Conspiracies: The Facts * the Theories * the Evidence (2 page)

conspiracies

amongst individuals are gleeful y splashed across screens and

newspapers with alarming regularity, yet any further suggestion

that similar actions might be coordinated by
groups
of individuals is almost universal y swept aside as being nothing more than

‘conspiracy theory’. The tones employed in these moments are

invariably tinged with contempt at the very idea that corruption

might be institutional or serve a wider mandate than one person’s misguided ego.

Is this marginalization of conspiracy theory fair? And does it

follow that anyone who believes in it is inherently flawed in their thinking, as such treatment would imply? Those who routinely

dismiss conspiracy theory often lack clarity about what they

mean by the term, allowing an easy sidelining of what could be

important areas for scrutiny. Is this merely lazy journalism or, as some would have us believe, a deliberate distraction?

To assess the true value of anything, establishing its key

principles is always an important starting point. Here, then, are three different definitions of ‘conspiracy theory’ from mainstream sources:

The belief that the government or a covert organisation

is responsible for an event that is unusual or unexplained,

especial y when any such involvement is denied.

Collins English Dictionary

A theory seeking to explain a disputed case or matter as a

plot by a secret group or al iance rather than an individual or
isolated act.

American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language

The idea that a group of people secretly worked together to

cause a particular event.

Macmillan Dictionary

Based on these definitions, it is difficult to understand why the media and authorities are so rigidly dismissive of the notion of

2

Conspiracy.indd 2

23/10/2012 15:42:19

what is conspiracy theory?

conspiracy theory. Indeed, by applying these descriptions to many events throughout history, it is clear that not only are conspiracies of all kinds rife, but that they are an inevitable component of

human civilization. Does anyone seriously dispute the existence of covert organizations, whether they be criminal cabals or corrupt

cliques active within governments?

Why, then, has it become such a major taboo to discuss how

these components might be working within our world today? How

is it that the academic world appears to accept multiple examples of internal subterfuge within the Roman Empire (
see
chapter 2) as likely conspiracies, for instance, yet it has such trouble believing that comparable things might still occur now? Human civilization, for all its technological leaps, has not moved on so much from the social structures of its ancestors.

We can perhaps obtain an insight into to why we might have

been conditioned to ignore modern-day conspiracies by hearing a

rather less balanced description of conspiracy theory:

Conspiracy theories exist in the realm of myth, where

imaginations run wild, fears trump facts, and evidence is

ignored. As a superpower, the United States is often cast as a
vil ain in these dramas.1

This is the opening shot on the pages of the official US government’s website dedicated to debunking conspiracy theories about

itself. That these overly defensive pages exist at all is significant, indicating that the many accusations that are indeed aimed at the US authorities (widely seen as main players in the ‘New World

Order’ project, explored throughout this book) are beginning to

sting. The fact that, in 2009, Barack Obama had to (albeit off-

camera) retake the presidential oaths just one day after fluffing the placement of the word ‘faithful y’ in his public decree, to ‘avoid conspiracy theories’, says much about how sensitive authorities

have become to the growing list of indictments.

3

Conspiracy.indd 3

23/10/2012 15:42:19

conspiracies

Is it, therefore, going too far to consider that, if Western

governments are concerned about the proliferating doubts

surrounding their integrity, they might instil a campaign of

psychological conditioning and propaganda to attempt to

discredit their accusers? The media, prone to arrogance and afraid to lose its necessary close contacts with the voices of power, could be easily manipulated (if not directly influenced by strings from above) into sneering on cue when something crucial is touched

upon that risks lifting the lid on a hidden layer beneath. Thus

the assertion that a deliberate taboo has been created around any serious mainstream discussion of conspiracy theory has become

yet another conspiracy theory in itself.

Who Is a Conspiracy Theorist?

Through the entrenched device of treating with ridicule those

who openly consider that certain events may be directed by

covert factions, an understandable but perhaps misplaced defen-

siveness has crept into the language of those who are, by the

simple dictionary definitions, conspiracy theorists. The adoption of the term is often strenuously avoided, however, lest anything

they say be routinely ignored, which sometimes results in the

unfortunate spectacle of researchers squirming with contrived

affectations of academic status to avoid a tag that is general y

placed on them in any case – usual y by the very groups to which

they would aspire to belong. The application of terms such as

‘truthseeker’ or ‘truther’ is perfectly acceptable as an alternative (and used in these pages), but does little to assuage the derision of the opposition. The fact is that marginalization of conspiracy theorists by the mainstream has been successful enough that no

replacement term nor aspiration to a higher social standing is

likely to have much effect on the critics once certain topics are breached – at least not currently.

4

Conspiracy.indd 4

23/10/2012 15:42:19

what is conspiracy theory?

It would seem that a new strategy is required for this topic to

be accorded higher status. Instead of seeking a respectability that will not arrive without some major social overhaul, those who

find themselves bracketed as conspiracy theorists might do better to stop worrying about what others think and plough on with

grounding their chosen field of study in reality as convincingly

as they can. Only through this will interest deepen and a wider

public conviction grow. The less discerning conspiracy thinkers,

who scream each new perceived horror as a given without proper

evidence, rooted more in paranoia than factual observation,

are those who have helped bring the area into disrepute in the

first place. The best remedy must be to match speculation with

serious research – and to use less strident tones. This way, there would, in time, be no reason to feel angst over being called a

conspiracy theorist. Better, perhaps, to follow the line that George Fox’s movement, the Religious Society of Friends, took after its

formation in the 1600s. Branded ‘quakers’ as a term of abuse

(because they were seen as misguided fanatics who ‘quaked in the

sight of God’), members simply adopted the insult as their official title, and so became the ‘Quakers’. The negative intent of their

critics was immediately neutralized, creating general bemusement

but, ultimately, a new and lasting public respect.

Beyond the standard conspiracy strongholds, there
are
a few dedicated researchers in wider circles who have managed to gain

respect for their personal convictions that specific events may be influenced by secret cabals but, even then, the reception of their work is muted. When Norman Baker, MP, published his brave book

The Strange Death of David Kel y
in 2007, which straightforwardly examined the substantial evidence that it was more probable that

the controversial UN weapons inspector was murdered than took

his own life (
see
chapter 5), the award-winning politician was from then on branded as a ‘maverick’ (enabling presenter Jeremy

Paxman, in an entirely unrelated
Newsnight
debate, later to dismiss Baker with the words ‘Wel , you’d find conspiracy in a cup of tea’).

5

Conspiracy.indd 5

23/10/2012 15:42:19

conspiracies

Another example is David Ray Griffin, a US professor and

Christian theologian, whose conscience would not allow him to

leave the many anomalies of 9/11 uninvestigated in his meticulous writings. He has become one of the more convincing of all the

many questioners of the attacks, leaving no stone of logic unturned, nor resorting to sensationalism. Griffin never considered himself a conspiracy theorist, and his previous track record showed few

signs of such tendencies. Yet even he is regularly dismissed in the mainstream as a ‘conspiracy guru’. So the tag seems unavoidable

in such areas. Given that pol s in 2011 (which, tellingly, received minimal coverage) demonstrated that a significant proportion

of the world’s population now doubts the official story of 9/11

in some capacity or another (
see
p. 171), Griffin needn’t be too concerned. In some matters, at least, it is clear that a large number of us are, in fact, conspiracy theorists.

The reality is that to veer even a little towards certain subjects is to
be
a conspiracy theorist in the eyes of the mainstream, no matter what caveats are presented. It is clear that the world we are presented with from our newspapers and screens is rather different to the reality of what many of us truly think, as is demonstrated by the 9/11 opinions and pol s on everything from David Kel y and

Diana conspiracies to ghosts, UFOs and astrology, which show a

sustained public belief in areas unremittingly debunked by most

media pundits. Thus the truth so passionately spoken of by the

theorists must be sought outside the mainstream for now, with the internet being its primary tool.

Finding the Middle Ground

What, however, is the ‘truth’? Defending the study of conspiracy is not to support the view that all the theories that spring from it are correct. The purpose of this book is to explore some of the more

widely held beliefs in the hope of attaining a constructive overview.

6

Conspiracy.indd 6

23/10/2012 15:42:19

what is conspiracy theory?

In attempting to establish a middle ground between the polarities of thought around the selected examples, some conspiracy staples

stand out as being genuinely compelling, while others bring

themselves into question by illogicality or lack of evidence. But this is not to make a conclusive judgement on anyone’s personal

views. The very problem with the establishment’s treatment of

conspiracy theory is that opinionated and often uninformed

rushes to judgement on both sides help no one but those who, it

would seem, prefer us not to scrutinize certain areas.

What does become clear when we il uminate some of the

key issues is that even if some of the more extreme elements of

conspiracy study are prone to going too far, the blanket dismissal of conspiracy theories that the establishment has perpetrated is

equal y unfair and misleading.

A Specific Kind of Conspiracy Theory

From the dictionary definitions of conspiracy theory, it is likely that there are many examples of covert groups in society scheming for their own small-minded agendas that would technical y fall

under the term. These areas are already well served by available

sources on criminology and corporate corruption; much of this

book investigates instead a broader and more specific angle that

has come to embody the more typical media interpretation of

‘conspiracy theory’, i.e. the belief that major world events are being deliberately engineered by an undeclared but very influential

ruling elite that may be using us as pawns in a long game which

seeks dominion over the entire human race.

The core of this angle is that control and surveil ance agendas

are being indelibly installed through geopolitical power games.

Manipulation through fear, war, economic subterfuge and, in

the eyes of some, the application of occult knowledge and the

influence of secret societies are the tools with which the ultimate 7

Conspiracy.indd 7

23/10/2012 15:42:19

conspiracies

goal of a ‘one world government’ might be achieved, a system

where ultimate power is placed into the hands of a select few,

operating people as puppets in a grand Orwellian nightmare. The

general term applied to this perceived master plan is the ‘New

World Order’ (NWO). Given that a desire for precisely this has

been openly boasted of in surprisingly bold public addresses by

major politicians, and that the ultimate shape of its aims do seem to risk – in a worst-case scenario at least – becoming exactly what the truthseekers fear, the New World Order seems a reasonable

umbrel a term to use for this strongly prevailing strand of conspiracy theory.

The many different ideas discussed throughout, from state-

sponsored terrorism to political assassinations, from depopulation theories to hidden official belief in paranormal forces, while at first seeming perhaps to be entirely separate, may in truth make

up a wider web of interconnecting threads which mask a much

broader agenda that, if shown to have substance, would certainly