Kenn 'The Shill' Thomas

[marduk]

Of all conspiracy theories, I think the one that says the JFK assassination was a conspiracy is well supported.

I'd say so:

On the Kennedy assassination, the HSCA concluded in its 1979 report that:
Lee Harvey Oswald fired three shots at Kennedy. The second and third shots Oswald fired struck the President. The third shot he fired successfully killed the President.
Scientific acoustical evidence establishes a high probability that at least two gunmen fired at the President. Other scientific evidence does not preclude the possibility of two gunmen firing at the President. Scientific evidence negates some specific conspiracy allegations.
The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee was unable to identify the other gunmen or the extent of the conspiracy.
The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the Soviet Government was not involved in the assassination of Kennedy.
The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the Cuban Government was not involved in the assassination of Kennedy.
The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that anti-Castro Cuban groups, as groups, were not involved in the assassination of Kennedy, but that the available evidence does not preclude the possibility that individual members may have been involved.
The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the national syndicate of organized crime, as a group, was not involved in the assassination of Kennedy, but that the available evidence does not preclude the possibility that individual members may have been involved.
The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that the Secret Service, Federal Bureau of Investigation, and Central Intelligence Agency were not involved in the assassination of Kennedy.
Agencies and departments of the U.S. Government performed with varying degrees of competency in the fulfilment of their duties. President Kennedy did not receive adequate protection. A thorough and reliable investigation into the responsibility of Lee Harvey Oswald for the assassination was conducted. The investigation into the possibility of conspiracy in the assassination was inadequate. The conclusions of the investigations were arrived at in good faith, but presented in a fashion that was too definitive.
The Committee further concluded that it was probable that:
four shots were fired
the third shot came from a second assassin located on the grassy knoll, but missed. They concluded that it missed due to the lack of physical evidence of an actual bullet, of course this investigation took place almost sixteen years after the crime.
The HSCA agreed with the single bullet theory, but concluded that it occurred at a time point during the assassination that differed from any of the several time points the Warren Commission theorized it occurred.
The Department of Justice, FBI, CIA, and the Warren Commission were all criticized for not revealing to the Warren Commission information available in 1964, and the Secret Service was deemed deficient in their protection of the President.
The HSCA made several accusations of deficiency against the FBI and CIA.[3] The accusations encompassed organizational failures, miscommunication, and a desire to keep certain parts of their operations secret. Furthermore, the Warren Commission expected these agencies to be forthcoming with any information that would aid their investigation. But the FBI and CIA only saw it as their duty to respond to specific requests for information from the commission. However, the HSCA found the FBI and CIA were deficient in performing even that limited role.

United States House Select Committee on Assassinations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[nameless]

I liked this show and Ken Thomas was a great guest. Unfortunately people seem to miss the point. He is a conspiracy theorist. THEORIST being the key word here. Much like when we use UFO it doesnt mean aliens, people. Making connections and seeing the irony in situations and finding the funny is a way of keeping this all in perspective as being an intellectual game. he is not claiming that any of these things are true but we should entertain these things in light of what is the perceived truth or consensus reality. It is important to be open to new thoughts and new ideas otherwise we can just carry on being told what to think rather than making our own choices.

Any noteworthy idea or invention is derived from placing the incongruous together. Seeing causal links and connections is indeed a natural high level brain function creating narratives or seeing narrative structures is too, and our Art and culture is a testament to our ability of sophisticated structure reading. Its not something to be ashamed of. Unfortunately media manipulation has turned the phrase "conspiracy theory" into some peoples minds as "a lie, untruth or fantasy". The same media will also tell you that muslim equals "terrorist" or that the gun man was a "loner" or a "fantasist" as if they are bad words or negative attributes. Control mechanisms in our life based on the social linguistic construction of reality works on the manipulation of words and the changing of their meanings. To be aware of control mechanisms is in itself to entertain conspiracy theory.

i dunno read more Noam Chomsky and Robert Anton Wilson dudes.

 

[Ezechiel]

Good points nameless.

Everything nowadays is pre-chewed.. We love our Big Macs, stops most of us from sharpening our critical thinking.

Would be mind blowing to discover that the real story behind our perceived reality was in fact an alien construct.

 

[Muadib]

I liked this show and Ken Thomas was a great guest. Unfortunately people seem to miss the point. He is a conspiracy theorist. THEORIST being the key word here. Much like when we use UFO it doesnt mean aliens, people. Making connections and seeing the irony in situations and finding the funny is a way of keeping this all in perspective as being an intellectual game. he is not claiming that any of these things are true but we should entertain these things in light of what is the perceived truth or consensus reality. It is important to be open to new thoughts and new ideas otherwise we can just carry on being told what to think rather than making our own choices.

Any noteworthy idea or invention is derived from placing the incongruous together. Seeing causal links and connections is indeed a natural high level brain function creating narratives or seeing narrative structures is too, and our Art and culture is a testament to our ability of sophisticated structure reading. Its not something to be ashamed of. Unfortunately media manipulation has turned the phrase "conspiracy theory" into some peoples minds as "a lie, untruth or fantasy". The same media will also tell you that muslim equals "terrorist" or that the gun man was a "loner" or a "fantasist" as if they are bad words or negative attributes. Control mechanisms in our life based on the social linguistic construction of reality works on the manipulation of words and the changing of their meanings. To be aware of control mechanisms is in itself to entertain conspiracy theory.

i dunno read more Noam Chomsky and Robert Anton Wilson dudes.

I agree with many of the things you've said here, I'd just like to point out that speculation becomes dangerous when it moves from speculation to "that's how the world actually works" There is nothing wrong with finding connections but it's when you ascribe meaning to mere coincidence or think that they disprove well established fact that it becomes problematic, imo. You can literally connect anything to almost anything if you try hard enough, it's like the game with Kevin Bacon someone mentioned here or in another thread.

I think you're giving Kenn a little too much credit though, he literally said he considers all conspiracies true until they're proven false. That's not objectivity, though it is definitely his right to think that way if he so chooses. My main problem with most conspiracy theories and theorists is that they always seem to over simplify events to fit them within their world view and claim knowledge that nobody really has. There is no ambiguity in their version of an event, they have the answers to all the questions that nobody else has the answers to, the who, how and why, it's not unlike religion in that sense. Where an objective observer would say we can't make that leap because there just isn't enough evidence, conspiracy theorists make the leap and then go beyond. Often times, it's because they don't have their basic facts right, so it's not surprising. Any mathematician will tell you that if you do the wrong equation, you get the wrong answer. In any case, I think many conspiracy theorists would do well to keep Hanlon's razor in mind: "Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity." Or as the British would say: "Cock up before conspiracy"

 

[dyingsun]

I doubt any Brit would utter such a sentence.

 

[marduk]

I liked the show but would put Kenn squarely into the "conspiracy entertainment" category. Lotsa vauge connections, names and events thrown together in the blender. I got about a dozen movie/book ideas listening to this, too bad I'm not a writer.

 

[nameless]

I liked the show but would put Kenn squarely into the "conspiracy entertainment" category. Lotsa vauge connections, names and events thrown together in the blender. I got about a dozen movie/book ideas listening to this, too bad I'm not a writer.

yeah you get it. i wouldnt write yourself off. your writing now. writing can be short stories, screenplays, movies, books, theatre comic strips.....

 

[Burnt State]

yeah you get it. i wouldnt write yourself off. your writing now. writing can be short stories, screenplays, movies, books, theatre comic strips.....

Your celebration of the narrative is quite laudable. Given that nothing can ever really get proven in linguistic reality, might as well make and share good stories together. More word pictures please.

 

[ProphetofOccam]

I think 9/11 conspiracy theories, and most other conspiracy theories, are for crazy people. However,

This worldview sees the USA as a nation that owes its wealth and power to imperialism and causing wars in many parts of the world and rapacious capitalism and exploiting 3rd world nations, and perhaps other historical crimes such as slavery and genocide against Native Americans.

Out of curiosity, what's incorrect about any of that?

-- All nations owe their wealth to imperialism; that's why nations acquire other nations after wars and through treaties. We usually call them "states." Hi, Hawaii, Alaska and mainland 48! Other times we call them "territories." Hi, Puerto Rico, Guam, Northern Marianas, Samoa, and American Virgin Islands (all of which make contributions to the treasury)! We use these unincorporated and incorporated territories in a number of ways to increase the overall national wealth, ranging from oil production to taxation to tourism and on and on.

-- The United States has engaged in several wars with little to no interest other than national finance.

-- The United States has rampant monopolies.
-- The United States allows those monopolies to exploit the citizens of 3rd and 2nd world countries, as well as the citizens of communist countries with severe socio-economic polarization, by facilitating wages and work conditions illegal domestically.

-- The United States was the largest contributor to the slave trade. This ended in 1863 -- just 150 years ago, if you're counting. Six generations.

-- The United States carried out genocide and treaty violation on the Native Americans as late as the early 1900's.

