Users Currently Browsing This Topic:
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Author Topic: Best Respectful Terms To Use - "Conspiracy Theorist" "Lone-Nut Proponent"  (Read 554 times)

Online Margaret Kelly

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 82
To keep a discussion on the JFK assassination respectful, what terms should be used to describe both sides:

Side 1: People who believe in a conspiracy
Side 2: People who say there was no conspiracy

What way do people like to be described? Are terms like "Conspiracy Theorist" or "Lone-Nut Proponent" offensive?

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 500
To keep a discussion on the JFK assassination respectful, what terms should be used to describe both sides:

Side 1: People who believe in a conspiracy
Side 2: People who say there was no conspiracy

What way do people like to be described? Are terms like "Conspiracy Theorist" or "Lone-Nut Proponent" offensive?

FWIW, devalued as it may be, over time I have developed the reasoning that the murder of POTUS JohnKennedySr is a tale of two theories. Whether one believes in the LoneGunmanAssassin Theory, or a ConspiracyToAssassinate Theory, either way a theory, IMHO. And, I prefer to avoid any LoneNut reference.

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
To keep a discussion on the JFK assassination respectful, what terms should be used to describe both sides:

Side 1: People who believe in a conspiracy
Side 2: People who say there was no conspiracy

What way do people like to be described? Are terms like "Conspiracy Theorist" or "Lone-Nut Proponent" offensive?

How does a person address an idiot who insults me when he regurgitates  the crock that LBJ's "Special Select Blue Ribbon Committee" dumped on us ?  I have no respect for an idiot who can't see that the WR is a damned lle.......   

Offline Bill Chapman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3011
To keep a discussion on the JFK assassination respectful, what terms should be used to describe both sides:

Side 1: People who believe in a conspiracy
Side 2: People who say there was no conspiracy

What way do people like to be described? Are terms like "Conspiracy Theorist" or "Lone-Nut Proponent" offensive?

From the Keep It Simple Sherlock department:

LNers  = Lee Harvey Occam-Oswald
CTers = AnybodyButOswald
« Last Edit: January 19, 2020, 08:44:39 AM by Bill Chapman »

Offline Jerry Freeman

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2165
Many do not know that...The conclusions of the Warren Report were originally written to state that Oswald killed JFK and Tippit and there was no conspiracy.
I believe it was commissioners Russell, Cooper and Boggs who would not sign off on that.
The conclusions were revised to state that ....no conspiracy could be found.
However it has been the belief of many and I contend----- that a conspiracy was never looked for.

Offline Larry Trotter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 500
To keep a discussion on the JFK assassination respectful, what terms should be used to describe both sides:

Side 1: People who believe in a conspiracy
Side 2: People who say there was no conspiracy

What way do people like to be described? Are terms like "Conspiracy Theorist" or "Lone-Nut Proponent" offensive?
FWIW, devalued as it may be, over time I have developed the reasoning that the murder of POTUS JohnKennedySr is a tale of two theories. Whether one believes in the LoneGunmanAssassin Theory, or a ConspiracyToAssassinate Theory, either way a theory, IMHO. And, I prefer to avoid any LoneNut reference.
How does a person address an idiot who insults me when he regurgitates  the crock that LBJ's "Special Select Blue Ribbon Committee" dumped on us ?  I have no respect for an idiot who can't see that the WR is a damned lle.......   

I actually thought that Ms Kelly was seeking opinion(s) regarding a respectful proper reference to those on each side of the debate regarding the shooting in Dallas' DealeyPlaza on 11/22/'63, that resulted in the death of President JohnKennedySr and critical wounding of Governor JohnConnallyJr, and I actually thought that I had replied accordingly to the posted subject matter.

Online Margaret Kelly

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 82

I actually thought that Ms Kelly was seeking opinion(s) regarding a respectful proper reference to those on each side of the debate regarding the shooting in Dallas' DealeyPlaza on 11/22/'63, that resulted in the death of President JohnKennedySr and critical wounding of Governor JohnConnallyJr, and I actually thought that I had replied accordingly to the posted subject matter.

Thanks Larry, yours was the best answer to date.

Though the terms "LoneGunmanAssassin Theory" and "ConspiracyToAssassinate Theory" are a mouthful to say when speaking. I was looking for shorter phrases. Point taken on not using "LoneNut" reference.

I guess:

Lone gunman proponents
Conspiracy proponents

are easier to say? Though "conspiracy proponents" could apply to any conspiracy, not just JFK related.


Online John Tonkovich

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 119
I'm just a skeptic.

The "two sides" approach is rather simplistic, and seems to create a great deal of unnecessary conflict.

Offline Paul May

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 289
To keep a discussion on the JFK assassination respectful, what terms should be used to describe both sides:

Side 1: People who believe in a conspiracy
Side 2: People who say there was no conspiracy

What way do people like to be described? Are terms like "Conspiracy Theorist" or "Lone-Nut Proponent" offensive?

Lone Nut or “Nutter” has never offended me. I do however understand why conspiracy advocates get upset by being called “kooks”.  Yet, many of the thousands of theories brought forward by these people over the years are so blatantly outrageous as to be “kookie”. Kook applies in a pejorative manner. Oh, it’s short and easy to write.

Offline Walt Cakebread

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4039
Lone Nut or “Nutter” has never offended me. I do however understand why conspiracy advocates get upset by being called “kooks”.  Yet, many of the thousands of theories brought forward by these people over the years are so blatantly outrageous as to be “kookie”. Kook applies in a pejorative manner. Oh, it’s short and easy to write.

Has it occurred to you that one of the best ways to discredit idea is to act as if you agree with the idea, and then add ridiculous and outrageous addendum.

Many of the most ridiculous ideas have been created by agents whose job it is to make " conspiracy theorists" appear to be kooks....

The book  Mortal Error is an excellent example ......

 

Mobile View