Conspiracies only exist in the minds of crazy people

[linazelle]

...if you buy into the shame-based definition by the very people who would conspire against you.

Anti-conspiracists want people to believe that there are no conspiracies--that it's impossible to get a group of people together to act based on secret purposes. They want you to believe that conspiracies can only thrive in dark rooms with drawn curtains and that only a few people are involved. And, oh yeah, believe that everybody on the "internets" is a wack job despite the fact that neither you nor I fit that bill.

Believe the conspiracists and conspiracy is as dirty a word as "liberal" to is to the right wing.

But look at the word's meaning.

The prefix con- is defined as meaning "against".

The word "spire" from which the suffix is derived, means to "sprout" literally from "a small point or top"
as in the tapering top of a tower or steeple.

So a conspiracy, then, is a growth of action against something--with secrecy.

Why is it so difficult to believe that there are people actively working against the best interests of this country in favor of their own personal interests? It's human nature really. Our forefathers warned against the pursuit of personal interests in the government--which is why they wrote checks and balances into the now-tattered Constitution.

Conspiracy theories usually get shot down based on the notion that they have to be carried out in total secrecy. Not true.

Only a few may be privy to the total agenda, but many parts of a scheme may be common knowledge.

People watch Faux "news" where vital information is routinely ommitted or withheld and assume that everything is on the up and up. They unwittingly buy into the conspiracy and actually become part of the web of deceit as supporters. Witness the conned viewers who believe the news fantasies created by fax blasts/White House-paid journalists/PR firms stemming from right wing think tanks while the right wing steals us all blind.

I think it's time to put the tinfoil hats away and step into the cold, harsh light of day.

We aren't crazy.

Conspiracies are far more common than we'd like to think. With Bu$hCo's conspiracy, there's a common theme. Whether they are robbing social security, funneling money to defense contractors, killing our military people, or stacking the decks in the voting game...the only purpose is to loot the treasury and make themselves exempt from the laws that would make them pay for doing that.

As Randi Rhodes said once: "Just because it's a theory, doesn't mean there isn't a conspiracy." (or something like that..)

[Benhurst]

1. And what is the government's version of what happened on

9/11? A conspiracy theory. Perhaps true. Perhaps not. But a conspiracy theory nonetheless.

[EVDebs]

64. They didn't use a Lone Gunman this time out, breaking with tradition.

[stepnw1f]

2. DId Ya See That Thread Yesterday

I wanted to puke... what bullshit was that? I'd say the Abramoff thing really is getting to some. Pass the popcorn, it's getting fun to watch.:popcorn:

[linazelle]

3. I didn't see the thread you mention. What thread was that? nt

[stepnw1f]

5. Somebody Posted a Poll

Asking whether DU was full of conspiracy theorists. By reading some replies, it was quit clear that was the intent to point that out by a person that always seem to bitch a lot about people here at DU.

[stepnw1f]

25. Here It Is

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=53875&mesg_id=53875

[linazelle]

41. What's funny is that you look at the responses and only a small

number of people actually kept that large thread afloat. That's a HUGH1!!11! sign of a conspiracy. :rofl:

[CJCRANE]

4. The Holocaust

was a conspiracy theory until after WWII.

History's shown that conspiracies happen all the time that we don't know about until years later.

Maybe someone needs to publish a list of "conspiracy facts"...

[linazelle]

7. Yes. It's amazing what real conspiracies look like (the Holocaust)

Watergate, the Arkansas Project...in hindsight. People want to hang onto the notion that conspiracies are small, and that they are totally secret. That does not seem to fit in any of the above examples--all known conspiracies.

[Marie26]

87. But now there's a conspiracy theory

that the Holocaust was all made up to justify the creation of Israel. Many Arab nations believe this. Is this a valid theory too? Remember all the conspiracy theories Republicans used to spin about Bill Clinton (he killed Vince Foster, etc. etc.). Most people at DU would probably agree these theories are false. Sometimes a "conspiracy theory" is right, often it's wrong. And sometimes, there's a grain of truth surrounded by false conclusions. Probably the best thing is to debate it & make up your own mind - which DU allows you to do.

[HR_Pufnstuf]

6. I agree. Abramoff, damn conspiracist.

nt

[BurtWorm]

8. The "spir" in conspiracy means "breath"

as it does in "respiration" and "inspiration." The word conspiracy conjures the image of people whispering in each others' ears.

[linazelle]

12. Really? Where did you find that definition?

I looked in a dictionary of etymology and could only find spire. I think the two have to be related, still. If you breathe in someone's ear/aka whisper, aren't you spreading/branching/sprouting a communication? Seems like it to me.

[RaleighNCDUer]

15. They are connected. The "spire" in a church is symbolic

of the voices of the worshippers reaching up to the heavens, where voice = breath.

Con-spir-acy is an act (-acy) of whispering (spir) against (con).

[BurtWorm]

17. Sure, that's what it's about.

Whispering and plotting.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?db=mwlaw&q=conspire

Main Entry: con·spire
Pronunciation: k&n-'spIr
Function: intransitive verb
Inflected Forms: con·spired; con·spir·ing
Etymology: Latin conspirare to be in harmony, to join in an unlawful agreement, from com- together + spirare to breathe
: to join in a conspiracy —compare SOLICIT


Source: Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.

[Nite Owl]

9. This group in power projects everything

Whenever they say the left is something they are really the ones that are

They claim fiscal responsibily yet not a balanced budget in sight ever from a repuke administration

They claim to be patriots yet who disregards the constitution and the lives and well being of the troops

They claim Christianity and act in direct opposition to the tenets of it

They say the words family values and yet do things that do not provide for the well being of families

They say tax cuts for the middle class and our taxes have gone up not down when you add in the property tax increases that the states and counties needed to meet ends from their cuts

You could go on and on, whenever they blame someone on the left it means that's what they are covering up themselves so it seems logical that they are the conspirators. Without a doubt they have a plan, it's really just putting all the loose ends together and it becomes obvious.

[linazelle]

11. You are so right. It gets tiring looking at lie after lie....you wonder

when people will wake up and see them for what they are. But, they continue their conspiracy and call us crazy for identifying them for who they are.

[applegrove]

26. Right. They are calling the people who do not trust Rove & al - crazies,

when in fact it is the nefarious political arm of the WH that is in deep shit with the law.

It is only untrue if you 1) say it isn't a theory 2) when proof comes out to prove it is wrong - you deny it.

9/11 being planned by Bush WH is a conspiracy theory. As to 9/11 being allowed to happen or Abramoff, or Rove, or lying the US into war - well there is much proof of those things on the side of the dems. The pattern is what you watch for with nefarious. The patterns holds true that they have "mythed" their way and "feared" there way into war & elections.

[AuntiBush]

61. Boy. That Just About Says It All, Nite Owl.

Great response!

[Double T]

10. Washington, D.C. is constructed of conspiracies made by.......

the politicians. Conspiracies are the stuff governments are made of AND you are CRAZY if you DON'T believe that!!!!!!

[MountainLaurel]

13. Right now I'm reading

A book about the history of U.S. and British involvement in the Middle East. It's amazing to see how underhanded the whole process has been and scary to note how many people who stood in opposition to Anglo-American plans to completely control the oil supply ended up dying in plane crashes or in "mysterious circumstances."

[Ready4Change]

14. Start a list of proven past conspiracys here:

Me first.

Nixon/Watergate.

[RaleighNCDUer]

16. Teapot Dome.

Republicans selling out national security to oil interests.

The more things change, the more they remain the same.

[jus_the_facts]

18. The JFK and RFK and MLK,JR. assassinations....

:(

[jus_the_facts]

20. I'll go ahead and say Paul Wellstone's death too....

:tinfoilhat: :shrug:

[Ready4Change]

36. Suspected by many. Considered not proven by most.

I'm suggesting a list of bonafide, past conspiracies, proven to have actually existed and been put into action.

While I too find Wellstones crash highly suspicious, no court of law has ruled it an assassination. Thus, it is in the tinfoil range, where some think it was a conspiracy and others called it something else, like an accident in this case.

Nixon/Watergate, OTOH, is a fact. Multiple people planned the Watergate break-in. Multiple people executed it, multiple people tried to keep it secret. And enough of it came out and has been verified to ensure all that it did all happen.

[Ready4Change]

42. I'd give this the nod. Some might not.

Many people believe these were acts by single nutjobs. And courts back them up. Personally, I think its pretty clear that more was involved in both of these than single gunmen.

