Conspiracies don't have to be large to work

[Lerkfish]

(thought this could be a separate topic)

In another thread, someone challenged that conspiracy theory is automatically wrong because it would require a massive organization and would be too unwieldy.

my answer was:

Consider however, how relatively small events (or relatively small to carry out) can have large consequences:

1. 911: one day's worth of attacks, 9 years worth of repressive evaporation of civil rights, two wars, over 2 million dead.
2. OPEC collusion on oil price *small number of countries*: global economic ruin.
3. Sudden death of one witness on voting irregularities: investigation of an entire election quagmires
4. Anthrax attacks of less than a dozen people: Patriot act passes without challenge
5. Outing of ONE CIA agent: the complete collapse of an entire network meant to safeguard against stolen nuclear weapons.


should I go on?

My point is that events only need a small nudge to change directions. Conspiracies can be small, in fact work better if small.

[midnight]

1. You might have to go on. Many are too distracted with their latest

bobble.

[truth2power]

2. The OFFICIAL 9/11 explanation is a conspiracy theory..

Osama conspiring, in a cave with his buddies blah blah...

I get tired of those who don't believe the absurd narrative propounded by Cheney being called (dismissively) conspiracy theorists.