Why tidying your desk might make conspiracy theories seem less plausible

A recent study by psychologists at the University of Amsterdam looked at the consequences of feeling ambivalent, with interesting implications for belief in conspiracy theories.

We experience ambivalence when we feel both good and bad about something at the same time. Imagine eating an entire tub of ice cream. You know it would be a delightful way to spend five minutes – but you probably also know it’d be pretty bad for you in the long run. That’s ambivalence. It’s a common experience. We all feel conflicting emotions about things at some time or another. But we don’t tend to enjoy the feeling. Psychologists have known for a while that ambivalence is an undesirable state of mind, leading to negative emotions and even, in extreme cases, mental health problems. We habitually seek order and consistency, and to be ambivalent is to experience disorder. When we feel ambivalence we sometimes try to diminish or overcome it by updating our beliefs so we can arrive at a more unequivocal attitude, or simply by ignoring and downplaying the importance of the beliefs.

Alternatively, we can use more round-about strategies to deal with our unwanted emotions. Ambivalence threatens our sense of order, and so to negate it, perhaps we can seek compensatory perceptions of order elsewhere. Doing so won’t affect the original cause of our ambivalence, but it might distract us just enough to put us at ease again – at least temporarily. This is the idea which the researchers set out to examine.

They first needed to induce feelings of ambivalence in their study participants. To do so, the researchers showed people a fake newspaper story reporting a political debate. One group of participants read a version which argued staunchly in favour of a proposed political action, while a second group read a version which contained a more nuanced argument offering both pros and cons of the proposed action. Thus, the former group was made to feel unequivocal about the issue, while the latter group was made to feel ambivalent.

Ambivalence successfully induced, the researchers then looked at people’s reactions to the unpleasant state of mind. Compared to people who read the unequivocal article, people in a state of ambivalence were more likely to see meaningful patterns in random visual static, like the picture to the right. Moreover, they were also more likely to endorse a conspiracy theory. This suggests that both the illusory patterns and the conspiracy theories were serving as forms of compensatory order, allowing people to satisfy the craving for order triggered by the experience of ambivalence.

So what does all this have to do with a tidy desk? For their pièce de résistance, the psychologists ran one final experiment. Having shown that ambivalence triggers compensatory order-seeking, they wanted to show that preemptively affirming order diminishes this need to grasp at illusory patterns and conspiracies. People who took part in the study read the same phony newspaper stories designed to provoke ambivalence. At that point in the experiment, however, the researchers arranged for an error message to appear on the computer screen – of course, in reality it was all part of their devious plan. They apologised to the unwitting participant and told them they would have to complete the experiment at another desk. They led the participant to a desk in total disarray, strewn with pens, crumpled papers and magazines. Then the crucial step of the experiment: the experimenter asked some participants to help tidy the desk and put the mess in order before continuing with the experiment. Those people who got the chance to restore order by tidying the disorganised desk were less likely to see illusory patterns afterwards, while people who weren’t given the opportunity to restore order grasped at patterns just as in the earlier experiment.

In sum, the findings show that ambivalence motivates us to seek order in the environment around us. These experiments focused on just two forms of compensatory order in illusory images and postulated conspiracies, but there are doubtless many other forms of order which we can use to cope with ambivalence. When we have the opportunity to generate order elsewhere – such as by tidying a disorderly desk – we no longer need to seek illusory patterns or conspiracies.

This might seem like a surprising and tenuous finding, but it fits neatly into a growing body of research which suggests that people are especially likely to buy into conspiracy theories when they feel powerless, anxious, or uncertain. Of course, ambivalence differs from powerlessness and uncertainty – you can be certain that ice cream is both delicious and bad for you. But regardless of these subtle distinctions, one appeal of conspiracy theories might be their power to offer compensatory order, control, and certainty by explaining ambiguous and complex events with a neat and orderly story.

Original research:

Van Harreveld, F., Rutjens, B. T., Schneider, I. K., Nohlen, H. U., & Keskinis, K. (2014). In Doubt and Disorderly: Ambivalence Promotes Compensatory Perceptions of Order. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General. doi:10.1037/a0036099

About Rob Brotherton

Rob is a Visiting Research Fellow at Goldsmiths, University of London, and assistant editor of The Skeptic [www.skeptic.org.uk]. Follow Rob on Twitter: @rob_brotherton
This entry was posted in Biases & heuristics and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

144 Responses to Why tidying your desk might make conspiracy theories seem less plausible

  1. hybridrogue1 says:

    In a word, trite.

    In two words, silly and jejune.

  2. hybridrogue1 says:

    So now that you boys have graduated and have your chips and dip-loma, does that mean you are leaving this blog site to go to the weeds?

  3. hybridrogue1 says:

    “Psychologists are amateurs at conceptual refinement and debate..”~Roy F. Baumeister
    [‘Free Will in Scientific Psychology’ – pg 15-16]

    • babaganusz says:

      so… what kind of car does Roy drive?

    • You cherry picked a sentence from a psychology paper written by a psychologist about psychologists. If all psychologists are amateurs at conceptual refinement and debate, then since Baumeister has debunked himself in the process his point is moot.

      • hybridrogue1 says:

        I read the whole paper killerguy. Did you?

        Baumeister’s assertion as to “psychologists are amateurs at conceptual refinement and debate,” is a preamble to what it is psychologists should be attending to rather than playing at ‘Philosophy’.