Sadly, we may never know 100% for sure. But I think this tips over from speculation into fact, even without court verification.

[Al-CIAda]

19. 9/11

[Ready4Change]

38. Gotta apply tinfoil here.

I too agree that much of 9/11 stinks of conspiracy. Personally I'm a LIHOPer.

However, no court has ruled culpability by this Administration.

You could say that it is the culmination of an AQ conspiracy. But to me, a conspiracy is people on the inside working secretly against their own system, rather than outsiders working against the same system. In my mind, AQ executing 9/11 was a plot or crime, but not a conspiracy.

In due time, should a valid investigation prove MIHOP or LIHOP, this would be at the top of my true conspiracies list.

[rman]

21. iran/contra

[Ready4Change]

39. Bingo.

Definite plot, planned by high officials, taken into actual execution. Then discovered, revealed and detail in court, although perhaps not prosecuted to as full an extent as it deserved.

But just the sort of thing I was looking for. Thanks!

[jus_the_facts]

22. Voter Fraud from 2000 to today.

[Ready4Change]

40. Again, gotta apply tinfoil.

2000 stinks. 2004 stinks. But nothings proved. I think there's some true conspiracy there. But courts haven't spoken, and heads haven't rolled.

I got my fingers crossed on this one. But until it's proven it's speculation, not fact.

[linazelle]

43. Nothing's been proven from he 2000 election? Votes weren't

There's proof that the voter rolls were purged in FL; that votes for Gore disappeared during uploading and obscure candidates absorbed other votes disproportionate to the population. Same thing in 2004 but only worse with the exit poll discrepancies. And you know what? Now BushCo speaks out about elections in Iraq and other countries and all of a sudden they point elsewhere at fraud--sort of to validate what's going on here and to hide their vote-stealing conspiracy. It disgusts me.

[Ready4Change]

45. Oh, I'm with ya. But the courts aren't.

At this point, the history books aren't going to say it was a true conspiracy. They'll say it was a jumbled mess. That, in hindsight, the SCOTUS made an improper decision, but at the time that's just how the dice rolled.

Perhaps in time real facts will make it clear that 2000 was as much a true conspiracy as was Watergate. But we aren't there yet.

Fingers crossed.

[linazelle]

23. Somebody mentioned the Holocaust earlier. nt

[Ready4Change]

44. Dual conspiracies, I think.

I think the first conspiracy was the Nazis conducting the Holocaust, at first without even the knowledge of many within their own organization. It is a conspiracy, that became common knowledge and an actual industry, and then was recognized as the abomination it truely was.

The second is the movement to claim the Holocaust never happened. Lots of people working on THAT agenda.

[Balbus]

24. What's your definition of proven?

I don't recall any other indictments or convictions for RFK, JFK, or MLK. I don't recall any indictments or convictions for 9/11 that would prove a conspiracy. I don't recall any indictments or convictions for 2000 or 2004 election fraud that would prove a conspiracy. (Oh, wait, there is this: http://www.belleville.com/mld/newsdemocrat/news/local/12017344.htm But I'm sure that's not what people mean.)

If by "proven" you mean "proven in my mind" then I guess all those would apply. :shrug:

[applegrove]

27. 2000 election going to someone other than the person elected is well

proven. So too 2004 election being lost on hearts and minds and swifboats & to the "war president" - well there is a ton of evidence of that. Not so much diebold. But all other manner of gerymandering and game playing.

RFK, MLK, JFK - no proof. Just theories.


Abramoff, Rove, lyed into war in Iraq, creating hate a personcution complex in the religious right, ... lots of proof there. Torture, neocons liking the social experiment that crisis brings - lots of proof there.

[Balbus]

33. All of it are theories...

Until someone has been proven accountable. And nobody has in any of your examples.

[applegrove]

50. Patterns of behaviour are proof. All the ones I say have good evidence

backing them up are proved. Twenty, thirty pieces of action proves something. As to the tiny meaning - perhaps not so much (were all the neocons trying to lye america into war or did they really think it was imminent? The answer to that lies somewhere in who is the super-nefarious out of the whole neocon cluster****. Some of them more nefarious than others - eh)

But I think in the examples I gave it was about gaining power for a small group of elites. Correct me if I am wrong but the GOP says to each of the accusations.. "aw it is just politics'.

