Lady Gaga, The Illuminati Puppet?

Who are you to say what is the Truth?

 

I don't follow.

nobody is too intelligent to be "used". it happens everyday in more sinister ways than most people want to realize.

 

she also has in her own words, "a very small penis."

I'm not kidding. Google it

 

This.


Or I think you mean nobody is unintelligent enough.


As Xac said, she is a part of the "conspiracy."


And Xac, I dont really appreciate your patronising undertones.

 

Well, just look at "her."

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Are you uhh serious? :smilielol5:


The Illuminati must be trying to recruit gay men. And amazingly it's working.

Her music is fucking annoying to say the least. When one of her songs comes over the airwaves i am almost praying that Mike Tyson will bite both of my ears off.:banghead:

Her music makes me want to shoot her in her man-jaw while i force her to listen to her own music so she can see what pain she is causing the world. Then i will drown her in the tears of people who listened to her music.

 

That was beautiful!

 

Well you said that you do not think she is intelligent enough to move her hands for the sake of the video clip right? well if she is not smart enough to do that she is not smart enough to make specific hand signals. If she is not smart enough to make specific signals, then she is not making specific signals. follow?

 

Who am I? are we to cease intelligent discussion to replace it with ego centric babble about how smart we are? I have no desire to convince you of my intelligence, nor do I wish to attach some holiness to the human ability to percieve truth. Simply if you do not like my argument, say so or completely ignore it, but stupid questions like that are pointless

Besides, I don't think I have made a claim one way or another, rather simply taking a look at the argument presented for my own entertainment purposes. This is a good thread because it is a typical style of argument and it is all posted by the OP, meaning we dont have to qoute back and forth between different articles. But again, I have not claimed in this thread that anything said is true or untrue.

 

I'm not sure that I did, perhaps that sentence is missing an "if".

Certainly, but I'm not exactly sure what you're talking about, perhaps you could direct me to what I have written that you find so patronising?

 

I find this to be patronising.


You are operating under the assumption that anything which has been labeled "Conspiracy theory" (which is itself a shutter term) is employing faulty logic.

I like my faulty logic, thank you very much.

 

I know people like their faulty logic, that is what i am getting at. I have read lots of conspiracy theories and they do tend to employ similar argument forms and reasoning and this particular theory is no different.

So perhaps you could explain to me your attachment to the conclusion, that is if you are attached to the conclusion of this thread at all. I also want to understand the resentment of counter argument. To me it seems counter productive not to accept and (hopefully) successfully dispute counter arguments if you really believe the conclusion and wish to change other peoples minds.

But don't complain to me about pointing out faulty logic of an argument and tell me you're happy with faulty logic, it's pointless. And I don't think it is assuming to base such claims on one particular argument (this one) when the argument is obviously faulty and lacks credibility, im not assuming, just pointing out what i see.

But this emotional reaction is exactly what i am curious about, and i also have to wonder, does it also pertain to theories in which you do not believe? or is it purely because you believe this theory?

 

Well, I really dont have any attachment to this thread, but it does fit in with my observations about occultism in the entertainment industry.

As for the emotional reaction, I have noticed it in myself.

I am aware that I am quite adept at convincing myself of something, and sticking to it, as I can be very stubborn.

And I know that I can be highly hypocritical at times, I think it is a type of blind faith, which can help as much as it can hinder.

I dont know if I addressed anything in your last post.

Feel free to clarify.

 

Well thats really thats what this thread is about, as i said earlier, the conclusion really should be about MK ultra, Project Monarch and brainwashing through media, because if those are true it easily follows that Lady Gaga is probably involved. Thats why this argument "begs the question" because the main point of the issue is provided in the premises, even though the premises are much more worth debating then the conclusion. So I understand where your attachment lies, not with Lady Gaga in particular, but rather with the premises that lead to that conclusion and it is exactly those same premises that matter to me most in this discussion.

Blind faith! this is exactly what I am trying to touch on, it's not a problem for me that people find this plausable (hell i do) but rather the blind faith that it must be true and any discussion/argument against it is seen as heresy. And I think it is this mind set that ruins any legitimacy in any given conspiracy theory.

I don't think it would be a fault of a conspiracy theorist to provide good sources or recognize if they are (the sources) not credible. I don't think it would be a fault to provide valid arguments and recognize when one is not. I think those are all virtues of any person trying to really pertain what the truth is.

Which is why I am 'attacking' the argument rather then the theory, it is just as silly to provide dodgey arguments counter for the sake of it.

No, you've adressed what i was getting at perfectly and i applaud you for being more polite then I have. I would love to continue this, and i probably will at some point but for the next few days, I have a paper to write and I think i should save my time and energy for the moment but thank you.

 

We arent finished yet!


I've seen a lot of the above, not only in regards to "conspiracy theory,"
but in many other aspects as well.

Mostly with religion, but the instance that sticks out most in my mind, is when I was talking to my econ teacher about the federal reserve and their monetary policy.

Not only did she disagree with me, but basically told me that I had no idea what I was talking about and to shut the fuck up.


I think it is a human coping mechanism, an attempt to explain the unexplainable with unreasonable jumps of logic, anything to make the person feel more comfortable.

I think it all boils down to a fear of change, as people are so attached to their "realities" that it is completely unthinkable to them should someone attempt to challenge said reality.

Hell, I know that there are ideals that I hold onto very strongly, and I dont let anyone get anywhere near them, I just shut them out, but those tie into my intuition, and there really isnt a way someone is going to dissuade me of my intuition.

But I learned long ago that there is nothing someone can say to another person for them to change something they hold to be True. That kind of change can only be incurred through close and careful introspection.

 

I think she is a virgin and damn suggestive, a total God damn coked up freak. It's not a nice 80's but some pictures are deeply entrancing. Others are totally pricks to say go away.

 

ok, ok, ONE last QUICK reply from me, then i really have to go

Sure, sure, lots of people use faulty logic and dodgey sources for a variety of things and religion indeed is a big offender.

I think this may well be true. But what reality does a conspiracy theory provide that is so important, say compared to God?

I agree, trust your intuition, i feel at least for my society personally, that we are taught not to value our intuition. But intuition is not truth or knowing.

You would be surprised, i think, by how easily some people can be persuaded by argument and also how persausive some arguments can be, which is only a good or bad thing if the conclusion is true or false. But often I find that introspection is not always a pre-requisite for changing an opinion.

Think about for example, the first conspiracy theory you found compelling, how much introspection did you need to believe it?

 

What I meant was that you cant change someones most deeply held beliefs, only they can do that, of course you can change someones opinion, but they arent going to LET YOU change something that they hold near and dear to their hearts.


And, I think the reality crutch that Conspiracy theories provide is... some people who may be disillusioned with the Establishment, (as I am, having come to the realisation that we live in a broken system long long ago) it gives them an escape, knowing that somebody is doing something wrong somewhere.


Plus, if people didnt believe, hacks like Alex Jones and Acharya S. would be out of a job!

 

I think you have to remember that mind-control is a very simple thing to do... when you watch a comedy movie - you feel happy; when you watch a action movie - your blood races

when you eat certain foods .. it does certain things to your body

when you are in a cold room ... it makes your body act in a certain way

when you hear certain sounds .. it does something to your chemistry

keep in mind that EVERYTHING changes and affects your brain and thus the way you act

I don't know if its all a conspiracy; I follow your logic and it can't really be flawed ... but the logic of nobody is really in control of anything cannot be flawed either

 

OH MY GOD........


So, like, lady gaga is Jesus daughter and like new world order and all that!?

This is fucking funny