        Do you, killerguy, understand the internal debate in the realm of “psychology” over “Free Will”? This is the context in which Baumeister’s quote is made; he is arguing that psychologist do not have the proper training nor temperament to speak to the topic of whether humankind possesses free will or not. It is beyond the proper domain of psychological inquiry.

        You are the only one here with a track record of debunking oneself.

        As an adjunct to such it should be pointed out that amateurs, such as your boy-wonder ‘heroes’ that put this site on the web, are mere children, barely beyond the swaddling stage. They have no more valid business joining in on driving the engines of Social Engineering than a dog catcher. They are young punks, wet behind the ears playing an adult game.

      • Oh look the idiot is rambling again off topic about shit he thinks he is an expert on.

        “You are the only one here with a track record of debunking oneself.”

        Says the handicap who posted a videos of a hoax made by a skeptic to see if idiots like you were gullible enough to believe anything on the internet. Lo and behold it worked on you too, 4 years after too. Debunking yourself is a specialist skillset you and only you possess around here. You’re an embarrassment to your fellow idiot twoofers.

      • hybridrogue1 says:

        Again killerguy dodges a straight forward question with empty insult.

        That question was and remains: I read the whole paper killerguy. Did you?

        With the adjunct question; Do you, killerguy, understand the internal debate in the realm of “psychology” over “Free Will”?

        Rather and instead killerguy jumps up with accusations that one simple mistake is grounds for dismissing everything I have said, by discounting my arguments by making a mountain out of a molehill.

        I will also point out that I have the character to have pointed out that mistake myself, and have never claimed infallibility.

  4. hybridrogue1 says:

    O’ Sanity…Sanity, where for art thou Sanity?

    Standing alone in the dead of night on a balcony overlooking the vast plaza stands a lady oft times called Truth, at times Liberty, others call her Justice.
    She calls out for her lover, over and yet again.

    But there is no reply.


  5. hybridrogue1 says:

    A Note on the Necessity of Historical Memory

    “What happened here was the gradual habituation of the people, little by little, to being governed by surprise; to receiving decisions deliberated in secret; to believing that the situation was so complicated that the government had to act on information which the people could not understand, or so dangerous that, even if the people could not understand it, it could not be released because of national security.

    Each step was so small, so inconsequential, so well explained or, on occasion, ‘regretted,’ that unless one understood what the whole thing was in principle, what all these ‘little measures’… must someday lead to, one no more saw it developing from day to day than a farmer in his field sees the corn growing…. Each act… is worse than the last, but only a little worse. You wait for the next and the next. You wait for one great shocking occasion, thinking that others, when such a shock comes, will join you in resisting somehow.” – Milton Mayer, They Thought They Were Free, The Germans 1933-45

  6. hybridrogue1 says:


      • hybridrogue1 says:

        ‘The March of Folly: From Troy to Vietnam’ by Barbara Tuchman is a theory, not ‘truth’ written in stone.

        The lesson on folly drawn from the Trojan war can be disputed by an understanding of the work of Julian Jaynes in the ‘Origins of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind’.

        The lesson on folly drawn from the Revolutionary War in America can be disputed with the information offered above, in the outline of the GRAND CONSPIRACY.

        But the most obvious criticism comes from the contemporary history of the Vietnam War.
        We are closer to it, and can be more sure of the facts due to this. This war was designed in such a way as neither ‘side’ would win. It was designed as a meat-grinder and profit generator. It was a charade, as all wars can ultimately be proven to be. An agenda created by design can be veiled by the concept of folly. Folly is the revetment, a “modified limited hangout”, or fall back position for failure in all or at least most covert operations. “Intelligence Failures” are the excuses given for the massive ‘coincidences’ found in the events of 9/11.

        Design masquerading as Diagnosis often uses ‘folly’ as an excuse and faint to draw attention away from the active agenda of political power.


  7. hybridrogue1 says:


  8. hybridrogue1 says:

    Col. George Nelson, MBA, U.S. Air Force (ret) – Commander of Aircraft Maintenance and Logistics.
    Aircraft Accident Investigator. Graduate, U.S. Air Force War College. 34-year Air Force career.

    Licensed commercial pilot. Licensed airframe and powerplant mechanic.
    Founding Signer Commissioned and Non-commissioned U.S. Military Officers petition calling for a new investigation of 9/11

    Personal statement of support:

    “In my first position paper, titled The Precautionary Principle, [see below] written shortly after the attacks on NYC and the Pentagon, I cautioned readers against a rush to judgment, although the immediate evidence suggested the crime had been an inside job. As the years went by, a virtual mountain of physical evidence was collected by hundreds of highly qualified investigators — evidence sufficient to convince any dedicated Grand Jury that the horrendous events of 9/11 were clearly an inside job…

    “In all my years of direct and indirect participation, I never witnessed nor even heard of an aircraft loss, where the wreckage was accessible, that prevented investigators from finding enough hard evidence to positively identify the make, model, and specific registration number of the aircraft — and in most cases the precise cause of the accident. …

    The government alleges that four wide-body airliners crashed on the morning of September 11 2001, resulting in the deaths of more than 3,000 human beings, yet not one piece of hard aircraft evidence has been produced in an attempt to positively identify any of the four aircraft. On the contrary, it seems only that all potential evidence was deliberately kept hidden from public view. …

    With all the evidence readily available at the Pentagon crash site, any unbiased rational investigator could only conclude that a Boeing 757 did not fly into the Pentagon as alleged. Similarly, with all the evidence available at the Pennsylvania crash site, it was most doubtful that a passenger airliner caused the obvious hole in the ground and certainly not the Boeing 757 as alleged.”

