I’d be interested to learn what position the Bible can’t be used to both attack and defend.
Even if we limit the definition of ‘Bible’ to ‘The KJV or more modern translations of only the books the KJV contains’, there’s still been so much hermeneutics done on this text by people of every social background, political slant, ethnic affiliation, and wealth level that for every ‘True Biblical Position’ there is an equal and opposite ‘True Biblical Position’.
OK, I have another question for whatever Conspiracy Theory believer wants to respond.
How do you respond to this statement:
If there was an organization powerful enough to do the things you theorize, they wouldn’t need to lie to us. They would just do it, and we would be grateful they let us live.
Same as Muffin: I’m not interested in trying to convince Kozmik that he’s wrong. I’m not even particularly interested in any of his specific theories. I’m much more interested in what it’s like to be a conspiracy theorist, how he sees the world differently, how he reaches some conclusions but not others, stuff like that. A combative Pit thread wouldn’t get me that. (Plus, I read the beginning of the linked one and couldn’t make heads or tails of it.)
There have been participants in all of his threads with the same mindset. All of these threads end up in the same place; with Kosmik responding to reasonable questions with nonsensical and increasingly evasive answers.
Gotcha. So far it’s interesting, though. If it gets nonsensical and evasive, I can just wander off. This is the joy of the internet 
A typical characteristic of a true believer/conspiracy theorist.
Nope. Not playing this time.
Honestly, the conclusion I took from the Pit thread is that Kozmik’s brain simply doesn’t work correctly. That’s not meant as an insult, but a genuine observation. Assuming, of course, that we’re not all simply being trolled, it seemed like K was making real attempts to explain his thinking to us. In his mind, he WAS giving explanations and the logical connections behind his conclusions. It’s just that what came out was, to the rest of us, nonsensical non sequiturs. I think his brain’s logic connection part is on the fritz.
Just one man’s opinion.
I agree with Smeghead. Our friend here seems to honestly believe he is explaining his views, and I also feel that he simply does not comprehend the objections. When things seem so self-evident, it is difficult to explain them or to even understand what constitutes an explanation.
So you seem to take pride in the fact that there’s not just one conspiracy, but that they’re everywhere. 9/11, JFK, Roswell, the list goes on. It’s conspiracies all the way down.
Here’s my question: Isn’t that just exhausting? Mentally and physically exhausting? You’re seeing zebras everywhere. Don’t you just wish, once, there was a single simple Occam’s Razor type explanation for something that’s occurred?
Ah, but you see, an all-encompassing conspiracy (Illuminati, whatever) IS the simplest explanation. It wraps everything up in a Theory of Everything.
Kozmik - what about RFK’s assassination? Do you think Sirhan Sirhan was a pawn? Do you think the CIA orchestrated it, or perhaps Richard Nixon’s campaign? Do you think there was a second gunman?
I mean that the SDMB is a message board where everything is discussed persuant to its mission. Were CTs, for whatever reason, not allowed then the SDMB wouldn’t be the SDMB. Also, the slippery slope fallacy.
I do not assume that any conspiracy theory is not worthy of discussion. For example, the moon landing hoax does not explain or account for other things or other conspiracy theories.
Besides the President, probably less than a hundred people are witting of these conspiracies. Not all elected leaders learn of the truth of these conspiracies. For example, George H.W. Bush, who was the Director of the CIA, probably knew; however, his son, George W. Bush probably did not know. Ted Kennedy likely did not know about the truth of his brother’s assasination and neither did anyone else in that family.
Some are. Some aren’t. The 2000 election was likely predetermined.
Yes.
The former.
Easy to outline, difficult to detail. Some person is head of the entertainment industry, Hollywood, another person is head of the financial industry, Wall Street. Another person is attached to the world’s religious centers, Rome, Jerusalem, Mecca. Another person is spread out among the world’s military/technological nodes.
They operate by ensuring that the entertainment industry, the financial industry, world’s relgions, world’s militaries, ect. are all on the same message, that they are all working in concert, that things happen in “mysterious ways”.
This is where many posters did not get the point I was making. My point is: There is 192 heads of government. Full stop. This is where conspiracy theory begins. I do not believe that the heads of government is the ultimate analysis of the world. Because at a G-192 summit, the heads of government would all be at the same level. My further point is this: The G-192 summit points to the possibility that there could be an even higher level.
This speech by Kennedy indicates that he did know.
The former.
Yes, and the Illuminati were involved in Watergate.
No. Only the Director of the Secret Service likely knew.
Yes. Earle Cabell was mayor of Dallas at the time and his brother Charles Cabell was Deputy Director of Central Intelligence. Also consider that Ruby shot Oswald at the Dallas PD.
Not every member. Some likely thought some orders were suspicious and alerted their supervisors who told them otherwise.
The latter.
Yes.
Very few. A little more than the number of heads of government.
I am agnostic. I am agnostic because the relgious are sometimes no better than the atheists and vice versa.
Yes as long as one keeps an open mind and as long as one is prepared for uncomfortable paths where ever the questions lead.
No, because Bohemian Grove, Bilderberg would be under the Illuminati.
You state: “they wouldn’t need to lie to us” and “we would be grateful they let us live”. Who is “us”? People concurrently living now, or people who will be living in the next 100 years, or both? Lying to us takes on a whole knew meaning when “us” spans across time.
It’s not exausting because I just read The New York Times for approximately one hour every day. That’s it. Then I work on average eight hours each day. Work is more exhausting. 
I wish there was an Occam’s Razor for 9/11 but then it would not account for the 1993 World Trade Center bombing.
I think Sirhan Sirhan was a pawn and I find it interesting that he remembers nothing of what happened. Probably the CIA or Nixon. There might not have been a second gunman for RFK’s assasination but there likely were accomplices.
What method and criteria do you use to distinguish between a true conspiracy and a false conspiracy?
I’m confused by your responses. You say the Illuminati are very few in number - only around a couple hundred members - but they control a huge number or organizations. How do they do that?
It’s 1963. You’re a Secret Service agent. You’ve been assigned to the President’s detail when he flies to Dallas. You get a phone call from a person you’ve never met and he tells you he’s one of the secret rulers of the world and they’ve decided to kill Kennedy. Your orders are to step aside when the second gunman shoots and let him have a clear shot.
Are you really going to do this because some mysterious stranger on the phone tells you he runs the world? Or if he shows up at your workplace? Or relays the order through your boss? If somebody tried this, they would just get arrested not have their orders obeyed.
And this is the United States. Imagine what happened to the Illuminati agent who told Hitler or Stalin or Mao that he was running their country and they had to obey his orders.
And here it is again. Try getting any sort of meaningful details to explain this paragraph. Go ahead, I’ll wait here.
I’ll make the popcorn.
Fnorty.
What needs to be accounted for in regards to the 1993 WTC bombing? You’ve mentioned that a few times and I don’t know what it means.
That explains why the SDMB allows you to post CTs, but that’s not what I was asking. My question is: why do the Illuminati and their forces allow you to post CTs here? If they’re hugely powerful, why don’t they just have you banned or censored? Or do they not care whether they’re exposed? (In which case, why bother with secrecy at all?)