Posted by: graemebird | December 3, 2006

Alibi-Lullaby: Nothing To See Here Folks, No Regimes Involved.

There is an incredibly dangerous notion thats been around up at least since the war. (Is it really a belief or is it a smug knee-jerk reaction?)

The notion that suspicious murders never involve a regime until absolute proof beyond reasonable doubt has been compliled.

Nothing could be more irresponsible then this behaviour. I just saw it minutes ago at Catallaxy with this comment from Daniel Barnes:

Best paranoid theory:

A Russian is murdered with a poison only normally available to regimes. And to EVEN SPECULATE about a regime being involved is thought to be paranoid.

What is the motive of people who put down these conspiracy theories?

1. Part of it is the opposite of the ‘halo-effect’. We might call it the anti-halo-effect. It is true that some people have a conspirational frame of mind for the most absurd of things.

If we run a sustained balance of payments problem thats a conspiracy. And probably by Jewish bankers and billionaires connected with the Bilderburg Group. Perhaps the Rockerfellas are involved. Or the Freemasons. Or the Illuminati.

Perhaps even some outgrowth of the Knights Templars gone underground for centuries and guarding the secret whereabouts of the holy grail. Or it could be that weird guy down the road. He’s got the windows of his place shut up all the time and he doesn’t go anywhere but when he does he always takes Jimmy Hoffas well-preserved body along with him in the boot of his car.

2. It could be a habit held over from the era of communism. Since the communists were murdering people all the time it was only natural for leftists to ridicule the entire notion of conspiricies involving regimes. Even before they had wiped the blood off poor Jack Kennedy’s face people were trying to prove that Oswald acted alone and at the same time any number of implausible conspiracy theories were being put about.

Somehow the most obvious culprits got left off the hook. No communist regimes to see here.

3. I think they are frightened witless myself. And this might be a sort of alibi-lullaby. But whatever is motivating this snide behaviour its an attitude that represents a grave threat to civilisation.


It is just so easy for governments to murder people nowadays. Easier then ever. In the 19th Century if you were some tinpot little Kingdom somewhere and you decided you might want to kill one of Her Majesties subjects, a chill would likely fall down your spine as you contemplated the next warm breeze off the ocean bringing a fleet of ships with cannonballs bouncing along the streets of your capital at 200 miles per hour…and British and Hindu soldiers tracking your ass down to humiliate you before your people, before you are hanged.

But now if you kill someone in a democratic country you ought to be able to get it done and the press go silent. Or the leftists go all smug and ridicule anyone looking at the evidence.

The most mammoth example of this was of course 9/11. Immediately people came out of the woodwork to alibi the lead suspect Saddam Hussein.

And when the Anthrax attacks murdered people in Washington this mania hit its absolute peak. Here was Saddam. Thought to have more Anthrax stock-piled then anyone in the world with perhaps the Russians only excepted as a possibility……. And out comes this mania. So strong was the pre-emptive-regime-alibi-mania that Saddam was not even considered as a suspect????!!!!!!!!

Now consider the implications of this. You are speaking out against some government or other, lets just say the Chinese Communists for example. Supposing you would even go that far in the first place.

And in this example you start getting some strange phone-calls. And then your ten year old says a Chinese man in raggedy clothes told her to ‘tell you father that all he has left is our friendship’.

Now in reality the man in old clothes could have been some drunk fool. Your daughter could have made it all up or heard him wrong. And the phone company could be getting its wires crossed.

But as you contemplate the situation you realise that you are now entirely alone. To even mention these things will tripwire the PRE-EMPTIVE REGIME-ALIBI-MANIA. And you find yourself simply having to shut up. Since even if you are subsequently assasinated the press will cover it up, the government will play it down, and there is no chance of your killing having any influence on policy whatsoever.

So the mania gives regimes a free hand to kill anyone they want.

Government is inherently evil and if we want the whole world to be a cesspit of fear, unfreedom and relentless assasination like the Middle East then we will continue with this mania.

But instead we ought to do the opposite. We ought to go back and reinvestigate any and all murders, suicides or accidents that look like they even MIGHT have a regime involved.

From the death of McCarthy. To the car accident that killed Patons son and the one that killed Patton. To the Kennedy assasination. To the Anthrax murders.

This is a real mania. And people who display it need to be severely ridiculed and pilloried. Because it means the end of free speech. Or rational discussion of defense policy. And it invites the way for any of us to be murdered, at any time, with the rest of the population complicit in our murder. Complicit by playing it down and letting the killers off the hook.



  1. off your meds? 🙂

  2. There you are third parties. Here the most dangerous mania I was just talking about.

    And totally mindless at that.

    And we need to track just where it is this mindlessness comes from.

  3. grame
    I’m amazed that you think anyone would bother to have June Chang assasinated on account of her finding out that the fat low-born peasant fuck Mousey Dung was a fat low born peasant fuck. The fucker’s widely reviled already. No great revelation there.

  4. The communist party has a sort of legitimacy deficit. So what sustains it is what amounts to a state religion with Mao as the key deity.

    If that unravels their existence is imperiled. Try arguing with mainlanders about Mao and you will see what I mean. They wanted this woman dead and they simply assumed she was a liar doing wicked things.

    Her suicide is totally suspicious because of the timing of it. Just after this great success in her stage of life.

  5. I’ve spoken to plenty of mainlanders about Mao. They mostly didn’t like him or were indifferent.

  6. Thats not been my experience.

    But anyway have I got it wrong about Jung Chang? Is she still alive? Surely both her and Iris didn’t kill themselves. I might have got it confused.

  7. I’m going to assume I’ve picked that one up from someone else who confused the two Chang women. Since I didn’t even know that the Mao writer was called Chang.

    Still I could have got it confused my own self. I’m just going to assume that she’s still alive and well. And so I have to rewrite the thread-starter accordingly. So that I don’t mislead anyone else.

    But I’ll keep these posts in because I don’t want to pretend that I don’t make mistakes like this all the time.

  8. The more I think about it the more I think what a weird, oddball, and extremely dopey theory it was that it was a local scientist who orchestrated the anthrax murders.

    What an incredibly stupid fucking idea that was.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: