New Post at Outward Trends

New post at my Outward Trends blog regarding the death of Osama Bin Ladin and the war on terror.  Check it out HERE.

Gov. Jesse Ventura and Dick Russell Featured On Black Op Radio

Black Op Radio show #597 features Jesse Ventura and Dick Russell discussing among other things their new book DemoCRIPS and ReBLOODlicans: No More Gangs in Government.

Len Osanic - Host


Links


http://www.blackopradio.com/archives2012.html

http://www.amazon.com/DemoCRIPS-ReBLOODlicans-More-Gangs-Government/dp/1616084480

At Least John Got A Mention

Here we go again.  Noted JFK researcher and co-founder of the Coalition on Political Assassinations  (COPA), John Judge, is interviewed by mainstream journalist Molly Redden.  Redden does a lot of work for New Republic but this article, Stirring the Plot, appears on the Washington City (DC) Paper's website.  The only redeeming part of the article is mentioning Judge's work on his project to found the Museum of Hidden History.  The rest is an attempt to re-image John Judge as a coo-coo while the writer interjects her assumptions of the man's character and doubts regarding his work.

And herein lies the problem we have presenting our information to these mainstream writers.  They all view conspiracy as kooky and the prevailers of it as kooks as well.  That is usually the focus.  What the person has to say about the anomalies and contradictions in official (i.e., government) accounts of events is downplayed or ignored.  This is the underlying theme of an article such as this.  What John Judge has uncovered factually, is never covered.  Hence the title, clever but tongue-in-cheek, to set the pace for what is to follow.

Unfortunately,  it doesn't help matters much to show a picture of John Judge looking completely demented.  The writer remarks Judge resembles a "slightly worse-for-wear Santa Claus" because of his white hair and so-called "scraggly" beard, which I failed to see in the accompanying photo.  Anyway, the tone is set.

Redden's article has an awkward vibe to it.  It is as if she really doesn't want to go anywhere near this subject but presses on regardless.  The pull-off comes when she dangles the carrot and then pulls it back.  For example, Redden says the following about John Judge:  "Judge bridges the pseudo and scholastic ends of the alt-history world..."  And then counters that with a quick follow-up, "at least, that is how he would like to be seen..." As if she just can't quite come around to giving John his due for his years of laboring to uncover the truth. So is he a connecting pathway between these diverse schools of thought or not?  The reader is left with a subtle...no.

These mainstream writers like Redden know how radioactive conspiracy thought is and how damaging it could be to a journalist's reputation to trek down that particular rabbit trail.  It's just not cool.  (Oh, it's cool if Hillary Clinton alleges a "vast rightwing conspiracy."  Who ever called her a conspiracy theorist?)  These people act as if the Abraham Lincoln assassination is the only conspiracy ever to happen.  That is, when they actually make reference to it, which is rare.  It was, after all, proof of conspiracy, that much maligned thing.  The hint of cowardice permeates writing such as this.  But it also keeps the herd-journalists in line. 

Not done, Redden soldiers on.  "But as a well-known figure in his field, Judge has an appropriately bizarre paper trail."  The bizarre paper trail she alludes to involves the idea that George Bush knew the outcome of the 2000 election; that the CIA was involved with the Jonestown Massacre; that Judge's 9-11 research for Rep. Cynthia McKinney featured prior knowledge by George Bush of the attacks.  I'll admit this stuff is way out there and I don't cater to it.  But I doubt it's all that bizarre.  Outlandish would be to say that Oswald was a Federal time travel assassin.  There are weirder beliefs than this in circulation.  I guess the single bullet theory is perfectly logical?  Anyway, it's presented to make sure her readers know that John Judge is just a little off.  Or for uncritical thinkers of government issued claptrap, like Redden, way off. 

I've said it before and I'll say it again.  Conspiracy is not a theory–it's a crime.  And people are indicted and convicted of it quite regularly.  As it says in the book of Proverbs, the wicked despise the righteous. Cain conspired to kill Able. It's something bad people do–they plot.  As far as government conspiracies go they happen throughout recorded human history.  The classic inside job was when Caesar let his guard down and the Roman Senators stabbed him to death.  We have a mindset that we are so civilized that something like that doesn't happen here.  Many view the government as benevolent, having our best interest in mind.  Well, they didn't have our best interest when they established the Federal Reserve Act of 1913.  This was a conspiracy by the bankers to finally establish a central bank on our shores to be in league with their European Brothers.  And they succeeded with this poke in the eye to Thomas Jefferson
Finally, Molly Redden has the effrontery to suggest at the end of her article that considering Judge's background in conspiracy research his museum might not be very educational.  As if she would know.  With the wealth of government documents from numerous sources on a variety of events and controversies in American history,  how could Judge's archive not be place of learning?  This is a writer maintaining her distaste for the person she is writing about.

There is history and there is what really happens.  I've said that before too.  Only a select few have access to the truth.  It's gotten deeper after the establishment of the Nation Security Act of 1947.  Harry Truman signed it into law and it was his stated regret for having done so.  Most of our current history is now concealed, locked in dark recesses and what we are told is either hard to swallow or based on multiple false leads.  And the truth?  An ongoing struggle by a few who in the end, only get a peep.


Addendum #1
Also mentioned in the piece is the phrase “deep history.”  Both it and “deep politics” were coined by noted researcher and author Peter Dale Scott.  His book Deep Politics and the Death of JFK explores the deep political undercurrents surrounding the Kennedy assassination.


Addendum #2
Molly Redden implies that Rep. Cynthia McKinney spoke before the 9/11 Commission.  Actually, she didn’t. She served as a commissioner to The Citizens' Commission on 9-11, a watchdog group keeping tabs on the work of the 9/11 Commission.  Redden states that McKinney “famously told the commission that Bush may have known about the impending attacks.”  This statement was not made in front of the 9/11 Commission.  There is also the implication that John Judge is somehow tainted by McKinney’s remark.  Hardly.  He’s just supplying her with research data.

Addendum #3
For more on CIA involvement with the Jonestown tragedy, check out Judge’s “The Black Hole of Guyana”.   https://ratical.org/ratville/JFK/JohnJudge/Jonestown.html


Sources
Stirring the Plot, Molly Redden
http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/articles/43149/stirring-the-plot/

Writings of John Judge
http://www.ratical.org/ratville/JFK/JohnJudge/

COPA
www.politicalassassinations.com

Huffington Post Censors Conspiracy Talk

Editor's Note: The Huffington Post's editorial policy, laid out in our blogger guidelines, prohibits the promotion and promulgation of conspiracy theories -- including those about 9/11. As such, we have removed this post.

Jesse Ventura, former pro wrestler and Minnesota governor, and now conspiracy researcher/author, recently had his article deleted from the Huffington Post news web site just a few hours after posting. His article, “What Really Happened on September 11?” was in regards to a group of architects and engineers that are challenging the government’s theory that a large commercial aircraft can crash into tall buildings and actually bring them down. All that is left behind is the comments section for a phantom article. The ironic part is if you read the article (HERE) there is little to nothing in regards to conspiracy or that the attacks were an inside job. It’s just a simple discussion of facts from engineers that contradict the official government line.

Of course any news organization is allowed to have its own editorial policy about what it publishes. In this case, Jesse Ventura, in his words, was lobbied for some time to post articles for the HP and told he could write about whatever he wanted. Then as soon as he posts the piece it’s yanked in a few hours. Ventura was none to pleased. “I don’t like it when people censor what I have to say.” He went on to say he would never write for them again. Perhaps we should follow suit and never read anything on their site again.

And what is really odd, is that actor/comic Richard Bessler is known to be pro conspiracy in regards to the death of JFK and has been allowed to publish articles on that subject there. Will he still be allowed to do so?

The Huffington Post seems to be a hip and progressive news web site. But to have a policy such as this, they show themselves to be old-school and as staid as the New York Times or the Washington Post which I am sure has similar policies. Do they not recall that the official tale of the 9/11 attacks is a conspiracy theory? It is as if the ways the Old Media are beginning to infiltrate down to the New Media. After all, when have you ever seen a critical analysis of the Warren Commission Report or for that matter any government investigation? Or for that matter, when was the last time a pro conspiracy book on the Kennedy assassination was reviewed in any major media outlet?

I guess we are all supposed to be good little sheep and go along with whatever the government says. Once again, the free press is as free as whoever owns a press. Or in the case, a web site. Apparently, Operation Mockingbird is still ongoing and the government is getting their shills in place in some parts of the New Media. I am sure those fellows in the National Security State were pleased to see the anti-conspiracy policy at the Huffington Post.

Shame on on Huffing Post and especially you Arianna Huffington. I guess free speech is as free as what you agree with, right?

