THE CONSPIRACY TO KILL THE FAIRYTALE PRINCESS

O.K., let’s file this one under …

THE CONSPIRACY TO KILL THE FAIRYTALE PRINCESS

As I have often said, sometimes a pea is just a pea. 

Round, green, and uncomfortable to royalty when placed under a mattress, they have at times come to represent tiny brains that can get connected together into a pod of a conspiracy theory.

I am, of course, paraphrasing even more here, but sometimes even horrible tragic accidents are just horrible tragic accidents.

There's been more British Royal Family in the mainstream media this week than anyone can take. 

I’m as far from mainstream media on this blog as is digitally possible, but I do work for NY1 in my day job, so it’s hard not to get caught up in the twenty-four hour news cycle.

With all the hoopla surrounding the marriage of The Prince and The Commoner in London this week it almost feels like we won neither The War of Independence nor The War of 1812.

On Friday morning, before all of us had even had our morning coffee, perhaps the most famous couple on the planet, William and Kate, exchanged vows with around two billion people watching.

I didn’t get invited -

William is of course, the son of Princess Diana. 

Twenty years ago, Princess Diana, and the current heir to the British thrown, Prince Charles, was probably the most famous couple on the planet. 

The Princess of Wales -

The fairy tale romance of Charles and Diana was overtaken by scandal and ended with her tragic death.

So while the rest of the world was talking about hats and dresses and the tolling of Big Ben, what do you think Jeff and I were arguing about?

A Royal Conspiracy Theory.

Here's how it went down:

Jeff:  You know the Queen killed his mother.

Me:  I heard.  She used a paparazzi as the murder weapon.

And I will use words as mine. 

But, was the Queen part of conspiracy to murder Princess Diana? 

And was there any evidence of conspiracy at all?

Here are the indisputable facts:

On the evening of August 31, 1997, a limousine carrying Diana, the divorced Princess of Wales, and Dodi Al Fayed, the son of an Egyptian billionaire, collided with a pillar in the Alma Tunnel in central Paris.  Al Fayed and the driver, Henri Paul, were pronounced dead at the scene.

The Tunnel -

The Princess was taken by ambulance to Pitié-Salpétrière Hospital, where she died a few hours later of cardiac arrest.

Only Al Fayed's bodyguard survived the accident.

The Limo -

Among the first details to surface about the accident that killed her was the fact that the driver of the limousine had been speeding to evade paparazzi photographers.  Autopsy results revealed that Henri Paul had a blood alcohol level at least three times the legal limit. 

Jeff’s theory is that the Royal Family wanted the Princess dead.

Why, you ask, would the House of Windsor want Princess Diana dead?  Because, say Jeff, she was poised to embarrass the crown by marrying Dodi Al Fayed who would then become stepfather to Princes William and Harry, the heirs to the British throne.  So, on Friday morning, Fayed would have been there at the wedding with the Groom’s mother. 

Horror of horrors.

To this day, Jeff’s theory also has it’s biggest champion in Mohamed Al Fayed, Dodi Al Fayed’s father, who refuses to this day to believe the fatal car crash was a mere accident.  He claims an Agent of British Intelligence engineered the accident at the behest of Queen Elizabeth herself.

The intelligence Agent was driving a mysterious white Fiat Uno to block the limousine’s route.  This phantom car forced the driver to swerve and collide with the pillar.  

The recordings from closed-circuit cameras in the Alma Tunnel, which would have documented the precise sequence of events were, of course, either tampered with or summarily disposed of.

Add to that, the surviving bodyguard, Trevor Rees, has little memory of the event.  Conspiracy theorists say he is being paid to keep silent. 

Why would he put his life at so much risk?  And why would he agree to keep silent against the wishes of his employer?

It's hard to imagine a government inquiry into the accident (or as Jeff claims, murder) more thorough than the 900-page Operation Paget, supervised by Lord Stevens, the former Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service, at a cost of four million pounds.

There were no unaccounted-for vehicles, least of all a phantom Fiat, involved in the crash, or caught by any of the cameras

There was no evidence of tampering with any of the security cameras. 

Nor was there any evidence of motive.  Contradicting long-standing rumors, family and friends denied in interviews that Diana was about to marry Fayed.

"From the evidence of her close friends and associates, she was not engaged and not about to get engaged," Stevens said.

Prince William himself had said that there had been no indication that his mother, Diana, was about to get married again.

