Are Conspiracy Theories more widely popular than they used to be?
- Thread starter Conway_Stewart
- Start date
Brill, you forget that Bush Sr. was Director of the CIA years before he became President (not that I'm saying he was the culprit).
Depends on what definition you use for conspiracy theory. The popular one is derogatory, however, this site discusses various other definitions => http://22november1963.org.uk/what-is-a-conspiracy-theory
The JFK Assassination Conspiracy is not based on blind faith or belief (wacky theories excluded), but serious analysis, experiments, research and study of the available evidence as well as declassified files since 1963.
Above, I quoted the conclusion of the House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1978 that JFK was probably murdered as a result of a conspiracy by another gunman although unknown. Not only did they arrive at that conclusion with science (acoustical evidence), they found holes in the Warren Commission Report in other areas, such as finding that Jack Ruby's underworld connections were indeed significant. Then later, as I've shown in a link above, the Chief Counsel for the HSCA finally concluded that the CIA withheld important information from the WC and the HSCA that would have revealed other leads or investigative direction, if not facts that weigh in favor of Oswald's innocence if not outright exoneration.
The conspiracy crowd do not all agree on who the plotters are because a) there are several possibilities but most likely that a few acted in concert*, and b) confusion between those who covered it up, and those who murdered the President, which probably were separate and distinct acts, the former being under the guise of following orders or acting in the defense of National Security. *(Most likely the Mob with CIA rogue agents and anti-Castro exiles, and I've discussed some of the evidence in other threads)
However, you should know that a conspiracy can exist even when you do not know who the plotters or shooters are. All that is required is circumstantial evidence from which an inference can be drawn (see Vincent Bugliosi quote above). This is how the HSCA concluded that JFK was probably murdered as a result of a conspiracy.
This is also a legal principle. To partially quote the 3rd edition of the Dictionary of Canadian Law (Dukelow), page 92:
A conspiracy must involve more than one person, even though all the conspirators may not either be identified, or be capable of being convicted (from the case of United States of America v. Dynar)
One can even conclude conspiracy (or otherwise) merely by applying the facts to common sense.
You applied common sense to disprove the 9/11 controlled-demolition debate (one e.g. being that the towers did not collapse at free fall because the unimpeded debris clouds fell faster and that WAS free fall).
You can also apply common sense to the JFK debate and argue that the evidence is inconsistent with the Single Bullet Theory (SBT) by a lone gunman firing from behind just as shown on the Zapruder film (e.g. 2 reactions too close together to come from a single shooter, or the violent back and left motion of the President to have come from behind including the brain and bone matter expelled to the rear left side on the trunk).
But that's just the beginning.
"Louie Louie" by the Kingsmen was kept out of the #1 position on Billboard Hot 100 immediately after the JFK assassination, it was only #2 for 5 straight weeks because of FBI and CIA interference.
J. Edgar Hoover was a big fan of Dale & Grace, the CIA head preferred The Singing Nun. They both despised Sinatra as well and had Frank Jr. kidnapped two weeks after they got rid of JFK because of his clandestine relationship with Barbara Bush.
J. Edgar Hoover was a big fan of Dale & Grace, the CIA head preferred The Singing Nun. They both despised Sinatra as well and had Frank Jr. kidnapped two weeks after they got rid of JFK because of his clandestine relationship with Barbara Bush.
I know the song but what's it about to have caused the CIA and FBI to keep it out of #1? I doubt they would get involved just because they prefer one group over another. Didn't know that they were behind Frankie Jr.'s kidnapping either but some say it didn't help that JFK was fucking Cord Meyer's wife (Cord Meyer was a CIA operative). Mary Pinchot Meyer died with a gun shot wound to the head while jogging in a park. I met the author of the new book who's dad was a CIA agent, about her death.
I will make a separate thread about the very first conspiracy theory every publicized and it may surprise you.
And their lack of logic makes it right for them to be derogatory.
LOL. It is based purely on belief. The theories don't provide any real evidence for their claims other than claiming there are flaws with the accepted story.
If you want to believe that there was some conspiracy behind it (or multiple conspiracies at the same time) then go for it. Like religion they don't pose a problem unless you infringe on the rights of others. But like religion, the claims aren't based on actual evidence but simply faith that it is the answer.
They spent a couple years analyzing the song and couldn't figure out if it was offensive.
https://terrinakamura.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/2_part0146-copy3.jpg?w=650
Maybe with the 9/11 controlled-demolition theory but not the JFK Assassination conspiracy. One easy reference, if you can find it, is a short book by Stewart Galanor called COVER-UP, a mathematician, who destroys the official version with very sound logic and deductive reasoning, merely by examining the SAME evidence used by the Warren Commission. Easy reading for anyone.
It's obvious that you have not delved into it or studied it. The JFK Conspiracy Theory (that it wasn't Oswald or Oswald alone) is truly based on facts.
If you've truly studied the JFK Assassination, rather than speak in generalities, you will see that the conclusions about a lone assassin are illogical and baseless - that the evidence does not support the lone gunman THEORY, is faulty if not tainted, or otherwise points to the opposite conclusion.
Remember, first and foremost, the assassination is a murder case. We aren't talking about the theory of relativity vs. some other physical theory or phenomenon. A murder case requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt to convict someone (the courts have said that beyond a reasonable doubt requires a confidence level of at least 95% that someone is guilty). Murder cases are tried based on direct evidence and/or circumstantial evidence which can be in various forms. An excellent book (trilogy volume) on an examination of the evidence is by Barry Krusch, author of IMPOSSIBLE: The Case Against Lee Harvey Oswald. He has a few $ challenges that you can indulge if you truly believe Oswald did it.
