1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
  2. Discuss politics - join our community by registering for free here! HOP - the political discussion forum

Were the Manson Killings a Government Black Op?

Discussion in 'Conspiracy Debates' started by Scott, Aug 16, 2008.

  1. Scott

    Scott Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2007
    Messages:
    96
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    8
    I'd never thought about this until I listened to this radio program.

    http://www.kpfa.org/archives/index.php?arch=25600

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_op
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counterculture#Sixties_and_seventies_counterculture

    It doesn't sound like such a far-fetched theory when we consider all the other stuff the US government has pulled off.

    http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-8136133221213939183

    People were figuring out that the govenment was lying to them about why they were in Vietnam. The counter-culture was thinking independently. The government was losing it's ability to form the people's political thinking. Whether it was a black op or not, the government used it to discredit the movement.

    http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/chomskyin1282.html
    (excerpt)
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Q: When the Indochina war ended in 1975 you wrote that our nation's "official" opinion makers would engage in distortion of the lessons to be drawn from the war so that the same basic foreign policy goals could be pursued after the war. You felt then that in order to keep the real meaning of the war from penetrating the general public they faced two major tasks: First, they would have to disguise the fact that the war "was basically an American attack on South Vietnam -- a war of annihilation that spilled over to the rest of Indochina". And secondly, they would have to obscure the fact that the military effort in Vietnam "was restrained by a mass movement of protest and resistance here at home which engaged in effective direct action outside the bounds of propriety long before established spokesmen proclaimed themselves to be its leaders". Where do we stand now on these two issues--seven years later?
    Chomsky: As far as the opinion makers are concerned, they have been doing exactly what it was obvious they would do. Every book that comes out, every article that comes out, talks about how -- while it may have been a "mistake" or an "unwise effort" -- the United States was defending South Vietnam from North Vietnamese aggression. And they portray those who opposed the war as apologists for North Vietnam. That's standard to say.
    The purpose is obvious: to obscure the fact that the United States did attack South Vietnam and the major war was fought against South Vietnam. The real invasion of South Vietnam which was directed largely against the rural society began directly in 1962 after many years of working through mercenaries and client groups. And that fact simply does not exist in official American history. There Is no such event in American history as the attack on South Vietnam. That's gone. Of course, It Is a part of real history. But it's not a part of official history.
    And most of us who were opposed to the war, especially in the early 60's -- the war we were opposed to was the war on South Vietnam which destroyed South Vietnam's rural society. The South was devastated. But now anyone who opposed this atrocity is regarded as having defended North Vietnam. And that's part of the effort to present the war as if it were a war between South Vietnam and North Vietnam with the United States helping the South. Of course it's fabrication. But it's "official truth" now.
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    http://michaelparenti.org/Imperialism101.html
    (exerpt)
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    By "imperialism" I mean the process whereby the dominant politico-economic interests of one nation expropriate for their own enrichment the land, labor, raw materials, and markets of another people.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    North American and European corporations have acquired control of more than three-fourths of the known mineral resources of Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Of the various notions about imperialism circulating today in the United States, the dominant view is that it does not exist. Imperialism is not recognized as a legitimate concept, certainly not in regard to the United States. One may speak of "Soviet imperialism" or "nineteenth-century British imperialism" but not of U.S. imperialism. A graduate student in political science at most universities in this country would not be granted the opportunity to research U.S. imperialism, on the grounds that such an undertaking would not be scholarly. While many people throughout the world charge the United States with being an imperialist power, in this country persons who talk of U.S. imperialism are usually judged to be mouthing ideological blather.
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    A lot of people were finding out what was really going on. It makes sense that the government would try to discredit the movement.
     
  2. Pandora

    Pandora Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    11,790
    Likes Received:
    257
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The people's republic of Eugene
    hmm if it were, wouldnt Manson have been saying that over and over? and all of the people still in prison today.

    and why would they want to kill Sharon Tate and the rest?
     
  3. Federal Farmer

    Federal Farmer New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    922
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Scott, before you fall into that trap of "everything that happened in the 60's was a government coverup for us being in Vietnam" mess, you might was to consider the following;

    1) Our first involvement in Vietnam was during WWII

    2) EVERY U.S. President, beginning with Truman, when he met with PM Plevin in the White House, avowed that the United States would do everything within our power to prevent Communist expansionism in SE Asia. That includes, of course Truman himself, but Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, and Ford.

    3) We accomplished that mission by 1973 when we bombed the N. Vietnamese to the peace table, thereby ending the War, but were betrayed by the Democrat controlled Congress who refused to continue their support for the S. Vietnamese government, which resulted in the subsequent fall of Saigon in 1975 (over 2 years AFTER we had left Vietnam), and the murder of over a million S. Vietnamese, Cambodian and Laotian citizens.
     
  4. Scott

    Scott Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2007
    Messages:
    96
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    8
    All you're doing is parroting the official version of things. The official version was just a pretext to tell the American people. They couldn't just tell the American people that they wanted to continue stealing the resources of the Vietnamese people and send a message to the peoples of other countries that had US puppet govenments that any attempt to get independence would be met with force.
    If you really believe the version you posted, you should start reading the alternative press and maybe talk to some people from Asia that live outside of the US.

    This is a good summary of what the US really does in the third world.
    http://mtwsfh.blogspot.com/

    Here's some stuff that focuses on Vietnam.

    http://www.plp.org/vietnam/vn6.html
    http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/vietnam_to_yugoslavia.html
    http://www.plp.org/vietnam/vn2.html
    http://www.plp.org/vietnam/vn1.html#TOC
    http://www.vietnamese-american.org/contents.html
    http://www.zpub.com/un/chomsky.html

    More here-
    http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/
     
  5. Scott

    Scott Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2007
    Messages:
    96
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    8
    He could have been given drugs in prison that altered his mind so much that he just couldn't understand what was happening to him. I never said I was sure about all of this. I'm just saying it fits the pattern of what the US government does and it's not a far-fetched theory at all.

    To shock the nation into thinking that any long-haired hippie was potentially dangerous, to associate that kind of madness with the counter-culture: if the government can do things such as fake the moon landings and plan and carry out the 9/11 attacks and make people think it was Muslims, the government's having orchestrated the Manson killings is not implausible at all.
     
  6. BigRob

    BigRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Messages:
    7,366
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    USA
    Since the US government did not do any of those things. Guess they had no hand in this.
     
  7. Federal Farmer

    Federal Farmer New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    922
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Scott, I have a couple of questions for you; Did you serve in the military IN Vietnam? If so, what was your Branch, MOS/AFSC, where were you based, and when were you there. If not, then do the world a favor and S T F U and stuff your silly little CT's where the sun doesn't shine.
     
  8. Federal Farmer

    Federal Farmer New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    922
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Why do that? He had already taken enough drugs BEFORE he ever got anywhere near a Prison that his mind was already irreparably damanged.

    Of course you don't have any evidence, because none exists, and it never has! You're just one of the "hate America first" crowd, and what's really sad is that you can't even be bothered to go after the things that are REALLY wrong, you've got to resort to inventing crap like this!

    A lot of those "long-haired" hippies WERE dangerous, and the "counter-culture" is what gave us the Black Panther Party, William Ayers and the Weather Underground, VVAW, SLA, and most of the other domestic TERRORIST groups.

    STEP AWAY FROM THE CRACK PIPE.

    Seriously now, you NEED TO STEP AWAY FROM THE CRACK PIPE!

    OK, you have GOT to get to a detox facility ASAP.
     
  9. Scott

    Scott Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2007
    Messages:
    96
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    8
    From what I've heard American soldiers who were arriving in Vietnam were surprised that the natives there weren't welcoming them as saviors. They could see that something was wrong.

    http://www.vvawai.org/

    The only way they could find out the details I suppose was to talk to some native Vietnamese who spoke English.

