Author Topic: Why government shills & intellectual cowards LOVE the term "conspiracy theory"  (Read 109735 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Geniocrat

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1,874
It is more of a case that idiots just don't want to be bothered.  The term conspiracy realist is true with 50 to 70% of Americans.

What is worse is the nerd population, they can tell you everything about the Star Wars series but they don't want to get political with current stuff that is in the news.

I got kicked off the Big Bang Theory forum for a week for bringing up political stuff.    :o

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,205

New Documentary on September 11, 2001 “False Flag”: “9/11 in the Academic Community”

By Dr. Gary G. Kohls
Global Research
September 10, 2014

Thursday, Sept 11, 2014, was the 13th anniversary of the controlled demolitions – by obviously pre-planted high explosive and incendiary cutter charges – of the three World Trade Center skyscrapers 1, 2 and 7. From my and many other’s experiences over the past 13 years, I think that I can predict with a high degree of confidence that there will be no credible coverage by the corporate-controlled media on the known science that has totally disproved the Cheney/Bush administration’s conspiracy theory.

Last week’s Duty to Warn column castigated the afore-mentioned media for continuing the (fragile and provably false) deception by continually referring to what happened as simply “911 attacks”, thus deceiving their readers, viewers and listeners into accepting the notion that it was two planes crashing into two of the towers that allowed the US to risk starting World War III.

The truth of the matter, of course, was that insiders had to orchestrate a much more catastrophic event that involved the actual collapse of the skyscrapers. With simply two planes hitting two of the towers, two brief fireballs, and a few office fires that quickly burned out, the crime scene would have shown that the massive 110 story girders were intact, the buildings intact, and only hundreds of fatalities rather than 3000. In addition the flight recorders would have been recovered intact as well as whatever passengers, if any, had been on the planes (the planes were likely piloted by computer-controlled drones rather than the accused amateur hijackers who couldn’t even fly prop planes).

The evidence is so overwhelming that 9/11 was a false flag op that any legitimate court of law (are there any?) willing to take testimony from the experts would easily determine the falsity of the official version.

A brilliant 5 minute review of 9/11 by James Corbett ( and can be viewed at, More thorough exposes of 9/11 can be viewed at

“Why do otherwise good people refuse to look at (or believe) the evidence?”

What also needs to be examined is the following question:

    “Why do otherwise good people refuse to look at the evidence?”

Or, in the situation that might be more likely to be the case, if these good people have actually spent the few hours necessary to adequately examine the evidence,

    “why do they then refuse to acknowledge the existence of the evidence that totally disproves the official story that they have somehow come to believe?”

It is easy to understand the reasons why powerful governmental or corporate entities obfuscate certain facts. Their jobs, income, prestige, well-being and personal security (even their lives) may depend on doing what their puppet-masters and paymasters want them to do.  Sometimes it doesn’t even take a direct order; they may know instinctively what to do.

The corporate-controlled media (starting with the publishers, editors and major shareholders) and their well-paid talking heads are in cahoots with the governmental agencies that insist on secrecy and the creation of plausible “sacred” myths (and therefore the intentional deception of the citizenry) if they think the national security (or the health of the stock market) is at stake.

The White House, the Cabinet, the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the Pentagon, military careerists, CIA, FBI , NSA (and the dozen of other national security agencies), the corporate-controlled politicians, legislators and various other thought leaders take certain “sacred” myths and the necessity for cover-ups of painful truths very seriously.

If a rare person of conscience (who was also in a position of power) chooses to resist the real powers-that-be, as was the case with JFK, MLK, RFK and Senator Paul Wellstone, there would be serious consequences.

Understanding the Motivations of the “Good German” Folks who say “I Wouldn’t Believe That Even if I Knew it Were True”?