Whose worldview doesn't contain this information and are they aware that there are organizations willing to help with their illiteracy?

 

[WhiteNoise]

I think 9/11 conspiracy theories, and most other conspiracy theories, are for crazy people. However,

Out of curiosity, what's incorrect about any of that?

-- All nations owe their wealth to imperialism; that's why nations acquire other nations after wars and through treaties.

I get your point but I personally thought Jase was referring to people who hold a more extreme view that the US is somehow more evil and repugnant and more guilty than other countries. This list seems to be a general list of negative aspects of humans governing other humans as opposed to things that would make the US more evil. Afterall, "all nations owe their wealth to imperialism" and I'm certain the US doesn't hold the patent on slavery.

From what I can see it does appear that people with views on the extremes (far left/far right) are the ones who generally subscribe to conspiracy theories. It is my opinion that, in general, conspiracy theories are what you get when evidence available in the real world doesn't conform to a person's beliefs. The thinking is... "Since the evidence suggests my view is wrong, and I cannot be wrong, then someone must be tampering with the evidence". I have some friends who I would consider to have "extreme" views and this fits their thinking exactly!

I understand the negative emotions that people have at times toward faceless institutions like "government" and "corporations" but I do get weary of the conspiracy theories after a while. I mean do you really believe that there is a conspiracy to "dumb down" the masses with Reality TV? Don't get me wrong, I hate the pop culture as much as anyone and find it extremely troubling but there is no way IMO that intelligent people are willingly watching this stuff and being dumbed down. No, these people were dumb to start with . There, I said it . These people are already this dumb...no dumbing down required. Sometimes I think there is an alien among us and IT IS ME.!

 

[DavidRavenMoon]

Unfortunately, as long as evil exists in this world we will never be free from crime. When might evil finally be vanquished? Never in this world.

It's not so much "evil". Most people that rob people are living in conditions of extreme poverty. So they are desperate. If we could take care of poverty then the crime rate will go down in those areas. I've seen this myself in different areas. They cleaned them up, and the crime rate went way down.

Then of course you have terrorist, and they are more what you would call evil, as they often have little direct reason for doing what they do beyond ideology.

Also, a lot of people who talk about "bad guys" have had no direct experience with it. I grew up in a town in Northern NJ that was pretty rough, and got rougher. I had been mugged twice, but never with a gun, but my girl friend at the time was. But those were by people in an expensive car that followed her home from work, from an expensive town, knowing she just got paid and left the bank.

Meanwhile my mother, who was 83 was murdered during a break in with a box cutter. So unless we are talking about areas where they have gangs, you really don't find guns being used, since the "bad guys" can't always afford them (but then they are often stolen from legit gun owners).

 

[DavidRavenMoon]

I think 9/11 conspiracy theories, and most other conspiracy theories, are for crazy people.

I always have to ask people when they doubt something fishy is up with 9/11... how many people in this thread where actually in NYC when it happened? Lots of people saw it on TV. But who was there?

I was. I was on 14th street. Not very close, but close enough to watch the whole thing... and smell it too. My ex wife and some friends were too. They were amongst the people you saw covered with white dust walking from the scene. My friend Kelly worked in tower #1 for Lehman Bros. My ex worked around the corner at Moody's. That's across the street from the Post office which was damaged, so it's VERY close to the towers. My friend happened to have been downstairs getting a bagel and coffee when the first plane hit, otherwise she would have been dead. They both told a very similar story, that right before the towers came down there was a series of very loud explosions, in series, that shook the ground like an earthquake. My ex said they were spaced about a second apart, and there was at least seven of them. Then the first tower came down. So what the heck was that? There was also not a whole lot of rubble left, for such large buildings. And lots and lots and unburned paper all over the place. You had to see it with your own eyes to believe it. I got down there before they closed the whole area off to take a look.

Another oddity is building #7. It was not close at all to the towers, and was not damaged at all. Yet it fell down. Then you have the owner of that building, on camera, saying they decided to raze it. How is that possible? It takes time to set up a controlled demolition.

So regardless of who people think was responsible, some facts just don't add up.

 

[ProphetofOccam]

I always have to ask people when they doubt something fishy is up with 9/11... how many people in this thread where actually in NYC when it happened? Lots of people saw it on TV. But who was there?

I was.

AT LAST! Mystery solved!

 

[DavidRavenMoon]

AT LAST! Mystery solved!

That was pointless, wasn't it?

 

[ProphetofOccam]

That was pointless, wasn't it?

Just following the theme.

 

[ProphetofOccam]

I mean, dude. Why don't you people realize how ridiculous that argument is? Do you not realize that not only were you in New York, but so were thousands of other people -- some actually qualified to make statements regarding structural integrity, explosives, and fire damage.

"I was there!" is the worst thing, ever. The worst.

 

[DavidRavenMoon]

I mean, dude. Why don't you people realize how ridiculous that argument is? Do you not realize that not only were you in New York, but so were thousands of other people -- some actually qualified to make statements regarding structural integrity, explosives, and fire damage.

"I was there!" is the worst thing, ever. The worst.

Are you 12 years old? "Dude"? Dude is the worst thing ever. "You people"? What wrong with you?

Plus I wasn't making an argument. I made no claims. I as pointing out that there are a lot of armchair theorist, like you.

As far as qualified experts, name a few. You also have qualified experts who said those buildings should not have come down. And how about building #7? What brought that down. Spend a few minutes and try to answer that. Stop blindly going along with what other people say. Think for yourself.

My point about being there was you didn't hear reports on TV about explosions.

 

[ProphetofOccam]

Firstly, you were making a claim. By passively challenging the views of "those who weren't there" and, further, people who "doubt something was fishy," any counter-structured presentation you lay out is going to take the position of a counter-claim in the discourse. Otherwise, what's the point in saying anything to the contrary, at all? The fact that you feel something was fishy is evidence enough for your intentions.

There are experts in fields that make statements that things don't add up, however many of them are not qualified to make statements within the relevant field. There's a reason it's a "conspiracy," chief. The staggeringly vast majority of qualified folks agree on the conditions of the event. Those conditions meet the readily observable conditions broadcasted on television and witnessed by onlookers. These are the "mainstream" views.

This is why conspiracy theories are for crazy people. Sometimes, people believe what they want. It doesn't matter what they see -- half the time they avoid information. When a sane person reads a conspiricists presentation, reviews it in relation to commonly known science, then reviews point-for-point deconstructions of the presentation by relevant professionals, they typically land in the "mainstream." They land in the mainstream because the mainstream is restricted to academia and review. Lunatics aren't restricted to anything. They can make up whatever they want -- whose going to care? When their nonsense is deconstructed, that's all part of the conspiracy. It's a landslide of bonkers for which sane people have no time to endlessly deconstruct.

I was juuust bored enough to make a joke about what you said, then defend that joke with two follow up postings. I am not bored enough to continue beyond this point. You'll call me stupid or whatever, then we'll both move on.

 

[DavidRavenMoon]

The point is all you know about the incident is what you heard on the news. Right? I’m reporting something you did not hear about, that is a fact, as reported by people who were witnesses to the event.

So if you are going to make you mind up about something, don’t you want all thew facts? You don’t have the facts. You have a version of the facts that were given to you. We can assume the people telling us these facts are sincere and correct. But we don't know that. If it’s the news media, well they often get things wrong. Same thing with most of the “experts”. Most people who call themselves skeptics do the damn thing. They do zero research, but know all the answers, just based on their world view.

You also haven’t told me how building #7 fell down. The one a block away that was not damaged at all. What do the staggeringly vast majority of qualified folks saw about that? Nothing really. It’s not talked about.

Now I said nothing about a conspiracy. I said not everything that went on there was reported on TV or in other media. If you talk to enough people who where there, they will tell you the same story. To show you how close I might be to the event, I knew one of the firefighters that went missing, and I had met one of the flight attendants on the second plane. They were both friends of my brother.

So I find it amusing that people would make their mind up about something they only know about in a round about way.

So please list the “staggeringly vast majority of qualified folks” who agree on that.

So if you have nothing better to do with your time, research building number 7 and report back with something meaningful. Nothing about the event is worth a joke.

 

[ProphetofOccam]

The point is all you know about the incident is what you heard on the news. Right

That's a lofty assumption.

So if you have nothing better to do with your time, research building number 7 and report back with something meaningful.

It's 2013. Do you honestly think there are people who haven't read the crackpot nonsense about building 7? Are you aware of how that has been explained within the confines of science, many times, over the last decade following the event? Now who's wasting time?

Nothing about the event is worth a joke

Then why do people keep coming up with these hilarious hypotheses?

Ok, ok. Now I'm done. I promise. You have the misfortune of posting while I am constructing a very tedious piece of animation.

I'm all stupid and haven't read anything, or whatever. I need to wake up, and stuff. All I do is watch the news. I should be getting all of my scientific data from the man on the street. I'll work on it.

As you were.