Topic: government accountability
Paranoia Revised Please read the article in its entirety before commenting. It seems that some have not realize this.by LibertasPraesidium
(Libertarian)
Wednesday, April 16, 2008
Alright, after a few responses I have decided to revisit, and expand why I believe that the conspiracies are irrelevant and must be dropped.
First off, I do not take stock in things that I have no proof of.
Second, Unless you have a document signed by the President of the United States saying there is a global conspiracy, do not say you have proof.
Third, conspiracies are subjective truths based on the perception of the individual to events that may or may not be related despite the evidence.
Fourth, the only way to show the real TRUTH, is to research it at its source, if you believe it is the government then get involved.
Now for the meat of the issue, are there truths out there about the conspiracies for the NWO , 9/11, and aliens, I most certainly hope so.
However, delving into them on an article where I do research into how to help this country turn around, and get back on track, is irrelevant. I will not, post about what I think of these conspiracies, they are and will be irrelevant until someone makes a stand and actually tries to impeach or punish those responsible for lying to the public.
I post these articles for my own good, and so that others may be enlightened as to what to do with the flow of knowledge online. I say read the news online, take it with a grain of salt, read the conspiracies if you wish, I do and I find some of them to be scary, but I will not allow them to encompass my life when I can go out and educate my Friends and Family as to how to better go about getting the Truth.
It is a fact that the government has lied to us, It is a fact that there are plans for a New World Order, they are an organisation that believes world peace can be achieved this way. Do I support it, no, I do not like being lied to by My own government, but unless I take an active role in educating people on how better to deal with such things, Then nothing will ever come of it.
Was Watergate a conspiracy? It went to court, people were tried and a president Impeached. I want facts, not conspiracies. The truth is simple, it is out there, we have to be active to expose it, and bring the government to accountability, but we cannot do that from the outside, we have to become what we hate, part of the government.
But in doing so we put into government what we love about this or any other country, our freedoms, our hopes, and our dreams, get involved instead of commenting that I do not support the truth, I very much do.
I also happen to know that the government as it is will not tell us the truth and the only way to change it is to change the government and get active in the local governments. Our own communities, get the word out about the government lying to us, start holding them accountable in congress as the Honorable Rep. Ron Paul from Texas has done.
Be a part of the revolution, not a conspiracy theorist, even if you believe them to be true, wait until you can prove it, beyond a doubt to the American people.
You want the truth, the government doesn't want you to have it, so they locked it up, and the only way to access it is to change the way the government is being run from the inside so we can stop theorizing and actually start the courts, and hearings and investigations. Many, many, many people have exposed the truth about the government, and yet the government continues to lie. We must at all costs increase government accountability and transparency, while still understanding that the nation needs to have a power structure, a government for the people, by the people.
So the conspiracy is irrelevant in my world, until we can uncover it from its source. IF you think you know the truth about it, write a blog, call your congressperson and ask them to investigate, if they won't then run against them so you know someone will. Support the candidates looking for truth and you will find it.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 7 thumbs so far
The views expressed in this
article are those of LibertasPraesidium only and do not represent
the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates. LibertasPraesidium is
solely responsible for the contents of this article and is not an
employee or otherwise affiliated with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Posted By: Gary R. Carter
Date: 2008-04-16 17:52:28
You should have retired after the first edition. Since you didn't, I will give you a few reasons to consider retirement.
1. It seems you have yet to realize the difference between a conspiracy and a conspiracy theory. What you keep spewing about is a conspiracy theory, not a conspiracy.
2. By saying that a document signed by the president is the only proof of a conspiracy, you are suggesting that a president infamous for lying and responsible for turning back the power of systems to acknowledge and uncover lies is the one and only source for truth in the world. Absurd!
3. conspiracy
1.
the act of conspiring.
2.
an evil, unlawful, treacherous, or surreptitious plan formulated in secret by two or more persons; plot.
3.
a combination of persons for a secret, unlawful, or evil purpose: He joined the conspiracy to overthrow the government.
