Why I Am a Card-Carrying Conspiracy Theorist

Why I Am a Card-Carrying Conspiracy Theorist
by Mary W Maxwell, PhD, LLB

I believe there is a World Government in place. To say that it is “hidden” does not make it woo-woo or silly. Any world government worth its salt would have to come about secretly. Deceit is one of the strongest weapons in our species. Knowledge is also a weapon, and the takeover artists had great knowledge as to how human nature works.

Amazing details as to how a few men accomplished such a feat can be found in the lecture that Richard Day, MD, gave to medical students and physicians in 1969. Dr Day worked for Planned Parenthood and his boss, therefore, was Rockefeller. Day was allowed to leak much information, perhaps as a trial balloon.

On that occasion, no member of the audience expressed objection to the “plans” that were revealed. Later, however, in 1988, Lawrence Dunegan, MD, went public with his complaints. I am going to go over a bit of this material again, as a new element has arisen. Namely, as from March 15, 2015, the government of France is proposing to criminalize the discussion of conspiracy theory.

It should indeed be necessary for the members of World Government to outlaw discussion of their doings, as their doings are, in part, criminal and they wish to avoid jail!

I hereby declare myself a conspiracy theorist, specifically calling attention to the crimes of the conspirators. If that means I get thrown into the klink, so be it. (By the way, judicial activist Bill Windsor has been incarcerated again, with bail set at $4.1 million. What does that tell you?)

Treasures from Dunegan’s Report of Dr Day’s Talk

Below are some of the predictions made in 1969 by Richard Day, MD. It seems obvious that an effective way to get control of society is to go against the sources of power -- family, dignity, and belonging to a group -- that folks otherwise possess. I’ll quote only ten of Day’s predictions. Rather than choosing the most sensational ones, I’ll go for ones of a homely, personal type.

1. He predicted that the entry to the grounds of hospitals would require an ID card (I assume this was to get the public used to having IDs at all places of employment) and that in order to start this move, “Thefts of hospital equipment would be allowed.” In other words, the guys who do all the behind-the-scenes stuff would steal things to make the public realize THAT PEOPLE STEAL THINGS. Gotta teach us what naughty folks do! (Later, I note, we’d need to be protected against people such as hijackers. This would require being frisked, emptying our luggage, and eventually trying out as nude models.)

2. Dr Day said that “More men will be transferred to other cities, and in their jobs more men would travel. Therefore it would be harder for families to stay together.” In other words, THE POWERFUL WILL SEE TO IT THAT THE MAIN SOURCE OF STRENGTH PEOPLE HAVE, THE FAMILY, WILL BE WEAKENED.

3. Regarding his own profession, Dr Day said “The solo practitioner would become a thing of the past.” I read this as: YOU CITIZENS WILL NOT BE ALLOWED TO BUILD UP A TRUSTING RELATIONSHIP WITH YOUR PHYSICIAN. YOU WILL BE ‘ON YOUR OWN.’ At the same time he leaked the fact that “new diseases would appear that would be very difficult to diagnose and untreatable – at least for a long time.” So YOU WILL NEVER KNOW WHERE YOU STAND, REGARDING HEALTH. (Ahem. How was he able to imagine disease that had not yet shown up?)

4. Dr Day said “Clothing would be more stimulating and provocative. Bras would be thinner and softer.” Read: Manufacturers will be guided to make sexually-liberalized clothes TO ENCOURAGE PROMISCUITY, THUS CURTAILING a main promoter of the pair-bond, namely INTIMATE knowledge ONLY OF ONE’S SPOUSE’S BODY.

5. He predicted that “Population shifts would be brought about.” So we would have “PEOPLE WITHOUT ROOTS IN THEIR NEW LOCATIONS.” And why? He said “Traditions are easier to change in a place where there are a lot of transplanted people.”

Note: thus far we see our hidden overlords deciding to help us do away with privacy, family structure, health security, the love bond, and tradition. Really, they are out to alter human nature. You’ve got to give the Rockefellers (or their advisers) a lot of credit for figuring out how our emotions and instincts normally guide our decisions.

6. “SPORT IN THE UNITED STATES WAS TO BE CHANGED, IN PART AS A WAY OF DE-EMPHASIZING NATIONALISM. Soccer, a world sport, was to be emphasized.”

7. “PEOLE WOULD BE MORE AND MORE USED TO THE IDEA OF RELINQUISHING SOME NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY.” (That was said in 1969 when nobody in the US was talking about such a thing, much less did we know the word ‘soccer.’)

8. Big leak here: “We can or soon will be able to control the weather. You can make drought during the growing season SO THAT NOTHING WILL GROW.” (A pretty counterintuitive advance in technology, eh?)

