Conspiracy Theorists Are the Greatest Challenge to Democracy … According to … Here’s who …

Have you ever come across an imperialist who was keen on activists challenging the establishment?

British establishment mouthpiece BBC leads the way again. This time it is about the biggest threat to democracy today. No, it is not terrorists. No, it is not Islamism. And, no, it is not the Western-Installed Dictator Regimes around the world. No, no, no, no, no. The new enemy is the conspiracy theorists. It is those who question their governments. It is those who find facts and confront the mainstream lies and liars such as BBC. Basically, it is you … and me.

Allow me to wade through all the fillers and present you with a few telling excerpts from this BBC report:

Are conspiracy theories destroying democracy?

The more information we have about what governments and corporations are up to the less we seem to trust them. Will conspiracy theories eventually destroy democracy?

Mr. Naughton is one of three lead investigators in a major new Cambridge University project to investigate the impact of conspiracy theories on democracy.

David Runciman, professor of politics at Cambridge University, the third principal investigator, is keen to explode the idea that most conspiracies are actually "cock-ups".

"Actually the conspirators are often the paranoid and crazy conspiracy theorists, because in their attempt to cover up the cock-up they get drawn into a web in which their self-justification posits some giant conspiracy trying to expose their conspiracy. "And I think that's consistently true through a lot of political scandals, Watergate included."

He is also examining whether the push for greater openness and transparency in public life will fuel, rather than kill off, conspiracy theories… "It may be that one of the things conspiracy theories feed on as well as silence, is a surfeit of information. And when there is a mass of information out there, it becomes easier for people to find their way through to come to the conclusion they want to come to.

What are they really talking about? What are they really presenting? A few things.

1- Challenging official stories, no matter how the record and history proves them to be false or exaggerated, lowers trust in government and government officials. This is a threat to the establishment and their operations through states. Thus, this is a threat to democracy. That is, if you believe that the state, the government, represents democracy. It means government equals democracy, thus, you are challenging democracy every time you challenge your government and what your government is telling you.

2- These guys, these credible Cambridge professors, claim that openness, the internet, and greater information accessibility creates more conspiracies and conspiracy theorists.

3- Now, if you add item 2 to item 1, you get this: Openness and greater information accessibility leads to more conspiracies and increases the number of conspiracy theorists, and that my friend presents the greatest threat to our democracy today.

Wow. Oh, wow. I am not going to even bother with the logical fallacies imbedded in the points made by these distinguished professors. Of course I won’t bother with BBC and its reputation and consistency when it comes to representing the establishment. Instead, I am going to get down and check out the source of funding for these academic hit-men.

Now, that was easy. I checked out Cambridge and this conspiracy theorist oriented research program, and I found the source of its funding right away:

Professor David Runciman is part of a new Leverhulme-funded interdisciplinary, collaborative project on conspiracy theories at the University of Cambridge.

Here is a short canned background on Leverhulme Trust:

The Leverhulme Trust was established in 1925 under the will of the First Viscount Leverhulme, William Hesketh Lever, with the instruction that its resources should be used to support "scholarships for the purposes of research and education." Since that time, the Trust has provided funding for research projects, fellowships, studentships, bursaries and prizes; it operates across all the academic disciplines, the intention being to support talented individuals as they realize their personal vision in research and professional training. With annual funding of some £50 million, the Trust is amongst the largest all-subject providers of research funding in the UK.

From the canned background I moved to the fund’s founder, William Lever, and a few noteworthy points got my attention:

He began manufacturing Sunlight Soap and built a business empire with many well-known brands. He was an advocate for expansion of the British Empire, particularly in Africa and Asia, which supplied palm oil, a key ingredient in Lever's product line.

Lever was involved with freemasonry and by 1902 was first initiate to a lodge bearing his name, William Hesketh Lever Lodge No. 2916, he later formed Leverhulme Lodge 4438. He saw freemasonry as a tool to reinforce the hierarchy within Lever Brothers…

In the early 1900s Lever was using palm oil produced in the British West African colonies. When he encountered difficulties in obtaining more palm plantation concessions, he started looking elsewhere in other colonies. In 1911, Lever visited the Belgian Congo to take advantage of cheap labour and palm oil concessions in that country. Lever's attitudes towards the Congolese were paternalistic and by today's standards, racist, and his negotiations with the Belgian coloniser to enforce the system known as travail forcé (forced labour) are well documented in the book ‘Lord Leverhulme's Ghosts,’ in which the author states: "Leverhulme set up a private kingdom reliant on the horrific Belgian system of forced labour, a program that reduced the population of Congo by half and accounted for more deaths than the Nazi holocaust." As such, he participated in this system of formalised labour

You see, when you read about William Lever and Leverhulme Trust’s background things start making more sense. Don't they?

William Lever was a high-level Freemason and very committed to the secret society. The kind of commitment Freemasonry demanded:

Regular Freemasonry has in its core ritual a formal obligation: to be quiet and peaceable citizens, true to the lawful government of the country in which they live, and not to countenance disloyalty or rebellion.[12] A Freemason makes a further obligation, before being made Master of his Lodge, to pay a proper respect to the civil magistrates

You see, those who challenge the establishment are also challenging the core of Freemasonry. No?

Lever was an avid advocate for expansion of the British Empire, particularly in Africa and Asia. Have you ever come across an imperialist who was keen on activists challenging the establishment, aka conspiracy theorists who challenge establishment-packaged information (propaganda)? I haven’t. Not one.

Lever was an enforcer of a system known as travail forcé, forced labour, in colonies where his business ripped the resources (Labor and agriculture). Back then, as it is today, moguls like Lever thrived based on their close partnerships with their imperial governments: colonization. What does that mean? It means, for imperialist business moguls like Lever, any challenge to the empires, challenging and questioning the imperial propaganda, equals a challenge to the empire’s business partners such as Lever. 

Now, with all the above, do you see how a handful of Leverhulme funded pea-brain academics spend millions of dollars to paint those who challenge imperial governments’ misinformation as conspiracy theorists who present a great threat to democracy? Do you see how these conspirators easily grab spots under the spotlights of the imperial media machine-such as BBC?

Please take notice of another highly important fact about this entire operation: They, the establishment, must be getting extremely nervous and threatened to put on such a goofy show with even goofier players via the ultimately goofy outlet BBC. That, my friends, is really good news for the conspiracy theorists … you … and me.

# # # #

Sibel Edmonds is the Publisher & Editor of Boiling Frogs Post and the author of the Memoir Classified Woman: The Sibel Edmonds Story. She is the recipient of the 2006 PEN Newman's Own First Amendment Award for her “commitment to preserving the free flow of information in the United States in a time of growing international isolation and increasing government secrecy” Ms. Edmonds has a MA in Public Policy and International Commerce from George Mason University, a BA in Criminal Justice and Psychology from George Washington University.

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING, and by ordering our EXCLUSIVE BFP DVDs.

FB Like

Share This

This site depends….

This site depends exclusively on readers’ support. Please help us continue by SUBSCRIBING and/or DONATING.


  1. Here are two “scholarly” books which I think both Naughton and Runciman should critique before condemning “conspiracy theorists.”: “Tragedy & Hope” and “The Anglo/American Establishment.”:

    Citations of Quigley in exposées of purported conspiracies

    Soon after its publication, Tragedy and Hope caught the attention of authors interested in conspiracies. They proceeded to publicize Quigley’s claims, disseminating them to a much larger audience than his original readership.[2]:96, 98

    This began in 1970, when W. Cleon Skousen published The Naked Capitalist: A Review and Commentary on Dr. Carroll Quigley’s Book “Tragedy and Hope”. The first third of this book consists of extensive excerpts from Tragedy and Hope, interspersed with commentary by Skousen. Skousen quotes Quigley’s description of the activities of several groups: the Milner Group, a cartel of international bankers, the Communist Party, the Institute of Pacific Relations, and the Council on Foreign Relations. According to Skousen’s interpretation of Quigley’s book, each of these is a facet of one large conspiracy.[24]

    In 1971, Gary Allen, a spokesman for the John Birch Society, published None Dare Call It Conspiracy, which became a bestseller. Allen cited Quigley’s Tragedy and Hope as an authoritative source on conspiracies throughout his book. Like Skousen, Allen understood the various conspiracies in Quigley’s book to be branches of one large conspiracy, and also connected them to the Bilderbergers and to Richard Nixon.[25] The John Birch Society continues to cite Quigley as a primary source for their view of history.[26]

    Quigley is also cited by several other authors who assert the existence of powerful conspiracies. Jim Marrs, whose work was used as a source by Oliver Stone in his film JFK, cites Quigley in his book Rule By Secrecy, which describes a conspiracy linking the Milner Group, Skull and Bones, the Trilateral Commission, the Bavarian Illuminati, the Knights Templar, and aliens who posed as the Sumerian gods thousands of years ago.[27] Pat Robertson’s book The New World Order cites Quigley as an authority on a powerful conspiracy.[2]:98 Conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly has asserted that Bill Clinton’s political success was due to his pursuit of the “world government” agenda he learned from Quigley.[2]:98 G. Edward Griffin relies heavily on Quigley for information about the role Milner’s secret society plays in the Federal Reserve in his book The Creature from Jekyll Island: A Second Look at the Federal Reserve. [28]

    Quigley was dismissive of the authors who used his writings to support theories of a world domination conspiracy. Of W. Cleon Skousen’s The Naked Capitalist he stated:

    Skousen’s book is full of misrepresentations and factual errors. He claims that I have written of a conspiracy of the super-rich who are pro-Communist and wish to take over the world and that I’m a member of this group. But I never called it a conspiracy and don’t regard it as such. I’m not an “insider” of these rich persons, although Skousen thinks so. I happen to know some of them and liked them, although I disagreed with some of the things they did before 1940.[29]

    On Gary Allen’s None Dare Call It Conspiracy he said:

    They thought Dr. Carroll Quigley proved everything. For example, they constantly misquote me to this effect: that Lord Milner (the dominant trustee of the Cecil Rhodes Trust and a heavy in the Round Table Group) helped finance the Bolsheviks. I have been through the greater part of Milner’s private papers and have found no evidence to support that.

    Further, None Dare Call It Conspiracy insists that international bankers were a single bloc, were all powerful and remain so today. I, on the contrary, stated in my book that they were much divided, often fought among themselves, had great influence but not control of political life and were sharply reduced in power about 1931-1940, when they became less influential than monopolized industry.[30]


    In Wall Street and the Rise of Hitler, the Hoover institution scholar Antony Sutton stated:

    Quigley goes a long way to provide evidence for the existence of the power elite, but does not penetrate the operations of the elite. Possibly, the papers used by Quigley had been vetted, and did not include documentation on elitist manipulation of such events as the Bolshevik Revolution, Hitler’s accession to power, and the election of Roosevelt in 1933. More likely, these political manipulations may not be recorded at all in the files of the power groups. They may have been unrecorded actions by a small ad hoc segment of the elite. It is noteworthy that the documents used by this author came from government sources, recording the day-to-day actions of Trotsky, Lenin, Roosevelt, Hitler, J.P. Morgan and the various firms and banks involved.[31]

    F. William Engdahl, in an overview of financial imperialism entitled The Gods of Money, criticized Quigley for stating that the power of international bankers declined in the 1930s, and insofar as the influence of international bankers in America was concerned, suggested that Quigley was confusing “international finance” with Morgan interests. He suggested, like Sutton, that Quigley’s papers had been vetted. Engdahl argued that it was not the case that the power of “international finance” declined, but rather, Morgan interests fell and were replaced by Rockefeller interests.[32]

    Quigley stated that the intentions and objectives of the group he profiled, associated with Wall Street and the City of London and Cecil Rhodes’ super-imperialism, were “largely commendable”. Members of the group, in statements recorded by the New York Times in 1902, proclaimed that they formed their society for the purpose of “gradually absorbing the wealth of the world”.[33]

    Quigley argued that the Round Table groups were not World Government advocates but super-imperialists. He stated that they emphatically did not want the League of Nations to become a World Government. Yet Lionel Curtis, who according to Quigley was one of the leaders of the Round Table movement, wished for it to be a World government with teeth, writing articles with H.G. Wells urging this.[34][35]

    Although Quigley did not overtly condemn the Anglo-American financial coterie that he wrote about, he, according to an interview he gave,[36] and letters of his that were later published by the magazine Conspiracy Digest, had the plates of his book destroyed against his will by MacMillan, and believed that his work was being suppressed. One of the published letters stated the following:

    The original edition published by Macmillan in 1966 sold about 8800 copies and sales were picking up in 1968 when they “ran out of stock,” as they told me (but in 1974, when I went after them with a lawyer, they told me that they had destroyed the plates in 1968). They lied to me for six years, telling me that they would re-print when they got 2000 orders, which could never happen because they told anyone who asked that it was out of print and would not be reprinted. They denied this until I sent them xerox copies of such replies to libraries, at which they told me it was a clerk’s error. In other words they lied to me but prevented me from regaining the publication rights by doing so (on OP [out of print] rights revert to holder of copyright, but on OS [out of stock] they do not.) … Powerful influences in this country want me, or at least my work, suppressed.[37]}

    According to Gary North, in Conspiracy: A Biblical View, Gary Allen received a letter from a friend of Quigley’s who stated that Quigley had begun to view the group he profiled as a malevolent influence in political affairs by the end of his life.[38]

  2. colinjames says:

    So, I guess “cock-ups” are just a routine part of democracy, then, and no matter the cock-up, whatever the cock-up involves, whoever the cock-uppers are, they themselves can in no way be a threat to democracy. Awesome. I think I WILL list the logical fallacies, just for the fun of it, when I have the time. Freeking hilarious stuff.

