Jump to content
The Education Forum

A Catalogue of Anti-Conspiracy Theory Propaganda ?


Recommended Posts

Question for the forum.

Has anyone involved in scientific and historical research about subjects like the JFK assassination, Watergate, Iran-Contra, or 9/11 ever published a reference list of authors, books, articles, movies, and websites that publish disinformation about so-called, "Conspiracy Theories?"  It would, obviously, be a very long list.

As a newcomer here, I have only been involved in studying these subjects for a few years, and it has taken awhile to sort through the ubiquitous disinformation on the internet-- which often surfaces toward the top of Google searches, and is usually presented to the public as rational "debunking" of "conspiracy theories" by people with legitimate-sounding academic and/or government credentials.  On a typical Google search, I have noticed that accurate, evidence-based research references about controversial subjects usually appear only AFTER pages 2 or 3 on Google-- following dozens of bogus, legitimate-sounding references to websites ridiculing kooky "conspiracy theorists."

I know some reasonably well educated people who have been completely duped by this ubiquitous propaganda, to this day.  It is, certainly, published with a slick veneer of credibility.

We also know that propagandists within the U.S. government-- from Frank Wisner, Allen Dulles and Cord Meyer to Cass Sunstein -- have been actively involved for decades in misleading the public about covert government ops.  Sunstein has even argued that "conspiracy theorists" studying covert U.S. government ops need to be undermined by internet propaganda and "cognitive infiltration," because, 1) the government has rarely deceived the public about covert ops, and 2) the mainstream media in our open society always keeps the public informed about government duplicity (!)

I have come to the conclusion that only people who have carefully studied and understood the actual science and history can see through this pervasive veneer of government-funded propaganda.

Here are a few obvious examples, based on my own review.  But I would appreciate any additions to this brief list-- or a reference to someone who has done this work.

 

Anti- "Conspiracy Theory" Propaganda Sources

1)  The Warren Commission Report

2)  Case Closed by Gerald Posner

3)  Reclaiming History by Vincent Bugliosi

4)  McAdams.edu

5)  Metabunk.com

6)  RationalWiki.com

7)  The 9/11 Commission Report

8)   Wikipedia

9)  Popularmechanics.com

10)  skepticalinquirer.org

11)  911myths.com

12)  skeptical-science.com

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, W. Niederhut said:

legitimate-sounding academic and/or government credentials

What is the distinction you draw between "legitimate-sounding" and "legitimate"?  Is "Professor of Clinical Psychology, Department of Psychiatry, Medical Sciences Division, Oxford University" (Daniel Freeman, https://www.psych.ox.ac.uk/team/daniel-freeman) legitimate or merely legitimate-sounding?

Did Cass R. Sunstein, https://hls.harvard.edu/faculty/directory/10871/Sunstein, in fact not graduate magna cum laude from Harvard Law School and hold distinguished professorships at the University of Chicago Law School for many years?  Is he not currently a distinguished professor at Harvard Law School?  Is he not the most-cited legal scholar in the United States?  Shall I relay your deep concerns to him?

Can you cite readers to instances of falsified academic or government credentials in the literature, or to any peer-reviewed publications that you believe are "government-funded propaganda"?

You characterization of Google is patently false.  Routine conspiracy-oriented searches return vastly more tinfoil-hat stuff than anti-conspiracy sites or studies.  I had to tailor careful, narrow searches to locate the serious research I have cited.

Here is one I'm pretty sure is not government-funded propaganda, although it well could be:  Paranoia: The Conspiracy Readerhttp://www.paranoiamagazine.com/.  I will let you decide whether to add it to your list or embrace it as the work of kindred spirits.

To a true Conspiracy Theorist, anyone who isn't equally bat-guano crazy is a disinformation agent sponsored by the mysterious Them.  Isn't that pretty much the Truth, Mr. Truther?

Even for this forum, your posts are so far into the ozone that I could almost believe you are a legitimate psychiatrist working on a study to expose the lunacy prevalent in conspiracy communities.  Trying to bring the real wackos out of the woodwork for purpose of research, don't you know?

Alas, serious researchers have beaten you to the punch.  In 2015, Italian researchers posted almost 5,000 obviously silly messages on science sites and conspiracy-oriented sites.  See https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0118093.  The messages were scientific-sounding lunacy - e.g., the mysterious chemtrails in the sky are actually spiked with Viagra in furtherance of a government conspiracy.  The messages received vastly more likes and favorable comments on the conspiracy sites than the science sites.  They also found that conspiracy believers are very insular - i.e., they tend to interact only with conspiracy sites, which of course serves as a reinforcement mechanism.

Wait a minute, I wasn't supposed to appear again until Groundhog Day.  When is it anyway?

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By "legitimate," I mean scientifically and historically accurate, true.

Surely, any informed person here could cite many examples of people with academic and/or government credentials who have published fraudulent claims, for financial or political reasons-- including some of my fellow Harvard University alumni.

To believe otherwise is, frankly, ludicrous.

As for Cass Sunstein-- the distinguished Felix Frankfurter Professor of social media surveillance and government propaganda hot dogs-- his treatise on the necessity of "cognitive infiltration" and manipulation of social media was put through the shredder by Professor David Ray Griffin.  Anyone interested should check the Unz reference that I posted on the "Cognitive Infiltration" thread here over the weekend.

Joseph Stalin would have LOVED Cass Sunstein.

Remember when Joe Djugashvili once said, "Ideas are far more dangerous than guns.  If we don't allow people to have guns, why would we allow them to have ideas?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, W. Niederhut said:

By "legitimate," I mean scientifically and historically accurate, true.

Surely, any informed person here could cite many examples of people with academic and/or government credentials who have published fraudulent claims, for financial or political reasons-- including some of my fellow Harvard University alumni.

To believe otherwise is, frankly, ludicrous.

As for Cass Sunstein-- the distinguished Felix Frankfurter Professor of social media surveillance and government propaganda hot dogs-- his treatise on the necessity of "cognitive infiltration" and manipulation of social media was put through the shredder by Professor David Ray Griffin.  Anyone interested should check the Unz reference that I posted on the "Cognitive Infiltration" thread here over the weekend.

Joseph Stalin would have LOVED Cass Sunstein.

Remember when Joe Djugashvili once said, "Ideas are far more dangerous than guns.  If we don't allow people to have guns, why would we allow them to have ideas?"

You need to improve your tap-dancing.  You said "legitimate-sounding … credentials."  Are the credentials of Freeman and Sunstein not "scientifically and historically true"?

Are you suggesting Sunstein publishes fraudulent claims for financial or political reasons?  Shall I pass on your defamation to the good professor and see what he says?  If not Sunstein, who?  You regard him as the "the distinguished Felix Frankfurter Professor of social media surveillance and government propaganda hot dogs," do you?  His vast resume - and I do mean vast - is published at https://hls.harvard.edu/faculty/directory/10871/Sunstein.  Can you steer us to anything in his numerous books and huge number of published articles that suggests he has the slightest interest in "media surveillance" or "government propaganda"?

Is research "fraudulent" merely because you happen to disagree with it?  Isn't that the real Truth, Mr. Truther?

The Sunstein article which you characterize as a "treatise" was in fact an invited, refereed (peer-reviewed), 25-page contribution to the highly prestigious Journal of Political Philosophy, which had a special "Symposium on Conspiracy Theories."  It was co-authored with Adrian Vermeule, Professor of Constitutional Law and Harvard, whose credentials are nearly as good as Sunstein's, https://hls.harvard.edu/faculty/directory/10919/Vermeule.  It was not published in some subversive governmental how-to manual.  It has been cited in 120 professional journals.

The suggestion by Sunstein and Vermeule for "cognitive infiltration" of conspiracy communities has been widely criticized, including by academics with far less obvious axes to grind than 9/11 Truther David Ray Griffin.  And so be it - the exchange of ideas is why philosophy journals exist.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Boy that was really nondescript was it not?

Even for an Oswald did it fairy tale.

I thought among the worst scenes was the portrayal of Oswald as an almost maniacal Marxist ranting and raving against the rightwingers in Dallas.

If Oliver Stone did that, whew.

But as long as its in a WC type production, its OK.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dulles - ghost writer of article after he was fired blaming JFK for withholding air support at the Bay of Pigs.   Edward Epstein - admitted source was Angleton.  Priscilla Johnson MacMillan, Gus Russo, Jerome Corsi, Roger Stone, Robert Blakey, Bugliosi, James Files.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

39 minutes ago, Ron Bulman said:

Dulles - ghost writer of article after he was fired blaming JFK for withholding air support at the Bay of Pigs.   Edward Epstein - admitted source was Angleton.  Priscilla Johnson MacMillan, Gus Russo, Jerome Corsi, Roger Stone, Robert Blakey, Bugliosi, James Files.

Ah, yes, Allen Dulles's protege, Priscilla What's-Her-Face-- the CIA's biographer of Marina Oswald...

But, speaking of the Dulles disinformation about the Bay of Pigs, the best analysis I have ever read about it is in Destiny Betrayed.

Col. L. Fletcher Prouty wrote about his own observations during the Bay of Pigs invasion, but the DiEugenio chapter (in Destiny Betrayed) explained the whole charade in considerable detail.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...