Monday, April 23, 2018

Some Thoughs on Conspiracy Theories

The term “conspiracy theory” was invented by the CIA in order to ridicule people who questioned the Warren Report on the Assassination of JFK. The implication is that those who believe, as anyone who has studied history, that conspiracies are part of the reality of Washington politics are fruitcakes, tin-foil hat wearing psychotics and so on. In this way a large chunk of real politics is automatically eliminated from consideration in the media and “polite society.” One the main ways this notion was transmitted to the “liberal” public was an article (and later a book) “The Paranoid Style of America Politics” by Richard Hofstadter in 1964 which critiqued right-wing populism in general as if they were a result of paranoid fantasies—this latter theme was picked up by the psyops department of the CIA in 1967 to establish this idea in the press (which, through “Operation Mockingbird” the CIA partly controlled).

Since then the term has been used for anyone who believes or reports on conspiracies within the federal government. The idea is now universally accepted by most of the left and right in America and only flourishes on the populist right and left who don’t care if the mainstream media approve or don’t approve of them. Those who are, for example, on the “left” even radicals avoid questioning the official Narratives of the great events of our time particularly those events that made a big difference like the assassinations of the 60s, 9/11, and many other events. No matter how compelling the evidence most political commentators and reporters will not even acknowledge or dialogue with someone who brings it up. If I believe, as I stated and insisted on, that the political assassination of the 60s were hits ordered by the government or elements within the government that evidence is not addressed but actively avoided by nearly all the left whether its Noam Chomsky or Chris Hedges or Amy Goodman—they will not go there. Yet, it seems to me that if there is evidence that a sitting U.S. President was assassinated by a segment of the State as a coup d’etat, which is what I claim, then it ought to be at least considered. But even in private conversations with people who have no reason to defend the official story, particularly if they are left-wing American intellectuals, the evidence will be dismissed regardless of how compelling it is. In fact, no books relating to the Assassinations are ever reviewed by any major media outlet or even small magazines. All scholarly research on the subject is dismissed as “conspiracy theory” and ascribed to mental illness or “sensationalism” to sell books which is obviously absurd since no book that even questions small details of the Warren Commission conclusion gets reviewed while ANY book that backs up the Warren Report (there are very few) will get glowingly reviewed by the usual hack book-reviewers. No purely scholarly examination of the Assassinations or 9/11 is allowed in the American Academy.

The mainstream argument shared by all but left and right populists (and very few of those) is that it is impossible for government officials to conspire to break the law because our system “works” to keep serious hanky-panky at bay because, if anything shady happened the press would find out and, since they always wanted to publish an exciting story they’d be on it. Of course that ignores the reality of “the street” and the fact a low-status reported is not going to ignore the fact that anyone who steps out of line in his/her profession is not every going to work again—or if that reported is really obstinate and won’t listen to reason then other fates await. The mainstream media is and has been pretty much captured by the National Security State and thus they are singing from the same song sheet. If the State (here I mean the permanent government aka “the Deep State”) wants people to believe that Trump  (there has been none so far) elected because of Russian collusion (whatever that means) there is no reason to ask for evidence—if they say there was collusion then there is collusion. If the State wishes to bomb Syria they accept that Assad, in order to seize defeat out of the jaws of victory, gassed residents of Douma for no sane military reason but just because he is a “monster” that needs to be exterminated which is how the American media tends to categorize anyone who does not follow orders from Washington. There was no evidence for this assertion but there were procedures to go and find evidence—instead bombing commenced without proof of anything simply because the government and its propaganda organs decreed that it happened and that declaration, like the official story of the Assassinations, has to be true because, well just because. And as the Red Queen said sentence first and verdict later. These assertions from the U.S. government of 100 major news outlets in the USA not one questioned the State’s assertions despite the startingly obvious fact that Assad had to be crazy to gas people for no reason—just to be cruel—and the fact is that Mr. Assad had been under attack by hired Jihadis and other soldiers (many of the soldiers in ISIS were mercenaries looking to loot and rape) and endless supply of money for insurgents from Saudi Arabia and material and logistical support from the U.S., Britain, Turkey, and Israel and yet, Mr. Assad still has triumphed and what I’m saying here would be considered a “conspiracy theory” because I’m using reason and evidence which is not allowed in propaganda.

The most obvious and now generally accepted notion of a conspiracy is the attack on Iraq in 2003. The lead up to the war featured clearly false planted stories of how dangerous Saddam Hussein was to the world. The Blair government in the UK claimed Brits were threatened with nuclear attack while those with intimate knowledge of the situation, like Scott Ritter, said 99% of all “WMDs” were accounted for by the inspection regime. Ritter was told by CNN execs if he said that publicly he would be banned from all media outlets despite his celebrity status as a hero of sorts—and, in fact, Ritter was airbrushed from not only all of the media but history itself. That was a conspiracy—the media claims it actually believed the government but I know for a fact they knowingly published false information. Later they said, as they always say after the usual catastrophe, that “everyone” believed the fake stories—well I didn’t because I checked the assertions the best I could and was sure the stories were fabrications. In the same way, financial journalists claimed they “no one” knew the 2008 financial crisis was going to happen when I know for a fact that if they talked to people on Wall Street (which is supposed to be their job) they would have known what was going to happen. How do I know this? Because I talked to a Wall Street insider in 2006 and he told me that a lot of people knew the bubble would crash but in the meantime they would ride it out for awhile—and he directly cited these fraudulent credit-default swaps that are still raising heck with some banks (like Deutchebank) to this day.

