Comments by "Ronald Greene" (@ronaldgreene5733) on "Benn Jordan" channel.

. . a conspiracy theory requires the notion of a conspiracy. Who would be conspiring to make noise? Haarp has been acknowledged and is not theory, nor the notion of such technologies. The word conspiracy is an entire package of assumptions by which one refuses to consider any issue for oneself in a shared compulsion of risk aversion, lest we ever be accused of thinking for ourselves. As a result, we require only repetition to establish a safe zone by which we can remain unaccused. Such shared compulsion of fear never needs to be acknowledged. Corruption however is a generic term that carries no baggage in shared fear-based responses. Normalization rather than conspiracy is how influence and corruption create and take precedence, so that awareness is hostage to the needs for anything other than ourselves to define what is real and acceptable -- the need for any form of consensus to rule us unaware lest we ever accept responsibility. The word conspiracy has no practical value beyond a case being adjudicated in court where it has specific meaning to come to a resolution according to the law. In any other context it serves only to distract and discredit. Any form of corruption can be called a conspiracy beyond the solitary thief. However, the word is only or primarily used when there is intent at some point to discourage people from considering anything from their own individual perspective. The individual perspective is the focus of power by which no person can be set against another with false or self-serving interpretations from another outside of ourselves.
4
. . a conspiracy theory requires the notion of a conspiracy. Who would be conspiring to make noise? Haarp has been acknowledged and is not theory, nor the notion of such technologies. The word conspiracy is an entire package of assumptions by which one refuses to consider any issue for oneself in a shared compulsion of risk aversion, lest we ever be accused of thinking for ourselves. As a result, we require only repetition to establish a safe zone by which we can remain unaccused. Such shared compulsion of fear never needs to be acknowledged. Corruption however is a generic term that carries no baggage in shared fear-based responses. Normalization rather than conspiracy is how influence and corruption create and take precedence, so that awareness is hostage to the needs for anything other than ourselves to define what is real and acceptable -- the need for any form of consensus to rule us unaware lest we ever accept responsibility. The word conspiracy has no practical value beyond a case being adjudicated in court where it has specific meaning to come to a resolution according to the law. In any other context it serves only to distract and discredit. Any form of corruption can be called a conspiracy beyond the solitary thief. However, the word is only or primarily used when there is intent at some point to discourage people from considering anything from their own individual perspective. The individual perspective is the focus of power by which no person can be set against another with false or self-serving interpretations from another outside of ourselves.
4
This could be slightly related . . a conspiracy theory requires the notion of a conspiracy. Who would be conspiring to make noise? Haarp has been acknowledged and is not theory, nor the notion of such technologies. The word conspiracy is an entire package of assumptions by which one refuses to consider any issue for oneself in a shared compulsion of risk aversion, lest we ever be accused of thinking for ourselves. As a result, we require only repetition to establish a safe zone by which we can remain unaccused. Such shared compulsion of fear never needs to be acknowledged. Corruption however is a generic term that carries no baggage in shared fear-based responses. Normalization rather than conspiracy is how influence and corruption create and take precedence, so that awareness is hostage to the needs for anything other than ourselves to define what is real and acceptable -- the need for any form of consensus to rule us unaware lest we ever accept responsibility. The word conspiracy has no practical value beyond a case being adjudicated in court where it has specific meaning to come to a resolution according to the law. In any other context it serves only to distract and discredit. Any form of corruption can be called a conspiracy beyond the solitary thief. However, the word is only or primarily used when there is intent at some point to discourage people from considering anything from their own individual perspective. The individual perspective is the focus of power by which no person can be set against another with false or self-serving interpretations from another outside of ourselves.
1
This could be slightly related . . a conspiracy theory requires the notion of a conspiracy. Who would be conspiring to make noise? Haarp has been acknowledged and is not theory, nor the notion of such technologies. The word conspiracy is an entire package of assumptions by which one refuses to consider any issue for oneself in a shared compulsion of risk aversion, lest we ever be accused of thinking for ourselves. As a result, we require only repetition to establish a safe zone by which we can remain unaccused. Such shared compulsion of fear never needs to be acknowledged. Corruption however is a generic term that carries no baggage in shared fear-based responses. Normalization rather than conspiracy is how influence and corruption create and take precedence, so that awareness is hostage to the needs for anything other than ourselves to define what is real and acceptable -- the need for any form of consensus to rule us unaware lest we ever accept responsibility. The word conspiracy has no practical value beyond a case being adjudicated in court where it has specific meaning to come to a resolution according to the law. In any other context it serves only to distract and discredit. Any form of corruption can be called a conspiracy beyond the solitary thief. However, the word is only or primarily used when there is intent at some point to discourage people from considering anything from their own individual perspective. The individual perspective is the focus of power by which no person can be set against another with false or self-serving interpretations from another outside of ourselves.
1