Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

Putin’s Violin

July 13, 2017

America’s obsession with “Russian interference” has reached a fever pitch… and all I can do is laugh.

Trump Jr went to a meeting to “get dirt on Hillary” but none such was actually received.

There have been blips and burps of connections with Russia leaked for months concerning BOTH Trump and Clinton and those who care about such things are frothing at the mouth to dig in.

Surprise! Just like Trump Jr’s meeting: all talk and no substance.

How better to manipulate the American political climate but to imply connections with either or both parties’ candidates, set up meetings to cast suspicion on everyone, and then sit back and enjoy the show?

You do not have to actually interfere in anything, just drop hints about the “furtive” meetings and allow the media to dig a little to find the “scoop”. You know, that thing you use to clean out the cat box.

And that amounts to what we are seeing mostly here, after months and months of ravenous searching.

Is Russia interfering in American politics?


And all Putin had to do was infer that he was interfering in American politics… then sit back and watch us rip out each other’s throats.

Who needs a Stradivarius?

Putin has America.


Not What You Think

March 10, 2016

A few days following Super Tuesday’s clean-up by Donald Trump, one commenter on one of the wire services said that Trump was only running to put Hillary in the White House.

Most of the responders to him called him a kook, a crack pot, or simply an idiot. Some added more to their ribbing with snippets like “why would a billionaire waste so much time and money to get Clinton in the White House?”

All the responders agreed that the idea was completely ludicrous. Why, indeed, would anyone even consider such a ridiculous idea!?!

History, that’s why.

Perhaps the responders were just ignorant of that which they are being doomed to repeat or perhaps they are simply slow to draw that faded line from point A to B.

This has happened before.

And not so very long ago.

The year was 1992 and incumbent President George H. W. Bush had a lock on re-election.

His challenger was a Governor from Arkansas, a state whose economics were in shambles and whose educational system was at the very bottom of all scales used. Yes, Clinton had a tough row to hoe in 1992.

Then up came a giant-killer by the name of Ross Perot. Ostensibly a Republican, he entered the race as an Independent. He was a billionaire and spent his own time and money “running for the office”.

Around the end of summer, he had gleaned enough votes from the Republican faithful backing Bush that Clinton had pulled ahead in the polls.

Suddenly, Perot got very quiet. Like some mouse, he had scurried away and left the race behind. For a time…

Then about a month before the general election, in early October, Bush had pulled ahead in the polls again, gaining momentum and looking to clinch the election.

Suddenly, Perot was resurrected, returning to the fray, pulling Republicans away from Bush. And he kept this up until election day.

Clinton won by a small margin. Had Perot not been there, it should have gone the other way.

In his first week in the White House, Clinton had Ross Perot over for a state dinner.

I wonder how else he assisted the man who had gotten him elected?

Still think Trump cannot be in it to get Hillary elected?

Some NSA Eavesdropping Fun

June 24, 2013

A singular thought I just had.

I mean, since the NSA is going to get ahold of everything we write and send over the internet anyway…

Why not just “CC:” them on ALL your communications. Every email, every upload, every tweet – everything!

I wonder how long their servers can keep up with the flood?

Just a random thought…

the Lie About Truth

November 20, 2012

So many people in comments to blogs or other venues are a bit confused, in my opinion, about what constitutes “truth”.

And while the “truth” can differ from one people to the next like Pontius Pilate’s question to Jesus about if their truths were the same, in modern parlance it has seemed to become something entirely different.

Some people remark, “If you want to know the truth, it’s that you’re stupid!” or “The truth is, that movie stank to high heaven!” or some such.

And while the speaker (or writer) may actually believe there is truth in their conviction, what they spout is not precisely truth.

It is opinion.

So, perhaps they are really saying “the truth is, my opinion is that you are stupid”, it is not truth to anyone but themselves, and only in that moment of time. In other words, it is not truth by any definition of the word. Opinion, yes, but “truth”?…No, not even close.

This would hardly be worth mentioning, of course, except to those nit-picky enough to try and educate commenters – probably a waste of time – except that people then tend to give a broader acceptance to people who spout such “truth”.

And, since this blog is primarily about the conspiracy, I am sure you can already see where I am going with this. Ridicule and the ever present use of the word “truth” is to be found in most pieces mocking the Conspiracy Theory. This was especially prevalent in the treatment given Charlie Sheen.

Detractors are quick to point out “truths” that are anything but truth. Opinions are often dressed up nicely and backed by some sort of factual evidence but it is still opinion.

And there’s nothing wrong with opinion. Without the opinion that something is wrong or false about the historical accounts, there would be no conspiracy theorists at all. But the evidence presented should not be opinion.

Unfortunately, people tend to take the opinion of some “expert” as a form of truth, as if the fact that the Great Name has spoken it, it should enter the record as gospel. It is a common practice and will probably never stop.

I just hope no one takes my ramblings as any form of “evidence”. But I do hope that it creates interest for people to go out and look for themselves.

Who knows? You may find out I am completely wrong and disillusioned, warping the evidence to fit my own demonic policy.

Maybe so.

But I am telling you up front that all this stuff is just my opinion.

You’ll have to decide if it is true.

a Few Novel Takes on the Conspiracy

May 2, 2010

A recent article caught my eye: advocacy journalist, Rosemarie Jackowski, wrote about trying to contradict the “Official Li(n)e”. Someone had said one or two articles would be enough to get the public’s attention. She said, “Exposure does not help very much because we are trying to expose a population that has been brain-washed through years in the schools. When that kind of thinking contaminates the educational process it cannot be counteracted with the few (in comparison) books such as Zinn’s. The other side wins because of its volume. And once they have won in the schools they then spread the propaganda in the media. For meaningful change to occur it will take more than just exposure to a different set of facts.”

That is the subject of an earlier blog (Conspiracy Pump-Priming from Nov. 15, last year) where I responded to a fellow Conspiracy Theorist who thought we were wasting time on the Dan Brown book and its conspiracy-as-literary-vehicle.

Sure, it is just a novel as was the prequel (although the sequel, in Hollywood fashion) Angels and Demons, which spoke specifically about the Illuminati.

It did not make a tsunami exodus to the conspiracy theory camp but it did increase the public’s awareness of secret societies and hidden agenda permeating our world. If each such volume only brought a handful of people into alignment with this idea, it should be considered a success.

The openess of people to the DaVinci code opens their minds to even more earth-shattering theories. Just as it shows Jesus might have been married, so might the reader’s world-view start to encompass some higher level betrayals going on. Many people are just now starting to question the official story of 9/11… even though in Oct 2001 98% of the country BOUGHT the Bushco party line. The insidious seepage of ideas gradually builds up to changing the public’s world view. Even if starting from something as disrelated as whether Jesus was married or not.

And Jesus being married is not news. Several people in the Middle Ages hinted at such, leading up to Da Vinci. In the 1850’s, the heads of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (the Mormons) announced that it was true and gave scriptural references to the fact. Dan Brown did not mention any of this in his book, even though he did reference the book Holy Blood, Holy Grail, published in the ’80’s by Baigent, Lincoln, and Leigh, though they were unaware of the Mormon writings on the subject.

There is a lot more truth to be found “out there” than can be dreamed of in the usual media sources.

If more mainstream novels revealed as much about a long-standing conspiracy, the public might even get more interested. Films such as “Enemy of the State’ and even “Avatar” show that there is more going on that we are told by our faithful media.

As Stephen Colbert said, “We did not want to know and the Media did not tell us. Thank you.” Most of them live from deadline to deadline and the era of the in-depth investigative reporter is long gone. Thanks to the speeding up of our technological world and the insistence on “news bites”, no one in the media has the time to get behind the scenes.

Thanks again to the technology that we “unknowingly” support through our endless feeding frenzy, we have created a media that can no longer serve our needs.

With the exception of the rare novel that catches such widespread attention as Dan Brown’s books or the novels of the late Michael Crichton, we might never have a clue about what forces are going on behind the scenes.

Even we seem to no longer have the time.