---*---
Conspiracy is as Conspiracy Does
Who are the real conspiracy theorists then? Those that believe in them because of the overwhelming evidence, or those that deny them in spite of the overwhelming evidence? Whenever even the most considered of individuals ruminate on the possibility that official explanations for the seminal political events may not be quite what the power elites would have us believe, for more polite folks not similarly predisposed the first and last refuge is the Pavlovian response:
"Oh, you're just another one of those conspiracy theorists."
Yet recent studies suggest that contrary to mainstream-media stereotypes, those designated "conspiracy theorists" appear to be saner than those who blithely accept the official versions of events. One such study was published in 2013 by psychologists Michael Wood and Karen Douglas of the University of Kent in the UK. Enticingly titled "What about Building 7? A social psychological study of online discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories," the study compared "conspiracist" (pro-conspiracy) and "conventionalist" (anti-conspiracy) comments at various websites. Here is a brief summary:
"....among people who comment on news articles, those who disbelieve government accounts of such events as 9/11 and the JFK assassination outnumber believers by more than two to one. That means it is the pro-conspiracy commenters who are expressing what is now the conventional wisdom, while the anti-conspiracy commenters are becoming a small, beleaguered minority." [My emphasis].
Now whilst this may be the case, it doesn't mean that the "small, beleaguered minority" are 'copping it sweet' and allowing the "conspiracists" free rein over political reality. Not by a long shot from the Texas School Book Depository Building! Well might we say they have come too far and worked too hard to allow that to happen. In fact they're fighting back. In this respect, the estimable Paul Craig Roberts, after noting that the concept of the 'conspiracy theory' has undergone an "Orwellian redefinition" -- and interestingly using The 9/11 Thing as his reference point -- observed the following:
"A "'conspiracy theory'" no longer means an event explained by a conspiracy....it now means any explanation, or fact, that is out of step with the government's explanation and that of its media pimps. For example, online news broadcasts of RT (Russian Television) have been equated with conspiracy theories by the New York Times (NYT) simply because RT reports news and opinions that the [NYT] does not report [on] and the US government does not endorse." [My emphasis]
The following is even more evidence of the 'best form of defence is attack' mindset of the "conventionalists".
Next Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
(Note: You can view every article as one long page if you sign up as an Advocate Member, or higher).
2
2
2
