This seemed like a fun quotation to build upon.  

In another post, Greg said the following:

It struck me today that "The Nine" were all American priests too back in 1983, weren't they?  

Why is it that Americans always seem to discover these diabolical plots to destroy the SSPX and Tradition?

Maybe, just maybe, it is because Americans are prone to be somewhat nutty-nutbar, insular and reactionary thinkers.  You know, invading countries they cannot find on the map.  "If you're not with us you're against us".  A two party political system (4 parties would confuse people too much).

Maybe, these US priests simply don't fly over to Europe enough and get to know the district Superior.  Can either Pfieffer or Hewko speak French and converse with Bishop Bernie in his native tongue?  Did Pfieffer learn Tagalog, Mandarin or Urdu in his Asia postings?  Williamson is a polyglot.

Why does America have Talk Radio and Alex Jones, but Australia and Britain don't?  Why do most conspiracy theories come out of America.  Why are UFOs sighted in America more than all the rest of the world put together?  Why are French people not seeing black helicopters and "chem-trails"?  Seriously, ask yourself.  The SSPX is a global organisation but the two crisises in its 40 history come from America.  Is that a mere co-incidence?

So.  Could it be true that Americans are predisposed to conspiracy theory?  I know that I personally am.  

If so, why?  

Perhaps it has something to do with the idea that our very foundation was rooted in a conspiratorial group (the Freemasons).  Maybe paranoia is a part of our heritage.  

cօռspιʀαcιҽs exist.  That is for sure.  The Devil's struggle to drag people into Hell is a conspiracy in itself.  But I swear...the last decade has been filled with cօռspιʀαcιҽs and counter cօռspιʀαcιҽs.  

Does no one else in the world acknowledge conspiracy?  I know that Syria realized American involvement in funding militants.  I know that America has backed--publicly--the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt.  I know that Iran is always accusing our government of conspiring with Jєωs.  

Doesn't anyone in Europe also consider cօռspιʀαcιҽs besides David Icke?  

What about all the Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ involvement in Europe and South America.  I know the Freemasons did a lot of crap in Ecuador and killed a holy president down there.  

Oh, and I know that Obama has been sending gαy ambassadors to different countries, including the Philippines.  

Sigh.  

Thoughts?

I am an American and I believe in a lot of cօռspιʀαcιҽs. It is one of the reasons I am a traditional Catholic: because I learned about the successful conspiracy to take over the Church and turn it into a den of perdition, and now only a remnant remains faithful.

Much of Catholic conspiracy literature is European in origin.  

A guy who is pro-Jєωιѕн is going to resort to the lowest common denominator when making a dishonest sales pitch.

You must love Greg.  You deeply crave that man.  I try starting a new thread--and I try to move away from our previous hostile exchange--and you just bring it right over into the new thread.  

Too much of the same thing gets tiresome, in my opinion.  Let's keep it fresh.  

I find one sentence you said to be interesting.  that Catholic conspiracy literature is European.  You reminded me of something.  Hitler believed and was correct in the Jєωιѕн conspiracy occurring in Germany at that time.  

So right there, we have an example of a European belief in a conspiracy.  You just jogged my memory.  

Also, it occurs to me, the Russians in hindsight of the Soviet situation had a growing distrust and belief of conspiracy in the Jєωs.  So right there.  Another.

Any others?

Liberals coming to troll this forum is not innocent, it's not honest.

It's about wanting to undermine and harm the movement.

Well!  Thank goodness neither you nor I am a troll!  
 :smile:

Let's stick with the OP, shall we?

You just posted a thread about his quotation.

Yes.  But I was hoping the quotation to be understood as merely a segue into the new topic.  

The new topic is: "Do other countries/cultures embrace conspiracy? Do Europeans acknowledge conspiracy?"

By using the quotation as a segue, it gives forum readers some perspective as to where I'm coming from with my question.  But also, it serves a double-purpose as a sort of an "ad" in case people also become interested in the previous thread--thereby drawing more contributors to the old thread as well.  I'm sure you'd like more people reading the stuff you wrote.  Right?


. . . . .

Moving on, doesn't England have some sort of "conspiracy culture" apart from David Icke?  I mean, you have the struggle with the Euro.  You have this insane North African immigration problem.  Don't others there hypothesize that there's hidden forces at work against the good of the whole country?

I have seen some French 'conspiracy' stuff, Count Leon de Poncin (sp) comes to mind. But I doubt very much of it is translated into English and I can't read French so...