American Conspiracies: Lies, Lies, and More Dirty Lies that the Government Tells Us, by Jesse Ventura and Dick Russell

Sources
Original Jesse Ventura article can be found here.
http://current.com/1ehbc4c

HP editorial policy and comment posts.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jesse-ventura/for-some-the-search-for-w_b_491504.html


assassination

Conspiracy Believers Attacked Again

Once again, conspiracy believers are the target of inquest while the reality of conspiracy is ignored. And this time it comes from the Science News web site (sciencenews.org). Too bad it is the same old tired arguments and issues being passed around again.

THE INNER WORLDS OF CONSPIRACY BELIEVERS by Bruce Bower deals with the thoughts and attitudes of people that believe in conspiracy theories. The piece begins psychologist Viren Swami of the University of Westminster in London analyzing the need of people to believe in conspiracy. As Swami states, “Often, the proof offered as evidence for a conspiracy is not specific to one incident or issue, but is used to justify a general pattern of conspiracy ideas.”

Nothing but psycho-babble. Swami shows himself to be ignorant of the basics of how people in the real world view life. Of course people are suspicious of their government. They have been lied to hundreds of times. Why believe anything they say at this point? The very Founders of our government told us to be vigilant because the natural inclination is towards tyranny. With the misnamed Patriot Act and the later, Military Commissions Act, we see this dark cloud looming closer.

Bower makes the observation that the mindset of a conspiratorialist is, “A belief that the government is covering up its involvement in the 9/11 attacks thus feeds the idea that the government is also hiding evidence of extraterrestrial contacts or that John F. Kennedy was not killed by a lone gunman.”

Here Bower uses two issues central to American’s distrust of government—the Kennedy assassination and the attacks of 9-11. Take this point made by John Farmer, Senior Counsel to the 9/11 Commission:

"At some level of the government, at some point in time...there was an agreement not to tell the truth about what happened."

And also:

"I was shocked at how different the truth was from the way it was described...The tapes told a radically different story from what had been told to us and the public for two years...This is not spin. This is not true."

Thus, we have the Senior Counsel to a government investigation alluding to a conspiracy.

Bower, in mentioning delving into the Kennedy assassin, has waded into foreign waters. Because the last official government investigation, The House Select Committee on Assassins concluded in their final report: "The committee believes, on the basis of the evidence available to it, that President John F. Kennedy was probably assassinated as a result of a conspiracy. The committee is unable to identify the other gunman or the extent of the conspiracy." For some reason this little fact is ignored. (Please review my article, The Little Girl and the Missing Train to see how conspiracy is not such a kooky idea after all.)

How about the idea that people believe in conspiracies because they actually happen? Was not Abraham Lincoln killed as a direct result of a conspiracy? Did not John D. Rockefeller conspire to control all oil production in America? Did not Andrew Carnegie scheme to control all steel production in this country? Was not Watergate a conspiracy that forced the first and only presidential resignation? Even the 9-11 attacks were based on a conspiracy created by an evil genius Saudi millionaire brooding in his mountain lair in Afghanistan. (Interestingly enough, rarely defined as a conspiracy by the coincidence-is-all crowd.) But it’s the “official” story as told to us by our alleged “betters.”

Quoted in the article is sociologist Ted Goertzel of Rutgers–Camden of New Jersey. “Arguments advanced by conspiracy theorists tell you more about the believer than about the event,” Goertzel said.

Which of course is hogwash. Tell that to the lead Watergate investigators or the lead investigators for the HSCA. These people deal in evidence to determine the truth. Goertzel then goes on to lamely accuse conspiratorialists of not needing much in the way of facts to support their suspicions. Seems a lot of what Goertzel is inclined to do in his reasoning.

People like this cannot admit that belief in conspiracy is good thing. What does he do when real intrigue comes along?

As usual this group of wise men never look into the needs and minds of people like themselves who deny conspiracies exist at all. Why not look into the psychological traits of people that want to believe a government that lies to them constantly? Or, that most events in life and history are merely coincidence?

Once again, we are being told that conspiracy is the domain of kooks. I would attest that anti-conspiracy is the domain of those that cannot handle the truth.

Sources
Sciencenews.org; Fonzi, Geaton, The Last Investigation; Gaffeny, Mark H., The 9/11 Mystery Plane; history-matters.com

John Farmer's book, The Ground Truth: The Story Behind America's Defense on 9/11, will be published in 1/10.

assassination