On paleologic nationalism

I find it a little pathetic that some regulars are trying to post pro-conspiracy comments in my recent post on John F. Kennedy’s assassination after I said that I’d shun all debate if they had not done their homework. I made an exception with a commenter from Germany because I believe that Germans, who have been thoroughly brainwashed by the Americans after the Second World War, deserve a little more patience. But it is inexcusable that native English-speakers are reluctant to read Vincent Bugliosi’s monumental refutation of every single JFK conspiracy theory in a work that took him twenty years to complete.

I must say something about what I have been repeating over and over again:

High-IQ people don’t believe in conspiracy theories: whether it’s JFK, 9/11, the US Moon landing “hoax” of 1969, Satanic Ritual Abuse or the UFO “landing” in New Mexico in 1947.

Silly white nationalists believe that the London decapitation incident was a Jewish hoax. Some of them not only blame the Jews, instead of the Muslims, for that single incident: they blame the Jews for the Boston bombings too; the killings of Adam Lanza, the Breivik incident at Norway, and some conspiracy theorists have developed crank theories about the 2005 London bombings too.

In Spain these idiots also believe that the Jihad attack of 2004 at Madrid was also staged. Here in Mexico the brown Untermenschen also believe that the assassination of a PRI candidate and a Catholic cardinal were orchestrated political murders. Lone wolf assassins cannot exist in the minds of those who lack an in-built parsimony principle (Occam’s razor or economy principle) in their little skulls.

People under the grip of what in my book I call “paleologic thinking” always elaborate hypothesis that preposterously multiply the entities.

I overstated. Some who score very high on IQ studies are every bit as paranoid as the common Neanderthal we see on the streets. Since in my previous post on JFK I mentioned Magnus Carlsen, who won the crown of chess a couple of days ago, I must add that one of the heroes in my teens, World Chess Champion Bobby Fischer, was as paranoid as the previous American champion, Paul Morphy. The grim fact is that you may have the highest IQ and still be the victim of mental disorders. (For those who read Spanish, take a look at my mini-book En Pos de un Rey Metafórico about the pathetic lives of the chess champions.)

I have quite a concrete idea of why humans (and white nationalists are human; all-too human) have a propensity to fall into what American psychiatrist Silvano Arieti used to call paleologic thinking. Unfortunately, this can only be properly explained by reading my book, Hojas Susurrantes, on the archeology of the human psyche.

In a single blog entry it is impossible to transmit a complex theory, where, besides Arieti, I use the work of Lloyd deMause, Colin Ross, Alice Miller, Julian Jaynes and the critics of psychiatry. Suffice it to say that I believe that the human psyche can be read like the stratigraphy in archeology, with the most primitive—and maddening—infanticidal forms of childrearing (cf. my Metapedia article on the subject) in the lowest stratum and the comparatively most benign forms of parental-filial relations at the top.

My favorite quotation in Arieti’s monumental Interpretation of Schizophrenia is that a hypothetical visitor from Mars would detect many instances of schizoid strata even among the modern Western man. DeMause would agree and would add that among the most primitive cultures, so immersed in magical thinking, psychological dissociation was much worse. In his famous The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bicameral Mind Jaynes even claimed “Before the second millennium B.C., everyone was schizophrenic,” in the sense that humans were immersed in magical thinking (non-paleologic, Aristotelian forms of logic would come later, with the Greeks).

I don’t expect those who have not read at least the translated chapters of my book to understand what all this has to do with lesser forms of paranoia, like those conspiracy theories I cited in my self-quote above, which includes the white nationalists’ paranoia of blaming 9/11 on everything except the actual Islamist perpetrators. But for those who already have a good grasp of what I say in Hojas Susurrantes, let me remind them these words: “The paleologician confuses the physical world with the psychological one. Instead of finding a physical explanation for an event, he looks for a personal motivation or an intention as the cause of an event.”