  9. hybridrogue1 says:

    “Let me draw a parallel. The Republic of Plato is the founding document of Western political theory. It is of overwhelming importance and contains a hundred fundamental insights and foundational thoughts. But it is a directly totalitarian text. It endorses an intensely hierarchical or caste society. It says that philosophers should rule, and with absolute power. One of the recurring themes is that the rulers will have to lie to the people continuously in order to control them, and it says they ought to. It proposes that the rulers match people up for mating in a gigantic eugenics program designed to entrench the class structure more in each generation: mate shoemakers with shoemakers, male soldiers with female soldiers, philosopher kings with philosopher queens. It says unauthorized infants should be killed. And so on. Aristotle was the first to systematically attack the Republic on such grounds, and in a democratic era, we must find the basic ideas repugnant.”~~Sartwell

    I have come to these very conclusions myself after reading The Republic.
    As far as real democracy is concerned, and not the false paradigm of Bernaysian Democracy – the only path to this principle is statelessness, that is anarchy.
    Finally an adult society, with no Parental State.


  10. hybridrogue1 says:

    Doublethink: Media Reports No Military Action Against ISIS While Reporting Airstrikes Against ISIS
    Melissa Melton

    “White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest was asked that very question back on August 29 — “Is the United States presently at war with ISIS — yes or no?” — he answered a definite “no,” instead claiming,
    “What we are doing is we are working very aggressively with international partners, with Iraqi and Kurdish security forces, to take the steps necessary to mitigate the threat that’s posed by ISIL.”

    See? Airstriking other countries isn’t war. It’s “mitigating a threat.” Funny…

    Ever since President Obama got the five-iron out of his … ahem … let me try that again. Once President Obama stepped up to his responsibilities and declared we would crush, kill, destroy — whatever verb he used — ISIL/ISIS/IS/non-Islamic non-State, the Administration has been on a positive tear through the thesaurus in trying to find euphemisms to describe what exactly we’re trying to do to whom, without us hearing that we’re doing anything definite to anybody real.
    Well, we definitely blew up 12 of Syria’s oil refineries today, so…

    What was the definition of George Orwell’s “doublethink” again? Holding two contradictory beliefs in one’s head simultaneously while believing both are true?

    Impossible in practice? Ask the White House and the establishment media.”


    “White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest” … As I noted before, even this guys name is Orwellian.

    josh (j sh) v. joshed, josh·ing, josh·es. v.tr. To tease (someone) good-humoredly. v.intr. To make or exchange good-humored jokes; banter.
    earnest (ûr n st) adj. 1. Marked by or showing deep sincerity or seriousness: an earnest gesture of goodwill. 2. Of an important or weighty nature; grave.

  11. hybridrogue1 says:

    A recent scientific study by Princeton and Northwestern universities, which has gone somewhat under reported in the mainstream media, concludes that the US is now a fully fledged oligarchy.
    The paper, entitled Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups and Average Citizens, notes that America is no longer even a Democracy, which begs the question, how far removed is the country from being the Republic envisioned and painstakingly established by Benjamin Franklin and the founding fathers.
    “The central point that emerges from our research is that economic elites and organized groups representing business interests have substantial independent impacts on U.S. government policy, while mass-based interest groups and average citizens have little or no independent influence,” the study notes.

    The study points toward the conclusion that the US is nothing more than an illusion of democracy.

    The authors of the study, Martin Gilens and Benjamin I. Page concur that the will or opinion of the majority in the US has no effect on the way government is run.
    “The preferences of the average American appear to have only a minuscule, near-zero, statistically non-significant impact upon public policy.”


  12. hybridrogue1 says:

    “Beneath the broad tide of human history there flow the stealthy undercurrents of the secret societies, which frequently determine in the depths the changes that take place upon the surface” -A. E. Waite (Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn)

    World leaders are made offers they cannot refuse, bribed, even blackmailed, or otherwise recruited and sworn into these secret societies. Then, often under blood-oaths to which they remain loyal, these Brotherhood initiates follow orders throughout their terms in office.

    In this way, the electorate constantly changes giving the illusion of discontinuity of leadership when in fact each successive leader “coincidentally” belongs to the same secret societies.

    A few of the more influential ones include the Freemasons, the Illuminati, Bohemian Grove, Skull and Bones, CFR, RIIA, Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission.

    “A disturbing majority of the House and Senate representatives hold membership to elite organizations publicly sworn to destroying America in favor of a Globalist one world order system.

    “This trend ranges from the now public U.S. centered Council on Foreign Relations through the Trilateral Commission to the quasi-secret internationalist Bilderberg Group. At the end of the spectrum we even see occult influences like Skull and Bones along with the Freemasons.

    “The justification for a zealously ordered One World Government is chaos. Terrorism is the premier method for fomenting this chaos.” – Paul Joseph Watson, Order Out of Chaos (125)

    “The conspiracy to create a centralized global fascist state is orchestrated in the five-sense ‘world’ by a secret network known collectively as the Illuminati or ‘Illuminated ones’.

