Correlation Is Causation (Part 2 of Harriet Holt’s Conspiracy List)

by Mary W Maxwell, LLB

Next-day photo after Coconut Grove fire, 1942

Many Americans think we’ve been hoodwinked. They say -- and they are right – that it’s hard to bring evil-doers to book. For years I have noticed the common belief that if you don’t have good evidence about ‘the accused,’ it won’t be possible to get a conviction. Well, that’s partly true. The rule of due process is there to protect someone – let’s call him Bob -- from a false charge.

The matter starts before his court date. To initiate a prosecution, a Grand Jury (which has up to 23 members, hence the word ‘Grand’) is told that Bob is a suspect. They will be given some of the dirt about him, and they have power to subpoena evidence and testimony from witnesses. All of this must be kept secret. Finally, the Granders might indict Bob. Or they may say “Never mind, let him go. We can’t make a strong case.”

This has given the wrong impression that obvious criminals will go free, as only those indicted with fabulous evidence should be put on trial. Nonsense! If it’s “obvious” that someone is committing crimes, he or she should be given an indictment and then a public trial. A jury of one’s peers (up to 12 members) can look at all the evidence, including hearsay and circumstantial evidence. They have the right to decide if guilt is “beyond reasonable doubt.”

Let Harriet Speak

In yesterday’s article, I invented a character called Harriet Holt who is not shy about saying that some horrible deed (say, JFK’s assassination) took place because bad people conspired to make it happen. Granted, anyone can argue against Harriet that even if the crime has some hallmarks of conspiracy, we must admit that it wasn’t necessarily conspiratorial. “Oswald may have acted alone. So what if there was an un-matching bullet on the gurney, that does not make for conspiracy.”

Oh yeah? Yes, it does make for conspiracy. Yes, yes, it does.

I have named this article “Correlation is not causation” to be ornery. Scholars love to point out that just because two things happened in sequence, one does not explain the other. We watered the lawn on Monday and by Tuesday all the dandelions had turned blue. Such a sequence does not satisfy scientists that the watering caused the blue-ification. It may have been something else.

In a murder case, if the husband had just taken out a big life insurance policy on his wife, and then she died, we can’t say he killed her. The correlation of the two things is not enough. Oh really? It may be enough. Harriet Holt wants us to stop being mealy-mouthed, at least in cases where the evil event is one whose effects are felt society-wide. She says it’s wrong NOT to parade correlation down the street to make folks think.

In fact, ‘Harriet’ feels sure that laziness and timidity are what holds us back from identifying major bad guys. The ‘correlation is not causation’ slogan is a blindfold that we deliberately place over our scared little eyes, as it is natural to fear the bad guys.

It’s Also OK To Point to Patterns of Conspiracy Crimes

In yesterday’s article, Harriet Holt mentioned five instances of “false flags” that started a war – in 1898, 1917, 1941, 1964, and 1990. Golly, I have only just noticed that four of the five used the sinking of a ship: Maine, Lusitania, several ships at Pearl Harbor, and the Maddox. If that doesn’t qualify as a pattern, I don’t know what does.

Then Ms Holt mentioned five instances of a “lone nutter doing what the powerful just happened to need” – in 1914, 1963, 1995, 1996, and 2014. (Sorry, in yesterday’s article I gave a 1996 date for the OKC bombing; I will get it corrected it to 1995.)

Come on, anybody can see the pattern there. When a nation wants to do something outrageous, such as burn a building, or assassinate a leader, it pins the blame on a patsy. A member of the Black Hand, Lee Oswald, Tim McVeigh, Martin Bryant, and Michael Zihaf-Bibeau were listed. The preferred type is foreign, religious, mentally disturbed, or has a manufactured history of announcing his plan on the Internet.

Occasionally we don’t know why the patsy did what he “did.” Poor old Oswald (a Marine) just got a liking for Communism. The Australians hardly bother to say why Martin Bryant massacred 35 tourists. Nevertheless, once there is enough history of a particular act, we can say that the latest lone nutter did it out of imitation. Using a car rampage instead of guns was popular there for a while. E.g., at Charlotteville and Melbourne and Berlin. “You go with the weapons you have.”

Give Harriet a Dispensation during Crises

Just to throw in one more “loosening up” here, I recommend that we allow a good researcher such as Harriet Holt the chance to cite immunity when she has virtually no evidence but can – how you say – “feel conspiracy in the air.” Of course she cannot send a person to the stockade for it, but she can talk freely, as long as her rationale is respectable.

Let me name three cases where I think that a conspiracy took place, despite having zero proof. In 1966, in Wales, there was a landslide that came down on a village school killing more than a hundred children. It’s known as the Aberfan disaster. “Prince Philip, Lord Snowdon, and the then prime minister Harold Wilson visited the scene the following day,” said the BBC. Moreover, I suspect it was a Satanic event to cause children to be ‘sacrificed.’ There are plenty of sicko’s who mass murder kids, although the story gets covered up.

A second case is that of the Coconut Grove fire, which killed 490 people in Boston in 1942. It was a dance hall, very over-filled that night. A waiter held a kerosene lamp too close to a curtain (or something like that) and the fire spread. There was a roof that could be rolled open, for a viewing of the stars but it did not work. Moreover, the doors were locked so very few of the patrons could escape.

My theory is that the Coconut Grove tragedy was planned in order to promote the usefulness of antibiotics. Boston newspapers made much of one patient in particular who had narrowly survived. This was a new turn in medicine. There are many events that I think have been arranged for the purpose of accustoming us to new cure.

A third conspiracy is the killing of the natives of Hawaii in 2023. Granted, non-natives got killed too, as collateral damage. The native Hawaiians have a beautiful culture that connects people to nature, involving land, sea, and air, and human relationships. This was so strong that it made it hard for new owners to take over. Ergo, many had to be burned out.

This was done from satellites, aiming directed energy weapons (DEW) at the town of Lahaina on Maui. Houses of some billionaires, including Oprah, had been fitted with a blue roof and this sufficed to keep the laser energy from burning their homes. For the most part, the people have not been able to face it. No one is looking to punish anyone. Two exceptions are Michelle Melendez on Big Island, and Tracy Derwin in California, formerly of Hawaii.

By the way, why doesn’t Oprah, knowing about the gossip, say “Ask me how I chose blue for my roof. Ask me if I had the slightest clue about DEW. I would never have participated in mass murder.”

Conclusion

In this “Part 2” article, I showed Harriet’s bold idea that it’s acceptable to see causation when you see correlation, and that there are at least two patterns -- false flag and lone nutter – that can be lumped in with “correlation is causation.”

I further tied that back to my complaint that we have been hoodwinked into believing that bad guys will always get off the hook because a prissy legal nicety ‘requires’ it. That is just a way of letting the most egregious crims live their lives undisturbed.

Finally, I urged occasional creativity, like the day at school when no one has to wear a uniform, in fact where uniforms are frowned upon. On that day, if you smell a conspiracy, don’t hold back. Come out with something outlandish.

Chances are you’ll be correct.

Postscript

There’s a problem at the Grand Jury level. The goings on should be under the discipline of the Foreman, but often that’s overriden by the DOJ in a federal case, or by the equivalent state office. If you can get this fixed up, the system will become much more productive of justice. Harriet Holt wants you to make the effort, please.