Just as the primitive man, in a definitive breakdown of the saner forms of cognition, for the disturbed individual the world turns itself animist; each external event having a profound meaning. There are no coincidences for those who inhabit the world of magical thinking. Both the primitive animist and the modern schizophrenic live in distinct dimensions compared to the rational man. The conceptualization of external happenings as impersonal physical forces requires a much more advanced level of cognition than seeing them as personal agents.

If the Greeks are afflicted by epidemics, it is because Phoebus wants to punish Agamemnon. Paranoiacs and paranoids interpret almost everything as manifesting a psychological intention or meaning. In many cases practically everything that occurs is interpreted as willed by the persecutors of the patient.

Along the lines of the reminiscences of paleologic process of thought of other ages, when everybody was immersed in magical thinking, if something as big as the assassination of JFK or the September 11 attacks ever happened, to the modern paleologician prosaic motivational explanations won’t be enough. He would search for a more transcendental, “meaningful” explanation of the human tragedy, as Phoebus punishing Agamemnon when the Homeric Greeks still had to develop more scientific and causal forms of thinking (replace “Phoebus” for “US government” to see my point).

If Jaynes is right, and I believe he is, it is understandable that the human psyche, especially among the most primitive specimens, will still show reminiscences of paleologic thinking in the modern age. All conspiracy theories are ultimately archetypical regressions, although “schizoid,” not “schizophrenic”—still not of the grotesque, acting-out kind that the psychiatrists encounter in their young patients.

Let’s pick the July 8, 1947 Roswell UFO incident from my above list. The paleologicians ask us to abandon both our in-built Occam’s razor and Aristotelic logic and believe that the incident elicited a massive, governmental cover up for an actual extraterrestrial visitation—a cover up involving several republican and democratic presidencies, from Truman to Obama!

This of course strains our credulity well beyond its breaking point, since it assumes that all those administrations, which had been at loggerheads with each other, suddenly fully agreed on the absolute need to hide from the public “the July 8 Truth.”

Prominent skeptic author Joe Nickell, whom I met in a 1994 conference of skeptics at Seattle, identified the myth-making process of the Truthers, which he called the “Roswellian Syndrome.” With another colleague Nickell used the Roswell event as an example, but pointed out that the same syndrome is readily observable in other conspiracy theories. Nickell and his colleagues identified five distinct stages of development of an urban myth:

Incident: The initial incident and reporting on July 8, 1947.

Debunking: Soon after the initial reports, the mysterious object was identified as a weather balloon, later confirmed to be a balloon array from Project Mogul which had gone missing in flight.

Submergence: The news story ended with the identification of the weather balloon. However, the event lingered on in the “fading and recreative memories of some of those involved.” Rumor and speculation simmered just below the surface in Roswell and became part of the culture at large. In time, UFOlogists arrived, asked leading questions and helped to spin a tale of crashed flying saucers and a government conspiracy to cover-up the true nature of the event.

Mythologizing: After the story submerged, and, over time, reemerged, it developed into an ever-expanding and elaborate myth. The mythologizing process included exaggeration, faulty memory, folklore and deliberate hoaxing. The deliberate hoaxing, usually self-serving for personal gain or promotion—for example, the promotion of the 1950 sci-fi movie The Flying Saucer—, in turn fed the urban folklore (“prolefeed for the proles”).

Reemergence and media bandwagon effect: Publication of books such as The Roswell Incident by Berlitz and Moore in 1980, television shows and other media coverage perpetuated the UFO crash story and cover-up conspiracy beliefs. Conspiracy beliefs typically mirror public sentiments towards the US government (the modern “Phoebus”) and oscillate along with those attitudes.

These stages are repeated almost in identical form in other conspiracy theories that don’t involve UFOs, like the ones referred to above in my self-quote. In my opinion, all of them are the product of a flaw in the human psyche. Big events must have big meaningful causes, not prosaic ones (Ancient Greece epidemics caused by Phoebus; JFK and 9/11 by Phoebus-substitute agents).

Reclaiming_History_Bugliosi_1st-ed-2007_WWNorton

But I don’t like posting this entry. Without an actual knowledge of the original synthesis I do of the published material of the mentioned authors (Arieti et al), the thrust of my argument is lost. I’d prefer that English-speaking visitors forget for the moment my theories and make instead an effort to listen, for the first time in their lives, the prosecutor who blamed Oswald and Oswald alone.

Don’t leave the courtroom without giving a fair hearing to the prosecutor, especially if you already have spent dozens of hours listening to the attorney.

27 Comments

  1. Reminds me of this lol.

    • Yes. Do you know that chess champion Paul Morphy said that his relatives wanted to steal or damage his clothes too? It’s a common form of paranoia.

  2. Dear Chechar,

    I am very grateful for your blog which has enlightened me to many areas of study which, in the course of my journeys, struggles, tarries and victories fortunate or earned, I overlooked or lacked the intelligence and inquisitiveness to seize.

    I am very grateful for your blog and insights. Please, keep writing.

    Nor is it lost upon me your level of erudition, especially considering English is not your first language. Your “the bloody aztecs” alone showed me a level of scholarship which humbles me, and in truth most who know me would describe me as an incorrigibly bumptious and bombastic bully, both intellectually and physically, not because I’m good, but because they suck, and lack my confidence.

    I found your blog because one day, in the desperation and disgust of simply, going back to the grind of what at times appears a hopeless struggle, for I do share your views on contempt of Christian so called morality and failed pseudo white nationalism, I randomly searched the web for “because the beauty of the white Aryan woman must not perish from the earth”, and stumbled upon a gem of a blog, that I follow when others such as occidental quarterly and counter currents, I care not to follow.

    Your articles on “Were the Greeks blonde” and “Sparta” in particular, I am most grateful for.

    The last time I casually took an IQ test, first thing in the morning without any warm up, I scored a 158, which, regardless of what that means or its accuracy or lack of, and despite the 5 languages I speak without trace of any accent, common sense and my eyes tell me irrefutably, that stupid is mushrooming.

    No, I don’t feel smart. I have been fortunate enough to come across a few, who, if I may borrow a Spartan phrase, it is good to know that there are better men than myself yet in the world.

    But I would urge and admonish you only one thing, consider, with the benefit of hindsight, how many times in the past, you were proven wrong? Not for anyone else but for your own sake, how often do you make mistakes?

    Carlos Hathcock himself said he couldn’t have made that shot.

    Are there too many paranoid conspiracy cooks? Absolutely.
    Are all conspiracies true? Of course not.
    Do conspiracies exist? Patently so. Julius Caesar was killed by a conspiracy, the federal reserve was thus hatched by a conspiracy, conspiracies, my friend, happen every day.

    Paranoia and cowardice are of course a part of the human psyche.
    And if you are interested, I will be happy to prove to you, or, be proven false by you, John Fitzgerald Kennedy was not lone-gunmanned.
    That is simply the catspaw patsie.

    It’s all academic really, for no doubt, you will send me your links, and I will send you my links, and each will have their “irrefutable proof”, and all believe the lies of their chosen fancy.

    Is that not, the way of the lemmings?

    Is Snowden a shill? I am not 100% sure on that.
    But was JFK shot by a single gunman?
    I am more than 100% sure he was not.
    A simple search of William Cooper’s released video before he was murdered shows the driver of JFK’s vehicle turning around to deliver the coup ‘di grace.

    And video, is a tad bit more convincing than, so and so’s writings, wouldn’t you say?

    But you are no doubt busy and I am also busy, I work more than 90 hours a week, between various projects, so while I appreciate backbone and sardonicism, haughty contempt and sangfroid in writing speaking and acting, simply consider, how many times in your life, have you been wrong?

    It is disheartening, to see the enemies of our race surpass us in solidarity while although we, surpass them in ability in so many areas, excel fighting the enemy only, in fighting each other.

