Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Clown-Free Zone... sorry, no clowns allowed -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Oblomov who wrote (191899)	9/13/2002 1:04:47 PM
From: Dave	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 436258

use of the term "conspiracy" has come to connote reductionist thinking, unblinking adherence to ideology, and partisanism. Worse, I think it's used to connote weirdos who worship crystals and claim communication with alien races and think there's something remotely interesting about the number of letters in "LINCOLN" and "KENNEDY." There's nothing reductionist, dogmatic, or partisan about that connotation. It's just old-fashioned wacko. I realize that none of my arguments will matter to someone who agrees with Chomsky. You're evidently much better versed with Chomsky than I. I am not really familiar with his methods or his arguments, only his claims. And many of these claims ring true. As for Rethinking Camelot, which I haven't read, there's nothing wacko about suspecting that the assassination in Dallas was more than the work of a lone crazy person. If he was a lone gunman, then the government went to extraordinary and inexplicable measures to cover up its own investigation into that loner. It doesn't ring true, and whether that constitutes a "conspiracy theory" is irrelevant to its veracity. And distrusting the "lone gunman theory" is definitely not "reductionist thinking, unblinking adherence to ideology, and partisanism." Blindly believing the official story fits that description better than questioning it does. Dave