The Craziest 9-11 Conspiracy Theory...The One We Accepted

9-11 will be here shortly; perhaps we briefly should reflect upon it.  I'm talking about the one that happened in the USA, not in Chile in 1973 (that one essentially was engineered by Henry Kissinger).  I'm no expert in these matters, but I do have a Science background (both academic & practical) and am thoroughly familiar with the Scientific Method of Inquiry.  The paragraph immediately below summarizes the craziest 9-11 conspiracy theory I've seen thus far...

Nineteen losers armed with box-cutters conspired to outwit & outmaneuver the entire U.S. Gov't Defense, Intelligence, & Security apparatus...and were successful.  Now that's a doozie of a theory.  Every poll I've seen indicates that slightly more than half of American adults no longer believe it.

I'm not going to re-hash all the contradictions in that theory.  We've all seen them in documentaries and/or read about them in articles and books...ad infinitum.  Much of the information was from reputable individuals or teams, both in the fields of Science and the Military.  Most likely, none of us ever will know the full story of what happened (and why, and how) on our 9-11...but I'm relatively sure about one thing--- the Govt's version of the story really stinks.

Some people appear to believe there are only two choices relative to an explanation of what happened.  According to them, either it's the way the Gov't described it OR our Gov't did it.  Either one of those could be true, but those certainly are not the only choices.  Please, think.  There are probably at least a dozen other logical possibilities (not necessarily probabilities).  Here's just one, as follows.

A few people, some high-ranking military or ex-military and police, claim that the Israeli Mossad somehow was involved.  There is a little evidence supporting that hypothesis, but it is far from being conclusive.  Before you completely poo-poo the idea, however, consider this.  In the 1940's, the Brits essentially were driven out of British Palestine due to the terrorism perpetrated by the Jewish Irgun (founded in 1931 by a group of Haganah commanders).  The well respected Menachem Begin was Commander of the Irgun (which split from the Haganah) and ordered armed resistance to the Brits...including the bombing of the King David Hotel.  Brit Military Headquarters were there.  [One country's "Terrorist" is another country's "Freedom Fighter".]  To this very day, two things generally are recognized about the State of Israel & its leaders:  they are masters of Black Ops; and they will do anything to protect their State.  I'm not necessarily denigrating them for that, rather just stating what many consider absolute facts.  Though not proof of anything, it's also true that Israel has benefitted greatly post-9-11.

I don't know exactly who was responsible for our 9-11, but it should be obvious that the investigation (though appearing otherwise) was badly flawed---from start to finish.  IF the Fed Gov't (at the highest levels) did pull the wool over our eyes regarding 9-11, that's tragic; but what's also tragic is that they do it regarding mega bankers, the economy, employment, health care, war, monetary policy, fiscal policy, elections, and on & on.  It's known as "molding the public mind" via Edward Bernays style Propaganda.  Both public & private Oligarchs consider it an absolute necessity in a "democracy".

Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Hoaxes and/or Lies by the Oligarchs (Plutocrats)

Here are just a few crucial ones---

1.  The Income Tax

Disregarding earlier, temporary income taxes in the 1860s (to fund the Civil War), the Big Kahuna was the Revenue Act of 1913.  It passed into Law shortly after the 16th Amendment to the Constitution was adopted.  [I won't get into arguments about whether or not the 16th was legitimately ratified.  That's a can of worms and could be argued until the End of Time...and is a waste of time.]  The purpose of the 16th Amendment apparently was to correct a glitch having to do with direct taxes and income from property & interest in the 1909 CORPORATE Income Tax law.

In passing the 1913 Revenue Act, the intent of Congress was to levy an income tax only on the very richest Americans.  [I forget the income threshold, but it was high.]   Only the top 2% of households were required to pay the tax; everyone else was exempt.  Furthermore, the tax was on income from property, rents, and interest, not wages.  [The top 2% had no wages.]  That was the original Income Tax Law.  Obviously, successive Congresses changed it...23 times if I recall correctly.  I sincerely doubt that We the People wanted all those changes...to the point where the IRS does what it does today.

The point is this:  I'm fairly certain that most Americans are largely unaware of the information above.  We've been sold a Bill of Goods relative to the history of the Income Tax Law.  The original intent of it never was to tax the wages of average Americans.  That was rammed through by the Oligarchy later.

According to Reagan's Grace Commission, 100% of your income tax dollars is used to pay the interest on the National Debt.  [97% of all money in circulation in the USA is debt.]  Gov't services are paid for by other taxes, and more borrowing.

2.  The Cold War (1945-1989) Resulted in a Victory of Capitalism over Socialism

Not true, and here's why.  First of all, we had then and still have a Mixed Economy.  At best, it's Crony Capitalism, not Free Market Capitalism.  The only Capitalists in the Western World are SMALL business people.  Western societies, including the USA, have both a weak Welfare State AND strong socialism for the super-rich.  Corporate welfare abounds.  The State-Corporate Complex rules the day.  That is not Free Market Capitalism.  Secondly, when Lenin and his Gang seized power in Russia, socialistic institutions created during the 1917-1918 Revolution were eliminated.  Bolshevism morphed into Communism...which is a political system, not an economic system...and it's totalitarian.  Socialism is not a political system.  The Cold War resulted in the triumph of Democracy (of a sort) over Communism.

The point is this:  the Oligarchs in the Western World today continually claim that they are Free Market Capitalists and that the only other alternative is Socialism...which they claim was defeated by the Cold War.  None of that is a true picture of reality.  Crony Capitalists are not Free Market Capitalists; instead, they are married to the State.  Soviet Russia had a super-elite Class which practiced Totalitarianism...that's what was defeated by Democracy (of a sort) and a Mixed Economy.

Mega, transnational corporations and their propagandists falsely claim that they are Capitalists opposing Socialism.  What they really are (in general) is Fascists opposing the rest of us.  Both FDR and Mussolini defined Fascism as:  the marriage of the State to BIG Business.  That's pretty much what we have in almost the entire Western World today.  Even China now is more Fascist than Communist.  I don't remember any Communist countries ever having billionaire real estate moguls.  China does.

Don't buy into the Propaganda.  Despite their claims, the super-rich are not Free Market Capitalists and they're not opposing Socialism.  They are Neofascists and are opposing the rest of us.

3.  The Scam of Neoliberalism

In the USA, it dates back to at least the 1970s.  The overthrow (essentially by Nixon & Kissinger) of Allende and the installation of Pinochet in Chile on 9-11-73 (the other 9-11) was to be the first practical test of a portion of Neoliberalism.  What a disaster.  The implementation of this political and economic philosophy continues, but Oligarchs here have managed to keep it mostly in the shadows... until recently.  None of that is a conspiracy; to them, it's simply good business practice.  In general, most all Oligarchs today are Neoliberals.  Those at the highest levels are Democrats, or Republicans, or Liberals, or Conservatives in name only.  They don't care at all about those obsolete categories... except to use them as divisive propaganda.

Neoliberalism exploded in growth during the reigns of Reagan and Thatcher.  It continues today.  The goal is nothing short of domination of the worldwide economy and finance by super-rich elites and mega transnational corporations.  Its adherents agree with David Rockefeller, who stated publicly in 1991, "Surely it is preferable to have the world run by unelected elites than by the corrupt politicians of today.".  At least he got the "corrupt politicians" part correct.  He also thanked the Mainstream Press for keeping the Elites' work under wraps "for the past 40 years".  [You couldn't make this stuff up if you tried.]

The irony of this is that it seems some, perhaps many, of these Elites actually are altruists.  I'm convinced that some of them really believe that the world would be better off if it were run by the unelected super-rich.
.......................................................................
If all this seems convoluted, that's because it is.  It's so Orwellian that I'm afraid most people don't believe it.  Or, if they do believe it, they either don't grasp how it affects them directly or they think nothing can be done about it, or both.  And so it goes.