[applegrove]

56. GOP not proven accountable for turning the 2000 election into a race

to the end in the judiciary - and banking on Gore to give up when something he loves got so sordid? No proof of that? What about the Supreme Court decisions and the invasion of Florida by well placed Republican operatives?

How many GOP flew down to fight the judicial and anti-electoral fight for the WH?

Sometimes a pattern of 200 linked events shows reality.

One or two - less than 6 events that could be linked is iffy.

Police use 9 as a number.

Oh - I think the news stories alone on Abramoff convinced him there was nothing to do but bargan. So was he not guilty (in reality) until he made the plea deal? Did all those events he participated in and more often than not lead.. did none of the events happen until he admitted it?

Please!

[Balbus]

74. And who has been held accountable for that?

A conspiracy implies many people - but I'm just asking for one name. Tell me one person that has been charged (much less convicted) of malfeasance in the 2000 elections which in the mind of the court caused the electoral votes that should've gone to Gore in turn went to Bush. Just one. Not he said, she said - not I think this I think that - a person that has been indicted by any court for breaking a law in connection with the 2000 elections.

on edit: Not that I, myself, am implying the right decision was made - just that there were no laws actually broken by anyone. Misinterpreted, maybe, but no malfeasance.

[applegrove]

75. There could be a conspiracy to get the election even when they didn't have

the numbers. A crown prosecutor is not needed. Just ample evidence that people get together to do something. Get power, break a law, destroy someone, etc. Could be one or all. Apparently no electoral law is worth the spirit it was written in anymore - we see that as dems - and we now say: okay - these guys play dirty - we have to rewrite the laws.

Regulations (laws) happen because of too much power. Look at laws created on collusion, racketeering, anti-combines law - all the give voice to a group with too much in the way of power and not living the spirit of the law.

You are saying there has to be an inditement and that is not the case. A conspiracy theory is a theory, involving more than one person, that proves to be wrong but is believed. A theory is just that - an admitted observation that must await more evidence. A belief that the GOP will rape the spirit of any electoral law it can get away with? Is that a conspiracy theory or is there a pattern of evidence? There is a pattern. Why we see the pitter patter of little democratic feet at the state level trying to fix election laws with the only power they have. Nobody will go to jail. But new laws will be enacted, new regulations. Because a problem was identified. A problem that goes against the spirit of the law and the democracy.

So no prosecutor involved - yet the problem/issue is identified. A group of GOP in the political arm have no morals. Will do anything for power. That is a trend, and a reality. So we try to fix it. It involves a whole pile of people thinking the same way. We highlight it. Get support and fix it.

Florida fits.

No need for a prosecutor to give an up/down vote on if a theory is a wrong conspiracy or not. That is not universal test. The universal test is reality and all the evidence pointing in one direction. Thousands and thousands of incidents make up a pattern.

[Balbus]

83. but this sub thread was asking for "proven" conspiracy theories.

And the 2000 elections have not been "proven" to be a real conspiracy - it's still just theory.

[Ready4Change]

93. Yep

I agree that, just because there hasn't been a court case doesn't mean there hasn't been a conspiracy. In fact, you could say that the mark of a truly successful conspiracy is that no one knows about it at all.

However, I'm looking for proven conspiracies. The reason why is to use them as a counter to people who link "conspiracy" with "nutball fallacy."

The message is: Conspiracies DO exist. They have been put into action, and have had world spanning effects. Sure, there are some nutball conspiracy ideas floating around. But SOME of the ideas floating around aren't nutball at all, and in time may be very well exposed in courts of law.

Here in this thread we can see the spectrum of that. Hard, known, verified conspiracies, pie in the sky theories, and many, many in the middle with both believers and non.

Because of the nugget of truth within, we mustn't allow all to be ignored as a category.

[Ready4Change]

47. I agree, hard to say.

I'm seeking what I'd called true, proven conspiracies, rather than pie in the sky suppositions.

One clear one, I think, is my first example. Nixon/Watergate. Courts say it happened. That many people, right to the President, knew about it and kept it secret. It was not only planned, but it was put into action, then a coverup was attempted.

