Blow my mind with some fringe shit that a lib would never even entertain, please, I'm bored

Death to America

  • Diogenes_Barrel [love/loves]
    ·
    2 years ago

    very timely: the democratic leadership literally wanted Roe overturned. Evidence: Joe Biden's record and being a catholic. Nancy Pelosi's a Cath and campaigns for pro-life dems.

    • MolotovHalfEmpty [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      I mean, is this a conspiracy or just pointing out a material history of personal statements combined with material political actions? You're right though.

  • ssjmarx [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    :epstein: didn't kill himself

    :fedposting: killed MLK

    :cia: killed JFK

    :ancap-good: is an ideology created by the government (one of many) to catch libs who are questioning the system and prevent them from becoming leftists

      • Runcible [none/use name]
        ·
        2 years ago

        First three are just facts

        Yeah but you asked for things that we know to be true but also where we don't have proof.

    • axont [she/her, comrade/them]
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      i'm more convinced the ancaps were invented by the university system to catch libs than the government itself. Every anarchocapitalist is some weird college debate nerd. The government is perfectly content killing class consciousness through either directly murdering through poverty or throwing treats around to confuse everyone

      • ssjmarx [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        aw shit I posted when the thread was young and played it safe.

        Here's a fun one: Blizzard commissioned porn of Overwatch characters during the initial advertising blitz for that game. There's no other explanation for ubiquitous it was and how quickly it fell off once the game actually released.

  • pooh [she/her, any]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    The 2004 Ohio election (first afaik to use electronic voting machines after the 2000 debacle) was straight up rigged, which directly led to Bush winning. There's no "smoking gun" but the difference between exit polls and official results indicates that votes were somehow flipped. This is not the only case where major discrepancies exist between exit polls and "official" results. There are many other cases of this happening, including in the 2016 and 2020 Dem primary.

    EDIT: Here's a great article on the topic:

    The first major indication that serious voter fraud had been committed was when the wide unexplainable discrepancies began to appear between the exit polls and actual vote counts and they all favored Bush.

    Experts say exit polling is the most reliable polling because unlike pre-election polls, in which voters are asked to predict future behavior, exit polls interview people leaving the voting box about an act that they just completed.

    On the basis of exit polls in 2004, CNN predicted that Kerry would defeat Bush in Ohio by a margin of 4.2%, but in the end Bush supposedly won Ohio by 2.5%.

    In fact, precincts where Bush received at least 80% of the vote, the exit polls were off by an average of 10%, a pattern that experts say indicates Republican election officials stuffed the ballot box in those precincts.

    Bush also tallied 6.5% more votes than the polls had predicted in Pennsylvania, and 4.9% more in Florida. According to Steven F Freeman, a visiting scholar at the University of Pennsylvania, who specializes in research methodology, the odds against all 3 of those shifts occurring in concert was one in 660,000.

    “As much as we can say in sound science that something is impossible,” he says, “it is impossible that the discrepancies between predicted and actual vote count in the three critical battleground states of the 2004 election could have been due to chance or random error.”

    Mr Freeman made a point of telling Robert Kennedy Jr in an interview for an article in Rolling Stone Magazine that he’s no Democrat lover. “I’m not even political — I despise the Democrats,” he said. “I’m a survey expert. I got into this because I was mystified about how the exit polls could have been so wrong.”

    But Mr Freeman also said in Rolling Stone, “When you look at the numbers, there is a tremendous amount of data that supports the supposition of election fraud.”

    • MolotovHalfEmpty [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      I remember this being an incredibly hot topic amongst security tech people I know at the time and then it just sort of disappeared. They took the attitude that any election done with that kind of voting machine was totally illegitimate, but the US continued regardless. I suspect the reason is because both parties use it now. It was essentially a tech advantage that the Democrats caught up to.

      • learntocod [they/them]
        ·
        2 years ago

        Yup. And Snowden showed us that the state is as capable as it is unaccountable. Oh, it’s not connected to the internet? Neither was that Iranian centrifuge.

    • crime [she/her, any]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Same discrepancies between exit polls and actual results for the 2020 Dem primaries on Super Tuesday

  • Ho_Chi_Chungus [she/her]
    ·
    2 years ago

    My mom went out for girl's night last night and Shinzo Abe got shot while she was gone

  • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Assad was not behind the chemical weapons released in Ghouta Douma (I mixed them up in my memory I think) in 2013 2018. It's impossible to know for sure what happened, it could've been basically any faction for any number of reasons. But it seems highly unlikely that Assad would cross the one thing the US specifically said was a red line for intervention. Chemical weapons don't give enough of an advantage to take that risk. It's more likely that some faction did it in hopes of drawing the US into the war (or by the US itself). The media was very quick to equate doubts about whether the weapons were linked to Assad with denial of the presence of chemical weapons at all, and both were answered with the horrific images and what kind of monster would defend this and so forth. I remember hearing later, once everyone had forgotten about it, that there was an official report where the original version, which included input from people on the ground when it happened, was completely scrapped and nobody ever saw it, and a second report was put together in Washington with nobody on the ground involved, which was based entirely on the video evidence everyone saw, which just showed evidence that the sarin gas was present.

    I don't have any way to know or prove what happened, I just think the official narrative doesn't make any sense if you expect Assad to act in a remotely rational way as opposed to a cartoon villain. And I sound crazy for bringing it up because everyone's forgotten it even happened. Hexbear is basically the only place on the internet where I can ever mention it.

    • space_comrade [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Wasn't this basically confirmed when the relevant UN institution for investigating this silently recanted their initial statement? I don't think it's a conspiracy as much as it just got memory holed like a bunch of other similar shit.

      • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]
        ·
        2 years ago

        I wasn't aware of that part. I still kind of consider it a conspiracy because it goes against consensus reality and I can't prove it.

        I saw that the Wikipedia listed the perpetrator as, "Likely Assad," which is kinda funny. Like, make what you will of that lol.

        • spectre [he/him]
          ·
          2 years ago

          You (or SWIM) should edit that to "unknown", and link it to a relevant section (which probably exists) discussing the possible responsible parties.

    • Frank [he/him, he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      Agreed. The cost of using chemical weapons so wildly outweighs the benefits that I want a very, very high burden of proof that it actually happened, and more that it was a government actor using them.

    • ClathrateG [none/use name]
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Different incident a few years later https://wikileaks.org/opcw-douma/ but if that's faked all claimed are highly suspect to put it lightly

      • Zuzak [fae/faer, she/her]
        ·
        2 years ago

        Oh shit I think that's actually the one I was thinking of. I thought 2013 seemed too long ago for it but I have no concept of time anymore and the other one was the first that came up when I googled

    • Opposition [none/use name]
      ·
      2 years ago
      1. Trump says no more war in Syria.

      2. McCain is outraged, flys to Syria immediately.

      3. Comes back a week later, after having met with rebels.

      4. Chemical weapon attack, very conveniently cancelling Trump's peace plan.

      5. Profit!

  • Owl [he/him]
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Some portion of YouTube's executives and upper-level managers are comprised of a fascist nepotism network, like the ones that exist in across US police departments. And I don't mean rhetorically fascist because neoliberalism has many of the same outcomes, or capitalists buddying up to fascists because they're at least not the left. I mean actually fascist, ideologically committed to the cause, would sacrifice profits to get the word out.

    Probably something similar in some branches of other tech companies too, but that's the one I've seen specific evidence for (which I can't share, sorry).

    • MolotovHalfEmpty [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      I find this hard not to believe. More so the more time and access I've had to wealthy people in tech.

  • star_wraith [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    The United States entered WW1 not because of the sinking of the Lusitania, the Zimmerman telegram, or any other ideological reason. But because if the Entante powers lost, they would never pay their loans to the US back.

    • HauntedBySpectacle [he/him, comrade/them]
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      isn't this just like... historical fact? the Lusitania thing is pretty commonly called a misconception, the sinking was in 1915, two years before the US entered. The telegram makes more sense as a cause, but really it was because it documented that Germany was intending to make unrestricted submarine warfare on American ships... which were sending weapons to the UK and France to fight Germany. not that there was a serious possibility of Germany aiding Mexico to conquer the Southwest.

      I think it's imperialism in general and not just the loans in particular, but that immediate interest makes way more sense.

      • emizeko [they/them]
        ·
        2 years ago

        isn’t this just like… historical fact?

        yes

        the Lusitania thing is pretty commonly called a misconception, the sinking was in 1915, two years before the US entered.

        Wilson's 1916 campaign slogan was "he kept us out of war"

      • Opposition [none/use name]
        ·
        2 years ago

        General Smedley D. Butler on the topic:

        I am not a fool as to believe that war is a thing of the past. I know the people do not want war, but there is no use in saying we cannot be pushed into another war. Looking back, Woodrow Wilson was re-elected president in 1916 on a platform that he had "kept us out of war" and on the implied promise that he would "keep us out of war." Yet, five months later he asked Congress to declare war on Germany.