    The 5 largest multi-media providers controlling 90% of America’s media are bloodline/secret society controlled. For example, the following are just a few of the hundreds of CFR, Trilateral, or Bilderberg owned/managed companies:

    ABC, CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, AP, Reuters, New York Times, New York Post, Washington Post, Washington Times, L.A. Times, Wall Street Journal, Newsweek, Business Week, National Review, Time, Life, Look, Fortune, Reader’s Digest, U.S. News and World Report, Atlantic Monthly, McCall’s, World Review, and Scientific American.

    Not only are the media CEOs and boards of directors usually secret society members, so are the show hosts and news anchors!

    “These societies hold considerable sway over national elections and policy, yet seem strangely immune to any investigation, whether by government or the mass media. Since its inception in 1913, there has never been an outside, objective audit of the Federal Reserve System despite periodic calls for such.” -Jim Marrs, Rule by Secrecy (109-10)

    “From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, to those of Trotsky, Bela Kun, Rosa Luxembourg, and Emma Goldman, this world wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilization and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence and impossible equality, has been steadily growing.
    It played a definitely recognizable role in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the nineteenth century, and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads, and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.”
    ~British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, 1920

    “The real rulers in Washington are invisible, and exercise power from behind the scenes.” – Supreme Court Justice Felix Frankfurter, 1952

    “The high office of President has been used to foment a plot to destroy the American’s freedom, and before I leave office I must inform the citizen of his plight.” – John F. Kennedy at Columbia University, Nov. 1st, 1963


      • hybridrogue1 says:

        “Hell is empty, the devils are here.”~Shakespeare – The Tempest
        . . . . .
        The assertion that powerful men and groups join together in private to plan and create a system that they retain power over is disputed by those who cannot see this obvious situation and call it “Conspiracism”, a conscious slur and epithet made in derision.

        They are pretenders, liars and dupes of the PR that the system drowns the minds of the population in. They can be referred to as TVZombies, Homo Vishnu Ignoramus, or any other moniker that describes these prefab automaton service widgets for the System. The vast sea of humanity roils and foams with these enchanted creatures.

        A tempest of madness stirs.

  13. hybridrogue1 says:

    “None are more hopelessly enslaved than those who falsely believe they are free.”
    ~Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

    Any social theory that does not take into account Social Engineering, will be fatally flawed.
    Dismissing the fact that the manufacture of consent is a proven phenomena of modern systems founded in public relations regimes leads invariably to preposterous analysis.

    This idea that any sort of democratic process can work, when that process is truncated at the very core, is based on such preposterous analysis. It takes a determined insistence on delusional pretense to remain so gullible; and this determination is the product of the conditioning and programming of the postmodern technocratic states.

    For those who haven’t studied and grasped the work of Bernays, and Lippmann and their school of progressive PR, nor the effects of watching television, can have no immunity to such scientifically calibrated persuasion.

    This thread is testament of the futility of attempting to break through such programming by simply making reasonable arguments. Such reason is dismissed by the emotions of the programmed automatons that make up the vast majority of modern societies.

    I would like to thank my prime opponent here for making such a perfect example of the ‘Programmed Automaton’ that I speak of. And I want to applaud such readers who are able to take away the positive lessons from this exchange. There is some growing portion of humanity that is awakening, and I hope this thread has contributed some little bit to that.

  14. hybridrogue1 says:

    CIA Document 1035-960: Foundation of a Weaponized Term

    “Conspiracy theory” is a term that at once strikes fear and anxiety in the hearts of most every public figure, particularly journalists and academics. Since the 1960s the label has become a disciplinary device that has been overwhelmingly effective in defining certain events off limits to inquiry or debate. Especially in the United States raising legitimate questions about dubious official narratives destined to inform public opinion (and thereby public policy) is a major thought crime that must be cauterized from the public psyche at all costs.”~James Tracy



  15. hybridrogue1 says:

    “President Eisenhower appointed General James Doolittle, a pilot famous for having bombed Japan in 1942 in retaliation for Pearl Harbor, to write a “Report on the Covert Activities of the Central Intelligence Agency.”
    In 1954, Doolittle produced a 69 page text written “with the very active support and cooperation of Allen Dulles.” The import of the text was that CIA should enjoy carte blanche, financial and otherwise.
    “Hitherto acceptable norms of human conduct do not apply,” Doolittle wrote. He argued that American history was “stained with blood” and that America had been created by “fundamentally repugnant wars” such as Indian wars, the American Revolution, the Mexican War and the Civil War. The CIA-engineered wars were no different.”~Mellen


