Do we all remember the anthrax-laced letters that were sent to members of Congress and media figures. Two postal workers were killed.
The letters, which came just on the heels of the Sept. 11 attacks, were pointed to as evidence of Iraq’s continuing threat to the United States.
The letters came with notes strongly suggesting that they came from Islamic radicals.
The government now claims that the prime suspect was a scientist employed by the U.S. Army, Bruce Ivins, a man who has just committed suicide.
There are indications, from letters that Ivins wrote to his local Maryland newspaper, that he might have been some kind of religious extremist.
ABC reported confirmation from unnamed sources that tests had revealed a substance that definitively pointed to Iraq. (It seems now that Ivins himself might have been this unnamed source, but ABC’s not talking.)
My mind is reeling.
I am not a conspiracy theorist. Obviously, if this had been a conspiracy, there would be no reason for the government to now point to Ivins and expose all this mess.
But, a conspiracy of one? A right-wing religious nutcase in an important job initiates a terrorist attack, which has the effect of cementing the neoconservative case for extreme measures?
But wait, one more detail. Members of the media were told on the sly by unidentified government officials that they should start taking cipro (an anthrax remedy).
I don’t believe in conspiracy theories. I do believe that the Bush administration had no scruples whatsoever about using any and every opportunity that presented itself to push their agenda on war with Iraq (an agenda that was in place long before 9/11) forward, despite the fact that Iraq had absolutely nothing to do with either 9/11 or the anthrax letters.
Frankly, the Bush administration has seemed surreal enough to me since the damn thing was inaugurated.
It’s been pointed out from the beginning how the anthrax letters were very convenient for the Republicans, and targeted at non-Republicans. And the anthrax was identified in 2002 IIRC as a strain made by the US army.
Why ? Are evil people not allowed to cooperate ? Conspiracies aren’t just believable, they are nearly inevitable. And the fact that one can discredit a theory merely by labelling it a conspiracy theory makes conspiracy all the more attractive - you don’t even need to succeed in keeping it secret, if most people will simply refuse to believe because of the label.
That doesn’t mean that all, or even most conspiracy theories are true; but it goes against human nature to assume they don’t exist.
It means that in 2001-2002 when this was being investigated Irving (possibly) was telling ABC news, “I’ve done tests on this, and it’s definitely from Iraq.”
As someone above said, “conspiracy theory” is more than just the words “conspiracy” and “theory” put together. A conspiracy theory is “the government was responsible for the 9/11 attacks”. A conspiracy theory is “the Jews are running the world through the banks”. I never said I didn’t believe there were conspiracies. If there were no conspiracies, it wouldn’t be a crime to conspire to commit a crime.
No a conspiracy theory IS just the words conspiracy and theory put together. It’s a common debasement of the language that only confuses discussion to use it otherwise.
You believe that there is a conspiracy WITHIN THE GOVERNMENT to willfully mislead the American people in order to consolidate power. How does what you just defined conflict with that?
Oh, sorry. If only I knew I was in the presence of the great arbiter of the English language I wouldn’t have done something so brash as question your authority. The collective knowledge of Wikipedia is nothing in the face of your steel fist of lexicological perfection. Carry on.
Well, now that the guy responsible is dead, I guess we won’t have to investigate any more! Case closed! Hurrah for the FBI! Clearly, he was just a lone nut, acting alone, who was not taking orders from anyone, even though his actions just happened to help push us into a war that the administration wanted. And if he had lived long enough to go to trial, I’m sure that’s exactly what he would have said on the stand. But I guess we’ll never know. Funny how stuff like that works out.
Yeah, that’s my take as well. As far as I am concerned, until I see their case, he was overwrought at the prospect of getting the shoddy treatment they gave Steven Hatfill. If he was depressed already, I can see how that would drive someone over the edge. This is not over to my mind.
You know as well as I do that ‘I don’t believe in conspiracy theories.’, means, “I don’t believe what those other crazy people believe, I believe…”, it only serves to confuse the issue being discussed because if something becomes the wrong kind of conspiracy rational and lucid debate about it becomes well-nigh impossible as ad hominems rule the day as anyone putting it forth becomes akin to a paranoid schizophrenic.
Just like in jayjay’s post where he said he didn’t believe in conspiracy theories, and then went on to elucidate a conspiracy theory that can be so defined even by the definition for conspiracy theory that he is a proponent of.
I have never heard the phrase, “I don’t believe in conspiracy theories.”, ever in my life lead to a more lucid and common understanding. Everyone believes in conspiracy theories, because conspiracies occur all the time. Even if the way he has defined it is a common way to do so, all it does is poison the well.
Or maybe there is a list of all the trademarked conspiracy theories, so I can tell which ones fit in Conspiracy Theories, as opposed to plain old English word usage conspiracy theories. So I can tell what separates 9/11 Government Coverup, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and JFK from the “Bush administration willfully misleads us.”
Generally I’ve found that when going with this sort of definition a Conspiracy Theory with capital letters means the thing that your silly opponents believe in, not the thing that you more rationally hold to.
Don’t tell me what I know, especially when you’re wrong. “I don’t believe in conspiracy theories” is pretty well accepted to mean “I don’t believe in bigfoot, UFOs, JFK, 9/11, etc.”
I don’t know where you get that. There are no faster-than-lightspeed bodies, but that doesn’t mean there’s no law against traveling faster than lightspeed.