![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2012\/02\/BBC-News.jpg\" "\\"BBC")
<\/a>That is the title of an article that appeared on BBC Online recently. The implication being that “conspiracy theories pose a threat to democracy”.<\/h5>\nOf course conspiracy theories aren’t a “threat to democracy”, this is just the BBC attempting to discredit them.<\/h5>\nInstead of actually looking at the propositions underlying “conspiracy theories” — and nowhere in the entire article does it even mention any of the facts fuelling doubts about the official stories of, for example 9\/11 or 7\/7 — it strives to marginalize and discredit them. By disingenuously suggesting that not all “conspiracy theorists” are “swivel-eyed loons,” with “poor personal hygiene and halitosis”.<\/h5>\nAs if most “conspiracy theorists” were smelly and somewhat deranged. They aren’t but the BBC would have you believe otherwise , which is why the article studiously overlooks the wide variety of professional bodies that question the official version of 9\/11.<\/h5>\nObviously bodies like Pilots for 9\/11<\/span> Truth<\/span><\/a><\/span>, <\/span>Architects and Engineers for 9\/11 <\/span><\/span>Truth<\/span><\/a> and Firefighters for 9\/11 <\/span><\/span>Truth<\/span><\/a> are not entirely comprised of swivel-eyed loons”. Which is why the article doesn’t mention them or talk to anyone credible who might support them.<\/h5>\nInstead it talks to academics who are researching “conspiracy theories”.<\/h5>\nLike the BBC however, these academics such as John Naughton, who is researching the topic for Cambridge University, seem averse to actually looking at what “conspiracy theories” might actually propose.<\/h5>\nIndeed, according to Naughton: “the minute you sniff at the 9\/11 stuff, you begin to lose the will to live”.<\/h5>\nRight. This is real research, which rubbishes the topic before even examining it.<\/h5>\nNor does the article recall one of the great modern conspiracy theories, which was openly touted by the BBC itself, at least for a while. Namely, Saddam Hussein’s Weapons of Mass Destruction.<\/h5>\nRemember them? The BBC devoted hours of news coverage to speculation about Saddam’s WMD and through it helped build the case for the invasion of Iraq. Until it became clear that Saddam’s WMD didn’t exist. Whereupon all the earlier speculation was quietly forgotten.<\/h5>\nIf nothing else though, the following article is an indication that the powers that be are getting worried. Too many people are asking questions and not everyone will now accept the neat answers and explanations offered.<\/h5>\nSo now the BBC and academics like John Naughton have been enrolled in an effort to silence those awkward questions: not by answering them, nowhere in the entire article does it even address them, but by disingenuously deriding the questioners. <\/span><\/h5>\nAre conspiracy theories destroying democracy?<\/h1>\nBrian Wheeler — BBC Online Oct 27, 2013<\/h2>\n
![\"\"](\"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/wp-content\/uploads\/2013\/10\/BBC-Are-conxpiracy-theories-destroying-democracy-300x168.jpg\" "\\"BBC:")
<\/a>The more information we have about what governments and corporations are up to the less we seem to trust them. Will conspiracy theories eventually destroy democracy?<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nWhat if I told you I had conclusive proof that the moon landings were faked, but I had been told to keep it under wraps by my BBC bosses acting under orders from the CIA, NSA and MI6. Most of you would think I had finally lost my mind.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nBut, for some, that scenario – a journalist working for a mainstream media organisation being manipulated by shadowy forces to keep vital information from the public – would seem entirely plausible, or even likely.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nWe live in a golden age for conspiracy theories. There is a growing assumption that everything we are told by the authorities is wrong, or not quite as it seems. That the truth is being manipulated or obscured by powerful vested interests.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nAnd, in some cases, it is.<\/span><\/p>\n‘Inside job’<\/span><\/span> <\/span><\/h2>\n“The reason we have conspiracy theories is that sometimes governments and organisations do conspire,” says Observer columnist and academic John Naughton.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nIt would be wrong to write off all conspiracy theorists as “swivel-eyed loons,” with “poor personal hygiene and halitosis,” he told a Cambridge University Festival of Ideas debate.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nThey are not all “crazy”. The difficult part, for those of us trying to make sense of a complex world, is working out which parts of the conspiracy theory to keep and which to throw away.<\/span><\/p>\n
As if most “conspiracy theorists” were smelly and somewhat deranged. They aren’t but the BBC would have you believe otherwise , which is why the article studiously overlooks the wide variety of professional bodies that question the official version of 9\/11.<\/h5>\nObviously bodies like Pilots for 9\/11<\/span> Truth<\/span><\/a><\/span>, <\/span>Architects and Engineers for 9\/11 <\/span><\/span>Truth<\/span><\/a> and Firefighters for 9\/11 <\/span><\/span>Truth<\/span><\/a> are not entirely comprised of swivel-eyed loons”. Which is why the article doesn’t mention them or talk to anyone credible who might support them.<\/h5>\nInstead it talks to academics who are researching “conspiracy theories”.<\/h5>\nLike the BBC however, these academics such as John Naughton, who is researching the topic for Cambridge University, seem averse to actually looking at what “conspiracy theories” might actually propose.<\/h5>\nIndeed, according to Naughton: “the minute you sniff at the 9\/11 stuff, you begin to lose the will to live”.<\/h5>\nRight. This is real research, which rubbishes the topic before even examining it.<\/h5>\nNor does the article recall one of the great modern conspiracy theories, which was openly touted by the BBC itself, at least for a while. Namely, Saddam Hussein’s Weapons of Mass Destruction.<\/h5>\nRemember them? The BBC devoted hours of news coverage to speculation about Saddam’s WMD and through it helped build the case for the invasion of Iraq. Until it became clear that Saddam’s WMD didn’t exist. Whereupon all the earlier speculation was quietly forgotten.<\/h5>\nIf nothing else though, the following article is an indication that the powers that be are getting worried. Too many people are asking questions and not everyone will now accept the neat answers and explanations offered.<\/h5>\nSo now the BBC and academics like John Naughton have been enrolled in an effort to silence those awkward questions: not by answering them, nowhere in the entire article does it even address them, but by disingenuously deriding the questioners. <\/span><\/h5>\nAre conspiracy theories destroying democracy?<\/h1>\nBrian Wheeler — BBC Online Oct 27, 2013<\/h2>\n
<\/a>The more information we have about what governments and corporations are up to the less we seem to trust them. Will conspiracy theories eventually destroy democracy?<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nWhat if I told you I had conclusive proof that the moon landings were faked, but I had been told to keep it under wraps by my BBC bosses acting under orders from the CIA, NSA and MI6. Most of you would think I had finally lost my mind.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nBut, for some, that scenario – a journalist working for a mainstream media organisation being manipulated by shadowy forces to keep vital information from the public – would seem entirely plausible, or even likely.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nWe live in a golden age for conspiracy theories. There is a growing assumption that everything we are told by the authorities is wrong, or not quite as it seems. That the truth is being manipulated or obscured by powerful vested interests.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nAnd, in some cases, it is.<\/span><\/p>\n‘Inside job’<\/span><\/span> <\/span><\/h2>\n“The reason we have conspiracy theories is that sometimes governments and organisations do conspire,” says Observer columnist and academic John Naughton.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nIt would be wrong to write off all conspiracy theorists as “swivel-eyed loons,” with “poor personal hygiene and halitosis,” he told a Cambridge University Festival of Ideas debate.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nThey are not all “crazy”. The difficult part, for those of us trying to make sense of a complex world, is working out which parts of the conspiracy theory to keep and which to throw away.<\/span><\/p>\n
Instead it talks to academics who are researching “conspiracy theories”.<\/h5>\nLike the BBC however, these academics such as John Naughton, who is researching the topic for Cambridge University, seem averse to actually looking at what “conspiracy theories” might actually propose.<\/h5>\nIndeed, according to Naughton: “the minute you sniff at the 9\/11 stuff, you begin to lose the will to live”.<\/h5>\nRight. This is real research, which rubbishes the topic before even examining it.<\/h5>\nNor does the article recall one of the great modern conspiracy theories, which was openly touted by the BBC itself, at least for a while. Namely, Saddam Hussein’s Weapons of Mass Destruction.<\/h5>\nRemember them? The BBC devoted hours of news coverage to speculation about Saddam’s WMD and through it helped build the case for the invasion of Iraq. Until it became clear that Saddam’s WMD didn’t exist. Whereupon all the earlier speculation was quietly forgotten.<\/h5>\nIf nothing else though, the following article is an indication that the powers that be are getting worried. Too many people are asking questions and not everyone will now accept the neat answers and explanations offered.<\/h5>\nSo now the BBC and academics like John Naughton have been enrolled in an effort to silence those awkward questions: not by answering them, nowhere in the entire article does it even address them, but by disingenuously deriding the questioners. <\/span><\/h5>\nAre conspiracy theories destroying democracy?<\/h1>\nBrian Wheeler — BBC Online Oct 27, 2013<\/h2>\n
<\/a>The more information we have about what governments and corporations are up to the less we seem to trust them. Will conspiracy theories eventually destroy democracy?<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nWhat if I told you I had conclusive proof that the moon landings were faked, but I had been told to keep it under wraps by my BBC bosses acting under orders from the CIA, NSA and MI6. Most of you would think I had finally lost my mind.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nBut, for some, that scenario – a journalist working for a mainstream media organisation being manipulated by shadowy forces to keep vital information from the public – would seem entirely plausible, or even likely.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nWe live in a golden age for conspiracy theories. There is a growing assumption that everything we are told by the authorities is wrong, or not quite as it seems. That the truth is being manipulated or obscured by powerful vested interests.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nAnd, in some cases, it is.<\/span><\/p>\n‘Inside job’<\/span><\/span> <\/span><\/h2>\n“The reason we have conspiracy theories is that sometimes governments and organisations do conspire,” says Observer columnist and academic John Naughton.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nIt would be wrong to write off all conspiracy theorists as “swivel-eyed loons,” with “poor personal hygiene and halitosis,” he told a Cambridge University Festival of Ideas debate.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nThey are not all “crazy”. The difficult part, for those of us trying to make sense of a complex world, is working out which parts of the conspiracy theory to keep and which to throw away.<\/span><\/p>\n
Indeed, according to Naughton: “the minute you sniff at the 9\/11 stuff, you begin to lose the will to live”.<\/h5>\nRight. This is real research, which rubbishes the topic before even examining it.<\/h5>\nNor does the article recall one of the great modern conspiracy theories, which was openly touted by the BBC itself, at least for a while. Namely, Saddam Hussein’s Weapons of Mass Destruction.<\/h5>\nRemember them? The BBC devoted hours of news coverage to speculation about Saddam’s WMD and through it helped build the case for the invasion of Iraq. Until it became clear that Saddam’s WMD didn’t exist. Whereupon all the earlier speculation was quietly forgotten.<\/h5>\nIf nothing else though, the following article is an indication that the powers that be are getting worried. Too many people are asking questions and not everyone will now accept the neat answers and explanations offered.<\/h5>\nSo now the BBC and academics like John Naughton have been enrolled in an effort to silence those awkward questions: not by answering them, nowhere in the entire article does it even address them, but by disingenuously deriding the questioners. <\/span><\/h5>\nAre conspiracy theories destroying democracy?<\/h1>\nBrian Wheeler — BBC Online Oct 27, 2013<\/h2>\n
<\/a>The more information we have about what governments and corporations are up to the less we seem to trust them. Will conspiracy theories eventually destroy democracy?<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nWhat if I told you I had conclusive proof that the moon landings were faked, but I had been told to keep it under wraps by my BBC bosses acting under orders from the CIA, NSA and MI6. Most of you would think I had finally lost my mind.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nBut, for some, that scenario – a journalist working for a mainstream media organisation being manipulated by shadowy forces to keep vital information from the public – would seem entirely plausible, or even likely.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nWe live in a golden age for conspiracy theories. There is a growing assumption that everything we are told by the authorities is wrong, or not quite as it seems. That the truth is being manipulated or obscured by powerful vested interests.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nAnd, in some cases, it is.<\/span><\/p>\n‘Inside job’<\/span><\/span> <\/span><\/h2>\n“The reason we have conspiracy theories is that sometimes governments and organisations do conspire,” says Observer columnist and academic John Naughton.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nIt would be wrong to write off all conspiracy theorists as “swivel-eyed loons,” with “poor personal hygiene and halitosis,” he told a Cambridge University Festival of Ideas debate.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nThey are not all “crazy”. The difficult part, for those of us trying to make sense of a complex world, is working out which parts of the conspiracy theory to keep and which to throw away.<\/span><\/p>\n
Nor does the article recall one of the great modern conspiracy theories, which was openly touted by the BBC itself, at least for a while. Namely, Saddam Hussein’s Weapons of Mass Destruction.<\/h5>\nRemember them? The BBC devoted hours of news coverage to speculation about Saddam’s WMD and through it helped build the case for the invasion of Iraq. Until it became clear that Saddam’s WMD didn’t exist. Whereupon all the earlier speculation was quietly forgotten.<\/h5>\nIf nothing else though, the following article is an indication that the powers that be are getting worried. Too many people are asking questions and not everyone will now accept the neat answers and explanations offered.<\/h5>\nSo now the BBC and academics like John Naughton have been enrolled in an effort to silence those awkward questions: not by answering them, nowhere in the entire article does it even address them, but by disingenuously deriding the questioners. <\/span><\/h5>\nAre conspiracy theories destroying democracy?<\/h1>\nBrian Wheeler — BBC Online Oct 27, 2013<\/h2>\n
<\/a>The more information we have about what governments and corporations are up to the less we seem to trust them. Will conspiracy theories eventually destroy democracy?<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nWhat if I told you I had conclusive proof that the moon landings were faked, but I had been told to keep it under wraps by my BBC bosses acting under orders from the CIA, NSA and MI6. Most of you would think I had finally lost my mind.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nBut, for some, that scenario – a journalist working for a mainstream media organisation being manipulated by shadowy forces to keep vital information from the public – would seem entirely plausible, or even likely.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nWe live in a golden age for conspiracy theories. There is a growing assumption that everything we are told by the authorities is wrong, or not quite as it seems. That the truth is being manipulated or obscured by powerful vested interests.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nAnd, in some cases, it is.<\/span><\/p>\n‘Inside job’<\/span><\/span> <\/span><\/h2>\n“The reason we have conspiracy theories is that sometimes governments and organisations do conspire,” says Observer columnist and academic John Naughton.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nIt would be wrong to write off all conspiracy theorists as “swivel-eyed loons,” with “poor personal hygiene and halitosis,” he told a Cambridge University Festival of Ideas debate.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nThey are not all “crazy”. The difficult part, for those of us trying to make sense of a complex world, is working out which parts of the conspiracy theory to keep and which to throw away.<\/span><\/p>\n
If nothing else though, the following article is an indication that the powers that be are getting worried. Too many people are asking questions and not everyone will now accept the neat answers and explanations offered.<\/h5>\nSo now the BBC and academics like John Naughton have been enrolled in an effort to silence those awkward questions: not by answering them, nowhere in the entire article does it even address them, but by disingenuously deriding the questioners. <\/span><\/h5>\nAre conspiracy theories destroying democracy?<\/h1>\nBrian Wheeler — BBC Online Oct 27, 2013<\/h2>\n
<\/a>The more information we have about what governments and corporations are up to the less we seem to trust them. Will conspiracy theories eventually destroy democracy?<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nWhat if I told you I had conclusive proof that the moon landings were faked, but I had been told to keep it under wraps by my BBC bosses acting under orders from the CIA, NSA and MI6. Most of you would think I had finally lost my mind.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nBut, for some, that scenario – a journalist working for a mainstream media organisation being manipulated by shadowy forces to keep vital information from the public – would seem entirely plausible, or even likely.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nWe live in a golden age for conspiracy theories. There is a growing assumption that everything we are told by the authorities is wrong, or not quite as it seems. That the truth is being manipulated or obscured by powerful vested interests.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nAnd, in some cases, it is.<\/span><\/p>\n‘Inside job’<\/span><\/span> <\/span><\/h2>\n“The reason we have conspiracy theories is that sometimes governments and organisations do conspire,” says Observer columnist and academic John Naughton.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nIt would be wrong to write off all conspiracy theorists as “swivel-eyed loons,” with “poor personal hygiene and halitosis,” he told a Cambridge University Festival of Ideas debate.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\nThey are not all “crazy”. The difficult part, for those of us trying to make sense of a complex world, is working out which parts of the conspiracy theory to keep and which to throw away.<\/span><\/p>\n
Are conspiracy theories destroying democracy?<\/h1>\nBrian Wheeler — BBC Online Oct 27, 2013<\/h2>\n
<\/span><\/p>\n What if I told you I had conclusive proof that the moon landings were faked, but I had been told to keep it under wraps by my BBC bosses acting under orders from the CIA, NSA and MI6. Most of you would think I had finally lost my mind.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n But, for some, that scenario – a journalist working for a mainstream media organisation being manipulated by shadowy forces to keep vital information from the public – would seem entirely plausible, or even likely.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n We live in a golden age for conspiracy theories. There is a growing assumption that everything we are told by the authorities is wrong, or not quite as it seems. That the truth is being manipulated or obscured by powerful vested interests.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n And, in some cases, it is.<\/span><\/p>\n “The reason we have conspiracy theories is that sometimes governments and organisations do conspire,” says Observer columnist and academic John Naughton.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n It would be wrong to write off all conspiracy theorists as “swivel-eyed loons,” with “poor personal hygiene and halitosis,” he told a Cambridge University Festival of Ideas debate.<\/span><\/p>\n <\/span><\/p>\n They are not all “crazy”. The difficult part, for those of us trying to make sense of a complex world, is working out which parts of the conspiracy theory to keep and which to throw away.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/a>The more information we have about what governments and corporations are up to the less we seem to trust them. Will conspiracy theories eventually destroy democracy?<\/span><\/p>\n‘Inside job’<\/span><\/span> <\/span><\/h2>\n