Conspiracy Theories

I hesitate to even begin writing this post, knowing as I do what it will get me.

Should you find yourself, a perfectly sane person, locked away in a mental institution, you have a bit of a problem.  If you tell them you’re not crazy, they will tell you “That’s what all the crazy people say.”  If you say nothing, your silence will be evidence of a condition.  If you protest loudly you will be considered a danger to yourself and/or others.  You’re stuck.

You are crazy because they said so, the matter is settled, and you cannot escape.

So it is with language today.  Words, phrases, and the meanings of these have been forcefully overtaken by the propaganda machine in order to marginalize opposition.  Concepts and ideas are deemed far-fetched by those in power, and so despite the truth of an accusation, the person making it is classified as an extremist.

Take for example the pejorative “Conspiracy Theorist”.

“Conspiracy” is a word.  It has a specific meaning.  Under certain circumstances it is a crime.

“Theory” is also a word.  It is used daily in science.

When you postulate a theory regarding a conspiracy however, you become a tin-foil hat wearing, aliens in Area 51 believing, Illuminati chasing, the Secret Service killed JFK believing, nut.

Why is that?

There are well-known and documented conspiracies out there.  The Gulf of Tonkin incident, which involved faking an attack on an American war ship in order to get us in to the Vietnam War, would be a good example.

Somehow the people who believe that Bush lied about weapons of mass destruction in order to start a war so that his corporate buddies in Haliburton could make millions…are just called Democrats though, not conspiracy theorists.

But those same people call those who asked to see Obama’s birth certificate “birthers”, and those who want an explanation to some irregularities in the events surrounding 9-11 are “truthers”.

Can someone explain this to me?

When building a jigsaw puzzle it is common practice to start with the edges and work your way in.  By building the border first you give yourself, literally, a frame of reference to piece together the rest of the puzzle.  Much of our news these days is presented in such a manner as to make it nearly impossible to find those edge pieces and build that framework.  We are bombarded by facts and figures, and propaganda masquerading as facts and figures.  24/7 the beat goes on, and we are lost in a sea of detail too vast for anyone to sort through.  But, from time to time, an individual has a moment of clarity and begins to see the foggiest view of the whole picture.  When that happens, that person is immediately marginalized, torn down, trampled and forgotten.  And the “facts” roll on, as if nothing was ever said.

I mention it this morning because there has been something on my mind for a few days now.

The Navy Yard shooter claimed to be the target of ELF weaponry.  He claimed to be hearing voices.  He claimed to have been unable to sleep as a result.  Eventually he lost his mind and began shooting up the Navy Yard.

Crazy, right!  The news refers to him as paranoid and delusional.  The FBI called him paranoid and delusional.  But one wonders….

If you wanted to pass sweeping gun control in an effort to disarm the public, the easiest way to do that would be to get the public to agree with you that they need to be disarmed.  Right?  Maybe by orchestrating a few mass killings… I mean these are the people that started a war for nothing right?  Twice now.  These are the people who gave LSD to unsuspecting Americans at clinics in the 60’s right?  These are the people tapping your phones, reading your emails and tracking your movements…right?

Well, consider the shooter’s claims in light of the following, and come to your own conclusion.  Just be careful…you might become a “conspiracy theorist”.

Biohazards of Extremely Low Frequencies (ELF)

by Dr. Nick Begich

Reprinted from Earthpulse Flashpoints Series 1 Volume 1.

In reporting on the HAARP project the issue of extremely low frequency (ELF) impacts on human health has been raised. The debate on the impact of ELF is still ongoing in international medical circles. However, recent research points to the fact that these frequencies when shaped and transferred to humans cause significant reactions. In our book, Angels Don’t Play this HAARP: Advances in Tesla Technology, we explore some of these reactions.

HAARP is not the only system available for taking advantage of these new technologies. The military has developed smaller weapon systems for use in battlefield applications. These new weapons were disclosed in documents authored and compiled by the United States Air Force. The Air Force documents indicate that these weapons can be used for mind control, inducing heart attacks, causing electronic failures and creating computer malfunctions. More recently these new weapons have been revealed in International Red Cross documents and in other press reports. In a CBS – 60 Minutes broadcast on February 11, 1996 a report on some of these new systems was shown. The program discussed some of the effects of these new weapons which included disorientation and “flu-like symptoms”.

This new classification of weapons has created some level of concern on the part of military planners in trying to find a way to introduce these systems. The United States Army has developed a concept called the Revolution in Military Affairs (RMA) which begins to unfold the weapons introduction plan. What this document points out is that many of these weapons will operate in a way which is in conflict with American values. The Army realizes that the conflict with our values exists and openly discusses the problem it presents. The Army then goes on to describe a number of ways to reshape those values so that these new weapons can be used. The basic problem, from this writers perspective, is that the U. S. Army’s role in the American scene is not intended to “shape and form public values”, rather it is supposed to “reflect” American values. The idea that any branch of government should see their role as one of setting the national ethic is wrong.

The United States military has taken advantage of the basic research which demonstrates the effects of various types of electromagnetic radiation. This research is being used for weapons development. These new technologies have been, in part, transferred to the United States Justice Department for use in domestic police actions. The technology transfers have been made over the last several years. Three conferences were held between 1985 and 1993 in order to gradually introduce the technologies. The last conference included discussions of pulsed radio frequency systems and was considered so sensitive that the entire meeting was classified by the Department of Defense and the program sponsor — Los Alamos Laboratory. This last meeting has led to policy development which now permits technology transfers from the military to the United States Department of Justice.

There are a number of documented effects of these low levels of electromagnetic radiation. The effects can be positive or negative depending upon the intent of the operators. In Europe, and elsewhere, the use of these low levels of electromagnetic radiations are being applied to the development of very effective healing systems. In future articles we will be discussing the findings of researchers and clinicians who are using these new electromedical systems. Significant work has been done in nonsurgical applications for treating heart disease, cancer, diabetes and numerous other disorders. However, on the dark side of these technologies is the military. The Department of Defense uses the same basic information for developing weapons which attack health.

The use of these new weapons in altering and manipulating human brain functions is startling. In November, 1995, I asked Dr. Patrick Flanagan if there was a way to guard against low level radiations in the ELF range. These are the frequency ranges which can cause disruptions in the human brain. He considered the question and then described the following equipment configuration for use in a home or work place:

HAARP Antenna Array

Dr. Flanagan suggested that a circuit be constructed. The system he described would start with a “white noise” generator. (These are available from organizations like the Sharper Image.) The white noise generator speaker would be disconnected and the speaker’s wire leads would be connected to the input side of a power amplifier. The output side of that power amplifier would then be connected to an insulated copper wire which would be looped once around the area which was to be protected against ELF. This circuit would provide protection for low power density ELF signals. The purpose of the system is to create a situation where the ELF signals cannot “lock” onto biological systems — like human beings. The effectiveness of the system would be based upon its actual construction and the ELF power levels in the area. The components for construction can be readily obtained from electronic supply houses and can be built by people skilled in electronics to assure that the components sizes match correctly.

Commentary On My Own Writing

As someone who enjoys writing and conveying my thoughts to others I am often faced with a dilemma.

I am aware of what I am thinking, of course.  So I am left with the decision to go in to graphic detail, or to leave some things to the reader’s interpretation.

I want to assume that if people are reading what I have written, if they have taken the time to go to a site like WordPress and search for an article, that they are intelligent people that do not need to be spoon fed every thought.  So, to some extent, I feel like too many clarifying statements leaves the appearance that I believe the reader is stupid.  On the other hand, as I am the only person actually in my head (as far as I know) it is possible that I am not clearly communicating what I intend to communicate.  So, clarification may be necessary.  It’s a tough choice.

As emotions are running high in the wake of the Navy Yard shootings, and there is a lot of debate on the subjects of mental health and gun control, I felt like my post for the writing challenge yesterday could use some clarification.

My point in the imagined conversation between myself and Mary was that sometimes, in the heat of the moment, we react without really thinking about things in depth.

Mary, being a black woman in the South, undoubtedly comes from a family where just a couple of generations ago fear of the police was an accepted fact.  It was the police that were beating people down in the streets during the Watts riots.  Police sicked dogs on marchers during the Civil Rights Movement.  And it is still police, to this day, pulling people over for no other reason than what has been called “Driving while black”.

Mary may also be unaware of the fact that there was a group of people in this country who were disavowed of their Constitutional right to bear arms.  Those people were black, and they were slaves.

My greater point was that in seeking security and safety we may cede our ability to protect ourselves to agencies which we were distrustful of not so long ago.  In so doing we may in fact place ourselves in greater jeopardy.

The deaths at the Navy Yard on Monday were tragic.  Newtown, Aurora, Ft. Hood, these were all tragedies.  But in reacting to these tragedies we must be careful that we do not swing the pendulum too far in the opposite direction.

Our government has already shown a penchant for being overbearing, intrusive and heavy-handed.  A quick scan of the news will reveal that police are gunning down black men in the street in N.C.; the EPA is conducting armed raids on gold miners in Alaska; the NSA is reading your emails.  The list goes on and on.

The one thing that has always held government in check is an empowered populace, aware of their rights, prepared to defend them, and armed for that purpose.  In every instance where oppressive, intrusive government has sought to disarm the public, the result has been an oppressed people.

To allow that only the various governmental agencies and their militant branches should have weapons, and then hope that somehow absolute power will not corrupt absolutely, is to invite abuse and eventually the dissolution of our nation as constituted.  This is a demonstrable historical fact, with centuries of precedent.  We Americans are not superior in this regard to the Empires that have appeared and then left the world stage over the centuries of recorded history.

I was simply making the point that if we, in response to the tragic deaths of some of our citizens, allow the nation itself to be turned in to a police state, then we have committed far worse crimes than those people we are horrified by.

Twelve people died at the Navy Yard.  If I recall correctly it was 32 in Colorado.  40 million people died under Stalin.  6 Million under Hitler.  Millions more under Mao, Pol Pot, et al.  In every place where the government is in sole possession of the weapons and power goes unchecked for long, that power corrupts those who hold it and the people suffer.

Patrick Henry said, “Give me liberty or give me death.”  Let us not now change that to “Take my liberty to preserve my life.”

In the end, historically, you wind up with neither.

The Morning After the Navy Yard Shootings

I work in a building just up the road from the Navy Yard.  Also a base.  Also a secured facility.  We can see the Navy Yard from the upper floors of our building.  I watched the helicopters circle for a while yesterday, before returning to work.

We were on lock down yesterday as well.  Though not as long as the Navy Yard was.  Some of them were stuck in their building for 14 hours.

This morning there is a difference in the atmosphere.

There are more armed police at each entrance.  Anyone with a purse, bag or backpack is having their stuff searched.

Some of he cops try to smile, present a friendly face, put people at ease.  Some of them are far more solemn and stern.  Some have an almost accusing look in their eyes.  Theirs is a tough task.  The vast majority of the people coming through the doors are good, solid, decent people.  These are the people those police men and women are here to protect.  But mingled in there somewhere, at least yesterday, was a person that meant harm to the people in the building.  How does one tell which is which?  A car scanned too quickly…a person waived on in a rush… could lead to dead people by the end of the day.

There is a part of me that is glad I do not have that job, though I have gone through some of the training.  And there is part of me, the part that wants to do something meaningful, that wishes I did in fact have that job.

I first applied to be a SPO at NSA in 1988.  I was rejected because, at that time, I had some issues with some of my activities.  Had I been brought on way back then I would likely still be there.  It’s a federal job, you don’t just walk away from one of those (most of the time).  So I can, to some small degree, put myself in the place of the responding officers when the shots rang out yesterday morning.  It literally could have been me, had certain things gone differently.

You have to wonder, or at least I do, how I would have handled it.  Perhaps it’s best I didn’t have to find out.

There is a lot more eye contact this morning.  People are going about their business, and a laugh or two can be heard here and there.  But people are looking at people.  People are scanning the room.  There is a lot more situational awareness.  A lot more realization that anything can happen, at any time, in any place, and so it is best to be aware of what is happening around you.

I have always lived that way.  I have always examined strangers, scanned rooms, made eye contact with passers-by.  So for me it’s just Tuesday.

For those around me it is “The Morning After the Navy Yard Shootings”.


Gun Control in the Wake of the Navy Yard Shooting

I tend to think in what I perceive to be a logical manner.  So it is difficult for me to predict what will be said and done (or at least attempted) as a result of the shootings yesterday at the Navy Yard in D.C.  Because whatever it is, it will not be logical.

People who were in no way impacted will give flowery speeches.  While those who were directly impacted will be forgotten in 3 days.

Policy changes, rules, regulations, new laws…all will be proposed.  Some will make it through the process.  Some will be beaten back.

And men who stand behind a phalanx of armed security will propose that you and I be disarmed in the interests of public safety.  Because in the mind of a liberal the public is safest when we must come face to face with individuals that the police will not face without vests, helmets, and automatic weapons…unarmed.

We are safest when we must huddle in our bedrooms, feverishly dialing 911 because someone has invaded our home, and pray that our children are not slaughtered, our wives are not raped, and our lives are not taken, during the 20-30 minutes before the police arrive.

We are safest when only agents of the state have weapons (ala Michael Bloomberg).  Though all of the places I am aware of where only police have weapons, eventually become police states.

Of course, if you close your eyes for a moment you can imagine a neighborhood somewhere in America.  Little blue and tan houses lined up down a quiet little street.  The wind blows through maples and elms.  The checkpoint at the end of the road is manned by four soldiers with automatic weapons and a 50 cal. mounted to a jeep…  Kids play in their front yards…until curfew.  State approved activities occur in the neighborhood daily…whether you like it or not.  From time to time one of the soldiers knocks on your door and escorts your wife down to the checkpoint for “questioning”.  Yeah… little pink houses for you and me.

Make no mistake, the stakes in this battle are high.  They are in fact, the highest of all stakes.  The nature of the Republic; the relationship between citizen and government; the future of the country hang in the balance.

Do not be fooled by fancy words and rhetoric.  These people are adept at manipulating language and confusing the easily confused.

Note the fact that in a recent discussion about relations between the United States and Russia, President Putin referred to himself as “Your humble servant”.  Anyone actually believe Putin is humble, or a servant of the people?  He’s a politician.  And so is Obama, Reid, Pelosi, and company.  The men and women who hold high places have one interest, that being to remain in high places.  Whatever they have to do to achieve that goal, they will do.

Wake up