9. “Implants would lend themselves to surveillance by providing radio signals. THIS COULD BE UNDER THE SKIN OR A DENTAL IMPLANT.” (In fact some employers now require that one’s ‘ID card’ be inside the body, and it’s being encouraged for pets, and for old folks who might wander.)

10. “Some books will disappear from libraries…. Further down the line NOT EVERYBODY WILL BE ALLOWED TO OWN BOOKS.” Well, son of a gun.

Are the ten foregoing items conspiratorial? Absolutely.
I hold that Dr Day knew of things that were being conspired about, and the proof of the pudding is that they have come to pass.

Evolutionary Biology

My writing career started in 1981 with the publication, in the Melbourne Age, of my review of "Genes Mind, and Culture," by Charles Lumsden and EO Wilson. I see human behavior through Darwinian eyes. There is no question that we are a predator species when it comes to killing other animals, but we also prey on fellow humans. We do it left, right, and center. Absolutely everyone does it. The Ten Commandments urge us not to, because we do so.

Kin altruism provides that we are not too grabby when it comes to the possessions of our close relatives. Indeed, we are inclined to make sacrifices for parents, siblings, and especially our offspring. But the human individual is, like other mammals, self contained and selfish. We have to look out for Number One in a competitive situation.

We are biologically equipped with ways to control others in ways that favor us. We may do it by emotionally manipulating them, or offering them promises. Our talent for deceit is a particularly useful thing for controlling others. (See Randolph Nesse, MD, on our marvelous capacity for self-deceit.)

Why People Resist the Revelations of Conspiracy

In general, it’s considered an embarrassment to subscribe to the main conspiracy theories of today. When JFK was killed in 1963, people did scoff at the Warren Commission’s findings that Oswald was a lone nutter. Yet hardly anyone would state outright that the assassination must have had huge help from high-level people.

Today the 9-11 conspiracy theory, often rendered as “9-11 was an Inside Job,” is seriously countenanced by a fair percentage of the American population. Still, there is quite a willingness to ridicule those who proclaim it.

I suppose it is natural for people to hold back on criticism of their leaders. To honor one’s group leader is biologically provided for, just as is the honoring of one’s parents. You feel terrible if you express any disloyalty.

Also, we all have an instinct to think our group is always right, and to have little regard for the rights of foreigners.

Yet the attacks of 9-11 are harmful to the domestic group. Why are people so reluctant to face up to it? Don’t we expect our parents, teachers, clergymen, doctors – anybody we trust – to take a stand when an evil deed has been committed?

Many Americans are in denial over 9-11 because it would be unbearable to admit that the US government was responsible for attacking the World Trade Center. So they shut their mind to it. Denial is a very strong psychological strategy. (I know I do it myself, over other issues.) It is probably the main reason for the anti-conspiracy position.

All Rather Self-Defeating

Today’s news, as mentioned above, is that France now views skeptics as criminals. This is very worrying. It implies that the Big Bosses (I take such decisions to have been made globally) feel they have sufficiently conquered the educated population! Oh-oh.

They assume we will accept this new regime in which critical thinking is taboo. Will we? I would not bet ten bucks on it -- either way. So far I see very little protest, none from legislators! If it’s true that the public will capitulate to these horrific laws, this will basically cancel the political gains of three centuries, starting with, say, John Locke’s 1689 "Two Treatises of Government."

If so, our biologically-grounded habits will have turned out to be our undoing. We will have said:

“Sure, powerful, ruthless types, do as you wish. We are averse to being confrontational with you. Go on, take our liberties. Oh, you want our money too? Hmm. That’s not so nice. Oh, you want our health? Gee, I didn’t know that was included. Hey wait a minute. You say you have the droit de seigneur? Crikey, I think you guys are going a bit too far.”

The Homely Examples

In an effort to persuade anyone who is on the fence about conspiracy theory, I ask them to look again at Dr Day’s 1969 predictions. Over the years, Dr Dunegan occasionally ran into persons who had been at the dinner, but they alleged no memory of the startling remarks. (Further evidence of the human mechanism of denial?)

To be fair, though, those doctors did not know that the predictions would come true! We have the great advantage of realizing that they did come true. This surely constitutes proof:

1. That somebody up there does make plans like that for the whole society.

2. That they’re able to direct the carrying out of such ideas, via business, government, schools, and media.

3. That, even though the predictions are 46 years old, the bits and pieces are still in the works, and the parts that have not yet happened are likely to happen.

Criminality: Can We Indict?

Call me old-fashioned but I think the solution to dealing with these characters is to recognize that their “grandiose plans” contain much that is against the law. We’re talking jailable offenses, and in one case a hanging offense. All it takes is a rap sheet.

Let’s analyze only the ten items shown earlier (Dr Day provided more than a hundred), viz.: 1. Stealing stuff from hospitals; 2. Men to travel in their jobs; 3. Solo GPs out, and new diseases in; 4. Bras to be softer; 5. People to move to new locales; 6. Soccer to be promoted; 7 Some national sovereignty to be relinquished; 8. Weather control; 9. Implants with radio control; 10. Books banned.

For starters, let’s scratch off the list some non-criminal items: Men to travel; Bras softer; Move to new locales; and Soccer to be promoted. We can also omit “GP’s out,” but leave half of that item: “new diseases” in. That leaves six of the ten for us to consider.

One of these is Theft from hospitals, but I suggest we ignore it as trivial. I’ll also omit Implants, as they would perhaps be done “consensually” and hence not criminally. And though I love Books, I don’t see criminality in banning them (in terms of today’s criminal law).

What we are left with are three major criminal offenses, so blithely proposed by Dr Day. Namely: inventing new diseases, and causing drought, both of which are forms of murder, and relinquishing national sovereignty, which may be an act of treason.

I have been working for years to tell people about these crimes. (My 2011 book is entitled: Prosecution for Treason; Epidemics, Weather Wars, Mind Control and the Surrender of Sovereignty.) So far I have constantly run up against the barrier of disbelief. But I didn’t use the clues given in Dr Day’s speech as evidence of World Government’s blatant criminality. I will do that here. Please listen up.

Diseases and Drought – Great Woes of Mankind

New diseases. Oh, come on, anyone can see that this is a crime. I think we should categorize it as the crime of murder, as murder has no statute of limitations. Many of the ‘new diseases,” not least AIDS, caused many deaths. The persons responsible need to be punished as murderers. That’s elementary, isn’t it, my dear Watson?

The other crime is weather control. When one mentions rain-making or temperature changing (both of which are massively being done today, as far as I can figure), one gets the retort “It is done for beneficial purposes.” OK, but that’s not true of drought-making. According to Dr Dunegan, Dr Day said “You can make drought during the growing season so that nothing will grow.”

Day’s remark was made in the context of food control, allegedly intended to get people to practice population control. He said “Food supply is to be brought under centralized control so that people would not have enough to support any fugitives from the new system.” Wow, we are talking life-and-death control here.

Who do these jerks think they are, anyway?

By the way, the US Constitution Article III, section 3, calls it treason if you “levy war” against the United States.
The punishment is death.
The Australian Criminal Code (Part 5.1, Division 80.1) provides a punishment of life imprisonment for any
person who “levies war, or does any act preparatory to levying war, against the Commonwealth.”

We could easily charge with treason those who levy war by drought-making or invention of new diseases. (I think the murder charge is easier, yet it might be wise to take the treason concept out of mothballs.)

Don’t you want, in your heart of hearts, to stop these things? Wouldn’t yours be a better world without strange new diseases and the use of weather control to produce hurricanes, tornados, and earthquakes at the drop of a hat?

Well, then, you have to think law. And don’t wait for the judicial system to get onto it, cause they ain’t gonna. (By the way, lotsa folks are committing the felony of obstruction of justice, in regard to the foregoing crimes.)
Better watch out if you’re one of them.

A Word about National Sovereignty

In the foregoing, I mentioned a major definition of treason found in US and Australian law: levying war against the people. In my book, Prosecution for Treason, I rehearse an expanded jurisprudence. I think the throwing over of the Constitution, the major protection of America, is a crime of treason.

I find it easy to identify treason in a Congressman. He commits this crime (no joke) any time he passes a law that delivers his legislative power to a party outside his hands, be it the Executive, the UN, or a “trade treaty.”

There’s also the attempt on the part of World Government to take away every nation’s government.
For example, the various nations of Europe – Spain, Germany, Italy, etc, -- gave up their autonomy by joining the European Union.

If the US or Oz follows suit, as it does to some extent in treaties (such as NAFTA or the Lima Declaration), is that a crime of treason? Personally I don’t think it can be a crime, except when committed by those who are supposed to guard us, namely our elected representatives and any officials they appoint.

If the Rockefellers go about undermining national sovereignty by corrupting our governments, I blame the members of government, not the Rockefellers. (And if they only “recommend” a yielding of national sovereignty, that is their First-Amendment right to free speech.)

Still, if you are keen on indicting the Rockefellers for treason, you can do so, as I said, under the clause about levying war (via the invention of new diseases and/or drought-making). Note: In the US, treason is a hanging offense.

By the way, some really fascinating things could come out at a properly conducted trial. Perhaps even some things favorable to, or exculpatory of, the Rockefellers. You never know....

Here is a video by Dr Stan Montieth with ideas about the Invention of diseases: 

Mary W Maxwell can be reached at mary.maxwell@alumni.adelaide.edu.au. Her 2013 book, Consider the Lilies, delves into some of the “new diseases” predicted by Dr Day. She writes regularly for Gumshoenews.com. Her recent article on the Port Arthur massacre is linked below. There may be some treason in that judicial episode, too!