There are three books translated into English:

Here's the first:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/160966348/Poncins-Leon-de-Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ-and-Judaism-Secret-Powers-Behind-Revolution-1929

http://archive.org/details/JudaismAndTheVatican

Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ and the Vatican

http://www.scribd.com/doc/80825618/Poncins-Fɾҽҽmαsσɳɾყ-and-the-Vatican-A-Struggle-for-Recognition-1968

The great British anthropologist, Richard F. Burton:

"It remains now only to touch upon the future prospects of the Jєωιѕн race. This important consideration is still subject to two widely different opinions.

The first, which may be called the vapid utterance of the so-called Liberal School speaks as follows: “In this century we are battering down the ponderous walls of prejudice which nations and sects have erected in past times, for the separation of themselves from their neighbours, or as a coign of vantage from which to hurl offensive weapons at them. Roman Catholic and Jєωιѕн emancipation have been conceded, though tardily, and we may fairly hope that in the next generation our political, social, and commercial relations with our fellow‑men will be conducted without regard to their religious belief or their ethnological origin.” The trifling objection to this “harmonious and tolerant state of things” is that, though the Christian may give up his faith and race, the Jєω, however readily he may throw overboard the former, will cling to the latter with greater tenacity, as it will be the very root and main foundation of his power.


The second is the Judophobic or Roman Catholic view of the supremacy of Jєωιѕн influence in the governments and the diplomacy of Europe. It openly confesses its dread of Judaic encroachments, and it goes the full length of declaring that, unless the course of events be changed by some quasi‑miraculous agency, the triumph of the Israelite over Christian civilization is inevitable—in fact, that Judaism, the oldest and exclusive form of the great Semitic faith, will at least outlive, if it does not subdue and survive, Christianity, whose triumph has been over an alien race of Aryans. “Gold,” it argues, “is the master of the world, and the Jєωιѕн people are becoming masters of the gold. By means of gold they can spread corruption far and wide, and thus control the destinies of Europe and of the world.” For the last quarter of a century the dominant Church in France seems to have occupied itself in disseminating these ideas, and the number of books published by the alarmists and replied to by Jєωιѕн authors is far from inconsiderable. Witness the names of MM. Tousseuel, Bédarride, Th. Halliz, Rev. P. Ratisbonne, and A. C. de Medelsheim, without specifying the contributors to the Union Israëlite and the Archives Israëlites of Paris—a sufficient proof of the interest which this question has excited, and of the ability with which it has been discussed in France.


But these are generalisms which require the specification of particulars. Where, however, the field is so extensive, we must limit ourselves to the most running survey of Europe and the Holy Land. Throughout this continent the career of the Jєω is at once thriving and promising. The removal of Jєωιѕн disabilities in England and the almost universal spread of constitutionalism throughout Europe have told mightily in favour of the Jєωs. An essential condition of all reform is that the reformer never can say, “Thus far will I go, and no farther.” In sporting parlance, he took off the weight from a dark horse, and the latter is everywhere winning in a canter. The father kept a little shop in the Ghetto; the son has palaces and villas, buys titles, crosses, and other graven images utterly unknown to the Mosaic Law, and intermarries with the historic Christian families of the land. The great, if not the only, danger is that in the outlying parts of Europe, where men are not thoroughly tamed, and where the sword is still familiar to the hand, the Jєω advances far too fast; nor is it easy to see how his career can be arrested before it hurries him over the precipice. At this moment Hungary is a case in point. The Magnate, profuse in hospitality, delighting in display, careless of expenditure, and contemptuous of economy, sees all his rich estates, with their flocks and herds, their crops and mines, passing out of his own hands, and contributing to swell the bottomless pocket of the Jєωιѕн usurer. But the Magyar is a fiery race; and if this system of legal robbery be allowed to pass a certain point, which, by-the-bye, is not far distant, the Jєωs must prepare themselves for another disaster right worthy of the Middle Ages. And they will have deserved it."

Thank you for the informative links, Tele.


Now we're getting somewhere.


. . . .

It just so happens that I've come across a related blog post by Anne Barnhardt.  It's good.  I think I'll bold the parts I really find interesting.  Pay attention toward the bottom.  She talks about the need to get rid of aliases for this oncoming war.

http://www.barnhardt.biz/2013/08/21/stating-the-obvious-and-important-tactical-admonition-on-aliases/

Also, please take note that she hyperlinks to a few sources to back herself up, so if you want evidence to corroborate her words, you'll have to go to her blog.

