You are Here:
Why government shills & intellectual cowards LOVE the term "conspiracy theory"

Author (Read 52180 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

 

Geolibertarian

  • Mega InfoWarrior
  • *****
  • 1118
    Posts
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
http://www.globalresearch.ca/media-disinformation-and-the-conspiracy-panic-phenomenon/5336221

Media Disinformation and the Conspiracy Panic Phenomenon

By James F. Tracy
Global Research
May 24, 2013



To posit that one’s government may be partially composed of unaccountable criminal elements is cause for serious censure in polite circles. Labeled “conspiracy theories” by a corporate media that prompt and channel emotionally-laden mass consent, such perspectives are quickly dispatched to the memory hole lest they prompt meaningful discussion of the political prerogatives and designs held by a global power elite coordinating governments and broader geopolitical configurations.

Cultural historian Jack Bratich terms such phenomena “conspiracy panics.” Potentially fostered by the coordinated actions of government officials or agencies and major news organs to generate public suspicion and uncertainty, a conspiracy panic is a demonstrable immediate or long-term reactive thrust against rational queries toward unusual and poorly understood events. To be sure, they are also intertwined with how the given society acknowledges and preserves its own identity—through “the management and expulsion of deviance.”[1]

In the American mass mind, government intelligence and military operations are largely seen as being directed almost solely toward manipulation or coercion of unfortunate souls in foreign lands. To suggest otherwise, as independent researchers and commentators have done with the assassination of President John F. Kennedy, the CIA-Contra-crack cocaine connection, and 9/11, has been cause for sustained conspiracy panics that act to suppress inquiry into such events by professional and credentialed opinion leaders, particularly journalists and academics.

At the same time a conspiracy panic serves a subtle yet important doctrinal function of manifesting and reproducing the apt ideational status quo of the post-Cold War, “War on Terror” era. “The scapegoating of conspiracy theories provides the conditions for social integration and political rationality,” Bratich observes. “Conspiracy panics help to define the normal modes of dissent. Politically it is predicated on a consensus of ‘us’ over against a subversive and threatening ‘them.’”[2] These days especially the suggestion that an official narrative may be amiss almost invariably puts one in the enemy camp.

Popular Credence in Government Conspiracy Narratives

The time for a conspiracy panic to develop has decreased commensurately with the heightened spread and availability of information and communication technology that allows for the dissemination of news and research formerly suppressed by the perpetual data overload of corporate media. Before the wide access to information technology and the internet, independent investigations into events including the JFK assassination took place over the course of many years, materializing in book-length treatments that could be dismissed by intelligence assets in news media and academe as the collective activity of “conspiracy buffs”—amateurish researchers who lack a government or privately-funded sinecure to overlook or obscure inquiry into deep events.

Not until Oliver Stone’s 1991 blockbuster film JFK, essentially an adoption of works by author Jim Marrs, Colonel L. Fletcher Prouty, and New Orleans District Attorney Jim Garrison, did a substantial conspiracy panic take shape as a response to such analysis thrust upon the public in popular narrative form. This panic arose from and centered around Hollywood’s apt challenge to traditional journalism’s turf alongside commercial news outlets’ typically deceptive  interpretation of the event and almost wholly uncritical treatment of the Warren Commission Report.

Shortly thereafter investigative journalist Gary Webb’s “Dark Alliance” series for the San Jose Mercury News demonstrated the internet’s capacity to explain and document a government conspiracy. With Webb’s painstaking examination of the CIA’s role in the illicit drug trade hyperlinked to a bevy of documentation and freely distributed online, the professional journalistic community and its intelligence penumbra fell silent for months.

In the interim the story picked up steam in the non-traditional outlets of talk radio and tabloid television, with African Americans especially intrigued by the potential government role in the crack cocaine epidemic. Then suddenly major news outlets spewed forth a vitriolic attack on Webb and the Mercury News that amazingly resulted in the Mercury‘s retraction of the story and Webb’s eventual departure from the paper and probable murder by the US government.[3]

Criticism of Webb’s work predictably focused on petty misgivings toward his alleged poor judgment—specifically his intimation that the CIA intentionally caused the crack epidemic in African American communities, an observation that many blacks found logical and compelling. So not only did Webb find himself at the center of a conspiracy panic because of his assessment of the CIA’s role in the drug trade; he was also causing mass “paranoia” within African American communities allegedly predisposed toward such thinking.

Since the mid-1990s conspiracy panics have increasingly revolved around an effort by mainstream news media to link unorthodox political ideas and inquiry with violent acts. This dynamic was crystallized in Timothy McVeigh, the principal suspect in the April 19, 1995 Oklahoma City Murrah Federal Building bombing,  who through the propaganda-like efforts of  government and major news media was constructed to symbolize the dangers of “extremist” conspiratorial thought (his purported fascination with white supremacism and The Turner Diaries) and violent terrorist action (the bombing itself). Conveniently overlooked is the fact that McVeigh was trained as a black ops technician and still in US Army employ at the time of his 2001 execution.[4]

Through a broad array of media coverage and subsequent book-length treatments by the left intelligentsia on the “radical right,” the alleged lone wolf McVeigh and the Oklahoma City bombing became forever coupled in the national memory. The image and event seemingly attested to how certain modes of thought can bring about violence–even though McVeigh’s role in what took place on April 19 was without question one part of an intricate web painstakingly examined by the Oklahoma Bombing Investigation Committee [5] and in the 2011 documentary A Noble Lie: Oklahoma City 1995.

The Quickening Pace of Conspiracy Panics

Independent researchers and alternative media utilizing the internet have necessitated the rapid deployment of conspiracy panic-like reactions that appear far less natural and spontaneous to neutralize inquiry and bolster the official narratives of  momentous and unusual events. For example, wide-scale skepticism surrounding the May 1, 2011 assault on Osama bin Laden’s alleged lair in Pakistan was met with efforts to cultivate a conspiracy panic evident in editorials appearing across mainstream print, broadcast, and online news platforms. The untenable event supported only by President Obama’s pronouncement of the operation was unquestioningly accepted by corporate media that shouted down calls for further evidence and alternative explanations of bin Laden’s demise as “conspiracy theories.”

