Many of the most notable events in modern (and even ancient) history have provoked some form of 'conspiracy theory'. That is to say, ordinary people were not satisfied with the official story about how the event unfolded because all or some aspects of that story simply did not objectively make sense. Despite what the mainstream media would like us to believe about 'conspiracy theories', most conspiracy theories are based on objective problems with the official narrative. But note that I said 'based on'. The problem with conspiracy theories is that, while they usually reflect a more accurate overview of a major event, they are forced to rely on theory (due to deliberate with-holding of data by official sources) rather than hard evidence (which would disqualify them as theories) and are therefore open to abuse by people who tend to use their imaginations to complete the picture rather than the more critical functions of the human mind.

Compared to other similar events where many people found the official story implausible, the Sandy Hook massacre has provoked a veritable flood of conspiracy theories, and many of them are not based on any hard evidence.

A large majority of the alternative news pundits that have attempted to independently investigate the Sandy Hook massacre have engaged in some seriously irresponsible and shoddy journalism. Among the more outlandish and baseless theories, we find the claim that "actors" took the place of the parents and siblings of the Sandy Hook victims, and that no children were murdered at all because, the theory goes, if they were, "why haven't we seen any bodies?" I've already exposed the logical fallacies in a few of these theories elsewhere, but there is one theory that still refuses to go away, perhaps because it is slightly less obviously bogus, and many people are still touting it as the single fact that "busts open" the official story as a "hoax".

The theory in question is that a man named Christopher Rodia was the REAL owner of the black Honda Civic, which has been identified as the car of Adam Lanza's mother that was found outside the Sandy Hook elementary school. The basis for this erroneous belief, still held by many, is police scanner audio that was picked up from the morning of Dec. 14th and which details Connecticut State Police response to the massacre.

In an article on Sott.net earlier this year entitled How is the World Going to End in 2012?, Laura Knight-Jadczyk wrote:

The world is ending in 2012. That is, the final implementation of the fascist, totalitarian New World Order will be accomplished this year and you will be in that "New World" that the global elite have designed for you, and planned to implement for a very long time now. Oh, indeed, similar New World Orders have been staged in the past on smaller scales, but this time it's global because they are all in on it together! Former 'New World Orders' didn't really fail, even if they ostensibly fell; they've just been passing the torch around for millennia, spreading the disease, growing the sickness in society, until finally, now, with global communication and incredible weapons of destruction in their hands, they are ready to finalize the Faustian bargain that you, the people, signed with your blood.

That's what 2012 is all about. It's not about some grand and glorious transformation or ascension to another existence! It's not about being 'raptured' to heaven at the right hand of Jesus because you helped to 'initiate the Eschaton'! It's not about 'Starseeds' being taken aboard spacecraft and getting airlifted to some other planet of the '5th dimension', but it is also not about 'life continuing on as normal'. Pure and simple, prophecy is coming true, it's just that it's going to be much more mundane and much less sensational than you might have imagined. It is the end of your world as normal, free human beings, and your reduction to pure grinding slave-hood, your children turned over to be sex toys or cannon fodder for psychopaths, and there's nothing you can do about it now.

Those are some pretty serious charges! Are they in any way an accurate description of human life on planet earth at the end of 2012?

In the following passage of my previous article on the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre in Newtown, Connecticut, I made the following reference to Ryan Lanza being the named second suspect caught armed in the adjacent woods:

Perhaps most astonishingly, this suspect arrested in the woods was named in an Associated Press report as 24-year-old Ryan Lanza. The original report has long since vanished of course, but you can see it referenced here. This was despite the fact that Ryan had already been named as the deceased suspect inside the school, lying next to two handguns.

I have since found the original Associated Press report, which in fact states that it was "Ryan's younger brother", Adam Lanza, who was arrested in the woods. So let's take a closer look at this revealing report.

The massacre of 20 children and 7 adults at the Sandy Hook elementary school last Friday was one more in a long line of atrocious mass murders committed in the USA. By now, four days later, an official version of events has more or less solidified to explain the chain of events. The familiar 'lone gunman' narrative has once more stoked the hot-button issue of gun control and left the general population as clueless as ever as to why people suddenly 'go postal' and target the most vulnerable members of society.

