[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Sign-in] [Mail] [Setup] [Help]
Status: Not Logged In; Sign In
|
War, War, War See other War, War, War Articles Title: Ridicule of Conspiracy Theories Focuses On Diffusing Criticism of the Powerful The label "conspiracy theory" is commonly used to try to discredit criticism of the powerful in government or business. For example, just this week - after Tony Blair was confronted by the Iraq Inquiry with evidence that he had used lies to sell the Iraq war - Blair dismissed the entire Iraq Inquiry as simply being part of Britain's "obsession with conspiracy theories". (Not only did Blair know that Saddam possessed no WMDs, but the French this week accused Blair of using of ‘Soviet-style' propaganda in run-up to the Iraq war). Of course, the American government has been busted in the last couple of years in numerous conspiracies. For example, William K. Black - professor of economics and law, and the senior regulator during the S & L crisis - says that that the government's entire strategy now - as during the S&L crisis - is to cover up how bad things are ("the entire strategy is to keep people from getting the facts").Similarly , 7 out of the 8 giant, money center banks went bankrupt in the 1980's during the "Latin American Crisis", and the government's response was to cover up their insolvency. And the government spied on American citizens (even before 9/11 ... confirmed here and here), while saying "we don't spy". The government tortured prisoners in Iraq, but said "we don't torture". In other words, high-level government officials have conspired to cover up the truth. And Tom Brokaw notes: All wars on based on propaganda. A concerted effort to produce propaganda is a conspiracy. Acceptable Versus Unacceptable Conspiracy Theories Bernie Madoff's Ponzi scheme was a conspiracy. The heads of Enron were found guilty of conspiracy, as was the head of Adelphia. Numerous lower-level government officials have been found guilty of conspiracy. See this, this, this, this and this. Time Magazine's financial columnist Justin Fox writes: Some financial market conspiracies are real ... Most good investigative reporters are conspiracy theorists, by the way. Indeed, conspiracies are so common that judges are trained to look at conspiracy allegations as just another legal claim to be disproven or proven by the evidence. But - while people might admit that corporate executives and low-level government officials might have engaged in conspiracies - they may be strongly opposed to considering that the wealthiest or most powerful might possibly have done so. Indeed, those who most loudly attempt to ridicule and discredit conspiracy theories tend to focus on defending against criticism involving the powerful. This may be partly due to psychology: it is scary for people to admit that those who are supposed to be their "leaders" protecting them may in fact be human beings with complicated motives who may not always have their best interests in mind. And see this. For example, Obama's current head of the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs - and a favored pick for the Supreme Court (Cass Sunstein) - previously: Defined a conspiracy theory as "an effort to explain some event or practice by reference to the machinations of powerful people, who have also managed to conceal their role." He has called for the use of state power to crush conspiracy allegations of state wrongdoing. See this, this and this. Similarly: Michael Kelly, a Washington Post journalist and neoconservative critic of anti-war movements on both the left and right, coined the term "fusion paranoia" to refer to a political convergence of left-wing and right-wing activists around anti-war issues and civil liberties, which he claimed were motivated by a shared belief in conspiracism or anti-government views. In other words, prominent neocon writer Kelly believes that everyone who is not a booster for government power and war is a crazy conspiracy theorist. Similarly, psychologists who serve the government eagerly label anyone "taking a cynical stance toward politics, mistrusting authority, endorsing democratic practices, ... and displaying an inquisitive, imaginative outlook" as crazy conspiracy theorists. This is not really new. In Stalinist Russia, anyone who criticized the government was labeled crazy, and many were sent to insane asylums. Using the Power of the State to Crush Criticism of the Government The bottom line is that the power of the state is used to crush criticism of major government policies and actions (or failures to act) and high-level government officials. Pay attention, and you'll notice that criticism of "conspiracy theories" is usually aimed at attempting to protect the state and key government players. The power of the state is seldom used to crush conspiracy theories regarding people who are not powerful . . . at least to the extent that they are not important to the government.
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 51.
#7. To: Ada (#0)
The term conspiracy theory is an accurate description of allegations for which there is no proof.
No, it's a pejorative term. Conspiracies happen all the time. It's no theory. Here is a list of conspiracy "theories" that are true: www.newworldorderreport.c...y-Person-Should-Know.aspx We didn't get the proof from the 9/11 Commission. So only those involved know what happened. We just have pieces of the puzzle and even those we argue over. Follow the money. You can't just focus on the attack, but on what came before it as well as what came after. Like the Unocal pipeline and the failed negotiations with the Taliban. I think that is why it happened.
Without proof, a conspiracy remains a conspiracy theory. If a conspiracy theory is proven it's no longer a conspiracy theory! None of the items on the list you linked to are conspiracy theories precisely because they've been proven. Every 9/11 conspiracy theory, however, remains just that.
By it's very nature 9/11 was a conspiracy. Where we may part company is in who the conspirators were. That is the "theory" part. Look at the actual strikes. You had some real fuckwits what could not walk and chew gum at the same time do some pretty good flying in multi-engine planes at very high speeds. IMO one of the weakest links is related to that. It's the Pentagram hit. Do you know what "ground effect" is, and how speed and altitude directly affects it? Then there's Bldg 7 and it's collapse. There's enough out there that I know the official story is bullshit, and I don't need all the answers to be able to say that because they could just as easily have blamed the fucking tooth fairy as being behind it all, and it would be as believable. I would like to know what really happened.
Yes and allegations that people within the US government were behind it is where the "theory" part comes in.
...and the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 is still a conspiracy theory, because, as you have pointed out, there's no proof bin laden did it.
There are no replies to Comment # 51. End Trace Mode for Comment # 51.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest |
||
|
[Home]
[Headlines]
[Latest Articles]
[Latest Comments]
[Post]
[Sign-in]
[Mail]
[Setup]
[Help]
|
||