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

http://monetary.org
http://schalkenbach.org
 

 

Geolibertarian

  • Mega InfoWarrior
  • *****
  • 1118
    Posts
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2013/07/12/313399/conspiracy-theorists-vs-govt-dupes/

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

Recent studies by psychologists and social scientists in the US and UK suggest that contrary to mainstream media stereotypes, those labeled “conspiracy theorists” appear to be saner than those who accept the official versions of contested events.

By Dr. Kevin Barrett
PressTV
July 12, 2013

The most recent study was published on July 8th by psychologists Michael J. Wood and Karen M. Douglas of the University of Kent (UK). Entitled “What about Building 7? A social psychological study of online discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories,” the study compared “conspiracist” (pro-conspiracy theory) and “conventionalist” (anti-conspiracy) comments at news websites.

The authors were surprised to discover that it is now more conventional to leave so-called conspiracist comments than conventionalist ones: “Of the 2174 comments collected, 1459 were coded as conspiracist and 715 as conventionalist.” In other words, 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.

Perhaps because their supposedly mainstream views no longer represent the majority, the anti-conspiracy commenters often displayed anger and hostility: “The research… showed that people who favoured the official account of 9/11 were generally more hostile when trying to persuade their rivals.”

Additionally, it turned out that the anti-conspiracy people were not only hostile, but fanatically attached to their own conspiracy theories as well. According to them, their own theory of 9/11 - a conspiracy theory holding that 19 Arabs, none of whom could fly planes with any proficiency, pulled off the crime of the century under the direction of a guy on dialysis in a cave in Afghanistan - was indisputably true. The so-called conspiracists, on the other hand, did not pretend to have a theory that completely explained the events of 9/11: “For people who think 9/11 was a government conspiracy, the focus is not on promoting a specific rival theory, but in trying to debunk the official account.”

In short, the new study by Wood and Douglas suggests that the negative stereotype of the conspiracy theorist - a hostile fanatic wedded to the truth of his own fringe theory - accurately describes the people who defend the official account of 9/11, not those who dispute it.

Additionally, the study found that so-called conspiracists discuss historical context (such as viewing the JFK assassination as a precedent for 9/11) more than anti-conspiracists. It also found that the so-called conspiracists do not like to be called “conspiracists” or “conspiracy theorists.”

Both of these findings are amplified in the new book Conspiracy Theory in America by political scientist Lance deHaven-Smith, published earlier this year by the University of Texas Press. Professor deHaven-Smith explains why people don’t like being called “conspiracy theorists”: The term was invented and put into wide circulation by the CIA to smear and defame people questioning the JFK assassination! “The CIA’s campaign to popularize the term ‘conspiracy theory’ and make conspiracy belief a target of ridicule and hostility must be credited, unfortunately, with being one of the most successful propaganda initiatives of all time.”

In other words, people who use the terms “conspiracy theory” and “conspiracy theorist” as an insult are doing so as the result of a well-documented, undisputed, historically-real conspiracy by the CIA to cover up the JFK assassination. That campaign, by the way, was completely illegal, and the CIA officers involved were criminals; the CIA is barred from all domestic activities, yet routinely breaks the law to conduct domestic operations ranging from propaganda to assassinations.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

http://monetary.org
http://schalkenbach.org
 

 

Geolibertarian

  • Mega InfoWarrior
  • *****
  • 1118
    Posts
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
http://www.prisonplanet.com/conspiracy-theorists-are-the-greatest-challenge-to-democracy-according-to-heres-who.html

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

Sibel Edmonds
boilingfrogspost.com
October 30, 2013

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:

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

http://monetary.org
http://schalkenbach.org
 

 

Geolibertarian

  • Mega InfoWarrior
  • *****
  • 1118
    Posts
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
http://www.prisonplanet.com/feds-move-to-pin-lax-shooting-on-patriots.html

Feds Move to Pin LAX Shooting On Patriots

Kurt Nimmo
Prison Planet.com
November 5, 2013

The FBI will assume its traditional role as a political police force in the wake of the LAX shooting. On Monday night, the agency announced it is looking into the political beliefs of Paul Ciancia, the unemployed motorcycle mechanic who allegedly shot and killed a TSA agent last week.

89.3 KPCC        ✔ @KPCC
LAX shooting: FBI eyeing Ciancia's focus on 'New World Order' http://kp.cc/1aCouqG  via @erikaaaguilar
11:15 AM - 5 Nov 2013


Ciancia reportedly had a handwritten note with him denouncing the “New World Order,” the TSA, former Department of Homeland Security boss Janet Napolitano, and other government officials.

Presenting a search warrant for Ciancia’s cellphone on Monday, the FBI noted the alleged shooter’s “concerns about a New World Order.”

The resident expert on all things New World Order, the South Poverty Law Center and its spokesman, Mark Potok, have trotted out a politically charged definition of the New World Order that has been digested without comment by the establishment media.

“Ciancia’s language and references seemed to put him squarely in the conspiracy-minded world of the antigovernment ‘Patriot’ movement,” the SPLC told USA Today. “The New World Order refers to a longstanding conspiracy theory that today, in its most popular iteration, claims that global elites are plotting to form a socialistic ‘one-world government’ that would crush American freedoms. Often, the root of the alleged conspiracy is traced to the 1913 creation of the Federal Reserve and the adoption of fiat currency — paper money that is not backed by gold, as it was once was in the U.S.”

Meanwhile, the establishment media is playing its role. On November 4, ABC News ran a Diane Sawyer piece on the shooting that inexplicably inserted a short clip of Alex Jones talking about the TSA. The clip was not explained. Alex Jones’ name was present in a lower third on the screen and infowars.com was displayed at the top of the screen. The insertion is clearly a brazen effort to pin blame for the shooting on the patriot movement in general and Alex Jones in particular.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

http://monetary.org
http://schalkenbach.org
 

 

Geolibertarian

  • Mega InfoWarrior
  • *****
  • 1118
    Posts
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
http://www.prisonplanet.com/contra-cocaine-was-a-real-conspiracy.html

Contra-Cocaine Was a Real Conspiracy

Robert Parry
Consortium News
December 5, 2013

The 50th anniversary of the JFK assassination saw a mainstream media blackout of nearly all evidence of conspiracy in that case. But New York Magazine went even further, mocking the proven Contra-cocaine scandal as a “conspiracy theory.”

In the insular world of Manhattan media, there’s much handwringing over the latest blow to print publications as New York Magazine scales back from a weekly to a biweekly. But the real lesson might be the commercial failure of snarky writing, the kind that New York demonstrated in its recent hit piece on “conspiracy theories.”

What was most stunning to me about the article, pegged to the 50th anniversary of John F. Kennedy’s assassination, was that it began by ridiculing what is actually one of the best-documented real conspiracies of recent decades, the CIA’s tolerance and even protection of cocaine trafficking by the Nicaraguan Contra rebels in the 1980s.

According to New York Magazine, the Contra-cocaine story – smugly dubbed “the last great conspiracy theory of the twentieth century” – started with the claim by ”crack kingpin” Ricky Ross that he was working with a Nicaraguan cocaine supplier, Oscar Danilo Blandon, who had ties to the Contras who, in turn, had ties to the CIA.

Author Benjamin Wallace-Wells writes: “The wider the aperture around this theory, the harder its proponents work to implicate Washington, the shakier it seems: After several trials and a great deal of inquiry, no one has been able to show that anyone in the CIA condoned what Blandon was doing, and it has never been clear exactly how strong Blandon’s ties to the contraleadership really were, anyway.”

So, it was all a goofy “conspiracy theory.” Move along, move along, nothing to see here. But neither Wallace-Wells nor his New York Magazine editors seem to have any idea about the actual history of the Contra-cocaine scandal. It did not begin with the 1996 emergence of Ricky Ross in a series of articles by San Jose Mercury-News investigative reporter Gary Webb, as Wallace-Wells suggests.

The Contra-cocaine scandal began more than a decade earlier with a 1985 article that Brian Barger and I wrote for the Associated Press. Our article cited documentary evidence and witnesses – both inside the Contra movement and inside the U.S. government – implicating nearly all the Contra groups fighting in Nicaragua under the umbrella of Ronald Reagan’s CIA.

Our Contra-cocaine article was followed up by a courageous Senate investigation led by Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts who further documented the connections between cocaine traffickers, the Contras and the Reagan administration in a report issued in 1989.

Yet, part of the scandal always was how the Reagan administration worked diligently to undercut investigations of the President’s favorite “freedom fighters” whether the inquiries were undertaken by the press, Congress, the Drug Enforcement Administration or federal prosecutors. Indeed, a big part of this cover-up strategy was to mock the evidence as “a conspiracy theory,” when it was anything but.

Big Media’s Complicity

Most of the mainstream news media played along with the Reagan administration’s mocking strategy, although occasionally major outlets, like the Washington Post, had to concede the reality of the scandal.

For instance, during the drug-trafficking trial of Panamanian dictator Manuel Noriega in 1991, U.S. prosecutors found themselves with no alternative but to call as a witness Colombian Medellín cartel kingpin Carlos Lehder, who — along with implicating Noriega — testified that the cartel had given $10 million to the Contras, an allegation first unearthed by Sen. Kerry.

“The Kerry hearings didn’t get the attention they deserved at the time,” a Washington Post editorial on Nov. 27, 1991, acknowledged. “The Noriega trial brings this sordid aspect of the Nicaraguan engagement to fresh public attention.”

Yet, despite the Washington Post’s belated concern about the mainstream news media’s neglect of the Contra-cocaine scandal, there was no serious follow-up anywhere in Big Media – until 1996 when Gary Webb disclosed the connection between one Contra cocaine smuggler, Danilo Blandon, and the emergence of crack cocaine via Ricky Ross.

But the premier news outlets – the likes of the Washington Post, the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times – didn’t take this new opportunity to examine what was a serious crime of state. That would have required them to engage in some embarrassing self-criticism for their misguided dismissal of the scandal. Instead, the big newspapers went on the attack against Gary Webb.

Their attack line involved narrowing their focus to Blandon – ignoring the reality that he was just one of many Contras involved in cocaine smuggling to the United States – and to Ross – arguing that Ross’s operation could not be blamed for the entire crack epidemic that ravaged U.S. cities in the 1980s. And the newspapers insisted that the CIA couldn’t be blamed for this cocaine smuggling because the agency had supposedly examined the issue in the 1980s and found that it had done nothing wrong.

Because of this unified assault from the major newspapers – and the corporate timidity of the San Jose Mercury-News editors – Webb and his continuing investigation were soon abandoned. Webb was pushed out of the Mercury-News in disgrace.

That let the mainstream U.S. media celebrate how it had supposedly crushed a nasty “conspiracy theory” that had stirred up unjustified anger in the black community, which had been hit hardest by the crack epidemic. The newspapers also could get some brownie points from Republicans and the Right by sparing President Reagan’s legacy a big black eye.

But Webb’s disclosure prompted the CIA’s Inspector General Frederick Hitz to undertake the first real internal investigation of the ties between the Contra-cocaine smugglers and the CIA officers overseeing the Contra war in Nicaragua.

The CIA’s Confession

When Hitz’s final investigative report was published in fall 1998, the CIA’s defense against Webb’s series had shrunk to a fig leaf: that the CIA did not conspire with the Contras to raise money through cocaine trafficking. But Hitz made clear that the Contra war had taken precedence over law enforcement and that the CIA withheld evidence of Contra drug-smuggling crimes from the Justice Department, Congress, and even the CIA’s own analytical division.

Besides tracing the extensive evidence of Contra trafficking through the entire decade-long Contra war, the inspector general interviewed senior CIA officers who acknowledged that they were aware of Contra-drug smuggling but didn’t want its exposure to undermine the struggle to overthrow Nicaragua’s leftist Sandinista government.

According to Hitz, the CIA had “one overriding priority: to oust the Sandinista government. . . . [CIA officers] were determined that the various difficulties they encountered not be allowed to prevent effective implementation of the Contra program.” One CIA field officer explained, “The focus was to get the job done, get the support and win the war.”

Hitz also recounted complaints from CIA analysts that CIA operations officers handling the Contras hid evidence of Contra-drug trafficking even from the CIA’s analysts. Because of the withheld evidence, the CIA analysts incorrectly concluded in the mid-1980s that “only a handful of Contras might have been involved in drug trafficking.” That false assessment was passed on to Congress and to major news organizations — serving as an important basis for denouncing Gary Webb and his disclosures in 1996.

Although Hitz’s report was an extraordinary admission of institutional guilt by the CIA, it went almost unnoticed by the big American newspapers. On Oct. 10, 1998, two days after Hitz’s final report was posted on the CIA’s Web site, the New York Times published a brief article that continued to deride Webb but acknowledged the Contra-drug problem may have been worse than earlier understood.

Several weeks later, the Washington Post weighed in with a similarly superficial article. The Los Angeles Times never published a story on the contents of Hitz’s findings though Los Angeles had been “ground zero” of the Ross-Blandon connection.

In 2000, the Republican-controlled House Intelligence Committee grudgingly acknowledged that the stories about Reagan’s CIA protecting Contra drug traffickers were true. The committee released a report citing classified testimony from CIA Inspector General Britt Snider (Hitz’s successor) admitting that the spy agency had turned a blind eye to evidence of Contra-drug smuggling and generally treated drug smuggling through Central America as a low priority.

“In the end the objective of unseating the Sandinistas appears to have taken precedence over dealing properly with potentially serious allegations against those with whom the agency was working,” Snider said, adding that the CIA did not treat the drug allegations in “a consistent, reasoned or justifiable manner.”
The House committee’s majority Republicans still downplayed the significance of the Contra-cocaine scandal, but the panel acknowledged, deep inside its report, that in some cases, “CIA employees did nothing to verify or disprove drug trafficking information, even when they had the opportunity to do so. In some of these, receipt of a drug allegation appeared to provoke no specific response, and business went on as usual.”

Like the release of Hitz’s report in 1998, the admissions by Snider and the House committee drew virtually no media attention in 2000 — except for a few articles on the Internet, including one at Consortiumnews.com. Because the confirmation of the Contra-cocaine scandal received so little mainstream media coverage, Gary Webb remained a pariah in his profession of journalism, making it next to impossible for him to land a decent-paying job and contributing to his suicide in 2004. [For details, see Consortiumnews.com’s “The Warning in Gary Webb’s Death.”]

What’s a Conspiracy Theory?

So, what is one to make of New York Magazine’s decision 15 years after the CIA’s confession and nearly a decade after Webb’s death to lead off its snarky ridicule of “conspiracy theories” with such a grossly inaccurate account of what was undeniably a real conspiracy?

One might have hoped that a publication that fancies itself as iconoclastic would have had the journalistic courage not to simply reinforce a fake conventional wisdom – and have the human decency not to join in the mainstream media’s dancing on Webb’s grave. But that is apparently too much to expect of New York Magazine.

There is another problem in New York’s sneering takedown of “conspiracy theories” – and that is the magazine lacks a decent definition of what a “conspiracy theory” is, especially given the pejorative implications of the phrase.

In my view, a “conspiracy theory” is a case of fanciful, usually fact-free speculation positing some alternative explanation for an event. Typically, a “conspiracy theory” not only lacks any real evidence but often ignores compelling evidence that goes in other directions. For instance, the current conspiracy theory about President Barack Obama being born in Kenya despite birth certificates and birth notices of his birth in Hawaii.

By contrast, a real conspiracy can be defined as a collaboration among individuals to engage in criminal or scandalous behavior usually in a secretive manner. There are many such examples involving high government officials, including Richard Nixon’s Watergate and Ronald Reagan’s Iran-Contra Affair.

The difference between a “conspiracy theory” and a real conspiracy is that the latter is supported by substantial evidence and the former is reliant on someone simply thinking something up, often with partisan or ideological motivation.

There is, of course, much gray area between those two poles. There are cases in which some evidence exists indicating a conspiracy but it’s short of conclusive proof. In such cases of legitimate doubt, aggressive investigations are warranted – and the U.S. news media should welcome, not punish, these lines of inquiry.

Instead, the role of the mainstream press often has been to ridicule journalists and other investigators who venture into these murky waters. Often, that ridicule leads to serious cases of journalistic malfeasance as occurred with the mistreatment of Gary Webb and the Contra-cocaine story.

Other times the smug “anti-conspiracism” makes it impossible to get at the facts and to inform the American public about wrongdoing in a timely fashion. That can allow corrupt government officials to go unpunished and sometime to return to government in powerful positions.

The other important lesson to take from New York Magazine’s lumping real conspiracies and possible conspiracies in with fanciful conspiracy theories is that each case is unique and should be treated as such. Each set of facts should be examined carefully.

Just because one conspiracy can be proven doesn’t substantiate every claim of conspiracy. And the opposite is also true, just because one fact-free conspiracy theory is nutty doesn’t mean all suspected conspiracies deserve ridicule.

Through its anti-journalistic behavior, New York Magazine makes it hard to mourn its current financial predicament as it cuts back to publishing every other week. Indeed, the magazine is making a case that few tears should be shed if it disappears entirely.
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

http://monetary.org
http://schalkenbach.org
 

 

Geolibertarian

  • Mega InfoWarrior
  • *****
  • 1118
    Posts
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org



^^  Pretty much sums up this entire thread, does it not?
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

http://monetary.org
http://schalkenbach.org
 

 

Geolibertarian

  • Mega InfoWarrior
  • *****
  • 1118
    Posts
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
http://www.prisonplanet.com/report-says-50-of-people-are-conspiracy-theorists-youre-probably-one-of-them.html

Report Says 50% of People are Conspiracy Theorists: You’re Probably One of Them

Elizabeth Renter
Prison Planet.com
May 20, 2014


Image: Thinker (Wiki Commons).

Do you believe the government actively works to suppress alternative medicine? Do you think they already know cell phones cause cancer and are simply refusing to do anything about it? Do you use nutritional supplements? If you responded yes to any of these questions, you could be the type of person that a new JAMA study paints as a simple-minded “medical conspiracy kook”.

Both the new study and the corresponding report from Reuters Health seem to look down on people like you and I (as readers of NaturalSociety), as if we don’t know any better -as if understanding medicine in the “right” way is a matter of intelligence and it’s not that we’ve come to our own ideas through research, but in an effort to make things simpler for our feeble minds.

