Britain’s Prime Minister Theresa May is publicly calling for social media giants like Facebook and Twitter to become hostile places for terrorists looking to communicate or recruit. Now, we all can probably agree that this is a good idea, and we certainly hope that none of our readers would feel otherwise. However, it is our duty at Common Sense Conspiracy to point out where this could lead in the future.
Grabbing control over the Internet has been a problem for world governments for now decades. While we may never know exactly what happened behind the scenes, somehow the Internet took off and became what it is today without governments all over the world realizing it in time to put the clamps down on it. This kind of unchecked freedom keeps them up at night, and there have been many legislative attempts over the years to find a way to exert more control over it. Social media blowing up like it has only upped the ante.
So, while we are not necessarily implying that May and others are using terrorist acts as a means for pushing for more Internet control, we are saying that the possibility for that exists. Whether that is the goal behind the scenes right now, you can rest assured they wouldn’t mind if gaining more control of the Internet and social media was some sort of collateral damage in fighting the spread of extremism. This is another example of what is often referred to by conspiracy theorists as the “slippery slope.” What starts out as one thing, and even a good thing at that, turns into something else entirely with time. Stay tuned as we continue to analyze this and future situations.
In little more than a week’s time, we have seen multiple events that have made a lot of eyebrows rise worldwide in conspiracy circles. For veterans to this scene, this explanation is probably not necessary (although you might still find it interesting or want to pile on if you have any more information that you think is helpful). However, the political climate among other things has a lot of people on edge, and that means that more people than ever before are turning to alternative news sources and opinions. This is an overwhelmingly great thing, and we are proud to have all newcomers. This is a primer for those that might wonder why so many people think what they think when things like this happen in our world.
It is drilled into our minds from almost infancy that our government and civic system is designed to keep us safe. Safety is one of the cornerstones of true control, and the government (all over the world) takes it very seriously. However, what if you are safe already? What if there isn’t a threat? Well, that doesn’t work out well for them, and that’s why it will never happen. So, many in conspiracy circles believe that if things are going okay in the world, the powers-that-be will work overtime to make sure that it doesn’t stay that way. That is where all of the drama about false flag operations and such originates.
Situations like the terror attacks in Britain are a great example. Are they false flag operations? Who knows? We at Common Sense Conspiracy certainly have no real evidence to present for or against. But the reason it gets tossed around is because these sorts of things are just bad enough to cause mass panic and hysteria, but not bad enough to encourage people to revolt. In other words, they want us to feel just unsafe enough that we believe the government is taking care of us. Does that mean that every major violent event in the world is a false flag operation? Absolutely not, and the CSC has repeatedly gone on the record questioning the validity of claims. As always, we like to see some evidence, preferably tangible, before we start putting theories forward. Too many people out there (we’re not saying any names) in our line of work don’t follow this rule, and they lead to the rest of us getting labelled as tin-foil hat wearers and conspiracy nuts. The reality is that there are false flag operations, and we know this. Deciphering real ones from unfounded speculation is a big part of what we do here.
Climate change is another topic that was big in the news this past week. President Trump’s decision to pull out of the Paris accords was a major news story and led to a lot of doomsday predictions. Now, we’re not here to give you a full scientific rundown or climate change and the evidence for or against. All we are saying is that it’s like a game. Is climate change real? Sure. Look around. Is it caused by man? Sure, probably doesn’t help anything. But is Florida going to be underwater in 2030? Now that’s getting a little crazy with it. Is the United States going to be consumed by a fireball as temperatures spiral out of control? The doomsday prophecies of climate change are ironic because of this. Almost every ardent supporter of climate change is probably vehemently against Donald Trump. Yet, they use his style of negotiation. Shoot high and hope to get something in the middle. They preach doomsday hoping that maybe they will get people to change somewhere down the line. This is probably a pretty obvious strategy to most reasonable people. However, what you may not have considered is that they also want you to be afraid. Too much gets made out of the politics of it. The Democrats want you to be afraid that the Republicans will cause your Earth to be destroyed and all your grandchildren’s children to perish. The Republicans want you to believe that the Democrats are wasting your money on a bunch of bologna. The reality is that both sides like it. Or a better description would be that the real government likes it. Once again, it promotes fear. It also promotes division. Those two things are critical aspects at keeping people (where the real power lies) in check.
So, we hope as you peruse our articles here at Common Sense Conspiracy both today and in the future, you will remember this one that kind of gives you a primer for what you will see here. No matter how one-sided a lot of things might look at first glance, a lot of times if you look closer, you’ll see that all sides benefit, not just one or the other. That’s what we call the machine at work, and believe you me, it has been working overtime in our world this past week.
London has suffered yet another terror attack. This attack involved a van careening into people on the London Bridge. It is already being labelled a false flag event in some conspiracy circles. We have no reason at this time to concur with that account of things.
