[...] Wonderful results against spam links using this plugin [...]……

completely safe to read in a faraday cage.

http://rense.com/general69/statee.htm

http://www.newworldorderreport.com/News/tabid/266/ID/980/33-Conspiracy-Theories-That-Turned-Out-To-Be-True-What-Every-Person-Should-Know.aspx

Horwitz uses the Jewish banker conspiracy theory as evidence itself that conspiracy theories are “unfortunate”. In this particular case, the theory is deemed false merely because the bankers are accused of being Jewish (which in fact they are and were for the most part).

Horwitz implies that one can totally refuse to even consider the actual facts of the matter since there are some who place emphasis on the cultural/religious/ethnic make-up of the conspirators. Yet later he offers this laugher:

“Our case for freedom must ultimately rest on reason and logic”

How absurd. There is a mountain of evidence that Rothchilds, Rockefellers and other notable international bankers were at the core of those who created the Federal Reserve System (and who 100 years later still hold controlling shares in it).

To allege that this wasn’t for their own financial gain is utterly preposterous. The facts are detailed in a plethora of credible sources, the most notable being “The Creature from Jekyl Island” and perhaps Woodrow Wilson himself who after leaving office remarked of the Federal Reserve, “I may have ruined the country”.

The problem with conspiracy theory bashers is their reliance on faulty premise to argue their case. For instance:

“the bigger the conspiracy the bigger the amount of information the conspirators must have and process.”

This is false. For instance, let’s take this out of the realm of government for a moment.

Let’s say that an employee of a local bank conspires with a few of his friends to drain the bank’s vault of all cash and valuables. Does that then mean that the Bank itself is involved in the conspiracy? Of course not.

The fact that a few in government might carry out a “massive” conspiracy without any of their downstream officers knowing they are involved in a crime and cover up is totally within the realm of possibility and only gets more likely the more power the conspirators possess.

Hayek may have been correct if you hold his statement to the proper context, that the more people actually know about a conspiracy, the less likely it will remain a secret. But merely to claim a blanket impossibility because the crime was enormous in its scope is just illogical and wrong.

Furthermore this is based on a false premise as well:

“Ultimately, believing that a small group of evil people are manipulating economic and social processes for their own ends concedes to defenders of government economic planning that controlling and manipulating the economy is in fact possible!”

Horwitz, while attempting to rebut all conspiracy theory, is still stuck arguing against a small group of bankers having the power to manipulate social and economic processes for their own benefit.

Because it is not possible to centrally plan the economy, therefore it is not possible to create ANY benefit for one’s self by using the tools economic and social planners use to control economies.

Again, this is totally false because the “conspiracy” has nothing to do with central planning per se. It has to do with a group of individuals who have injected themselves as a monopoly operator of monetary policy in this country. The fact that they can’t actually control the outcome of all economic activity is irrelevant. They’re not really interested in that. They dangled out their entity (The Federal Reserve) to politicians as a carrot in THEIR belief that the outcomes could be controlled.

Federal Reserve board members do not care whether the economy can be planned or not, they care about making a profit. And to that end, they have created a marvelous engine. In 100 years they’ve been able to reduce the dollar’s value to 4% of its original value (when it was tied to Gold) and all of that “loss” in value has ended up in the pockets of their member banks.

They don’t have to be able to achieve central planning nirvana.

Horwitz has not thought this argument through at all but is holding it out as an example of “logic”. Sadly, it looks as though some other bloggers are buying it as well.