New studies: ‘Conspiracy theorists’ sane; government dupes crazy, hostile

reply to post by alfa1


You are Absolutely Correct.
Inside every painfully knot- tide Press TV Article......
There is an American trying to get out.

You can't believe everything you read and hear, can you ?
Now if you'll excuse me, I'll be on my way.
Pump Up The Volume.

www.youtube.com...

reply to post by SunnyDee


It seems that all this study shows is that conspiracists post more comments on a possible conspiracy than do conspiracy deniers or doubters. Is this really surprising? I don't think so. Does this mean that conspiracy theorists are more the norm than conspiracy theory deniers in the general population? Again, no.

I really don't see what the point of this study was, nor can I see a reason for citing it. It's meaningless.

For the record, I'm of the school of thought that humans often conspire, and there have been many a documented conspiracy, but that doesn't make everything a conspiracy. But citing this study as somehow vindicating all conspiracies and conspiracy theorists is very, very weak sauce. And I think that is the problem with many a conspiracy theorist: they will grasp at straws for anything they think backs up their POV.

Also, from what the OP provided, the title of the thread is very misleading, if not downright false.

In addition, I'd love to see some documentation for the claim that the term "conspiracy theorist" was coined by the CIA. I don't doubt that from its inception, the term has been meant to smear those who believe in such theories as well as the theories themselves, but to say the CIA is behind it seems a bit of a stretch.

The term was invented and put into wide circulation by the CIA to smear and defame people questioning the JFK assassination! “

That is incorrect. Only after the publication of Josiah Thompson's book "Six Seconds in Dallas" that was followed up by Sylvia Meagher's "Accessories After the Fact" did rouge elements of the CIA began a disinformation campaign aimed at writers and publishers-in an attempt to intimidate them-not individual readers of the works.

Insinuating the the CIA began labeling readers of post WC critical accounts, on the inconsistencies of the report, as 'conspiracy theorist, is false. The term was used to force publishers not to publish former Senate investigator Harold Weisberg's work "Whitewash" that both the FBI and CIA knew contained damning information about the self serving nature of the evidence as presented in the evidence volumes of the report.

FBI director Hoover, using Weisberg's Russian Jewish heritage as fuel, began harassment of publishing company's not to assist Weisberg in the printing and marketing of his long expose on the differences of the evidence contained in the final report-and in the evidence volumes that didn't support these claims. He succeeded and it took years for Weisberg to finally publish them at his own expense.

Weisberg was the first to labeled a 'conspiracy theorist' and that was done by director Hoover. Part of the disinformation campaign against the investigator was that, as Hoover explained, Weisberg believed Premier Stalin and America were involved in a 'conspiracy' to obliterate evidence of war crimes against top scientist from the NAZI regime that both countries had smuggled out of Berlin. Aimed at Jewish owned publishing company's in America this outright lie was highly effective.

That is the origin of the term "conspiracy theorist'

When a co-worker of mine visited New York for a few weeks, 5 years ago he came back and told me the majority of New Yorkers don't believe in the OT anymore, but within that group most have decided to move on, they realize there is nothing they can really do without ruining their own lives. They are perfectly sane and realistic.

Originally posted by Blue_Jay33
When a co-worker of mine visited New York for a few weeks, 5 years ago he came back and told me the majority of New Yorkers don't believe in the OT anymore, but within that group most have decided to move on, they realize there is nothing they can really do without ruining their own lives. They are perfectly sane and realistic.

I would really like to know who those people are that he talked to. I talked to someone who actually worked at the WTC when 9/11 happened and she thinks the 9/11 conspiracy people are nuts. I myself have a friend who works in NYC and I cannot repeat the words he uses to show his contempt for the the 9/11 conspiracy groupies.

