THE CONSPIRACY TO MAKE ALL ROADS LEAD TO ROME

O.K., let’s file this one under …

THE CONSPIRACY TO MAKE ALL ROADS LEAD TO ROME

Jeff and I rarely talk about religion.

However, last week he brought up the subject in one of those “shock value” moments. 

Sometimes Jeff can’t resist a button push when those secret black helicopters flying by our window give us a moment of peace and quiet.

So, as the church bell tolled atop the Saint Marks Church outside the window, Jeff announced that organized religion is a tool for enslaving the masses and that the Catholic Church has been conspiring to keep us all in a carefully docile flock for thousands of years. 

I'm the son of an Irish Catholic Dad and a Jewish Mom.  But I wasn’t really raised with any sort of organized religious upbringing. I guess my Mom and Dad sort-of cancelled each other out.  So this statement really did not resonate with me at all.  Readers of this blog know that I am far from docile.

I also haven't seen the inside of a synagogue or a church in years, except for the occasional wedding or Bar Mitzvah. 

So, I freely admit my ignorance on the whole subject of organized religion and whether it actually is an institution with the purpose on placing stranglehold on society.

Sure, I know the basics, like creation took six days, and that Abel was not the keeper of his brother.  I also know Moses sailed for weeks in an Arc full of animals, waiting for the rain to stop.

Did they eat the animals? -

But my knowledge of Chapter and Verse is as weak as the walls of Jericho were, and I can probably name more States than I can Apostles.

The only "who-begat-who" that I know are that those sex-charged Sons of God who went after the daughters of men, and bred Alien-Human hybrids that became the slaves that built the Pyramids.

But I know full well that the Catholic Church is a powerful institution and not unlike those closed societies that are Jeff’s favorite bogeymen.

Where The Popes Supposedly Hatch Their Plots -

Here’s how it went down, with Jeff full of fire and brimstone:

Jeff:  The Catholic Church is built on lies.

Me:  I though it was built on Saint Peters Square.  Or is it Saint Peter’s circle?

Jeff:  Go ahead Sam, make fun, but there's not one pieces of truth in anything the Church says and does, and you do pride yourself on truth.  As in “this blog has no greater agenda than…”

Me:  Let’s see... The truth is that the Church is built on a conspiracy of lies?  Didn’t Dan Brown write a novel about that?

Jeff:  Not exactly.  Brown said Jesus was married and had a child.  That’s impossible when no such person ever existed.


Woah...

See what I mean about shock value?

No such person as Jesus?  How can that be?

So I accept the challenge. 

Never mind all the religious mumbo jumbo.  I’m not going to argue or search for miracles or get tangled up in trying to connect Aramaic symbols.

Just the simple question:  Did the man known as Jesus Christ exist?  Or is it possible that he is a fabrication?

Jeff’s conspiracy theory is detailed in the book The Christ Conspiracy: The Greatest Story Ever Sold .  The author theorizes that Jesus Christ and Christianity were created by members of various secret societies and religions to unify the Roman Empire under on State Religion, and that the architects of the faith drew on numerous myths and rituals which existed previously and then constructed them into the Christianity that exists today.

The story of Jesus Crist is not at all original.  There are remarkable similar stories in earlier cultures.  The Egyptian Osiris, The Zoroastrian Mithra, and The Greek Prometheus were all born around December 25th to a godly father and a virginal mother. 

The Greek Dionysus transformed water into wine, rode an ass, fed crowds, suffered, and was mocked. 

The Hindu Krishna’s adoptive human father was a carpenter and was of royal blood.

But these details could have been embellishments around the actual man Jesus, who existed in First Century Palestine, and preached his own sect of Judaism.

Mythology built around iconic leaders is not new.  George Washington has his cherry tree. 

But iconic leaders can also be fabrications.  King Arthur, Camelot, and the round table probably never existed.

Much of what we know about Jesus comes from four accounts, the New Testament Biblical Gospels of Mark, Luke, Matthew and John. 

