Police and prison officers can plant evidence, falsely testify regarding criminal intent/behavior, or they may inflict extreme psychic pressure and harassment upon non-cooperative individuals. The "code of silence" which prevails among their peers often shields them from exposure.
Furthermore, the scope of their type of conspiracy often involves a very small number of people who are under the direct control, supervision, or purview of the conspirators. In addition, there is the societal pre-disposition to believe whatever a policeman or prison employee might say as compared to testimony from convicted criminals or persons perceived as sociopaths and predators.
Similarly, military personnel can engage in torture, extreme forms of harassment, or even kill persons they claim were "combatants" OR they can allege "collateral damage" has occurred to cover-up their own illegal acts (including murder) and thus feel confident that their criminal acts and their conspiracy will remain un-exposed.
By contrast, the tools available to the CFR-NWO crowd to discourage and prevent exposure of their conspiracy by co-conspirators or witnesses are much more subtle and much less effective. Nevertheless, the police, military, organized crime, and prison conspiracies are routinely penetrated, exposed, and prosecuted despite their more self-sealing or invisible quality.
But we are asked to believe that the alleged CFR-NWO conspiracy (or comparable other alleged political conspiracies) can operate with invisibility and impunity decade after decade.
THE UNDERLYING DYNAMIC OF POLITICAL CONSPIRACY THEORY
A while back I stumbled across the results of a poll whose respondents were Birch Society members/sympathizers in the New Orleans area.
The poll question was "Who killed Nicholas Berg?".
51% of respondents thought our CIA killed Berg.
14% agreed with the following statement about Berg: "He's not dead. It was staged."
What possible methodology could one employ to prove either contention false (to the satisfaction of those Birchers?).
However, the actual content of any given conspiracy theory is of secondary importance. Instead, one needs to understand the underlying dynamic at work.
Conspiracy theorists present themselves as being uniquely insightful, i.e. they perceive relationships, unearth data, and connect dots which escape 99% of the rest of humanity.
Why is it then, that their self-proclaimed superior intellect, research skills, and analytical abilities are never employed to first DISPROVE the most compelling competing theories which they believe to be erroneous?
For example:
- Why can't Birchers definitively refute Christian Identity theories?
- Why can't Birchers even refute their own dissident elements (originating within the JBS) that concocted a theory which makes sinister, derogatory assertions about the background of many of the original JBS National Council members whom, it is alleged, were actually secret CFR, freemason, Illuminati agents?
- Why can't Willis Carto adherents definitively refute LaRouchian theories?
- Why can't CFR/New World Order/elitist hidden government theorists definitively refute holocaust denial or other anti-semitic theories?
In the process of successfully refuting alternative theories, these folks would win legions of new followers to their own clearly demonstrated superior theory! So why don’t they refute the competing theories?
