I liked your analysis, and yes....where does one draw the line?
So many people are content with what little they know. They may get that information from their favorite news network or newspaper. They believe it, there's nothing more to it, and that's the end of it.

They will never become a detective, an investigative reporter or a forensic scientist.
I went through a period where I was fascinated with some conspiracy theories. Some sounded plausible. Some was just looking at the underbelly of the beast. Perhaps THAT's what Hoover was talking about. Until you go down some of those dark corridors, you have no idea how dark minded some individuals are, and how well they find each other to extenuate their plans.

I had a paper I found just before I moved that was written around 1980. It was a list of 20 things, all "conspiracy" that were supposed to happen in the next decade or two. I found that paper again in 2005 and all of them had come true, except for two or three of them, and after the reign of GWB, we were on the road to having them ALL in place.

I am reading a book now I got from a doctor friend of mine for my birthday. It's called "Dr. Mary's Monkey" by Edward Haslam and is a chilling investigation into the lives of some CIA operatives such as Lee Harvey Oswald and David Ferrie and their participation in a biological weapons program that grew out of tainted monkey viruses that were used to vaccinate millions of trusting school children causing a rash of soft tissue cancers. Dr. Mary Sherman was brutally murdered during the partial exposure of this fact, while she was working on a secret three story particle generator operating in downtown New Orleans in the 1960's. This book is fascinating and takes you into the underbelly of the beast.

Not just anyone could have done the research for this book. There had to be a will to open the mind and connect the dots. "Not only does Haslam provide residents and other aficionados of this area with a thrilling history of dot-connecting events that literally traverses from one end of St. Charles Avenue to the other, he does so compellingly in simple colloquial language that facilitates his theory involving a cover-up of far-right wing politics gone very wrong. "

Reviews <here.>