This blog, originally posted June 17, 2011, was updated June 27, 2011, and again on January 14, 2012. Scroll to the end for the updates.
The respite from presidential politics that we’ve enjoyed since election night 2008 is definitely over. Not long ago Mitt Romney and Michelle Bachmann declared their candidacies for the Republican nomination, and while Sarah “Lipstick Bulldog” Palin hasn’t, she’s certainly been acting like she’s running. There is, however, another candidate, not affiliated with either party, who’s also in the race: Scott Keller, a former lifeguard and boiler technician…and evidently a conspiracy theorist.
Keller has been running for president since at least summer 2010. (Here are the papers he filed with the FEC to get into the race). So far as we can tell, his main issue appears to be support for a “resource based economy”―the utopian fantasy championed by the Venus Project, which only recently fell out with the conspiracy theory cult known as the Zeitgeist Movement. Indeed Keller attracted attention from Zeitgeisters early on. His web site doesn’t mention the Zeitgeist Movement―nor does it explicitly refer to conspiracy theories―but Keller’s support for the Venus Project is quite explicit (note, this text no longer appears on Scott Keller’s website, though he does continue to link to the Venus Project website):
“The term resource based economy was coined by Jacque Fresco of the Venus Project, so I think the Venus Project comparison is likely the best you’re going to find…But, first, because it was asked, I will say here that it is not communism….Although I will absolutely promote, and encourage, and try to clear the way for the formation of Venus Project type cities/towns that run as RBE cities/towns, I would never be in favor of IMPOSING any type of system on anyone or manipulating things so they have to accept it. This is a free land and I intend to restore freedoms that have been cleverly removed from us without our conscious consent.”
Whether you agree with the idea of a resource based economy or not―and I happen to disagree―this sounds at least reasonable, doesn’t it? I mean, not any more unreasonable than any of the other crap that fringe presidential candidates are advancing?
If Keller had stopped there, it wouldn’t be an issue. In fact, I believe that Scott Keller is probably a good guy who means well and honestly thinks this is the best future course for America. I disagree, but that’s fine; I do not question his motives or his honesty. However reasonable you think it may be for a candidate to support a resource-based economy, though, how reasonable is it that Keller seems to believe in baseless conspiracy theories, such as “9/11 Truth”? That is not a question of good intentions; it’s a question of judgment, and such a question, I think anybody would agree, is absolutely key in choosing the next leader of the free world.
Having had long experience with 9/11 Twoofers, I suspected strongly that Keller was one. The similarity of his key issue to Zeitgeist, which is a movement based on conspiracy theories, as well as the buzzwords “freedoms that have been cleverly removed from us,” led me to believe that Keller might have a tinfoil hat. Curious about whether Keller believes in 9/11 conspiracy theories, a young friend of mine asked him point-blank if he thought it was an “inside job.” Here’s what Keller said, on his Facebook page:
“I believe I don’t really know what the truth is, one way or the other and my position is that we ought to find out what the truth is one way or another. We should weigh the evidence, all of it, and put the issue to rest.”
This is a classic Twoofer dodge. People who believe 9/11 was an inside job but don’t want to look like loons by openly endorsing conspiracy theories often resort to this hedging type of language, claiming that they don’t know what the truth is, or that no one can know what the truth is, and they usually end by calling for a new investigation. (Of course, conspiracy theorists will never accept the legitimacy of any investigation that does not explicitly endorse the conspiracy conclusion). But, okay, Muertos, let’s not condemn him too quickly. Let’s give President-to-Be Keller the benefit of the doubt.
Just to give Keller every opportunity to disavow 9/11 Twoof nuttery, I myself posted on Keller’s wall, asking the following question:
“Since you evidently don’t believe that Al Qaeda attacked the U.S. in September 2001, do you believe terrorists are a credible threat to U.S. interests at home and abroad, and how do you plan to protect the American people from these threats?”
Even if you think I’m being snarky here, you have to admit this is a reasonable question. I mean, Al-Qaeda is a genuine threat to the United States. Many Twoofers believe Al-Qaeda doesn’t even exist. If we’re voting for president, don’t you think we should at least determine whether a person who wants that office is in a position to protect the American people from genuine threats?
Keller’s response was politician-like weaseling, refusing either to endorse or condemn 9/11 conspiracy theories. My young friend again honed in on the issue, and Keller had this to say:
“What makes you think they [the government] are telling you the truth about 9/11? Do I accept as truth all of the various versions out there? No. do I think it plausible that other explanations might exist? Yes. And, since the government has lied about other things I don’t see reason to believe they’re incapable of doing it again.”
The signs that Keller is a dyed-in-the-wool Twoofer are getting stronger. Note here that his answer presumes that the conclusion that Osama and Al-Qaeda were responsible for 9/11 is accepted is because it was told to us by the government. This is classic conspiracy theorist, and classic Twoofer, reasoning, or lack thereof. They can’t seem to get it through their heads that we do not know what we know about 9/11 because the government told us, but instead because the evidence comes to us from numerous independently corroborated sources, very few of which are governmental in nature. Whenever you see someone asking you to defend the “official story” or accusing you of believing something “because the government told you,” you can bet 99.9% of the time that they’re a conspiracy theorist.
In my own thread, a vocal Keller supporter chimed in. This person, who I had never heard of and will call “Supporter X,” wrote this:
“These are the facts. Al-Qaeda attacked the USA on 911 with the help of the USA government. Its not one or the other. Its both. Al CIA-DUH is just another fragmented branch of the CIA.”
Facts? No–more conspiracy theories! This version of 9/11 Twoof is called LIHOP—Let It Happen On Purpose, as opposed to MIHOP, Made It Happen On Purpose. LIHOP is just as ridiculous as MIHOP, and there is not a shred of evidence to support it. (I wrote a blog recently which dealt with Lawrence Wright’s book The Looming Tower, which, among other things, shatters the myth that Al-Qaeda or Osama bin Laden had anything to do with the CIA. This theory is utterly false). Why am I bringing this up considering it was not Keller who said this, but someone else? I’ll get to that in a moment.
I was growing tired of Keller’s evasiveness so I tried to pin him down:
“Well, you have a chance here to make your position crystal-clear. Are you willing to state categorically and unequivocally that 19 Al-Qaeda hijackers attacked us on 9/11, in a plot masterminded by Osama bin Laden, without the knowing involvement of the U.S. government? If you’re not willing to make this statement, why not, unless you believe that the 9/11 conspiracy theories advocated by ‘Truthers’ have some potential validity?”
President-to-Be Keller replied, emphasis added:
“I absolutely will say that the Al-Qaeda hijackers attacked us. I will say that OBL [Osama bin Laden] was at least involved in the masterminding of it. Regarding the conspiracy theories, some are very tough or even impossible to believe, others are not and I cannot rule them out without seeing all of the evidence from both sides. I am not prepared, without such evidence, to declare with absolute certainty that one side or the other is partially or completely correct. What [Supporter X] says above is absolutely plausible.”
There you have it. Scott Keller explicitly endorsed the LIHOP 9/11 conspiracy theory advanced by Supporter X, which is that Al-Qaeda is a branch of the CIA and that this organization attacked New York and Washington with the acquiescence of the United States government. The conclusion is inescapable: Scott Keller is a conspiracy theorist.
Note the weasel words here as well. “I cannot rule them out…evidence from both sides…one side or the other…” These disingenuous words are meant to project the erroneous ideas that (A) there is still relevant evidence about 9/11 that remains unknown or is not in the public domain; and (B) the question of what happened on 9/11 is a contest between two relatively co-equal claimants, those being the “official story” and “other explanations,” which mean (of course) conspiracy theories. Both of these ideas are absolutely false. There is very little that we don’t know about 9/11. To pretend that there’s some other “evidence” out there which would impugn the conclusion that Al-Qaeda did it alone is something akin to being a believer in a cargo cult, waiting for a plane to swoop down from the sky and deliver manna from heaven. And there is no contest between “both sides,” as if it’s an even match that could go either way and Keller is just being fair and impartial by refusing to choose between them. What conspiracy theorists term the “official story” is supported by an insurmountable surfeit of evidence that has never been refuted. By contrast, there is not a single shred of evidence indicating that 9/11 was a conspiracy by the U.S. or some other government.
Just in case you think I’m being unfair to President-to-Be Keller by calling him a conspiracy theorist, let me show you some of the other things he said, both in my thread and in response to my friend:
“90% of the population is still asleep, just like you are apparently. Hypnotized into believing whatever your uncle Sam tells you. You still haven’t provided any logical or physical proof that any of the proposed alternative scenarios is false.”
Got that? I’m “asleep.” That is a conspiracy theorist meme. Someone who believes in conspiracy theories is “awake,” and those who deny them are “asleep” or “hypnotized.” Notice again the insistence that disbelief of conspiracy theories is tantamount to 100% acceptance of everything the government says—and I made the point again, as if it’s not clear enough, we do not know what we know about 9/11 because the government told us. Also note that Keller is trying to shift the burden of proof. It’s now evidently up to me to prove that the conspiracy theories are false. Conspiracy theorists love to do this: claim that they win because you can’t prove their cockamamie paranoid fantasies to be false. Actually I can prove them false, but I didn’t get into that on Keller’s page.
Another choice quote, this one in response to my friend, specifically regarding whether the Bilderberg Group secretly rules the world (another tinfoil hat favorite):
“You just proved essentially that you want me to do your research. I’ve already watched most of the documentaries and read most of the articles and had tons of discussions on the topics. Your arguments are extremely weak…”
“Do your own research!” is conspiracy theorist-speak for “watch YouTube videos made by conspiracy theorists” and “read conspiracy theorist websites,” which is exactly what Keller goes on to say he’s done. Conspiracy theorists who rely on the assertions solely of other conspiracy theorists, and ignore real evidence, often congratulate themselves on having “done their research.” In fact all they’ve done, in most cases, is click on a couple of ridiculous YouTube videos, because there usually are no legitimate sources that support their ludicrous assertions.
President-to-Be Keller evidently has some doubts about the recent death of Osama bin Laden. In reply to my friend he says:
“And regarding OBL, how many thousands of American, Iraqi, and Afghan lives (among others) were lost in trying to kill one person?…Why was there a coverup at the end of the operation? The operation brings up almost more questions than it attempted to answer…”
There was, of course, no cover-up regarding the death or disposal of the remains of Osama bin Laden; conspiracy theorists just like to say so because they’re reluctant to admit that Osama bin Laden is really dead. Questioning the recent wars in Iraq and Afghanistan is, of course, a legitimate position for any presidential candidate to take, but questioning the “cover-up” about the death of Osama bin Laden clearly is pretty dodgy. In fact, it’s conspiracy theorist nonsense, because there was no cover-up.
So, Scott Keller, who wants to be the president of all the people, believes:
1. Either September 11 was deliberately allowed to happen by the U.S. government, or there’s enough doubt on the matter that he’s unwilling to denounce the conspiracy theories that say this is what happened;
2. That the Bilderberg Group is secretly controlling the world;
3. That the U.S. government covered up something in the death of Osama bin Laden—which, logically, could only be either (i) Osama isn’t dead, (ii) Osama didn’t die when they said he did, or (iii) he didn’t die under the circumstances as reported; and
4. The vast majority of the American people are “asleep” and have been “hypnotized” into not believing conspiracy theories.
Look carefully at point number four. Keller just called 90% of the American people “asleep” and “hypnotized.” (In fairness he did not use the word “sheeple,” but I suspect that’s what he means). This is the same American people he’ll need to vote for him in huge numbers if he hopes to replace Barack Obama as president on January 20, 2013.
