The "Conspiracy Theory" Conspiracy

There is nothing like a good conspiracy theory. What makes a good one is a total lack of any evidence - BUT also - conclusions drawn which, on the surface, seem not to be able to be refuted. And certainly not able to be refuted by the average reader.

One of the most in-depth ones I read went something like this, "The Jews wanted something from the U.S. and the U.S. wasn't playing ball. So after a few threats and still no cigar, the Jews had their lapdogs crash two planes into The World Trade Center towers. Not only did this prove to the U.S. govt that they meant business, it also destroyed the evidence the CIA had against the Jews - as the evidence was housed in the building - and destroyed the gold reserves of a few nations which were also being housed in the towers. This was also a signal to those other nations that the Jews could get at their stuff no matter where it was."

The theory also goes on that the attack was due to the U.S. about to let Palestine be its own nation and the Jews didn't want that. That Osama bin Laden is on the payroll of the CIA. That Kennedy was killed as a warning to those who might resist Israel's wishes and yadda yadda yadda.

It is quite detailed and can be read here: The World Trade Center Bombings.

If you read it, pay VERY close attention to the use of factual sentences without anything to back them up. Such as this example...

"There are certain neighborhoods in Israel where a Palestinian cannot be issued a building permit, nor have the opportunity to buy or rent a home."

At first, this may sound like a very bad thing that Israel is doing - denying someone the ability to buy or build a home. But let me point out, before you join the ranks of the mindless socialists who want to champion the cause of the Palestinians, that the very same thing could be said of your country. Which is to say, there are certain neighborhoods where you (or a foreign person who is not a citizen of your country - even if they are a Palestinian) cannot be issued a building permit or have the opportunity to buy or build a home.

For instance, Industrial estates. No matter what your nationality is, you will not be issued a building permit, nor be allowed to buy or build a home. Because homes are considered residential and not industrial. See how misleading something can be when taken out of context.

Also when/if you read that piece, as it starts by asking "Who benefits" of the WTC bombings, ask "Who benefits" by writing such a piece.

Onward.

Then, of course, we have the New World Order conspiracy. Where everything is a plot by the hidden power brokers to control the world for their own benefit. THEY are the ones behind the WTC bombings so THEY could instigate wider controls which infringe upon our property rights. THEY are the ones who decide who wins the elections and who does not. THEY control the money flow and monetary policy. Some call them Illuminati, others hint at the Bilderbergers, Rockerfellas, Rothschilds, Skull and Bones, Tri-lateralists, and so on.

Let's imagine, for a moment, they did "control" the whole world. They would control nearly one billion peasants in India, about the same in China, and about the same in Africa. Of course, trying to actually control such a large number of people would be near on impossible at the best of times, let alone when they are peasants, raging savages and/or other forms of dullards who only know how to breed. The U.S. has a hard enough time with its own leeches on society without wanting to take on the role of looking after more of them.

And also consider this point... as the super rich and powerful people that they are, they want for nothing. Which is to say, if they want cleaning done, they pay someone to do it out of the money that streams into their hands every day. They make money faster than they can spend it. IF they "controlled" everything, they would then be adding a whole bunch of responsibility to their load and not gaining anything other than what they already have right now.

Sorry. A conspiracy of a small cabal of people who want to control the world, doesn't make sense no matter which way you look at it.

And besides, considering that this conspiracy is out in the open, it would be a pretty silly hidden power broker to go ahead with it, wouldn't it? I mean, if someone was publishing for all the world to see, all about your plans to rob a bank, for example sake, it would be daft of you to then rob the bank, yes?

So how are all their actions explained?

Simply like this: People will do what matters to THEM and THEIR property. These rich people have different businesses than the rest of us. If something would effect their business in a bad way, they take action to prevent that. The results of that action may or may not effect us. When they do effect us, the conspiracy crowd write about it.