Something clearly at the other end of the spectrum would be, to me, the theory that a group Nazis are alive today, operating secret flying saucers out of a secret base in the center of the Earth, which they access via a giant cave opening in Antartica. It's certainly a hypothesis, but I'm not on enough medication to buy into it.

JFK and MLKs assassinations may be good examples of cases right in the middle. To me, I'd say they are true conspiracies. The courts don't agree. I'm abashed to say I don't know enough about RFK's to make a call. So, for at least 2 of these three, I'm going with proven in my mind.

OTOH, while I also feel something is quite rotten about 9/11, I don't feel enough information has been revealed to tip it into the true conspiracy column. It's close, in my mind.

[MountainLaurel]

29. Allende

CIA involvement in Latin America, Africa, and pretty much everywhere else on the planet. The use of anticommunism efforts as an excuse to control world oil reserves. Operation Northwoods. COINTELPRO. The Library Awareness Program. FBI spying on civil rights leaders, folk singers, peaceniks, and anyone else considered "subversive."

[Octafish]

34. Iraq-gate

[Ready4Change]

48. Not sure exactly what action/era you are refering to.

Is that picture from the time many claim the CIA put Saddam into power? I don't dispute the truth of that, but I call it a plot, or a geopolitic action. I just don't think there was that much of a secret about it. The CIA may have been acting covertly, but I don't think there was any real secret about our intentions.

OTOH, I do think that the Bush administration, in cherry picking intelligence to support their own pre-drawn conclusions and thus rope our nation into the Iraq War, conducted a true conspiracy. I hope that in time it will be proven and that key figures will do jail time.

[Monkey see Monkey Do]

58. That's Rummy shaking Saddam's hand in (IIRC) 1983

Iraq-gate refers to the covert arming and support of Iraq through the 80's, up until Saddam invaded Kuwait, despite his appauling human-rights record.

see - http://www.cjr.org/archives.asp?url=/93/2/iraqgate.asp

Alan Friedman's "Spider's Web" is a good book on the subject, covering the US, UK & Italian (BNL) involvement.

[Ready4Change]

68. Thanks for the info.

.

[rman]

76. Operation Gladio

http://demopedia.democraticunderground.com/index.php/Operation_Gladio

[rman]

77. Operation Mockingbird

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Mockingbird

[rman]

78. COINTELPRO

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cointelpro

[Ready4Change]

84. My difficulties with the above 3 items...

Is that they are actions by organizations (CIA, FBI) that are supposed to be, in many ways, secret in the first place.

To me, a conspiracy is people doing things in secret who aren't supposed to be doing secret things. Maybe I'm just being nit picky, but if these above items are conspiracies, maybe they should just be rolled up inside two big ones, the CIA and the FBI?

[rman]

89. Gladio is considered "clandestine" - not just covert,

and all of them, especially the other two are arguably against the interests of The People. I see your point, but i think anything covert done by govt agencies that isn't about upholding the law but about subversion, false-flag, provocation, disruption etc is not something that government agencies should be doing to citizens. If the situation would be the reverse then it would by official government standards qualify as conspiracy, and i think the rules they make should apply to them as well.

you say: "To me, a conspiracy is people doing things in secret who aren't supposed to be doing secret things."

I think that's not an accurate description of conspiracy. Even ordinary folk can do certain things in secret without it being conspiracy. If you secretly plan a large birthday party for a friend or family member, that's not conspiracy. Secrecy is required there (you're 'supposed' to do it in secret) because you don't want to spoil the surprise.

As far as i know for the law, conspiracy is when more then one person plan to do something that is illegal. Delay for instance is indicted not just for money laundering but also for conspiracy to do money laundering.

[Ready4Change]

94. I forgot to include Gladio.

BTW, I wasn't aware of it until I read your top post.

It certainly sounds like something I'd include in a list of proven conspiracies. I don't know enough about it to say 100%, but I'm willing to go with you on it.

[stickdog]

80. Enron price gouging. WTC air quality EPA cover up. Tobacco & Asbestos

"scientists" and executives swearing up and down that their products were safe.

Agent Orange.

The Gulf of Tonkin incident.

The Bay of Pigs Invasion.

The Manhattan Project.

The Holocaust.

The Tuskeegee Experiments.

The Gunpowder Plot.

...

...

...