Not just my opinion.  Be Well

Obama's Trial Balloon, RE: Syria

Brand Obama recently sent up a trial balloon regarding bombing inside Syria... to see the reaction of the U.S. public.  This type of thing is done often by sitting politicians.  Even in dictatorships, but especially in a soft Fascist State such as the USA (where we still have considerable freedoms), public opinion does matter.  The DC Cronies, mostly via the Corporate Media, put forth an idea that is illegal and unconstitutional to see if the "meddlesome outsiders", the "bewildered herd", the "ignorant masses" (that's you and me) will raise any sort of objection or protest.

There appears to be little or no doubt that ISIS members are vicious, brutal fanatics.  But that's not the issue regarding attacking inside Syria.  The issue is this:  what are the permitted and Constitutional uses of the U.S. military?  So-called Conservatives (which now means NeoCons) and so-called "Liberals" (which now means Moderate Republicans) in our Fed Gov't apparently believe that the phrase "Commander-in-Chief" means that the President can do whatever he pleases with our Armed Forces.  They also appear to believe that the War Powers Act trumps the Constitution.  None of that is true.

What is being proposed relative to Syria is somewhat similar to Nixon's illegal and secret bombing of Cambodia during the Vietnam Conflict.  [It was first called a "Conflict" by the DC Cronies because they knew that the Constitution required a Declaration of War...which they hadn't bothered with, just as with the Korean "Conflict".]  The primary difference with Obama's Syrian proposal (trial balloon) is that it's not SECRET.  Oligarchs don't much feel the need for a lot of secrecy anymore [there are many exceptions to that] because they figure that the "bewildered herd" (that's us) is so thoroughly propagandized and distracted that secrecy mostly is no longer needed...in some subject areas.

Let's be clear:  bombing, attacking, shooting missiles into another country without a Declaration of War by the Congress is illegal and unconstitutional.  Anyone who can read and has an IQ of at least 100 knows that... unless they are so propagandized by the Oligarchy that they no longer can think critically.  It doesn't matter how vicious the enemy is, it doesn't matter that the President is Commander-in-Chief.  What matters is:  what are the requirements and limitations imposed by the U.S. Constitution?  They are stated CLEARLY in the document.  Parts of it are long-winded, but it's written with clarity.

It appears that both Liberals AND NeoCons have adopted the belief that the Constitution must be adapted to modern times...without the use of Amendments.  We'll just read into it what we must in order to conform to modern-day life.  That belief is not only tragic, but downright comical as well.  There is no such provision in the Constitution.  To change it, it must be formally amended or completely re-written.  No other ways are permitted.  It also appears that both Liberals AND NeoCons do not understand that our Gov't is one of Enumerated Powers (Google it).

I, of course, am convinced that all the DC Cronies (the Gang of 535) know better.  They understand the limitations imposed by the Supreme Law of the Land on the Fed Gov't perfectly well.  They simply ignore those limitations... and get away with it.  Because of that, the U.S. Fed Gov't (at the highest levels) has become the largest terrorist operation in the world.  You don't think so?  Perhaps you should ask Pakistan, a country which is not at war with the USA but one where Hellfire missiles are fired from U.S. drones at SUSPECTS.  Or perhaps you should ask the Gazans, civilians who were bombed by U.S. equipment (stamped "Israel" on the side, or something similar).  Your tax dollars helped kill about 500 children just recently.  Perhaps you should ask Sunni civilians in Iraq?  Perhaps you should ask the democratically elected governments around the world that were overthrown by covert U.S. help.  [Just prior to Allende being overthrown on 9-11-73, Kissinger told Nixon (two crazy people in a conference) that Chile---because it had elected Allende---was "a virus that could spread throughout Latin America".  The coup was then engineered.]  Perhaps you should ask the countries that were placed under "sanction" by the U.S. Gov't, in some cases resulting in the deaths of children.  Madeline Albright once essentially stated that "it [punishing Iraq with sanctions] was worth the price" [the death of hundreds of thousands of children in Iraq].  Killing children, either directly or indirectly, is terrorism in my book.

ISIS was founded as a direct result of the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003, the years-long occupation by the U.S., and the so-called "collateral damage" inflicted upon Iraqis.  Whenever we do such things, it's not terrorism...but when they do it, it is terrorism.  Hypocrisy.  According to all our Presidents, other countries must abide by International Law; but our Gov't has exempted itself time and again from any prosecution by the International Criminal Court.  Finally, ISIS is a threat primarily to other Muslims, especially Shiites; the only reason it threatened the USA is because we attacked them FIRST (with the start of America's Third Iraq War a short while ago).

It would be great if Americans would deflate Obama's Syrian trial balloon.

Be Well

Globalization: Part I, Beginning Seeds

Some people think not, but history is important when attempting to understand current events. Globalization arguably and presently is the most significant event relative to the future of our Republic and our individual sovereignty. Here, in Part I, I'll present the beginning seeds of the phenomenon known as Globalization or Globalism.

In 1944-45, as a result of the Bretton Woods Agreement, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and what finally came to be known as the World Bank were created to help rebuild Europe after WW II. The Agreement, drawn up by the UK and the USA, established the rules/regulations for an international monetary system. Some years later, the IMF and the World Bank began making loans to poor countries, the Third World...and those loans had strings attached. More on that in Part II.

In 1965, General Suharto launched a successful coup against Sukarno in Indonesia, a country rich in resources, potential markets, and potential labor. The coup was known about beforehand by both the UK and the USA, but not revealed to Sukarno. [Sukarno, a strong nationalist, had kicked the IMF/World Bank out of his country...refused their "aid".] After the coup and over time, between 500,000 and one million Indonesians were murdered by the Suharto regime. Our CIA supplied a list, which facilitated the beginning of the massacre, of about 5,000 Indonesian communists to the Suharto regime. During that time, loans were made to Indonesia by the IMF and World Bank...with strings attached.

In 1967, Time-Life Corporation sponsored a meeting in Switzerland, the purpose of which was to plan the corporate takeover of Indonesia...that is to say, the economic (not political) takeover. David Rockefeller, a Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) member, representing Chase Manhattan Bank attended, along with dozens of other business luminaries--- representatives of Lehman Brothers, various oil companies, food companies, ALCOA, U.S. Steel, Siemens, various other banks, etc. General Suharto had his representatives there as well. [This is a classic example of Fascism in action--- mega corporations colluding with government cronies in order to control both the People and the economy.]

The large group in Switzerland divided up according to various sectors: banking and finance, food, consumer goods, oil and energy, etc. Each smaller group then hammered out the rules for doing corporate business in Indonesia. As part of the deal, the government of that country obtained another series of loans from the IMF/World Bank.

In 1973, the USA's CIA helped overthrow the democratically elected President of Chile, Salvador Allende...because he was a Socialist, and probably had plans to nationalize U.S. businesses in Chile. A brutal dictator, General Pinochet, was installed; some time later, Pinochet's government obtained loans from the IMF/World Bank. Pinochet ruled for seventeen years. Henry Kissinger, a CFR member, chaired the meetings in the Nixon Adminstration that dealt with covert operations in Chile prior to the coup. Also prior to the coup, a Pepsi Cola franchise owner in Chile who also owned a newspaper (which was thought to be a CIA front) was called to DC to update Dr. Kissinger on the political situation.

In the 1980s, Thatcher of the UK built up her country's arms business and made a lot of armament sales to General Suharto of Indonesia. Also during that time, Thatcher and the USA's President Reagan laid the groundwork for what became known in 1989 as the "Washington Consensus"---a series of policies that supposedly would lead to global prosperity and unfettered economic growth by means of deregulation, privatization and trade liberalization (so-called "Free Trade") around the world. In the Third World, such a lofty goal would be attained through use of the IMF and the World Bank. The "Structural Adjustment Programs" of those two institutions supposedly would be the key to success. Details in Part II of this essay.