05-11-2014, 10:35 AM
I just posted this as a comment to a review of Aaronovitch's book "Voodoo History" on Amazon.co.uk
The reason that conspiracy theories gain traction these days is simply that governments and the media have a proven track record of lying to the public, only to be found out by declassified records. For example, CIA's Operation Mockingbird to control the agenda of the media including having journalists in their employ. We know from declassified documents that the CIA issued guidance to their media assets on how to paint the authors of books critical of the Warren Commission in a bad light - they were doing it for profit; they are trying to subvert the American government; etc etc. This is the CIA!!! Telling the media how to review books critical of the house of cards that was the Warren Report!!!
The Oliver Stone film JFK led directly to the creation of the JFK Records Act which formed the Assassinations Records Review Board, an official, legally sanctioned body. From the work of that organisation, we know that Gerald Ford (yes, that Gerald Ford) moved the description of the bullet hole in JFK's back from "below the shoulders" (which is where it was, 5 3/4" below the shirt collar) to "the base of the back of the neck" in order to make the single bullet theory possible. We know from the ARRB's work that the body did not arrive for autopsy in the coffin that it left Dallas in. We also know from the ARRB's work that the autopsy doctors sawed the head open BEFORE THE AUTOPSY began in order to change the appearance of the head wounds. We also know from the work of the ARRB that the diagrams of the brain shown in the records is of a second brain belonging to someone else. It can't be John F. Kennedy's.
Don't take my word for it. Listen to Doug Horne, the Assassination Records Review Board's Chief Analyst for Military Records. He has a presentation here: http://fff.org/explore-freedom/article/altered-history-exposing-deciet-and-deception-in-the-jfk-assassination-medical-evidence-part-1/
We know now from the work of the Church Committee in 1975 that the CIA was plotting to kill Fidel Castro in alliance with the American Mafia, and that the FBI was undertaking illegal surveillance against US citizens within the US.
I have few firm views on 9/11, but consider this: the question is NOT "Was 9/11 a conspiracy?" The official story has 19 Saudi hijackers all working together! That is the definition of a conspiracy! The REAL question is "Whose conspiracy was it?" in other words, who was involved. Even the official report for 9/11 has no explanation for how building 7 collapsed or why. It wasn't hit by any planes, it didn't have jet fuel burning inside it. They can't explain it, and expect the rest of us to be happy with that.
Watergate? Again, an acknowledged conspiracy. Whose? Good question.
Oh, and let's not forget all of those WMDs that the media and governments TOLD us existed in Iraq. They wouldn't lie to us would they?
The real point of all of this is to be found in the old phrase "Treason doth never prosper. For if it prosper, none dare call it treason." Conspiracies happen, all right. That's a proven, historical fact. Only when it's accepted, no one ever refers to it as a conspiracy.
I have no problem whatsoever in criticising someone's version of an event if there is no evidence to support that view. What I DO have a problem with is the pejorative label "conspiracy theorist" being used to stifle discussion and belittle the people putting forward arguments that are often valid. It is the biggest act of intellectual snobbery to dismiss as "conspiracy theory" a valid argument. For example, I very much doubt that Aaronovitch even knows what the ARRB are and what they did, let alone the facts they uncovered.
The reason that conspiracy theories gain traction these days is simply that governments and the media have a proven track record of lying to the public, only to be found out by declassified records. For example, CIA's Operation Mockingbird to control the agenda of the media including having journalists in their employ. We know from declassified documents that the CIA issued guidance to their media assets on how to paint the authors of books critical of the Warren Commission in a bad light - they were doing it for profit; they are trying to subvert the American government; etc etc. This is the CIA!!! Telling the media how to review books critical of the house of cards that was the Warren Report!!!
The Oliver Stone film JFK led directly to the creation of the JFK Records Act which formed the Assassinations Records Review Board, an official, legally sanctioned body. From the work of that organisation, we know that Gerald Ford (yes, that Gerald Ford) moved the description of the bullet hole in JFK's back from "below the shoulders" (which is where it was, 5 3/4" below the shirt collar) to "the base of the back of the neck" in order to make the single bullet theory possible. We know from the ARRB's work that the body did not arrive for autopsy in the coffin that it left Dallas in. We also know from the ARRB's work that the autopsy doctors sawed the head open BEFORE THE AUTOPSY began in order to change the appearance of the head wounds. We also know from the work of the ARRB that the diagrams of the brain shown in the records is of a second brain belonging to someone else. It can't be John F. Kennedy's.
Don't take my word for it. Listen to Doug Horne, the Assassination Records Review Board's Chief Analyst for Military Records. He has a presentation here: http://fff.org/explore-freedom/article/altered-history-exposing-deciet-and-deception-in-the-jfk-assassination-medical-evidence-part-1/
We know now from the work of the Church Committee in 1975 that the CIA was plotting to kill Fidel Castro in alliance with the American Mafia, and that the FBI was undertaking illegal surveillance against US citizens within the US.
I have few firm views on 9/11, but consider this: the question is NOT "Was 9/11 a conspiracy?" The official story has 19 Saudi hijackers all working together! That is the definition of a conspiracy! The REAL question is "Whose conspiracy was it?" in other words, who was involved. Even the official report for 9/11 has no explanation for how building 7 collapsed or why. It wasn't hit by any planes, it didn't have jet fuel burning inside it. They can't explain it, and expect the rest of us to be happy with that.
Watergate? Again, an acknowledged conspiracy. Whose? Good question.
Oh, and let's not forget all of those WMDs that the media and governments TOLD us existed in Iraq. They wouldn't lie to us would they?
The real point of all of this is to be found in the old phrase "Treason doth never prosper. For if it prosper, none dare call it treason." Conspiracies happen, all right. That's a proven, historical fact. Only when it's accepted, no one ever refers to it as a conspiracy.
I have no problem whatsoever in criticising someone's version of an event if there is no evidence to support that view. What I DO have a problem with is the pejorative label "conspiracy theorist" being used to stifle discussion and belittle the people putting forward arguments that are often valid. It is the biggest act of intellectual snobbery to dismiss as "conspiracy theory" a valid argument. For example, I very much doubt that Aaronovitch even knows what the ARRB are and what they did, let alone the facts they uncovered.