  3. “The minute you get into the JFK stuff, and the minute you sniff at the 9/11 stuff, you begin to lose the will to live,” he told the audience in Cambridge.”: Observer columnist and academic John Naughton.

    ‘Loose the will to live’? I’d say Naughton is sniffing more than he tells. The true academic exhorts the student to research and produce the argument in academic form. Produce the paper. Argue the points. Then submit and have reviewed, and argue again. THAT is academia. THAT IS SCIENCE. That is LIFE.
    And that is what the 911 activist community is doing to great effect, which is obviously where auntie BEEB and Naughton etal come into it.
    Naughton the ‘academic’, is also Naughton the ‘journalist’, embedded in creatioNIST agnotology. He reports his ‘will to live’ threatened by the proper academic peer reviewing of the multitude of papers presented by scholars advancing forensic and expert and eyewitness evidence, that 911 was a sophisticated demolition and cover-up, and JFK another ‘inside job’.
    To treat the entire body of literature surrounding these two most egregious ‘deep state’ events as not passing a sniff test? This point of view is not rational, but is another example of a ‘crippled epistemology’ invented by and perfectly in accord with, the Sunstein/ Vermule paper advancing tactics for government agencies combatting efficiencies gained by the ‘truth movement’ that 911 was, and continues to be, the most heinous of all the false flag deceptions.

  4. BennyB-DoubleD says:

    Speaking candidly in an interview with BennyB-DoubleD outside of The Lodge, which in addition to its dedication to public policy studies, directs a charitable outreach program that provides agricultural education and work opportunities for impoverished rural African communities, Runciman points out the growing threat conspiracy theories pose to democracy:

    “The proliferation of what many of the conspiracy theorists refer to as “alternative media” outlets has contributed to an alarming trend where, without the guidance of established news sources such as the BBC, individuals may become paranoid; even delusional, to a state of psychosis where they begin to see patterns suggesting their government may be acting in a manner which runs contrary to their best interests. Furthermore, studies have shown that prolonged exposure to this sort of ‘cock-up’ nonsense can lead to a state where they actually believe the traditional media, as a whole, is purposely portraying news in a way which is misleading.”

  5. BennyB-DoubleD says:

    I don’t know if that’s kosher, but you can yank it if need be…

  6. Imants Virsnieks says:

    Well said Sibel, “and that my friend presents the greatest threat to our democracy today. ” they are afraid of the irate minority, the 911researchers etc in short they are afraid of TOO MUCH democracy and thus they’re re-doubling their efforts to revalidate the phrase ” you’re a conspiracy theorist” as a dismissive perjorative. Of course that’s obvious to all BF subscribers.

  7. jackdonovan says:

    The issue here is PRIMARY SOURCES.

    These academics have stopped looking at PRIMARY SOURCES.

    They can only read a text after they read someone explaining the text. This has got to stop!

    PRIMARY SOURCES. In the case of 9/11, search on YouTube NIST FOIA, and watch a good 6 hours of the stuff. If you still can’t believe your eyes that you’re witnessing THREE BUILDINGS BEING BLOWN UP, you are officially brainwashed.

    Also watch the ZAPRUDER FILM a couple, uh, hundred?, times. That is an almost unprecedented event in history. Yet people DON’T BELIEVE THEIR OWN EYES. Back and to the Left. Back and to the Left. Other injuries.

    What’s really giving me a lot of hope is the fact that suddenly YouTube comments are getting smarter and smarter, and that the majority of BBC commentators of the article are actually pointing out the shortcomings of the article.

  8. donilo252525 says:

    Cambridge PR puts forward new advertising line: Come visit our new “drive-up window for political analysis” – our new feature this week The Triple Whopper!Do you want to biggie-size that?

  9. mariotrevi says:

    In very crude terms, the imperialist-types would say: “Don’t bite the hand that feeds you, or else you will be left to fend for yourself, or starve!” …

    Bravo again, Sibel Edmonds.