According to Wikipedia, 129,391,711 people voted for one of the two major party candidates in the 2008 election. Assuming 2012 turnout is roughly similar, Keller will need at least 64,695,856 votes to win. If he believes 90% of the American people are “asleep” and “hypnotized,” that means that something like 58,226,270 of the people whose votes he needs to win fall in that category. Insulting 58 million people whose votes you need doesn’t seem like the best political strategy one can think of. But, I believe in the “official story” of 9/11, so what do I know?
My opinion is this, and while it is an opinion, I think probably a fair portion of those 58 million potential voters would agree with it: any person who believes that 9/11 was an “inside job”—whether they believe in a MIHOP or a LIHOP theory—is unfit to hold any elected office, much less President of the United States. Belief in 9/11 conspiracy theories indicates that a person has problems distinguishing real evidence from innuendo and falsehoods, and may have difficulty reaching logical conclusions based on critical thinking and reasoning as opposed to intuition. A chief executive, in my opinion, must be able to distinguish real evidence from falsehoods, and he or she must not only be capable, but must excel, at critical thinking and reasoning. In my view Scott Keller doesn’t fit the bill.
This is all quite academic, in any event. Scott Keller will not be President of the United States. I believe that Obama will cruise to re-election without breaking a sweat, so I think even Mitt, Michelle, Newt, and Sarah are just as doomed as Scott is. But, as long as my blog focuses on conspiracy theories, I thought I’d give Keller some free advertising here. Since he thinks that any attempt to argue against his conspiracy beliefs will be a net positive for him—as demonstrated by the final quote from him, two paragraphs hence—I certainly don’t think he’ll mind me giving his candidacy a little jump-start in this blog.
There is one post-script to this story that I add just for grins. My young friend who started the conversation with Keller was ultimately blocked from Keller’s Facebook page. He emailed Keller and continued the exchange there. My friend forwarded those emails to me and gave me permission to post them. After another argument about what my friend did or did not say on Keller’s Facebook page, the man who wants to be the 45th President of the United States had this to say:
“You’re like a stalker. Sounds like Chicago politics—are you sure you’re not an Obama lover?…You really think you’re smart? Go ahead and post your shite wherever you like. It’ll be free advertising for me. Maybe one of your buddies will be smart enough for a real debate. I don’t have time for your BS. And FYI, there have been LOTS of questions on my page and after 3100 people, you and Robert [another person who questioned Keller’s belief in conspiracy theories] are the only ones I’ve had to block and I only blocked you because you joined your lover Robert and I confirmed your intent. There was nothing in any of the posts between you and I that will do anything but help me with anyone with half a brain so have at it. And yes. For all the people. Even those like you who have received the brunt of the failed education system. I kind of feel sorry for you.”
So, there you go! Some candidates shake hands and kiss babies to win votes; others promise pork-barrel projects to their constituents; Scott Keller berates his audience as “asleep” and “hypnotized” and says they’ve “received the brunt of the failed education system,” despite the fact that their assertions about events such as 9/11 are demonstrably true while Keller’s are demonstrably false. God bless America for the fact that someone with Scott Keller’s views can not only speak them freely in this country, but run for president; but also God bless America that the vast majority of us remain too stubbornly connected to reality to take candidates like Scott Keller very seriously.
Don’t forget to vote in 2012! Thanks for reading.
Update I: 6/27/2011
Scott Keller has a new, and newly-designed, web site. Here it is. In my opinion it’s way too dependent on Flash elements and is very short on substance, but that’s neither here nor there. What is interesting is that Keller seems to be soft-pedaling the RBE stuff. Indeed, the material I quoted early in the blog about the Venus Project was already down from Keller’s site by the time my blog was originally posted. Now it takes a while of drilling into the new Flash-heavy site to see any explicit mention of a “resource-based economy.” The Venus Project is not mentioned either, except in a tiny bubble in the upper right-hand corner of an otherwise incomprehensible “issue map” whose ultimate message I have a difficult time fathoming. Although Keller still talks about “seeking truth,” most of the conspiracy theorist buzzwords have been removed from the site.
I find it very interesting that he’s no longer pushing the RBE stuff as hard as he was at first. Could it be because RBE is now irrevocably tied up, in the minds of those who know what it is, with Zeitgeist and conspiracy theories? If so, that would be very ironic, considering the Zeitgeist Movement and the Venus Project hate each other now and won’t have anything to do with each other. I have no idea whether Keller is backing off the RBE rhetoric in an attempt to dissociate himself from Zeitgeist (which, I repeat, he never explicitly mentioned on his site, either in its old or new incarnation), but I suppose it’s a possibility.
This leaves the very big question: without the RBE “issue,” what does Keller really have to promote himself? A nice guy with good American values who believes Washington should change and he’s the guy to do it? Mitt Romney is already that. A quasi-libertarian who thinks the Federal Reserve is evil? That’s Ron Paul’s territory. How does Keller plan to position himself to be even remotely noteworthy?
If Keller does still believe in an RBE but is soft-pedaling it for marketing reasons, this leaves us in the uncomfortable territory of a Presidential candidate who’s something of a Trojan horse. If he really wants to try to implement an RBE (good luck!), he should say that. If he no longer believes in it, he should say that too. But if Keller wants anyone to vote for him, he needs to level with the potential electorate–about an RBE, about Zeitgeist and about his belief in conspiracy theories. I don’t see his redesigned web site moving in that direction.
Update II: 14 January 2012
I haven’t been hearing much about Scott Keller in the past few months. Now that the Zeitgeist Movement is dead, I was curious as to whether his campaign has also died. Looking at his website, which has been revamped again, I see there has been no activity since November. However, Keller does have a Twitter account which is active. Clicking that on I see that his campaign is still going on, but he’s made a major change: he’s now trying to get the Libertarian Party nomination for President.
Keller announced this six days ago on his Facebook page. The main reason for the switch seems to be a practical one: the Libertarians have ballot access in all 50 states. Is Keller really a Libertarian? I’m really not sure, though it doesn’t surprise me that he’s moving in that direction. Libertarianism is the most common political identity of conspiracy theorists. Peter Joseph Merola, leader of the dead-in-all-but-name Zeitgeist cult, was formerly a huge Ron Paul supporter in 2008. Guess what? Ron Paul is himself a conspiracy theorist, as I have identified previously on this blog that he is a global warming denier.
So does he still promote Zeitgeist-style “RBE” ideology? Evidently yes, though he seems to be soft-pedaling it. He no longer mentions the Zeitgeist Movement by name (not surprising considering it’s pretty much defunct). Here’s what he had to say about Zeitgeist-style ideas:
“I’m not willing to change stances just to align with a party….I will continue to be a supporter and promoter of a move towards innovative ideas such as the Venus Project and the testing of Resource Based models.”
But doesn’t Gary Johnson already have the Libertarian nomination pretty much locked up? No, according to Keller, who tells his supporters:
“I think we’ve got a very good shot at getting the nomination as our approaches and stances and solutions make a lot more sense than what the others are saying. The only one who seems to understand the financial system other than myself is Bill Still and I’ve not heard much about him actually pushing his campaign. I even sent him a message and haven’t heard back from him.”
The name Bill Still has been mentioned on this blog before. Still, the author of an anti-Fed screed called The Money Masters, recently popped up in Foster Gamble’s conspiracy theory documentary Thrive, whose trailer I debunked here in November (that article mentions Bill Still) and which is the subject of my other blog, Thrive Debunked. Surprised? I’m not.
The apple doesn’t fall very far from the tree in conspiracy-land. These days, if you believe in Zeitgeist, you’re a 9/11 Truther, or you think “free energy” is being suppressed, chances are better than even money that you’re also a Libertarian and want to abolish the Fed. These tired tropes pass for issues among fringe candidates like Scott Keller. Still, I’m glad he’s running, as he will provide some entertainment during what promises to be a long, bleak presidential campaign season.
