Lately, from conversations and reading posts on the Web, I have been struck by how many people have developed hardened positions on the assassination of JFK based on inadequate information. Lots of people, for example, are unaware of the extraordinary number of witnesses who told stories that ran counter to the official version produced by the Warren Commission. They also don’t seem to know about the scores, perhaps hundreds of witnesses who originally told stories inconsistent with the lone assassin scenario, then recanted.
We can better understand the recantation process by watching this vintage video. It depicts a psychological test proving how people can be made to change their assertions based on subtle peer pressure: (thanks to Brasscheck TV for bringing this to my attention)
Classic experiment indeed.
There is the same hardening of positions about what really happened on 9/11, due in very large measure to professional agents of disinfo, obfuscation, and distraction. We have the web now and access to plenty of “unofficial” versions. No excuses not to have done a little homework to extricate the whowhatwhy out of the muck.
One shouldn’t need to go much farther than viewing the demolition of WTC7, but if one did . . . there are scores of fascinating subplots and details . . . why are journalists neglecting the most incredible and spectacular newsworthy stories ever?
This stuff didn’t happen 45 yrs ago . . .
Yes…do watch…
This: Psychological experiment with conformity
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TYIh4MkcfJA
And then;
This is an Orange
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3898962504721899003#