Saturday, January 16, 2016

Conspiracy Theories




Last night I happened across an article by Brandon Murphy on the CIA generated label of "Conspiracy Theorist."   Brandon's article, published at Waking Times, draws extensively upon a book published by the very reputable University of Texas Press by Lance deHaven-Smith, a well-established political scientist. I ordered the book but will today simply except from Murphy's article.

Drawing upon deHaven's account (pages 85-100 in his book), Murphy's article at Waking Times describes CIA Dispatch 1035-960 instructing CIA agents to contact journalists and opinion leaders concerning critics of the Warren Commission in order that they might assist in combatting the influence of “conspiracy theorists” who blamed US leadership for the death of President John Kennedy (page 85)


Brandon Murphy, “In 1967, the CIA Created the Label Conspiracy Theorist,” Waking Times January , 2016,  http://www.wakingtimes.com/2016/01/13/in-1967-the-cia-created-the-label-conspiracy-theorists/

SOURCE Lance deHaven-Smith, Conspiracy Theory in America (Discovering America) Hardcover –University of Texas Press (April 15, 2013) http://www.amazon.com/Conspiracy-Theory-America-iscovering/dp/0292743793/ref=tmm_hrd_swatch_0?_encoding=UTF8&qid=&sr=


The dispatch states:

2. This trend of opinion is a matter of concern to the U.S. government, including our organization.
The aim of this dispatch is to provide material countering and discrediting the claims of the conspiracy theorists, so as to inhibit the circulation of such claims in other countries. Background information is supplied in a classified section and in a number of unclassified attachments.

3. Action. We do not recommend that discussion of the [conspiracy] question be initiated where it is not already taking place. Where discussion is active addresses are requested:

a. To discuss the publicity problem with and friendly elite contacts (especially politicians and editors) , pointing out that the [official investigation of the relevant event] made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by …  propagandists. Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.

b. To employ propaganda assets to and refute the attacks of the critics. Book reviews and feature articles are particularly appropriate for this purpose. The unclassified attachments to this guidance should provide useful background material for passing to assets. Our ploy should point out, as applicable, that the critics are (I) wedded to theories adopted before the evidence was in, (II) politically interested, (III) financially interested, (IV) hasty and inaccurate in their research, or (V) infatuated with their own theories.


Majia here: The following recommendations really struck me because I've seen these practices deployed when controversial claims are made at my blog and other social media sites:

[instruct opinion leaders that authorities] made as thorough an investigation as humanly possible, 
that the charges of the critics are without serious foundation, 

and that further speculative discussion only plays into the hands of the opposition. 

Point out also that parts of the conspiracy talk appear to be deliberately generated by …  propagandists. 

Urge them to use their influence to discourage unfounded and irresponsible speculation.


 For an example of these types of comments, see this blog post here: http://majiasblog.blogspot.com/2016/01/waveforms-and-sonifications.html

I am NOT using this discussion of psyops to argue that any particular theory/hypothesis about the cause of the Fukushima disaster is true or false because I lack adequate information to come to any conclusions. 

What I am arguing is that we can see these tactics being deployed, rightly or wrongly, in the comments of this blogpost.


6 comments:

  1. "According to John Ayoto's 20th century words, the phrase "conspiracy theory" was originally a neutral term and only acquired a pejorative connotation in the mid 1960s, implying that the advocate of the theory has a paranoid tendency to imagine the influence of some powerful, malicious, covert agency in events."-20th Century Words In effect, there was a conspiracy of sorts to give the expression a pejorative meaning! in order originally to protect what by now has been shown to be an actual conspiracy to assassinate JFK. Now the expression is dragged out every time a rather flimsy explanation is given of a negative national event which has the effect of discouraging discussion and the presentation of diverse points of view. It has become politically incorrect to doubt the official report.
    For example, some are now viewing the immigration disaster in Europe as a deliberate attempt on the part of the New World Order to destroy the ethnic nationalities of European nations. This would in many circles bring forth the term conspiracy theory. Still one wonders why a smart woman like Angela Merkel would just open the borders to hordes of apparent refugees of a different culture and religion? There are already several million Turks in Germany for quite some time who are self-ghettoizing and who are still poor and barely integrated. Having a PhD in physics she should have seen this as bad science. Meanwhile she has mentioned the war guilt and in Leipzig the riot aimed at the Muslims is compared to Kristallnacht. Soon the Muslims will be likened to the Jews. One can see the manipulation at work easily. Next we have to add in that the top expert on false flags,Ole Dammegard, believes the Paris attacks of November the 13th (a Friday) were fake. And were the work of American and French intelligence in which no one actually died. I must admit that the photo of the supposedly pregnant woman hanging from a ledge outside the concert hall about 50 or 60 about the street seemed like the work of a trained high wire expert.
    Well, for me what George W. said about seeing the first plane fly into the Twin Tower and the look on his face when a Secret Service Agent told him about the second tower being hit tells it all.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I appreciate william sorry if rude to will in past. G gordon liddy said the cia actively plants their own conspiracy theories to confuse people

    Rense who initiated headlining enenews decided he would not tolerate the haarp two nuc bomb dogma because fuku so serious. It would be hard to impossible to drill deep enough much less set off nuclear bombs to cause tonoku earthquake. Drilling 11000 feet especially in ocean not so easy.

    FACT From USGS webpage: An “Aftershock” can be greater than the initial earthquake.
    “Foreshock”, “mainshock”, and “aftershock” are relative terms, all of which describe earthquakes. Aftershocks are smaller earthquakes that occur in the same general area during the days to years following a larger event or “mainshock”. They mostly occur within 1-2 fault lengths of the mainshock. For the largest earthquakes, this is a long distance; it is thought that the 1906 San Francisco earthquake triggered events in southern California, western Nevada, southern central Oregon, and western Arizona, all within 2 days of the mainshock.
    As a general rule, aftershocks represent readjustments in the vicinity of a fault that slipped at the time of the mainshock. The frequency of these aftershocks decreases with time. If an aftershock is larger than the first earthquake then we call it the mainshock and the previous earthquakes in a sequence become foreshocks. About 5% to 10% of earthquakes in California are followed by a larger one within a week and then are considered a foreshock.
    It is possible to have two earthquakes of about the same size in a sequence. There is a 5% chance of having the two largest earthquakes in a sequence be within 0.2 units of magnitude, during the first week of a sequence. Given that very large earthquakes are rare to begin with, it is not surprising that we have not yet observed two very large earthquakes so close together in time in California.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Nd god knows where there is money power greed and political fanatics like neoconservtives there are plenty of real conspiracies and conspiracies within conspiracies going on. thats where occams razor can help

    ReplyDelete
  4. I am actually kind of afraid to post much anymore as an antinuc because of strange group think and fanaticism. I do not see majia or william as fanatics and i am sorry again william. Here is an example of how far group think can go
    http://www.alternet.org/world/group-think-putting-us-precipice-dangerous-conflict-russia

    ReplyDelete
  5. No cia tactics here majia

    ReplyDelete
  6. Plenty of red neck and right wing bullying on places like enenews , alex jones and even glp. Think Ill go back to beyond nulear, harvey wasserman, arclight. Too bad things went this way. Lots of people wanna know the truth about fukushima and what they can do. not be bullyed by teapattiers anyn randers and the like or told haarp can miraculously push radionucleides put of the atmosphere like the lm peopke say. I am voting for bernie sanders because he is solidly antinuke. The haters will tell you he is a communist or socialis. He is a social democrat and solidly anti nuk. Does not support government owning means of production. Supporters of right wing bullies like trump know he is not antinuk. He spouts racist dogma.

    The only cleanup of nuclear dumps I have ever seen done was done by the united states government. and that is so pathetic and ironic there are no words to describe it. Not the uranium corporations like uranium1 or the kermagees that spread plutonium everywhere. Those corporations went in and made their millions or billions and left huge messes. Sure the government initiated nuclear but corporation and nuc cartels lobbied for the work and never clean up. Same for Mallincrodt in St Louis. There is an old arabic saying about how a truly wise man can differentiate the difference between an enemy and a friend. Unless there is integrity in information and actively support of people who want to stop production more nukes and bombs as in Germany there is little hope because there is so much at stake. Until there is an active political mission to do something effective about nuclear waste it will be a lot of the same ol same ol. The germans are doing it. Some adults have to at least try and be somewhat responsible for our childrens sake.

    ReplyDelete