Talk:Tavistock Institute for Human Behavior
Most of this page is based on the work of a conspiracy theorist, Dr. John Coleman, who has picked up many of his ideas on the Tavistock Insitute from the Lyndon LaRouche group. Most of this page should be deleted. It is unreliable. Unless there is a discussion about this, I will delete most of this page, and all references to the Coleman book.--Cberlet 16:48, 5 Jan 2005 (EST)
Rather than delete it, I think the books content should be moved onto a seperate page/article, and the plain, fact based information kept. That way, even if the book is based mostly on LaRouche conspiracy theory, and basically bumpkis, we can later cite counter arguments against the book.
That's an interesting idea, and it sounds like a better plan. How would it work exactly? What would the title be for the page based on the dubious book? --Cberlet 17:34, 5 Jan 2005 (EST)
I would guess just move it onto a page that has the same name as the book, along with the authors name.
I think the general rule on things that border on conspiracy theory is to mention them but too be careful about presenting them as "authoritative". In the case of this article, the book and the article were fused as one, often blurring the factual with the skeptical.
- I think SiberioS has the right idea. Conspiracy theories shouldn't be simply deleted from the SourceWatch. They could be catalogued and critiqued, the same way we critique other misinformation. By the way, welcome to Cberlet! Are you Chip Berlet, by any chance? --Sheldon Rampton 18:10, 5 Jan 2005 (EST)
- Hi Sheldon. Yes, it's the actual Chip Berlet. I wanted to use the same sign in for both Wikipedia and SourceWatch, so I created a new account. Hope that doesn't mess things up.--Cberlet 22:39, 5 Jan 2005 (EST)
- No, that's fine. I'm glad you're here. I've admired your work over the years. You might be interested in taking a look at an article that I was just editing here today, which talks about the Barnes Review and its role in circulating fake whistleblower memos on media bias in the Iraq war. I think I used one of your articles about Willis Carto when I wrote that article initially. --Sheldon Rampton 23:31, 5 Jan 2005 (EST)
I found John Coleman interesting. You can say that what he says is crap all you'd like, but it doesn't change the findings of the Cox and Reece Committes. That's palpable evidence that the tax-exempt foundations are covertly trying to take over the US government. In fact, there's an interview of Norman Dodd, the director of research for the Reece Committee, floating around on google video. I think all the 'anti-conspiracist' propaganda floating around is a product of people's nescience of the subject. What evidence do you have that Coleman is wrong, or are you just throwing around assumptions without evidenciary support? There is no 'conspiracy theory' either, it's conspiracy fact. The only reason it's considered 'theory' in the first place is because people refuse to accept the truth, so they filter it out and regard it as 'theory'. One prime example of the manifestation of the conspiracy recently is PNAC, the think-tank group that wrote the ideological manifesto of the neo-clown crowd(Rebuilding America's Defenses). It's a sub-project of the New Citizenship Project founded by 3 foundations. Howevever, I'm sure you'll continue burying your heads in the sand and consider the conspiracy only a 'theory' in the face of evidence of it. heinj98
Edit Notes
I have moved the following unreferenced material off the article page. --Bob Burton 01:27, 14 June 2007 (EDT)
- According to the conspiracy-obsessed Lyndon LaRouche network and author Dr. John Coleman Committee of 300, the Tavistock Institute is a major component of the vast, secret, timeless, conspiracy that controls everything. The London bombs of July 2005 are believed by conspiracy theorists to have been connected in some way to the Tavistock Institute. One of the July 7 bombs (the bus bomb) blew up on Tavistock Square, just metres from the original site of the Tavistock Clinic, the forerunner of the Institute. Bizarrely, two of the failed London bombers (the alleged planters of the July 21 bombs) were subsequently arrested by police in Tavistock Crescent.
