Want to be marginalized? Talk about your ‘conspiracy theory’

My approach to the JFK assassination is that it was “an operation”.   When I’m feeling down to earth, I refer to myself as an “operations researcher.” When I’m making progress, I might upgrade to “investigator.”If I was looking for employment, I would go with “analyst.”
 David Talbot refers to people like us as “people’s historians”.  That’s good too.
When discussing the events of November 22, 1963, I ted to use terms like “Joint action”, “concerted action”, or “acted in concert.”  Don’t forget the simple word “plan.”
I don’t often use the word “conspiracy.” I think that when talking about the JFK case or similar events, the c-word is counterproductive and marginalizing.  Why describe those of us that challenge the lone gunman story as “conspiracy theorists”?  Or, in reductive bumper sticker terms: CTs?

Those who study the case are “historians”, “researchers” or “students”.  All perfectly good words, unlike “CT,” “LN,” or  “theorist,”  Theory of what?

‘JFK buff’ is an insult

The term “buff” is — how do i say this politely? –repellent.  A buff is a hobbyist.   What we’re doing has great value, but it would be a pretty sick hobby.    Remember how John Kerry did some good work on the contra-cocaine story?  Newsweek labeled him a “randy conspiracy buff”, invoking the trifecta of nudity, sex, and high adventure.  No thanks.

I refer to myself as an “operations researcher.” When I’m making progress, I might upgrade to “investigator.”I

“Lone nut” is also in poor taste, often used in the context of the “LN crowd”.  The terms “Lone wolf” or “single gunman” are respectful ways to refer to one’s adversaries in a case like this.

The people fighting AIDS had to deal with “victim”, “sick”, and similar metaphors.  Those in danger of infection were not “shooters” or “junkies” but “injection drug users”, or IDUs.  The challengers of the anti-immigrant forces have spent many years using the phrase “undocumented worker” rather than “illegal alien”.  Words matter.
The romance of conspiracy

I believe that many of us use the phrase “conspiracy theorist” because it seems practical, romantic, or titillating.

The last two reasons are bad ones.   Real bad.  Two of the many reasons the word has been marginalized.

Those who study the case are “historians”, “researchers” or “students”.  All perfectly good words, unlike “theorist”.  Theory of what?

If we want to not be seen by anyone as “on the margins”, there is a simple fix.  Admit that the phrase has been abused by our adversaries and the mass media.  It is now used as a red flag.  The design is to put the target in a box.  It can no longer be used by us in a practical sense.

I think the romantic and titillating aspects of the word “conspiracy” are enticing.  “They killed the President!  We have to call it what it is – conspiracy!”  It’s fun to be wrapped up in a world of high adventure, fighting the forces of Mordor with the energies of truth and light.

I understand it — I like romantic stuff and have a rebel nature.  But, I have to admit, it makes me blue.  We’re in the midst of an important conflict about how history will be written.  We need to share good stories, not needless drama.  I’d rather win.

23 comments

  1. Thank you for those thoughts Mr Simpich,

    I always refer to myself as a “Conspiracy Analyst”, and will in longer discussions describe myself as a historical researcher.

    I am not uncomfortable with the word “conspiracy” at all, that there are conspiracies that drive most of history is I think a proven fact.

    A national security state is in fact a conspiratorial organization of the state, based on secrets beyond the reach of the public need to know. Such a state is indeed a conspiracy against the general public.

    It is perpetually curious to me that this nation, predicated on personal liberty and “unalienable rights”; with a Constitution establishing a Republic, has allowed the rise of an unaccountable oligarchy, a criminal syndicate that sits in obvious constitutional ultra vires condition in DC.

    Of course the main problem is propaganda, or what Bernays euphemistically refers to as “Public Relations”. This combined with cradle to grave indoctrination by both so-called “Education” (compulsive), and Infotainment is at the heart of the matter.

    A further complication is a “legal system” based on tolerating legal fictions as a given; generating the “fictitious entity”; the corporation with all of it’s indemnities and impunity written into statutory “law”.

    I am most curious to read what our resident state propagandists have to say about your commentary here.
    \\][//

  2. theNewDanger says:

    Most of the observations I have read here of what WCR opponents post here aren’t theories. They are observations of what is wrong with the accounts of the criminal globalist collectivist syndicate and its acolytes’ truculence towards telling the truth about an unelected plutocracy determined to make permanent the propagandist capability to mold the public into living any lie in any event.

  3. JohnR says:

    I work in local government. My co-workers are well aware that I consider myself to be a student of the assassination. Periodically, some new person I encounter tries to insult me by calling me a “buff,” or “nut.” I simply remind the individual they themselves have witnessed firsthand the lengths to which a government agency will go to employ public relations (propaganda) to protect their, but not necessarily the public’s, interest. I simply point out that it’s naive to think the same dynamic does not play out at the national level. After that, I’m usually left alone.

  4. theNewDanger says:

    Just like the powers-that-shouldn’t-be (PTSB) installed Armas and took him out when he pissed them him off, they did the same with JFK. Yes, America is a banana republic whose people are dumber, more prone to sell out their children, and more weak-willed than any other banana republic. JFK was made an example out of to anyone in any political office who would dare to make a change for humanity instead of guiding the 99.99% towards wage-minus-inflation serfdom and turning human life into the PTSB’s own perverse interpretation of Orwell’s Animal Farm.

  5. Photon says:

    “The term “buff” is-how do I say this politely?-repellent .” Obviously Mr. Simpich hasn’t spent much time in Boulder. What does he think the word ” fascist” is-something used by our Conspiracy Analyst ( ie. High School graduate who never completed a college degree) to describe those who do not subscribe to his viewpoints?
    I thought that this site was supposed to discuss the facts (perceived or otherwise) regarding the assassination of Jack Kennedy. By what stretch of the imagination does Mr. Whitten’s post have to do with that? I understand Mr. Simpich’s obfuscation and tangents-he is a skilled attorney whose job isn’t to find the truth, but to establish the best case to aid his client.Facts that may get in the way of that case need to be contradicted, impeached or most conveniently ignored.But let’s face it -he really isn’t interested in the physical evidence, nor the ballistic evidence, nor the medical evidence: he is interested in trying to convince the uneducated that THEM killed JFK-be they the CIA, the Right Wing Conspiracy, Goldwater Republicans, or any other conspiracy-de-jour group that specifically does not include a left wing radical like Oswald, who owned the gun, worked in the TSBD, shot a cop and fled the scene in front of multiple witnesses, tried to shoot another cop in front of multiple witnesses, whose palm print was found on an interior aspect of the murder weapon and whose fingerprint was found on the murder weapon years later, whose wife took pictures of him holding the murder weapon and whose last known position prior to the assassination was on the same floor that the shots came from.
    Instead we are supposed to believe that none of that matters, because the CIA ( or somebody in the CIA) hated JFK-despite his increasing their budget, increasing their responsibilities, increasing their standing vis-a-vis the military,using them as his primary weapon against Castro, etc.
    There is not now, nor has there ever been any evidence that theory has any truth to it. Not because evidence ” is hidden” by nefarious elements, but because after 50 years there is no “there” there.

    • As I said above: ‘I am most curious to read what our resident state propagandists have to say about your commentary here.”

      So, thank you Dr Photon, your commentary is exactly what I expected to see from you; a bold and spurious reiteration of the same propaganda garbage that you usually spew here.

      You disparaging remarks as to some one having “only” a high school education is quite humorous. You seem to defame didactic – self education as some sort of sin, rather than the avoidance of the indoctrination one is burdened with in so-called “Higher Education”, yet you yourself have shown profound ignorance in most of the topics discussed on this forum, including what you claim to be your primary education, that of medicine.

      In fact your commentary here has been nothing but serial appeals to authority and pretense at knowledge to a penumbra of topics that you clearly have no clue to whatsoever.
      \\][//

    • Paul May says:

      Two words in the English language where “the” is never required are God and CIA. One employed in any capacity within CIA would know this. A not so surprising mistake by Photon.

      • Photon says:

        Please go to YouTube.
        #1.”Lincoln Academy 1999 Interview Stansfield Turner”.
        #2.”Richard Helms needed to work on his plausible denial face”.
        Perhaps the word didn’t get to the Director(s).

  6. kennedy63 says:

    Photon, after 50 years plus years, there is a turning point where truth is stranger than fiction. Were we to concede that Oswald alone shot President Kennedy, how can the contradictory evidence be explained? The JFK narrative (both the official version and the citizen produced evidence) contradict the findings of the Warren Report. Operation 40 was started under Nixon and Allen Dulles, and trained a group of exile Cubans in warfare, assassination, sabotage, and terrorism. It is possible individuals from this elite cadre conspired to kill JFK. After all, it was the DRE that pushed propaganda about Oswald’s defection and it seems that military agents or personnel passed to DPD the identifying information on the shooter, both at the TSBD and the Tippit crime scene. The 5’10”, 165 lbs. white male with brown hair was exactly the descriptive information sent from CI/SIG to other Intel agencies because CI/SIG was conducting a mole hunt (cover) to frame Oswald for JFK’s murder. When you consider all the people Oswald was connected to, the idea that the finger prints of intelligence was all over him becomes a reality. David Atlee Phillips admitted he handled Oswald and places blame directly at the door of the CIA for the JFK murder. Furthermore, with Oswald conveniently dead, the evidence could be more efficiently contrived against him. Dead people cannot mount a sustainable defense. We seek not to defend Oswald, as much as we seek to uncover the sponsors of JFK’s assassination. We know Hoover and Johnson conspired to cover up the crime by blaming Oswald. hoover knew as early as 1959-60 (When Oswald was in the Soviet Union) that someone was using his name and birth certificate. Hoover stated they attempted to facilitate a deal to send jeeps to Cuba. The principals involved in that chicanery had ties to the mob and exile Cubans. Nixon and Dulles colluded to foment anti-Castro forces BEFORE Castro came to power (See newly released FBI document at MFF). If any groups had motive, means, and opportunity, it was CIA, MOB/Right-wing oil Businessmen, and exiled anti-Castro Cubans. All these groups had a common goal of toppling Castro, or Kennedy, as both were bothersome problems. When we say these groups, we mean individuals of like minds and penchants for using criminal means to achieve their goals. The fact that Kennedy was shot four time (back shot, frontal throat shot, two head shots (back and front), and Connelly being shot twice (back and wrist) equals a conspiracy of synchronized shooters. Oswald could not shoot that fast or accurate – trained para-military shooters could. The ob and the exiled Cubans has their reasons to kill Kennedy, but so did individuals inside and outside the Establishment. Essentially, what we are saying is that the para-military mechanics shot JFK, but the men in suits acted collectively to cover up the crime.

    • seems that military agents or personnel passed to DPD the identifying information on the shooter, both at the TSBD and the Tippit crime scene.

      Evidence? We know how the DPD got those descriptions.

      David Atlee Phillips admitted he handled Oswald and places blame directly at the door of the CIA for the JFK murder. Furthermore,

      Evidence?

      We know Hoover and Johnson conspired to cover up the crime by blaming Oswald.

      Evidence?

      hoover knew as early as 1959-60 (When Oswald was in the Soviet Union) that someone was using his name and birth certificate.

      No. Marguerite went to the FBI and said that somebody might have taken Lee’s birth certificate, and an agent suggested to Hoover that this might mean that some impostor had it. Hoover then sent out a memo mentioning this possibility. That’s not “knowing” any such thing as you suggested.

      The fact that Kennedy was shot four time

      Not a fact. All the medical evidence shows two shots.

      Connelly being shot twice (back and wrist)

      The trajectory from an exit in his chest works perfectly for a hit to his wrist and then thigh.

      Your post was a farrago of buff book factoids.

      • Tom S. says:

        Your post was a farrago of buff book factoids.

        Dr. McAdams, you’re trying my patience. Must your choice of labels be so limited, especially in this particular thread?
        I have to click on a green colored link, worded “approve” to add your comment to the mix, here, and I can assure everyone, I do
        not approve, not one bit!

        • Given what you approve from the conspiracy folk here, who are constantly insisting that everybody who disagrees with them is a CIA spook, I find it odd that you object to the way I characterize the assertions in that post.

          • “Given what you approve from the conspiracy folk here..”~McAdams

            But sir! You really don’t know what you are missing.

            Now do you?

