cj#794-moderator article> Police State Conspiracy Indictment: Day 3


Richard Moore

[3780 words]



                    - an INDICTMENT -

         Presented before the GRAND JURY of LIBERTY
               On this THIRD DAY of HEARING

                  The PEOPLE v NWO Et Al

       Defendant 1 - NWO ("Corporate Globalist Elite")
       Defendant 2 - MEDIA ("Corporate Mass Media")
       Defendant 3 - GOVT ("National Government Leadership")
       Defendant 4 - INTELCOM ("Intelligence Community")

           Copyright 1998 by Richard K. Moore
                    Wexford, Ireland
         for publication in New Dawn magazine


    |                                                   |
    |  Section 2: The use of Conspiracies and Incidents |
    |  to expedite creation of police states: focus on  |
    |  the USA and UK.                                  |

Note to non-Anglo readers / jury members: Again, as was mentioned on
Day 1 and 2, please keep in mind that policies and practices which
originate in the US in these days of globalization have a habit of
showing up elsewhere afterwards, starting usually first in the UK.
This article is thus of urgent significance to global audiences.



        We may congratulate ourselves that this cruel war is
        nearing its end. It has cost a vast amount of treasure
        and blood.... It has indeed been a trying hour for the
        Republic; but I see in the near future a crisis
        approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble
        for the safety of my country. As a result of the war
        corporations have been enthroned and an era of
        corruption in high places will follow, and the money
        power of the country will endeavor to prolong its reign
        by working upon the prejudices of the people until all
        wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is
        destroyed. I feel at this moment more anxiety for the
        safety of my country than ever before, even in the
        midst of war.
             --Abraham Lincoln, letter to William F. Elkins,
               Nov 21, 1864.  Archer H. Shaw, ed., The Lincoln
               Encyclopedia 40 (1950)



2.1   Conspiratorial Incidents are KNOWN to have been employed by US
elite rulers.

The creation, fabrication, or arrangement of Incidents on the Public
Stage in order to accomplish policy objectives is a well-documented
and time-honored strategy of US elite rulers.

I'll mention two Incidents in particular which _cannot_ be dismissed
as speculation or as "conspiracy theorizing."  Both of these
Incidents have been subsequently acknowledged as being conspiracies
even by what are ironically called "respectable" news sources and

    AUTHOR'S NOTE: My own definition of _respectable_ puts New Dawn
    magazine considerably ahead of the likes of the New York Times.
    Here we see, unlike in the NYT, editorial integrity, breadth of
    viewpoints, and political courage.)

The first Incident I'll mention is the American U2 spy mission which
was deployed over the USSR back in the fifties, and that was timed so
as to scuttle a Summit Conference scheduled between the US and the
USSR.  Then President Eisenhower was planning to attend this summit,
and there was general expectation that significant progress was going
to be made in the direction of reducing Cold War tensions.

The outrage that was generated in US public opinion by this Incident
prevented Eisenhower from approaching the USSR with anything other
than a reflection of that outrage; he was prevented from approaching
with an olive branch, and the Summit itself was cancelled.

It is especially notable here that INTELCOM (Intelligence Community)
acted independently from the official US GOVT and its constitutional
process.  Eisenhower and the State Department were the primary
targets of this covert operation -- they were being coerced into a
policy position contrary to their better judgements.  This aspect --
the distinction between INTELCOM and official GOVT -- will be
developed further below.

The second Incident I'll mention is the Gulf of Tonkin Incident, in
which a North Vietnamese patrol boat was accused of attacking an
"innocent" US Navy ship on the "high seas" back in the early days of
the Vietnam War.  This Incident was seized upon by the Johnson
administration and an "authorization" was promptly obtained from
Congress for escalation of the US invasion of South Vietnam and the
bombing of North Vietnam.

It was later revealed, even in the "respectable" press, that the
Incident was bogus and never really happened at all.  In this case it
was the US Congress that was the primary target of the deception.
Congress was compelled to respond to the public outrage that arose
from sensationalist MEDIA treatment of the fabricated Incident.