But the psychology of why otherwise good people decide to maintain their silence in the face of unwelcome truths has many ramifications, which I will address more thoroughly in a future column. (A great series of articles by psychologist and 9/11 truth-seeker, Francis Shure, entitled “Why Do Good People Become Silent—or Worse—About 9/11?” can be read, starting at:

For now, interested readers should consider researching the following psychological realities that will partially explain why the truth about 9/11 is such a taboo subject:

Cognitive Dissonance: the psychological discomfort one feels when faced with new information that contradicts deeply held beliefs that are now suddenly proved to be false,

Denial, “Obedience to“ (Stanley Milgram’s seminal book), “1984” and George Orwell’s concept of Doublethink (the capacity to hold two contradictory beliefs in one’s mind simultaneously and accept them both),

Groupthink (“running with the pack”),

Denial, Conformity, and the fear of challenging a “sacred myth” – and thus being ostracized by the bamboozled majority.

I include below extended excerpts from an important Global Research article written by Elizabeth Woodworth about the serious problem of the silence of most academics and scholars regarding the truth of 9/11. Historically, academics have been allowed – if not encouraged – to be independent, outspoken and courageous thinkers, but, being human and increasingly disempowered members of increasingly corporate-controlled American universities, they are subjected to the same psychological, social, economic and corporate influences as the rest of us.

Woodworth writes about a new documentary titled “9/11 in the Academic Community” which was a prize winner at the 2013 University of Toronto Film Festival. The film was produced and directed by Adnan Zuberi. The trailer can be viewed at:

“9/11 Truth” and the Failure of the Academic Community to Explore the Events of September 11, 2001

By Elizabeth Woodworth – Co-Founder of the 911 Consensus Panel (

“Academics have been milquetoasts when it comes to the truth about what really happened on 9/11/01, this century’s first great day of infamy.” – Canadian academic historian Michiel Horn

Entire article posted at: Global Research, September 05, 2014

As the academic year begins, and the 13th anniversary of 9/11 draws near, it seems timely to review this eye-opening documentary about the failure of academia to explore the evidence about the events of September 11.Indeed, there are literally dozens of peer-reviewed science articles challenging the American government narrative about 9/11 that academics simply do not talk about.  These articles stand published in the science literature – for the most part unreported, unexamined, and unrefuted.

9/11 Academic Failure in the Context of Traditional Scientific Publishing

In view of the magnitude of the 9/11 tragedy, and the persistent public doubts about its cause,[1] the scientific academy has been eerily silent.[2] Although many studies questioning the official account have been published in peer-reviewed science and engineering journals,[3] they have not generated debate in the literature, or reports in the media. This is virtually unprecedented, for new scientific research always stimulates a trail of discussion – be it through letters, rebuttals, or further studies.

Two examples of peer-reviewed articles that should have made sensational headlines and stimulated major academic discussion simply faded into obscurity:

An article published in the Journal of Business was reported by econometrician Dr. Paul Zarembkaas showing a 99% statistical probability that high-volume insider trading occurred with American Airlines and United Airlines stocks in the days before 9/11;[4]

A nine-author article published in the peer-reviewed Open Chemical Physics Journal (2009) reported that unreacted nanothermite, which can be tailored to behave as an incendiary (like ordinary thermite), or as an explosive, was found in four independently collected samples of the World Trade Center dust.[5] Nanothermite is a high-tech substance not found in nature, yet there has been no published research follow-up to this landmark article’s astonishing conclusions.

In short, the subject has been untouchable.

Glaring Anomalies in the Government Narrative That Should Have Aroused Academic Concern

This documentary interviews a group of ten current and former Canadian and American university professors[6]about eye-opening contradictions in the official account.

Some of these include:

1.  Ground Zero was the biggest crime scene in US history, yet the telltale steel girders were quickly trucked away before forensic examination could take place.

2.  Originally there was to be no investigation, and only following intense political pressure from the families was an investigation mounted in 2003.

3.  Paradoxically, the 9/11 Commission Report (2004) stated that its purpose was “to provide the fullest possible account of the events,” but “not to assign individual blame.”[7]

4.  Nonetheless the Report accused al Qaeda of responsibility, basing 25% of its supporting footnotes on torture testimony, and providing no spokespersons to represent the accused.

5.  The Executive Director of the 9/11 Commission, Philip Zelikow – a White House insider – framed the Report’s narrative in advance by providing an outline to the findings before the investigation had begun.

6.  The NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) conclusions regarding the collapses of the Twin Towers and WTC7 were based on simplified models that defied Newtonian physics and were in conflict with direct observations.

7.  After seven years of study, NIST granted that free-fall acceleration had taken place in 47-story steel-framed WTC Building 7, which was not hit by an airplane – but could only cite office fires to explain this unprecedented event.

Cultural Pressures to Delegitimize Inquiry into 9/11

How could these extraordinary anomalies have been ignored and overlooked by the academic community? The term “conspiracy theory” was first introduced into common use by the CIA following the publication of the Warren Commission report on the assassination of JFK, when “a public opinion poll recently indicated that 46% of the American public did not think that Oswald acted alone, while more than half of those polled thought that the Commission had left some questions unresolved.” The document, released following a FOIA request in 1976, outlined the CIA’s concern regarding “the whole reputation of the American government.”[8] The term “conspiracy theory,” which had formerly held neutral connotations, began to acquire a derogatory sense that identified certain topics as off limits to inquiry or debate. It has even been referred to as a “weaponized term.”[9]

One of the professors in the film referred to “the spiral of silence,” and another to “thought stoppers” – such as the charge of “conspiracy theory.” A third referred to 9/11 as “one government story that’s untouchable.” Another said that raising the subject in academic circles is somehow forbidden, unmentionable – that it sullies and profanes a person to bring it up.  Sometimes persons who raise it are themselves attacked. Indeed a number of professors who persevered with research were vilified, harassed, and even dismissed for attempting work in this area.

The Fallout from 9/11

Although 9/11 itself has seldom been questioned within the academy, its implications and fallout have been permissible fields of study, and include:

"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,205

The CIA’s Invention of the “Conspiracy Theorist”: Smear Campaign to Discredit Dissenters

Why do Good People Become Silent About the Documentable Facts That Disprove the Official White House Conspiracy Theory About 9/11? – Part Two

By Dr. Gary G. Kohls
Global Research
September 24, 2014

In his 2013 book, Conspiracy Theory in America, author Lance deHaven-Smith traced the term “conspiracy theory” back to a CIA propaganda campaign that was designed to discredit doubters of the Warren Commission’s fake search into who assassinated President Kennedy in Dallas. In this light, the use of this pejorative term is obviously a tactic to shame and humiliate those who saw through the ulterior motives of the commission, and thus effectively censor out or even banish anyone who questions official government accounts.

The Warren Commission, to its eternal shame, ignored the testimony of a multitude of eye witnesses to the crime that proved that there were shooters both behind and in front of Kennedy’s motorcade. Many witnesses, none of whom were called to testify, had heard shots coming from the grassy knoll in front of the motorcade.

One of those eye-witnesses was an emergency room physician that attended Kennedy’s dying body. He would have testified to the commission that there was a tiny entry wound in JFK’s throat as well as a large exit wound that blew off the back of his head (depositing a chunk of his brain on the trunk of the limousine – which Jackie was shown retrieving in the famous film of the assassination by Abraham Zapruder).

Anyone with discerning eyes saw JFK’s head being violently thrown backwards from the head shot, thus proving that that shot had come from the front (as did the neck shot), thus disproving the single shooter theory and proving that the assassination of the president was indeed a conspiracy (i.e., more than one entity plotting an evil deed).

Hence the CIA’s cunning ploy (with the pejorative “conspiracy theorist” label) to discredit those who had taken on as their duty to be skeptical of what was indeed another of the Big Lies that regularly come from political entities that want our trust and votes; from advertising campaigns from corporations that want our trust and money; from government and military entities that want our trust and support; and from the for-profit media entities that want our trust and money. All those entities had to be involved in the crime and cover-up of the events of 9/11/01.

Both the Warren and 9/11 commissions were, in effect, saying “Hey you American idiots, listen up. How many times do we have to tell you that this case is closed? We got our crazed lone gunman; now just be obedient children and resume your shopping, brain-numbing amusements. celebrity worship and vegetating on the couch cheering for your favorite professional football, baseball, hockey or basketball teams.”

Or they may try to reassure us a bit more diplomatically by saying “trust us when we say that those heinous crimes were simply committed by lone gunman like Lee Harvey Oswald, James Earl Ray, Sirhan Sirhan, Osama bin Laden or Adam Lanza (despite all the evidence to the contrary) – and those cases have been neatly wrapped up (by hook or by crook).” “So just move on – there is nothing more to see here; and, should you continue to have doubts about our official stories, just be sure to remember what happens to conscientious whistleblowers like Martin Luther King, Chelsey Manning, Edward Snowden and Julian Assange when they go poking around where they’re not wanted.”

There have been many America military/government/corporate conspiratorial dirty tricks that were initially denied by the propagandizing powers-that-be but which were later admitted to – after diligent and courageous whistle-blowing investigative journalists proved the conspiracies. In every case the powers-that-be had been, in effect, calling the truth-seekers “conspiracy theorists”.

Such a list could mention hundreds of examples, including the following short list that occurred during recent presidential administrations:

"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

Offline BluePhoenix729

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 53
  • `Don´t focus on death, for you won´t live life.`
This is an excellent post! This is why we should always be objective and think for ourselves. With that I mean is for example: Russia and China are not (as far as we know) fully integrated in the NWO plan. I don't think they have  the best of intentions either, however you feel a certain friction going on. That's why this whole thing is a strategic game. The financial meltdown, depopulation etc. is being planned and it will come once those of the NWO feel that they have a certain advantage over Russia and China. That is why people have been saying for years a financial meltdown is coming, but nothing is coming, yet. They are waiting for the right moment. If something were to happen in the US, like a revolution or civil war, how will Russia and China react?
It is very difficult but we need to think like them, very mysterious with all the disinformation and mysteriousness going on, but if we do that we would be much more accurate. This is better than fowolling information, yelling something will happen, while chances are big it was either disinformation, or a chance, that will happen when they are ready. Big things are happening, and we need to be ready.
`Don´t focus on death, for you won´t live life.`

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,205
What is a Conspiracy Theory? What is the Truth?
« Reply #124 on: February 10, 2015, 06:56:59 am »

What is a Conspiracy Theory? What is the Truth?

By Prof Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research
February 05, 2015

Obama is on a hot war footing. Western civilization is allegedly “threatened by the Islamic State”. 

 The “Global War on Terrorism” is  heralded as a humanitarian endeavor.

We have a “Responsibility to Protect”. Humanitarian warfare is the solution.

Evil folks are lurking. ‘Take ‘em out”, said George W. Bush.

The Western media is beating the drums of war. Obama’s military agenda is supported by a vast propaganda apparatus.

One of the main objectives of war propaganda is to “fabricate an enemy”. As the political legitimacy of the Obama Administration falters, doubts regarding the existence of this “outside enemy”, namely Al Qaeda and its network of (CIA sponsored) affiliates  must be dispelled.

The purpose is to tacitly instil, through repeated media reports, ad nauseam, within people’s inner consciousness, the notion that Muslims constitute a threat to the security of the Western World.

Humanitarian warfare is waged on several fronts: Russia,  China and the Middle East are currently the main targets.

Xenophobia and the Military Agenda

The wave of xenophobia directed against Muslims which has swept across Western Europe is tied into geopolitics. It is part of a military agenda. It consists in demonizing the enemy.
    Muslim countries possess more than 60 percent of total oil reserves.  In contrast, the United States of America has barely 2 percent of total oil reserves. Iraq has five times more oil than the United States. (See Michel Chossudovsky, The “Demonization” of Muslims and the Battle for Oil, Global Research, Jannuary 4, 2007).
A large share of the World’s oil lies in Muslim lands. The objective of the US led war is to steal and appropriate those oil reserves. And to achieve this objective, these countries  are targeted: war, covert ops, economic destabilization, regime change.

The American Inquisition

A consensus building process to wage war is similar to the Spanish inquisition. It requires social subordination, the political consensus cannot be questioned. In its contemporary version, the inquisition requires and demands submission to the notion that war is a means to spreading Western values and democracy.

A good versus evil dichotomy prevails. We must go after the bad guys.

War is peace.

The ‘big lie’ has now become the truth … and the truth has become a ‘conspiracy theory’.

