One of the most misunderstood words in the English language is conspiracy. Another is theory. Putting the two together indiscriminately compounds both the error and the folly.
The Oxford English Dictionary
defines the word conspiracy as a combination of persons for an evil or unlawful purpose, a definition that is subjective enough and broad enough to encompass most human behaviour. The word theory is derived from philosophy and science. When scientists investigate something they go about it in a scientific manner. They collect evidence, then frame an hypothesis. If this hypothesis stands up to rigorous testing, it becomes a theory, and may eventually become a law. If at any time it fails the test, it is thrown out, quite possibly in its entirety.
Most so-called conspiracy theories that float around the Internet are not theories at all, they are the cyber equivalent of what Max Mosley
would call pub banter. While the Internet is unquestionably the greatest thing since sliced bread, its downside is that any half-wit can churn out an article or even a video and peddle it as a conspiracy theory, or even proven fact. Most of the rubbish written about 9/11 falls into that category. Many of the so-called Truthers either make things up or don't bother to do the slightest fact checking, which is why we hear nonsense like the claim that there was no plane wreckage found at the Pentagon, or Shanksville, that Building 7 collapsed of its own accord, or that the phone calls from Flight 93 were faked
The latest nonsense concerns the recent horror in Aurora, Colorado. If this mass shooting had happened in the UK, and a suspect had been arrested, and now formally charged, we would have to watch what we said because of the Contempt Of Court Act
, 1981, not in spite of but because of the strength of the evidence against him.
Another correspondent has covered much of this nonsense, including the lurid speculations of Mike Adams
, who is also a 9/11 Truther (see above).
One startling observation is that the behaviour of the suspect was completely out of character. Wow, like he's never murdered anyone before? Obviously he must be a victim of mind control, a false flag used as the pretext for inducing or compelling Americans to surrender their guns to the New World Order.
The events in Aurora awakened memories of other mass shootings
, some of them very recent, including of the one which nearly cost the life of US Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords. The youngest victim that day was 9 year old Christina Taylor Green, who was born on September 11, 2001. The significance of this was not lost on the lunatic fringe, for while her parents and some other caring people have set up a foundation
in her name, all manner of kooks have crawled out of the woodwork spreading the most ludicrous, scurrilous and undoubtedly at times hurtful nonsense about the circumstances and alleged purpose of her death.
This begs the question: mass shootings, 9/11, the 7/7 atrocities
in London, Mumbai, is there any mass killing that is not
a false flag in the eyes of these dimwits? Sadly, the answer to that question is no; many of the adherents of this belief system - including mystics like David Icke
- are proponents of the Grand Conspiracy
Others lay the blame at the door of the American Government, the CIA, the Mossad, and so on. The other common factor they have is what might be described as paranoia. It is well documented that for the loonies of the conventional left, anyone who doesn't swallow their dogma piecemeal is a fascist, racist
, anti-Semite, and so on. For the 9/11 Truthers and their ilk - far left, anarchists, extreme right, mystics, general kooks...anyone who has the temerity to question their ravings is following the company line - in the words of Daryl Bradford Smith - or is a paid shill of the New World Order.
Obviously there is no countering this sort of lunacy, because no quantity of quality evidence, no amount of logic or reason will ever convince them otherwise. We should not though fall into the trap of throwing out the baby with the bathwater, because false flags are indeed real, as are entrapment operations. So how do we sort the wheat from the chaff?
First, let us draw a distinction between false flags and entrapment/incitement, and run of the mill conspiracies, including cover ups.
The term false flag was used initially in a literal sense. During both the First and Second World Wars there were a number of examples of ships flying false flags; these tactics were soon adapted to operations on land.
A better and more accurate term was used by the anti-Nazi propagandist Sefton Delmer. In Black Boomerang
, the second volume of his autobiography, Delmer wrote: "...the simplest and most effective of all 'black' operations is to spit in a man's soup and cry 'Heil Hitler!'"
Unlike David Ray Griffin
and most if not all the rest of the 9/11 Truth Movement, Delmer could also distinguish between cause and effect, in particular the fact that our leaders and others are prepared to exploit a particular tragedy for their own purposes does not mean they initiated it.
One of the most notorious black operations/false flags was the Lavon Affair
, in which the Israelis recruited a number of Egyptian Jews to carry out bomb outrages in Cairo and Alexandria against British and American interests, in the hope of blaming them on the Moslem Brotherhood for political reasons.
This failed, the perpetrators were brought to book, and two of them were hanged. What was the reaction of the Israeli Government? The same reaction we always see when Kosher Red Riding Hood is caught with her hand in the heimische pickle jar up to her elbow, she screams, "It wasn't me, it was the big bad anti-Semitic wolf".
Thirteen years later, the Israelis were at it again, and this time there was no way they could deny responsibility. On June 8, 1967, Israeli fighters attacked an unarmed American spy ship, the USS Liberty
, in the Sinai Peninsula killing 34 personnel and injuring 171.
The Israeli claim, which is echoed by its lapdog the ADL
, is that this was all a terrible mistake. The reality is that this was a deliberate attempt to sink the vessel and blame its sinking on those wicked A-rabs during the course of the so-called Six Day War
. One can imagine what would have been the reaction had Iran carried out such an atrocity.
Not only was the attack on the Liberty
whitewashed by the Lobby we all know doesn't really exist, the compensation paid to the families of the victims and survivors came out of the pockets of the American taxpayer.