    • Thank you for your praise. It is very uncommon that people share my ultimate drive: the preservation of Aryan female beauty. Yes: there’s a gulf between me and WNsts because we are seeing different things. My Self is spiritually-oriented, and the Self’s fulfillment, even after I die (what a Spanish poet called “dust in love”), is what drives me.

      Are there too many paranoid conspiracy cooks? Absolutely. Are all conspiracies true? Of course not. Do conspiracies exist? Patently so. Julius Caesar was killed by…

      But here you are conflating different things. I don’t deny that conspiracies exist. That would be crazy. When in the 1980s I lived in the States the Iran-Contra affair exploded against president Reagan. It was a real conspiracy and do you know what?: Real conspiracies always are exposed. Always.

      What I am talking in these entries is “conspiracy theories”. Totally different subject.

      Take the Roswell paradigm for example. In such conspiracies virtually all of the System’s institutions are involved: the US government, the CIA, the FBI, the Security Departments and even the non-governmental, most powerful institutions in the US like the Mainstream Media.

      Everything and everyone is confabulated in a gigantic conspiracy involving several administrations to hide from the public “The Truth” (not only UFO visitations but human sacrifices of children; faked landings on the Moon, or attacks on presidents and the symbols of trade power in New York).

      Totally different subject! In the Iran-Contra affair, for instance, which I followed closely when living in California (to the point of watching the TV proceedings at the Congress and the “trial” of Oliver North) the conspirators were very few. In what we skeptics call “conspiracy theories” almost everyone in the government and the media is involved in hiding “The Truth” about 9/11, JFK or UFO landings, you name it.

      was JFK shot by a single gunman? I am more than 100% sure he was not.

      But there’s the rub. Can you consider “how many times in your life have you been wrong?” Because errare human est that means that any of us could be wrong, not only me.

      A simple search of William Cooper’s released video before he was murdered shows the driver of JFK’s vehicle turning around to deliver the coup ‘di grace.

      You are proving my point. It seems that you have not listened anything of what the prosecutor says, since all of this and more has been rebutted many times by the skeptics (not only Bugliosi).

      I know what your attorney says. I grew up in a culture where I watched most of what the sensationalist media asks us to believe. And this includes Oliver Stone’s film and the Mexican media and friends and family that took that fiction as fact, even the serious journalists.

      I passed thru the stage of believing the media but then I studied the other side. Before Bugliosi published his work, in Houston I obtained a copy of Gerald Posner’s book on the JFK assassination, Case Closed, which proved that Oswald acted alone.

      That was in the middle 1990s. If I was able to listen to both attorney and prosecutor, will you be willing to do the same?

      My experience in parapsychology tells me that when you read only one side of the debate, as I did in my twenties, you cannot even conceive that the skeptics could be right. I was “more than 100% sure”, to paraphrase you, that the paranormal existed. But I was deluded.

      What I did in my twenties was not rational: reading tons of literature of one side of the debate. Read the other side on the JFK controversy (Posner’s much slimmer book than Bugliosi’s if you like) and make up your mind. Avoid the mistakes that I did when I was much younger.

  3. “I find it a little pathetic that some regulars are trying to post pro-conspiracy comments in my recent post on John F. Kennedy’s assassination after I said that I’d shun all debate if they had not done their homework.”

    Well, I have done some of my “homework” on this subject and it does not include Bugliosi’s book, but does include Craig Roberts book “kill Zone, A Sniper Looks at Dealy plaza”. In this book, Roberts quotes US Marine Corps sniper Carlos Hathcock (a military legend here and also, Hathcock was the founder of the Marine Corps Sniper School. Hathcock had 93 confirmed kills in Vietnam) as having stated that he …

    (rest of the comment removed by admin)

    • You misunderstood completely. I am not talking of listening exclusively to the attorney and claim that you did you homework. I am saying that if you spent, say, a hundred hours reading conspiracy conjecture you need now to spend another hundred hours listening to the prosecutor. Have you done that?