    I'd learned all about American foreign policy just by living abroad years before the information on the internet was available.
    http://houseofpolitics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=780

    Once people have seen the evidence that 9/11 was an inside job, only people who are predisposed to believe the official government version believe the official government version.

    http://houseofpolitics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=782

    The same goes for the moon missions. Once people have seen the evidence of a hoax, there's nothing anyone can do do make them think they really went to the moon.

    http://houseofpolitics.com/forum/showthread.php?t=781

    A lot of the links in the above thread are dead so here's another page with updated links.

    http://www.politicalcrossfire.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=108971&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=20

    Take a look at the info in those links and give some analysis instead of empty ridicule and invective. I know it's difficult for older Americans to admit to themselves that they've spent their whole lives believing a lie and they sometime go into cognitive dissonance.

    http://www.learningandteaching.info/learning/dissonance.htm
    (excerpt)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Cognitive dissonance is a psychological phenomenon which refers to the discomfort felt at a discrepancy between what you already know or believe, and new information or interpretation. It therefore occurs when there is a need to accommodate new ideas, and it may be necessary for it to develop so that we become "open" to them. Neighbour (1992) makes the generation of appropriate dissonance into a major feature of tutorial (and other) teaching: he shows how to drive this kind of intellectual wedge between learners' current beliefs and "reality".


    Beyond this benign if uncomfortable aspect, however, dissonance can go "over the top", leading to two interesting side-effects for learning:

    if someone is called upon to learn something which contradicts what they already think they know — particularly if they are committed to that prior knowledge — they are likely to resist the new learning. Even Carl Rogers recognised this. Accommodation is more difficult than Assimilation, in Piaget's terms.
    and—counter-intuitively, perhaps—if learning something has been difficult, uncomfortable, or even humiliating enough, people are less likely to concede that the content of what has been learned is useless, pointless or valueless. To do so would be to admit that one has been "had", or "conned".
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Don't feel bad. The government does a very good job of controlling the information we get.
    http://apollohoax.proboards21.com/index.cgi?board=othertheories&action=display&thread=1525

    People who believe the official US government version of everything aren't stupid. They've just never been in a siuation where they could find out the truth. I used to believe the official version of everything. I moved to Northern California in 1976 and met some informed people whe explained things to me. I moved to Southern California in 1980 and I talked to lots of Latin Americans who filled me in. When I left the US, I saw that almost all political discussions were based on the kind of info I posted above and Americans were considered to be very naive people although well-intentioned. Outside the US there's nothing more amusing than a group of Americans discussing politics.
     
  10. Federal Farmer

    Federal Farmer New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    922
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
  11. Pandora

    Pandora Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Apr 6, 2008
    Messages:
    11,790
    Likes Received:
    257
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    The people's republic of Eugene
    HAHA that was cute :)
     
  12. Scott

    Scott Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2007
    Messages:
    96
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    8
    Hey Federal Farmer--

    This is from my last post.
    I'm still waiting.
     
  13. Federal Farmer

    Federal Farmer New Member

    Joined:
    Jun 9, 2008
    Messages:
    922
    Likes Received:
    3
    Trophy Points:
    0
    It's IMPOSSIBLE to respond to the lunatic ravings of mindless, tin-foil hatted, drivel spewing fools WITHOUT scorn, ridicule and invectives.

    When you come up with something that even closely approximates intelligent and thoughtful research and analysis, I'll be more than happy to look at it, but what you've presented thus far is....well, I'm not allowed to say what it is without risking accusations of "personal attacks" which could result in my being banned.

    EDIT: Also, I note that you did not respond to my questions, therefore I will assume that you not only didn't serve in Vietnam, that you haven't served in the military at all, and as such, any statements on your part having anything to do with the United States Armed Forces will be considered third-hand rumor at best, and treated accordingly.
     
  14. Scott

    Scott Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2007
    Messages:
    96
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    8
  15. BigRob

    BigRob Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Sep 4, 2007
    Messages:
    7,366
    Likes Received:
    314
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    USA
Loading...

Share This Page