• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Conspiracy Theories & Democracy

There seems to be some news about the (slowly becoming infamous) Steele dossier. Since my previous post about this survived moderation, I assume this topic is allowed. More here, with further discussion in the comments: No More Mister Nice Blog: Another Steele Dossier?

This is kind of interesting, reported in England by The Telegraph (paywall) and picked up by the Sydney Morning Herald: It seems Christopher Steele compiled a second dossier on Donald Trump, this one directly for the FBI, after Trump took office:

The second dossier contains raw intelligence that makes further claims of Russian meddling in the US election and also references claims regarding the existence of further sex tapes :)(emphasis mine). The second dossier is reliant on separate sources to those who supplied information for the first reports.

The fact the FBI continued to receive intelligence from Steele, who ran MI6’s Russia desk from 2006 to 2009 before setting up Orbis, is potentially significant because it shows his work was apparently still being taken seriously after Trump took hold of the reins of power.
It was, was it? We'd been given to believe FBI broke off relations with Steele in November 2016, after David Corn revealed the existence of the original dossier in a Halloween article in Mother Jones—not that at that point that they didn't trust his research, but that they couldn't trust him to stay away from the press, which is understandable (...)

In the interview, Steele told the FBI that Orbis had “four discrete, ‘hermetically-sealed’ main agent networks”. His primary “sub-source” for the dossier was no longer “active” at the time of the interview with FBI agents, but that another “main agent network is up and running and is now starting to get good information”. The Telegraph understands this agent, referred to by Steele in his interview with the FBI, supplied information for the second dossier.

One interesting detail is that he frequently appeals to Fiona Hill, a close friend, to vouch for the primary sub-source, to whom she had introduced him in 2011; another is that he did a study of Dmitry Rybolovlev and the purchase of that Palm Beach house on which Trump made an inexplicable $54-million profit, which didn't make it into the dossier. Also, he regards Carter Page as an entirely insignificant figure; it's the sinister presence of Paul Manafort in the Trump orbit that got him interested in the Trump campaign, before he started working on it with Fusion GPS. (...)

Nobody seems to have looked at this material from January—hardly anybody seems to have reported on it, other than the Trumpy Washington Examiner and Putin's RT, which both focus naturally on trying to make Steele look like a criminal and deflecting—but the Telegraph story about the second dossier makes it all make sense. Most of the attention on that (e.g. in Salon), as in the first dossier, seems to be going to the question of new sex tape allegations, inevitably, but there is so much more going on than that. I hope the dossier itself comes out, and I mean soon. Trump-Russia is far from dead.

Trumps;s case over dossier dismissed.

Donald Trump's attempt to bring a case in the UK against a former MI6 officer who compiled a salacious dossier linking him to Russia has failed.

The former president had been seeking to use data protection laws to sue the company run by Christopher Steele but the High Court has thrown out the case.

Mr Steele compiled the dossier which contained unproven allegations about bribing officials and sex parties.
It was leaked to the media just before Mr Trump was sworn in as president.

In bringing the lawsuit against Orbis Business Intelligence Ltd, he said the dossier contained allegations that were inaccurate and breached his data protection rights.

In Thursday's ruling in London, Mrs Justice Steyn DBE said she did not make any judgement on the allegations themselves but found Mr Trump's claim had not been brought within the six-year limitation period.

"There are no compelling reasons to allow the claim to proceed to trial," she wrote.

A statement is expected from Mr Steele later today.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-68166050
 
Y'know I've searched threads for my recent 'thought' but can't spot it yet. Happy to be corrected by mods but ...

Is there a link with conspiracy 'believers' and paranoia? Do conspiracies play up to the psychological condition, or do they encourage it?
When talking to some 'believers', I can't help thinking that the ultimate consequence of 'following the clues' is complete isolation from any real contact with people. Might it 'create' a feeling of despair and agoraphobia?
 
Y'know I've searched threads for my recent 'thought' but can't spot it yet. Happy to be corrected by mods but ...

Is there a link with conspiracy 'believers' and paranoia? Do conspiracies play up to the psychological condition, or do they encourage it?
When talking to some 'believers', I can't help thinking that the ultimate consequence of 'following the clues' is complete isolation from any real contact with people. Might it 'create' a feeling of despair and agoraphobia?
Plenty of 'conspiracy theories' turn out to be quite valid though.
MK Ultra anyone?
 
As one analogy put it, knowing that your neighbor has a blue car doesn't tell you what color his kitchen table is.

But knowing that he has a car... means it's easy to believe someone who told you they saw him buy motor oil. You can't be certain it's true. But it's plausible, and you don't have reason to immediately think it's wrong.
 
As one analogy put it, knowing that your neighbor has a blue car doesn't tell you what color his kitchen table is.

But knowing that he has a car... means it's easy to believe someone who told you they saw him buy motor oil. You can't be certain it's true. But it's plausible, and you don't have reason to immediately think it's wrong.
How do you know that my neighbour's got a blue car.....???

Seriously I think that if you have an interest in anything then you start to notice anything that relates to it. For instance I grow cacti, I hope I'm not obsessive but I see others who grow them pointing them out wherever they see cacti or images of cacti. "Oh look, here are cactus themed stamps, here are mugs with cacti on them, that Western novel has a picture of cacti on it." Now I probably do notice the odd item like that but I don't notice the same with roses or carnations as I'm not that interested.

Now if your "interest" is in how whatever group maybe spying on you or clues about how fish aren't real or whatever then I guess you may go down the equivalent of the "Oh look a cactus themed T shirt." and find all sorts of clues to prove your belief where none exist.
 
How do you know that my neighbour's got a blue car.....???

Seriously I think that if you have an interest in anything then you start to notice anything that relates to it. For instance I grow cacti, I hope I'm not obsessive but I see others who grow them pointing them out wherever they see cacti or images of cacti. "Oh look, here are cactus themed stamps, here are mugs with cacti on them, that Western novel has a picture of cacti on it." Now I probably do notice the odd item like that but I don't notice the same with roses or carnations as I'm not that interested.

Now if your "interest" is in how whatever group maybe spying on you or clues about how fish aren't real or whatever then I guess you may go down the equivalent of the "Oh look a cactus themed T shirt." and find all sorts of clues to prove your belief where none exist.
Or perhaps notice things others would ignore......
 
Back
Top