    “Science in general – medicine in particular – is complicated and cognitively challenging because you have to carry around a lot of uncertainty,” said lead author J. Eric Oliver. “To talk about epidemiology and probability theories is difficult to understand as opposed to ‘if you put this substance in your body, it’s going to be bad.’”

To come to such conclusions about a large segment of the U.S. (and global) population, Oliver and his team surveyed 1,351 adults. Participants were asked to read “six popular medical conspiracy theories” and indicate whether they have heard of them and whether or not they agreed with them.

The questions included things like:

     Cell phones causing cancer and the government refusing to act
     GMOs being used for population control
     The government suppressing alternative medicine
     Vaccinations causing autism
     HIV intentionally being sent into African American communities

Nearly half (49%) of participants agreed with at least one of the theories. About 37% thought the government actively works to suppress alternative medical treatments and 20% believed vaccinations cause autism.

    “Although it is common to disparage adherents of conspiracy theories as a delusional fringe of paranoid cranks, our data suggest that medical conspiracy theories are widely known, broadly endorsed, and highly predictive of many common health behaviors,” reads the study in an ever-so-respectful tone.

The researchers indicate that those who believe in these “conspiracies” are more likely to take herbal supplements, clear evidence that they are idiots, the study seems to suggest.

“For people who don’t have a lot of education, it’s relatively easy to reject the scientific way of thinking about things,” said Oliver. He suggests doctors get in there and rectify the situation, educating their patients about the “truth”.

As the Alliance for Natural Health reports, the mockery of natural health claims, treatments, and theories is following a predictable path:

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

http://monetary.org
http://schalkenbach.org
 

The Dreaded "Conspiracy Theory"
« Reply #32 on: Aug 13, 2014, 02:17:13 am »
 

Geolibertarian

  • Mega InfoWarrior
  • *****
  • 1118
    Posts
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
http://www.prisonplanet.com/the-dread-conspiracy-theory.html

The Dread Conspiracy Theory

Prison Planet.com
July 31, 2014

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fMBgt_zalew



You’re a lunatic. This is exactly what the term conspiracy theory connotes or, more precisely, is designed to connote. It’s intended to refer to the paranoid and delusional, the pathologically frightened and unrealistically suspect, the psychologically disenfranchised. The loon, the nut, the emotional outlier. It ends conversation in mid thought. It derails discussion and reserves for the trash heap of critical thinking subjects and issues that are vital for understanding and review.

What’s fascinating is that our history and the history of the world are replete with conspire cay facts not theories. Actual cabals and confederations designed to bring about an evil end. Doubt me? Try Johnson and the Gulf of Tonkin on for size. Oh, and there’s that JFK assassination moment. Oh, but sorry, I forgot. Lee Harvey acted alone. On three everybody: Right.
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

http://monetary.org
http://schalkenbach.org
 

 

Geolibertarian

  • Mega InfoWarrior
  • *****
  • 1118
    Posts
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
http://www.globalresearch.ca/new-documentary-911-in-the-academic-community/5400702

New Documentary on September 11, 2001 “False Flag”: “9/11 in the Academic Community”

By Dr. Gary G. Kohls
Global Research
September 10, 2014



Thursday, Sept 11, 2014, was the 13th anniversary of the controlled demolitions – by obviously pre-planted high explosive and incendiary cutter charges – of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers 1, 2 and 7. From my and many other’s experiences over the past 13 years, I think that I can predict with a high degree of confidence that there will be no credible coverage by the corporate-controlled media on the known science that has totally disproved the Cheney/Bush administration’s conspiracy theory.

Last week’s Duty to Warn column castigated the afore-mentioned media for continuing the (fragile and provably false) deception by continually referring to what happened as simply “911 attacks”, thus deceiving their readers, viewers and listeners into accepting the notion that it was two planes crashing into two of the towers that allowed the US to risk starting World War III.

The truth of the matter, of course, was that insiders had to orchestrate a much more catastrophic event that involved the actual collapse of the skyscrapers. With simply two planes hitting two of the towers, two brief fireballs, and a few office fires that quickly burned out, the crime scene would have shown that the massive 110 story girders were intact, the buildings intact, and only hundreds of fatalities rather than 3000. In addition the flight recorders would have been recovered intact as well as whatever passengers, if any, had been on the planes (the planes were likely piloted by computer-controlled drones rather than the accused amateur hijackers who couldn’t even fly prop planes).


The evidence is so overwhelming that 9/11 was a false flag op that any legitimate court of law (are there any?) willing to take testimony from the experts would easily determine the falsity of the official version.

A brilliant 5 minute review of 9/11 by James Corbett (http://www.corbettreport.com/about/ and http://globalresearch.ca/) can be viewed at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuC_4mGTs98, More thorough exposes of 9/11 can be viewed at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ddz2mw2vaEg



“Why do otherwise good people refuse to look at (or believe) the evidence?”

What also needs to be examined is the following question:

    “Why do otherwise good people refuse to look at the evidence?”

Or, in the situation that might be more likely to be the case, if these good people have actually spent the few hours necessary to adequately examine the evidence,

    “why do they then refuse to acknowledge the existence of the evidence that totally disproves the official story that they have somehow come to believe?”

It is easy to understand the reasons why powerful governmental or corporate entities obfuscate certain facts. Their jobs, income, prestige, well-being and personal security (even their lives) may depend on doing what their puppet-masters and paymasters want them to do.  Sometimes it doesn’t even take a direct order; they may know instinctively what to do.

The corporate-controlled media (starting with the publishers, editors and major shareholders) and their well-paid talking heads are in cahoots with the governmental agencies that insist on secrecy and the creation of plausible “sacred” myths (and therefore the intentional deception of the citizenry) if they think the national security (or the health of the stock market) is at stake.

The White House, the Cabinet, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Pentagon, military careerists, CIA, FBI , NSA (and the dozen of other national security agencies), the corporate-controlled politicians, legislators and various other thought leaders take certain “sacred” myths and the necessity for cover-ups of painful truths very seriously.

If a rare person of conscience (who was also in a position of power) chooses to resist the real powers-that-be, as was the case with JFK, MLK, RFK and Senator Paul Wellstone, there would be serious consequences.

Understanding the Motivations of the “Good German” Folks who say “I Wouldn’t Believe That Even if I Knew it Were True”?

