by Home home
wisdom is in knowing you know nothing.” It serves as a
warning we should heed. We need to be very wary of those
who claim they 'know' the facts.
History is strewn with individuals who knew the truth. More
to the point, it is littered with the bones of millions who
accepted that they didn't know much, but believed and
10
A Dangerous Ideology
followed those who claimed they did.
Given the wisdom of an immense intellect like Socrates, it
seems likely that those who are certain they 'know' how 9/11
and 7/7 occurred, and who was responsible, are not reliable
sources of information upon which to base any response.
Especially if that response means killing more people.
While both conspiracy theorists and government claim this
certainty, at least the conspiracists suggest you exercise due
diligence, research the evidence yourself and make up your
own mind. However, in keeping with the government's
approach, if you don't agree with their conclusions, you're
wrong.
Herein lies one of the problems many of us have with
conspiracy theorists who apparently claim possession of 'da
troof.' Despite all the commonly held opinions, that most
reasonable people consider plausible, the conspiracy
theorists claim we are deluded 'sheeple' who need to
'awaken.' In this, some differ little from our idiot leaders who
also state they know what is best for us.
For example President Trump appears to be a buffoon
offering us his own version of 'truth.' One truism being the
hitherto unknown existence of 'fake news.' While we may
assume he means 'fiction', it appears he means something
else. The accuracy of the reporting is an irrelevance as far as
he is concerned. 'Fake news' doesn't mean 'fiction' in the
mind of Trump. Regardless of how much evidence is offered
to substantiate the reporting, as far as ‘the Donald’ is
concerned, 'fake news' is news that makes him look bad.
In part this is fair enough as 'who' reports the news matters.
Equally, so do the preconceptions of the reader. However,
rejecting all evidence, simply because it is produced by
people you don't usually agree with, is not objectively
tenable.
If we aspire to objectivity, when assessing the validity of the
news, political claims and social commentary, it is we, as
recipients, who must be vigilant. We should reflect upon, not
only the vested interests of those providing information and,
perhaps more importantly, paying for its distribution, but
11
A Dangerous Ideology
equally our own confirmation bias.
The social psychologist Scott Plous defined confirmation bias
as:
“....the tendency to search for, interpret,
favor, and recall information in a way that
confirms one's preexisting beliefs or
hypotheses.”
People who consider themselves to have some kind of
objective grasp of reality frequently get all uppity if you
suggest they have a confirmation bias. Yet it is only those
who recognise their own confirmation bias who have any
chance at all off achieving any measure of objectivity. For
our purposes here, we don't care 'who' reports the news. All
sources are valuable until they are proven worthless.
Most of the sources quoted herein are found on the Internet.
Some reading this will reject these as not being credible,
claiming that only publications owned and distributed by
billionaires are capable of providing 'trustworthy sources.' To
which my response is twofold. Firstly, whilst being mindful
of influence and agendas, the source's credibility should be
assessed only in terms of the strength of evidence it offers in
corroboration. Secondly, it's 2019.
In the time it has taken to write this book some of the
sources cited will have been removed. However, any links I
have provided can be found through the useful Internet
archive called 'Wayback Machine.' Simply paste the link into
Wayback Machine's search box and it will find the last
indexed version of the given URL. The site address is:
( https://archive.org/web/web.php )
If we wish to understand the dangerous ideology of the
'conspiracy theorists,' we must try to evaluate the evidence
they offer. It is important to acknowledge the social, political
and cultural bias of the sources they provide and strive for
objectivity. However, it is illogical to reject their evidence
simply because we disagree with the political agenda of the
source.
For example, if a news item from Russia Today is cited as a
12
A Dangerous Ideology
source, we can be fairly certain it will promote the policies of
Vladimir Putin. However, if that same news item contains a
first-hand witness account of a bombing, we shouldn't
discount the testimony simply because RT have reported it.
It is perfectly reasonable to ask why RT have chosen to
report the testimony, but that does not mean it is false. We
must apply evidential standards.
If you watch, read and/or listen to 'the news' with an open
mind; if you value verifiable evidence, as crucial to
establishing facts, and if you prefer to think for yourself, I
hope you will find some value here.
This book is written for those not easily offended who value
'free speech.' I suggest, if you are quick to take offence, this
probably isn't for you.
13
A Dangerous Ideology
Part 1:
The Dissonant Battle
14
A Dangerous Ideology
Chapter 1
Surely It's Al Just Conspiracy Theory?
The whole world agrees, in 2001, 19 Islamist
terrorists, predominantly Saudis, attacked the World Trade
Centre and the Pentagon with jet airliners. They hijacked
four planes and three hit their targets. Less than four years
later, four British men chose to become suicide bombers.
They were also Islamist terrorists who blew up three London
underground trains and a public service bus. The attacks in
the U.S provided the 'casus belli' to legitimise the 'war on
terror' and the London atrocity, the political momentum to
maintain and expand it.
Yet a significant minority of people across the world believe
that both 9/11 and 7/7 were staged events. They claim they
were 'false flag' attacks designed to propel the world into
perpetual conflict with an intangible, and therefore,
undefeatable enemy.
They say this conflict is primarily run for the continual profit
of global corporations but also provides government with the
justification it needs to roll out draconian legislation,
designed to erode our freedoms, and censor any dissent
15
A Dangerous Ideology
against the rule of the political and financial elite. They claim
everything we are told by our news media is propaganda,
and our politica
l leaders are merely the corrupt stooges of
the hidden, corporate dictatorship that rules all of us.
This book is partly for those of us who suspect the so called
'conspiracy theorists' have a kangaroo loose in the top
paddock and should probably have a little lie down.
World events, the reporting and interpretation of those
events, undoubtedly shape both our own views and those of
the policymakers who dictate many aspects of our lives.
Often we don't agree with the decisions made in our name
but, at least in Western democracies, we do get an
opportunity to influence them.
Not so, say the conspiracy theorists. It is a complete
charade. We have all been fooled into 'believing the lie.' It
makes no difference who you vote for because the people
who really run things aren't elected.
We are going to attempt to understand why, despite all the
common beliefs most of us find reasonable, there are a
growing number of people who suggest that nothing is as it
seems.
Certainly conspiracy theory, as we understand the term
today, is nothing new. Nearly every single significant world
event has at least one conspiracy theory attached to it. These
alternative interpretations are found throughout history.
In 117 CE, the Roman Emperor Trajan died only two days
after adopting his successor Hadrian. All his symptoms
indicated a stroke brought on by cardio vascular disease.
The adoption made sense as Trajan was childless and
Hadrian was his preferred successor. This seemed to be the
final political act of a man who knew his time was up.
Yet by the 4th century, in the questionable historical text
'Historia Augusta,' a number of 'conspiracy theories'
surrounding Trajan's death had emerged. The 'alternative'
history, claimed in the Historia Augusta, was that Trajan
had been poisoned by Hadrian with Attianus, Trajan’s
praetorian prefect and Trajan's wife, Plotina, the co-
16
A Dangerous Ideology
conspirators.
The text was a self-proclaimed biography of Roman leaders
which opined on a range of Roman political events. Many of
these accounts have subsequently been proven
unsubstantiated conspiracy theories. It is now known the
text was written for political reasons and was a deliberate
attempt to falsify history. However, for centuries, the
conspiracy theories were believed.
Conspiracy theorists say our mistrust of anything labelled as
'conspiracy' stops us recognising 'the truth.' Whereas most of
us see the hand of error prone idiots, crooks, power hungry
careerists and tyrannical despots behind the chaos we call
politics, they see dark forces, purposefully manipulating
world events, controlling our media driven misconceptions,
propelling us towards a eugenic inspired, war-torn, dystopia.
Unless we accept conspiracies are a reality, we will never be
free from their grasp, claim the deluded 'conspiracy
theorists.'
By seemingly rejecting the possibility that world events are
usually the result of monumental cock-ups, rather than the
furtive conspiracies they prefer, most of us feel they are too
eager to offer nonsensical conclusions that rely upon
unproven assumptions. We suggest they add, embellish and
distort information to justify their own opinions; look for
connections that aren't there; offer facts that lack supporting
evidence and would rather believe their own myths than
accept objective reality.
Take the conspiracy favourite the Illuminati, for example.
In 1776 Adam Weishaupt, professor of law at the University
of Ingolstadt, with the support of other academics and
leading business men, formed a secret order called the
Illuminati. Weishaupt himself stated the purpose of his
organisation was:
'..illumination, enlightening the understanding
by the sun of reason, which will dispel the
clouds of superstition and of prejudice'
From the outset this fraternity upset pretty much everyone.
17
A Dangerous Ideology
In 1777 Weishaupt and his fledgling organisation were
incorporated into the local Masonic Lodge 'Theodor zum
guten Rath' in Bavaria, modern day Germany. They assumed
a masonic reforming agenda of 'pure masonry' and
immediately incurred the wrath of many of their fellow
Masons. The Illuminati were inspired by the radical
rationalism that underpinned the French Revolution and
promoted many of its principle arguments, upsetting the
royalists. They also heavily prescribed every belief their
members were required to unquestioningly accept, thereby
winding up the sceptical, and rationalist followers of the
Enlightenment.
Public relations does not appear to have been their strong
point.
So it really doesn't come as much surprise that, having made
a concerted effort to infiltrate and undermine local and even
national government, in 1784 the Illuminati was banned by
the Bavarian authorities. Weishaupt was kicked out of his
university position and fled Bavaria, having been accused of
sedition.
So the Illuminati project, on the face of it, appears to have
been an ignominious, largely ineffective, failure. That is not
how the 'conspiracy theorists' saw it then and is opposed to
their modern historical interpretation.
By 1797 conspiracy theories about the Illuminati had spread
as far as the United States of America. These were initially
based upon the writings of the Scottish scientist John
Robison. Robison claimed the Illuminati was created “for the
express purpose of rooting out all religious establishments,
and overturning all the existing governments of Europe.”
Amongst the New England federalists, who were strongly
opposed to what they saw as rising religious infidelity and
Jeffersonian democracy, this all seemed like fairly alarming
stuff. Consequently, the pulpits soon began to ring out
warnings of the Illuminati's evil intent.
The malevolent role of the Illuminati is only one of the
hundreds, if not thousands, of conspiracy theories that have
been further fuelled by the advent of the Internet. Our ability
18
A Dangerous Ideology
to share information, to communicate and collectively foment
ideas, has never been greater. Conspiracy theories have
remained extremely popular as a result.
These theories range from the existence of a shadowy secret
government (the 'Deep State', 'the powers that shouldn't be',
'the New World Order' and so on) to the existence of aliens,
secret basis on Mars, pan dimensional lizard people, fake
moon landings, flat Earth and a holographic universe.
Within conspiracy theory circles there is often hot debate
about these topics. Disagreements are frequent and many
suspect infiltration by agents of the 'Deep State' to misdirect
and misinform the 'truth movement.
' In reality conspiracy
theory is not a belief system. It is a term used to describe a
huge range of opinions that present some form of challenge
to orthodox views.
For example, people who don't agree that carbon dioxide
causes global warming, those who question the efficacy of
some vaccines, individuals who explore evidence of
suppressed history and technology and some who suggest
the monetary system is actually a fraudulent, criminal
racket, are all castigated as conspiracy theorists. However,
interest in one field doesn't necessarily mean the person is
intrigued by another. People called conspiracy theorists don't
all believe the same thing.
However, whatever the individual perspectives, there is an
overarching theory the majority accept to some degree.
Namely, that governments are lying through their teeth in
order to control us. In this regard, they may have found
some common ground with the rest of us.
Where we diverge is that most of us accept that the worst
politicians are basically a bunch of lying, self-serving
careerists, best ignored. However, we still recognise the value
of our democratic system. Conspiracy theorists think they
are PR agents for a malevolent kakistocracy, who we ignore
at our peril. Further, the democratic system is now so
hopelessly corrupt it no longer serves the people, only the
feudalist, corporate dictatorship that owns it. The question is
why?
19
A Dangerous Ideology
Why do these people keep railing against what most of us
consider to be patently obvious? What is it that drives them?
Is there anything we can learn from them? Does anything
they say make sense? Are we the hapless 'boiling frogs' they
seem to think we are, or are they the irretrievable cranks we
suspect?
Given their claims about state sponsored terrorism, it is
certainly worth considering the question. If there is even the
remotest chance these allegations have any legitimacy, we
can't afford to simply dismiss them. Not without considering
the evidence they say they can point us towards.
This is far from the first attempt to try to figure out why
conspiracy theorists are so eager to convince the rest of us
they know something we don't.
Talking about his book 'Voodoo Histories: the role of
Conspiracy Theory in Modern History (2009),' the