On closer inspection, however, there is clearly more to many of these mass shootings than meets the eye. Very often the earliest reports present information that directly contradicts key foundations of the final 'official' analysis of events. Granted, confusion is natural when a story breaks, but some of the initial reports conflict so completely with the lone gunman narrative that I'm going to compile them here and then try to put this tragedy in a more objective context. In his speech at the Sandy Hook Interfaith Prayer Vigil in Newtown, Connecticut on Sunday night, President Obama quoted the following biblical passage:

"So we fix our eyes not on what is seen, but on what is unseen, since what is seen is temporary, but what is unseen is eternal."

~ 2 Corinthians 4:18

The traumatised Newtown community deserves the facts without the spin. Everyone touched by this brutal event deserves to know what really happened, so let's fix our eyes on what remains unseen...

As you probably know, a lot of conspiracy web sites and '2nd amendment' types in the USA are up in arms (literally?) right now about what they suspect is a covert attempt by the US government (or some section thereof) to rob them of their right to own guns.

The plot, according to the hard-line conspiracy theorists, is that the recent massacre in Sandy Hook elementary school in Newtown, Connecticut was in some way 'staged' and was, essentially, a means to an end, the end being that the massacre provides plausible just cause for the government, congress, etc., to table legislation to abolish, or at least water down, the 2nd amendment right to bear arms.

Why would the government want to disarm the US population? Well, it's pretty obvious! The only thing stopping the US government from implementing an overt police state in the USA is the 100 million Americans that own guns. That's the theory anyway. Of course, probably very few gun lovers in the US are hardened conspiracy theorists who think that the government was behind the Sandy Hook school massacre, but you can bet that most of them are conspiratorially-minded enough to believe that the government may try to use the massacre to rob them of their favorite piece of cold hard steel.

My take on the Sandy Hook massacre is that there are enough surpassingly strange and as yet unexplained aspects of the shooting for me to, at the very least, question the veracity of the official 'lone nut' story. At the same time however, my take on the gun lovers' conspiracy theory is that it is bunk. That is to say, if the Sandy Hook massacre was some kind of government psy-op, it had nothing to do with any attempt to take guns out of American society so that the government could implement an overt police state. The reasons are as elementary as the classes that were being given to those beautiful children just before they were slaughtered.

I don't want to say a word about this. I don't want to analyze it, or to even think about the implications of America's most recent horrid emotional shock. The profound grief and loss experienced by the families in Newtown CT is so overwhelming, so unthinkable, so achingly painful to contemplate that I really just want to be quiet for them - out of respect, out of profound empathy, I just want to be quiet and hold them in my mind and heart. For the last three days that's what I've done. But now it's time to speak, out of that same respect and profound empathy, because we, as a nation, are in a state of psychological shock and during such times, that shock makes us more easily moved, more easily influenced and more easily herded by the people who, by their very nature, do not have our best interests at heart.

From the beginning, the information coming out of Newtown was sketchy, which is not unusual in such situations, but when our national and personal emotions are being so worked, we must strive to pay attention to what is really going on, no matter how much our emotions pull us in the direction of feeling only and thinking not at all. This article goes into the preliminary details (there's more to come) of what doesn't quite fit about this event, so I'm not going to go into that right now. What I would like to do is take a look at how we are being moved to think and feel about this heart-wrenching slaughter by those in the position to change the future of our society. In very much the same way, our society was fundamentally changed on and in the days following September 11th 2001, when America was herded toward previously unimaginable control through emotional trauma and manipulation resulting in things like this being the "new normal".

The reason I feel it's now time to say something is that President Obama gave a brief speech last night from the Sandy Hook Interfaith Prayer Vigil in Newtown, CT and I'd like to go through it with the focus on the real message, not the illusion.

Yesterday December 14, 2012, another 'withdrawn', 'troubled', 'genius nerd' allegedly went on a rampage in the USA, killing dozens of people - this time, mostly small children at the Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut.

The U.S. government wasted no time in making subtle allusions to 'gun control': "We're going to have to come together and take meaningful action to prevent more tragedies like this, regardless of the politics", said Obama in the wake of the massacre. Statements such as these threaten to give America's millions of 2nd amendment nut-jobs a collective aneurism.

