# Ask the conspiracy theorist **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [October 27, 2012, 5:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012 "2012-10-27T05:07:39Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 33
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 4:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/641 "2013-02-26T04:46:26Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > It’s not countries _per se_ that matter - it’s heads of countries. So it’s not a meeting of all countries; more to the point, it’s a meeting of _all_ heads of _all_ countries. But it still doesn’t make sense why 192 heads of state need to be in one place for the Illuminati to be involved. I don’t understand why a vast majority of leaders in one place (let’s say 184 of them) isn’t worth the Illuminati attention, but 192 is very very important. > [@](#): > > Divide and conquer for one. That makes no sense. Gathering everything within a set (192 countries, 100 senators, 99 red balloons) is the opposite of dividing. It is unifying. ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 6:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/642 "2013-02-26T06:00:54Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > But it still doesn’t make sense why 192 heads of state need to be in one place for the Illuminati to be involved. It’s not that 192 heads of state need to be in one place for the Illuminati to be involved - it’s that _all_ heads of state need to be in one place for the Illuminati to be involved. > [@Ravenman](#): > > I don’t understand why a vast majority of leaders in one place (let’s say 184 of them) isn’t worth the Illuminati attention, but 192 is very very important. Until the Pope resigns, 192 is _all_ the heads of state. After the Pope resigns (and until the a new Pope is elected) 191 is _all_ the heads of state. Understand, it does not matter what number it is, 191, 192 – all that matters is that it indicates _all_, that it is everything within a set as 192 is this month and 191 is next month. > [@Ravenman](#): > > That makes no sense. Gathering everything within a set (192 countries, 100 senators, 99 red balloons) is the opposite of dividing. It is unifying. Divide and conquer. Unify and \_\_\_\_\_\_\_. Fill in the blank. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 11:07am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/643 "2013-02-26T11:07:16Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > ```auto > > ``` > > Excellent question. Let’s say that the G-192 summit were to be held from February 25 to March 11. On February 28, one of the attendees would have to recuse themself. Before February 28, it would be a meeting of all heads of government and after February 28 it would still be a meeting of all heads of government. > > There would be no such summit if some world leaders decided not to attend. There would be such a summit, however, in the extraordinary event that the Pope resigns. Understand that it’s not important that all countries are represented, it’s important that all heads of countries are represented. > > It’s not countries _per se_ that matter - it’s heads of countries. So it’s not a meeting of all countries; more to the point, it’s a meeting of _all_ heads of _all_ countries. > > To demonstrate what or who the heads of countries collectively represent. **hint: it’s not countries (which they represent individually) but something or someone else.** > > Divide and conquer for one. What did I tell you about “hinting?” Let me remind you - DON’T DO IT. Because you _really, really_ suck at it. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 12:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/644 "2013-02-26T12:27:32Z")
Kozmik- do you understand why we disagree with you? Basically, you seem to be making a series of assumptions (like all 192 world leaders are equal, and a meetnig of all the world leaders would need to be presided over by someone with greater power/status), and we think _all of your assumptions are incorrect_ (and not only incorrect, but ludicrous and nonsensical). ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 2:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/645 "2013-02-26T14:04:13Z")
> [@DrFidelius](#): > > What did I tell you about “hinting?” Let me remind you - DON’T DO IT. Because you _really, really_ suck at it. **Ravenman** will be able to get the hint. (I wasn’t directing my post at you. But I know, you just can’t help yourself.) He asked why having all heads of state was very, very important. hint: All of _something_ is represented. answer: All power is represented. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Kozmik- do you understand why we disagree with you? Basically, you seem to be making a series of assumptions (like all 192 world leaders are equal, and a meetnig of all the world leaders would need to be presided over by someone with greater power/status), and we think _all of your assumptions are incorrect_ (and not only incorrect, but ludicrous and nonsensical). Yes, except I do not understand why you are speaking on behalf of others. I do not assume that all 192 world leaders are equal. I am only pointing out that all 192 world leaders have the same status as world leaders. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 2:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/646 "2013-02-26T14:25:32Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > **Ravenman** will be able to get the hint. (I wasn’t directing my post at you. But I know, you just can’t help yourself.) He asked why having all heads of state was very, very important. hint: All of _something_ is represented. answer: All power is represented. I literally never would have guessed that. I truly don’t understand the way you think about these things, which is why I ask you questions. Because I don’t understand, there’s no way I can extrapolate your thinking into the conclusions you assume. I agree, you shouldn’t hint at things. Just say them. > [@Kozmik](#): > > It’s not that 192 heads of state need to be in one place for the Illuminati to be involved - it’s that _all_ heads of state need to be in one place for the Illuminati to be involved. > > Until the Pope resigns, 192 is _all_ the heads of state. After the Pope resigns (and until the a new Pope is elected) 191 is _all_ the heads of state. Understand, it does not matter what number it is, 191, 192 – all that matters is that it indicates _all_, that it is everything within a set as 192 is this month and 191 is next month. > > Divide and conquer. Unify and \_\_\_\_\_\_\_. Fill in the blank. You’re getting way too literal here and not answering the actual question. I will rephrase. Why are Illuminati so interested in getting all leaders together, but not interested if all but one, two, or a handful of leaders get together? Why wouldn’t the Illuminati preside over a meeting of 98% of the world’s leaders, but would be compelled to preside over a meeting of 100% of the worlds leaders? I can’t fill in the blank, because I have no clue what you’re driving at. Again, clarity is your friend. Unify and… Surrender? ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 2:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/647 "2013-02-26T14:35:04Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > Yes, except I do not understand why you are speaking on behalf of others. I hope others will correct me if I’m wrong about them. > [@](#): > > I do not assume that all 192 world leaders are equal. I am only pointing out that all 192 world leaders have the same status as world leaders. Your second point is tautology. So what if they’re world leaders? Most of them don’t have supreme power in their countries- and the democratically elected ones must answer to the people. And many countries don’t even have a clear leader- who is the “world leader” in Iran or Thailand, for example? Your assumption that your G-192 meeting happens is evidence-free (and ridiculous on its face). Your assumption that were such a meeting to happen, that it would have to include a higher authority is false- meetings happen all the time between “equals” with no higher authority. The way you try to connect two seemingly unrelated assertions (like the existence of “world leaders” with the G-192 and/or the Illuminati) is nonsenical. I’ve asked you before- but please give me an example of a world event that CANNOT be explained without the Illuminati- and please tell me _why_ the Illuminati must be invoked. I believe that for any example you choose, I or someone else can explain it without invoking the Illuminati or any other global conspiracy. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/648 "2013-02-26T14:37:41Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > **Ravenman** will be able to get the hint. (I wasn’t directing my post at you. But I know, you just can’t help yourself.) He asked why having all heads of state was very, very important. hint: All of _something_ is represented. answer: All power is represented. But all power would NOT be represented- very few world leaders actually have supreme power in their countries. Hell, there’s plenty of people (like Bill and Hillary Clinton, for example, or Mayor Bloomberg) who have plenty more actual influence and power then dozens of “world leaders”. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 6:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/649 "2013-02-26T18:30:41Z")
As far as I can tell, Kozmik first developed the idea of the G-192 conference about eight months ago, in a now-closed thread in the Pit. I find it sad that this idea he pulled out of thin air seems to now be a central tenet of his belief system. It has made no impression at all to point out that international meetings do not work that way, never had worked that way, and there is no conceivable mechanism or reason for them to start working that way in the future. ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 6:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/650 "2013-02-26T18:48:38Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Why are Illuminati so interested in getting all leaders together, but not interested if all but one, two, or a handful of leaders get together? Why wouldn’t the Illuminati preside over a meeting of 98% of the world’s leaders, but would be compelled to preside over a meeting of 100% of the worlds leaders? Because unless there is a meeting of 100% of the world leaders then all power will not be represented. > [@Ravenman](#): > > Unify and… Surrender? Yes! > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > And many countries don’t even have a clear leader- who is the “world leader” in Iran or Thailand, for example? Ali Khamenei and Bhumibol Adulyadej. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Your assumption that were such a meeting to happen, that it would have to include a higher authority is false That is not false. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > But all power would NOT be represented- very few world leaders actually have supreme power in their countries. Hell, there’s plenty of people (like Bill and Hillary Clinton, for example, or Mayor Bloomberg) who have plenty more actual influence and power then dozens of “world leaders”. This is false. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 7:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/651 "2013-02-26T19:18:05Z")
Not all countries are constituted with a single chief executive or “Head of State.” Some of the countries which do have such an executive have him (or her) as a purely titular leader. Very few countries have a ruler rather than an executive. The leaders of the most powerful countries have the most limitations on their powers from other branches of their governments. The CEOs and Boards of Directors of the top fifty corporations in the world have more power and influence than the executives and legislatures of the bottom fifty countries in the world. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 8:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/652 "2013-02-26T20:00:02Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > That is not false. Yes it is. > [@](#): > > This is false. No it’s not. ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/653 "2013-02-26T20:04:02Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > Because unless there is a meeting of 100% of the world leaders then all power will not be represented. > > [. . .] > > That is not false. > > This is false. You get no credit for your answers unless you show your work. ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/654 "2013-02-26T21:23:50Z")
> [@DrFidelius](#): > > You get no credit for your answers unless you show your work. The same applies to you: > [@DrFidelius](#): > > The CEOs and Boards of Directors of the top fifty corporations in the world have more power and influence than the executives and legislatures of the bottom fifty countries in the world. ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 9:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/655 "2013-02-26T21:25:26Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > Because unless there is a meeting of 100% of the world leaders then all power will not be represented. Why is it important that 100% of “power” be represented??? Why isn’t 98% sufficient? Or 62%? How many times can I ask you to explain that? > [@](#): > > Yes! [re: “Unify and surrender”] Huh? Are you saying that the G-192 would all come together and surrender to the Illuminati? I thought the whole idea of the Illuminati is that they already run everything. Are the Illuminati omnipotent or impotent? (Please feel free to use full sentences to explain your responses, as hints and one word answers don’t effectively convey your thoughts.) ---
**Author:** ![DrFidelius](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/drfidelius/32/3447_2.png) [@DrFidelius](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DrFidelius)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/656 "2013-02-26T21:57:08Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > The same applies to you: Certainly. > **[List of largest companies by revenue](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_companies_by_revenue)** > > This list comprises the world's largest companies by consolidated revenue, according to the annually ranked Fortune Global 500 published by Fortune magazine, as well as other sources. Out of 50 largest companies 23 are American, 17 Asian and 10 European. > This is limited to the largest 50 companies, all of which have annual revenues exceeding US$130 billion. This list is incomplete, as not all companies disclose their information to the media or general public. Information in the list relates ... > **[List of countries by GDP (nominal)](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_GDP_%28nominal%29)** > > Gross domestic product (GDP) is the market value of all final goods and services from a nation in a given year. Countries are sorted by nominal GDP estimates from financial and statistical institutions, which are calculated at market or government official exchange rates. Nominal GDP does not take into account differences in the cost of living in different countries, and the results can vary greatly from one year to another based on fluctuations in the exchange rates of the country's currenc... The combined GNP of the lowest 50 countries on the list does not approach the gross revenue of the first corporation listed. Why would the president (or whatever the leader of Burundi is called) get a seat at your power conference while the CEO of Walmart had to sit outside? You need to rethink your concept of “power,” perhaps through a course in global economics? ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/657 "2013-02-26T22:23:11Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > Why is it important that 100% of “power” be represented??? Why isn’t 98% sufficient? Or 62%? For the same reason that it is important that the President of the United States represents 100% of the people. As **iiandyiiii** points out: > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > the democratically elected ones must answer to the people Even the ones who do not have to answer to the people still represent the people, if only nominally. All world leaders individually represent the people; however, all world leaders collectively represent the Illuminati. That is why it is important that 100% of power is represented. > [@Ravenman](#): > > Huh? Are you saying that the G-192 would all come together and surrender to the Illuminati? Yes, the world leaders would surrender their collective power to the Illuminati. > [@Ravenman](#): > > Are the Illuminati omnipotent or impotent? Omnipotent. > [@DrFidelius](#): > > Why would the president (or whatever the leader of Burundi is called) get a seat at your power conference while the CEO of Walmart had to sit outside? Because the CEO of Walmart is represented by the President of the United States. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 10:51pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/658 "2013-02-26T22:51:28Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > all world leaders collectively represent the Illuminati. That is why it is important that 100% of power is represented. There’s no reason to believe this, it’s just nonsense. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 10:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/659 "2013-02-26T22:52:32Z")
> [@Kozmik](#): > > Omnipotent. Are they powerful enough to conjure up a world without the Illuminati? ---
**Author:** ![Kozmik](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/8dc957/32.png) [@Kozmik](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kozmik)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2013, 10:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012/660 "2013-02-26T22:55:55Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > it’s just nonsense. It’s not nonsense. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > Are they powerful enough to conjure up a world without the Illuminati? This question is nonsense. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012.md?page=32) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ask-the-conspiracy-theorist/639012.md?page=34)