The believer in a conspiracy theory or theories becomes, in his own mind, the one in proper communion with the underlying universe, the one who understands the true ordering of things…conspiracy theories are actually reassuring. They suggest that there is an explanation, that human agencies are powerful, and that there is order rather than chaos. This makes redemption possible.It was revealed in the newspaper this week that 14% of Canadians are considered anti-Semitic, agreeing with such statements as "Jews have too much control over global affairs" and "Jews are responsible for most of the world's wars". I have been fascinated with anti-Semitism for the longest time precisely because I don't understand it -- who are the fear-mongers that spread the idea that the Jewish people are a shadowy cabal that pull the strings behind the scenes? And when you compare the anti-Semites with the Jews, which side looks more conspiratorial?
In Voodoo Histories, David Aaronovitch answers these questions and more, starting with The Protocols of the Elders of Zion and its role in launching the age of the modern conspiracy theory: That Jews had planned and caused WWI as war profiteers and to disrupt world governance. While there was undeniable proof at the time (1919) that The Protocols was a forgery (it was originally a French satire about Napoleon's lust for power that was later edited to implicate Jews instead), the fact that it seemed to make sense of the devastating war that had left the populace feeling powerless and horrified made it irresistible. This acceptance of shadowy theories despite proof to the contrary is a recurring theme in Voodoo Histories, and here's what I found interesting about that: Although I have heard of these various conspiracy theories, I have never heard that there is definitive proof that the American Armed Forces hadn't cracked the Japanese codes during WWII (and so they couldn't have been aware of or supported the attack on Pearl Harbor); I have never heard that an expert panel (not the Warren Commission) proved that JFK could have been shot by Oswald alone; I have never heard that Princess Diana was definitely neither pregnant or engaged to Dodi Al Fayed (removing any tenuous excuse for her "assassination" by the Royal Family) -- it boggles my mind that the conspiracy side has been louder throughout the years than the plain facts; that even someone like me who doesn't go looking for conspiracies has heard the cranks but never their detractors (and honestly, I was sure that Oswald didn't act alone).
Now, I've never gone looking for conspiracies, but I do have a soft spot for pseudo-history, so was surprised at the inclusion of (and denigration of) authors like Erich von Däniken and Graham Hancock, and especially, Michael Baigent, Richard Leigh, and Henry Lincoln and their book Holy Blood, Holy Grail -- how especially disappointing to learn that the last three knew their theories were based on a hoax even before they went to print. I admit that I have spent many happy hours reading these authors' wacky alternative history theories (the pyramids were built by the Atlanteans! Ezekiel's Wheel was an alien spaceship! Jesus' descendants await a return to the throne of France!) and I would tend to think, "I don't believe it, so what's the harm?", but Aaronovitch explains:
I have now plowed through enough of these books to be able to state that, as a genre, they are badly written and, in their anxiety to establish their dubious neo-scholarly credentials, incredibly tedious. So, if we're not reading them for the prose, why are we? Why do we read bad history books that have the added distinction of not being in any way true or useful, and not buy in anything like the same numbers history books that are often far better written and much more likely to give us an understanding of who we are and where we came from?Those are good questions: I have never bought a National Enquirer in my life (or even flipped through one in the checkout line to see the real and unretouched photos of the Elvis-Sasquatch baby), so why do I pollute my mind with nonsense because it has the veneer of scholarship? And since most of us agree that the Truthers and the Birthers are all crackpots, what's the harm of letting them have their pastimes? Aaronovitch explains that there is harm: Once upon a time, the crackpots poring over The Protocols of the Elders of Zion were young men named Hitler and Himmel, and based on a forged hoax of a book, these men tried to implement the Final Solution. In our modern times, within 5 years of 9/11, over a third of New Yorkers believed that the US government was either complicit in the attack on the Twin Towers or at least were involved in a coverup. When we look at the big picture of history, past conspiracies do affect modern political agendas -- and I must assume that includes persistent anti-Semitism, and especially as it is expressed in the poll I started with.
Voodoo Histories is an interesting and erudite book -- a relentless debunker of all the modern conspiracy theories -- and if I had one small complaint it would be that, as it was written by a British journalist, it includes a few scandals that I've never heard of and they were a little dull to me: Would you care if I told you your shoelaces are NSA listening devices and then disproved it in the next breath? Remember you heard it here first.
My sister-in-law, Lolo, has a brother who long ago fell down the conspiracy rabbit-hole. For many years now, he has spent all his free time on the internet, looking for the connections that explain what is "really" happening in the world. He has done this to the exclusion of face-to-face relationships, and although he is a good looking guy with a job and a condo, he doesn't date or have friends or even leave home much. He's the kind of guy you don't want to be cornered by at a party because he is sincere in his efforts to educate you. For example, their other sister was a teacher at an international school in Cairo for quite a few years and transferred out just months before the revolution started in Tahrir Square. I said to him, "You must be glad that Ellen got out of Egypt when she did."
He narrowed his eyes at me and said, "How do you mean?"
"Well, with all of the violent clashes with the police and innocent bystanders getting caught up in the fights, you must be glad she got out safely."
"Only if you believe what they want you to believe."
Was there ever any question about what was happening in Cairo? How could "they" manipulate foreign journalists and private youtube videos? To what end? So, I do understand that getting caught up in the conspiracies isn't truly harmless.
And yet, some theories make me giggle. As I've said before, my friend Delight has a social justice group on facebook and just last week she posted a link to some anti-nuclear blog and this was my favourite comment below the original post:
So Oppenheimer was a luciferian "jew"... that figures. Khazar Martian/Cydonian luciferian LIZARDS "who call themselves jews" have almost ruined this planet too.
Stupid pagan lizards and their ma$ons and witches. It's about time for all of the dirty lizards with their queen witch mother lucifer, ALL their beer-baby demons and the pagan apple-eaters they've picked up, to go back home. Dumbass lizards and pagan apple-eaters... go back home to your ruined planet already. I'm sure it's gonna be a real party for ya.
There's that anti-Semitism I'm not really any closer to understanding, too, but "dumbass lizards and pagan apple-lizards" -- what does that guy's rabbit-hole look like?
And this quote is insanely long (and hard to read), but it was shared on Delight's group's page by someone who is always trying to get her into a debate about money (for which Delight thanks her for bringing new perspectives to the group -- *eyeball straining eyeroll*). I need to keep this here to remember where I first encountered the phrase "zombie-rape-baby" to describe Jesus; this is a rabbit-hole from a different planet:
THE TENDER FOR LAW – APPOINTED ARTICLE - INSURANCE FOR THE INEPT -
By APPOINTMENT of Gail Blackman (c) 2013 ROGUESUPPORT INC. under a Creative
Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported License.
One of the great things about being in a law forum, run by a
prorogued noble, is that you have the unique opportunity of posing the right
question and always getting a near-magical answer; which causes something to
flip in that little lump of protoplasm you laughingly call a brain.
...and everything becomes clear.
How many of you are kicking yourselves because you didn't know what
THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER means?
Well, this one's no different.
Readers of this forum will notice I have a particular distaste for
the Abrahamic religions. I have to tell you, it's not going to let up in this
article, because this article is about INSURANCE. We all know about INSURANCE.
If you're driving, you HAVE to have INSURANCE. Hell if you want safe harbour anywhere,
the harbour-master will demand that your boat have INSURANCE.
So let's look at the word. First the prefix "in". What
does the prefix "in" mean? Well, look at all the words that I use to
describe all of you - Inept, incompetent, incapable, insecure, insincere,
indefensible, inexcusable, ineffective...I'm sure you guys are getting the
idea. And the rest of the word just refers to surety. In the end it all refers
to surety and accounting -- nothing else.
In order to completely remove surety (insure) another PERSON must
take responsibility for your actions. This concept is in fact, FRAUD. Here in
reality it's not what you know, it's what you can prove. I've leveraged that
concept all my life. Let's assume as I type this, I KNOW I am responsible for
at least three homicides; but can you prove it? Let's say you could. What if
you decided I committed those homicides for the right reasons, and you decided
that you were going to "do the time" for me. And while I certainly
don't want to discourage people from doing really nice things for me, you
serving the sentence for me does not actually absolve me of the responsibility.
You're just taking the proverbial "hit" for me. Allowing you to do
that time for me would be unethical in ways I won't even cover here, yet that
morally repugnant concept is played out daily - with INSURANCE.
Another PERSON assumes SURETY for your actions. This is why
INSURANCE companies still refer to natural events/disasters as "Acts of
God". A delusional Christian fuck-wit brings this up weekly as though
their INSURANCE policy validates the existence of God.
This is one of many uses for the Abrahamic religions. They
socially-engineer concepts like INSURANCE so they are elevated from blatant
unethical FRAUD to a necessity for daily life, and they will say you are
foolish, or a bad person, for not having INSURANCE.
How did they manage to pull that off? In my above homicide
scenario, I explained the FRAUD in plain, unambiguous terms. Only the most
ethically bankrupt amongst you will miss the point. The reason it has never
occurred to you, is because of everybody's favourite zombie-rape-baby, Jesus H.
Christ.
As a little side note to Christians, as it may not have occurred to
them, it's NOT OK to impregnate women in their sleep! This should seem obvious
but you're a Christian -- so you can never be too sure.
Anyway...where was I? ...Jesus the zombie-rape-baby...right.
The whole Christian doctrine revolves around the assertion that
Jesus-zombie-rape-baby died for your sins. Only Christians seem to be able to
determine what these "sins" are; however, apparently having sex is a
sin, and murder is a sin; hell, even thought crimes (impure thoughts) are sins.
But don't you worry, you horrible, wretched thing, Jesus the zombie-rape-baby
has died for your sins. And if you can believe that, well then, Bob's Universal
All-encompassing mega INSURANCE policy (don't forget to read the fine print) is
for you (Act now, 'cause you know we can't do this all day)!
One of the things all of you have to realize, especially the
Christians, is that the entire history of the world was rewritten in the
1500's. Shakespeare was introduced to inject "legalese" into the
vernacular of the Angols. Translate any copy of THE MAGNA CARTA and you will
notice no legalese ever appears in it. And my personal favourite is Christians
that wave around the KING JAMES BIBLE. I can't make this any simpler. It says
right on the fucking cover who is scamming you!
Everything in the nobility is executed by APPOINTMENT, from social
engineering projects like the KING JAMES BIBLE, to Dunhill cigarettes, because
the Queen likes a certain type of tobacco. These products and
"services" are executed with the presumption that they are in
compliance with the Sovereign's wishes, and notice is given on the product
itself that it was created by APPOINTMENT, by the entity who appointed it.
The KING JAMES BIBLE was APPOINTED by King James. The technology
had reached the point were mass production of print medium was possible. This
meant that social engineering that normally relied on "word-of-mouth"
could now have rigid change-control introduced. This meant the instructions for
selling your daughter into slavery was consistent throughout the Commonwealth.
This also introduced the concept of an imaginary rape baby taking
responsibility for all the bad shit you do. Seriously that's what you
"bought". There are people reading this who believe this to be true.
The whole "dying" thing is also a scam. That's the zombie
part. Zombie-rape-baby-Jesus supposedly came back to life three day's after he
died. Where's the sacrifice? He wasn't even out of commission long enough for
his relatives to start fighting over his stuff. The very notion that
"Jesus died for your sins" is nullified by the fact that he stopped
being dead. He didn't die for your sins, he had a bad weekend for your
sins...and he slept through most of it. OK, I'm really Christian-bashing here.
Let's split the difference and say, "Jesus was sightly inconvenienced for
your sins."
I understand he was inconvenienced on a long weekend, too, which
makes it really...bad?
I'm sorry, I'm really trying to ascertain how this equals all the
bad shit you do. You Christians will claim this Jesus guy will absolve me of
any wrongdoing because of the "sacrifice" he made, but I'm not seeing
where this sacrifice is. I'm not mentioning this because I'm looking for
convincing. I'm from that same group of guys that made this book, and that's
where the argument becomes moot.
I can't stress this enough, but I'm one of the guys that's in on the
scam.
You'll constantly hear me say, "Stop studying the clubhouse
rules, because you're not in the club." I'm descended from the founders of
the club. I would rather live in poverty than to live off your labour; although
my position on this has been on a sliding scale of late. Of all the clubhouse
rules, the bible in any form, should be avoided at all costs. It should be
fought at every possible opportunity, and should be met with all the ridicule
and contempt you can throw at it...
...because it deserves no less. It is an ethically bankrupt
FRAUD...just like INSURANCE.
If you think I can make Christianity sound retarded, wait until I
cover INSURANCE.
So let's zoom back to when you were 16-years-old. You can't vote,
you can't drink, there's a question mark as to whether you can legally have sex
according to where you reside, but there is one thing you can do -- you can
drive.
Hence you engage in the ego-building act of getting
"permission to learn" from the government. So, at the whim of a
paper-pusher who couldn't get a job in the real world, you will hopefully be
given permission to learn; and you will have proof that you have this
permission when you produce a LEARNER'S PERMIT. And so every good Christian
goes through this RIGHT OF PASSAGE where they are granted permission to learn.
Gee willikers, it's awfully swell that the government gave you permission to
learn, huh?
But you're just sixteen, remember? You're not old enough to know of
the real pitfalls of life...like dames and broads trying to play you for a sap
(I'm laughing as I type this, because 1950's movie-speak is almost as retarded
as this generations's pop-culture slang).
Now in order to exercise your newly-acquired "permission to
learn" you're going to need a vehicle, perhaps a car, which is a
contraction of carriage...which is a LEGAL term, so don't use it. But since
you're trying to be "LEGAL", having been granted "permission to
learn" (seriously am I the only one who finds that the most demeaning
thing ever written on paper?), a car will do just nicely. But what if you get
into an accident? It won't occur to you that accident is just that - an
accident. There is no SURETY, real or implied, for something that's accidental.
That's what makes it an accident! There is no intent behind the damage. But if
you subjugate yourself to a PERSON, that PERSON will assume full SURETY for any
damages, and like zombie-rape-baby-Jesus, this PERSON only exists on paper. All
of you consider it so real, that people are jailed regularly for "Driving
without INSURANCE". It sort of "drives" the point home, doesn't
it?
You have been pre-programmed to accept this subjugation, this
ridiculous, FRAUDULENT, morally-bankrupt subjugation is a LEGAL necessity, and
all of it deals with MONEY OF ACCOUNT. MONEY OF EXCHANGE never touches the
equation. For those of you who are too lazy and/or stupid to learn the
difference between MONEY OR ACCOUNT and MONEY OF EXCHANGE, one dollar in MONEY
OF ACCOUNT is only capable of buying and/or cancelling another dollar in MONEY
OF ACCOUNT. 90% of all money in the world is this type of money. It's pretend.
It's not real. It only applies to the clubhouse rules, and it competes directly
with the money in your pocket. This is the dynamic that everyone misses.
I hear lots of extremely accurate descriptions of how MONEY OF
ACCOUNT is created, and they all come from idiots who know nothing about what
money is. They'll go off on some tangent about Lou Manotti and his evil
henchmen, the Freemasons. ...and lizards. There's lizards somewhere in all of
their crap, too.
Once again I'd like to digress and remind everyone that on every
occasion that I required a mason, free did not enter into the equation. Masons
are fucking expensive, and there's no such thing as a free one.
...where was i?
Ah yes...MONEY OF ACCOUNT versus MONEY OF EXCHANGE.
THE TENDER FOR LAW is primarily about the money that carries that
TENDER. There are lots of learned men who will talk endlessly about law. I have
forgotten more about law than all of these men combined have ever learned. I
say men because a woman's brain simply would not be able to encompass the
blatant lies that the travesty that we call law spews at them. Reading the
writings of Mary Elizabeth Croft will provide you with one example of what goes
through a thinking-woman's mind when law is actually analyzed. You'll notice
the things I teach you here from a law perspective, are really simple. They are
all created with the intent of getting you out of accounting and surety. I have
declared publicly on the record that the TENDER FOR LAW that money provides is,
in fact, a FRAUD. Most of you reading this are probably already painfully aware
of this fact.
My entire life plan relied on the RULE OF LAW remaining intact, but
when the time came for me to assert my RIGHTS under that rule, the pretence
became blatant. Anyone else going through what I have, would have been
defeated; but as I constantly point out, I'm descended from an evil, vile,
pseudo-culture...and I've forgotten more about law than any of these people
will ever know. There are lawyers that will testify to that fact, so it's not
like this should come as a surprise, but I have documented EVERYTHING. If it
was spoken as regards me, I have a recording of it. If any name over which I
have executive authority has been used in a document, I have a copy of it. Laid
out on a time-line, the blatant FRAUD becomes irrefutable, conclusive proof of
what everybody already knows.
I mention all this because what I'm describing is, INSURANCE.
Notice that my INSURANCE is a little different than the good neighbours at,
"State Farm". It's designed to put the SURETY where it belongs -- not
with me. The difference between the good neighbours at State Farm and me, is
that I am not subjugating myself. My INSURANCE is real. It exists in the real
world, and the more astute among you will see that I am pushing it all into a
universe of virtual worlds.
When you understand what money is, you can construct money through
VALUE.
If it exists in the real world, it has VALUE. Any currency used to
track that VALUE, when exchanging goods, is MONEY OF EXCHANGE.
Bitcoin, on the other hand, does not exist in the real world. Only
its mysterious creators have any COPYHOLD on the VALUE. That's the thing about
Bitcoin - in the end the guys that created it, get all the money. They get this
because people volunteer to take alpha-test-grade, proof-of-concept code, and
open their computers up to the Internet. They then give hardware-level access
to their memory, processor, GPU and hard drive, to a rogue, autonomous process
that their empty, little heads couldn't even dream of understanding, with no
one paying attention to its original intent -- which is to prove that it could
be done.
Don't get me wrong, there are people who are doing this on purpose,
because the VALUE is returned almost immediately. For Bitcoin has all the
properties of gold, without the liabilities. Bitcoin is but one cryptographic
currency. AQUILAE has its own cryptographic currency. It cannot be
counterfeited, and is a near-perfect accounting mechanism. AQUILAE is not even
a PERSON, it's a TRUST. If a TRUST can have a currency, why can't you? What I
am building for everyone here, is a method to remove the middle-man. If you
have your own currency, you don't need a bank. If cryptographic currencies
can't be counterfeited, then it's trade cannot be regulated. It remains within
the private realm and the ease at which you can convert your currency to MONEY
OF EXCHANGE anywhere in the world, is directly proportional to your VALUE. In
the current economic framework, backed by debt-based FIAT currency, the only
legitimate path to wealth is to produce, to make something in the real world
that didn't exist before.
Like every dollar in existence, all things of VALUE have a creation
date and a death date. Whatever you produce must be built with that in mind.
For instance, producing a plaque with a cheesy-Jesus slogan on it, actually has
VALUE. Perhaps it has VALUE to its creator, but here in reality, that plaque
with the cheesy-Jesus slogan, will find its way to a landfill very quickly.
This very article you are reading has a creation date, and a death
date, and this is becoming apparent with the four threads that just magically
disappeared here. Pierre destroyed the thread where he was bestowed his sacred,
native name. The thread itself had VALUE, for it reflected the culture from
whence Pierre came. The colloquial term, "fucking the dog" refers to
bored, unionized workers taking their one-hour breaks between their fifteen
minutes of actual labour. Look at any road crew in Quebec and you will see a
working example of "fucking the dog." And so, Fucks the Puppy was
bestowed upon Pierre as an homage, and in an irrational fit of nameless rage
Pierre destroyed the thread, which by the way, is the most labour I've ever
seen out of labourer in Quebec. Ok, I don't really feel that way about people
from Quebec. Don't quote me on it, but I'm pretty sure there's an act or
statute somewhere in Ontario that says I must make fun of people from Quebec.
I'm also pretty sure there's an equivalent act or statute for people in Quebec
to refer to people in Ontario. Truth be told, one of the most inspirational
people in my lifetime was Rene Levesque, and I strongly suggest that every
single reader look at the history of this awesome shit-disturber.
Quebec politicians do some awesome things. For example, if you want
to see awesome, political suicide, no one will ever beat Jacques Parizeau...but
I digress again...
We were talking about INSURANCE.
My INSURANCE is my life plan. It's way off track, and I need to get
it back on track. But my life plan relied on the Rule of Law remaining intact.
And while we weren't looking, our RIGHTS got sold, and nobody bothered
consulting us. My INSURANCE company went bust. The Rule of Law is not intact, and
in my eyes they have forfeitted the right to exist; because I've made it very
clear, that limited liability is a fallacious concept, and if I stand by and
watch the GOVERNMENT OF ONTARIO operating as "JUSTICE", victimize the
PUBLIC whose TRUST it holds, I become no better than you. I have a life plan
that I must return to. I have a defective government process posing as
"JUSTICE" and victimizing the citizens it has sworn to serve.
To return to my life plan under these circumstances is to make
myself an enabler; and so I have a problem. For whether I like it or not, I'm
one of the good guys, and it's not a role I'm comfortable with. There are many
reasons for this, one of them being that to be the good guy, I have to do both.
I have to get "a" Rule of Law in place, one that serves the interests
of the people it governs. Since I love spewing out spoilers I'm going to give
the end of the story away RIGHT NOW! Why am I destroying your journey of
discovery by giving away the ending? Because, FUCK YOU, that's why! I may be
the good guy, but I don't have to be nice about it.
The only way to LEGALLY and LAWFULLY do what I propose is to
restore EXECUTIVE POWER to the Monarchy for a period not exceeding five years.
From this moment forward a primary focus of those who follow what I am teaching
should be an investigation into why this is true. It is the only possible
answer that has any chance of success. Over the next few weeks we will explore
why giving executive power to a little old lady of Germanic descent, and nine
Corgees, is a good idea. AND, because I'm right, everybody is going to find out
the hard way, that it is impossible to prove that I'm wrong. That's what makes
it right!
As I explain, step-by-step, how I intend to accomplish this lofty
goal, it will become readily apparent that I already have everything in place.
I've planned for what's to come. AND, before shit gets real, I'm going to train
you all up to a level where you can think in a useful manner. By useful, I mean
to YOU, because you currently think wrong, and VALUE the wrong things. It may
be difficult to hear, but you're programmed to be a useless, sack-of-shit. If
you should produce any VALUE, the government is there to lie to you about that
VALUE, and to trick you into thinking you owE THEM for being VALUEable. If I'm
successful, all that stolen VALUE will be returned to the people it was stolen
from. But what happens at the end of that five years? You see Elizabeth Windsor
is the KEEPER OF THE TRUST. You see a little, old lady. I see an echo of a little
girl that the world knew as Princess Elizabeth -- and her plea to the
Commonweath to come to her aid. This is the SOVEREIGN OF THE COMMONWEALTH, and
she didn't choose it. My grandfather taught me all I needed to know to TRUST
Elizabeth Windsor. When the power is handed to her, she'll know what to do with
it, because she knows that even if she fails at what is surely a lifetime of
planning, she has you and I, as INSURANCE.