If you’ve read this far, you probably suspect that the official stories are probably there to deceive us and you would be right. A look at the evidence of the President Kennedy hit is obvious. Whether it is the magic bullet, or the absurd notion that the alleged rifle was used—which was not a rifle anyone would use or could use to fire those shots or the hurry by the coup plotters to remove the body from Dallas by the use of force to dozens of other proofs of the absurdity of the official story—like motive. I don’t want to go into. You can do your own research. I will mention only one actual case because it is easy and simple to describe. In the RFK murder the “conspiracy” part of all this is very obvious Sirhan Sirhan was found guilty of killing Senator Kennedy—only he could not have done so—and the evidence is a smoking gun. The official Coroner’s report in the case which was actually entered into evidence but ignored said that the fatal shots were fired at near point-blank range (powder burns) to the back of the Senator’s head from someone who below pointing upward. Since Kennedy was facing Sirhan who was no closer than 2.5 feet according to witnesses he could not have killed Senator Kennedy—not only that but he could not have fired 13 shots from an 8 shot revolver as recorded by sound analysis and witnesses who the shots sounded like “firecrackers” which meant that there was more than one gun since no one can fire a .22 revolver to mimic the sound of firecrackers. If what I say is true (and you can check for yourself) then this involved, cops, prosecutors, public officials, the judge and the defense attorney.

Yes, the U.S. news media companies do act together no so much in a “conspiracy” as such but as a consortium. They are a conspiracy however when the plot together with the government to enable illegal activity such as war (all recent wars have been technically illegal under U.S. and international law), non-reporting of corrupt illegal activity both in government and the private sphere. Without understanding that powerful people and groups conspire to get an advantage and to it ALL THE TIME, every day, all day long. As we speak there are plots within governments, within corporations, NGOs, and so on—in fact anywhere there are large scale rewards. This is why the drug-war has stimulated the drug trade and the corruption of police officers and DEA agents and to think that war, drugs and human trafficking do not stimulate crimes and conspiracies in the USA.

Without understanding what happened in 1963 and 1968 and investigating those cases you cannot possibly understand politics since then or politics now. I think one of the main reasons why the left in American died and was resurrected as the Republican Party of the 50s (corporate Democrats as personified by the Clinton wing and the Congressional leadership) is that even radicals refused to understand that the coup of 1963 had deep effects on public policy. The “left” that is those to the left of even the left part of the Democratic Party like Chomsky and his acolytes complicit with the mainstream Narrative because they believe that not going along with the mainstream Narrative would mean they are being discredited and the public, utterly hypnotized by the mainstream Narrative, would discredit them. Well, they have no power anyway so that’s a dead-end. I’ve run into this consistently in the past decade and a half where any major question of the mainstream Narrative on left-leaning sites means you’re banned for life. I had this happen to me on the Naked Capitalism site where they sid, in so many words, the didn’t want to lost the attention of the Obama White House who was reading them—Yves, who runs the site, was gloating over how the blog was being read by public officials and didn’t want to be undermined by conspiracy theorists. Ultimately, I was kicked out because I insisted on two things—first the RFK murder as evidence for the existence of a conspiracy that goes beyond RFK, and second for insisting on the term “deep politics” and “the Deep State” the last of which is no in common use on the Naked Capitalism site. NC is typical of left wing sites that strain to be “respectable” they do their good deed by presenting some ideas unlikely to be in the mainstream media but won’t allow us to color leftists are always worried about what the mainstream media will say so they soft-pedaled their opposition to imperialism and oligarch. Well the fact is the left has had NO voice whatsoever—the only “debates” were between corporate pro-war Democrats and corporate pro-war Republicans and the anti-imperial, pro-class struggle Democrats went the way of Bernie Sanders who was cheated out of the nomination and told the STFU,  he did—he has family.

It seems creating fables our of events and ignoring even the most obvious bits of evidence would be hard to get away with. However, what the State does realize is that public opinion is pretty easy to regulate—to put it bluntly—the majority of Americans want to be told what to believe. In order to have an orderly life conformity to some accepted “norm” is very important to all people. No matter how absurd the belief, if the rest of your community believes in a lie and saying the lie is a lie would banish you from family, friendships, jobs and so on it is a bit irrational to believe in the truth and most people choose not to believe in the truth—I believe this is unconscious but also conscious. I’ve had some people with graduate degrees from top universities say something to the effect that even if what I say is true—they refuse to believe it. A sure way to clear a room is to say 9/11 was in “inside job” you can trot out all the evidence you want and most people you know, even if they agree with you in private, and they’ll still not want to hear it.

No comments:

Post a Comment

The Deeper Side of 9/11

The events of 9/11 go beyond the events to something far deeper and more important. Yes, the deaths of a bit less than 3k people is impor...