[Ready4Change]

85. Some good ones in there. n/t

[stickdog]

81. Wikipedia's list pf proven conspiracies.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_proven_conspiracies

[rman]

90. that's almost worthy of a thread on its own

1810 to 1850 the Underground Railroad

The Underground Railroad was a network of clandestine routes by which African slaves in the United States escaped to freedom, with the aid of abolitionists.

--

Abolitionism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolitionism

Abolitionism was a political movement that sought to abolish the practice of slavery and the worldwide slave trade. It began during the period of the Enlightenment and grew to large proportions in several nations during the 19th century, largely succeeding in its goals.

========

2001 September 11 attacks
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/9/11_conspiracy_theories

<snip>
A number of other theories as to who conspired have formed though which question this account.

--

9/11 conspiracy theories

<snip>

The 9/11 Commission

* Vice President Dick Cheney initially opposed a congressional commission into the 9/11 attacks, suggesting it would take vital resources and personnel away from the war on terrorism.
* The 9/11 Commission investigation began 411 days after the attacks, whereas the investigations into the attack on Pearl Harbor and the assassination of JFK began after only 9 and 7 days, respectively.
* The commission was given a startup appropriation of only $3 million and made a subsequent funding request for $11 million in order to meet its target date for completion. As a point of comparison, $50 million was set aside to investigate the destruction of the space shuttle Columbia, and $40 million was set aside to investigate Bill Clinton's lying about his indiscretions with Monica Lewinsky.

<more>

[linazelle]

91. Very good. But how do they skip from Ceasar to GHW Bush?

Gimmeabreak. I know there a few plots in between, but there are WAYYYY more than what are list.

Thanks for posting this. It's very informative.

[stickdog]

82. The shootdown of KAL 007 (nt)

[Ready4Change]

86. Certainly a theory.

And your link definitely gives some tasty details. The concept that there was an extended air battle between US and Soviet aircraft? That maybe an EF-111 was shot down? Would certainly make a good book, if nothing else.

However the official record doesn't agree with what is proposed by the link. Sorry, I'm keeping my :tinfoilhat: on for now.

[Marie26]

88. Aaron Burr Conspiracy

Going way back now. In the 1700's, Aaron Burr was the Vice-President for Jefferson until he was kicked off the ticket. Then Burr & some other conspirators started hatching a plan to conquer the Western states & Mexico and create a new empire, with Burr himself as Emperor. He was finally arrested for treason. (Can't you just see Dick Cheney doing this?)

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/duel/sfeature/burrconspiracy.html

[Ready4Change]

92. That sounds like a good one.

I'm not familiar with that. (Bad history student in High School, I guess?)

[librechik]

28. researchers and detectives connect the dots

conspiracy crazies invent the dots.

Democrats are proud of living in "The reality based community. Republicans RIDICULE us for living in the "reality based" world. To me, that means we are detectives and researchers, and THEY are the crazies, inventing dots and throwing them in our eyes to distract us from noticing reality.

How can we be annoyingly reality-based and at the same time conspiracy crazies?

They are the nutty ones.

[pinto]

30. A word about the word "conspiracy":

I think it comes from the Latin "con spirare" ie, to breathe together, referring to a group of people talking.

[dusmcj]

31. another opponent of shame-based reasoning

:toast:

I guess we're all not Connected and Under Control enough, otherwise we'd be Confident and Firm, and Trust that our Leaders were working for our Freedom.

[wildbilln864]

32. Police detectives deal with conspiracy theories everyday...

so do scientists, anthropologists, etc. Does that mean they too are crazy?

[newyawker99]

46. Hi wildbilln864!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[A-Schwarzenegger]

35. Why black & white? Some conspiracies are plausible

& seem to be sustained by evidence, some are not.
I believe conspiracy existed in the JFK, RFK, MLK assassinations.
I believe conspiracy existed in the provocation that led to
the downing of the Korean airliner near Japan, and I believe
the TWA airliner was shot down by a rocket fired during a
Naval exercise. I've looked at enough evidence in those cases
that I do "believe" such conspracies are real.
However, I dont believe, for example, that a "Rove operative"
got on the line in West Virginia and gave the false info about
the miners being alive. That suggestion by a poster was what
set off the current proconspiracy/anticonspiracy smokescreen
brouhaha. I try the old-fashioned approach, thinking for myself.

EDIT: Corrected spelling of "Rove", which somebody added an
"r" to after I posted!

[linazelle]

37. Nicely reasoned response. nt

[bpilgrim]

53. i notice you left out 911...

be that as it may, why are you so reductionist in your conclusion?



fyi: that SINGLE theory ("Rove operative") wasn't the ONLY thing being discussed about that terrible day.

the other two - at least from what i read - was WHY THE FUCK did the corp mine company SIT on the TRUTH for 3 hours after the print media was put to bed?

to DISTRACT, maybe, from the REAL STORY i.e. OVER 200 safety violations in 2005 with their company?

that seems plausible to me :shrug:

anyways...

i think you sure can understand folks getting tired of the BS CT rhetoric that gets bandied around here after EVERY MAJOR FUCK UP in this country and can FORGIVE your fellow DU'ers who might image the WORST from these fucking crazies, no?

BTW: why did you leave out 911, this generations biggie :evilgrin:

peace

[A-Schwarzenegger]

54. I dont believe BushCo made it happen or let it happen.

I wouldnt put it past them to let it happen, but I dont believe it
based on the evidence I've seen. I just dont believe they would plan
9/11. At the same time, I admit that it could be a failure of mine to
see how utterly diabolical they are. I once believed that Oswald
did kill JFK alone, until I read a lot of books on it and changed
my mind. A friend of mine wrote a book on the Kennedy assassination
called Best Evidence. At the end of the book he wrote about the power
of the belief that the naked Emperor is wearing clothes. I admit that
naievete may still be alive in me. Somehow when I was reading about
FDR maybe letting Pearl Harbor happen, it was not that difficult to
take that scenario seriously, I think because there is such historical
distance there. I am nowhere near believing BushCo planned 9/11, but
the LIHOP is more possible to me, but I'd also say that if that did happen that they didnt know how bad 9/11 would be. My mind is open, and I do
admit there is a part of my mind that remains rube-ish as far as not
believing that these guys are utterly truly Satanic, which to me they
would have to be to have been behind 9/11. Hope you respect my honesty
if nothing else.

[bpilgrim]

55. i do respect your honesty and so do the 'fucking crazies'

the neoCONs are called that by folks who worked with them from way back and honest folks really just can't BELIEVE they could let or even worse make such a horrid thing happen and thats exactly what the neoCONs count on most, bet.

i'm from the streets... a punk philly kid so it's easier for me to get it after seeing most of the evidence in open-source now - thank GORE he 'invented' the INTERNETs ;->

thanks for sharing your thoughts A-Schwarzenegger :toast:

peace

[justabob]

49. Isn't one of the characteristics of conspiracies

that the right hand doesn't know what the left hand is doing? I mean isn't that part of the definition of conspiracy... legally speaking anyway?

<<Anti-conspiracies want people to believe that there are no conspiracies--that it's impossible to get a group of people together to act based on secret purposes. They want you to believe that conspiracies can only thrive in dark rooms with drawn curtains and that only a few people are involved.>>

I know that I am very tired of being labeled a 'conspiracy theorist' simply because I have some question about the "official story". Just because I think I am being lied to by whatever powers that be or think that the official line does not make sense, does not mean that I believe some painfully implausible and convoluted story... which is what that label implies. It is possible to want further proof or explanation without having formulated a wild scenario of my own.

[Ready4Change]

51. Conspiracy implies multiple people, acting in secret.

So ya, left hand doesn't know what right hand is up to.

And I agree that the word conspiracy has come to mean "crackpot theory," and that is a problem.

[StraightDope]

52. Well, an awful lot of people must be crazy...

Because the last time I checked, the great majority of people bougt into the theory that 19 Muslim hijackers single(multiply?) handedly conspired to bring down the WTC on 9/11.

SD

[applegrove]

57. How about the take out of the democratically elected leader of Zaire

in the 1960s with help from the CIA? Conspiracy? All untrue? Good - I'll get on the horn to the people of the Congo and tell them that their country really was not robbed blind of all resources for 30 years - and that they in fact are not in a civil war where 100,000s have died.

It was all a dream!

They got democracy and a really populist leader - and as the richest most resource endowed place in Africa... they are all middle class.

That story about using dynomite to blow up hippos so whole communities could eat for a day.. all lies.