When governments are able to engage in - and get away with - this sort of perfidy, and most especially when people who expose the truth are denounced as bigots (anti-Semites by those wonderful people who gave you the Flotilla Massacre), it is hardly surprising that the gullible see conspiracies and false flag operations everywhere.
Then there are other obscenities like the Tuskegee Syphilis Study
, which became especially notorious because of the perceived racial angle, the implication being that the lives of poor black sharecroppers didn't matter, or that somehow their treatment (non-treatment in this case), contributed to a hypothetical greater good, the perennial rationalisation of all statists who have the temerity to masquerade as democrats.
The cornerstone of the modern Grand Conspiracy though is Operation Northwoods
, a set of proposals, discussions, call them what you will, that were kicked around at the highest level of the American Government in the early 1960s. The fact that these documents have been declassified and placed in the public domain doesn't bother the Grand Conspiracy enthusiasts one whit.
It is notable though that the truth about both the Lavon Affair and many other genuine conspiracies leaked out, most of them fairly quickly. For 9/11 to have been carried out by the US Government - with or without the cooperation of the Mossad - would have been a logistical nightmare, as anyone who stops and thinks about it for a few minutes will surely realise. On top of that, it would have been a lot simpler for the CIA/NSA or whoever to create one of these dirty bombs we hear so much about and explode it in New York, or bomb the Twin Towers or some other building in the same fashion as did McVeigh at Oklahoma City six years earlier.
Smaller false flags and entrapment/incitement operations though are an entirely different kettle of fish, and in spite of the perfidy of those behind them, we have enormous documentation to support their existence.
In August 2007, a group of undercover police disguised as black bloch were caught red-handed - and stopped - by a G20 protest organiser
The activities of Mark Kennedy have also been thoroughly documented
. Although this was not a false flag operation, we saw here an undercover police officer working for years within an organisation that at the worst advocated and to some extent practised non-violent civil disobedience. We have also seen government agents both inciting and participating in crimes from the very beginning. Two examples of this are the entrapment of John Delorean
, and the Siege of Ruby Ridge
In the first case, the defendant was acquitted; in the second, the victims were put on trial. After the acquittal of Kevin Harris and Randy Weaver (whose wife and son were murdered by government agents), Weaver's attorney told the New York Times
: "A jury today has said that you can't kill somebody just because you wear badges, then cover those homicides by prosecuting the innocent."
Unfortunately, he was wrong, because in the past three years - in Britain - two innocent men have been killed by police officers with impunity. In the case of Mark Duggan
, there has been no prosecution, indeed no proper investigation, and as things stand, there never will be.
The death of Ian Tomlinson
is extremely instructive, not because of what happened, but what happened afterwards. Unlike the death of Mark Duggan - by a trigger happy cop - Ian Tomlinson was the victim of two gratuitous assaults by PC Simon Harwood. The only thing that can be said in Harwood's defence, is that he couldn't possibly have realised he was assaulting a man who was so sick that he would literally drop dead within minutes.
So what did the police do? They tried to cover it up big time; their most underhand ploy was bringing in a discredited pathologist to perform the autopsy, a man most people wouldn't trust to carve a Sunday roast, much less to open a human body in an attempt to determine the cause of death. Then they tried to, and succeeded in, delaying the proceedings against Simon Harwood until they could no more. Finally, they tried to cover up his atrocious disciplinary record. This evidence did not go before the jury, as was probably correct legally, but we can see all the way here how real conspiracies operate. This - call it a cover up instead, if you will - was all done with a nod and a wink.
reason the truth came out was because the incident was filmed, but 15 or even 10 years ago when ordinary people were not walking around with film cameras in their pockets, it would have been a different story entirely.
The one edifying feature of this tragic case is that a number of officers broke The Code
and testified against a brother officer.
Finally, let us return to the USA for a look at what have been called false flags but are really low level entrapment operations of social inadequates. Here is a short video
about this subject, sadly this behaviour by so-called law enforcement is thoroughly documented.
The bottom line is that it is very easy for police officers and other agents to find, recruit and incite social inadequates, persons of low intelligence or people with grudges to carry out acts of terror (or other crimes) in order that they may be arrested, tried and convicted for a crime that would not have happened or been planned but for its being created by the state in the first place.
The way to prevent this latter is of course to apply the law to police officers and other government agents, ie if they incite crimes, they too should end up in the dock. Sadly, this seems never to happen.
This then is the bottom line with regard to false flags. They are real, though at a higher level they are far less common than believed by the lunatic fringe. Governments and people in high places have other, far more reliable and less dangerous ways of imposing their will on us.
A false flag operation of any complexity is almost certainly doomed to fail, and one such as 9/11 which would of necessity involve the active
participation of hundreds if not thousands of players and involve precise timing is frankly ludicrous. As for programming people to carry out mass shootings, this is Alice-in-Wonderland stuff. But
, at a lower level, they are a regular feature of police and other law enforcement work. In theory they are, or should be illegal, period, but they will continue unless and until our leaders pull the plug on them. If they wonder why so many otherwise intelligent people believe in these idiotic conspiracy theories
, they shouldn't, because they have only themselves to blame.
Contra, if people would stop making outrageous or even ludicrous claims without at least examining the evidence, when government agents or even highly placed government officials are caught doing things they didn't ought, the media and indeed all of us would take them more seriously. Perhaps though, people like David Icke and Alex Jones don't want us to take them seriously, which raises an interesting question, could some of those making the most outrageous and laughable claims really be government shills? Or even working for the Grand Conspiracy?