      • In this case (Kennedy’s assassination ), it is not necessary to read the entire 889 page Warren Commission Report, or delve into the archive of court records to…

        (rest of the comment removed by admin)

      • Nope. And I am sorry that I keep deleting most of your comments as per what I said in my previous entry: basic homework obviously means listening to both sides of the debate. If you have spent certain amount of hours listening to the attorney (conspiracy conjecture to absolve Oswald), in a court you will be obliged to listen the same amount of hours to the prosecutor.

        What I delete of your comment has been answered by Bugliosi and I won’t add his arguments here because you seem to be unwilling to do your basic homework: listening both sides of the debate before you, as a member of the “juror”, reaches a verdict.

        Like all who indulge in conspiracy conjecture, you seem to believe that it’s enough to listen to one side and form “an educated opinion”. But that is not an educated opinion. It’s religion. It is blind faith.

        Any judge whose courtroom you left when the prosecutor stars to present his case blaming Oswald and Oswald alone because, as you say in your removed comment, “It is only necessary to use your own judgment, or the judgment of very capable others”, would ask the courtroom’s police to impede your exit and force you to listen to both sides.

        Anyway, I am not asking you to read Bugliosi’s very thick book or the Warren Commission report. Reading the much shorter book by Gerald Posner, Case Closed, from which I’ll add soon its prologue for this blog, would be an excellent start.

        Please don’t comment in these JFK threads until you actually listen to the other side of the debate.

  4. Honestly, I find most conspiracy theories pretty boring. Andrew Anglin and Alex Linder are both convinced 9/11 was an Israeli operation, but have little tolerance for people going on about crisis actors and chemtrails, so there’s a range of skepticism as well.

    It seems strange to claim that all conspiracies have been exposed. Sort of like claiming that all murders result in the discovery of a corpse. Discovering the corpse confirms that a person’s been murdered, but that doesn’t mean a person couldn’t be murdered without anyone ever knowing.

    In any case, most conspiracy theorists possess a very superficial skepticism. They’re raised by the government schools to love something called “democracy”, and so they’re convinced they need to protect “democracy” from the conspirators. They can’t reassess their fundamental assumptions, just specific events.

    • “It seems strange to claim that all conspiracies have been exposed.”

      I had in mind big political news such as e.g., Lincoln’s assassination and the Iran-Contra affair when I wrote that sentence.

  5. This is by far the best blog, containing probably the best mind in WN.

    Bravo, Chechar, I thought you would have quit by now … apparently you have an engine like Bowden … just hope it doesn’t burn up so quickly as his did.

    As it relates to conspiracies, I do believe in Atlantis and the cover-up by the Jews of the true origin of the Aryan race.

    I know you don’t like the topic of esotericism, but I hope that you do research on the legitimacy of Himmler’s interest in the ‘Aryan race’ … as now mummies of Celts and Teutons have popped up in Japan, China, Egypt, Tibet, N. Africa, and Ireland. Ancient swastikas have been found on every major continent in abundance, along with Phoenician [the language the Jews stole] carvings that indicate a common language among tribes.

    It’s all very hard to prove, of course, but there does seem to be a lot of evidence that Western Europeans were involved in civilizing host populations throughout the world far prior to European expansion in the Middle Ages.

    • Oh, thanks for the praise…

      Bowden died in his late forties; I’m already in my middle fifties but the engine will die only when my body dies.

      Villa_Romana_La_OlmedaYes: in Kemp’s book it is mentioned what you say about mummies of whites being found everywhere, as far as China and also what you say about the swastikas.

      When I lived in Gran Canaria, an island beside the African Sahara, I learnt that in the 1930s Himmler’s buffs took serious interest in the troglodyte settlements in the island because they were blonder and whiter than the 16th century Spaniards who conquered them.

