Friday, December 07, 2007

Conspiracy is an Absolute Fact

Conspiracy is an Absolute Fact

Crimes of the State

I hear a lot of nonsense on the Internet -- much disinformation, [1] plain old vanilla misinformation, and grotesque ignorance up the wazoo.

Ignorance of specific facts and incidents is excusable, but an entirely fraudulent view of modern history?

You can't quite be sure if your fellow travellers have any inkling of their own nation's history, of their own government's substantiated, well-documented, and even admitted-to series of wrongdoings -- crimes, conspiracies.

Thus, you inevitably run into the cult of wild-eyed hyper-emotional flag-wavers who bring along their own lexicon of rude, arrogant and sometimes vulgar slurs. I'm referring to the "conspiradroid," "whack job," "nutcase," "moonbat," variety.

Why do these people seek solace in ignorance? I can understand that the alternative is scary, even terrifying. But hiding your head under the pillow does not make reality just disappear. Sorry, children.

Conspiracy is one of the most often prosecuted charges in the United States. It is simply defined as two or more people agreeing to commit any criminal act.

When high level government officials agree that the Geneva Conventions are "quaint," "obsolete," [2] and that they are not going to follow the letter of the law [3], and that they are going to condone torture [4], this is a conspiracy, simply one of many that remains unprosecuted at this time.

Because these conspirators are high level government officials, the hoi polloi (that's you) tends to assume that prosecutions will simply not occur. This is a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy, which has led to the culture of open criminality in Washington D.C. that we witness today.

Under the Nuremberg standard [5] most of the U.S. Congress as well as the White House are open to charges of war crimes, vis-a-vis the illegal invasion of Iraq. Crimes have indeed been comitted, agreed to and executed. Aggressive war is simply not legal under the UN Charter, which is the "supreme law of the land" according to our own Consitution.

First: The Old Pearl Harbor

One of the most ignorant arguments that I hear today goes along the line of, "A government conspiracy is impossible -- something would have leaked."


It took more than 50 years for the truth to come out about the Pearl Harbor provocation, and subsequent naval attack, which was not at all a "surprise attack," as it now exists in America's collective imagination.

Most people do not know this history, still, and they believe the myth rather than the facts. Some may even consider this deliberate sacrifice of 3,000 American servicemen a sort of "noble lie" that served the "greater good" of getting the U.S. involved in World War II, the so-called "good" war.

But let's establish the facts of the case as is the standard prosecutorial model.

Robert B. Stinnett's Day Of Deceit [6] provides oriiginal navy and intelligence documents obtained under the Freedom Of Information Act. These communications from 1940-41 show unequivically that the Pearl Harbor attack was not only expected, but deliberately provoked so that the Japanese would commit the "first overt act of war." [7]

This specific plan of provocation was first suggested in October 1940 in a memo by Lt. Commander Arthur McCollum. [8] McCollum's October 7, 1940 memo to provoke Japan was written less than two weeks after Japan, Italy and Germany signed the "Tripartite Pact" on September 27, 1940. [9] This "Axis Powers" alliance linked the war in Europe to any war in the Pacific involving the Empire of Japan.

It was the White House's intent to enter the war in Europe against the Nazis, but an overwhelming majority (up to 96%) of the American public wanted to stay out.[10]

Eight specific points were spelled out in order to maneuver the Japanese into attacking the US fleet in the Pacific. President Franklin D. Roosevelt, "...adopted all eight of the provocations — including where he signed executive orders. And other information in Navy files offers conclusive evidence that he did see [the memo]."

Interviewer: The memo is addressed to two of Roosevelt’s top advisors, and you include the document where one of them is agreeing with McCollum’s suggested course of action.

Stinnett: Yes, Dudley Knox, who was his very close associate.

Interviewer: FDR and his military advisors knew that if McCollum’s eight actions were implemented — things like keeping the Pacific fleet in Pearl Harbor, and crippling Japan’s economy with an embargo — there was no question in their minds that this would cause Japan — whose government was very militant — to attack the United States. Correct?

Stinnett: That is correct, and that is what Commander McCollum said. He said, “If you adopt these policies then Japan will commit an overt act of war.” [11]

The "intelligence failure" of Pearl Harbor

A U.S. intelligence communications relay station was located on the other side of Hawaii, but the classified transmissions were not automatically (or otherwise) sent on to the one person in the world who needed them the most: Admiral Kimmel, the commander of the Pearl Harbor fleet. This is established by Stimmet, among others, and in a highly credible BBC investigation called Sacrifice at Pearl Harbor (1989). [12]

The Roosevelt White House was aware that the Japanese fleet was enroute to attack the sitting duck American fleet, moored at Pearl Harbor. Even several hours before the attack began US intelligence intercepted a message from Japan to its ambassador in the U.S. -- declaring war. [13] Still Admiral Kimmel was not notified, and he was hung out to dry as the scapegoat in the wake of the massive military defeat at Pearl.

Perhaps this unfair disgracing of Kimmel's name is what motivated the decades of hard investigation that finally led to these revelations of truth.

Perhaps that is why that in the "new Pearl Harbor" no one is scapegoated, and no blame is assigned for "intelligence failures" on and around 9/11/01.

The "New Pearl Harbor"

Given this reality, this context, does not the Project For a New American Century call for a "...catastrophic and catalyzing event, like a new Pearl Harbor," in September of 2000 take on a more expansive dimension? [14]

You see, the American public may be ignorant about the facts of the successful Pearl Harbor provocation, but it is stretching it to assume that professional foreign policy planners are also ignorant about the true nature of America's entrance into World War II. This appears to be one of those "insider" areas of understanding on the grand chessboard of international power projection.

Other Lies

This may come as news to some naive readers, but the corporate media routinely censors a lot of the news concerning official crimes. This has gotten much more obvious of late, with the consolidation of the big broadcasters, but it has long been the norm.

This censorship is obvious in cases like CIA connected planes caught trafficking narcotics in Mexico, which is unmentionable on national network news. [15] In other cases, the government simply refuses to disclose the evidence for decades, and the news media refuse to investigate on their own.

Gulf of Tonkin -- There was no North Vietnamese attack on the USS Maddox on August 4, 1964. This attack was a fabrication. Literally millions of deaths and injuries were the result of this fraud. [16]

John F. Kennedy Assassination -- The Warren Commission's theories have no connection or relevance to John F. Kennedy's fatal head shot, which exited the back of his head with a grapefruit-sized exit wound. This was consistently testified to by the overwhelming majority of doctors and nurses in Dallas, military doctors in Bethesda, morticians, x-ray technicians, Secret Service agents and others. [17]

WTC Attack, 1993 -- The bomb that killed 6 people and injured a thousand others was not built by Osama bin Laden. It was built by undercover FBI provocateur Emad Ali Salem, who was also a colonel in Egyptian intelligence. [18]

Oklahoma City Federal Building Bombing -- The truck bomb was insufficient to cause the observed damage, as concluded by Air Force Brigadier General and ballistics/ordnance specialist Benton Partin in his investigation. [19] Demolition charges were placed inside the secure facility on supporting columns, some of which did not explode and were removed by the bomb squad, as reported in real time. [20]

CIA connected drug traficking -- Even after it was admitted to by the CIA Inspector General, this ongoing conspiracy is covered up by the government and by corporate media. [21]

Numerous other examples exist, and they point in one direction: conspiracy is a fact, not a theory. U.S. leaders (elected and not) have track records which we would be fools to simply ignore.

These numerous exposed conspiracies are not the product of delusional mental patients -- although this image is promoted by those who have a vested interest in hiding the facts. These crimes are very real, always covered up, and numerous false "theories" accompany them in order to cloud the waters and to confuse the public.

Another trait common to high level conspiracies is that they are never prosecuted. The American public has been unable to demand justice and to get it. The media's denial of the existence of the crime -- at all -- in conjunction with its repeated ridicule of skeptics, tends to suppress the legitimate public outrage, and to marginalize dissent.

In other words, the liars are winning.

The Clouding

If Executive Branch conspiracies are unprosecutable this could explain the tortured contortions of many media personalities when reporting on them. They have personal stakes in remaining on the correct -- if not necessarily the true -- side of the historical record.

Other than the corporate paid "professional journalist" class, a number of "left" and "alternative" personalities have sided with the government, and against the 9/11 "conspiracists" who are rarely -- if ever -- given an opportunity to present any actual evidence.

Outspoken voices in the government's camp are Chomsky [22] and Cockburn [23], Taibbi [24], Corn [25], Monbiot [26] and Rothschild [27]. These named writers resort to ad hominem attacks, without the common courtesy of an open debate of the facts. The censorship in the "alternative" press has been disgraceful, openly biased and hostile.

