I hate conspiracy theories do you?

Would you hate a conspiracy theory if it turned out to be true? Or do you consider them all to be false by definition?

Would you hate a conspiracy theory if it turned out to be true? Or do you consider them all to be false by definition?

I really do hate them. I think the base of it is the whole fear what you don't understand thing. I have a few friends that are all in to just about every theory out there and a few who really just have a couple. The issue is the same with all though, conspiracy theorists don't entertain counter logic. Like if I try to argue against a conspiracy theory im just " buying into it " pfff...most of them have way too many holes anyway..I say boo!

That's an interesting take. Peole would rather believe something whacky than admit to having no idea what is going on. However, i do believe that conspiracy theories have lives of their own. There was a conspiracy behind the September 11th, 2001 attacks. It was planned by high-level leadership in Al Qaeda, and carried out by 19 fanatics, mostly Saudis, with some Egyptians and a Lebanese. But that's not good enough for the conspiracy theorists. Perhaps they think it makes them look wise and knowing to mouth platitudes about what will or won't make a building collapse, while darkly hinting of deep laid plans by cynical and murderous members of our own government.

There's quite a few problems with this conspiracy theory - namely, making claims without a shred of evidence. 'Put Options'? If these nameless people actually did make these bets, then there are records of them, and they can be named. The other issues are many are simply perspectives put forth as 'real'. Other than that I didn't watch the whole video - the author lost a great deal of credibility due to just those two things alone.

As for general conspiracy theories - I'm with JL - some events that most would dismiss as conspiracy theories actually have basis in 'fact' and historical records.

Some examples, particularly from the CIA (as over the years as secrecy laws expired, their records started showing a number of interesting thing) :

- The CIA coup in Iran in 1951 (or 2) was widely known to be run by the CIA, and eventually after the secrecy laws expired, their records showed it to be true.

- the CIA may or may (or may not) have a 'secret cash fund'. After WW2 when the CIA was set up, they were given unlimited access to funds from The Marshall Plan, and no one knows just how much they took (though presumably these funds would have found their way into bosses pockets). While the concept of a secret cash fund has conspiracy theory written all over it, the existance of one, or not, should be left purely to 'a possibility' rather than being labelled one way or the other (a problem facing those for conspiracy theories, or dead against the mere existance of conspiracy theories)

-the CIA did try to kill Castro multiple times, and Castro wrote to the director and told him to stop or he would kill the US president. The president told the CIA to stop, and they did...until Kennedy got elected and they started again. Surprise, surprise, Kennedy was then shot by a man with links to Castro.

Those details come from a 2007 Pulitzer prize winning book called 'Legacy of Ashes : a history of the CIA', which claims to be written from the CIA's own records, plus interviews with operatives etc.

Particularly the last one - was always regarded as a conspiracy theory - but as you can see, (whether or not it existed) there was actually reason for a CIA coverup to exist. Whether one existed isn't actually the point.

There are other things that may or may not mean anything - in Pakistan, a country in which the common people hate the US, the only 3 presidents to have been assassinated have been the only 3 anti-US presidents. If that means anything - who know's.

A very famous and true 'conspiracy' is the Nazi takeover of Germany - that required co-ordinated effort. The invention of 'Propoganda' is it's most famous element. The dismissal of the 'Nurenburg defense' as a defense against war crimes is another notorious element. The creation of the SS and the Hitler youth brigade contributed.

Again - I agree with JL - there's no point dismissing something that has evidence as a conspiracy theory just because you don't like the idea or it would require co-ordinated effort. But there is no point in taking every conspiracy theory to heart that has no shred of evidence (that video for example).

The coup in Iran was in 1953, and it was initially instigated by MI6. The Brits were enraged that Mosedegh (the democratically elected PM) was nationalizing the petroleum industry, and tried, but failed, to organize a boycott on purchasing Persian oil. You'll never get people to sign on to such a boycott, petroleum is too precious to the industrial world. So, MI6 got together with Central Intelligence to organize the coup. This was carried out in 1953, at the very beginning of the Eisenhower administation. Truman had already rejected Brit calls for an embargo of Persian oil, and they weren't going to try to get him to go along. Eisenhower always felt he had been suckered by the Brits in Iran, so, in 1956, when the French and the English organized the silly attempt to take the Suez Canal, and suckered the Israelis into going along with the plan, Eisenhower refused to back their play, sent a naval task force with Marines to cruise off the Lebanon, and told the Israelis in no uncertain terms to evacuate the Sinai if they ever wanted to see another penny of American aid.

I can't think why you list this under conspiracy theories. Eisenhower certainly never tried to hide any of this, and although the details came out slowly, it's been known almost since the day of the event.

The only thing i see here which might qualify as a conspiracy theory is linking the Kennedy assassination to attempts on the life of Castro. That one qualifies as a conspiracy theory, and despite your pet author here, no one has yet produced credible evidence.

I think you must be very confused about what constitutes a conspiracy theory. The take-over of the German government by the NSDAP in 1933 may be deplored, but there was no conspiracy involved. Hitler proceeded by constitutional means. At no time did the NSDAP ever have a majority in the Reichstag, so he formed a coalition with the DNVP (the German National Peoples' Party--the other big right wing party in the Reichstag). To pass the enabling act, he needed a two thirds majority, so he cut a deal with the Centre Party, a Catholic Party from southern Germany. Unfortunately for the German nation and for Europe, there was still sufficient anti-Catholic bigotry in Germany that all Hitler had to do was promise to lift the restrictions on Catholic office holding and Catholic schools--it was simplicity itself. When the Enabling Act became law, he simply used the provisions of that idiotic measure (thanks, Bismarck) to outlaw all other political parties.

We many deplore the result, but it was achieved by constitutional means. I know of no one who alleges a conspiracy in the matter.

I've never heard this to be a conspiracy - especially not a "very famous and true conspiracy".
[Besides that, I don't understand what the creation of the SS and Hitler youth had to do with it. And if that had something to do with it, why did you leave out the other Nazi organisations?]

I do not hate all conspiracy theories I just hate the fact that things are not very transparent at times and it makes it hard for us to get to the truth of things.
When we have people that make false claims about so many things it gives conspiracy theories a bad name!




No!
I think that some are true but it sucks that we have so many that are made up and are false. These false theories discredit the true ones from even being considered in some peoples minds.

Conspiracy theories are probably here to stay. Television makes money off them.
IMO they are the television version of gossip, it fills a niche in today's isolated society. Believe it or not, there are a lot of average people out there who need a little intrigue in their lives.
I get a bit of a kick out of some of the shows on the history channel. They run the gamut of conspiracy theories and fantasies from bigfoot to aliens.
I enjoy spotting their techniques of misinformation and emotional appeal.

I don't feel that my intelligence is threatened by theories of this sort, and see no reason to hate them. I will admit, they once annoyed me, most especially when friends so often bought in to them. However, I learned not to feel threatened by this, and now take some pleasure in the silliness of it all.

their fun to hear, because alot of them would make good writing material!

Oh, for f&*** sake..

http://www.911myths.com/html/volume_spikes.html

Conspiracy theories give conspiracy theories a bad name.
It's the nature of conspiracy theories to make false claims and ignore facts.

I tend to think of "conspiracy theories" as esoteric realities behind the official picture of historic events. All societies engage in clandestine actions, in which interesting conspiracies operate. But the notion that there are sometimes larger stories behind official version, more "interesting" versions that violate our sense of the order of things is what I think of as "conspiracy theories." Allegations of FDR's clandestine withholding of information that permitted the Japanese success at Pearl Harour in order to get us into the war is my ideal type conspiracy theory. I ask Setanta to comment on this perspective.

Yes, Wayne. Conspiracy theories are so much more interesting--and therefore commercially valuable--than simple historically accurate but too transparent accounts of events.

Moving from another thread since it isn't on topic there....

Reasoning Logic..

You didn't read the link or you would have known that the video and the link I showed about paying taxes were both about the "City of London" which is located in greater London.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/City_of_London

You are correct It seems that I was not understanding that what you were sharing was relevant to what I was asking. My mistake this is how I learn!

I do have a question though! What do you think about what was being proposed in the amendment?

If any citizen of the United States shall accept, claim, receive or retain any title of nobility or honour, or shall, without the consent of Congress accept and retain any present, pension, office or emolument of any kind whatever, from any emperor, king, prince or foreign power, such person shall cease to be a citizen of the United States and shall be incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under them, or either of them.

Read the link

Now that you have a document showing the taxes paid by the City of London, how do you feel about the video that said they don't pay taxes?