You are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

abc_xyz ago

A group of individuals working together to achieve a common goal, usually manipulating or oppressing a facet, which directly affects the majority of the populace.

When someone is accused of being a "conspiracy theorist", this dual concept conflates the first word, which I previously defined and the concept of a theory -- insinuating that the person has zero evidence.

The problem is that they usually have a lot of circumstantial evidence, so the label is completely loaded.

it is a conspiracy, and here is a pile of circumstantial evidence.

Normally in these types of situations, the decision maker is killed or suicided - viewers forget the event even took place. Intelligence agencies are in on it to sweep the circumsntial evidence under the rug so to speak.

Based on the above:

Those with authority that deny the existence of obvious evidence tampering or OBSTRUCTION OF JUSTICE are likely party to said conspiracy.

Ex: Look at how Trey Gowdy dealt with this. He stated anyone who impedes his investigations will be forced to publicly explain why they are impeding his investigation.

Conspirologist ago

The accusation of being conspiracy theorist is quite simple to debunk, because it is obviously illiterate.

They are deliberately switching definitions between hypothesis and theory.

Hypothesis - is based on argumented logic assumptions as a starting point for a theory.

Theory - is based on argumented facts that are exposing a conspiracy as truth or consensus.