    So rather than any moral repentance, what we get from Doolittle is disgusting and spurious excuse and pretext to continue the murderous campaigns of the past.
    And so here Amerika is today, the same old predatory beast that it was spawned as.~ww
    “Appalled by the Doolittle report, Eisenhower appointed a Board of Consultants on Foreign Intelligence Activities. To this committee, he appointed the aforementioned David K. E. Bruce. Then Eisenhower re-assigned this task of writing a report on the clandestine services to David Bruce, whom he was about to appoint to be Ambassador to Germany.
    The Bruce-Lovett Report (Robert Lovett, Truman’s Secretary of Defense worked on the report with Bruce) is devastating in its condemnation of the clandestine services. Bruce excoriates “the increasing mingling in the internal affairs of other nations” by CIA in its “King-making propensities” and its “rogue elephant” operations. He corrects the Cold War mythology about the Soviets, to noting that the Soviet Union, which had lost twenty-eight million people to Hitler, was less about expansion than about survival. Then Bruce argues that under the guise of “frustrating the Soviets, almost any [covert] action can be and is being justified.”
    Bruce deplores CIA secrecy. “No one, other than those in the CIA immediately concerned with their day-to-day operations, has any detailed knowledge of what is going on,” he wrote. Meanwhile – and this was something President Kennedy would oppose too, CIA was enjoying “almost unilateral influence…on the actual formulation of our foreign policies.” Ambassador Bruce knew from his own experience that CIA’s activities were “sometimes completely unknown to the Ambassador or anyone.”
    He adds that supporters of George Kennan’s 10/2 “could not possibly have foreseen the ramifications of the operations which have resulted from it.” The Directorate for Plans was operating “on an autonomous and free-wheeling basis in highly critical areas,” its actions “in direct conflict with the normal operations being carried out by the Department of State.”
    Bruce concluded that CIA’s clandestine services had led America to a “virtual abandonment of the international golden rule” and were “responsible for stirring up the turmoil and raising the doubts about us that exist in many countries of the world today.” He could have been thinking of the Islamist movement day when he asked: “Where will we be tomorrow?”



  16. hybridrogue1 says:

    Dear Mr Cameron and all of your killerguys,

    I write this open letter to you in response to your recent speech at the United Nations calling for military intervention in Iraq and Syria over the threat of ISIL. In particular I would like to make mention of your reference to the so called threat to society of what you have termed ‘non-violent extremists’, including those who are attempting to bring forward information and evidence about 9/11 which contradicts the official version of events.

    Putting aside the direct issue of ISIL for a moment, I find this position on 9/11 evidence to be quite incredible. It is a position that is either extremely ignorant, or it is a position that goes against freedom and democracy in British society to such an extent that it is scarcely believable. Huge numbers of extremely credible and professional people across the world are now bringing forward incontrovertible facts and evidence showing us that the events of 9/11 have been systematically covered up, and that the public has been deceived and manipulated on this issue at a quite incredible level. Just like the public was deceived and manipulated about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

    While you are labelling these people who bring this evidence forward about 9/11 as ‘non-violent extremists’, are you aware of what is currently happening in New York City regarding 9/11?

    Are you aware that more than 100,000 New York residents have just signed the petition calling for a new investigation into the collapse of World Trade Centre Building 7 through the ‘High Rise Safety Initiative’?

    Are you aware that through the fundraising efforts of public groups in the US, there is currently a massive digital screen in the centre of Times Square showing rolling video footage of the controlled demolition of World Trade Centre Building 7 to three million New Yorkers? This is footage of a collapse of a massive 47 story building (not hit by a plane) that most people have not even been aware of or seen before now. How can this level of information cover-up be possible in this day and age?

    Are you aware that many members of US Congress are now demanding that President Obama release the 28 redacted pages of the 9/11 Commission Report because there is information in those pages that will shock the nation, according to the two members of Congress who have been authorised to view the pages?

    But yet you have just stated to the world that you consider members of the public to be ‘non-violent extremists’ and a part of the ISIL challenge if they merely wish that these facts, evidence, and information about 9/11 be made available to the wider public and that appropriate investigations are held.

    I repeat my previous point. To make that statement to the world as you did, you are either extremely ignorant about this issue, or you are attempting to take a position which is so at odds with a decent, free society that it beggars belief. I find it difficult to believe that the Prime Minister of Britain would be unaware of what I have stated here, and therefore I have to believe that it is the latter scenario that is most likely.

    Yours sincerely,

    Peter Drew – MSc
    UK Facilitator – Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth



  17. hybridrogue1 says:

    As I said before, I do not post here to make an effect on this killerguy entity, but address the larger readership. I offer information and facts, and at the same time point out that killerguy is a jejune prankster spraying digital graffiti like a juvenile delinquent.
    Again, he is a perfect example of a brainwashed widget.

  18. hybridrogue1 says:

    When nothing you have been taught to believe is true; when you have been raised in an utterly false paradigm, what does it matter whether you call the plan to propagate such an agenda a “conspiracy theory” or something else? The fact is that the great mass of the peoples on this planet are living a manipulated delusion.

  19. hybridrogue1 says:

    Being well adjusted in a psychopathic society is no sign of good mental health.

  20. hybridrogue1 says:

    Moral Cowards

    It is moral cowardice that balks at the truth and in the final argument says ‘I don’t want to know’. They may or may not say it up-front, but it eventually comes out in their subtext. They have been terrorized by the propaganda of ‘Fear & Loathing’. Big Daddy told them to be afraid, very afraid, convinced them with horror shows Big Daddy designed himself; gruesome carnage on an industrial scale, heartless and bloody. Calibrated to fascinate and repel with cognitive dissonance slamming their manipulated emotions.

    The great majority is enchanted & stupefied, their minds frozen by fear into seeking empty rituals of mindless entertainments and distractions. And they are willing to fight you to the death if you attempt to wake them up from their sedated state.

  21. hybridrogue1 says:

    Good morning, Mr. President. I’m a representative of the shadow government that put you into power. Did you ever wonder how we keep people fighting with each other? Or obeying our silly rules? Or actually loving their captors and slavemasters? This morning we’re going to brief you on just that. Are you ready to begin?


