Government Promulgates the Wackiest Conspiracy Theories

Al Lorentz June 26 2003

I've heard some conspiracy theories in my days, some are quite valid and some are too far fetched and error laden to be credible. Since conspiracy theories abound, I have developed a methodology for investigating conspiracy theories. First and foremost I ask, what is the motive for advancing the theory. 

Elitist naysayers and generally ignorant "sheeple" of course dismiss any conspiracy theory out of hand. For those incapable of seeing beyond the sand their head is buried in, anything unusual is just a coincidence. Anything which might require them to actually think critically is of course out of the question. 

Naysayers also enjoy an undeserved sense of moral and intellectual superiority by dismissing conspiracy theories. With a wave of the hand or a condescending smirk, they simultaneously eject from their limited consciousness anything which might challenge their rather inane and limited worldview. Having avoided the intellectual pain of deep thought, they return happily to their slavish lives, falsely convinced they are free. 

I investigate conspiracy theories on a regular basis and have discovered that for every conspiracy theory advanced, especially regarding government, there is a counter-theory offered. For example, at the time of the assassination of JFK, credible investigation was accidentally unearthing evidence indicating that there was more than one shooter. Numerous eyewitnesses, many of them whose testimony would be considered 'expert' by a court of law supported this. 

To counter this, the government, via the Warren commission, offered the nuttiest counter theory, that of the lone shooter named Lee Harvey Oswald. Let me be blunt, while Oswald was a former Marine, he was NOT a sniper, in fact, he was a nominal shooter. Oswald qualified as a sharpshooter. The shooting ranks range from lowest to highest as follows Marksman, Sharpshooter and Expert. 

As a former Marine sniper, let me also say that for someone to use a rather inferior bolt action rifle (Mannlicher Carcano), even with a scope and make the fantastic shots against a moving automobile takes a lot more skill than Oswald had. I have seen some of the better shots in the military and I don't know of any who would be capable of pulling this off. 

This of course does not take into account the differing trajectories and angles as well as a host of other conflicting data and obvious cover-ups. Suffice it to say that the conspiracy theory that dictates more than one shooter has a lot more credibility than the nutjob conspiracy theory offered up by our government and the utterly corrupt Warren Commission. 

Another wacko conspiracy theory advanced by the same government says that Timothy McVeigh's truck bomb demolished the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City while "oddly" not demolishing the building across the street. There is not enough space here today to go into the numerous contradictions and lies that our government has advanced in an attempt to get us to buy into their tinfoil hat conspiracy theory. 

The massacre and murder of over 80 men, women and children by Federal butchers of the FBI and ATF at Waco Texas is another conspiracy theory we are being asked to believe. To bolster their nutjob theory, the government engaged in suppression of evidence, destruction of evidence, distortions, obstruction of justice and outright perjury. Fortunately for the government though, most Americans lack the intellectual capacity to pay attention long enough to have seen though this charade. 

The most bizarre conspiracy theories to date though has coincidentally been the latest one advanced by the same looneybin rejects that have hijacked our government. When the twin towers were attacked by a very determined, very organized and very brave bunch of hijackers who crashed the planes they were flying into them, the government conspiracy theory machine kicked into high gear. 

Claiming that the hijackers had gone to all this trouble, detail and eventually giving their lives because they "hated freedom" reminded me of the response liars and criminals give when they are punished. To the criminal mind, any punishment or retribution against them for wrong doing is an undeserved attack against them. Clearly President Bush has not been paying attention to our foreign policy which is chock full of reasons and justifications for any number of enemies to attack us any way they can. 

Better still though, and part of this ongoing conspiracy theory has been the recent foray into Iraq for the ostensible reason of eliminating the Iraqi threat against America. Using the gun control crowd's argument that the possession of weapons indicates a clear and direct intent to use them criminally, Bush and his socialist cabinet of warmongers have plunged us into a war that apparently has no end and no exit strategy. At the center of this fantastic conspiracy theory are Weapons of Mass Destruction. 

At one time Iraq did have a goodly arsenal of chemical weapons and before Desert Storm had wanted to develop nuclear weapons. Desert Storm put an end to any aspirations for developing nuclear weapons and nobody can say for certain where the chemical weapons went which brings up a good point.

If we invaded Iraq because we had "hard evidence" of the existence of Weapons of Mass Destruction, just how "hard" was that evidence if we can't find a SINGLE WEAPON today? Never mind all the nonsense about mass graves, torture chambers and other hysterically motivated propaganda designed to take our attention away from the fact that no WMD's have been found. 

The WMD conspiracy theories though have taken on a life of their own and they would be entertaining if they were not the cause of the deaths of hundreds of US soldiers and thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens. The warmongers have angrily demanded that we give them more time to produce these weapons which I doubt they ever will. We are told that the WMD's were probably destroyed when we invaded although no evidence of their destruction has been found. This brings up another question, if Saddam had these weapons, why didn't he use them when we were on the outskirts of Baghdad? Given that we were going to depose him from power and had tried to kill him numerous times, I want to know what did he have to lose? If you were coming to my house to kill me, rest assured that I wouldn't worry about public opinion or going to jail and would use any weapon at my disposal to defend myself. 

We are told that perhaps the weapons were snuck out of the country into Syria or Iran but given that we have satellites that can read the newspaper in your hand, I wonder why we haven't got a clue as to just where they went. With the tens of billions of dollars we give our CIA (for what?) I would hope that they have a handle on where these potentially dangerous weapons have gotten to. That is assuming of course that they existed in the first place.

While our public servants are demanding that we believe in all of these incredible theories (if you disagree you are obviously un-patriotic according to them), they simultaneously want us to disbelieve some other rather obvious conspiracy theories that have a lot more credibility. Conspiracy theories that ask "why did Vice President Dick Cheney's company Haliburton land a rather large contract for reconstruction of Iraq without a single competing bid. In fact, none of the defense contractors and others who are going to profit handsomely from this war and the rebuilding had to compete for the contracts in direct violation of US law. 

Another conspiracy theory that these same folks are arrogantly dismissing asks, just what plan for reconstruction do we have? The Walt Disney version we were sold about a grateful Iraqi people embracing Democracy and becoming a model of civil behavior isn't panning out. What has happened instead is growing resentment where the Iraqi people actually hate us, want to establish an Islamic regime and are resisting our efforts to "liberate" them. Perhaps the Iraqi's are smarter than the average Boobus Americanus and realize the "democracy" we are foisting on them looks a bit more like a colonial empire with them as tax slaves. 

Yes, I believe in conspiracy theories but I think that the ones offered by our government are without merit, without credibility and frankly, resemble self serving fairy tales and outright lies.

Al Lorentz is a Fundamentalist Christian, father and devoted husband, state chairman of the Constitution Party of Texas. Al has served as a Marine Sniper and later as an Airborne Ranger in the Texas National Guard.  He welcomes your comments at allorentz@truevine.net.

...are not sufficient to explain any number of events.

911 - 19 Arabs, with FALSE ID'S (meaning we don't really know who they were - no proof even they were Arabs). They were able to fly around the most controlled airspace in the world and make a leisurely approach to crash into buildings. And they did this because they hate our freedoms, nevermind that they supposedly went out drinking and whoring the night before the attack (actions strictly forbidden under Islam) and then because of their strong religous fervor commit suicide.

and then we have:

"At one time Iraq did have a goodly arsenal of chemical weapons and before Desert Storm had wanted to develop nuclear weapons. Desert Storm put an end to any aspirations for developing nuclear weapons and nobody can say for certain where the chemical weapons went which brings up a good point.

If we invaded Iraq because we had "hard evidence" of the existence of Weapons of Mass Destruction, just how "hard" was that evidence if we can't find a SINGLE WEAPON today? Never mind all the nonsense about mass graves, torture chambers and other hysterically motivated propaganda designed to take our attention away from the fact that no WMD's have been found. 

The WMD conspiracy theories though have taken on a life of their own and they would be entertaining if they were not the cause of the deaths of hundreds of US soldiers and thousands of innocent Iraqi citizens. "

"Al Lorentz is a Fundamentalist Christian, ..."

Do you also believe in the easter bunny, the tooth fairy, and santa claus, you psycho?

That was me. I'm so clever!

...makes sense or it does not.

Either his facts are valid or they are not.

Religious Bigotry is not a valid counter argument.

I was just waiting for some Bigot to take up that point.

Regardless of whether or not you share his Religious beliefs has nothing to do with whether he makes a valid argument or not.

For the Record I am NOT a Christian. However, I support their right to practice their beliefs so long as they do not use force to force them on another.

"Regardless of whether or not you share his Religious beliefs has nothing to do with whether he makes a valid argument or not."

Sorry that I was too stupid to understand that. I'm a conservative.

or stick your diversionary attempts up you know where.

...I'd rather have a penis "up you know where."