A false flag event has to have a point. With the information we have right now, we can see no advantage the government of either Britain or a shadowy New World Order would gain from this attack. Yes, it keeps people on edge, but as terror attacks go, this and the Manchester attack are very terrible events, without a doubt, but small on the scale of these things. We’re not saying that it doesn’t matter or that this sort of speculation is not pertinent and worthwhile; we are only saying that to declare this a false flag operation by the British government, we would need a goal, an objective that this helps to fulfill. At this time, we at Common Sense Conspiracy have not seen any evidence of this. However, there are those that disagree with us. The video below shows one such YouTubers who most certainly thinks he has this nailed down. Perhaps with more information we will see where he is coming from, but we aren’t ready to make such a declaration at this time.
There are now multiple fatalities confirmed in an attack that the media is already recognizing as an “act of terror.” Just after an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, there is little information available right now, except that police are confirming multiple deaths. Early reports indicate it was an explosion, although other conflicting reports say there was gunfire as well. The amount of damage is unknown at this time, and reports about the deceased range from a couple to dozens. For reports to be this inaccurate is quite common in these situations. We should have more information in a few hours. However, as you know if you read here often, we are not going to report the news. There are plenty of news sources out there, and some of them even tell what really happened. What we do is analyze this from the conspiracy perspective.
We are already having some of our readers write in claiming that this is a false flag attack for different reasons. One popular one that is forming is that this is designed to shake up things before the major election in just a couple of weeks in the UK that was already hotly contested. And no doubt ISIS will be more than happy to claim responsibility for the incident, especially with President Donald Trump currently touring the Middle East (he is currently in Israel). In any case, we will be watching as more information comes available about this so we can help you figure out what is really going on behind the original story that we will no doubt be fed. Look for crisis actors to be a big factor, and there will be tons of enterprising Youtubers with their take on things. Continue to visit Common Sense Conspiracy to get the scoop as we analyze this from all angles.
It was a national news story the other day that people were looking up the variations of the search term “World War 3” (variations meaning they combined the totals of other ways of putting it, like World War III or actually spelling it out) more than ever at any point in the history of the Internet. This, of course, came right on the heels of the general wariness of many following Donald Trump’s unexpected ascension to the Presidency and his subsequent bombings of Syria and Afghanistan. Throw in some serious tension with Russia, and you have a lot of reasons for people to feel a little uneasy.
Nuclear powerhouses like the United States and Russia having a war of words will always concern many that it could give way to a war of nukes. However, we at Common Sense Conspiracy would like to point out that if you are looking for a nuclear bomb to go off in a World War 3 scenario, neither of these superpowers is likely to be your culprit. It’s called the theory of mutually-assured destruction, a term that rose out of the Cold War arms races and is now considered an unusual method of keeping the peace. See, both Russia and the United States possess enough nuclear weaponry and technology to effectively obliterate the other if it came down to it. They both possess the technology to make a retaliation would still take place, no matter how overwhelming a first strike may be. Basically, either one could decide to take out the other one on any given day, but they would also all but certainly seal their own fate with mutual destruction. And as messed as it may be, that acts as an extremely effective deterrent.
The problem with mutually-assured destruction is it assumes that cooler heads prevail. Putin or Trump on their worst day isn’t ready for a nuclear war with the United States or Russia respectively. There is absolutely nothing to be gained, and perhaps everything to lose. They may do a lot of things up to that point because of overinflated egos or questionable morals and world views, but at the end of the day, no one is pulling that trigger. However, when you look to the Irans and North Koreas of the world, you have a real problem. See, these regimes are different. Cooler heads do not prevail. If they acquire nuclear weapons (North Korea has at least rudimentary nukes already, and the deal with Iran made by the Obama administration could mean that it’s only a matter of time for them as well) and the means to use them effectively wherever they see fit, they don’t worry about mutual destruction. Call it bat crazy or overzealous religious maniacs, but these folks are fully aware that America or Russia could wipe them off the face of the Earth, but that fear is not enough to stop them from potentially going ahead with it. Iranian leaders have actually referenced ushering in nuclear war as a way of helping get on with Allah’s master plan. North Korea’s leadership might rather be a martyr that left a crater in America or somewhere in Asia rather than cooperate with the international community.
So, if there is a World War 3 scenario out there, we don’t really know what it is. If North Korea launched a missile anywhere at all, it would be utterly destroyed in days. If Iran tried something, they might succeed in killing a lot of innocent people, but there would not be a world conflict. They would simply be obliterated. People like to point to China, but if North Korea actually nuked someone, China would most likely condemn it and get out of the way. Unless, of course, they perceived the North Koreans as having a really good reason for what they did.
Furthermore, let’s look at why people feel this way. Tensions between Russia and the United States are heightened, especially with the mess in Syria, but remember, the American government and mainstream media can’t even decide right now whether Trump and Putin are great buddies plotting world domination in the sauna or sworn egotistical enemies set for final showdown with the world at stake. They can’t decide which narrative to push because they can’t decide which one advances their own agenda, which is the only reason the mainstream media exists in this era. The truth is that President Obama publicly stated that he wanted to do something like Trump did in response to a chemical attack. Congress declined to authorize it, and President Obama declined to put his foot down. Whether you think that is right or wrong is a personal decision, but it is fact. So, if you think Trump bombing Syria is some great provocation, it’s really no different than what has been going on for the last eight years, albeit more in-your-face than Obama’s cloak-and-dagger tactics. Believe it or not, Putin may find this strategy more palatable. At least Trump is being forward about it and not trying to array the chessboard against you with seemingly clean hands. Putin probably respects that in a crazy sort of way.