These incidents WERE ACTUAL CONSPIRACIES, and their existence has
been ACKNOWLEDGED even in the "respectable" public record -- they are
NOT examples of conspiracy THEORIES.  In the first case the US
INTELCOM -- at the highest levels -- conspired against the entire
rest of the US GOVT.  In the second case the US Administration
(President et al) conspired against the Congress and the American

In both conspiracies, the deception was effective enough to
accomplish its goals.  Eisenhower's Summit Conference was called off;
the Vietnam War was launched.  When the deceptions and covert actions
were later uncovered and published that had very little consequence.
The Summit was not rescheduled; the Vietnam War was not cancelled;
the head of the CIA was not ousted; an apology was not issued to
North Vietnam; Johnson was not impeached.

In other words, to be successful, a conspiracy does not need to be
kept secret forever.  It only needs to "provide cover" for long
enough to accomplish its objectives.  And the existence of such
conspiracies does not imply a _general_ consensus in elite circles:
it does not imply there is a grand secret alliance that "runs
everything."  It only implies that _some_ elite elements got together
long enough to plan an operation that would accomplish some immediate

But when such a conspiracy does occur, the rest of the elite close
ranks behind it.  No matter how angry Eisenhower might have been, he
was not going to "go public" with outrage at CIA deception.  One
thing the elite do share in common is a desire for the people to be
kept in ignorance that their democratic processes are a sham, and
that elite schemes of one sort or another are what decide public

The US GOVT, with its vast array of agencies, operates routinely on a
basis of secrecy.  Most important policy discussions are _officially_
secret, protected by stringent "national-security" laws.  But even if
official secrecy is not operative in a given situation, GOVT is
highly PR-conscious, and public pronouncements are designed to
influence public opinion in certain directions, not to candidly share
with the America people what GOVT is up to.

The temptation, then, to employ covert measures to accomplish elite-
desired policy objectives is thus very strong.  It is much easier and
more reliable to pull a stunt like the Tonkin Gulf Incident, than it
is to try to honestly sell to the American people on the advisability
of this or that military intervention or whatever else the elite wish
to pursue.


2.2 Most American military involvements throughout its history have
been facilitated by Incidents which were in one way or another
tainted by conspiratorial activity on the part of the US.

* Mexican war - as confirmed by testimony of military officers
directly involved.  The US deployed troops in a provocative way on
the Mexican border and eventually taunted the Mexican's into a
response -- an Incident -- which then led to the war and to
annexation of Texas, California, and the rest of the current US
Southwest region.

* Spanish-American War.  In a context where US leaders were openly
eager to pursue imperialist expansion, the battleship Maine was
"mysteriously" blown up in Cuban waters.  The US got control of Cuba
and the Philippines in the ensuing war.

* World War I (US involvement therein).  When the Lusitania set sail,
the US and Britain knew full well that the ship would be subject to
attack by German U Boats.  It was, and this Incident was pivotal in
preparing US public opinion for war with Germany.  US entry into the
war was a clear objective of both the US and British GOVTs.

* World War II (US involvement therein).  FDR was well aware that
Japanese strategy was likely to involve an attack on Pearl Harbor.
When the attack did occur all of the strategically important ships
(eg, aircraft carriers) "happened" to be safely at sea.  Listening
posts in Kauai, over which Japanese attack planes flew, were
"mysteriously" asked to stand down just prior to the attack.

Six months later the US was able to decipher Japanese transmissions
and this enabled the US to win the Battle of Midway.  Was this
deciphering capability operational in December 1941?  We may never

* Korean War.  The US provoked North Korea into attacking southward.
This Incident was seized upon to launch the US invasion and start the
Korean War.  This war was part of overall US Cold-War strategy.

* Vietnam War.  The Gulf of Tonkin Incident was discussed in 2.1.

* Grenada invasion.  Whether or not it was the CIA that killed the
Grenadan leader (I forget his name), that Incident was seized upon to
snuff out a GOVT that was too democratic (aka "socialist") for US
tastes.  US students on the island at the time were amazed at the
invasion and reported they were in no danger whatsoever.  The pretext
of the invasion, as is common, was to "protect American lives."