But the psychology of why otherwise good people decide to maintain their silence in the face of unwelcome truths has many ramifications, which I will address more thoroughly in a future column. (A great series of articles by psychologist and 9/11 truth-seeker, Francis Shure, entitled “Why Do Good People Become Silent—or Worse—About 9/11?” can be read, starting at: http://www.ae911truth.org/en/news-section/41-articles/821-why-do-good-people-become-silentor-worseabout-911-.html.)

For now, interested readers should consider researching the following psychological realities that will partially explain why the truth about 9/11 is such a taboo subject:

Cognitive Dissonance: the psychological discomfort one feels when faced with new information that contradicts deeply held beliefs that are now suddenly proved to be false,

Denial, “Obedience to“ (Stanley Milgram’s seminal book), “1984” and George Orwell’s concept of Doublethink (the capacity to hold two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously and accept them both),

Groupthink (“running with the pack”),

Denial, Conformity, and the fear of challenging a “sacred myth” – and thus being ostracized by the bamboozled majority.

I include below extended excerpts from an important Global Research article written by Elizabeth Woodworth about the serious problem of the silence of most academics and scholars regarding the truth of 9/11. Historically, academics have been allowed – if not encouraged – to be independent, outspoken and courageous thinkers, but, being human and increasingly disempowered members of increasingly corporate-controlled American universities, they are subjected to the same psychological, social, economic and corporate influences as the rest of us.

Woodworth writes about a new documentary titled “9/11 in the Academic Community” which was a prize winner at the 2013 University of Toronto Film Festival. The film was produced and directed by Adnan Zuberi. The trailer can be viewed at: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFzVKDdCa6s.



“9/11 Truth” and the Failure of the Academic Community to Explore the Events of September 11, 2001

By Elizabeth Woodworth – Co-Founder of the 911 Consensus Panel (http://www.consensus911.org/)

“Academics have been milquetoasts when it comes to the truth about what really happened on 9/11/01, this century’s first great day of infamy.” – Canadian academic historian Michiel Horn

Entire article posted at: Global Research, September 05, 2014
http://www.globalresearch.ca/911-truth-and-the-failure-of-the-academic-community-to-explore-the-events-of-september-11-2001/5399487

As the academic year begins, and the 13th anniversary of 9/11 draws near, it seems timely to review this eye-opening documentary about the failure of academia to explore the evidence about the events of September 11.Indeed, there are literally dozens of peer-reviewed science articles challenging the American government narrative about 9/11 that academics simply do not talk about.  These articles stand published in the science literature – for the most part unreported, unexamined, and unrefuted.

9/11 Academic Failure in the Context of Traditional Scientific Publishing

In view of the magnitude of the 9/11 tragedy, and the persistent public doubts about its cause,[1] the scientific academy has been eerily silent.[2] Although many studies questioning the official account have been published in peer-reviewed science and engineering journals,[3] they have not generated debate in the literature, or reports in the media. This is virtually unprecedented, for new scientific research always stimulates a trail of discussion – be it through letters, rebuttals, or further studies.

Two examples of peer-reviewed articles that should have made sensational headlines and stimulated major academic discussion simply faded into obscurity:

An article published in the Journal of Business was reported by econometrician Dr. Paul Zarembkaas showing a 99% statistical probability that high-volume insider trading occurred with American Airlines and United Airlines stocks in the days before 9/11;[4]

A nine-author article published in the peer-reviewed Open Chemical Physics Journal (2009) reported that unreacted nanothermite, which can be tailored to behave as an incendiary (like ordinary thermite), or as an explosive, was found in four independently collected samples of the World Trade Center dust.[5] Nanothermite is a high-tech substance not found in nature, yet there has been no published research follow-up to this landmark article’s astonishing conclusions.

In short, the subject has been untouchable.

Glaring Anomalies in the Government Narrative That Should Have Aroused Academic Concern

This documentary interviews a group of ten current and former Canadian and American university professors[6]about eye-opening contradictions in the official account.

Some of these include:

1.  Ground Zero was the biggest crime scene in US history, yet the telltale steel girders were quickly trucked away before forensic examination could take place.

2.  Originally there was to be no investigation, and only following intense political pressure from the families was an investigation mounted in 2003.

3.  Paradoxically, the 9/11 Commission Report (2004) stated that its purpose was “to provide the fullest possible account of the events,” but “not to assign individual blame.”[7]

4.  Nonetheless the Report accused al Qaeda of responsibility, basing 25% of its supporting footnotes on torture testimony, and providing no spokespersons to represent the accused.

5.  The Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission, Philip Zelikow – a White House insider – framed the Report’s narrative in advance by providing an outline to the findings before the investigation had begun.

6.  The NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) conclusions regarding the collapses of the Twin Towers and WTC7 were based on simplified models that defied Newtonian physics and were in conflict with direct observations.

7.  After seven years of study, NIST granted that free-fall acceleration had taken place in 47-story steel-framed WTC Building 7, which was not hit by an airplane – but could only cite office fires to explain this unprecedented event.

Cultural Pressures to Delegitimize Inquiry into 9/11

How could these extraordinary anomalies have been ignored and overlooked by the academic community? The term “conspiracy theory” was first introduced into common use by the CIA following the publication of the Warren Commission report on the assassination of JFK, when “a public opinion poll recently indicated that 46% of the American public did not think that Oswald acted alone, while more than half of those polled thought that the Commission had left some questions unresolved.” The document, released following a FOIA request in 1976, outlined the CIA’s concern regarding “the whole reputation of the American government.”[8] The term “conspiracy theory,” which had formerly held neutral connotations, began to acquire a derogatory sense that identified certain topics as off limits to inquiry or debate. It has even been referred to as a “weaponized term.”[9]

One of the professors in the film referred to “the spiral of silence,” and another to “thought stoppers” – such as the charge of “conspiracy theory.” A third referred to 9/11 as “one government story that’s untouchable.” Another said that raising the subject in academic circles is somehow forbidden, unmentionable – that it sullies and profanes a person to bring it up.  Sometimes persons who raise it are themselves attacked. Indeed a number of professors who persevered with research were vilified, harassed, and even dismissed for attempting work in this area.

The Fallout from 9/11

Although 9/11 itself has seldom been questioned within the academy, its implications and fallout have been permissible fields of study, and include:

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

http://monetary.org
http://schalkenbach.org
 

 

Geolibertarian

  • Mega InfoWarrior
  • *****
  • 1118
    Posts
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-cias-invention-of-the-conspiracy-theorist-smear-campaign-to-discredit-dissenters/5403876

The CIA’s Invention of the “Conspiracy Theorist”: Smear Campaign to Discredit Dissenters

Why do Good People Become Silent About the Documentable Facts That Disprove the Official White House Conspiracy Theory About 9/11? – Part Two

By Dr. Gary G. Kohls
Global Research
September 24, 2014



In his 2013 book, Conspiracy Theory in America, author Lance deHaven-Smith traced the term “conspiracy theory” back to a CIA propaganda campaign that was designed to discredit doubters of the Warren Commission’s fake search into who assassinated President Kennedy in Dallas. In this light, the use of this pejorative term is obviously a tactic to shame and humiliate those who saw through the ulterior motives of the commission, and thus effectively censor out or even banish anyone who questions official government accounts.

The Warren Commission, to its eternal shame, ignored the testimony of a multitude of eye witnesses to the crime that proved that there were shooters both behind and in front of Kennedy’s motorcade. Many witnesses, none of whom were called to testify, had heard shots coming from the grassy knoll in front of the motorcade.

One of those eye-witnesses was an emergency room physician that attended Kennedy’s dying body. He would have testified to the commission that there was a tiny entry wound in JFK’s throat as well as a large exit wound that blew off the back of his head (depositing a chunk of his brain on the trunk of the limousine – which Jackie was shown retrieving in the famous film of the assassination by Abraham Zapruder).

Anyone with discerning eyes saw JFK’s head being violently thrown backwards from the head shot, thus proving that that shot had come from the front (as did the neck shot), thus disproving the single shooter theory and proving that the assassination of the president was indeed a conspiracy (i.e., more than one entity plotting an evil deed).

Hence the CIA’s cunning ploy (with the pejorative “conspiracy theorist” label) to discredit those who had taken on as their duty to be skeptical of what was indeed another of the Big Lies that regularly come from political entities that want our trust and votes; from advertising campaigns from corporations that want our trust and money; from government and military entities that want our trust and support; and from the for-profit media entities that want our trust and money. All those entities had to be involved in the crime and cover-up of the events of 9/11/01.

Both the Warren and 9/11 commissions were, in effect, saying “Hey you American idiots, listen up. How many times do we have to tell you that this case is closed? We got our crazed lone gunman; now just be obedient children and resume your shopping, brain-numbing amusements. celebrity worship and vegetating on the couch cheering for your favorite professional football, baseball, hockey or basketball teams.”

Or they may try to reassure us a bit more diplomatically by saying “trust us when we say that those heinous crimes were simply committed by lone gunman like Lee Harvey Oswald, James Earl Ray, Sirhan Sirhan, Osama bin Laden or Adam Lanza (despite all the evidence to the contrary) – and those cases have been neatly wrapped up (by hook or by crook).” “So just move on – there is nothing more to see here; and, should you continue to have doubts about our official stories, just be sure to remember what happens to conscientious whistleblowers like Martin Luther King, Chelsey Manning, Edward Snowden and Julian Assange when they go poking around where they’re not wanted.”

There have been many America military/government/corporate conspiratorial dirty tricks that were initially denied by the propagandizing powers-that-be but which were later admitted to – after diligent and courageous whistle-blowing investigative journalists proved the conspiracies. In every case the powers-that-be had been, in effect, calling the truth-seekers “conspiracy theorists”.

Such a list could mention hundreds of examples, including the following short list that occurred during recent presidential administrations:

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

http://monetary.org
http://schalkenbach.org
 

 

Geolibertarian

  • Mega InfoWarrior
  • *****
  • 1118
    Posts
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
http://www.globalresearch.ca/what-is-a-conspiracy-theory-what-is-the-truth/5429344

What is a Conspiracy Theory? What is the Truth?

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research
February 05, 2015



Obama is on a hot war footing. Western civilization is allegedly “threatened by the Islamic State”. 

 The “Global War on Terrorism” is  heralded as a humanitarian endeavor.

We have a “Responsibility to Protect”. Humanitarian warfare is the solution.

Evil folks are lurking. ‘Take ‘em out”, said George W. Bush.

The Western media is beating the drums of war. Obama’s military agenda is supported by a vast propaganda apparatus.

One of the main objectives of war propaganda is to “fabricate an enemy”. As the political legitimacy of the Obama Administration falters, doubts regarding the existence of this “outside enemy”, namely Al Qaeda and its network of (CIA sponsored) affiliates  must be dispelled.

The purpose is to tacitly instil, through repeated media reports, ad nauseam, within people’s inner consciousness, the notion that Muslims constitute a threat to the security of the Western World.


Humanitarian warfare is waged on several fronts: Russia,  China and the Middle East are currently the main targets.

Xenophobia and the Military Agenda

The wave of xenophobia directed against Muslims which has swept across Western Europe is tied into geopolitics. It is part of a military agenda. It consists in demonizing the enemy.
    Muslim countries possess more than 60 percent of total oil reserves.  In contrast, the United States of America has barely 2 percent of total oil reserves. Iraq has five times more oil than the United States. (See Michel Chossudovsky, The “Demonization” of Muslims and the Battle for Oil, Global Research, Jannuary 4, 2007).
A large share of the World’s oil lies in Muslim lands. The objective of the US led war is to steal and appropriate those oil reserves. And to achieve this objective, these countries  are targeted: war, covert ops, economic destabilization, regime change.

The American Inquisition

A consensus building process to wage war is similar to the Spanish inquisition. It requires social subordination, the political consensus cannot be questioned. In its contemporary version, the inquisition requires and demands submission to the notion that war is a means to spreading Western values and democracy.

A good versus evil dichotomy prevails. We must go after the bad guys.

War is peace.

The ‘big lie’ has now become the truth … and the truth has become a ‘conspiracy theory’.

Those who are committed to the Truth are categorized as “Terrorists”.

According to Paul Craig Roberts (2011), the conspiracy theory concept “has undergone Orwellian redefinition”…
    A “conspiracy theory” no longer means an event explained by a conspiracy.  Instead, it now means any explanation, or even a fact, that is out of step with the government’s explanation and that of its media pimps….

    In other words, as truth becomes uncomfortable for government and its Ministry of Propaganda, truth is redefined as conspiracy theory, by which is meant an absurd and laughable explanation that we should ignore.
Fiction becomes fact.

Investigative journalism has been scrapped.

Factual analysis of social, political and economic issues is a conspiracy theory because it challenges a consensus which is based on a lie.

[Continued...]
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

http://monetary.org
http://schalkenbach.org
 

 

Geolibertarian

  • Mega InfoWarrior
  • *****
  • 1118
    Posts
  • 9/11 WAS AN INSIDE JOB! www.911truth.org
To call these blame-freedom-firsters intellectual cowards, moral hypocrites and authoritarian control-freaks would be a gross understatement:

http://www.prisonplanet.com/bloggers-compared-to-isis-during-congressional-hearing.html

‘Bloggers’ Compared to ISIS During Congressional Hearing

People who challenge establishment narratives online likened with terrorist organization

Paul Joseph Watson
Prison Planet.com
April 16, 2015

Bloggers, conspiracy theorists and people who challenge establishment narratives on the Internet were all likened to ISIS terrorists during a chilling Congressional hearing which took place yesterday.

     https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2LzvuiLbUvM



The hearing, hosted by the House Foreign Relations Committee, was titled “Confronting Russia’s Weaponization of Information,” and accused Russian state broadcaster RT of weaponizing “conspiracy theories” to spread propaganda.

One of the speakers giving testimony was former RT host Liz Wahl, who made a public spectacle of quitting Russian state media last year in an incident stage-managed by neo-con James Kirchick, himself a former employee of Radio Free Europe – a state media outlet.

Remarking that the Internet provided a platform for “fringe voices and extremists,” Wahl characterized people who challenge establishment narratives as a “cult”.

“They mobilize and they feel they’re part of some enlightened fight against the establishment….they find a platform to voice their deranged views,” said Wahl.

Referring to comments made in January by US Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) chief Andrew Lack, who characterized RT as a threat on the same level as ISIS and Boko Haram, Wahl said the comparison was justified.

“By using the Internet to mobilize people that feel displaced, that feel like they’ve been on the outskirts of society, and give them a place where they can find a sense of belonging, and maybe make a difference in their own way, and it’s a problem,” she said.

Wahl went on to bemoan the fact that conspiracy theorists were “shaping the discussion online, on message boards, on Twitter, on social media,” before asserting that the web had become a beacon of “disinformation, false theories, people that are just trying to make a name for themselves, bloggers or whatever, that have absolutely no accountability for the truth, that are able to rile up a mass amount of people online.”

Committee Chairman Ed Royce then proceeded to accuse people on YouTube of using “raw violence” to advance conspiracy theories.

Peter Pomerantsev, of the London-based Legatum Institute, followed up by claiming that conspiracy theories were no longer “fringe” and were now driving the success of Jean-Marie Le Pen in France, before lamenting the fact that conspiracy theories were challenging the “global order” and threatening to undermine global institutions.

All three individuals that gave testimony are staunch critics of Russia, leading Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) to wish “we had at least one other person to balance out this in a way that perhaps could’ve compared our system to the Russian system, to find out where that truth is, just how bad that is.”

[Continued...]

-----------------------------------------

^^  Translation: their lies aren't working anymore because they've been caught lying so many times in the past, and so now they're whining like spoiled children and calling people names.
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

http://monetary.org
http://schalkenbach.org
 

 

Al Bundy

  • Global Moderator
  • Mega InfoWarrior
  • *****
  • 1460
    Posts
http://www.prisonplanet.com/report-says-50-of-people-are-conspiracy-theorists-youre-probably-one-of-them.html

Report Says 50% of People are Conspiracy Theorists: You’re Probably One of Them

Elizabeth Renter
Prison Planet.com
May 20, 2014


Image: Thinker (Wiki Commons).

Do you believe the government actively works to suppress alternative medicine? Do you think they already know cell phones cause cancer and are simply refusing to do anything about it? Do you use nutritional supplements? If you responded yes to any of these questions, you could be the type of person that a new JAMA study paints as a simple-minded “medical conspiracy kook”.

Both the new study and the corresponding report from Reuters Health seem to look down on people like you and I (as readers of NaturalSociety), as if we don’t know any better -as if understanding medicine in the “right” way is a matter of intelligence and it’s not that we’ve come to our own ideas through research, but in an effort to make things simpler for our feeble minds.

    “Science in general – medicine in particular – is complicated and cognitively challenging because you have to carry around a lot of uncertainty,” said lead author J. Eric Oliver. “To talk about epidemiology and probability theories is difficult to understand as opposed to ‘if you put this substance in your body, it’s going to be bad.’”

To come to such conclusions about a large segment of the U.S. (and global) population, Oliver and his team surveyed 1,351 adults. Participants were asked to read “six popular medical conspiracy theories” and indicate whether they have heard of them and whether or not they agreed with them.

The questions included things like:

     Cell phones causing cancer and the government refusing to act
     GMOs being used for population control
     The government suppressing alternative medicine
     Vaccinations causing autism
     HIV intentionally being sent into African American communities

Nearly half (49%) of participants agreed with at least one of the theories. About 37% thought the government actively works to suppress alternative medical treatments and 20% believed vaccinations cause autism.

    “Although it is common to disparage adherents of conspiracy theories as a delusional fringe of paranoid cranks, our data suggest that medical conspiracy theories are widely known, broadly endorsed, and highly predictive of many common health behaviors,” reads the study in an ever-so-respectful tone.

The researchers indicate that those who believe in these “conspiracies” are more likely to take herbal supplements, clear evidence that they are idiots, the study seems to suggest.

“For people who don’t have a lot of education, it’s relatively easy to reject the scientific way of thinking about things,” said Oliver. He suggests doctors get in there and rectify the situation, educating their patients about the “truth”.

As the Alliance for Natural Health reports, the mockery of natural health claims, treatments, and theories is following a predictable path:

[Continued...]

Conspiracy theorist ? That`s me, folks. I accidental told on work,  ;D
 

 

Powered by EzPortal