Here's a declassified FBI document that puts a wrench in the lone assassin theory or official version. It's a fact, not just an empty belief.
Unfortunately, the FBI under Hoover wasn't interested in finding the true killers of JFK or coming down on organized crime as they should have under the Kennedys.
@ Basketcase - Logical argument for the JFK Murder Conspiracy
Here's a video of Barry Krusch, using evidence from the two investigations (Warren Commission and much later, the House Select Committee on Assassinations), as well as quoting Steward Galanor's analysis, and Barry's own, to disprove Bill O'Reilly or the Warren Commission's own conclusion, that a lone assassin did it firing from the 6th floor window of the Texas School Book Depository. Just one example of the conspiracy angle as not a wild belief as you say, devoid of facts or logic.
Here's a video of Barry Krusch, using evidence from the two investigations (Warren Commission and much later, the House Select Committee on Assassinations), as well as quoting Steward Galanor's analysis, and Barry's own, to disprove Bill O'Reilly or the Warren Commission's own conclusion, that a lone assassin did it firing from the 6th floor window of the Texas School Book Depository. Just one example of the conspiracy angle as not a wild belief as you say, devoid of facts or logic.
I met another flat earth believer today. NASA are assholes who are hiding the truth from us, simple people. There was no flights to the space, much less to the Moon.
I couldn't help myself and said "so, hundreds of people were able to keep this secret? I bet you two fucking people wouldn't be able to keep it". He couldn't answer that but attempted to spray me with further propaganda.
Degeneracy is through the fucking roof. These people remind me those who were hurt by women and now are mad at women. These are mad at the world and its order. And internet sure as hell feeds it instead of halting it.
I wonder, how many of them are formally educated and how far did they go? The ones I met had college degree at most.
I couldn't help myself and said "so, hundreds of people were able to keep this secret? I bet you two fucking people wouldn't be able to keep it". He couldn't answer that but attempted to spray me with further propaganda.
Degeneracy is through the fucking roof. These people remind me those who were hurt by women and now are mad at women. These are mad at the world and its order. And internet sure as hell feeds it instead of halting it.
I wonder, how many of them are formally educated and how far did they go? The ones I met had college degree at most.
As I pointed out before, finding flaws in the accepted theory does not suddenly make alternative theories correct (and I use "alternative" in the Kellyanne Conway context). I notice that you are not even suggesting another theory of events, merely complaining about the 'official' story. If another theory better fit the evidence and had less flaws it would become the accepted one.
And yes, if you want to discuss this in a legal case context, in order to have the previous conviction (Warren) overturned, you need to provide evidence substantial enough to convict other people.
I don't think your right about this.
If a murder conviction is appealed, the appeal is based on the merit of evidence pertaining to that case, not on the necessity of finding who the real murderer is.
Here's the problem:
People used the amazing freedom of expression the internet created to post a lot of really stupid things on YouTube, and a lot of other people were actually stupid enough to believe it.
It's both hard to argue against freedom of expression, and hard to take seriously anything expressed on YouTube.
People used the amazing freedom of expression the internet created to post a lot of really stupid things on YouTube, and a lot of other people were actually stupid enough to believe it.
It's both hard to argue against freedom of expression, and hard to take seriously anything expressed on YouTube.
I would say that conspiracies are more common than they used to be. Technological innovation, global interconnectedness, the increased mobility of capital, and global emphasis on weakening borders facilitate conspiratory activity.
People who don't subscribe to mainstream media rhetoric will always be called stupid or crazy by those that do. Being a contrarian doesn't always mean that you are right, but I would say those that contradict the mainstream values of the day are right with regards to several major global political issues.
People who don't subscribe to mainstream media rhetoric will always be called stupid or crazy by those that do. Being a contrarian doesn't always mean that you are right, but I would say those that contradict the mainstream values of the day are right with regards to several major global political issues.
So you are admitting that the conspiracy theories do not have another well supported theory, just complaints about the accepted one.
BTW. Convictions are overturned if there is evidence of prosecutorial misconduct, an error in implementation of the law, or new evidence that exonerates the convicted. None of those apply to these asinine conspiracy theories.
Lol....put your cock back in your pants, let me know how you came up with that gem.
I'm not arguing that. I was responding to this:
We aren't talking about a science experiment here but I need to remind you that the HSCA concluded conspiracy based on the acoustical analysis of a dictabelt tape on a police motorcycle as well as other circumstantial evidence (eg. WC hid the fact Ruby had extensive ties to the Mob, whereas the HSCA found those ties as "significant"). The HSCA didn't say who were the shooters but said that organized crime had both the motive and means to carry out the assassination.
If the lone assassin theory or scenario fails, then there's only one scenario left => conspiracy.
No you don't. Eg. O.J. lawyers didn't provide a suspect for the murder of his wife and Ron Goldman. (If Oswald had a trial today, they probably if not easily would have established reasonable doubt. You don't need to know who the shooters were or their paymasters.)
P.S. The Warren Commission was not a trial. There was NO conviction. No adversarial format. No reasonable doubt. Worse - it was based on limited information fed by the Kennedy haters at the time - the CIA and J. Edgar Hoover. I previously posted a link to Chief Counsel Robert Blakey of the HSCA who said the CIA lied to the Commitee and withheld information also from the WC which would have likely changed the direction of the investigation.
P.P.S. I noticed that you originally grouped the Ancient Alien Pyramid building theory as a conspiracy theory, but how is that a conspiracy theory (whether one believes in it or not)? Where's the conspiracy there?