        In that five-month interval the people had not been asked whether they had changed their minds. The 4,000,000 young men who put on uniforms and marched or sailed away were not asked whether they wanted to go forth to suffer and die. Then what caused our government to change its mind so suddenly?

        Money.

        An allied commission, it may be recalled, came over shortly before the war declaration and called on the President. The President summoned a group of advisers. The head of the commission spoke. Stripped of its diplomatic language, this is what he told the President and his group:

        "There is no use kidding ourselves any longer. The cause of the allies is lost. We now owe you (American bankers, munitions makers, American manufacturers, speculators, American exporters) five or six billion dollars. If we lose (and without the help of the United States we must lose) we, England, France and Italy, cannot pay back this money ... and Germany won't. So....."

        Had secrecy been outlawed as far as war negotiations were concerned, and had the press been invited to be present at that conference, or had radio been available to broadcast the proceedings, America never would have entered the World War. But this conference, like all war discussions, was shrouded in utmost secrecy. When our boys were sent off to war they were told it was a "war to make the world safe for democracy" and a "war to end all wars."

        Well, eighteen years after, the world has less of democracy than it had then. Besides, what business is it of ours whether Russia or Germany or England or France or Italy or Austria live under democracies or monarchies? Whether they are Fascists or Communists? Our problem is to preserve our own democracy. And very little, if anything, has been accomplished to assure us that the World War was really the war to end all wars.

    • Diogenes_Barrel [love/loves]
      ·
      2 years ago

      the weird thing about this is the entente couldn't have lost. however much you want to hype up german 'stormtroopers' they were cruising on the hopes and dreams of fumes.

      i'd get even more conspiracy brained, like completely off-the-books collusion between manufacturers & the gov to secure US contracts for armaments---most the manufactured materiel never saw combat but did get paid for.

      or the US wanted to gear up for taking the imperial mantle off the British and test modern warfare techniques developed through the war. fleet expansion and airforce creation being the most pertinent examples

      • furryanarchy [comrade/them,they/them]
        ·
        2 years ago

        Even if the Entente won without the help of the US (which they basically did, the US did very little in WW I), perhaps the powers in charge in the US at the time thought they would be so bankrupt by the cost of winning they wouldn't get paid back fast enough.

        That in combination with the weird upper class obsession with the manliness of war at the time would be enough to push things twords joining? Like, dumb cultural things like that can cause major events if material factors don't stop them.

        • Diogenes_Barrel [love/loves]
          ·
          2 years ago

          more i think about this today the more im leaning toward cloaked imperial project. the Wilson administration, fitting as it was headed by a virulent white supremacist, wanted to get into the imperial game, and saw an opportunity in ww1. how else do you explain the US' outsized participation in peace talks and advocacy for the League of Nations---a LON whose first task was not-coincidentally going to be taking over the administration of territories belonging to germany and the ottoman empire. the naval treaty negotiated a few years later hamstrung the royal navy without firing a shot.

          • furryanarchy [comrade/them,they/them]
            ·
            2 years ago

            That would track with the cultural forces I'm referring to as well. This "do the manly war thing" was based on how doing imperialism makes you cool. Even if you aren't doing war against native people and instead other imperial powers, if you are doing war for imperial goals, that fits in perfectly with the culture.

      • Opposition [none/use name]
        ·
        2 years ago

        In 1916 the Germans were winning and the Entente were being bled white. The French army mutinied and refused to attack. Without American help (and here I don't mean soldiers on the front) the Entente very well could have been forced to end the war.

        • Diogenes_Barrel [love/loves]
          ·
          2 years ago

          the germans were not winning. they were losing every front but Russia and stalemated in France. they were blockaded & had no way to break it. the french mutinys were not so much 'let the germans run us over' as 'we're not going to go on a suicidal charge'---not exactly a coup de grace for the germans

          its a simple matter of resources: germany needed imports which were cut off & the entente not only maintained colonial extraction, they captured more. just look at the numbers of tanks & other materiel on each side by the end of the war, germany never had a chance after the first few months

          • Opposition [none/use name]
            ·
            2 years ago

            Then why did the Entente come to the USA hat in hand saying they were going to lose the war? And if the Americans wanted their loans paid back, they'd better get involved? Wilson ran on "he kept us out of the war" and then immediately turned his coat and got America involved.

            And it wasn't the Zimmerman telegram or the Lustitania.

  • MolotovHalfEmpty [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    Despite being introduced to a lot of 9/11 conspiracy documentaries during smoking sessions with friends and partners, I never really bought those narratives. I could maybe, at a stretch, see a couple of very well connected people knowing aspects of the plan and a few people in the admin being happy to minimise or ignore warnings and preparedness because they didn't care if it happened and could make hay either way.

