Just to show an example of how nonsensical the terms liberal and conservative have become:

Operation Iraqi Freedom stems from a liberal policy. By going to Iraq and generously giving the people freedom from tyranny, American foreign policy is essentially liberal.

A true conservative would conserve the resources of our nation for domestic problems.

Noam Chomsky explains this pretty well.

I'm tired of theses conservatives who just think with their feelings.

It is not really an issue of is it a conspiracy or not, but rather what kind of conspiracy it is. Is it really a conspiracy by the US and British to liberate the Iraqi people? Or is it an effort by US and British oil interests to secure a region? Or is it a conspiracy to create the worldwide perception that energy is scarce?

SUPPRESSED ALTERNATIVE ENERGY: AN INTERVIEW WITH A FORMER OIL COMPANY EXECUTIVE

March 29-30. Weekend edition. I have recently made contact with a former oil-company executive. This man, for what he considers very good reasons, chooses to remain in the shadows. He offers explosive charges about the suppression of energy sources which could change, as he puts, "the whole style of living on this planet." Because he insists on speaking off the record, I cannot call this a definitive smoking gun, but it's getting there. It's getting there. This man was reluctant. It took me awhile to convince him to speak.

Q: Why did you come forward now?

A: Because of the war.

Q: The war for oil?

A: Yes, but you have to understand a few things. I assume you've read Bucky Fuller.

Q: Sure.

A: Well, all this has to do with scarcity. The appearance of scarcity.

Q: What do you mean?

A: Creating the picture they want you to see.

Q: In what sense?

A: You've written about this.

Q: Specifically, what are you referring to?

A: Ask yourself why the oil companies like big government.

Q: Why don't you tell me.

A: Why do you see these companies supporting candidates who will do nothing for them? Wouldn't you think they'd back real free-market advocates, instead of the phonies who run from the Democratic and Republican sides?

Q: Am I supposed to believe that big oil companies want, what, libertarians in office? That's a hopeless cause.

A: Nothing is hopeless if you have millions of dollars to spend.

Q: Yeah?

A: Yeah. You don't see it, do you?

Q: See what?

A: These companies pretend to want economic freedom in the marketplace, the freedom to drill and explore anywhere. But they don't.

Q: No?

A: They want protection given to them by the government. They want to work with the government. They want their basic kind of protection.

Q: And that is?

A: A monopoly on energy. And you don't get that by trying to change the political landscape, by supporting free-market thinkers and doers.

Q: When you say "monopoly on energy," what are you talking about?

A: It's all about perception. Engineering the perception that oil is the only viable form of energy for the world.

Q: I see. So you're saying the major oil companies are more concerned with making everyone think that oil is the only fuel we really have for universal consumption.

A: Basically, yes. With a few minor exceptions that don't add up to much. And ask yourself, if you want to engineer that perception, who must you work with? The government. Certain agencies of the government.

Q: Are you talking about the CIA, for example?

A: I'm not going to get into that. But get my point here. Above all, no matter what they say, no matter how much they may deny it, these oil companies want the world to believe that oil is all we have.

Q: And that is not true.

A: Of course it's not true. Give me a billion dollars and I'll build a hydrogen project that'll prove splitting water into oxygen and hydrogen can take over the function of oil. And there are other avenues too.

Q: So to engineer the idea that oil is all we have, these companies want to walk hand in glove with big governments.

A: Right. It has nothing to do with a free market. Nothing.

Q: And how is all this connected to the war?

A: If you fight a war for oil---which everybody knows is going on right now---

Q: James Woolsey [former head of the CIA] admitted that the first Gulf War was fought for oil---

A: I know that. If you fight a war for oil, then everyone believes that oil really IS the only hope we have for a fuel to run the world.

Q: What are you saying?

A: This war has a much deeper ulterior motive. Most of the people who THINK they're really part of the global elite, who think they're in the know because they understand this war is about oil---

Q: Are missing the deeper point.

A: Yes. And the deeper point is, this war is being fought to create the perception that we must have that oil because oil is all we have.

Q: Whereas the truth is?

A: We don't need that oil. We can run this planet on other fuels, like hydrogen. But that perception must not be allowed to surface and gain a position of consensus. Billions and billions of dollars are at stake here. This is a very big craps game. The biggest people---and I'm not really talking about your oil-company CEOs, I'm talking about bigger people---and I won't go farther on that subject---the biggest people will do what they need to do to make everyone believe---

Q: That fuel for the planet is a very scarce commodity---the most precious commodity there is. And it's oil.

A: Right. Bucky Fuller said scarcity was a hoax. And he was right. We have the technology to provide everybody in the world with energy, cheap energy, and it's not oil. It doesn't have to be oil.

Q: So they need to impress on everybody the idea that we'd go to war for oil and kill who knows how many people, when in fact---

A: They're covering up something a lot more incredible. Yes---

Q: On one level, it's a war for oil, but at a higher level of power and control, it's a war to make people think oil is the only hope. And you accomplish that by focusing everybody's attention on oil, oil, oil.

A: Yes. Let me put it to you this way. When you focus everyone's attention on something, you tend to create the impression that that something is scarce. Do you see a lot of news about oxygen or ten toes or dirt or grains of sand? You keep pointing people at oil and they think, this oil is VERY valuable. This could be cut off. This is scarce.

Q: Keep going.

A: Yes. But if people knew how readily available other energy sources were, they'd yawn when you said oil. It's like putting two dogs out there fighting over a bone. All the other dogs want that bone too, after awhile. Even though there is a huge barrel full of bones a hundred feet away. But if you don't want the other dogs to discover that barrel, you have to keep them focused on the two dogs fighting over the one bone. And you have to keep those two dogs fighting on and on. You have to---

Q: Concoct all sorts of reasons for the dogs to keep fighting. You have to prod them and push them and irk them.

A: Right. Yes.

JON RAPPOPORT www.nomorefakenews.com

Tater is right about one thing. The "majority of people in this country from the boardroom to the schoolroom...don't have time for those" conspiracies. Why should they let facts, logic, and investigations get in the way of their stubborness and feelings.