Earl Spencer, Diana's brother, and her sisters Lady Sarah McCorquodale and Lady Jane Fellowes, also supported Stevens' findings.  There was no marriage in the offing, according to all three of them.

"We have been briefed on the conclusions of the inquiry and agree with them entirely, and look forward to reading the full report in detail," their statement said.

Said Lord Stevens:  "Our conclusion is that, on all the evidence available at this time, there was no conspiracy to murder any of the occupants of the car.  This was a tragic accident."

Findings showed undisputed proof that he driver was going twice the 30 mile per hour speed limit through the tunnel at the time of the crash.

"We can say with certainty that the car hit the curb just before the 13th pillar of the central reservation in the Alma underpass, at a speed of 61 to 63 miles per hour," Stevens said. "Nothing in the very rapid sequence of events we have reconstructed supports the allegation of conspiracy to murder."

Perhaps the idea that a drunk driver could have been responsible for the horrible accident seems too simple.  The public seems constantly in need of bogymen including phantom drivers, paparazzi, and intelligence agents. 

But sometimes drunk driving is just drunk driving.

The supposed architect of the conspiracy, the grandmother of Diana’s children, who would have to be a real Evil Queen to have the mother of her two young grandchildren murdered.

Where’s the Poison Apple? -

I can’t resist.  Sometimes a poison apple is not a poison apple.

As Lord Stevens concluded:  "Three people tragically lost their lives in the accident and one was seriously injured. Many more have suffered from the intense scrutiny, speculation and misinformed judgments in the years that have followed. I very much hope that all the work we have done and the publication of this report will help to bring some closure to all who continue to mourn the deaths of Diana, Princess of Wales, Dodi Al Fayed, and Henri Paul."

Sorry Jeff, it’s all just a fairy tale. 

It does not connect –

Back to round the clock wedding coverage…

Emails, Direct Messages, and Royal Decrees are always welcome.

But please no poison apples.

By the way, I wonder if I should change my twitter to @commoner? 

Never mind, it's probably already taken by the new duchess…

I’m sure Jeff will suggest that I change it to @peabrain, but that’s probably taken too…

THE CONSPIRACY TO SECRETLY CONTROL THE ECONOMY

O.K., let’s file this one under …

THE CONSPIRACY TO SECRETLY CONTROL THE ECONOMY

The rent on the apartment was due today, so it’s as good a time as any to dedicate an edition of the blog to our economic woes. 

Conspiracy theorists love to obsess over money.  They love to chatter above how the word M-A-S-O-N is hidden in secret on the one-dollar bill. (See: THE CONSPIRACY OF THE 33RD DEGREE)… The mere mention of the term “Amero” sends them running to apply for gun permits (See: THE CONSPIRACY OF THE NAU)…

I’ll admit, there is quite a bit for both conspiracy theorists, and truth seekers, to be concerned about over the financial issues these days.

All of the empty stores on Avenue A are a painful reminder of the recent banking and mortgage crisis.

The bankruptcies of multinational companies like General Motors, and the failure of financial institutions such as Lehman Brothers, inspire other bloggers to write about the wisdom of keeping your money in the mattress, or buying and hoarding gold.

The economic recovery seems to have been slower than economists had hoped, reminding those of us who have jobs to cherish them. 

There, NY1, I said something nice about you…

To get the economy back on track, there have been all manner of stimulus packages totaling in numbers that require thirteen key-strokes to type. 

Our leaders have tried to increase confidence in the system and to get the population spending again.  Even though it was neither Christmas, nor Jeff’s birthday, I bought him a copy of the book Why People Believe Weird Things: Pseudoscience, Superstition, and Other Confusions of Our Time, just to do my part to get more money in circulation.

Despite all of the economic bad news, there are no signs of panic or depression.  There’s no rush on the banks.  There are no breadlines on East 2nd Street.  There are no apple sellers seeing up in Tompkins Square Park.

But conspiracy theorists are still worried.  They claim that the worst is yet to come. 

Conspiracy theorists think the next economic enemy will come from a distant shore, and is already hiding in plain sight ready to take control of the economy, for a dire outcome.

The Trojan Horse, according to Jeff, is the Federal Reserve Bank.

The Federal Reserve Bank-

The Federal Reserve Bank is the nation’s central financial institution.  The duties of the “Fed,” according to official Federal Reserve documents, are to conduct the nation's monetary policy, supervise and regulate banking institutions, maintain the stability of the financial system, and provide financial services to depository institutions, and to the federal government.

According to Jeff, there is a massive conspiracy concerning the true ownership of the Federal Reserve.  As such, everything the central bank does is potentially subject to a secret agenda.

It all began with a harmless visit to the ATM this morning, on the way back from the gym. 

As my five crisp twenty-dollar bills were dispensed:

Jeff:  You know the entire banking system can be shut down without warning.  The country can be brought to its knees.

Me: So, do I need to take more money out, or should we just go to the supermarket to pick up items to use to barter?

Jeff: While you write your little blog, and make your funny little videos about our arguments, remember it’s all ones and zeros.  And those zeros come in any language.  Very few people control the money supply and interest rates, and none of them are in the United States.  They operate in secret.

They always do. 

But is there anything to this?

Is our banking system controlled by foreign agents with sinister motives?  Can the economy be so easily shut down with the press of a button, without us ever being able to prepare to face our enemy? 

Witness the following and follow along as a witness because there is something to be learned about the control of monetary policy and whether or not it is at all subject to any unchecked wrong-doing.

The United States is divided up into twelve banking districts, and in each of those districts is located a branch of the Federal Reserve Bank.

Each of the bank’s branches is privately owned by shareholders.

The Federal Reserve System-

As the Federal Reserve Bank is not a publicly traded corporation, it is not subject to the by the Securities and Exchange Commission requirement that a list of its major shareholders be published. 

This, as Jeff said, would seem to indicate that the owners of the branches of the Fed can remain completely unidentified, and could be anyone, anywhere.

The central banking system is also completely autonomous from the three branches of government we learn about in elementary school.

That’s the sort of secrecy and lack of oversight that really gets conspiracy theorists going. 

So is it possible that a controlling interest of the shares of Federal Reserve Bank ownership could be held by interests that reside outside, rather than inside, the borders of the United States?

The question of the ownership of the twelve branches can actually be addressed by examining the legal rules for acquisition of the stock.

The majority of the shares of each of the twelve branches are all owned by publicly traded banks.  The stock of each branch is to be held by banks that are members of the banking system within the district.  Banks with household names like Citibank, The Bank of America, and Chase Manhattan. 

This ownership is a specific requirement of the very Federal Reserve Act that established the Federal Reserve System in 1913. 

Even though the Federal Reserve Bank may not have to identify it’s shareholders because of SEC rules, it does by it’s own rules.  Its owners are not secret. 

Since all of those banks are publicly traded, they must divulge the identity of any individual or organization that owns more than five percent of the outstanding shares. 

That’s the law.  And it has been the law for some time.

If foreigners own any shares of the banks that in turn own shares of branches of the Federal Reserve, then their portions would have to be less than five percent, and thereby not subject to the disclosure rule.  Less than five percent would certainly not give a shareholder enough of an ability to exert any influence on the bank that holds the shares in the Federal Reserve Branch. 

That small a percentage is simply not a significant interest.  If it were an interest capable of any real decision making, it would have to be disclosed.

Conspiracy theorists cannot have it both ways.  It either has to be secret or significant. 

In this case it simply can’t be both.

It seems that the same law that established the Federal Reserve banking system allows for a small portion of Federal Reserve stock to be made available for sale to the public.   Given that factor, perhaps foreigners own shares of branches of the Federal Reserve Bank directly.

But no person or organization may own more than twenty five thousand dollars worth of such stock and none of it carries voting rights.  Those rights belong to banking shareholders only. 

Also, under the terms of the Federal Reserve Act, stock was only to be sold to the public in the event that the sale of stock to member banks did not raise the minimum of four million dollars of initial capital for each Federal Reserve Bank when they were organized in 1913.

Each of the twelve banks easily raised the necessary amount through member bank stock sales, so no public stock was ever sold to any members of the public or to any foreigners. 

If Bank of America, Citibank, and all the rest were going to conspire to bring down the economy, they do not need to do so in absentia.  As Lehman Brothers did, they can do it all by themselves.

On the issue of Fed ownership, we can all rest easy.  The Fed is the same solid institution it was when we wok up this morning.  There is just no possibility of the conspiracy to which Jeff alludes.

There is, however, the matter of the Chinese having control over an enormous amount of the United States’ national debt.

I wonder if Jeff will be hitting me up with some conspiracy related to that, not long after I upload this blog. 

Meanwhile Jeff must pay his own visit to the ATM for the money to pay off his debt.

Beers will be on him, for my having so easily disposed of this flimsy conspiracy theory.

Better luck next time.

As always, e-mails and ATM withdrawals are always welcome.