  22. hybridrogue1 says:


  23. hybridrogue1 says:

    Central Bankers – Central Intelligence
    … Like Bread & Butter

  24. hybridrogue1 says:

    The technical imperative has culminated in the myth of “surgical” bombing, suggesting that the state being targeted is to be treated equally as an enemy to be defeated and a patient to be cured. Spare the civilians, despoil the regime. Such notions became popular with the emergence of that troubling notion of “humanitarian” intervention, treating the human subject as sacred even as bombs rain all around.”~Kampmark

  25. hybridrogue1 says:

    While we can rhetorically deny ‘conspiracy’, we cannot deny the ubiquity and persistence of war despite its lunacy, inefficiency, and hypocrisy. War has virtually never not been a conspiracy, or at least the interactions of a set of conspiracies. As the popular quote goes: “The first casualty of War is Truth.” This is why it is vitally important to examine the relationship between war discourse, power politics, and the public interpretation of such events (popular geopolitics). While war has taken new abstract forms in the 21st century, it has far from disappeared, and a theory must be rigorous and vigilant against systemic-conspiracies, ie. the “War on Drugs,” the “War on Terror.” These can be seen as discursive and systemic conspiracies, in which we all play a role, with deep implications and ramifications for society.

  26. hybridrogue1 says:

    A Curriculum for Studies in Systemic Power Structures

    Important contributions have been made by:
    Charlotte Iserbyt, Antony Sutton, Carroll Quigley, John Gatto, Foucault’s analysis of power…

    ‘Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling’~Gatto
    ‘Weapons of Mass Instruction: Through the Dark World of Compulsory Schooling’~Gatto


  27. hybridrogue1 says:

    Social Engineering from the horse’s mouth:

    ‘Propaganda’ by Edward Bernays
    ‘Crystallizing Public Opinion’ by Edward L. Bernays

    ‘The Engineering of Consent’
    (an essay by Edward Bernays first published in 1947)

    Bernays explained, “Professionally, [public relations] activities are planned and executed by trained practitioners in accordance with scientific principles, based on the findings of social scientists. Their dispassionate approach and methods may be likened to those of the engineering professions which stem from the physical sciences.”[2]

    The threat of engineered consent in democracy has been expressed in a textbook on American government:[3]

    Under modern conditions of political advertising and manipulation, it has become possible to talk of the engineering of consent by an elite of experts and professional politicians. Consent that is thus engineered is difficult to distinguish in any fundamental way from the consent that supports modern totalitarian governments. Were the manipulated voter to become the normal voter, the government he supports could hardly be said to rest on his consent in any traditional sense of that word.
    To some observers, consumer psychologists have already made the choice for people before they buy a certain product. Marketing is often based on themes and symbols that unconsciously influence consumer behavior.

    The “Engineering Consent” chapter of Christopher Bryson’s book The Fluoride Deception describes how Bernays helped the water fluoridation campaign in the USA.



  28. hybridrogue1 says:

    “The American business community was also very impressed with the propaganda effort. They had a problem at that time. The country was becoming formally more democratic. A lot more people were able to vote and that sort of thing. The country was becoming wealthier and more people could participate and a lot of new immigrants were coming in, and so on.

    So what do you do? It’s going to be harder to run things as a private club. Therefore, obviously, you have to control what people think. There had been public relation specialists but there was never a public relations industry. There was a guy hired to make Rockefeller’s image look prettier and that sort of thing. But this huge public relations industry, which is a U.S. invention and a monstrous industry, came out of the first World War. The leading figures were people in the Creel Commission. In fact, the main one, Edward Bernays, comes right out of the Creel Commission. He has a book that came out right afterwards called Propaganda. The term “propaganda,” incidentally, did not have negative connotations in those days. It was during the second World War that the term became taboo because it was connected with Germany, and all those bad things. But in this period, the term propaganda just meant information or something like that. So he wrote a book called Propaganda around 1925, and it starts off by saying he is applying the lessons of the first World War. The propaganda system of the first World War and this commission that he was part of showed, he says, it is possible to “regiment the public mind every bit as much as an army regiments their bodies.” These new techniques of regimentation of minds, he said, had to be used by the intelligent minorities in order to make sure that the slobs stay on the right course. We can do it now because we have these new techniques.

    This is the main manual of the public relations industry. Bernays is kind of the guru. He was an authentic Roosevelt/Kennedy liberal. He also engineered the public relations effort behind the U.S.-backed coup which overthrew the democratic government of Guatemala.
    His major coup, the one that really propelled him into fame in the late 1920s, was getting women to smoke. Women didn’t smoke in those days and he ran huge campaigns for Chesterfield. You know all the techniques—models and movie stars with cigarettes coming out of their mouths and that kind of thing. He got enormous praise for that. So he became a leading figure of the industry, and his book was the real manual.”~Noam Chomsky

    (From Chomsky’s “What Makes Mainstream Media
    Mainstream”: a talk at Z Media Institute, June 1997)

  29. hybridrogue1 says:

    Bernays commenting on exactly what killerguy is doing here with his pictorial “rubber-stamps”:

    “IN the days when kings were kings, Louis XIV made his modest remark, “L’Etat c’est moi.” He was nearly right.
    But times have changed. The steam engine, the multiple press, and the public school, that trio of the industrial revolution, have taken the power away from kings and given it to the people. The people actually gained power which the king lost For economic power tends to draw after it political power; and the history of the industrial revolution shows how that power passed from the king and the aristocracy to the bourgeoisie. Universal suffrage and universal schooling reinforced this tendency, and at last even the bourgeoisie stood in fear of the common people. For the masses promised to become king.
    To-day, however, a reaction has set in. The minority has discovered a powerful help in influencing majorities. It has been found possible so to mold the mind of the masses that they will throw their newly gained strength in the desired direction. In the present structure of society, this practice is inevitable. Whatever of social importance is done to-day, whether in politics, finance, manufacture, agriculture, charity, education, or other fields, must be done with the help of propaganda. Propaganda is the executive arm of the invisible government
    Universal literacy was supposed to educate the common man to control his environment. Once he could read and write he would have a mind fit to rule. So ran the democratic doctrine. But instead of a mind, universal literacy has given him rubber stamps, rubber stamps inked with advertising slogans, with editorials, with published scientific data, with the trivialities of the tabloids and the platitudes of history, but quite innocent of original thought. Each man’s rubber stamps are the duplicates of millions of others, so that when those millions are exposed to the same stimuli, all receive identical imprints. It may seem an exaggeration to say that the American public gets most of its ideas in this wholesale fashion. The mechanism by which ideas are disseminated on a large scale is propaganda, in the broad sense of an organized effort to spread a particular belief or doctrine.”~Ibid

      • hybridrogue1 says:

        “There are invisible rulers who control the destinies of millions. It is not generally realized to what extent the words and actions of our most influential public men are dictated by shrewd persons operating behind the scenes.
        Nor, what is still more important, the extent to which our thoughts and habits are modified by authorities.”~Bernays

      • hybridrogue1 says:

        “..invisible rulers..” in the quote by Bernays below means “invulnerable” as in the sense of the Ring of Power. That is why you are left with your “what if’s” – and you cannot KNOW that the agenda’s are “contradictory” when the system is hierarchical – which it is, which means that ‘contradiction’ with the top tier is not a possibility.

        The brand “ILLUMINATI” is just that, it matters not what the power structure is called, it matters how it works. And that is where the power of propaganda and your enforced ignorance comes into play here killerguy.
        You and your silly flash-card “argumentation”. You are a typical twit playing bullshit games here. Obvious to any lucid and sane individual.

    • hybridrogue1 says:

      David Cameron told the U.N. that “non-violent extremism” is just as dangerous as terrorism and must be eradicated using the government’s garbage disposal and fire ant poison.

  30. hybridrogue1 says:

    Go ahead and play your picture game killerguy, I will let the candid readership decide who the idiot is in this thread.

  31. hybridrogue1 says:


  32. hybridrogue1 says:

    What–you got a hard on for Keanu Reeves? You want to suck him with that twat of a mouth?
    You sick perv…

  33. hybridrogue1 says:

    “I vividly recall how, in the wake of Osama bin Laden’s killing, Obama partisans triumphantly declared that this would finally usher in the winding down of the War on Terror. On one superficial level, that view was understandable: it made sense if one assumes that the U.S. has been waging this war for its stated reasons and that it hopes to vanquish The Enemy and end the war.

    But that is not, and never was, the purpose of the War on Terror. It was designed from the start to be endless.

    Leon Panetta, the long-time Democratic Party operative who served as Obama’s Defense Secretary and CIA Director, said this week of Obama’s new bombing campaign: “I think we’re looking at kind of a 30-year war.” Only in America are new 30-year wars spoken of so casually, the way other countries speak of weather changes. He added that the war “will have to extend beyond Islamic State to include emerging threats in Nigeria, Somalia, Yemen, Libya and elsewhere.” And elsewhere: not just a new decades-long war with no temporal limits, but no geographic ones either. He criticized Obama – who has bombed 7 predominantly Muslim countries plus the Muslim minority in the Phillipines (almost double the number of countries Bush bombed) – for being insufficiently militaristic, despite the fact that Obama officials themselves have already instructed the public to think of The New War “in terms of years.”

    Then we have Hillary Clinton (whom Panetta gushed would make a “great” president). At an event in Ottawa yesterday, she proclaimed that the fight against these “militants” will “be a long-term struggle” that should entail an “information war” as “well as an air war.” The new war, she said, is “essential” and the U.S. shies away from fighting it “at our peril.” Like Panetta (and most establishment Republicans), Clinton made clear in her book that virtually all of her disagreements with Obama’s foreign policy were the by-product of her view of Obama as insufficiently hawkish, militaristic and confrontational.

    At this point, it is literally inconceivable to imagine the U.S. not at war. It would be shocking if that happened in our lifetime. U.S. officials are now all but openly saying this. “Endless War” is not dramatic rhetorical license but a precise description of America’s foreign policy.

    Just yesterday, Bloomberg reported: “Led by Lockheed Martin Group (LTM), the biggest U.S. defense companies are trading at record prices as shareholders reap rewards from escalating military conflicts around the world.” Particularly exciting is that “investors see rising sales for makers of missiles, drones and other weapons as the U.S. hits Islamic State fighters in Syria and Iraq”; moreover, “the U.S. also is the biggest foreign military supplier to Israel, which waged a 50-day offensive against the Hamas Islamic movement in the Gaza Strip.” ISIS is using U.S.-made ammunition and weapons, which means U.S. weapons companies get to supply all sides of The New Endless War; can you blame investors for being so giddy?”~Glenn Greenwald, in his latest piece for the Intercept



  34. hybridrogue1 says:

    I haven’t run across any site with such drool and spittle as I see from killerguy on this psychoblog.