    I'm almost :10000-com:% convinced that the anthrax attacks afterward were entirely and specifically carried out by assets of the Bush admin / New American Century etc to pass the Patriot Act and justify whatever else they had in store.

    • Mrtryfe [none/use name]
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      Anthrax attacks being a false flag shouldn't even be up to much debate, imo. Anthrax being sent to the people most opposed to the Patriot Act coincidentally? Please. That shit is also pretty much confirmed to have originated at Fort Detrick, which is also a place that has had SARS testing, has had MKUltra testing and along with being tied in with other MK sub programs, is very much tied in with Operation Paperclip, is also featured when it comes to CIA rendition and torture programs and so and so forth...

      • MolotovHalfEmpty [he/him]
        ·
        2 years ago

        They also worked incredibly hard to smear and blame a guy who was found innocent, then convieniently blamed it on a dead man for whom the plot didn't even make sense. It was then memoryholed.

    • MaeBorowski [she/her]
      ·
      2 years ago

      That used to be my mindset as well regarding both 9/11 and the anthrax attacks (and still is on the latter). Listening to the TrueAnon episodes on the subject is what finally conspiracy-pilled me on 9/11. Would recommend.

  • SoyViking [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    The Danish government knew about Operation Weserübung and the Nazi invasion in 1940 and agreed in advance to only put up token resistance (for instance the guns on the forts in the Copenhagen harbour all failed to fire that day) in exchange for a peaceful occupation and being allowed to stay in office.


    Also, the Danish political establishment was thrilled to get to use Nazi demands as an excuse for outlawing the communist party. Why else would they arrest more communists than those the Nazis had demanded?


    Anders Fogh Rasmussen, current ghoul and former Danish prime minister and NATO secretary general struck a deal with Erdogan to shut down the Kurdish broadcaster ROJ TV in exchange for getting the NATO job.

    ROJ TV had been broadcasting from Copenhagen for years and Turkey had been butthurt about it for just as long. Several complaints had been made over the years but every time the authorities reached the conclusion that ROJ TV had not broken any laws.

    But then Rasmussen who was prime minister at the time needed a new job. The economy was going to shit and he was looking for an escape hatch to avoid a humiliating electoral defeat. Rumor had it that he was applying for the NATO job but that his application was being vetoed by Erdogan who was butthurt about the Kurdish issue.

    Then, suddenly, the authorities made a U-turn and concluded that ROJ TV was supporting terrorism and revoked their broadcast license. Shortly after Rasmussen was appointed head of NATO.

    As a side note to make the story extra shitty, Rasmussen had made quite a name of himself on the right wing as a defender of freeze peach by supporting racist Muhammad cartoons published in the reactionary broadsheet Jyllandsposten.

    • NPa [he/him]
      ·
      2 years ago

      I have a document of insane conspiracy cork-board ramblings that I add to every time I read about some new deep state fuckery that Anders Fogh is involved in. I'm convinced he's the most Gladio prime minister we've had so far.

    • Opposition [none/use name]
      ·
      2 years ago

      The Danish government knew about Operation Weserübung and the Nazi invasion in 1940 and agreed in advance to only put up token resistance (for instance the guns on the forts in the Copenhagen harbour all failed to fire that day) in exchange for a peaceful occupation and being allowed to stay in office.

      Interesting! Got any sources (in English)? I'm intrigued.

  • Diogenes_Barrel [love/loves]
    ·
    2 years ago

    cops put the fent on the streets. they do it to kill undesirables and secure more funding for the war on drugs. the feds don't even need to be involved at this point theres so much money behind local police now there could be a hundred separately conceived plots and undercover operations doing it

  • leftofthat [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    The US Government created Facebook and "gave it" to Zuckerberg, who is a failed actor

  • bayezid [any]
    ·
    2 years ago

    Neoliberalism as a 'fix' to the civil rights movement. You can't legally pay black people less for the same work now so you have to find other ways to uphold the racial caste system. Following the exclusion of poc from the Gi Bill white people were more likely to own houses. So they developed a system where wages stagnated but (a continually shrinking group of) white people didn't see their lifestyle deteriorate because they could refinance their homes.

  • President_Obama [they/them]
    ·
    2 years ago

    Too many cute boys. I think they're trying to trick me into h*lding their hands. Can't prove it tho

  • Fartbutt420 [he/him]
    ·
    2 years ago

    Lyme disease is definitely a bioagent that was developed in an American military lab off the coast of New Jersey