind words, I feel compelled to only say nice things back. But I do disagree with this. In fact, it resembles the John Birch Society discourse about conspiracy - all history is a conspiracy, they are all around us and in the open, if only we look closely.

If this a 'conspiracy', then it doesn't have much relationship with the concept of conspiracy as it is used in everyday language. This kind of conspiracy happens all the time. It so common place that the problem is not finding them, but finding out where their limits are. The example I gave of someone's wife and her credit card problem makes this point. While it your definition of a conspiracy seems to work for tobacco, it could also work for all those marriages being split up by the financial freedom caused by the conspiracy between credit card companies. the legal system and women. Where do we stop? How do we know it is a 'conspiracy' or just something else? What could this something else be? Could the credit card companies and the legal system being conspiring to give women financial freedom? And if so, what point is there using a term that lumps the struggle for women's rights in with 9/11 Truth and the New World Order?

Of course it is not a conspiracy Scott. In this regard I could not agree with you more..........

Was that unfair of me to have done this? I think not. My point of course was to point out how people in authority hurt us and hurt us badly outside the context of conspiracy. And so, in my saying as above, in my slamming big tobacco and big government, I hoped to show that it was/is the hurt that matters, and the method is but of little concern, IF OF ANY CONCERN AT ALL.....

The cigarette problem was/is about many things, including government INCOMPETENCY. As government is more often, or at least, as often as not the villain with regard to all this conspiracy stuff, my point was/is that government does hurt us and hurts us terribly, but it is the day to day stuff, the ho hum business as usual NON CONSPIRATORIAL STUFF that killed off 100,000,000 of us here in one fell indifferent yawn and regal fart. We hardly need to invoke "conspiracy" to show/demonstrate how these clowns screw us so REGULARLY, DAY IN AND DAY OUT, RAIN FOG SMOKE OR SHINE.

Am I naughty for behaving like this, my playing with words? The government was simply incompetent, straightforwardly so, and I made them out to be not plainly and simply dumb, which they were/are, but rather instead, I presented them as plainly and simply conniving. And so Scott, they are indeed NOT CONSPIRATORS. I do indeed so ever agree with you.

My important point is their "methods" matter not, whether they hurt us with their conniving or their imbecility, the issue is the fallout, in this case the 100,000,000 lost souls, deaths. The mainstream defends the incompetents they support by way of their semantic games. I just played one of my own to hammer a point, and a good one one at that....

Of course it is not a conspiracy, but conspiracies are really not what any of this is about, not at all, not at all......

A day or two ago Complexity suggested that I refrain from satire and the use of other literary devices of which I am so fond. This of course is rather impossible.

I make my points any way I can, and if I can make a point referable to more than one important category of concern at once as I did here, all the better....all the better... all the better.....

 

[Scott Sommers]

Of course it is not a conspiracy Scott, and as such, I could not agree with you more..........

Was that unfair of me to have done this? I think not. My point of course was to point out how people in authority hurt us and hurt us badly outside the context of conspiracy.

The cigarette problem was/is about many things, including government incompetency. As government is more often, or at least, as often as not the villain with regard to all this conspiracy stuff, my point was/is government does hurt us, terribly, but it is the day to day stuff that kills 100,000,000 of us. We hardly need to invoke "conspiracy" to show/demonstrate how these clowns screw us so REGULARLY, DAY IN AND DAY OUT, RAIN FOG SMOKE OR SHINE.

Am I naughty for behaving like this, playing with words? I think not.....

Of course it is not a conspiracy, but conspiracies are really not what any of this is about, not at all, not at all......

Naughty? Not a chance. You wanna see naughty, check this out. But then, why bother? Just go here and scroll down to my post #7.

I agree with you completely and thank you for having the patience. I would have strung it out a while longer and tried to whip even the more patient people among us into a frenzy. That way, they would hate you every time they see your name.

But seriously, it's driving me nuts, as well. It's a complete misunderstanding of the point of conspiracy. What interests me is why there is this misunderstanding. I would have thought it was straightforward. Bad planning and the creation of underprivileged groups may be a logical consequence of the system we all live in, but it's hardly conspiracy - and it doesn't even seem like it to me. So what's the logic that goes through the minds of those conspiracy intellectuals gathering here to thrash out the details of their ideas and put them to the hard test of the JREF?

 

[little grey rabbit]

I would have thought it was straightforward. Bad planning and the creation of underprivileged groups may be a logical consequence of the system we all live in, but it's hardly conspiracy - and it doesn't even seem like it to me. So what's the logic that goes through the minds of those conspiracy intellectuals gathering here to thrash out the details of their ideas and put them to the hard test of the JREF?

Have you ever considered that conspirational behaviour might be a logical consequence of the system we all live in and the phenotype of the homo sapien?

Consider rape, rape obviously is universally considered nasty, yet a lot of rape still takes place. We could imagine that a propensity to rape under some circumstances in males would be an evolutionary trait that might be selected for - or at least in the past when selection was more important.

So might it be with conspiracy. A tendency to act in a conspirational manner (or if you prefer with pronounced in-group mutualism) might propel a very minor and obscure tribe in an economically backward area of the globe to controlling significant swathes of the banks, the entertainment industry, the medical and legal professions and the media.

Conspiracy, like rape, proliferates because it is evolutionary successful

 

[Patrick1000]

It's been way too long little grey rabbit since we crossed paths and conspiracies....

Have you ever considered that conspirational behaviour might be a logical consequence of the system we all live in and the phenotype of the homo sapien?

Consider rape, rape obviously is universally considered nasty, yet a lot of rape still takes place. We could imagine that a propensity to rape under some circumstances in males would be an evolutionary trait that might be selected for - or at least in the past when selection was more important.

So might it be with conspiracy. A tendency to act in a conspirational manner (or if you prefer with pronounced in-group mutualism) might propel a very minor and obscure tribe in an economically backward area of the globe to controlling significant swathes of the banks, the entertainment industry, the medical and legal professions and the media.

Conspiracy, like rape, proliferates because it is evolutionary successful

It's been way too long little grey rabbit since we crossed paths and conspiracies....

Interesting point you make here....

Best to you, soldier on my friend.....

 

[Patrick1000]

I think they hate me in a major way already.......

Naughty? Not a chance. You wanna see naughty, check this out. But then, why bother? Just go here and scroll down to my post #7.

I agree with you completely and thank you for having the patience. I would have strung it out a while longer and tried to whip even the more patient people among us into a frenzy. That way, they would hate you every time they see your name.

But seriously, it's driving me nuts, as well. It's a complete misunderstanding of the point of conspiracy. What interests me is why there is this misunderstanding. I would have thought it was straightforward. Bad planning and the creation of underprivileged groups may be a logical consequence of the system we all live in, but it's hardly conspiracy - and it doesn't even seem like it to me. So what's the logic that goes through the minds of those conspiracy intellectuals gathering here to thrash out the details of their ideas and put them to the hard test of the JREF?

I think they hate me in a major way already Scott, even without my having squeezed this one for a page or two longer.

 

[Scott Sommers]

I think they hate me in a major way already Scott, even without my having squeezed this one for a page or two longer.

We're friends now. Especially after the way you brushed off Conspiracy Boy. Are you sure you want to be my friend? Some people think that would make you bad.

He's not blaming the common white\other culture man/woman for the problems with black peoples. He's referring to those Whites THAT are "IN POWER" & running the show. You are simply a beneficiary of the white power structure while some of your suffering brethren are casualties of war.