  35. hybridrogue1 says:

    “Under the auspices of the United Nations Security Council, with president Obama chairing the Council session, the United States has called upon the international community to adopt strong measures, at national and international levels, to curtail the recruitment of Islamic State fighters.

    What is not mentioned in the media reports is that the heads of State and heads of government who have endorsed America’s campaign against the Islamic State, advised by their respective intelligence services, are fully aware that US intelligence is the architect of the Islamic State and related Al Qaeda entities. Countries are either coerced into supporting the US sponsored resolution or they are complicit in the US terror agenda.

    Lest we forget, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, have been financing and training the ISIL terrorists on behalf of the United States. Israel is harboring the Islamic State (ISIL) in the Golan Heights, NATO in liaison with the Turkish high command has since March 2011 been involved in coordinating the recruitment of the jihadist fighters dispatched to Syria. Moreover, the ISIL brigades in both Syria and Iraq are integrated by Western special forces and military advisers.

    All this is known and documented, yet not a single head of state or head of government has had the courage to point to the absurdity of the US sponsored United Nations Security Council resolution, which was adopted unanimously on September 24.

    “Absurdity” is an an understatement. What we are witnessing is a criminal undertaking under UN auspices.”

    While international diplomacy is often based on deception, US foreign policy lies are no longer credible. What we are witnessing is a total breakdown of established diplomatic practice. The “Forbidden Truth” is that the Islamic State is an instrument of Washington, a US ” intelligence asset”. ISIL is not an independent entity, nor is it an “outside enemy” which threatens global security, as conveyed by the Western media.”

  36. hybridrogue1 says:

    David Cameron told the U.N. that “non-violent extremism” is just as dangerous as terrorism and must be eradicated using all means at the government’s disposal. He references 9/11 and 7/7 Truthers as examples of the type of extremism that must be dealt in a similar fashion to ISIS.
    If you thought Obama’s War is Peace speech to the U.N. was creepy, wait until you get a load of this. Cameron is officially announcing a the plan to use a full assault on dissenting views.

  37. hybridrogue1 says:

    Infinite regress in consciousness is the formation of an infinite series of “inner observers” as we ask the question of who is observing the output of the neural correlates of consciousness in the study of subjective consciousness.

    Infinite regress in optics is the formation of an infinite series of receding images created in two parallel facing mirrors. See optical feedback.

    “Some hold that, owing to the necessity of knowing the primary premises, there is no scientific knowledge. Others think there is, but that all truths are demonstrable. Neither doctrine is either true or a necessary deduction from the premises. The first school, assuming that there is no way of knowing other than by demonstration, maintain that an infinite regress is involved, on the ground that if behind the prior stands no primary, we could not know the posterior through the prior (wherein they are right, for one cannot traverse an infinite series): if on the other hand – they say – the series terminates and there are primary premises, yet these are unknowable because incapable of demonstration, which according to them is the only form of knowledge. And since thus one cannot know the primary premises, knowledge of the conclusions which follow from them is not pure scientific knowledge nor properly knowing at all, but rests on the mere supposition that the premises are true. The other party agree with them as regards knowing, holding that it is only possible by demonstration, but they see no difficulty in holding that all truths are demonstrated, on the ground that demonstration may be circular and reciprocal. Our own doctrine is that not all knowledge is demonstrative: on the contrary, knowledge of the immediate premises is independent of demonstration. (The necessity of this is obvious; for since we must know the prior premises from which the demonstration is drawn, and since the regress must end in immediate truths, those truths must be indemonstrable.) Such, then, is our doctrine, and in addition we maintain that besides scientific knowledge there is its original source which enables us to recognize the definitions.”
    —Aristotle, Posterior Analytics I.3 72b1–15

  38. hybridrogue1 says:

    “Why should we not form a secret society with but one object, the furtherance of the British Empire and the bringing of the whole world under British rule…” – Cecil Rhodes

    Why not? So they did, the ‘Round Table Group’. Has sort of that Arthurian flair to it. Doesn’t it?
    Carroll Quigley has this all told with citations in his books, Tragedy & Hope, and The Anglo-American Establishment.

    See: http://www.carrollquigley.net/pdf/The_Anglo-American_Establishment.pdf


    • hybridrogue1 says:

      This secret society (Round Table Group) established the ‘Royal Institute of International Affairs’ in 1919. It controls, to a very considerable extent, the sources and writing of the history of British Imperial and foreign policy since the Boer War.

      A sister group was established in the US known as the ‘Council on Foreign Relations’, which operates on the same principles as the British group, inner and outer circles of memberships, rather the typical hierarchical structure of most organizations.

  39. Gabriel Goh says:

    If ambivalence primes the mind to see patterns (where there are none) and prepares one to frame conspiracies out of whole cloth, or link unrelated incidents and facts into a conspiracy theory, what does games like Bejeweled, and Candycrush (I think) do?

    Would playing games like Bejeweled, where one has to spot patterns or group objects to clear the screen serve to satisfy the craving for order, or would the unending cascade of random objects serve instead to intensify the conflicted state?

    So the experiment above, instead of a messy table, the subjects are either allowed to play Bejeweled for a while, or read a book, perhaps?

    Would be good to run this experiment.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s