  6. I agree with Mister Deutsch above Chechar, you are probably the best mind in WN or rather NS, certainly the best mind I have come across over the internet. Continue onward in your uncompromising upward drive toward uncompromised perspectives/truth, regardless of how far it takes you from “humanity”. As Adolf said

    “our thoughts and actions must in no way be determined by the approval or disapproval of our time, but by the binding obligation to a truth which we have recognized.”

    Of course I know you understand well the spirit behind that logic. Good luck!

    • Thank you for the huge compliment. And please check your spam filter. Soon I’ll email you.

  7. My concept of the “conspiracy shell game” is what you are touching on, though from a most negative point of view.

    In this era, how is one to know which ‘facts’ are true, which are frauds, and in either case, how they are affected by spin?

    Because of this, I take no hard stand, pro or con, in most of those such as you have mentioned above. I do not play the conspiracy shell game!

    However, if there is conclusive evidence — such that I would honestly bet my life on it — I will take a stand.

    Why are you so sure Bugliosi is always right?

    Would you bet your life on it?

    Bob

    • It was not only Bugliosi’s debunking of the lies. I made up my mind since I did a little research on Stone’s movie right after it was shown in the Mexican theaters and most Mexicans, even the sophisticate swallowed it whole as a true history. That was many years before Bugliosi published his book.

      In that Seattle event I mentioned, there was a conference about the JFK conspiracy theories, which corroborated and reinforced what that I knew. Again, years before Bugliosi published his book.

      • Michael Collins Piper takes issue with Bugliosi avoiding the issue of Jewish, Israeli, possible Mossad involvement.

      • And I would call that paleologic thinking or, if you swallow it without actual listening to the prosecutor, paleologic WN.

      • They both make some points, but I don’t play the shell game.

  8. Arieti was a Sephardic Jew from Pisa. Can’t get away from Jews, can you?

    • Yes: and not only he but a gal I mention above, the late Alice Miller, was genetically a Jewess. At The Occidental Observer Der weiße Engel pointed to the fact that though the charlatans of the human psyche, like Freud, infected the West with psychoanalysis, it is curious that those who provided the antidote to both Freud’s charlatanry and biological psychiatry’s drugging of white children were also Jews (e.g., the quarter Jew Tom Szasz who died the last year).

      What I like of Arieti is that he was one of the main proponents in the US of the “Trauma model of mental disorders”. See the Wikipedia article under that title that I started to find the elemental sources of what all this is about. There are non-Jew proponents of that model anyway. It is only that Arieti’s treatise won the prize of the 1975 National Book Award in Science and even in the earlier version of that book he presented the model with extreme clarity. It is not my fault that non-Jews have not been as prominent in this field of research:

      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trauma_model_of_mental_disorders

  9. JFK conspiracy theories are Jewish through and through. All of the initial books were written by Jews and heavily promoted by the Jew media. ALL of them. This is from Charles Roberts’ 1967 book THE TRUTH ABOUT THE ASSASSINATION:

    “Beginning with Buchanan’s Who Killed Kennedy?, printed in Britain even before the Warren Commission submitted it’s report, a dozen books had been published [by the Fall of 1966] . . . The new theories posed ranged in improbability from Buchanan’s (a Texas oil millionaire decreed the deaths of Kennedy and Khrusshchev to gain control of the world oil market) to Edward Jay Epstein’s [JEW] mild-sounding conclusion of the book Inquest (“there is a strong case that Oswald could not have acted alone”). In between were such works as The World Affair, by Leo Sauvage, a [JEW] Frenchman who believes Kennedy was killed by Southern racists, and Whitewash, by Harold Weisberg [JEW], a Maryland poultry farmer who apparently disbelieves everything in the Warren Report but the page numbers . . . The bestseller of them all was Mark Lane’s [JEW] Rush to Judgement, a book that embraces almost every theory contrary to the Warren Commission’s findings. (Roberts pg. 23-24)”

    All of those authors are verifiably Jews excluding Buchanan who, although not a Jew, was a card-carrying Communist. http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/JFKbuchananT.htm

