The Music of Kelly Van Shaar

Conspiracy Theories ~ 2011-07-29

We here in the good ol' U.S. of A. believe that our leaders are generally good. We expect that those who have been scrutinized, analyzed, approved, elected and appointed are worthy of their offices. After all, we have a democratic system in this country that allows us to vote for whoever we want, so why would the people as a whole choose somebody that isn't right for the job? I suppose you could say it's one of the foundational principles of our system of government: 'By, for and of the people' and all that. And the flip-side of 'we voted on it' is 'we live with the consequences', because if we didn't, well then we'd feel like the whole voting thing was pointless (which it mostly is if there are no good candidates to choose from) and then somebody would say that if the vote is pointless then we don't live in a democracy (which we don't) and then, well, a lot of textbooks would have to be rewritten (which is constantly being done anyway).

And not only do we choose to believe our leaders are good people, we generally believe that they are better than us in some way. Go ahead and examine your own opinions of your leaders; I just did and here's what I found out. While I may disagree with some things they do, I excuse their shortcomings with rationalizations like, "Well, he won the vote; there must be something good about him" or "Yes, well I may disagree with them on this issue, but I'm sure I don't understand the whole story", or "well maybe people would point out a mistake or two if my every move was being scrutinized and publicized" or the ever-popular "yeah well, I wouldn't want that job."

Maybe we believe our leaders are better equipped for the job than we are because we can tell they know how to make money or because they understand complex legal issues or because they know how to handle the media. In spite of their shortcomings, we make allowances. Unless of course they were elected by the 'other' political party, and then we go ahead and criticize everything they do, because we no longer identify with them as 'our' leaders.

But try this little exercise with me right now. Imagine that a newly elected official (could be president, governor, etc.) is a person just like you and me, or better yet, like that neighbor down the street that you never really got along with. Think about how your neighbor is subject to the same weaknesses, frailties and temptations that you are. Think about what he or she probably does when nobody is looking. Now, imagine them with control over almost unfathomable wealth. Then add a staff of 'patriotic' individuals trained in the arts of secrecy, deception and warfare who will follow every order without question. Along comes a dark figure from your neighbor's past; someone with personal knowledge and hard evidence of one of those things your neighbor did when he or she thought nobody was looking. This person contacts to your neighbor privately and threatens to expose those secrets.

What do you think is going to happen to that person from your neighbor's past? They're going to disappear. Don't bother denying it. Your neighbor is going to casually comment to somebody on his staff, "I sure would like to get rid of that guy" and that's the last anybody will ever hear about it.

If your neighbor is asked later about the coincidental disappearance, he's going to reply that he knows nothing about it. But within his own mind, he's going to justify his actions by saying things like "I was acting in self-defense" or "I'm doing this for the greater good." And those are going to seem like pretty good justifications. If somebody is going to expose you as having committed a great crime or done an embarrassing thing, to quietly get rid of this person is very easy to rationalize as 'self defense.' If you get kicked out of office before you can put into effect all your great plans or amass great wealth or benefit those who put you in office, aren't you acting for the greater good by acting in self-preservation?

If you're the king, you can do as you like. If somebody threatens you, you issue a decree and have them whacked. If somebody doesn't like it, you have them whacked too, and so on until people get the message. In a representative republic (that's our form of government) you have to be a little more sneaky about it. We have these pesky things called laws and this irritating system of checks and balances designed to keep tyrants under control. Not only that, but we've got these 'citizens' going around spouting off about 'rights' and other such nonsense. Something to do with some colonies who rebelled against their king hundreds of years ago because they were tired of being whacked. Something to do with them writing some old document called a constitution that nobody even reads or believes in any more. It makes the whacking a little more complicated.

Eliminating the opposition to gain power is not a new idea. Remember Cain and Abel? Yeah, it's right there in Genesis. Cain murders his brother for his own personal gain. This was not a case of domestic dispute turning to violence. He thought about it beforehand (planned, premeditated), then he carried out his plan and denied it later.

Cain is by no means the only historical example we have of this. In the Book of Mormon a full-blown conspiracy that rivals any of our more modern examples is described. Amalickiah was a commander of a portion of the army of the Lamanites. He has one of his own servants murder the king, and then has that same servant testify in front of the murdered king's widow that it was the king's own servants that committed the act. Amalickiah then courts and marries the widowed queen, thus placing himself on the throne. Reference Here

In the Book of Mormon they used another phrase instead of 'conspiracy'; they called it a 'secret combination'. The simplest definition of both could be the one given by Cain in the Book of Moses (In The Pearl Of Great Price): "And Cain said: Truly I am Mahan, the master of this great secret, that I may murder and get gain." Reference Here Of course the thing with Cain was a one-man job, unless of course you count Satan. Eventually there were more people willing to participate in these type of schemes and they had to develop a method of working together. It's kindof a tough thing, because, well, how much can you trust somebody who is planning to kill someone for their own gain? What is the assurance that you're not next? Satan was more than willing to help them come up with some ideas.

One way to prevent being exposed is to "take out insurance" as they would say in the movies today. You make sure that you have damning evidence on every person that you let in to your conspiracy. Then if they ever think about ratting you out, you can be sure they go down with you.

Next, you can always use the threat of more death. If you're not afraid to kill once, people will understand that you won't hesitate to do it again. Therefore, once somebody is in on a conspiracy they and their loved ones will forever more be in danger of permanent consequences should they ever let the wrong word slip.

A lot of people in the media like to poke fun at conspiracy theories, but there is a very obvious reason that they are only theories: All the people with the proof are either in on it, threatened with death themselves (or their families), or dead already!

The next time you hear somebody in the media pass something off as "just another wacky conspiracy theory" take just a minute to think about it. Conspiracy theories get started in an effort to explain facts that don't fit the accepted explanations of events. And here's a scarier thought: most of the really good conspiracies are the ones you never suspected.

Many if not most of the politicians in both political parties in this country stopped being 'good guys' a long time ago, especially on the national level. As the values of this nation continue to erode, our politicians are not standing up to stop the collapse; no, not by a long shot. They have been LEADING the collapse for generations. Secret killings, foreign wars with questionable motives, falsified attacks on US citizens spark wars, legalized abortions, legalized lewdness in every form of media, allowing drugs and prostitution to overrun our country, forced acceptance of homosexuality and other immoral behavior, and socialist slant in the overwhelming majority of movies and TV shows.

No, our leaders are not better than us; far from it. They are just like our neighbor down the street - or just how he might be if he was constantly being tempted with money and power - and they are leading us to a destruction from which we may never return. They were elected because they were more successful in pulling the strings of their puppets - the mainstream media - than their opponents, and were perceived by the voters as being the lesser of two evils. They attained their positions by dozens - likely hundreds - of 'secret combinations.' Their powers are used only to destroy their enemies and keep their co-conspirators in positions of power; the debate about right and wrong ended long ago; there is only the thirst for power, and the fact that most of America seems to sit idly by waiting for the next TV show to start while the minority are honestly weighing the decoy issues allowed to reach the ballots is only a testament to the extent of the conspiracies.

You may want to sleep with a gun under your pillow, if you're still allowed to own one.