The Future of Conspiracy

politics1.jpg

I was just reading this well done commentary over at Common Dreams about “conspiracy theories” and specifically the coordinated and well planned effort to assassinate Martin Luther King, Jr.

The term “conspiracy theory” has become a negative term to describe an opinion as somehow ridiculous or flimsy and not to be taken seriously. As if anyone who might not subscribe to the official explanation for a situation or event is an idiot. There always seems to be an organized spin campaign to belittle and discredit “conspiracy theories” and these campaigns are effective.

kennedyjohn.jpg

Muddying the information water with dozens or even hundreds of alternative explanations is also an effective way of reducing the credibility of the “conspiracy theory.” Or, if the “conspiracy theory” has not been made public, the powers that be can always cover it up or hide it or classify it in the interest of national security or to avoid “dividing our nation” or some such bullshit.

It’s as if there is a conspiracy against conspiracy theories!

And why does it seem to me that the “conspiracy theory” is always a liberal explanation and the discrediting spin is always a conservative one. John Kennedy had serious misgivings about our involvement in Vietnam and was also akennedy.jpg strong supporter of civil rights. Dead.
Bobby Kennedy, also a strong supporter of civil rights, was committed to convicting organized crime figures, many of whom had close government ties and even were employed by the government at times. Dead.

Martin Luther King, Jr. who became enormously popular for his work on civil rights and black voting rights in the south, Dead.

king.jpgFor those of you outside of the US who might be reading this, many Americans believe that these murders were not the work of some lone, crazed gunman but were part of a well planned conspiracy involving segments of the government, law enforcement and civilian contractors, all in an effort to protect a certain status quo.

I don’t want to sound melodramatic or paranoid here but it occurred to me that our upcoming Democratic president could easily be at risk of suffering the same fate unless some precautions are taken. I don’t make this statement lightly or tongue in cheek. In our world today this is a real threat with historic precedent.

If a new Democratic leader, or anyone with the power to do so, takes any actions that actually threatens the arms, oil or any other military related industry, they are at risk.

If such a leader or leaders takes any serious action or makes any meaningful effort involving the redistribution of wealth through real individual and corporate tax reform or by any other means, they are at risk.

If a new Democratic leader, especially with a majority in the House and Senate, were to push serious legislation for universal, no cost health care, they would be at grave risk and the list goes on and on.

I think some powerful forces are more willing now to use the most extreme measures to protect their social and business interests than they were 40 years ago and they were obviously willing then.

I propose that one way for the Democratic candidate to help insure his or her own safety is to name a vice presidential running mate that is even more liberal than they are. John Kennedy had as his VP Lyndon Johnson who was a Texan and more conservative. It was a perfect set up for the military/industrial powers to take Kennedy out, automatically making Johnson the president and thus insuring our deepening involvement in Vietnam.

With our current involvement in the Middle East and the possibility of that expanding, that same military/industrial power stands to lose an enormous cash cow if current policies are suddenly changed. I don’t doubt at all that they will do absolutely anything to avoid that. After all, what is one or two more lives. There are nearly 4,000 dead already due to their agenda.

By naming an even more liberal leaning VP, the president can make it a no win situation for the war mongers. Of course these same war mongers will have no problem taking out a VP too so this “more liberal” idea better extend to the Speaker of the House and the next few down the line of presidential ascension.

Advertisements
Explore posts in the same categories: America, Government, Politics

2 Comments on “The Future of Conspiracy”

  1. Capt Fogg Says:

    I can’t remember who the comedian was – but there was a black comedian who joked about being the ideal choice vice-president because no one was going to to anything to the president and put him in the White House.

    Watch and see if Mr. Obama gets chosen.

  2. expatbrian Says:

    Good point. Sounds like something Pryor would do. But the concern is valid and it will be interesting to see who is chosen. It has to be someone the right just could not tolerate as president


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: