They R Not “Conspiracy Theories”They R, in Fact, “Discoveries”-Jesse, Editor, TV

[Guest guest]

S

Sun, 24 Jul 2005 10:15:11 -0700 (PDT)

They R Not " Conspiracy Theories " They R, in Fact,

" Discoveries " -Jesse, Editor, TVNewsLies.org

 

 

 

 

 

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/they_are_not_conspiracy_theori.html

 

They Are Not " Conspiracy Theories "

They Are, in Fact, " Discoveries "

Jesse, Editor, TVNewsLies.org

 

July 22, 2005

 

 

Those to whom information is presented must deal with their personal

unwillingness to hear new facts.

 

We have to make a serious effort to distinguish between the

_expression of an unfounded theory and the disclosure of verifiable

information and facts.

 

They absolutely refuse to accept even the most convincing proof

because they dare not admit to themselves that they have been lied to

by officials in whom the placed their trust.

 

 

 

It is currently standard practice in America to simply dismiss any

piece of information that punches a hole in any widely accepted

explanation of a disturbing event. In many cases, especially when a

serious crime is in question, the " conspiracy theory " tag is

immediately attached to any new discovery about the event. Information

related to such important topics such as 9/11, election fraud, the new

world order, secret societies, or globalization is too often ignored

as part of a baseless conspiracy theory even before any of it is ever

presented, discussed, or evaluated.

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/9_11_facts.html

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/election_2004.html

http://educate-yourself.org/nwo/

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secret_society

http://www.globalisationguide.org/

 

 

There seems to be no set criteria for dismissing information as a

foolish conspiracy theory. The only prerequisite for information to

be so categorize seems to be the desire to reject it. The reason for

the rejection does not seem to matter. It appears that anything people

do not want to believe is simply set aside as not believable. It

almost seems that if you set some people of fire they would dismiss

the flames as non-existent, simply because they did not want to

believe what was happening. The pain and damage done by the fire, no

matter how devastating, would not be evidence enough to convince these

people that the fire was real. Their need to believe otherwise would

win out. In the same vein, people dismiss information and apply the

conspiracy theory tag to anything they chose to disbelieve at their

own discretion, regardless of any hard evidence that accompanies the

" theory. "

 

 

 

It's time to put an end to this nonsense once and for all. It's also

time dispense with the name calling and and understand the dynamics of

what is happening when new information is rejected. We have to deal

with the resistance to any tampering with accepted " truths. " And we

have to find ways to convince people to seriously consider the new

information, new discoveries if you will - that so many refuse, under

any circumstances, to acknowledge.

 

 

 

It is absolutely accurate to say that conspiracies exist all around us

every day of our lives and and in all walks of life Conspiracies are a

very common part of life. Children conspire to play jokes on their

friends, football teams conspire (in the huddle) to outmaneuver their

opponents; the rich conspire with one another to get richer and

governments conspire about virtually everything. Any time two or more

people are involved in setting private plans to do anything, you have

a conspiracy. And every single time you have a powerful government,

you have secret organizations conspiring to remain secret.

Conspiracies, by definition are shrouded in secrecy. In turn, their

secrecy begets speculation and that speculation spawns new theories

about the conspiracy itself. .Is there any wonder that theories arise

about things we do not fully understand and events we find suspicious?

In the end, theories are inevitable. Truths, however, are essential.

 

 

 

It is perfectly acceptable for curious parties to evaluate or theorize

about conspiracies. It is natural to assume that conspiracies take

place and it is perfectly understandable for people to speculate on

potential or known conspiracies. Trying to figure out what trades your

favorite baseball team might make is a perfect example of this. The

team is conspiring to make changes and you are theorizing about the

changes. There is nothing wrong with that. Strangely, when you call

your local sports radio show to speculate on the trade, no one will

call you a conspiracy theorist, despite the fact that the name does

apply. By speculating about the secret plans of others, you actually

are expressing a theory about their conspiracy.

 

 

 

Conspiracy " theories " are just that; theories. Theories are based on a

logical or a reasonable theses that take known information into

account and draw a conclusion based on those known facts. Theories, in

essence, are educated guesses, and conspiracy theories are educated

guesses about conspiracies people perceive around them. The sinister

nature of conspiracy theories, then, is totally undeserved.

 

 

 

When new facts are brought out about controversial issues, something

strange happens. Minds close and battle stations are taken. A

confusion arises between unfounded theories and actual facts,

discoveries, clues or evidence that may or may not support existing

beliefs about those issues. We have to make a serious effort to

distinguish between the _expression of an unfounded theory and the

disclosure of verifiable information and facts.

 

 

 

Today there is an ongoing battle between those in possession of newly

discovered information and those who do not want to even consider the

validity of that information. Real evidence and factual information

are being lumped with baseless theories. This is not always the fault

of the person to whom the information is presented. In many cases,

the presenters offer unpopular conclusions too quickly that alienate

their audience. This is often the case when new information about the

events of 9/11 are revealed.