* Panama invasion: A US armed patrol broke through a Panamanian
checkpoint, gunfire was exchanged in both directions, and a US
soldier was killed.  This Incident was reported in the US press as an
"unprovoked attack on a US soldier who did not return fire."  Thus
the US was able to take out Noriega, who was not conforming to US
policy directives in Central America, and to repeal ex-President
Carter's Panama Canal Treaty, which was scheduled to turn control of
the canal over to Panama.

* Desert Storm.  The US encouraged Kuwait to dump its oil at low
prices over an extended period, which Iraq considered to be an act of
economic warfare on the part of Kuwait.  For this and other reasons,
Iraq sent a note to the US Secretary of State saying that they
intended to invade Kuwait, and asking if the US would object.  The
unequivocal reply was that the US was unconcerned: such an invasion
would be considered an internal Arab matter.

There was no particular reason for Iraq to doubt the sincerity of
this US response.  The US frequently "permits" such cross-border
incursions -- as we see today with Turkey, vis a vis Kurdish areas in
northern Iraq.  In fact the Iraqi invasion was seized upon by the US
as an Incident, was exploited in the MEDIA and in diplomatic
channels,  and thus Desert Storm was enabled.

Desert Storm and the subsequent sanctions, as I've pointed out in
previous New Dawn articles, have served the purpose of helping
establish the "legitimacy" of a hi-tech elite strike force, a strike
force whose purpose is to maintain global "order" under the elite-
controlled globalist world GOVT which is part-and-parcel of the
globalization process.


2.3  There is a scientific way to analyze suspected conspiracy
scenarios -- what I call the "Sherlock-Holmes" method.

Conspiracy theorists frequently pursue, to the detriment of their
intended purpose, a particular investigative cul de sac.  To wit,
they see their task as "proving" that a given conspiracy did in fact
occur.  Success in such an endeavor is in most cases nearly
impossible.  Whether it be the JFK coup d'etat, the TWA 800
shootdown, or the Oklahoma bombing, the ability of elites to conceal
the basic facts of the case makes rigorous proof of conspiracy very
difficult to establish.

In fact there is a much more fruitful investigative method, one that
is far easier to pursue, and one that can be applied to scenarios
where little or no direct evidence is at hand.  This I call the
"Sherlock" method.

This method involves enumerating the plausible scenarios which might
explain a given Incident, and then assigning probabilities to the
various scenarios based on the available evidence.  No claim is made
under this method that "Scenario X _is_ what happened"; instead, one
makes the claim that "Scenario X is the _most likely_ explanation
given the available facts."

Let's take the TWA 800-shootdown Incident as an example.  The
undisputed facts are these:
    1) The plane crashed due to an explosion.
    2) Hundreds of witnesses reported seeing a missile streaking
       toward the plane before the explosion.
    3) There was an operational US missile testing range in the
       vicinity of the Incident.
    4) There were several US naval ships engaged in testing
       exercises at the time of the Incident.
    5) The US GOVT initially denied, and later admitted,
       the existence of the naval ships.
    6) The US denies, without revealing any evidence to support
       the denial, that no missile was involved.
    7) Radar recordings, satellite surveillance records, and other
       evidence in the possession of the US, and which could firmly
       establish what happened, have been kept under close wraps.
       In one case at least, the FBI confiscated a radar recording
       that was in private hands.
    8) The US has articulated no scenario for the Incident which is
       even slightly convincing.
    9) The US would be highly embarrassed to admit one of its
        missiles was responsible for the Incident.
    10) The US (as we saw in 2.2) has few qualms against employing
        conspiratorial deceit in support of US objectives.

The Sherlock method looks at these facts and identifies "shootdown by
US missile" as being clearly the most likely scenario.

None of the obfuscating US pronouncements detracts from this
analysis, even though "proof" of friendly fire, under the
circumstances, is nearly impossible.

I recommend to you, members of the jury, that you think in Sherlock-
Holmes terms when considering the various alternative explanations
for mysterious or unsatisfactorily-explained Incidents.  That is the
method I will employ in the remainder of this Indictment.


2.4  The elements of the Sherlock method are simply standard
detective procedure.

In investigating a crime, in particular in assessing a suspect, the
standard criteria are these:
    1) MOTIVE: Did the suspect have a credible _reason_ to commit
       the crime?
    2) OPPORTUNITY: Was the suspect credibly _able_ to commit the
    3) MODUS OPERANDI: was the crime, in the way it was carried
       out, typical of the _known behavior_ of the suspect?