This serves the purpose of clouding the issue, and of obscuring known hard facts. This faction has helped -- for some unknown motive -- to keep the alternative view and the damning suppressed evidence out of sight of the majority of the population. In other words, the presumed opposition media ... isn't. There are some issues that they just will not stand in opposition.

When the opposition media and leaders destroy their own reputations by defending the Warren Commission, and the Lee Harvey Oswald lone gunman theory, it is both shocking and enlightening. They are not to be trusted, and this should inspire the reader to seek out other sources of historical information -- better sources.

There is precious little that can unite an American majority to rise up and demand justice. The understanding that 9/11 was high treason has that power. It therefore has been the object of massive opposition from the beginning.

Attempts were made to make 9/11 a sacred event, beyond comment, beyond question, even though the government has still not proven what actually happened that day, and has outrageously witheld as much evidence as they could get away with hiding.

The 9/11 complicity issue has the power to unite a large block (62% in a recent Scripps poll [28]) behind exposing the truth of 9/11.

Such a revelation could bring down a lot of entrenched politicians who have gone out of their way to keep 9/11 covered up. They therefore fear the truth. They fear the backlash once a majority learn the whole truth and respond accordingly.


1. "The 9/11 B.S. Movement, Blatant Insanity = Deliberate Disinformation," John Doraemi, Crimes of the State Blog

2. Center for Constitutional Rights Opposses Nomination of Alberto Gonzales to Attorney General Post,
Group Cites Gonzales Memo Calling Geneva Conventions “Quaint” and “Obsolete”, Press Release, Nov.10, 2004

3. "Make Sure This Happens!!"
How Rumsfeld Micromanaged Torture, By ANDREW COCKBURN, CounterPunch, April 30, 2007

4. The Case Against Rumsfeld, American Civil Liberties Union

5. Crime Against Peace, Wikipedia

6. The Independent Institute, Interview with author Robert B. Stinnett: Do Freedom of Information Act Files Prove FDR Had Foreknowledge of Pearl Harbor? March 11, 2002, by Douglas Cirignano

7, 8. Ibid.

9. Tripartite Pact, Wikipedia

10. Opinion and Foreign Policy, William C. Adams, Foreign Service Journal (May 1984) ,

"Americans overwhelmingly wanted to stay out of World War II. Gallup polls in 1939 showed that 96% opposed "joining the European war" and declaring war on Germany."

11. Stimmett, ibid.

12. BBC, Sacrifice at Pearl Harbor, 1989, currently online at google video.

13. Stimmett, ibid.

14. Rebuilding America's Defenses, The Project for a New American Century, September 2000

15. Daniel Hopsicker, Madcow Morning News, October 8, 2007, Sloppy Tradecraft Exposes CIA Drug Plane

16. New Light on Gulf of Tonkin, With fresh evidence now available, claims that the Tonkin Gulf incident was deliberately provoked gain new plausibility. By Captain Ronnie E. Ford, U.S. Army


18. "Who Bombed the U.S. World Trade Center? — 1993, Growing Evidence Points to Role of FBI Operative," By Ralph Schoenman, (published in Prevailing Winds Magazine, Number 3, 1993

19. Letter from Gen. Partin to U.S. Sen. Trent Lott, July 30, 1995

20. Oklahoma City Bombing RARE footage (newscasts), Youtube, from various local Oklahoma news reports.

OLIVER NORTH IS TOAST!, Michael C. Ruppert, From the Wilderness, October 21, 1998

22. Defending the Indefensible: Noam Chomsky's 9/11 Spin, Crimes of the State Blog

23. 9/11: Pathetic "Left" Disinformation, The ravings of Alexander Cockburn / CounterPunch (among others) and the Limits of Permissable Discourse Concerning 9/11, Crimes of the State Blog

24. Alternet, Matt Taibbi, "The Idiocy Behind the '9/11 Truth' Movement", Sept. 26, 2006

25. The Nation, David Corn, "The September X Files", May 30, 2002

26. Z-Net, George Monbiot, "The 9/11 conspiracy theories are a coward's cult", February 23, 2007

27. The Progressive Magazine, "Enough of the 9/11 Conspiracies, Already," By Matthew Rothschild, September 11, 2006

28. "Selected results from a Scripps poll about conspiracies," Scripps Howard News Service, 2007-11-23

" How about that some people in the federal government had specific warnings of the 9/11 attacks in New York and Washington, but chose to ignore those warnings. Is this very likely, somewhat likely or unlikely?

Very Likely....................... 32

Somewhat Likely................... 30"