The Inner Worlds of Conspiracy Believers

Reader Comments
Back to article

Well the government itself is a believer in conspiracies. After all, there are many laws in which certain things are made punishable, that are even called "conspiring to ... " so then, how is it one is only a sane believer in conspiracies if one endorses the same ones as does the government?

HG Wolf of VA 2:36PM February 09, 2012

And I am Laughing my ass off at the "made up" conspiracy.
https://rt.com/news/phone-spy-messages-carrier-747/

kurt of AK 10:07AM December 01, 2011

And I am Laughing my ass off at the "made up" conspiracy.
https://rt.com/news/phone-spy-messages-carrier-747/

kurt of AK 10:06AM December 01, 2011

The government already declassified how it thinks. Look up operation northwoods. We've had several presidents speak out about how dangerous the military industrial complex is. Several soldiers have come forward saying they were commanded to use psy-ops against US senators and other VIPs, which is blatantly illegal. Not to mention the feds 8-12 trillion dollar bail out. And its about to bail out europe.... etc etc etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Northwoods

kurt of AR 10:04AM December 01, 2011

Ahhh, how very Soviet of the good 'doctors'. As Solzhenitsyn so eloquently documented, the State and its flunkies WILL label you mentally ill if it is threatened by the Truth. That, along with the fact that SIX (!) corporations own virtually ALL the MSM in America means that you WILL BE called crazy AND would never get a fair hearing in the MSM press. Just ask Ron Paul...

jbw of CA 6:36PM November 30, 2011

These scientists assume that we, an educated public (we *have* been educated exactly as they were educated) cannot form a reasonable suspicion based on critical thinking as well as a trail of documented evidences. Instead, these scientists insist that because they are scientists they have the only necessary perspective to assess a set of indicators that plausibly add up to a conspiracy.
By conducting these studies to discredit conspiracy theorists, these scientists formulate a hypothesis based upon a theory that conspiracies do not exist. They however cannot disprove their theory, a core necessary in the validation process of any given hypothesis. As such, their theory is no less a conspiracy theory about conspiracy theorists. In addition, they also discredit their research methods by designing their studies based on pre-determined exclusionary criteria. Lastly, these scientists have formulated a predetermined outcome by assuming that there is a correlation between suspicion and discreditation. After all is said and done, it is only for authority and scientists to be able and capable of holding to a reasonable suspicion, and only for these authorities to be capable of evaluating evidences. This final adduction avers that the correlating data amassed in these pre-cooked evaluations cannot be disputed without again invoking that a conspiracy is in play. That is a false logic.

Du DeLebowski of CT 9:34AM September 17, 2010

The researchers thought they had invented a phony conspiracy theory, but no; it's really happening:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2019239,00.html

highwatch of VA 2:54AM September 16, 2010

http://wearechangenorwich.blogspot.com/2009/05/conspiracy-realists.html
Flawed Channel 4 Classroom Propaganda: UK Psychologists attack conspiracy theorists for partial evidence, cognitive dissonance, clearly demonstrate exact opposite.
The Psychology of Conspiracy Denial

critical thinker 1:12PM August 29, 2010

... some of the best cloaking devices for clandestine covert-operations and hidden agendas have been invented by the most brilliant minds – here is one exposition for instance from Ezra Pound: “invent two lies and have the public keep arguing which one of them might be true”. Another is by Leo Strauss – the erudite teacher of the majority of the neo-cons – called “Noble Lies”. A third by the White House, often referred to as “plausible deniability”, okay may be it was invented by the DIA, the grand-daddy of all intelligence agencies. This thinly-veiled euphemism for deception to protect the leadership if things go badly in covert-operations became public knowledge during the Iran-Contra scandal, the televised coverage of which had gripped the American nation for months, including myself. And this wasn't just a rogue operation with ad hoc deniability cover by patriotic agents as most in the public are led to believe. Deniability is official government policy vis a vis any covert operation dating back to President Truman's signing of NSC 10/2. That directive made the introduction of “plausible deniability” a requirement for CIA’s clandestine operations in case they were ever blown while still active. Below is an excerpt from “Note on U.S. Covert Action Programs”:
'Management of Covert Actions in the Truman Presidency
...
http://print-humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/2010/03/anatomy-of-conspiracy-theory.html

Project Humanbeingsfirst.org of CA 1:02PM May 04, 2010

“Often, the proof offered as evidence for a conspiracy is not specific to one incident or issue, but is used to justify a general pattern of conspiracy ideas,” Swami says.
Caught in a lie, one's credibility begins to diminish. Repeatedly get caught lying and eventually nobody's going to believe you...
Take Bruce Bower, for instance. His article is tantamount to a litany of lies. Pathological liar, I'd say.
For more on pathalogical liars, check out
http://british-columbia.ca.human-rights.org/

David Thomson 1:52AM April 12, 2010