A Game of Conspiracies

What a powerful word, the word conspiracy. It was Tony's lawyer in the Sopranos that said, "you put three guys in a room and that's a conspiracy." And true to his words, Americans everyday are prosecuted for conspiracy to commit murder, conspiracy to defraud, and so on.. Hell, if you find yourself in the same vicinity as someone affiliated with Al-Qaeda -- let alone the same room -- you are likely to get taken out by a Hellfire missile; even if you are a government negotiator. So, for an American prosecutor, the ability to allege a conspiracy is very straightforward and simple. 

However, something interesting happens when it is not a prosecutor, an agent of the state, that is alleging a conspiracy against a civilian, but rather a civilian alleging a conspiracy against government agents; it become a "conspiracy theory." For some reason, this carries a largely negative connotation in the English language. Like the phrase "alien abduction," the phrase ''conspiracy theory'' carries those elements that make us nervous and roll our eyes. But this is not the case everywhere outside of America.

If I were, for example, sitting around a table full of Dominicans and alleged that the Dominican military was working with the Haitian military to bring drugs into the country, the people around would most likely inquire further. Even if someone were to say that my allegation was a "teoria conspirativa," it would have little meaning to the Dominicans around the table. 

If I were sitting around a table full of Americans and said, "the CIA is bringing crack into the inner city," most would choose not to further inquire, and if someone at the table said, "that's a conspiracy theory!" then it would be an instant indication that it's best to change the subject. 

So, I asked a random Dutch woman with whom I have no romantic involvement, "when you hear the word complottheorie, what is the first thing that comes to mind?"

She answered: "I'm always suspicious of people who believe complottheories, but I guess it depends on the topic."

I asked her: "if I tell you that the government carried out 9/11 and offered you evidence to back up that assertion, would that be a complottheorie?"

She answered, ''yes.''

I continued: "what if I allege that the government killed JFK and offered evidence to back that assertion, would that be the same as the assertion about 9/11?"

She answered: "yes."

I continued: "What if I allege that the government came into contact with aliens and offered evidence to back up that assertion, would that be the same as the assertion about 9/11 and JFK?"

She answered: "no."

I asked: "why?" 

She replied: ''because to me aliens are less believable."

I asked: "so, it basically comes to how believable the assertion is?''

She answered: "yes."

Now, this randomly selected Dutch woman has what I would describe as "mainstream" theories -- as they are propagated in the media. In the mainstream world, "conspiracy theories" are all lumped together and then sorted based on how believable it is to the listener. But to me this seems not only unscientific, but also problematic. In fact, I believe that there should be a new phrase: "prosecutorial theory."

Does an assertion about aliens involved a known crime for which there should be a prosecutor and an accused?

No!

Does the assertion that Bin Laden did not fully carry out 9/11 involve a known crime for which there should be a prosecutor and an accused?

Of course!

Now, it doesn't take learning many different languages to notice that culture and language greatly trains us to react emotionally to certain phrases and words. The emotions we associate with certain words and phrases affects our ability to ask questions and demand answers. 

While at Yale, I was the only person I knew willing to publicly ask questions and demand answers. In private, engineering and architecture students agreed with me regarding 9/11. In public, the possibility that they could be branded as modern day blasphemers, as conspiracy theorists, was too risky for their careers and they didn't speak publicly or ask questions. The fear of a label is not going to stop me from forcing the government speak the truth about 9/11.

Many people are skeptical and want another investigation. They want someone to be prosecuted and accused. To summarize my argument, 9/11 was a crime and there has been no proper prosecutor accusing someone in a manner that is consistent with democratic transparency. 

Thomas Kean, the head of the 9/11 commission, the man who himself said he was stonewalled by the CIA, is in my opinion nothing resembling an investigator or prosecutor. In fact, my entire reason for leaving and fearing returning to the land of the free can be encapsulated in this short video. 

Yes, we don't know if anyone died there, so there's no reason to investigate. It's like finding two buses and a minibus at the bottom of a ravine and neglecting to mention the minibus because no one died in the vehicle. I wouldn't hire this guy to be the prosecutor in a traffic case, much less the biggest crime in American history.  No one died in that building -- to the best of our knowledge -- because the steel was shipped off to China before getting properly analyzed. Yet, people don't want to talk about 9/11 because to do so would be something that in America scares and is referred to as a "conspiracy theory."

The Enemy's Most Powerful Weapon

New ideas and beliefs are dangerous because they can undo the order of things and unseat the current establishment. As an outside observer, I have seen a rise in the number of Americans who believe anti-government theories, and who see the US government as an adversary. One of the reasons why many Americans are absolutely convinced of the evil of the United States is because of 9/11. Whether you or I believe that the government itself carried out 9/11 is irrelevant. What is scary is the number of armed Americans who believe just that and increasingly call for blood and revolution. 

From an outside point of view, there is a large segment of the American population unsure not just about their financial situation, but also the possibility of an armed confrontation against the government in the event of a worsening economic scenario, which is itself increasingly likely. Anyone who has taken basic military strategy knows that defeating an enemy is as much a physical act as a psychological act. To defeat your enemy, you must make him lose trust in the very institutions that are supposed to support him.

America's enemies are using conspiracy theories against her. Press TV, the official Iranian news agency, recently reported on the murder-suicide of Phillip Marshall, the author of The Big Bamboozle, a book that accuses the US government and the Saudis of complicity in 9/11. A large number of Iranians believe that 9/11 was a false flag attack, and when an individual with a white face and a credible title appears on TV telling them that the US government killed a man and his family for writing a book alleging something that many of them suspect, it only reinforces what they already believe.

The individuals in control of the Iranian regime are pretty smart, and they recognize the power of the mystery surrounding 9/11, and they know that they have to exploit it. Should the Iranian regime begin to assassinate within Israel and the US, it might be in their best interest to assassinate 9/11 truth activists, as this would promote uncertainty and fear. 

I'm not exactly sure what happened to Phillip Marshall, but it seems that the Iranians are benefiting. We live in a time of conspiracy, of uncertainty. We can only hope that the Iranians don't retaliate for the assassination of their scientists with politically-motivated assassinations in the US and Israel. 

According to one of my sources within ICE, the Department of Homeland Security has evidence to indicate that there is a large Mexican cartel directly under the control of Iran's Revolutionary Guard. For now, it hasn't been revealed which cartel, but DHS fears that this cartel will carry out hits in the US once Iran goes nuclear and feels more secure in its own borders. 

My source revealed little, but he mentioned that the top three guys in the cartel are Mexican-Iranian double-agents; their followers are completely unaware that they are anything but pure Mexican ex-military. The average cartel foot soldier would never even dream that he works for anyone but Mexican elements. 

These three Iranian double-agents have succeeded in developing a nation-wide trafficking and assassination network without having ever even set foot within the United States. The trafficking allegedly provides money for the Revolutionary Guard, and the assassination network serves obvious enforcement efforts as well as future political efforts. A war with Iran will not be easy; beyond Hezbollah and Syria, Iran has Latin American proxies.

To be fully honest, however, I can't say whether my source is feeding me the truth, or the DHS version of how Marshall was killed. There is a real possibility that Iran could control a cartel near the border; after all it would be a strategically powerful weapon to have a destabilizing capability near your enemy. I can say with certainty that there is an attempt to hide the truth regarding Marshall's death.