But what about Afghanistan? That war is supposed to be over and done, but here’s Trump dropping the biggest bomb next to a nuke in the American arsenal. Well, two things you need to know about the mainstream media’s portrayal of that. First of all, the MOAB bomb is the biggest, deadliest one up to a nuke. That is true. But it’s a contortion of the facts for the purpose of agenda. A nuclear weapon by today’s standards is more than 250 times more powerful than the MOAB. So, while the statement is true, the MOAB is still not even deserving of being in the conversation with a true nuclear bomb. It’s not even close. Terming that way is designed to make it sound like a lot more than it is. Also, the media makes it sound like Trump is totally behind this. Most likely, Trump had nothing to do with it, besides the known fact that he has authorized the military to do what it needs to do to get the job done against ISIS. Meaning Trump didn’t personally tell them to drop this thing. He told them to use the weapons you need to get the job done. That’s what they did. There is nothing wrong with being uneasy about this. It is natural to feel that way. But do analyze the agenda that is being laid out for you. The media is working overtime to create a narrative, and every little phrase they use to describe every little thing is part of the plan. The problem is that many believe that the mainstream media’s agenda is either Democratic or Republican (Fox or CNN, for example). Nothing could be further from the truth. The real agenda of the collective mainstream media is to influence American minds, keep the two parties divided ideologically as much as possible, and push globalism. This was the case before Trump took office, and it will almost definitely continue to be the case going forward.
Could World War 3 break out tomorrow? Sure. But it probably won’t be for any of the reasons that the average person is walking around being worried about. It’s the unknown factors that are the real reason for concern.
We’re not here to report the news. You should know this by now if you are a regular here. There are plenty of sources for you to find the news, be it fake or somewhat based in truth. By now, you no doubt know something of the chemical attack that has now led to an American attack on Syria and setting the stage for a major conflict with Russia and perhaps the world. As you might imagine, there are plenty of conspiracy theories sprouting up like weeds on this one. Let’s examine some of the most common ones so far.
Assad got fingered when he wasn’t behind it. This theory revolves around the concept that Assad did not perpetrate this attack but was blamed for it by somebody else. The who is a whole different story. Some believe the rebels, Russia, or even a false flag perpetrated by America itself to engage in war. Each possible assailant has it’s own reasons. The most obvious is the rebels who certainly benefit from a Syrian airbase being decimated. For Donald Trump it could mean diverting attention away from the investigation of his campaign’s supposed ties to Russia. There’s probably other parties we haven’t even heard about yet.
How valid are any of these theories? It’s hard to say at this point. We at Common Sense Conspiracy are working overtime to get more real facts before we weigh in. But you can bet there’s more to the story than you will hear about on your mainstream news sources, and we will continue to make sure the real story gets told as more information becomes available.
In case you missed it, a few weeks ago President Donald Trump shocked the world when he took to Twitter to scold former President Barack Obama for wiretapping him and his associates during the presidential campaign and subsequent transition. Everyone laughed, pointed fingers, made memes, and said Trump was off his rocker. Only, now the Susan Rice revelations are showing that whether or not Trump was exactly right, he was at least not talking complete nonsense, and it will probably turn into quite a political and possibly even criminal issue as the Obama administration seeks to make Susan Rice the fall gal for the second time (remember Benghazi anyone?). We are not here to discuss the allegations and what it means. We just want to give our readers a quick scorecard so they are up to speed on where we are at with things.
Ok, let’s start back last year when Russia supposedly leaked to Wikileaks the emails that revealed that Bernie Sanders never was really in this thing, and the DNC let millions of Americans donate their hard-earned money to his campaign knowing full well that it was fixed and Hillary Clinton would be the candidate no matter what happened. Now, follow along here, Russia supposedly did this to “influence” the election by revealing to the American people that at least half of the primary process was fixed. Now, the whole Russia investigation revolves around the idea that Trump or someone close to Trump was talking and colluding with Russia to make this happen. Just in case that didn’t sink in, they are saying that Trump was colluding with Russia to leak the truth about the Democratic primary to the American people. In other words, Russia sought to influence the election in Trump’s favor by revealing to the American people just how corrupt the Democratic Party really was. And Trump was helping reveal the truth, which is what they are now investigating. I know it’s confusing.
Now, we find out that President Obama’s administration was also working hard to uncover the Trump collusion with Russia so it could leak it to the media or WikiLeaks and therefore influence the election in the other direction. Trump accused Obama of doing so, so he is now accusing Obama of doing what Obama is accusing him of doing. The scary thing is it looks like they are all right.
Yes, everyone is right. Everyone was trying to influence the election in an illegal fashion, and they were all doing it by revealing facts about each of the candidates that are basically indisputable. So, they sought to cleverly lie by telling the truth. Are you still with me?
Perhaps it would have been a lot easier if either political party could have simply found a decent human being to run for President. But that was too much to ask.