            I have an unapproved comment in this very thread. You have no idea of what Tom saves your precious thin skin from “professor”.
            \\][//

      • “Your post was a farrago of buff book factoids.”~McAdams

        It has become such a bore reading this same lame drivel from you day after day, week after week, month after month… as the years go by… a tepid brew of bland bantersnatch; relentless and exhausting.
        \\][//

  7. “If liberty means anything at all, it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.”~George Orwell

    “Free speech is not for the faint of heart.

    Nor is it for those who are easily offended, readily intimidated or who need everything wrapped in a neat and tidy bow. Free speech is often messy, foul-mouthed, obscene, intolerant, undignified, insensitive, cantankerous, bawdy and volatile.

    While free speech can also be tender, tolerant, soft-spoken, sensitive and sweet, it is free speech’s hot-blooded alter ego—the wretched, brutal, beastly Mr. Hyde to its restrained, dignified and civil Dr. Jekyll—that tests the limits of our so-called egalitarian commitment to its broad-minded principles.

    Unfortunately, our appreciation for a robust freedom of speech has worn thin over the years.

    Many Americans have become fearfully polite, careful to avoid offense, and largely unwilling to be labeled intolerant, hateful, closed-minded or any of the other toxic labels that carry a badge of shame today. We’ve come to prize civility over freedom. Most of all, too many Americans, held hostage by their screen devices and the talking heads on television, have lost the ability to think critically.

    Societies that cherish free speech relish open debates and controversy and, in turn, produce a robust citizenry who will stand against authoritarian government. Indeed, oppressive regimes of the past have understood the value of closed-mouthed, closed-minded citizens and the power inherent in controlling speech and, thus, controlling how a people view their society and government.”~John Whitehead

    https://www.rutherford.org/publications_resources/john_whiteheads_commentary/the_right_to_tell_the_government_to_go_to_hell_free_speech_in_an_age_o

    \\][//

  8. For the elucidation of Dr Photon, who claims that the US would never use the tactics of Stalinist Russia by using the psychiatric powers to incarcerate an innocent person:

    “Reporter Donny Gilson falsely committed to 6 months in St. Cloud MN psychiatric ward for “conspiracy theories”
    VANCOUVER, BC – In an interview from inside the Behavioral Mental Unit of the St. Cloud Hospital, St. Cloud, MN, Donny Gilson, reporter for Truth Frequency Radio, has been able to document his ordeal since a commitment based on family objections to his “conspiracy theories,” thus reporting on how many alternative media and free thinkers on the Internet are targeted by increased surveillance under “psychiatric” laws that hold “conspiracy research” to be a “mental disorder”.

    Donny Gilson and his network Truth Frequency Radio and host Chris Geo are now taking steps to help free him on a writ of habeas corpus or other legal document, as there are no legal or psychiatric grounds for Donny Gilson’s commitment. He is not a danger to himself or to the public at large, and you can judge from this interview. MORE>>

    http://www.zengardner.com/real-conspiracy-theorists/

    \\][//

  9. Noah says:

    I’m new here, so maybe this has been fully discussed, but do any of the supporters of the official story have anything to say about documented mainstream media infiltration by intelligence (Operation Mockingbird) and earlier by tax-free foundations (Normon Dodd’s work)? Or about the CIA memo regarding using the term conspiracy theorist for critics of the Warren Commission and to “employ propaganda assets [in the media] to answer and refute the attacks of the critics”? Do they see the irony that they clumsily still follow an outed CIA memo to debunk the idea that the CIA could have anything to do with this? I’m guessing it’s a see no evil, hear no evil type of response, but you never know.

    Aside: Of course, the truest facts are government facts, until new truer facts are adopted by government, at which point the former never were, and the latter always are, until they aren’t again. That’s what current studies tell us. 😉

  10. Gerry Simone says:

    Referring to JFK assassination conspiracy theorists as buffs certainly is demeaning. It’s a way to rebuff their position (pun intended) or to not take them seriously.

    Conspiracies are no laughing or trivial matter in the area of criminal law. Neither is circumstantial evidence.

    LN or Lone Nutter is no more derogatory than saying CT or CTer.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

In seeking to expand the range of informed debate about the events of 1963 and its aftermath, JFKFacts.org welcomes comments that are factual, engaging, and civil. more