In the case of TWA 800, for purposes of the current discussion, the
alleged "crime" involved is (a) an irresponsible accidental shoot-
down, plus (b) a cover-up of that accident.  The Sherlock analysis:
    MOTIVE: avoiding embarrassment
    OPPORTUNITY: missile testing range; control over factual
        records; control over official pronouncements; control
        over MEDIA reports
    MODUS OPERANDI: see section 2.2 above.

The US can thus, with considerable certainty, be dubbed the "prime
suspect" in the TWA 800 Incident, even if the US cannot said to be
fully "proven guilty".  This is simply another way of saying that
friendly-fire is the "most likely scenario."


2.5  Universal application of the Sherlock method is absolutely
essential to forming a useful understanding of what's going on in the

Without this method, one is left in a state of impotent ignorance
regarding almost everything of substance going on in the world today.
Most major decisions are taken secretly, most major events can only
be perceived through the eyes of the elite controlled MEDIA,  and
most powerful GOVT's are known to lie through their teeth whenever it
suits them.  In this context the choice is between the Sherlock
method, crippling know-nothingness, or, worst of all, belief in the
lies of MEDIA.

By employing the scientific Sherlock method, one is able to identify
a most-likely scenario for individual events, and from there one can
go on to piece together a most-likely overall model of what's going
on in the world as regards any particular domain of interest.

You might protest that you'd rather deal with "certain" knowledge
rather than with "most likely" knowledge, in the case of important
Incidents.  To this I say: Why deal with Incidents differently than
you deal with everything else in your life?  Do you demand
_certainty_ that there isn't a traffic blockage on your usual route
to work every morning?  Do you demand _certainty_ that your car won't
break down on the way to work?  Do you demand _certainty_ that an
earthquake won't occur before venturing outside every day?

No indeed -- you and I and everyone else _must_ deal with most-likely
models of the world if we are to get on with life.  Otherwise we'd
confine ourselves and our families to concrete bunkers and never
venture out for fear of _entirely possible_ calamities of one
description or another that _might_ befall us or our loved ones.
IN LIFE.  NO ONE DOES IT AND NO ONE SHOULD.  Bishop Berkeley tried
the "certainty approach," but, fortunately for him, he confined the
exercise to his philosophy and lived his real life more sensibly.

Similarly, if you require certainty in your interpretation of world
events and Incidents, then you are confining yourself to a political
concrete bunker.  You are rendering yourself deaf-dumb-and-blind as
regards your role as a citizen in a democracy.  You are ceding
political hegemony to those who control GOVT and MEDIA. You are
delivering yourself, your family, and your progeny into serfdom under
the dominion of the NWO elite.

DON'T DO THIS TO YOURSELF.  The world _needs_ you to wake up and deal
with politics as sensibly as you deal with the rest of your life.
Apply Sherlock and save the world!


2.6  The Sherlock method indicates that NWO, GOVT, and MEDIA are
implementing police states by means of conspiratorial Incidents that
can be characterized as HEINOUS CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY.

I will enumerate in this section a number of INDICTMENT COUNTS --
Incidents and Ongoing Activities which are collectively and rapidly
leading us to police-state societies worldwide.  In each case, the
MOTIVE, OPPORTUNITY, and MODUS OPERANDI all point directly to the
doorsteps of the DEFENDANTS.

Behind each of these individual INDICTMENT COUNTS is a fundamental
elite's need to maintain "order" in societies under full

The neoliberal globalist program, as should be plain to anyone who
has at least one good eye or one good ear, involves the
destabilization of our societies, the disaffection of the citizenry,
and sows the seeds for widespread dissatisfaction, unrest, and
ultimately defiance of GOVT authority -- either through criminal
activity or political rebellion.

Neoliberal globalism (ie, downsizing, privatization, free-trade, etc)
represents a conscious abandonment of the long-standing attempt in
our Western Democracies to maintain popular nationalism and middle-
class prosperity. As a consequence, police states are the elite's
"solution" to the social unrest that will inevitably arise and is
indeed beginning to stir worldwide.

    2.6.1 INDICTMENT COUNT: International drug trafficking
        A. Immediate MOTIVES:
            a) political neutralization of target populations
            b) justification of "War on Drugs" (both domestic
               and international)
            c) funding of INTELCOM operations
            a) access to secure global communications
            b) access to Top Secret worldwide transport
            c) cloaking of all INTELCOM operations by Official
               and anti-democratic GOVT Secrecy Acts
            d) worldwide agent network
            e) ability to squash investigations by police
               forces worldwide
            f) ability to dictate MEDIA coverage on pretense of
               "national security"
            a) See section 2.2: Conspiratorial Incidents
            b) Opium War and China opium trade (UK)
            c) Air America and Laos heroin trade (USA)
            a) See: "The Politics of Heroin -- CIA Complicity
               in the Global Trade", Alfred McCoy.
            b) See: (notorious but now suppressed) San Jose
               Mercury article on CIA complicity in supplying
               of guns and crack cocaine to LA street gangs

    2.6.2 INDICTMENT COUNT:  Military suppression of popular
        movements for democracy and justice in Latin America
        A. Immediate MOTIVES:
            a) maintenance of NWO-friendly GOVTS in region
            b) prevention of democracy
            a) See: 2.6.1.B: potent and nefarious global
               projection of power and influence
            c) ability to compel cooperation by Pentagon via
               influence over NSC (National Security Council)
            a) See section 2.2: Conspiratorial Incidents
            b) Vietnam War
            c) state-supported terrorism via US-created and
               funded Contra terrorists in Nicaragua
            d) "School of the Americas" -- a training center
                for fascist military dictatorships throughout
            a) current US operations in Peru, Columbia,
               Mexico, and other similars

    2.6.3 INDICTMENT COUNT:  paramilitarization of domestic police
        forces and encouragement of un-constitutional suppressive
        A. Immediate MOTIVES:
            a) maintenance of social "order"
            b) prevention of democracy
            a) ability to dictate MEDIA coverage on pretense of
               "national security"
            b) distraction of public awareness via hypocritical
               rhetoric regarding "War on Drugs" and "War on
            c) ability to control Congressional legislative
               agenda indirectly via control over public
            d) decisive influence over local police forces
               through various Federal assistance programs and
               unconstitutional expansion of direct Federal
            a) See section 2.2: Conspiratorial Incidents
            b) the "CROSSING THE RUBICON phenomenon":
               importation of practices long-common in imperial
               dominions -- see 2.6.2
            a) everyday suppressive behavior of police in
               minority communities

    2.6.4 INDICTMENT COUNT: arrangement of bombing of World Trade
        A. Immediate MOTIVES:
            a) unconstitutional expansion of indictment powers
               under Federal conspiracy statutes
            b) shifting of public expectations regarding
               likelihood of domestic terrorism and "necessity"
               of police paramilitarization and suppressive
            c) ongoing promotion of anti-Muslim public
               sentiment in order to facilitate Mid-East
               military interventions to maintain control over
               global petroleum industry
            a) agents and informers in group that executed
            a) See section 2.2: Conspiratorial Incidents
            b) See 2.6.3.C.b: CROSSING THE RUBICON
            a) laughable cover-story that informer "forgot" to
               check in with base just prior to bombing

    2.6.5 INDICTMENT COUNT: arrangement of bombing of Oklahoma
        Federal Building
        A. Immediate MOTIVES:
            a) See: 2.6.4.A a & b.
            c) demonization campaign against US militia
               organizations who heroically and courageously
               oppose Federal assault on US Constitution
            a) agents and informers in group that executed
            a) See section 2.2: Conspiratorial Incidents
            b) See 2.6.3.C.b: CROSSING THE RUBICON
            a) clear seismographic evidence of military-grade
               second explosion
            b) clear evidence that BATF agents knew in advance
               of bombing
            c) highly suspicious bulldozing of explosion
               evidence before adequate investigation could be
               carried out



                  Restore democratic sovereignty.
                  Create a sane and livable world.
             Bring corporate globalization under control.

     Posted by: Richard K. Moore | PO Box 26, Wexford, Ireland
     mailto:•••@••.••• | http://cyberjournal.org
    * Non-commercial republication authorized - incl this sig *