The place is the garden of eden. They all shared in the wealth of the country. It just coincidentally ended up in some bank in switzerland.. but they get really good interest rates there - so much so - as a country they have been willing to starve for 30 years.

[applegrove]

59. From Wikipedia - must meet several of the criteria.

Orifinally posted by LoZoccolo here:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=62758&mesg_id=62758



WIKIPEDIA:

"Allegations exhibiting several of the following features are candidates for classification as conspiracy theories. Confidence in such classification improves the more such features are exhibited:

1.Initiated on the basis of limited, partial or circumstantial evidence.

Conceived in reaction to media reports and images, as opposed to, for example, thorough knowledge of the relevant forensic evidence.

2.Addresses an event or process that has broad historical or emotional impact.

Seeks to interpret a phenomenon which has near-universal interest and emotional significance, a story that may thus be of some compelling interest to a wide audience.

3.Reduces morally complex social phenomena to simple, immoral actions.

Impersonal, institutional processes, especially errors and oversights, interpreted as malign, consciously intended and designed by immoral individuals.

4.Personifies complex social phenomena as powerful individual conspirators

Related to (3) but distinct from it, deduces the existence of powerful individual conspirators from the 'impossibility' that a chain of events lacked direction by a person.

5.Allots superhuman talents and/or resources to conspirators.

May require conspirators to possess unique discipline, never to repent, to possess unknown technology, uncommon psychological insight, historical foresight, etc.

6.Key steps in argument rely on inductive, not deductive reasoning.

Inductive steps are mistaken to bear as much confidence as deductive ones.

7.Appeals to 'common sense'.

Common sense steps substitute for the more robust, academically respectable methodologies available for investigating sociological phenomena.

8.Exhibits well-established logical and methodological fallacies

Formal and informal logical fallacies <1> are readily identifiable among the key steps of the argument.

9.Is produced and circulated by 'outsiders', generally lacking peer review

Story originates with a person who lacks any insider contact or knowledge, and enjoys popularity among persons who lack critical (especially technical) knowledge.

10.Is upheld by persons with demonstrably false conceptions of relevant science

At least some of the story's believers believe it on the basis of a mistaken grasp of elementary scientific facts.

11.Enjoys zero credibility in expert communities

Academics and professionals tend to ignore the story, treating it as too frivolous to invest their time and risk their personal authority in disproving.

12. Rebuttals provided by experts are ignored or accommodated through elaborate new twists in the narrative

When experts do respond to the story with critical new evidence, the conspiracy is elaborated (sometimes to a spectacular degree) to discount the new evidence. "

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Contents

[bpilgrim]

62. the bashers are excellent generalist on DU but when it comes to a specific

they often have nothing but one-line hate messages or extreme strawmen examples.

the point is that DU exposes the TRUTH that a lot of folks can't handle and then lash out against other du'ers.

good thing we got a paper trail here ;->

peace

[applegrove]

63. We never have to fear the truth. The scientific, fact based truth. They

do. We should be well versed and educated in all parts of the arguments and discussion. If you get called anything - research it deeper.

[bpilgrim]

65. as i always say...

Thank GORE he 'invented' the INTERNETs ;->

:hi:

peace

[applegrove]

66. You too! We shall overcome - as long as we do it as adults with might,

intellect, empathy, discernment and the truth.

Peace!

[bpilgrim]

67. thats what makes DU great

and why i keep coming back :hi:

peace

[applegrove]

69. Happy New Year!

:hi:

[bpilgrim]

72. 2005 DU New Year Slide Show

Happy New Year!

peace

[applegrove]

73. Al Gore, adult, looks like he could have punched out an African elephant

that very moment.

[Ready4Change]

70. It got me to look up deduction and induction.

After reading the Wikipedia bit, I found I wasn't clear on the difference.

[AuntiBush]

60. Funny, but isn't Faux News based on a Conspiracy

to lie, to sham the American people?

Just a thought...

[rman]

79. the RW just loves the moon landing hoax CT

especially FOX does

[radio4progressives]

71. Besides, the Proper Term is "Coincidence Theory"

a friend of mine who is a researcher and a 9/11 expert truth seeker, identifies himself in these discussions as "coincidence theorist" ...

it has a certain ring of accuracy to it, don'cha think... ;)