05-11-2014, 12:47 PM
Graeme MacQueen has a lengthy section at the beginning of his new anthrax book where he justifies and defends the use of the term 'conspiracy theorist', and suggests that researchers need to step up a little in reclaiming the term. He feels that avoiding the terminology for fear of being tar-and-feathered makes it harder to openly discuss conspiracies, and limits the ability of researchers to publicly critique the activities of the various intelligence communities and military/industrial complex insiders that repeatedly commit conspiracies against us. The full title of his book is THE 2001 ANTHRAX DECEPTION - THE CASE FOR A DOMESTIC CONSPIRACY, and he basically notes that if that's what it was, that's what you have to call it. This is occasionally easier said than done, I'll admit.