What will put an end to conspiracy theories about the U.S. government?

Do we trust that the main purpose of government is to look out for the best interest of its constituents?

If so, then we must adhere to the belief that they tell the truth at all times and not withhold information from us.

Therefore, the establishment and institution of administrative bureaucracies' policies (i.e, DEA, EPA, IRS, NSA, etc) implemented promote the safety and well-being of all its citizens?

Especially in consideration that the government employs the best scientists, researchers, professionals, etc. and that their findings and facts support the decisions that shape policy.

Why then do we question the legality of the income tax, the need to develop alternative energy, the war on drugs, the certain suspension of civil rights to secure the homeland?

Implication: it was wrong for the Allies to withhold the plans of the Normandy landings in 1944 prior to D-Day. Do you believe this?

Let me put things in another way:

Take for instance 9/11. Capable individuals who are bi-products of six figure educational institutions provide information about what happened in 9/11 pretty much debunking the myth that it was an inside job.

Other capable individuals with similar academic competencies do years of research regarding climate change, the causes/effects of drug abuse, economic evaluations to come up with a fair taxing policy, etc.

So, in that context, the government is honest with its people and acts accordingly in the peoples' best interest.

Or do they pick and choose which studies, evidence, etc, as it suits them?

If there is to be an end to conspiracy thinking, then we must always trust that the government acts in good faith at all times?

Or, is pragmatism the order of the day?

It is the latter, but the government is not so joined-up as all of this implies. Different departments and divisions have different biases and agendas which will prevail and influence their work accordingly. But the controlled demolition of the WTC conspiracy theory is still trash and the NIST reports are more trustworthy than in other fields of study. The subject matter (engineering and physics) lends itself to greater rigor than does, say, health or climate and there is thus much less wiggle room for biases to intrude.

But, doesn't not health rely on biology, chemistry, both sciences that rely on rigorous experimentation. So when, a PhD makes a contribution to the JAMA on a topic such as drug abuse, isn't that report a valid one.

Also, isn't physics is the foundation principle in other science disciplines are based?

Everything is ultimately physics, but physics is not the foundation of all scientific disciplines with the way they are currently demarcated. Doctors and biologists do not know much physics, generally. The systems that lend themselves to a complete physical description are much simpler than a biological organism, such as a human. When physicists or chemists look at the human body, it is usually at aspects that can be simplified and thus more rigorously described. Some of these results can be useful to medicine, but the approach used in each subject is different. The complexity and variability of the human body makes the study of it very difficult. Increasingly, scientists are looking at the human body in terms of subjects like fluid dynamics, but our present problems with human health indicate that they have a long way to go yet before they make significant headway.

A building is a much simpler system and lends itself to a more complete physical and chemical description.

While this is true, the goverment is an organization as a whole and in essence ultimately must find a balance in order to achieve a common purpose which is to be accomplished under the direction of a leader.

So a person must choose which to focus on. A conspiracist will place emphasis on the agendas and biases and a non-conspiracist will choose to view the organization as a whole.

as long as there are conspiracies there will be theories surrounding them.

the collaboration of two or more individuals to engage in a criminal plot is a conspiracy, not a theory. thats all it takes.

the US is not the only nation to utilize clandestine operations.

that which is a secret to one group is a conspiracy to another.

it is one matter to keep state secrets, it is another to undermine the trust of a nation. (or the world.)

from what we have to go on there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to put complete faith in government. if that weren't so, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

failure to question authority is the ultimate act of submission. the question then is: are you comfortable with that? do you have that much faith in the devices of humanity?

at no time throughout civilization has government consistently and wholeheartedly served the people, therefore failing to meet its primary function. the population has always served those in power.

the government does not entirely provide the best researchers, doctors, and other representatives. if that weren't true we would have state or federal funded health care. the best interest demands it. people would not have to be subjected to second and third rate health care.

the government does however place those it deems most capable with projects or fields that are deemed more worthy of federal funding... which may or may not be in the best interest.

politicians make promises that cannot be kept. a liar is... a liar.

allow me put this another way: a soldier's rifle is always bought from and made by the lowest bidder. this is in no way toward the soldier's best interest.

no offense but thats gullible to assume that your gov. is a benign organization hear to help you because we have limited knowledge of what they do so how can we trust them? If they were open and honest than that is a different story.

The purpose of this thread is to get at all that you stated and more, Aba.

Some people will question the reasons why some people subscribe to a conspiracy theories.

Inevitably, an assumption is made that once a person sees a conspiracy somewhere they he/she starts seeing conspiracies everywhere.

Then, you'll have someone trying to convince the other that based on this research, that scientist, etc. it is untrue.

EDA: I don't want this to be about 9-11 because there is a thread about that already.

The purpose of it is to show that you can't have an America free from belief in conspiracy theories.

None taken. I'm trying to get people to have a dialogue about this. My approach is just different than yours.

its all good. It's just the gov. does not have a good track record.

No, I believe that it is stereotypically the conspiracist who views the government with much greater central authority than there is. The non-conspiracist usually recognizes the differing parts. There is some central control, obviously, but it is not so all-powerful as many seem to believe. We would better say that the conspiracist sees the agendas of the central authority dominating that of all others in all government work, whereas there are actually those of the de-centralized elements playing a part.

That's a good point.

"The purpose of this thread is to get at all that you stated and more..."

i can tell.

not the entirety of government is to blame, because after all there are normal everyday people that work government jobs. (utility workers, social workers, computer technicians, etc.) it is unlikely that everyone with a seemingly mundane government job works for the NSA, DoD, CIA, USSS, DIA... (but surely some of them do) and even most jobs in those agencies are not of the super-spy caliber.

the pointing of fingers should go in the direction of policy makers and so-called leaders. it is they that decide where and when funding and appropriations are allocated. they decide presumably what is in the best interest, be it for the people, the government, themselves, a cause, some other obfuscated organization, or other faction of power and influence.

lobbyists are a powerful force. glorified lawyers. their arguments sway decisions regarding appropriations and importance or urgency of issues that need to be addressed. part of that involves decisions to ignore certain situations or bring them to the forefront. unscrupulous organizations are represented by people like this... in the seat of power in such organizations one will find another that does not hearken the call of what is good for the all.

multi-organizational entities such as this are in the business of making money, and they have enough of it to shape everything from local politics to international policy. (that means they can summon forth the power of a nation's military because they have it's government by the balls.)

these are not opinions and theories. these are facts. this is the way of things.

because a government relies on those it subjugates it cannot be omnipotent. at some point it will corrupt. rigidity breeds resistance. (physics. action and reaction, equal and opposite.)

There is an organization that is trying to gain control of the World and they have gotten control of parts of our Government. It is the richest organization in the world and does many things in secret.
Read online book, SMOKESCREENS. Conspiracy to control the US Govt. is ongoing.
http://www.chick.com/reading/books/153/153_03.asp

very well said aba. and one of the worst things about lobbyists and how they influence is that there is a track record that they don't even bother to hide.... all one needs to do is look at how much money (kickbacks) politicians make from that all the way up to our president.

Andrew.....with all due repsects...I'm not sure who was kept out the loop....except for the Germans.

The public were.

andrew....of course they were.....with all due respects should they have put it in the paper?....:headscrat ....I did think you were talking about US allies like England, France and Canada.....and russia