Take the Savings and Loan crash of the 1980s. IF - and this is just conjecture as I do not know the American system - banks were required to keep X% of the deposits in the Federal Reserve, but Savings and Loans were not, then as more and more people started using Savings and Loans, the Fed would begin losing money. As the Fed is a private enterprise business, they would see their cash cow drying up. To prevent what is happening to THEIR business, they influence the govt to pass laws that effectively collapse the Savings and Loans across the country. All business thus goes back to the banks. And as the banks have to keep X% of their deposits with the Fed, the increased bank business means more money in the Fed. Those who run the Fed are too rich to give a stuff about you, or trying to control you. They can already buy whatever they want in the world. Having to be your minder is the last thing they want.

Another conspiracy is that govt wants to control us all like in the book 1984.

Ok. I admit to making reference to us heading that way. And we are. One step at a time. But one thing I will not do is say it is one giant conspiracy from the govt to enslave us.

The lying bastards do not sit around in clandestine meetings plotting how to enslave us. All they are concerned with is feathering their own nest. That it is done at our expense is a secondary consideration.

And the only way to feather their own nest is to tax us and take a cut of that tax. And to make sure we pay up, they pass laws. And to enforce those laws they need police, which need to be funded. So more laws are passed that enables the police to raise revenues. And on and on. All of it with the end result that the lying bastards live fat off the hog. They are like leeches we cannot get rid of.

And to ensure they stay in power, they pander to whatever whim the people have. If people are scared of something, the lying bastards will promise to fix it. Once elected they won't fix it.. but fixing it was never the goal... getting elected was the goal. And the goal was accomplished.

Sometimes they need to create new laws. But those laws usually have a way of fattening their wallets at our expense.

All liberals of wealth are so far left it isn't funny. They detest the ability of someone else to reach their level - it would mean more competition. So, sticking with what I just said about caring for themselves, to keep the competition away they want increased taxes and whatnot. Making it harder for others to reach their level of wealth and compete. And thus, their position is protected.

Also, all politicians serve only one function... to get re-elected. And will do anything to maintain their elected position. If that means bowing down to the wishes of a noisy lobby group, then they will do it. As most noisy lobby groups are leftist, and leftism is about control and infringing upon the property rights of people, then that is what happens when the politicians take action to silence the lobby group.

Politicians don't have time to examine the truth of the claims those groups make. If they did, we would not have fluoride in our water or have joined the Kyoto push to stem global warming - because global warming isn't happening as claimed.

Next is the conspiracy that the govt is going to take all our guns. Something I have written about a few times - as in, it is the little steps that will lead to civilians having no guns; and gun removal paves the way for rampant crime against the unarmed citizens. But while I write about the results of too much gun control, I wouldn't go so far as to say there is a secret plot being hatched by our leaders to take our guns away. Our leaders are just covering their own butt... bowing down to the loudest lobby group so it looks like they are doing something, while not totally pissing off the other side.

Imagine what would happen if they truly wanted to grab all the guns. People would either bury them in oil soaked sacks inside PVC pipes to protect them from the damp conditions. Or, they would think "Heck, they want to round us all up" or something like that, and then attack the govt, with a civil war ensuing.

Neither option sees the lying bastards feathering their nest very well, or being re-elected. So it just ain't gonna happen. But those who do benefit from the cries of gun conspiracy are the gun sellers and manufacturers - as people rush out to buy guns in case they are banned or something.

This is what happened when Australia had the forced gun buy-back. Those forced to hand in firearms that, up until that moment in time, had been legal, then went out and bought other guns to replace the ones they had to hand back. And not only that, they bought additional guns. Just like people buy up big when there is a sale for fear of missing out, the gun owners bought more guns in case there was going to be some kind of ban on importing guns or whatever.

Another conspiracy is that the U.S.A. controls the world. All I will say on this one is, maybe someone should tell that to North Korea, France, Germany, Russia, China, Belgium, and so on. They obviously need to be re-educated that the U.S.A. controls the world and shouldn't go against what the U.S. says or wants.

Anyway. As you look at most conspiracies, what you actually see are people who care only about themselves, trying to get by or maintain their position. That their actions sometimes effect us in negative ways is of no concern to them. That you can look back at events and see what appears to be a plan, is pure coincidence - as you would see the same plan-like occurrence when looking back at events in your own life.

Now let me leave you with this thought... what if the conspiracies were true? What if a secret cabal really was planning to control the world by first getting rid of guns and whatnot? Obviously, it would be in their interest to have a list of people who could stand to oppose them. And such a list would be easily generated by simply creating a conspiracy website and selling conspiracy books. Then, when the secret cabal was ready, it would be a relatively easy matter of rounding up all those who knew of the conspiracy and locking them up. Leaving the rest of us for easy pickings.

Why We Can NEVER Stop Terrorists

Regular readers will know of my disdain for the "War on Terror" (WOT) and how I think it is being used as an excuse to take away our freedoms and instigate additional controls upon us.

In this entry, I'd like to give my reasoning for WHY all the measures the government is taking to "protect" us, are a complete and utter waste of time, effort and money and won't stop any terrorist act at all.

First, the WOT is targeting an action. Terrorism is an action, like running or walking is. So to understand the futility of what the govt is doing, call it a War on Running, or a War on Walking. See how stupid it is? You cannot have a War on a military strategy. It's as silly as calling it a War on Bombing or a War on Shooting.

Anyway. Let's have a good ol' look at how the terrorists are carrying out their dirty deeds...

With semi-improvised weaponry. Home-made bombs. Box cutters. In short, pretty low tech stuff. Stuff available to any civilian.

And yet, the govt launches a high-tech assault. Digital mug-shots and fingerprinting upon entering the U.S. Linked databases (like any good dictator would have - funny how we cringed at Saddam's stockpile of info of Iraq's citizens but think nothing of it when the U.S. does it). Computers trying to figure out if an audio message has a hidden trigger in it. And a whole bunch of stuff.

On the surface, this seems insane, doesn't it? Using the super high-tech to fight terrorists who use improvised weapons and tools and equipment which is readily available in any hardware store or supermarket. But to truly understand why they launch a high-tech assault you need to know how they think.

My contacts in the military tell me that they are taught, "to never under-estimate the enemy. If you have a certain type of weapon, ALWAYS assume the enemy has the same or better."

So the govt has all this high-tech gear and they are thinking, "the enemy also has this high-tech gear or even better." And once they think that way, their high-tech assault is the result.

They target banking, making it ever harder to open accounts and whatnot. Supposedly, to help stop the flow of money into the terrorist's hands. But the terrorists aren't doing any illegal banking. It draws too much attention. They do all their banking above board. And they conduct business in CASH. Which is to say... they take cash out of the bank and then spend that cash, leaving no paper trail behind so other people can't see what they spent money on - just like we ALL used to do years ago. (And many still do because each time you use your debit card your wear a transaction fee from the bank. Easier to withdraw a bunch of cash to see you through until next pay day.)

Restricting my banking activities, or passing laws that require banks to file reports with the govt for any transactions that fit a certain guideline, will not have any effect on what a terrorist does or doesn't do. But it sure effects the honest people who are now more exposed to the ever watching gaze of big brother.

The govt wants wider hold and search powers. Powers that see them NOT need a warrant to enter your property. And yet, if there is evidence to suggest you might be up to no good, then a judge will grant that warrant. So how this now warrantless search helps law enforcement to a greater extent is not said. We are just told it will help fight the WOT better.

But such laws are "police state" laws. Where the cops can just up and enter your sanctuary and search through it. We were outraged at those kinds of goings on in Nazi Germany, but don't seem too upset when those laws are to be brought to our society.

If you object the reply is, "Don't you want to prevent a terrorist attack". To which I would say, "Yes. But this doesn't prevent a terrorist attack. And to say warrantless searches and unlimited powers of entry will prevent such an attack is an out and out lie without any basis in fact or proof of effectiveness."

Massive police presence at the slightest hint of some possible terrorist threat. Hmmm. Imagine it... terrorists threaten MacDonald's. The law floods into all MacDonald's eating places throughout the city. People can't stand the disruption and so go to Subway instead. All the while, some terrorist with a simple improvised weapon goes and blows up a Pizza Hut or Walmart - while the police resources have been diverted and distracted by threats at MacDonald's.

You cannot search and pat down every person who wants to board a train. So ANY terrorist who wants to blow one up, can. And there ain't a god damn thing the govt can do about it. And making it harder for me to get a bank account certainly isn't going to stop the terrorist from blowing up that train. Spending hours trying to analyze a crackly audio for possible trigger phrases, isn't going to prevent a terrorist from blowing up a train either.

And if it isn't a train, then driving a car into a fuel tanker would be pretty disruptive. As would driving a fourwheel drive into a school playground during lunch break... or driving it into a shopping center tossing Molotov cocktails out at the same time.

How else could a terrorist perform a terrorist act?

Well, if we assume they want to not be caught, then a delayed timing mechanism with some explosive material is the ideal. If you know how, these delayed timing mechanisms are NOT hard to create. And some can be made waterproof, until they go off. Which means, they could be dropped into a container of petroleum and explode the lot.

Imagine a 2 liter milk bottle filled with gasoline. Unscrew the lid, drop your delayed detonator in - which will give you about a minute to leave - then walk away. One minute later a fireball explosion.

Now imagine such a device being deployed in a major supermarket on a weekend. Possibly next to the chlorine or Cleaning chemicals and other flammable stuff like methylated spirits, kerosene, turps, etc.

Now imagine a dozen terrorists doing this in a dozen different locations throughout the city, at all the same time. They would escape in the confusion with ease, and all supermarkets would shut down for fear of other attacks.

There is just NO WAY to prevent such improvised weapons being used, by a person who wants to use them.

But the public cannot be told this. For it would undermine the faith they have in the govt to protect them. It would show the govt for what it is... incapable of protecting anything other than its own interests... and even that is by infringing upon the property rights of its own law-abiding citizens.

All the high-tech stuff in the world is useless against improvised weapons - such as ALL those the terrorists have been using to carry out all their deeds.

What about the World Trade Center, you ask? They used planes.

Um. No. They used box cutters to hijack planes. A box cutter is a fairly low-key weapon. No-one would have thought it possible to hijack a plane and fly it into a building by using a box cutter... until it happened that is.

And the result is, more high-tech "protection" employed to stop hijackings again. Reinforced cockpit doors. Passenger screening.

But we caught the shoe bomber? So? You caught one guy. How many have NOT been caught?

Even just a small baggie of gas then ignited on a plane in mid-flight would be enough to cause absolute mayhem. If five terrorists did it at the same time, it would be a nightmare on the aircraft. And such a small bag could easily be held in place under the arm. Because there is no metal, the metal detector will not sound. And the baggie wouldn't be found unless a full pat down took place. And again, you only need a couple to get through even if some get caught - because you can't pat down everyone who wants to get on an aircraft.

Thinking that terrorists can be stopped, is foolhardy. The govt can't even prevent crime - it can only respond to crimes already committed - in our towns and cities. How is it going to stop terrorists? The answer is, it canNOT. The terrorists have been thinking up a whole plethora of ways to stuff us up. More than I could ever think of in writing a few blog entries.

Knowing and accepting this means YOU can take your own precautions to keep yourself safe. And doing so anyway is a smart thing to do.

Private Militias - Oh The Hypocrisy

A "militia" is like an independent army or fighting force. Usually their loyalty is not to a country, per se, but to something smaller - a local area, a person, small group of people, and so on. And in plain speak a militia is a bunch of civilians trained as soldiers but not part of the regular army.

What makes them so effective is, if trouble starts they come together as a force and defend their area/person/whatever. Once the danger has passed, they go back about their day-to-day lives.

George Washington was a member of a militia. And I suppose you could think of them in a similar way to a volunteer fire brigade. But to protect not against fire, but those who want to take you over and control you.

Ideally, they would be on the local level. Which is your immediate community made up from a small group of suburbs. And possibly a city version - based on the coming together of the local militias.

Their role is to protect the citizens within their communities. If a riot broke out, the militia would come together and quell the riot. No outside interference needed.

Such an idea would be frowned upon by the govt. Because it would undermine their self-proclaimed authority and remove the need for a police force. And yet, there are militias the govt ignores, even accepts without question!

The most famous one of these is the Grenadier Guards who protect the Queen of England. They are loyal to her, have sworn an oath to her, and NOT the U.K. govt. So they are, in essence, the Queen's own private army.

Another example could be considered to be the private "security force" some of the wealthy employ. Those private "security force" groups are also left alone by the govt.

But there are militias the govt doesn't like. They are the militias who are opposed to the govt in question, or whom are protecting someone the govt doesn't like much.

The best example of this is Sadr's "militia" in Iraq. There was talk about such militias not being good, needing to be outlawed, etc. And I would expect nothing less of a govt who wants to control everything. Because a militia means a force that "might" need to be fought against if/when laws become too controlling.

And here we have the classic govt hypocrisy - the Queen's militia is ok because no-one is trying to control the Queen; whereas Sadr's militia is not ok because it interferes with the control trying to be imposed in the area.

I can hire my own private security force and the govt will be ok with is, as long as, they (the govt) aren't after me. At which point in time, my security force becomes illegal and something to be disbanded.

The govt will also leave me and my force alone as long as I don't try to remove the control of the govt. If I let them have their control, all will be fine.

Want to see it in real life. Just look at your city. As long as everyone bows down to the wishes of the local council, all is well. As soon as you discard your approval and try to remove yourself from their control, they will come after you. First it will be with words on paper. Words reminding you of their "authority". And if ignored long enough, they will confiscate your house - because they have some magical authority to do so, even though YOU NEVER GRANTED them this authority. If you resist, you may be forcibly removed by armed police. If YOU are armed, the police will create a "no go zone" around your property and the TV news will appear to film how the police are being held at bay. Maybe even SWAT will be brought in. And now you see the guns.

And this is just you, by yourself. If there are a bunch of you in a private militia, the feds will arrive. And it'll be another Waco - guns a blazing, people dying. And for what? Because you decided you didn't want to be controlled by the govt any more and withdrew your permission, and tried to withdraw totally - including the paying of land taxes. And you will be labeled a criminal. And the actions taken against you will be HARSH, so as to discourage others from doing it too.

This is why the govt really doesn't like militias - even though they truly are the best form of protection for a community - and a country, for that matter. If it wasn't for militias, the U.S.A. would not have won its War of Independence.

Personally, I'd like to see community militias that a person could join for a while, like a child can join the Scouts, or like a person can join the volunteer fire brigade.

Such volunteer groups would teach self-defense and self-reliance. What to do in a range of situations would be learned. And, as a result, the community would become safer. Not just because the citizens are willing to band together to fight off "bad apples" but because individually, each citizen is capable of defending themselves. The "bad apples" would think twice before trying anything in that community. For one, the person they attack might hurt them back. And for another, they may soon find themselves swarmed upon by other equally trained members of the community.

Such groups would also stop the govt getting too controlling, or flexing its muscle too much.

But ultimately, our view (meaning the community's view) of militias, which is closely linked to the govt's thanks to govt propaganda via the mass media, is that they are good when they "protect" things we like and are bad when they protect things we don't like. Where what we like and don't like are really what the govt does and doesn't like.

The govt likes the Queen and so tolerates her militia. The govt doesn't like Sadr and so thinks his militia is bad. Of course, if you were Sadr, you'd be thinking your militia was pretty good - just as the Queen would think should anyone want to attack her.

Militias aren't really a known thing in Australia. In fact, I am unaware of any that exist at all. But in the U.S., they seem to have survived from before the War of Independence. Unfortunately, the govt has done a pretty good job of making most people think of them as far right looney wack-jobs who run around in the bush shooting at anything that moves, not trusting anyone outside of their militia group, and people to be avoided at all costs (and while there are some militias that are like that, the entire concept of a militia is for protection only). Yet it is these very people who may one day prevent the govt from totally controlling the citizens when its fascist ideals turn dictatorial - as they eventually will as a consequence of the tyranny by vote (democracy) system we are forced to live under.

Here's a thought: The country of Swizterland is a militia - all the citizens, while not being an army, have been trained in soldiering and do keep guns at home. Wo the country that tried to invade Switzerland, they would be fighting a militia (armed force) millions strong!

Some reading this will think I am advocating the creation of a military force to go against the govt. I am NOT. What I am advocating is community-based protection. Like Neighborhood Watch where each member has been trained. That is all. And if something happens in the community which needs action to be taken, then action will be taken.

I suppose you could think of those White Knights that ride the trains keeping fights from breaking out. A community based security group. Where instead of hiring a private security company to keep an eye on things, the members of the community do it. It'd be like Neighborhood Watch on Steroids.

Pot Calling The Kettle Black

To fluoridate the drinking water, or not. That seems to be the question of the moment being foistered onto my state's lying bastards.

Our state generally does not have fluoridated drinking water. One city does. But the rest of the state does not.

The dentists "claim" that our state has the highest incendents of cavities, but don't back this claim up with any data. They "claim" adding fluoride to the drinking water will reduce these cavities, without any data to back this claim up.

No voice from the dentists is telling our children to stop eating liquid candy (soft drink like Coke and Pepsi, cordial and so on), to stop eating candy all together, and to eat wholesome and nutritious foods as nature intended - free of processed, refined and added sugar. Nope. Instead of advising to stop doing the thing which causes the cavities in the first place, the dental association wants the govt to add toxic sludge to our drinking water. (I wonder if the dental association gets kick backs from industry for convincing people that toxic sludge fluoride is good for us - even though it will kill you in a heart beat?)

The last thing I want is to have this chemical FORCED onto me. It is like FORCED medication, where the medication has questionable health benefits and no proof it can do what is claimed.

Thankfully, the person in charge of our city's water has a few brains. Her response to calls from dentists to fluoridate the water was...

Wouldn't it be better to educate people about what they eat rather than adding poison to the water supply?

She also said a more effective and efficient option would be to add fluoride to a consumer item such as milk. This would give people the choice of whether they wanted to consume it or not. And also...

We have issues of fluorosis in teeth. There's cancer risks and I don't know any govt that's given any guarantee that there are no health risks.

Environmental scientist (whatever that is) and director of the Sustainability Center, Dr Mark Diesendorf described fluoridation as mass medication with an uncontrolled does. "Your daily dose depends on the amount of fluoridated water your drink. High doses may be ingested by athletes, outdoor workers, people with diabetes insipidus, and infants who are fed formula made with fluoridated water - these infants get 100 times the fluoride dose of breast fed babies."

The Australian Dental Association of Queensland (ADAQ) accused the anti-fluoride groups of scaremongering. Which is the pot calling the kettle black considering they also say this... "Evidence is mounting that poor oral health can impact adversely on your body's wellbeing. Your mouth and teeth can leak inflammation into your body that can increase the risk of heart attack, stroke and even premature labor if your are pregnant."

Now who is doing the scaremongering?

All we get from the ADAQ are a bunch of platitudes... the fact less than 5% of the state enjoy the benefits of water fluoridation is the greatest triumph of quackery over science... in face of the 'big lie' perpetrated by anti-fluoridationists, it is time for the public to be aware of the facts and demand the long overdue introduction of one of the greatest preventative public health measures of modern times.

There is nothing to back up these comments. And they are riddled with the type of wording normally seen in politics... claims without substance. - Just like the implied result that lack of fluoridation leads to leaking inflammation from the mouth into the body which can cause heart attacks.

FACTS are, fluoride is a poison. Organic fluoride does occur in nature and is in our water in small doses. Inorganic fluoride which is added to water is an industry waste product. Better care of teeth while not eating liquid candy or refined process sugar leads to better dental work. While adding industry waste products to water has no proven benefits.

If YOU want fluoride, then buy some fluoride tablets and add it to your own water. But do NOT force this toxic waste product into my water.

Sure, I could spends hundreds of dollars buying a filter to filter it out. But why should I have to?

Let those who want it, add it to their own water. That seems the simplest solution to me. But then again, I don't have an agenda to push.