  10. mariotrevi says:

    I find that the world of conspiracy theories is both strange and complex. I approach things using the historical method: searching the trail backwards in time. One of the key difficulties is figuring out which writers/authors/people to trust. For example, I still wonder how the non-communist world acted (in detail) after the Bolsheviks seized power in St. Petersburg in October 1917. Were there embargos? etc.

  11. Just kinda makes you want to scream doesn’t it?

    What I always ask the people who go all derogatory on conspiracy theories is this: You mean you believe that two or more people have never in the history of the world agreed to do something bad, secretly?

    In short, anyone who attempts to dismiss all conspiracy theories en masse is every bit as intellectually bereft as anyone who uncritically believes them all to be true.

    Surely the devil is in the details.

  12. “The more information we have about what governments and corporations are up to the less we seem to trust them. Will conspiracy theories eventually destroy democracy?”

    Talk about non sequiturs! This may be the least logical sequence of two sentences ever put together by a human being. More people finding out more information about how untrustworthy the government is…and that’s a threat TO democracy? That’s a threat FROM democracy!

    Here I’ll add the implicit bit that must have been left out as just too obvious: “The more information we have about what governments and corporations are up to the less we seem to trust them…AND OF COURSE THAT’S JUST SILLY BECAUSE NO MATTER WHAT WE KNOW WE OUGHT TO TRUST THEM UNQUESTIONINGLY!”

    Hell’s teeth. This is bad even for the BBC.

  13. I think the three lead investigators of this grant at Cambridge need to be embarrassed, along with the source of the money. The BBC is beyond embarrassment. This is akin to medical doctors researching whether or not chicken soup causes the common cold.

    Cambridge is a public research university. They’ve probably got a Public Relations department where questions about these clowns and Cambridge itself can be directed. What is the publicly funded portion of their salaries? Is there any other irrational, illogical, oligarchy-funded, sociopathic research going on in Cambridge? How does this research align with Cambridge’s mission? Is it difficult being a whore?

  14. Interesting topic. Historically, “conspirology” has been the product of the far-right fringe ideologists and expressed the sense of confusion and nostalgia on the part of the social groups well on their way out from the scene of history. Speaking of the modern age, it was a group of Polish feudals who concocted the “Testament of Peter I” used by Napoleon, Hitler and the Bushes Clan against Russia and the Soviet Union. “The Protocols of Zion Elders” that played important role in the early Nazi ideology was manufactured by elements in Tsarist secret police and Orthodox hierarchy, translated for Henry Ford by Russian military intelligence officers active in the monarchist Black Hundreds circle. Until recently, virtually, all American literature of this kind (Scousen, Sutton, et al) was produced by far-right elements representing the declining small bourgeoisie of the South and Mid-West and the bygone ethos of settlers’ farmstead paradise and the liberal, pre-monopolistic past of US capitalism. The irony of this is that until recently — before “the new normal” — the ideological crap about the land of the free, the city on the hill, and one day my ship will come in had been proliferated by monopolistic propaganda apparatus both private and “public” as a part of the Cold War and anti-communist crusade both at home and around the world. So it was precisely “the establishment” vilified by the Fringe that is largely responsible for the longevity and relative visibility of right-wing conspirology.

  15. “This is akin to medical doctors researching whether or not chicken soup causes the common cold.” — Xlcha


    Perhaps the takeaway point is that at the root it’s always about power with bastardized ideas, if necessary, to dress the pig.

    Fine article, Sibel.

  16. Having now read the BBC article in its entirety, the only thing I would say in tentative defense of the researchers is that the article may well not be doing them justice. There are strong indications that their research does not dismiss conspiracy theories altogether, and other indications — less clear, but still discernible — that they may in fact take a fairly nuanced approach to the topic. Some quotes MAY have been taken out of context.

    In short, the BBC article is clearly atrocious. The research itself may or may not be.

  17. RIght on, remo.

  18. mariotrevi Says:

    I find that the world of conspiracy theories is both strange and complex. I approach things using the historical method: searching the trail backwards in time.

    How easy we forget.

  19. Thanks for that link Xicha. Runciman is very clearly extremely ignorant of, at least, the JFK assassination. Would love to see him put in his place in a debate with, say, Jim DiEugenio. He’d be shredded very thoroughly in short order. What a presumptuous and pompous fool.

  20. “This is akin to medical doctors researching whether or not chicken soup causes the common cold.”

    I forgot to mention that the research would be funded by an actual secret chicken coop. The Hidden Henhouse Grant for promoting the ills of eating poultry. Next on BBC or NPR… Brings a whole new meaning to cock-up.

Speak Your Mind