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/9_11_facts.html

When people are involved in discussions about the attacks, they are

prone to dismiss verifiable evidence because they are offended or

distressed by greater ramifications that arise. . This is both

unproductive and dangerous. Information has to be examined and

evaluated, regardless of its wider implication. That is the

responsibility of the recipient. But there has to be a way to clearly

present valid, tangible, verifiable and often undisputed information

so that it is more readily accepted. That responsibility belongs to

the presenter, who must deal with facts rather than conclusions.

 

 

 

Another thing to keep in mind is the possibility that a simple

discovery can disprove a great deal of what is previously accepted as

truth. At the same time, however, it may not completely prove the

validity of an alternative theory.

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/new_pearl_harbor_-_9_11_omissi.html

It only proves that an existing belief is wrong. This is the case

regarding the mountains of evidence uncovered by the independent 9/11

researchers. What they have discovered easily disproves the official

version of the events and the Kean Commission findings. What it does

not prove conclusively is what actually took place.

 

 

 

There is also another factor to deal with when dealing with the

truths, half truths, and lies that surround events not clearly

resolved in the minds of the public. Holding on to half truths is

often easier than accepting that one has been fed a truckload of lies

in the first place. Suffice it to say there is a large segment of the

American population that continues to dismiss every one of the

verifiable findings of the independent 9/11 research community. They

absolutely refuse to accept even the most convincing proof because

they dare not admit to themselves that they have been lied to by

officials in whom the placed their trust. Betrayal by those who lead

the country they love is simply too painful to accept. Denial is too

often the best defense of the deceived.

 

 

 

My own venture into educating the public about media deception has led

me into a world of information that has been hidden from the public.

Actually, it is not completely hidden, but it surely can not be found

in the mainstream media. If we use Iraq as an example, even the most

rudimentary research into the history of the first Gulf War will

uncover a reality that is very different from the common folklore.

When I bring up issues regarding the first Bush administration and

Iraq, such as the hiring of a PR firm to lie to Congress about

atrocities committed by the Iraqis in order to garner support for war,

http://www.prwatch.org/books/tsigfy10.html

people immediately tag my information as my conspiracy theory. In

part, they are correct. There was a conspiracy, but it was not mine.

And there was no theory, there was only truth... The account is

factual, it really happened and it was a conspiracy to lie to the

Congress and the nation. Fortunately, this particular issue is

verifiable. It is also no longer denied. Sadly, like so much people

should know, these events are destined to remain in the dustbin of

history, thanks to our mass media. And it might explain why I, along

with many other people, are working hard to bring the truth to the people.

 

 

When researchers, history buffs, truth seekers, conspiracy nuts or

whatever you want to call us, present newly discovered, yet verifiable

information to the public, we are directly attacked as promoters of a

conspiracy theory and lambasted with the usual assortment of insults.

.. This is totally unacceptable. We can no longer allow the conspiracy

theory tag to be indiscriminately used whenever anyone has new

discoveries to reveal. There has to be a concerted effort to clarify

the goals of those with information to impart. Presenting new

evidence can not be perceived as an attempt to establish a forgone

conclusion. At the same time, new information must be dealt with in

isolation of any other ramifications or another resistance relating

to its possible reality.

 

 

 

9/11 remains the perfect example with which to illustrate my concerns.

A massive amount of valid evidence exists to show that elements of the

official story (itself a conspiracy theory because it is not

verifiable), are false. It is not possible, however. to use the newly

discovered evidence as the basis for a conclusion about what actually

happened and who was responsible. At least not yet. There are many

indications, and there is a long trail of evidence suggesting US

government complicity, but that is all there is. That much is a

theory, but the evidence itself is comprised of facts. That evidence

can not be dismissed simply because the theories that are wrapped

around them are inconclusive. The proverbial baby cannot be thrown out

with the bath water.

 

 

 

In conclusion, let me summarize two " conspiracy theory " problems that

must be dealt with:

 

1. Those who opt to disclose new discoveries must clearly separate

the theoretical elements of their presentation from the information

they disclose.

2. Those to whom information is presented must deal with their

personal unwillingness to hear new facts. They must become more

receptive to new evidence and avoid dismissing verifiable evidence

simply because the ramifications are distressing or difficult to conceive.

3.

 

We have to discourage the misuse of language that wrongly labels and

categorizes people with information to share. Hostile or incorrect

terminology only serves to interfere with our mutual and communal

education. It is vital that we examine evidence and discoveries for

what they are. We must be careful not to expand evidence beyond its

empirical reality. Facts must not be confused with folklore, but must

be presented within the limits of their validity. By doing this, we

may convince the skeptics among us to listen with less resistance and

to end the practice of dismissing evidence solely because it disproves

their initial beliefs. If we deal effectively with these obstacles,

we all may become better informed about the things we need to know.

And perhaps one day we will come to know the reality that continues to

evade us to this day.

 

 

 

Jesse - Editor, TvNewsLIES.org

 

*

WHY AMERICANS REFUSE TO BELIEVE THE 9/11 EVIDENCE!!! - The

attacks of 9/11 were so unthinkable that most Americans would refuse

to believe the complicity of their own government, even if presented

with a mountain of evidence. - Very simply, it is possible to escape

blame if you do something that nobody in the world believes you could do.

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/refusing_the_9_11_evidence.html

 

 

 

address of this article is :

http://www.tvnewslies.org/html/they_are_not_conspiracy_theori.html