Those who are committed to the Truth are categorized as “Terrorists”.

According to Paul Craig Roberts (2011), the conspiracy theory concept “has undergone Orwellian redefinition”…
    A “conspiracy theory” no longer means an event explained by a conspiracy.  Instead, it now means any explanation, or even a fact, that is out of step with the government’s explanation and that of its media pimps….

    In other words, as truth becomes uncomfortable for government and its Ministry of Propaganda, truth is redefined as conspiracy theory, by which is meant an absurd and laughable explanation that we should ignore.
Fiction becomes fact.

Investigative journalism has been scrapped.

Factual analysis of social, political and economic issues is a conspiracy theory because it challenges a consensus which is based on a lie.

"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

Offline Geolibertarian

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13,205
‘Bloggers’ Compared to ISIS During Congressional Hearing
« Reply #125 on: April 16, 2015, 08:17:55 am »
To call these blame-freedom-firsters intellectual cowards, moral hypocrites and authoritarian control-freaks would be a gross understatement:

‘Bloggers’ Compared to ISIS During Congressional Hearing

People who challenge establishment narratives online likened with terrorist organization

Paul Joseph Watson
April 16, 2015

Bloggers, conspiracy theorists and people who challenge establishment narratives on the Internet were all likened to ISIS terrorists during a chilling Congressional hearing which took place yesterday.

The hearing, hosted by the House Foreign Relations Committee, was titled “Confronting Russia’s Weaponization of Information,” and accused Russian state broadcaster RT of weaponizing “conspiracy theories” to spread propaganda.

One of the speakers giving testimony was former RT host Liz Wahl, who made a public spectacle of quitting Russian state media last year in an incident stage-managed by neo-con James Kirchick, himself a former employee of Radio Free Europe – a state media outlet.

Remarking that the Internet provided a platform for “fringe voices and extremists,” Wahl characterized people who challenge establishment narratives as a “cult”.

“They mobilize and they feel they’re part of some enlightened fight against the establishment….they find a platform to voice their deranged views,” said Wahl.

Referring to comments made in January by US Broadcasting Board of Governors (BBG) chief Andrew Lack, who characterized RT as a threat on the same level as ISIS and Boko Haram, Wahl said the comparison was justified.

“By using the Internet to mobilize people that feel displaced, that feel like they’ve been on the outskirts of society, and give them a place where they can find a sense of belonging, and maybe make a difference in their own way, and it’s a problem,” she said.

Wahl went on to bemoan the fact that conspiracy theorists were “shaping the discussion online, on message boards, on Twitter, on social media,” before asserting that the web had become a beacon of “disinformation, false theories, people that are just trying to make a name for themselves, bloggers or whatever, that have absolutely no accountability for the truth, that are able to rile up a mass amount of people online.”

Committee Chairman Ed Royce then proceeded to accuse people on YouTube of using “raw violence” to advance conspiracy theories.

Peter Pomerantsev, of the London-based Legatum Institute, followed up by claiming that conspiracy theories were no longer “fringe” and were now driving the success of Jean-Marie Le Pen in France, before lamenting the fact that conspiracy theories were challenging the “global order” and threatening to undermine global institutions.

All three individuals that gave testimony are staunch critics of Russia, leading Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-CA) to wish “we had at least one other person to balance out this in a way that perhaps could’ve compared our system to the Russian system, to find out where that truth is, just how bad that is.”



^^  Translation: their lies aren't working anymore because they've been caught lying so many times in the past, and so now they're whining like spoiled children and calling people names.

Perhaps this will help...
"Abolish all taxation save that upon land values." -- Henry George

"If our nation can issue a dollar bond, it can issue a dollar bill." -- Thomas Edison

Offline attietewd

  • Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2,667
This is one of those threads that all newbies should read.  It is filled with wonderful stuff.  I am sorry some of the pics have been removed but the information is as fresh today as the day it was posted.  Lots of research went into it.  Read it, enjoy it and add new.  Thanks Geo, and others who have contributed.  You guys rock!  I hope by reposting it new life will come into it.
“Thus, condemnation will never come to those who are in Christ Jesus…”