4.
Law. an agreement by two or more persons to commit a crime, fraud, or other wrongful act.
5.
any concurrence in action; combination in bringing about a given result.
4. I thought the president was the keeper of truth?
It is the media that portrays an alternative idea as a conspiracy theory. Outside of media and other puppets such as yourself, these are just ideas. Ideas are then used to gather evidence and work towards an outcome or solution. By suggesting to stop conspiracy theories, you are basically saying that the government should be taken at its word when it is historically positioned for the exclusive task of bending you and me over.
Thank you for the definition, though it was mainly just for an imformative description of how I used those words.
I am simply implying that government centered conspiracies, or theories, are pointless without researching its source, and with today's government being so closed-lipped, then the only way to expose such conspiracies or theories inside of government; you have to be inside the government, which requires an active role.
And as far as using the Pres. as a source it was to point out that unless you have hard evidence linking the people involved in the conspiracy, do not tout it as evidence.
Point of view from someone who's worked in the government.
A lot of conspiracy theories are, of course, complete bunk. As you suggested in your first article, they sometimes come about due to nothing more than the 1% unknown or the fact that we can't be sure.
But some conspiracy theories arise simply because the facts that are known don't seem to match the presented "truth" as given by the government.
For example, there are people who believe the moon landings were complete fakes. They have no hard empirical evidence of this, and the most telling thing -- that if it was a fake, the USSR would have wasted no time assuring us of that fact -- is left aside. These sort of flawed theories only make any sense if you ignore very real, pertinent facts.
The other kind of conspiracy theory is, as indicated by Gary Carter, an alternative view. Certainly the JFK assasination, the MLK assasination, the actions of the FBI in the 60's and 70's, things like MKULTRA and CARNIVORE and the like -- these can be seen as conspiracy theories based around the concept that the presented facts don't match up with the perceieved reality.
It is very simple -- and often very easy -- to dismiss most conspiracy theorists as kooks. There are people who rant and rave about the CFR and how RealID is the first step to a police state. There are people who rant and rave that all survivalists are really racists and that most of the anarchist movement in the country are secret spies from (insert country here). The problem with any kind of theory along this line is that "fact" is hard to identify.
As far as including it in a dialogue about the country and it's issues, a lot of people -- and some of them are statists -- believe that the surest way to tyranny is not "big government" but rather "opacity". When the government is not open and honest, when issues are left on the table and addressed with half-assed assurances that the "facts have been found out", and when people have questions that very simply go unanswered, it reduces the level of trust in government.
Good governance cannot happen if large segments of society are cynical about the government telling the truth. To suggest that it plays no role in solving the problems of this country misses the larger point -- valid or not -- that I think Libertarians are making. If you can't trust the government to tell you the truth on one issue, why should you believe them on the economy?
On the War in Iraq?
On how the taxes are spent? And so on and so forth. There is, after all the obfuscation and lying and crap by GWB, a huge credibility problem with the government, and it will take more than electing a new president to fix that. Most government agencies view the public's "right to know" as nearly heretical, with the belief that if you don't work here, you can't understand it so why even bother telling the public.
I will think about it and thank you for the comment. That is exactly my point, one person cannot change the government as a whole, but many people working in their local gov'ts can exert an influence on the state and then up from there. We have to work together despite our differences, especially when it comes to conspiracies, or religion for that matter. The founding fathers may have been very different people but they had a common goal. The establishment of a better nation, under a government that had its hands tied by the very people who established it, it is our right, and duty as Americans to see that the government continues on the path they paved for us. Hence, the working together part. :-)
"I may disagree with what you have to say, but I shall defend, to the death, your right to say it."
Francois Marie Arouet VOLTAIRE The Friends of Voltaire, 1907 French philosopher and writer (1694-1778)
Want to comment on this
article? Leave your comment here. Your email address is
required to track your comment. However, we will neither
publish your email address nor distribute it to other
organizations or persons. The only reason we might use
it would be if we needed to contact you regarding your
comment. All comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