Stating the Obvious and Important Tactical Admonition on Aliases

Back to my old job of STATING THE BLOODY OBVIOUS:  Barack Obama personally and the entire Obama regime is in an EXPLICIT ALLIANCE with the Muslim Brotherhood.  Obama personally is a product of the MB and has connections from his university days, Chicago and his putative Kenyan relatives – Malik Obama (putative half brother) is a high-ranking MB player in Africa.  Further, Hillary Clinton’s right-hand-man and possible lesbian concubine Huma Abedin (Mrs. Anthony Weiner) is the daughter of two of the MB’s highest-ranking members.  The MB has massively, massively infiltrated the United States, the FEDGOV bureaucracy, the intelligence agencies, most particularly the FBI, and the Congress and Executive branches of the post-American regime.  Further, nothing will be said about the Christian genocide in Egypt (well over 80 Coptic churches and monasteries burned in the last three weeks) because these people in Washington are evil, evil people and HATE Christianity and the Church.  They WANT Christianity and Christians to be exterminated.  They relish in the death of the Copts in Egypt.  They relish in the genocide and are preparing to carry out the same thing in the former United States eventually in an axis with Sodomites, musloids and militant Marxists – and many of the Sodomites and Marxists will SELF-IDENTIFY AS CHRISTIANS. You mark my words.  This war is going to be so unlike anything ever before seen, because the lines of battle are going to be almost impossible to conventionally demarcate.  Every population center will be its own discrete theater, and the players, with the exception of gang-bangers, will be almost impossible to visually sort.  And yes, there will absolutely be white, middle-class suburban people among the enemy.  Been to the airport lately?  TSA much?

Which brings me to something I have wanted to talk about for a while.  We need to talk about “handles”, “aliases” and “noms de guerre”.  Guys, while that tactic may have been sound in previous wars, it is going to be a disaster in this war.  It needs to stop.  Let me explain.  Let’s say I go to some gathering somewhere of counter-revolutionaries.  A middle-aged white dude walks up to me and says, “Hi.  I’m ‘Disturbed Citizen’ from the Mid-South Shotgun Shooters blog.  We have corresponded via email.”  Now stop and think about this.  How can I possibly, possibly confirm that this guy, who I have indeed corresponded with via email, actually is who he says he is?  We all now know for a metaphysical certitude that all of our email has been logged and may have been read by FEDGOV.  We MUST assume that FEDGOV is every bit as knowledgable of our data and correspondences as we are.  How do I know that this man standing before me really is ‘Disturbed Citizen’?  There is no possible way for me to confirm this.  I don’t know what ‘Disturbed Citizen’s’ name is, so asking for an I.D. is pointless.  I don’t know what ‘Disturbed Citizen’ looks like, so visual confirmation is off the table.  And the enemy has FULL ACCESS to all correspondence between myself and the real ‘Disturbed Citizen’, and thus can quote and make references WITH FULL CONTEXT AND DETAIL.

Do you see this?  Given the tactical situation, the proper course is NOT for us to hide.  That ship sailed a LONG time ago.  The only thing that hiding behind aliases, handles and noms de guerre accomplishes is opening a HUGE door to the enemy such that they can infiltrate us with ease never-before-seen in the annals of war.  The proper tactic is to BE NOT AFRAID and come out from behind aliases and handles NOW.

Now, take me, for example.  If I were to roll into some event somewhere, people would know who I was by name and by sight, and if they did not know who I was, I could quickly and easily confirm my identity and bona fides.

I know it is a big step, but just read over what I have said and then THINK.  The tactical table has been inverted.  If you all try to fight this war as if it hasn’t, you will get your butt handed to you and you will deserve it.  Enough of this prevent defense.  The only way to win is to fix bayonets and charge, and in my considered opinion, step one should be establishing identity so that we at least have a chance at a modicuм of OPSEC.  Counterintuitive?  Absolutely.  But the truth often is counterintuitive.

That is all.

In regards to the idea of removing my internet name...I've often thought about it.  A lot.  It's humorous that I chose a name that turned out to be Jєωιѕн.  I had no idea at the time.  

Towards the end of my life, I am hopeful in the idea of revealing my name and idenitity.  For now, however, no.

He has a much bigger following in the US than here.  He is pretty unique and ever now and again BBC4 will make a program about him so students taking drugs can listen and consider his arguments and drunken students can laugh.

I wonder if the UK will do the same thing with Alex Jones.