Throw Up And Go To Sleep: Why There Are No Paranoid Lunatic Conspiracy Theorists | Atlantic Free Press

Home

Writers

Op/Ed

Book Reviews

You are here:

Mon

Aug

2007

Throw Up And Go To Sleep: Why There Are No Paranoid Lunatic Conspiracy Theorists

Written by Winter Patriot

Monday, 13 August 2007 23:15

by Winter Patriot

On one hand you've got this "election integrity" thing — not a "coalition" or a "movement" but an illness, a dementia, really: all these paranoid lunatics who say our elections aren't free and fair just because they're run on machines that give the voter no way to verify that his vote was counted correctly, without leaving a paper trail, only totals tabulated by secret software that can be easily hacked, and because millions of people are illegally prevented from voting, and millions of other votes aren't even counted, and blah blah blah.

Look, I'm sorry but I can't listen to it anymore; it puts me to sleep.

On the other hand you've got these "9/11 truth" conspiracy theorists who say "the twin towers didn't collapse, they disintegrated" and "the NIST report calls itself a whitewash with its 'low probability of occurrence' nonsense" and "the FBI has no evidence implicating Osama bin Laden in the attacks of 9/11" and all sorts of other cheap-shots against the victims and their families. How disgraceful can you get?

Then they turn around and ask hateful and irrelevant questions like "Why did the President just sit there and listen to those kids read?" and "Where was the Air Force when all this was happening?" and they just go on and on and on. It's been going on for almost six years now and I can't listen to another word of it.

How could anyone be so unpatriotic? Can you imagine? It makes me want to throw up.

You would think, if you were inclined to think at all, that these two rabid and radical nut-bar fringe groups would fit together, so to speak. In other words, you would expect to see a lot of paranoid lunatic conspiracy theorists. But you don't...

...or at least I don't.

Look at this!

The text at the bottom may be hard to read: it says

DEMAND: Impeachment & Treason Trials | End The War | Restore The Bill Of Rights | A New 9/11 Investigation

Quite a laundry list, don't you think? We could talk about this insanity for a long time. But here's the key question: Do you see anything here about elections?

Of course not! All this "General Strike" nonsense comes from conspiracy theorists.

I know! it makes you sick to your stomach, doesn't it? But hang on! -- just for the sake of discussion, have a look at this picture.

Look closely. The people who designed these buttons are paranoid lunatics, but they're not conspiracy theorists. You can see that, can't you?

It's not hard to see that, in fact it's hard not to see it, because we've come to expect it. But my question today is a more interesting one:

Why?

Why are there no paranoid lunatic conspiracy theorists? In other words, why don't we see "Election Integrity" and "9/11 Truth" in the same place?

I think I know the answer.

~~~

Say what you like about the paranoid lunatics; they're not stupid. At least some of them aren't. They know their paranoid lunacy is not reality so they shy away from anything that might "tarnish" what they call their "credibility". They stick to known facts rather than wild speculation, and rightly so, in my opinion.

In other words it's a known fact that electronic voting machines can be hacked; that's been proven by Ivy League scientists and everything. It's solid. There's no conspiracy theory about it. This is fundamental, and decisive; some would say divisive. In any case, it's completely different from all the ridiculous conspiracy theories about the Islamo-Fascist terrorist attacks of 9/11, 7/7, and so on.

The conspiracy nuts aren't gonna like this, because it blows all their half-baked theories out of the water, but recently unreleased documents confirm it was Khalid Sheikh Mohammed who scheduled more than a dozen simultaneous US Air Force wargames for the very day of 9/11, thus stripping the Eastern Seaboard of its air defenses. He did it by cellphone from a cave in Afghanistan, using a codebook found by an al-Q'aeda operative on a bus in Switzerland. The CIA has just confirmed all this based on records from a wireless server they impounded from an internet cafe in the Hindu Kush.

Or at least that's what they say. The actual details of the calls themselves are redacted for national security reasons. But it sounds reasonable to me. I couldn't read the source document, even if it were unclassified -- I haven't got time, and it's probably in Urdu anyway.

More to the point, would the CIA lie about something like this? I don't think so, unless it were a part of an official disinformation campaign, and as I understand it they don't do those anymore, because disinformation campaigns are now categorized as unofficial.

So that's it! And I'm glad it's settled, because that was the only remaining question; by now I think it's pretty well accepted -- even among the most rabid wackos on the frothing fringe of the increasingly gullible conspiracy community -- that Osama bin Laden personally appointed Philip Zelikow to head the independent investigation after Henry Kissinger recused himself in order to pursue less lucrative but more patriotic service opportunities. So that pretty much settles it, unless I've missed something.

Of course it doesn't really matter whether I've missed anything or not, because the conspiracy theorists will surely come up with something else; they always do. Can you believe it? Next they'll be claiming important events have been reported before they even happened.

But it's all hogwash, demented hogwash from demented conspiratorial minds, and even the paranoid lunatics want nothing to do with them. I wouldn't either.

To their credit, the conspiracy theorists are smart enough to avoid being associated with the paranoid lunatics, and this, too, is perfectly understandable, I think.

If you were a conspiracy theorist trying to drum up popular support for a laundry-list of ridiculous, treasonous demands -- a hard-left pro-terrorist manifesto, as it were -- would you include any word or phrase that fairly screamed out "PARANOID LUNATICS HERE"?

I wouldn't either, and it's a good thing too, because if all the paranoid lunatics and all the conspiracy theorists ever got out in the streets together -- on September 11, 2007, for example -- it just might encourage them to stay a while.

And that would be very bad, both for America and for me personally.

It would be bad for America for many reasons but primarily because it would show the American people how widespread mental illness is in this country, and how common delusional thinking has become. It might also give them dangerous ideas about the power of the government and the consent of the governed and possible relations between the two.

It would also be bad for me personally, because I'm a news-hound. I read several short news articles per week, and I'm afraid if there were a big, long general strike by a coalition of paranoid lunatics and conspiracy theorists, the media would start covering them. And if I ever read about paper ballots and false flag terror in the mainstream media, I know I'm gonna throw up and go to sleep.

Normally, I don't like writing about myself and my own personal reactions to things, but in this case it's "fitting and proper", as Abe Lincoln would say ... because what's bad for me personally ... is bad for America!

This is Winter Patriot reporting, from ...What? My mic is on? Damn!! [click]

a guest said:

	Now I am confused? Am I a Paranoid nut or a conspiracy theorist Or both? Or does it even matter, as the machinery I use may well not count the votes, and the media certainly will not support anything but the official meme?
	report abuse vote down vote up

August 13, 2007 | url
Votes: +0

a guest said:

Arabesque
"all sorts of other cheap-shots against the victims and their families. How disgraceful can you get?"

It seems to me that you ought to do more research before claiming to know what the family members think. The ultimate insult to the 9/11 family members is ignorance about the facts and their views.

Fact: 70% of the questions by the family members were never answered by the 9/11 commission, and this same commission was called “derelict in its duties" by the 9/11 family steering committee. [See Film/Documentary: 9/11: Press for Truth—it’s freely available on Google video, and was made with the direct support of 9/11 family members.]

Why would they say that, and why were their questions not answered?

Fact: probably more than 50% of the family members believe that 9/11 was an inside job.

"Alex Jones: With your 7,000 members, I'm sure you've talked to most if not all of them. What percentage would you say believe 9/11 is an inside job to some extent?

Bill Doyle: Maybe half... Probably 50/50."

Now why would these family members think that? Are they “insert insult here” too? Why did it take so long to get an investigation in the first place? Perhaps the worst attack in US history wasn’t important enough for an immediate investigation or even testimony under oath from high officials?

It is my suspicion that the 9/11 family members have researched 9/11 far more than you have, and if you do not wish to insult them with inaccurate and ultimately misinformed commentary, you would do well to familiarize yourself with the facts of 9/11.

August 13, 2007 | url
Votes: +0