Throughout the wide and emotionally charged media coverage, no one seems to care that there are many serious unanswered questions about the last major US domestic massacre, allegedly by another 'withdrawn', 'troubled', 'genius nerd' - James Holmes - in July 2012 in an Aurora, Colorado movie theater.

Starring the Aurora Police Chief and a smirking FBI special agent, the following 3-minute video poses some uncomfortable questions that take us beyond the 'lone nut and a nation in grief' storyline that gets dragged out to placate the population every time someone goes postal in the USA.

I'm sick and tired of the anti-smoking culture that has taken over the entire world. I have had enough of hearing "don't smoke, it's bad for you!!" The ignorance that betrays such remarks is utterly abysmal, especially coming from people who should know better. So for all those who have asked me why do I actually smoke, I'm going to explain my reasons in this article.

I have found anti-smoking activists to be intolerant, judgmental Authoritarian Follower types. They believe and parrot emotionally charged catchphrases taken straight from government anti-smoking propaganda. Doctors and non-smokers alike are guilty of this. They feel righteous when providing such 'advice' yet fail to take notice of how ill they themselves look, and forget that, in many cases, their own health issues went downhill when they stopped smoking. Thanks to some pretty convoluted thinking, if they are some day diagnosed with a serious disease, they will later blame their 'smoking years', while overlooking the real culprits of today's modern diseases: junk diets high in carbohydrates and the industrial-scale toxicity that has choked our environment.

Yes, the changes in our diet, particularly since the introduction of mechanised agriculture, the Industrial Revolution and arrival in the 'enlightened' Modern Age, have systemically destroyed our health. The mismatch between our ancient physiology - which thrived with little or no edible plant food - and our current diet, is at the root of many so-called diseases of civilization: coronary heart disease, obesity, hypertension, type-2 diabetes, cancer, autoimmune disease, osteoporosis, etc. But I'm not here to talk about that. You can read more about it here. My aim here is to defend the rights of people who choose to smoke. It may surprise you to know that, while the percentage of the population that smokes has declined in recent years (due to government propaganda), the incidence of heart disease has not declined. The reason, shock! horror! is that smoking is not the real problem to begin with!

It is true, all we need is love. But do we really know what love is? Love is a word that is sung about in songs, written in poems, talked about a lot and it is something many people long for one way or the other, mostly in the form of a partner. We hear it a lot these days: "Be heart-centered" and "Be love", "Love is the answer, because love always wins!", "Send Love and Light!" and so on. People use it casually in conversations in their every day lives. It is seen as the solution to all the world problems. All you need is Love!

If that's so easy, how come nothing has changed fundamentally on planet earth despite the obvious technological progress? We still see genocide, oppression and wars happening. Hundreds of thousands of children and civilians have died in the Middle East and around the world because of the war machine under the control of psychopathic leaders who couldn't care less about anyone who holds up a peace sign with a proclamation of love as the force for change. Looking at it more closely we can see that "Love" is one of the most abused and misunderstood words.

I imagine I probably shot myself in the foot with the title of this piece. Over the years, health-related journalism has beaten the artificial sweetener horse so beyond dead that I doubt anyone even pays attention to the words anymore. I know that when I see the words 'Artificial Sweetener' in the title of an article, I'm thinking, "Oh good, another article about artificial sweeteners! I wonder if it will give me the exact same information as the last six articles I read about artificial sweeteners along with some sweet alternatives at the end like stevia and xylitol?" Sometimes I'll skim them to see if the author passes the acid test by not recommending honey or agave syrup (i.e., sugar and sugar).

Well this article is going to be a little different, and it's not because I'm going to annoyingly refer to sucralose by its chemical name 1,6-dichloro-1,6-dideoxy-BETA-D-fructofuranosyl-4-chloro-4-deoxy-alpha-D-galactopyranoside (does that sound delicious, or what?). What I'm more interested in exploring here is not whether these things are bad for you, since it's abundantly clear that they are, but the question of why. Why is it that, despite all the information about artificial sweeteners, the sheer number of 'health news' articles floating around the interwebs, and the total chemical shitstorm these abominations of nourishment inflict on your insides, people continue to guzzle this stuff like it's water?