    This is a passage from George Lincoln Rockwell’s WHITE POWER (1967):

    “Only two years after even the Communist Worker’s choice for chief investigator, Earl Warren, had to admit that the assassination was the product of a COMMUNIST, four leftist authors, Mark Lane, Joachim Joesten, Harold Weissberg and Jay Epstein, (all four of them Jewish), are peddling books of the most sophist “reasoning”, casting doubt on the inescapable fact that it was Oswald who shot the President. They have manufactured “extra bullets”, “grassy knolls”, “contradictory” testimony, etc., and very cleverly left out all the damning facts which leave NO doubt that Oswald did it. (And, unfortunately, there are many conspiracy -buffs in the anti-communist side who are actually cooperating with these Jewish smoke-screen operators).

    But it is not the books of these men themselves, which are worthy of note in studying how our charts are forged. By themselves, the books would expire of their own weaknesses.

    It is the constant top coverage given these books by book reviewers, TV interview shows, newsstand operators, etc., which have shoved them down the throat of the public. I have studied them carefully, and there are no two ways about it,— they are devilish, if slick,— lies. Any careful student of any one of them knows this immediately . Yet they are given enormous publicity and dignity by editors, interviewers and publishers.

    What they are up to is a game they have played many times. When a fact is impossible to get around or cover up,— the liars and chart-forgers help each other throw up an enormous smoke-screen. These assassination books are that smoke screen. They are given such dignity and publicity that before long, most Americans, WHO WILL NEVER READ THE BOOKS,— will begin to believe that the Oswald theory is thoroughly discredited. It’s the same technique they used with the facts of RACE.”

    Bugliosi puts the nail in the coffin of all of this nonsense with RECLAIMING HISTORY. There’s a few other good books too like JFK: MYTH AND FACTS by Larry Sturdivan, CONSPIRACY OF ONE by Jim Moore and even Posner’s CASE CLOSED and a few others. Also there is the must-watch mock trial of Lee Harvey Oswald that is found on YouTube. It is very telling. But of course the conspiracy buffs completely ignore the mock trial because it is so damaging to their position.

    • Thank you. To me this is a litmus test on who’s really smart or not. It’s a pity that so few in the pro-white movement can see this subject as a crystal-clear, closed case as we do.

  10. High-IQ people don’t believe in conspiracy theories: whether it’s JFK, 9/11, the US Moon landing “hoax” of 1969, Satanic Ritual Abuse or the UFO “landing” in New Mexico in 1947.

    Silly white nationalists believe that the London decapitation incident was a Jewish hoax. Some of them not only blame the Jews, instead of the Muslims, for that single incident: they blame the Jews for the Boston bombings too; the killings of Adam Lanza, the Breivik incident at Norway, and some conspiracy theorists have developed crank theories about the 2005 London bombings too.

    Your argument is a false dichotomy: The alternative to the official account of any public event is some lunatic and easily disproven conspiracy theory.

    That dichotomy is incorrect.

    Here’s some news for you: Some conspiracy theories have been officially admitted. You can look them up: Tonkin Gulf incident, Operation Gladio, US Gov funding of ISIS.

    How does your dichotomy fare in relation to those?

    So, Bugliosi’s discrediting of any number of theories is no proof of the official theory. Furthermore, he couldn’t possibly address every possible theory, since there can be an infinite number of them. Logic 101.

    • You completely fail to understand the term conspiracy theory.

      • From the link:

        A conspiracy theory is an explanatory or speculative hypothesis suggesting that two or more persons or an organization have conspired to cause or to cover up, through secret planning and deliberate action, an event or situation typically regarded as illegal or harmful.

        That is also my working definition. Could you please indicate where you think I do not understand.

      • I won’t explain anything. I am very busy trying to write my new book and coping with a recent tragedy (my sister died). I already told you before: I don’t have time to respond to your dozens of comments in old threads that nobody is reading now. Bye.


Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: