Zahir
Ebrahim | Project
Humanbeingsfirst.org
Caption
American Government Response to Conspiracy Theories “Conspiracy
theories exist in the realm of myth, where imaginations run wild,
fears trump facts, and evidence is ignored. As a superpower, the
United States is often cast as a villain in
these dramas.”
Caption
Anatomy of Conspiracy Theory. NSC 10/2 directed CIA to conduct
“covert” rather than merely “psychological”
operations, defining them as all activities “which
are conducted or sponsored by this Government against hostile foreign
states or groups or in support of friendly foreign states or groups
but which are so planned and executed that any US Government
responsibility for them is not evident to unauthorized persons and
that if uncovered the US Government can plausibly disclaim any
responsibility for them.”
– Furthermore, in order to preempt such uncovering, to
continually seed red herrings and false theories; to delegitimize
their unraveling by labeling them as kookish “conspiracy
theories”; to defocus public energies by introducing
“beneficial cognitive diversity”, fabricated leaks
of half-truths which retain core-lies, and “Limited Hangout”
mea culpae, all fed through the “Mighty
Wurlitzer” messaging machinery; to brand the few daring and
persistent unravellers of “truth's protective layers”
as deniers of reality suffering from “emotional or mental
illness”, an “oppositional defiant disorder”
exhibiting a pattern of “negativistic, defiant, disobedient
and hostile behavior toward authority figures” and
therefore a threat to themselves and to society; and when all else
fails, to eliminate these 'malcontents' who refuse to tow the
official line by branding them “domestic terrorists”.
Some
may rationally ponder that how is it, that such a long running global
conspiracy for world government as outlined in Project
Humanbeingsfirst's report “The Enduring Capitalist
Conspiracy for World Government”, can be kept alive across
centuries and across geographies. This
brief paper examines that question.
Noam
Chomsky had once observed an insightful nature of such
“conspiracies”, as the open shared natural goals stemming
from the very nature of its definition, which could therefore, no
more be termed a conspiracy than both GM and Ford endeavoring to
maximize their profits at all cost be termed a 'global corporate
conspiracy'.
I
have always added to that, the equally un-remarkable observation that
a hungry lion anywhere in the world pouncing upon a lamb is similarly
no global conspiracy by the world's lions to eat up all the lambs on
the planet. That is just the nature of the bestial predators when its
“might defines right”. The higher cerebral
concepts of “right”, “wrong”, “moral”,
immoral”, etc., do not even exist among any primal predators,
for these only behave according to their nature. Pious platitudes, if
they could be argued by the lion or the snake for instance, would in
fact only be disseminated to the lambs and the mice to make them an
even easier morsel to acquire!
The
only thing that occasionally deters such exercise of primacy is a
collective natural response like the one observed in the “Battle
at Kruger” park. Indeed, the quest
for the holy grail of extracting voluntary servitude from the masses
of mankind is the key idea of cultivating a willingly compliant
public in order for the illuminated ones becoming their stewards for
life. In Bertrand Russell's' timeless
characterization, to extract voluntary servitude such that: “a
revolt of the plebs will become as unthinkable as an organised
insurrection of sheep against the practice of eating mutton.”
Thus
we observe that from Plato to Nietzsche,
from the philosopher-king to the 'ubermensch', all have argued the
necessity of ruling upon the sheepish masses as the 'divine'
imperative of the “enlightened ones”. Indeed, Zbigniew
Brzezinski even sub-titled his seminal book “The Grand
Chessboard” with its egotistical subtitle “American
Primacy and Its Geostrategic Imperatives”,
merely extending that idea of 'ubermensch' rule from the most
“enlightened ones”, to the most powerful sole-superpower!
The
same theme exists among the “Chosen Peoples”, to deem
their primacy upon the goyem their inherent
nature, their divine destiny. The 'ubermensch' are suckled these
lessons in their mothers' milk to acquire those imperatives across
generations in perhaps the same way as the generations of corporate
executives and CEOs who inherently know that they need to continually
enhance the valuation of their company's stock performance in a
capitalist system.
So,
when these 'divine' ubermensch creatures who are beyond good and
evil, self-servingly behave in their primal
predatory natural manner across time and space, across evolution or
creation, are they being “conspiratorial”?
In
the Chomsky-Ebrahim nomenclature, perhaps not.
In
the Ron Paul nomenclature, it is merely a shared “Conspiracy
of Ideas” in which “CFR exists, the Trilateral
Commission exists”, and that, it is only “an
ideological battle” wherein:
“some
people believe in Globalism, and others of
us believe in national sovereignty; and there is a move on toward a
North American Union just like early on there was a move on for a
European Union and it eventually ended up. ...
These
are real things, it's not somebody made these up, it's not a
conspiracy, they don't talk about it, and they might not admit about
it, but there has been money spent on it ...
So
it's not so much a secretive conspiracy, it's a contest between
ideologies; whether we believe in our institutions here, our national
sovereignty, our Constitution, or are we going to further move in the
direction of international government, more UN. You know, this
country goes to war under UN Resolutions. I don't like big government
in Washington. So I don't like this trend towards international
government ...
But
it's not so much it's a sinister conspiracy, it's just knowledge is
out there, if we look for it, you'll realize our national sovereignty
is under threat!”
In
the United States' legalese nomenclature, breaking of a “federal
statute” by at least two or more persons working in
collusion (and when caught), is defined as “criminal
conspiracy” and “federal crime”.
According to the Columbia Encyclopedia, it is criminal whether or not
Congress imposed criminal sanctions on the activity itself. A
conspiracy need only be proved by “circumstantial evidence”
even “if it violates the rules against hearsay evidence”:
Conspiracy:
“in law, agreement of two or more persons to commit a criminal
or otherwise unlawful act. At common law, the crime of conspiracy was
committed with the making of the agreement, but present-day statutes
require an overt step by a conspirator to further the conspiracy.
Other controversial aspects of conspiracy laws include the
modification of the rules of evidence and the potential for a
dragnet. A statement of a conspirator in furtherance of the
conspiracy is admissible against all conspirators, even if the
statement includes damaging references to another conspirator, and
often even if it violates the rules against hearsay evidence. The
conspiracy can be proved by circumstantial evidence. Any conspirator
is guilty of any substantive crime committed by any other conspirator
in furtherance of the enterprise. It is a federal crime to conspire
to commit any activity prohibited by federal statute, whether or not
Congress imposed criminal sanctions on the activity itself.”
According
to such legalism, smart conspirators, if powerful enough, could
affect the enaction of conducive federal
statutes, or prevent the enaction of adverse ones, that would enable
them to get away with many morally reprehensible systems and acts.
The Federal Reserve System for instance, falls into this category. A
legalized extortion racket to enslave the public in perpetual debt
for the issue and supply of their own national currency. Similarly,
bootlegging is a federal crime one decade, a respectable business the
next! And internationally, it is the enaction of laws under WTO which
defines what is criminal and what isn't – not the raping and
harvesting of developing nations that goes on under its
conspiratorial rubric!
Thus
suffice it to say, the word “conspiracy” even has legal
semantics, albeit rather limited. It is limited because it is easy to
circumvent an abhorrence and call it legal when the king makes the
laws.
But
the multitudinous connotations of this word do not stop there. It
also has a 'tin-hatted' or 'kookish'
implication in furtherance of the devilish art of political science
based state-craft. This was indeed implied by Congressman Ron Paul in
his afore-quoted speech when he stated
regarding the North American Union: “These are real
things, it's not somebody made these up, it's not a conspiracy, ...
So it's not so much a secretive conspiracy, ...”.
In
fact, some of the best cloaking devices for clandestine
covert-operations and hidden agendas have been invented by the most
brilliant minds – here is one exposition for instance from Ezra
Pound: “invent two lies and have the public keep arguing
which one of them might be true”. Another is by Leo
Strauss – the erudite teacher of the majority of the neo-cons
– called “Noble Lies”. It is derived
from the political philosophy of both Plato and Nietzsche, and
re-dignifies the “end justify the
means” paradigm of ancient statecraft of kings and supermen by
renaming deception as “noble lies”. A readable
non-philosophical tutorial to understand how this ancient idea was
used to wage war upon Iraq with the fiction of WMD is by Professor
Shadia Drury,
titled 'Noble lies and perpetual war: Leo Strauss, the neo-cons, and
Iraq'. A third by the White House, often referred to as “plausible
deniability”, okay may be it was invented by the DIA,
the grand-daddy of all intelligence agencies. This thinly-veiled
euphemism for deception to protect the leadership if things go badly
in covert-operations became public knowledge during the Iran-Contra
scandal, the televised coverage of which had gripped the American
nation for months, including myself. And this wasn't just a rogue
operation with ad hoc deniability cover by patriotic agents as most
in the public are led to believe. Deniability is official government
policy vis a vis any covert operation dating back to President
Truman's signing of NSC 10/2. That directive made the introduction of
“plausible deniability” a requirement for CIA’s
clandestine operations in case they were ever blown while still
active. Below is an excerpt from “Note on U.S. Covert
Action Programs”:
'Management
of Covert Actions in the Truman Presidency
The
Truman administration’s concern over Soviet “psychological
warfare” prompted the new National Security Council to
authorize, in NSC 4-A of December 1947, the launching of peacetime
covert action operations. NSC 4-A made the Director of Central
Intelligence responsible for psychological warfare, establishing at
the same time the principle that covert action was an exclusively
Executive Branch function. The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA)
certainly was a natural choice but it was assigned this function at
least in part because the Agency controlled unvouchered
funds, by which operations could be funded with minimal risk of
exposure in Washington.1
ClA’s
early use of its new covert action mandate dissatisfied officials at
the Departments of State and Defense. The Department of State,
believing this role too important to be left to the CIA alone and
concerned that the military might create a new rival covert action
office in the Pentagon, pressed to reopen the issue of where
responsibility for covert action activities should reside.
Consequently, on June 18, 1948, a new NSC directive, NSC 10/2,
superseded NSC 4-A.
NSC
10/2 directed CIA to conduct “covert” rather than merely
“psychological” operations, defining them as all
activities “which are conducted or sponsored by this Government
against hostile foreign states or groups or in support of friendly
foreign states or groups but which are so planned and executed that
any US Government responsibility for them is not evident to
unauthorized persons and that if uncovered the US Government can
plausibly disclaim any responsibility for them.”
...
The Special Group and the 303 Committee approved 163 covert actions
during the Kennedy administration and 142 during the Johnson
administration through February 1967. The 1976 Final Report of the
Church Committee, however, estimated that of the several thousand
projects undertaken by the CIA since 1961, only 14 percent were
considered on a case-by-case basis by the 303 Committee and its
predecessors (and successors). Those not reviewed by the 303
Committee were low-risk and low-cost operations. The Final Report
also cited a February 1967 CIA memorandum that included a description
of the mode of policy arbitration of decisions on covert actions
within the 303 Committee system. CIA presentations were questioned,
amended, and even on occasion denied, despite protests from the DCI.
Department of State objections modified or nullified proposed
operations, and the 303 Committee sometimes decided that some agency
other than CIA should undertake an operation or that CIA actions
requested by Ambassadors on the scene should be rejected.'
Lastly,
among the already well-known tools of Management of Covert Actions
for statecraft, we also have the “limited hangout”
and “modified limited hangout” conspiracies
to mislead the public in case “plausible deniability” for
governmental wrong-doing doesn't work. This modus operandi of
accepting partial mea culpa for something
less consequential in order to mask the more egregious crimes was
amply demonstrated by Richard Nixon during the waning years of his
presidency. A good description of it with excerpts from the Nixon
tapes planning the red herrings is on Wikipedia.
Calculated
omission is perhaps the most crafty tool of public persuasion in the
general statecraft of deception as it naturally relies on ignorance –
for who can have complete knowledge of every subject? Aldous Huxley
aptly recalled the Churchillian term for creating such a chasm
between facts and fiction as lowering an “iron curtain”
around the public's sense of perception:
'The
greatest triumphs of propaganda have been accomplished, not by doing
something, but by refraining from doing. Great is truth, but still
greater, from a practical point of view, is silence about truth. By
simply not mentioning certain subjects, by lowering what Mr.
Churchill calls an “iron curtain” between the masses and
such facts or arguments as the local political bosses regard as
undesirable, totalitarian propagandists have influenced opinion much
more effectively than they could have done by the most eloquent
denunciations, the most compelling of logical rebuttals.' (Aldous
Huxley, 1946 Preface to Brave New World, 1931)
Keeping
thinking peoples plausibly occupied lest they discover the real
levers of power is much more complicated than mere manufacturing
consent among the masses. The latter are generally quite amenable to
simple propaganda, to the big lie, and appeal to the irrational mind
and subconscious fears (or needs), with
repetitious reinforcement. That diabolical science of mass persuasion
is already well understood, thanks to the pioneering work of Edward
Bernays and the Mighty Wurlitzer, not to overlook Goebbels and
Hitler, as the engineering of consent among the majority. Hitler
categorized them into type-1, “those
who believe everything they read; ... when the voting papers of the
masses are the deciding factor; the decision lies in the hands of the
numerically strongest group; that is to say the first group, the
crowd of simpletons and the credulous.”
The
minority of thoughtful peoples however, also often the people of
conscience, pose a different problem. According to Hitler, the
type-3, “those who critically examine what they read and
form their judgments accordingly. ... Hence the trash that newspapers
are capable of serving up is of little danger--much less of
importance--to the members of the third group of readers. In the
majority of cases these readers have learnt to regard every
journalist as fundamentally a rogue who sometimes speaks the truth.
Most unfortunately, the value of these readers lies in their
intelligence and not in their numerical strength, an unhappy state of
affairs in a period where wisdom counts for nothing and majorities
for everything.” If not craftily waylaid, this third group
of people stand to acquire some real comprehension of the otherwise
carefully hidden from the masses in plainsight, conspiratorial forces
which actually shape their world.
These
rebels – referred to as the
'malcontents' by H. G. Wells in his famous book “New World
Order” – can also figure out that the visible rulers whom
the public elects with such gravitas every so often to run their
country on their behalf in a momentous celebration of 'democracy'
which in reality only affords the demos the choice between twiddledee
and twiddledum in a carefully choreographed Hegelian Dialectic, are
actually not their public servants. To hide the fact that these
elected psychopaths are really still only the errand boys and girls
of an invisible ruling-oligarchy, manufacturing dissent to mislead
the energies of the handful of thinking and conscionable
peoples has become a necessary instrument of statecraft.
This
deception typically entails manufacturing dissent chiefs who can
craftily take their respective flock, by a circuitous route, to the
same pastures as the mainstream public. I.e., the net impact of their
celebrated dissent in derailing the manufactured consent among the
masses being exactly zero. These crafty dissent-chiefs, fortunately
enough, are also rather trivial to identify. Their main modus
operandi appears to be to oppose power while still echoing its core
message!
These
traffickers in 'truth' – i.e., absurdities – will often
truthfully describe the visible puppetshows and bravely challenge
empire on what is already known and overt, such as its criminal
bombings and maiming of other nations. But they will also, for
instance as in this war on terror, also echo one or more of the
primemover axioms of empire which ab initio enables empire's
“imperial mobilization”! Namely, that some 'Ali Baba'
magically pulled off 911 from his almighty perch in the Hindu
Kush, that Islamofascism is a genuine threat to mankind, that
Al Qaeeda is out to impose its will on the West and is being aided
and abetted from Pakistan-Iran nexus, etc. Because these
dissent-artists hector empire in its killing of innocent civilians,
they often attract big audiences among the type-2 category people
identified by Hitler, “those who no longer believe
anything;”. According to
Hitler, these were formerly type-1 who changed their allegiances from
unquestioningly believing establishment's dogmas, to blindly opposing
them. They now unquestioningly follow their new leaders, the artfully
fabricated dissent-chiefs.
But
they also attract some type-3, fortunately only temporarily, since
fabricated dissent is trivially exposed to those unencumbered by
blind-faith in power and its many incantations. See Weapons of Mass
Deception for more in depth deconstruction of the diabolical
Manufacturing of Dissent.
And
for the most recalcitrant among the 'malcontent' unwilling to
subjugate their own common and political sense to the devil's
science, exclusively the type-3 of Hitler's classification whose
value “lies in their intelligence and not in their numerical
strength”, new modalities to discredit them are are
continually constructed. The latest being mental illness.
As
reported in the Washington Post, if “there might be a legal
entitlement to be a jerk”, most assuredly there will be legal
entitlement to be a non-conformist, i.e., an independent thinker:
'Today's
DSM defines “oppositional defiant disorder” as a pattern
of “negativistic, defiant, disobedient and hostile behavior
toward authority figures.” Symptoms include “often loses
temper,” “often deliberately annoys people” or “is
often touchy.” DSM omits this symptom: “is a teenager.”
This
DSM defines as “personality disorders” attributes that
once were considered character flaws. “Antisocial personality
disorder” is “a pervasive pattern of disregard for . . .
the rights of others . . . callous, cynical . . . an inflated and
arrogant self-appraisal.” “Histrionic personality
disorder” is “excessive emotionality and
attention-seeking.” “Narcissistic personality disorder”
involves “grandiosity, need for admiration . . . boastful and
pretentious.” And so on.
If
every character blemish or emotional turbulence is a “disorder”
akin to a physical disability, legal accommodations are mandatory.
Under federal law, “disabilities” include any “mental
impairment that substantially limits one or more major life
activities”; “mental impairments” include
“emotional or mental illness.” So there might be a legal
entitlement to be a jerk. (See above, “antisocial personality
disorder.”)' -- George F. Will, The Washington Post, February
28, 2010, Handbook suggests that deviations from 'normality' are
disorders
It
should now be self-evident that while a conspiracy is still active,
or while mileage is being extracted from a clandestine operation that
is on-going or an agenda that is being secretly pursued, or to hide
or spin some other egregious wrong-doing, all analytical and
deconstructive references to its unraveling
must be squashed or dismissed. Inter alia, by defocussing attention
from them, by introducing clever red herrings and side shows, and by
labeling such detective work by the public
as kookish “conspiracy theories”.
Its
advocates, the few daring and persistent unravellers of “truth's
protective layers”, to be marginalized by labeling them as
fools, idiots, deniers of reality suffering from “emotional
or mental illness”, an “oppositional defiant
disorder” exhibiting a pattern of “negativistic,
defiant, disobedient and hostile behavior toward authority figures”
and therefore a threat to themselves and to society! Those resorting
to any active opposition against the government's lies and deceit,
such as through civil disobedience, to be designated as “domestic
terrorists”.
And
when the conspiracies are prematurely blown despite all the
Machiavellian preemption efforts at masking them, to have the
multiple cover stories ready for “plausible deniability”,
including some version of “limited hangout”, using
the ubiquitous Mighty Wurlitzer's message
machine.
Is
all this a fairy tale? The rabbit hole runs deep and permeates not
just the news media and the privately funded think-tanks, but also
the academe which is routinely tapped for statecraft.
Cass
R. Sunstein of Harvard Law School, the man
who is today President Obama's Information
Czar in the White House, in his 2008 paper titled “Conspiracy
Theories”, called this process of the creation of
diabolical red herrings, introducing “beneficial
cognitive diversity” through “cognitive
infiltration”. The paper has to be read in its entirety
in order to be appreciated for its brazen and open appeal to
Machiavelli for conducting statecraft when thinking people remain
unencumbered by its mere propaganda spin. (The main theme and core
purpose of Cass Sunstein's rehash of ancient craft as “new
theory” of governance is summed up in this scribe's response
paper A
License to Kill:
Did David Ray Griffin and Steve Lendman miss the real purpose of Cass
Sunstein's “Conspiracy Theories”? in these words: The
Sunstein project is evidently part of a much bigger agenda of the
United States Government which spans the gamut of social engineering.
Of which, not only political theory and psychiatry are very visible
constructs, but also the newly prepared concentration camps.)
What
are these deceptions of statecraft if not real conspiracies by the
establishment to mask their real clandestine covert-operations,
untenable agendas, and wrong-doings?
Thus,
if it is axiomatically asserted that there is no such thing as a real
conspiracy, then that really works wonderfully in the interest of the
cloak-makers because it makes one forget the perspectives of history.
And
this complex Machiavellian deception game behind alleging
'kookishness' bears exposing fully: invent
two or more lies, not just one, and keep the good hearted well
meaning peoples in the “populist democracy” occupied
debating which one of them might be true, for it would hardly matter
what conclusions they reached. And wherever they ended up, to perhaps
yank one of the lies from underneath them by conclusively showing it
to be false thus conveniently demonstrating a baseless “conspiracy
theory” in order to keep that notion alive in the public
imagination. This consequently delegitimizes in the public mind
serious researchers' efforts in uncovering any covert-operation while
its secrecy is of paramount necessity. Afterwards, after faits
accomplis, after statute of limitations expiring, it makes little
difference if historians and con-fession
artists make a pecuniary gain peddling what is inconsequential
history to the newer evolving realpolitik
du jour. The recognition of this self-evident truth of the matter and
its utility to Machiavellian statecraft was boldly narrated even in
the New York Times, quoting a senior advisor to the president of the
United States at the time, George W. Bush:
'“That's
not the way the world really works anymore,” he continued.
“We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our
own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously,
as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which
you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're
history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just
study what we do.”' (Ron
Suskind, NYT, Oct. 17, 2004)
So
many complex semantics for the simple term “conspiracy
theory” – it's not just mere nomenclature –
that this overview of its usefulness to statecraft was necessary in
order to situate anything with such a bombastic title as “The
Capitalist Conspiracy”, in its proper
social-political-legal-conspiratorial context.
And
an equally insightful and rational response to this question of long
enduring conspiracy for world domination, is added to the
motivational mix by G. Edward Griffin in the video below:
“After
a man has far more money than he possibly can spend for pleasures,
what is left to excite him? For those with the ruling class
mentality, the answer is power – raw power over other human
beings. Money can buy such power only to a point, beyond that,
politics is the sport, and world politics is the ultimate game.”
Thus,
Griffin aptly noted: “The New World Order Is Not New”,
but a common objective borne of natural inclination to primacy which
apparently transcends time, space, geography and race. It naturally
increases in its scope in proportion to the vistas of power it
acquires. And it automatically attracts to its cause the coterie of
sycophants and useful idiots essential in
realizing its overarching agendas. It is helped along, as W. Cleon
Skousen uncannily
observed in his commentary in “The Naked Capitalist”:
'The
real value of Tragedy and Hope ... [is the] bold and boastful
admission by Dr. Quigley that there
actually exists a relatively small but powerful group which has
succeeded in acquiring a choke-hold on the affairs of practically the
entire human race. Of course we should be quick to recognize that no
small group could wield such gigantic power unless millions of people
in all walks of life were “in on the take” and were
willing to knuckle down to the iron-clad regimentation of the
ruthless bosses behind the scenes. As we shall see, the network has
succeeded in building its power structure by using tremendous
quantities of money (together with the vast influence it buys) to
manipulate, intimidate, or corrupt millions of men and women and
their institutions on a world-wide basis.' (pg. 6)
Subsequent
manipulation of global events through statecraft machinations become
trivial when one has already taken over the state's machinery
through its many essential instruments of policy-making. The same
instruments today are behind the formulation of coercive
policies for ostensibly addressing the myriad global crises
plaguing mankind today – from Global War on Terror to Global
Financial Collapse to Global Epidemics to Global Warming to Global
Food Shortage to Global Water Shortage etceteras
– and for which, the solution posited, is of course Global
Governance:
'I
have never believed that there is a secret United Nations plot to
take over the US. I have never seen black helicopters hovering in the
sky above Montana. But, for the first time in my life, I think the
formation of some sort of world government is plausible. A “world
government” would involve much more than co-operation between
nations. It would be an entity with state-like characteristics,
backed by a body of laws. The European Union has already set up a
continental government for 27 countries, which could be a model. The
EU has a supreme court, a currency, thousands of pages of law, a
large civil service and the ability to deploy military force. So
could the European model go global? There are three reasons for
thinking that it might. First, it is increasingly clear that the most
difficult issues facing national governments are international in
nature: there is global warming, a global financial crisis and a
“global war on terror”.' ( Gideon
Rachman, And now for a world government,
Financial Times, December 8, 2008 )
Right
out of the box of user manuals for the “end run around
national sovereignty” made
available to the world through the benevolence of the Council on
Foreign Relations:
“In
short, the ‘house of world order’ will have to be built
from the bottom up, rather than from the top down. It will look like
a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion’ to use William
James’ famous description of reality, but an end run around
national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece will accomplish much
more than the old-fashioned frontal assault.
Of
course, for political as well as administrative reasons, some of
these specialized arrangements should be brought into an appropriate
relationship with the central institutions of the U.N. system, but
the main thing is that the essential functions be performed.
The
question is whether this more modest approach can do the job. Can it
really bring mankind into the twenty-first century with reasonable
prospects for peace, welfare and human dignity? The argument thus far
suggests it better had, for there seems to be no alternative. But the
evidence also suggests some grounds for cautious optimism.”
(Richard N. Gardner, The Hard Road To World Order, Foreign Affairs,
April 1974, 558-559)
In
summary, the upshot of it all is that it becomes a moot point what
label one might give to this empirical predatory behavior wrapped
in deception. Zbigniew Brzezinski even
openly proclaimed its pertinence to statecraft in the very first
sentence of his book mentioned earlier: “Hegemony is as
old as mankind”. And Nicolò
Machiavelli very perceptively outlined its recipe in The Prince
whose modern reincarnation in murderous play on the Grand Chessboard
has been to convince people of absurdities to get them to acquiesce
to the atrocities and spendings
of hegemony.
The
undeniable fact remains that world-government has been a long
historical passion of oligarchs! The quest for the hegemony of the
entire world has been their natural enduring conspiracy for world
government. Its new religion is secular humanism. Its new imperative
is population reduction. Its primal modus operandi is deception,
which, in its harbingers' own words, is to create “an end
run around national sovereignty, eroding it piece by piece [by making
it] look like a great ‘booming, buzzing confusion’”.
And it is finally coming to its grand fruition in our own time with
continuous newer myths and crises creation which span the gamut from
'Global Warming' to 'Global War on Terror', and more recently from
'Global Swine Flu Pandemic' to 'Global environmental disaster due to
oil spill', each new crisis and myth leading to enacting new
legalisms for incrementally eroding more national sovereignty
while ushering in more police-state. In keeping with the
“conspiracy theory” paradigm of statecraft, most useful
idiots are kept busy mindlessly chattering on about “conspiracy
theories” and “Islamofascism” in perfect echo with
the Machiavellis. Enjoy Ed Griffin's
narration in The Capitalist Conspiracy video, made in 1972!
Further
Study References
[6]
Harry S. Truman, NSC 10/2,
http://fas.org/sgp/advisory/state/covert.html
Shadia
Drury, Noble lies and perpetual war: Leo Strauss, the neo-cons, and
Iraq, http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article5010.htm
[7]
Cass Sunstein, Conspiracy Theories,
http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1084585
[8]
1982 video interview of Norman Dodd, the 1954 staff director of the
Reese congressional committe to investigate tax-exempt foundations,
by G. Edward Griffin, The Hidden Agenda of Tax Exempt Foundations for
World Government, http://youtube.com/watch?v=16_4Sgluk4Q
[15]
Richard N. Gardner, The Hard Road To World Order, CFR Foreign
Affairs, April 1974,
http://archive.org/download/TheHardRoadToWorldOrder/HardRoadtoWorldOrder.pdf
Alternate
URL: http://humanbeingsfirst.blogspot.com/p/conspiracy.html
Alternate
Mirrot URL:
http://bloghumanbeingsfirst.wordpress.com/2010/07/16/anatomy-of-conspiracy-theory-by-zahir-ebrahim/
Source
PDF:
http://humanbeingsfirst.files.wordpress.com/2013/04/anatomy-of-conspiracy-theory-by-zahir-ebrahim.pdf
Zahir
Ebrahim, an ordinary researcher and writer on contemporary matters, a
minor justice activist, grew up in Pakistan, studied EECS at UET,
MIT, and Stanford, engineered for a while in high-tech Silicon Valley
(http://tinyurl.com/zahir-patents),
and retired early to pursue other responsible interests
(http://zahirebrahim.org).
His maiden 2003 book of protest written in the aftermath of 9/11
during the American invasion of Iraq in search of WMDs, was rejected
by countless publishers and can be read on the web at
http://PrisonersoftheCave.org.
His writings are available for free download from his project website
http://Humanbeingsfirst.org#books.
Verbatim reproduction license at
http://humanbeingsfirst.org#Copyright.
First
Published March 7, 2010 | Last updated video linkfix 04/17/2013 22:00:08
5576
Anatomy
of Conspiracy Theory By Zahir Ebrahim 17/17