Let's face it, the 9/11 conspiracy movement had over ten years to prove its case and all it could provide was innuendo and outright false information. Characters like Richard Gage had all the time in the world to conduct their own investigation and they didn't do it, which tells me they're either so unrepentently lazy to prove whether their accusations are even true, or they're lying through their teeth and they know they can't make two plus two equal five no matter how artful they calculate it out. The burden of proof is on the accusor so it seems rather silly and childish to me for someone to make excuses for the conspiracy movement's poor job of proving their case by claiming "people who dare to question what we say are all crazy and hostile", as the OP is alluding to.

There is a very powerful force keeping the majority of people from prying their eyes open and seeing the truth.
When you can get an entire nation to swallow a story so ridiculously comical as the one put out about the events of September 11th then well........you can pretty much do whatever you want can't you?

The general public's willingness.....no.....insistence on keeping the status quo and outright refusal to question anything which would cause them to have to completely dismantle their entire world view and come face to face with that most powerful force in the universe, the force that allows the beings who run this planet to completely control every aspect of human affairs........



FEAR!!!


Through the manipulation of our fears, ANYTHING is possible!
You aint seen nothin' yet.

Hopefully more and more people challenge their fears and make a decision to come face to face with them.
When When WHEN

WHEN, you make THAT decision, you immediately see beyond the illusion to the other side of the curtain.
Fairy tales about boogy men/"terrorists" get exposed for what they truly are.

Control mechanisms.

They are used on us everyday.

We are just to afraid to see them.

reply to post by GeneralChaos

When you can get an entire nation to swallow a story so ridiculously comical as the one put out about the events of September 11th then well........you can pretty much do whatever you want can't you?

So how do you feel about a small percentage who believe inuendo without any proof behind it?

Originally posted by GoodOlDave

Let's face it, the 9/11 conspiracy movement had over ten years to prove its case and all it could provide was innuendo and outright false information. Characters like Richard Gage had all the time in the world to conduct their own investigation and they didn't do it, which tells me they're either so unrepentently lazy to prove whether their accusations are even true, or they're lying through their teeth and they know they can't make two plus two equal five no matter how artful they calculate it out. The burden of proof is on the accusor so it seems rather silly and childish to me for someone to make excuses for the conspiracy movement's poor job of proving their case by claiming "people who dare to question what we say are all crazy and hostile", as the OP is alluding to.

edit on 15-7-2013 by GoodOlDave because: (no reason given)

If this isn't a perfect example in relation to the thread subject, I don't know what is.

I don't think those that question 911 here have the ability or contacts to make a new investigation possible, as obviously no one in the world seems to have that ability, or something new would have happened.

reply to post by MrInquisitive


Yes, in hindsight, the article is not heavy with quality documentation. But what I take from it:

1. 911 truthers tend to be less hostile in their stance than Os'rs(which I equate to being less fanatical) And I do not take this just from the article but also from what I see alone on this site.
2.. The term "conspiracy theorist" has been purposely manipulated in media to conotate anyone with this title to be nutty. The 2 words in and of themselves should not create this perception, but a longtime propaganda campaign has been well maintained, (by something with that ability).

here I have to say again....
1...gulf of Tonkin conspiracy...proven and admitted to
2...Watergate conspiracy...proven and admitted to
3...Iran-contra conspiracy...proven and admitted
4...CDC's secret syphilis experiment on black men...proven and admitted to
5...and the most recent...government gathering of every Americans data...proven and admitted to

seems fairly sane to me

reply to post by jimmyx

1...gulf of Tonkin conspiracy...proven and admitted to
2...Watergate conspiracy...proven and admitted to
3...Iran-contra conspiracy...proven and admitted
4...CDC's secret syphilis experiment on black men...proven and admitted to
5...and the most recent...government gathering of every Americans data...proven and admitted to

Just how long did those remain secrets?
Factor in the total number of people involved in each.

911 was 12 years ago and not one person has come forward.
We have WIKI Leaks and peple like Snowden yet silence.
We have hundreds of thousands of engineers through out the world and only one travels up north preaching.
We have thousands of government workers losing their jobs through sequestration but not one goes after whistleblower money.
How can our government keep the lid on something this big and not be able to deliver water bottles to New Orleans?
How can our government silence pilots and engineers from every country on the planet?

A conspiracy this big and involved is beyond the abilities of the US and any other government.

Originally posted by jimmyx
here I have to say again....
1...gulf of Tonkin conspiracy...proven and admitted to
2...Watergate conspiracy...proven and admitted to
3...Iran-contra conspiracy...proven and admitted
4...CDC's secret syphilis experiment on black men...proven and admitted to
5...and the most recent...government gathering of every Americans data...proven and admitted to

seems fairly sane to me

IIRC none of these were the subject of conspiracy theories before being revealed by normal press investigations or insiders. The problem with 'conspiracy theory' is not that conspiracies do not exist; just that the style of thinking popularly used by most conspiracy theorists is inadequate to discover anything but the preconceived conclusions of the conspiracy theorists themselves.

Lance deHaven-Smith, a conspiracy theorist who authored one of the articles referred to in the OP has a revealing statement in this video.

at 9:50 he makes a claim that conspiracy theories should be held to a much lower standard of evidence than other ideas.

This amounts to an admission that he can't produce really convincing evidence concerning his favorite conspiracy theories. But he'll no doubt go on promoting them nonetheless.

Originally posted by SunnyDee
Do any of you here think this way? I don't. That does sound like the thinking of a less sane person.

It seems to me that holding conflicting beliefs is quite common in the truth movement. Just some examples:

Bush was warned in advance about a terrorist attack vs it was an inside job.
Debris ejecting in all directions proves explosives vs buildings falling in their own footprint proves explosives.
Thermite explains the lack of explosions vs witnesses heard explosive charges going off.
Dancing Israelis prove Mossad was behind it vs Bush/Cheney were behind it.
911 was executed to invade Afghanistan and Iraq vs they lied about OBL and WMD.

Its not rare to see one and the same person defending two or more conflicting beliefs.

reply to post by alfa1


And if you read the summary what it actualy says is that CT's are more interested in rejecting any and all official stories - regardless of what is actually true:

These tendencies in persuasive communication can be understood as a reflection of an underlying conspiracist worldview in which the details of individual conspiracy theories are less important than a generalized rejection of official explanations.

which explains why CT's never seem to notice that various theories about a given conspiracy are often in total contradiction to each other - as long as it says the official story isn't true it must be good!

reply to post by samkent


It may have been a smaller group than you think. Obviously it was pulled off and yet even the official story has no whistleblowers. What does that tell you? Do you hear rumors from the Mideast about the stunt "they" pulled? Nope. So your theory of no one talking holds no water, in that someone would have slipped up. Oh, and please don't say that OB l took credit, because that could have been contrived.

Yes conflicting "ideas" is common in the truth movement because we just don't know the truth, but conflicting "beliefs" is something different and less of what I am about, that is certain.

reply to post by SunnyDee


Nice catch OP, there certainly are a surprising amount of government "dupes" on this website; though in some cases dupes may be a slight misnomer and the label "I'm ex-government/military and am so desperate for a paycheck I'll doing anything including being a sock-puppet on conspiracy websites" may be more apt.

Here is the well-known "33 conspiracies that were proven to be true", most on here are familiar with it, I'll post it for the newbies; and of course as usual go through these yourselves and ignore the hit and run attacks that will claim these are not true - they are - but don't take my word for it and check yourself. Of course you have to ask yourself why people will come on here and argue with people they consider to be silly, delusional, ignorant etc or even why someone as one of the posters above would even be on one of the internets most famous conspiracy websites if they didn't believe in conspiracy theories. Just curmudgeonly?

33 Conspiracies proven to be true

reply to post by PlanetXisHERE


There's thousands of conspiracies that are "proven to be true" - millions even.

That's why they are not "theories"

reply to post by SunnyDee


I am not saying that you personally are holding conflicting beliefs, I am claiming it is a common occurrence in the truth movement.

But to give a small example, the idea that is was just a very small group, and the idea that the NIST report is a lie is already conflicting with each other.