OK, Frank Gol, what about -

Governments do not employ enough investigators to investigate the disclosures of whistleblowers. This is a government conspiracy to ensure that damaging disclosures are not investigated.

And-
Can you nail the difference between a cover-up and a conspiracy for me? Maybe a cover-up is something that happens after a whistleblower exposes a conspiracy? But don't people conspire to cover-up?

Dealing With The Mob

The problem lies in proving intention to conspire - i.e. to work secretly together to commit or conceal a reprehensible or illegal action. Sure governments may fail to employ enough investigators. But their reasons may be (a) inadequate funds because they have other priorities, or (b) lack of conviction that the issue is worth the effort, or (c) sheer incompetence in responding to an issue, or (d) complacency and arrogance, or (e) other motives.

It's important to distinguish between intention and effect otherwise you can end up calling anything bad that a government does (or doesn't do) a conspiracy. And if you do that, people stop taking you seriously.

You're right to say that a cover-up is something that (often, but not always) happens after a whistleblower exposes a conspiracy. And people do conspire to cover-up. Conspirators don't want their actions exposed obviously and secrecy is paramount to them.

Which is worse: the substantive conspiracy (to commit illegal actions, to defraud, to mislead etc) or the cover-up that may be attempted after the whistle has been blown?

I agree that treating whistleblowers as if they were criminals or lepers (as has happened recently) is totally reprehensible.

I'm all in favour of introducing whistelblower protection laws where they don't exist (at Commonwealth level) and stronger ones where they do exist (in some of the States). In an ideal world we'd reward whistleblowers not punish them as the Commonwealth has done recently. But this is not an ideal world - and politicians with the most to lose from public exposure make the laws.

Now forgive me if I am wrong, but wouldn't this Rockafella fella be more interested in what is right for his business than what is right for the United States?

So, if what was in his business best interests was not in the best interest of the US, would it not be true to say that he was then working agianst the best interests of the US?

Spot on JamesH, spot on.

JamesH said: "Now forgive me if I am wrong, but wouldn't this Rockafella fella be more interested in what is right for his business than what is right for the United States?"

You're forgiven ;) - No feed back on Price Philip, though?

Anyway, here's one of Rockheadfella's good friend's that also openly admits to be conspiring against the will of the global public...enter Henry Kissinger and his EVIAN-LES-BAINS, FRANCE 1991 statement, that David Rockheadfella seeks also;

"Today America would be outraged if UN troops entered Los Angeles to restore order; tomorrow they will be grateful! This is especially true if they were told that there were an outside threat from beyond, whether real or promulgated, that threatened our very existence. When presented with this scenario, individual rights will be willingly relinquished for the guarantee of their well-being granted to them by the World Government."

Anyone seen the movie 1984 where made up "threats" are used to scare the public into "submission" ? Kissinger and Rockheadfella have!

Here's Henry Kissinger on video admitting it... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bKwH3kJew4

Why care about Henry Kissinger? Because he tells G.W Bush what to do... http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/09/28/60minutes/main2047607_page3.shtml

And after March 2003, we ALL know G.W Bush tells John W Howard what to do.. http://www.australiamatters.com/media/bush_exposes_howard.wmv

Posted by aussierod, Sunday, 24 June 2007 11:25:23 AM

You're forgiven ;) - No feed back on Price Philip, though?

I was hoping to avoid that one!

Prince Philip is right that the biggest threat is human overpopulation.

In the past the growth of the human population was controlled by disease, food supply and war.

Lets also consider that in some western countries the population is now in negative decline and perhaps the three biggest factors is firstly affluence, secondly birth control and thirdly feminism.

We have DINKS (dual income no kids), in Australia we seem to be having a growing singles base.

Now I wouldn't wish another world war on anyone, because it is horrible and besides it us blokes who get used a cannon fodder and I bet that if everyone was conscripted except for pregnant women, Australias birth rate would sky rocket over night.

Angry Harry has provided recently some interesting perspectives on war.

The Battle Of Alesia

The Shadow of the Gladiator

http://www.angryharry.com/youremails.htm