But the Gospels aren’t recognized as actual eyewitness accounts.  They were likely not even written by the actual Apostles.

The Last Supper -

The first independent historical reference to the Gospels themselves was in 130 A.D.  If Jesus was born in the year zero (or maybe earlier if he were born during the reign of Herod as is noted in the Gospels) and if he left the world at age 30, then the Gospels may have actually been written down almost 100 years later by people who were writing about him from hearsay. 

100 years is three or four generations that would have passed by the time of the writing.  In a time before telephone, that’s a hell of a telephone game. 

No wonder other popular stories were incorporated into the narrative.

There is no doubt that Emperor Constantine existed, or that Alexander the Great really lived, or that Ramses ruled over Egypt.  For each of those world leaders, there are multiple contemporary accounts as well as tangible evidence.  Paintings, writings, reliable eyewitness accounts, exist for each one of them. 

It seems to be the same for almost every other major historical figure, except for the ones in the Bible, and perhaps King Arthur.

Even if the Bible stories were written down at the time of Jesus, which they were not, the Bible simply is not a reliable historical account.

The Bible is not a history book.  No one really argues that Moses was a real person… Or Adam… Or Eve…

For two thousand years, scholars have known that much of what’s written in the Bible is often self-contradictory.  Even if it actually were a collection of contemporary eyewitness accounts, the internal inconsistencies make its use as any sort of historical record questionable. 

There are two conflicting stories of Creation.  There are two very different stories of Noah.  And there are four stories of Jesus, with precious few details.

So what about outside sources?  Are there any non-Biblical eyewitness accounts that make reference to Jesus Christ.  Is there any tangible evidence?

It is important to note at this point that in 70 A.D., the Romans invaded and destroyed most of Israel, slaughtering its inhabitants.

Entire cities, including Jerusalem, were literally burned to the ground.  


Much evidence of Jesus existence could easily have been destroyed.

The Destruction of the Temple -

But there are, actually, some third party references which survive.

First Century Roman documents mention the execution of a man who claimed to be the Messiah of the Jews.  But he was named Yehuda, and this was in 6 A.D.  That’s a miss of 25 years.  So it’s probably not a reference to the Biblical Jesus.

Josephus Flavius, the Jewish historian, mentions a Jesus in Antiquities.  Josephus' birth in 37 A.D. means he was born well after the events in question.  He wrote Antiquities in 93 A.D.  That doesn’t count as an eyewitness account, or a contemporary document.

In the British Museum is a copy of a letter sent by a Syrian named Mara Bar-Serapion to his son Serapion in 73 A.D.  Part of the letter reads:  "What advantage did the Athenians gain from putting Socrates to death?  Famine and plague came upon them as a judgment for their crime.  What advantage did the men of Samos gain from burning Pythagoras?  In a moment their land was covered with sand.  What advantage did the Jews gain from executing their wise King?  It was just after that their kingdom was abolished.  God avenged these three wise men: the Athenians died of hunger; the Samians were overwhelmed by the sea; the Jews, ruined and driven from their land, live in complete dispersion.  But Socrates did not die for good; he lived on in the teaching of Plato.  Pythagoras did not die for good; he lived on in the statue of Hera.  Nor did the wise king die for good; He lived on in the teaching which he had given..."

That letter would seem more solid proof.  However, there is no mention of Jesus by name in the document.  

But the circumstances match.  Jews.  King.  Teaching.

So is that evidence of the actual existence of Jesus?

It’s the best outside evidence that I was able to find, but it’s hardly conclusive.

Perhaps the greatest evidence that Jesus did exist is the fact that literally thousands of Christians in the first century A.D., including the twelve Apostles, were willing to give their lives as martyrs.

I can believe that people will die for what they believe to be true. 

I can not believe that anyone would die for what might not be true, or worse, be a lie.

What say you Jeff?

As always, emails, comments, and messages are welcome.

And please don’t shoot me, I am only the messenger, though not of God.

Peace out.

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.