13 May 2011

UPDATE: Due to this BS thing where I can do everything with this blog except publish a post, I have moved home to Wordpress: http://ncnblogger.wordpress.com/ (this will remain as an archive and be damn sure I will still read all your wonderful blogs as ever). Those who have linked me please update the link. Thanks all. Looking forward to continued blogging in the future.

2 May

Today's news is that Osama is dead. Well it's sort of 10 year old news, but there you go. Supposedly one of the very mind controlled special forces shot him in the head, although given the notorious nature of the invading forces' willingness to kill someone then play dress up afterwards, who knows it may have been a woman who they drew a beard on with marker pen. Photo looks 'shopped but what do I know. Then again corpses just like your TV dinner keep very well in the freezer...lol...


Anyway I'm off to get kidney dialysis using only sand and donkey piss while being hunted by all the satellites and spy planes that a trillion dollar military budget can buy, for ten years. Ciao

PS does this mean the war on terror is over now and 'we' can come home and dismantle the police state and not have RFID passports and iris scans and creepy wiretaps anymore? (Comptroller says no)

Saturday, 31 January 2009

More Globalist Nonsense

From the appointed IMF World Bank Wonder Boy currently 'in charge':

Gordon Brown Calls For Global Co-Operation to Beat Economic Slump

I am getting bored of how many times he says 'New World Order' (but apparently that's still a conspiracy theory - have they acheived a real-life version of the Jedi mind trick?).

(Image: "You'll never guess where I have a Rothschild tattoo")

But here is a special treat from Comrade Brown, the Dear Leader of INGSOC. One of the problems, apparently, is 'implicit protectionism' going on at the moment. Double U-Tee-Eff? The problem is protectionism? Because here I thought the problem was the globalists and the bankers who engineered this crisis by deliberate increasing of the money supply.

It's funny...literally the same day, business secretary Peter Mandelson is warning against protectionism, saying that implementing it would worsen the economy. (you and your globalist masters did a good enough job of doing that!)

So in other words, protectionism isn't happening - but it simultaneously is part of the economic problems.

Yet more nonsense spewing from the shapeshifting 'big party' politicians who answer to their banker masters. Globalism is going to make everything OK, right? Maybe I should make it clear...

WE were supposed to be a SOVEREIGN NATION it was YOU who banned the guns YOU who vandalise the currency YOU who neglect our borders and YOU who are setting up the Police State THE PEOPLE will not take this forever be it 2 years or 200 years THEY WILL WAKE UP and THEN the spotlight will be firmly where it should be...ON YOU.

"The world will not accept dictatorship or domination" - Mikhail Gorbachev

Woman Pregnant for 60 Years

That is not a typo.

Woman Stays Pregnant with Dead Fetus for 60 Years

Somehow, she survived while carrying the dead foetus, which did not decompose, without any ill effects. Only in China...

Friday, 30 January 2009

Obama pwned by Rahm Emanuel!

New Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel is "the second most powerful person in [America]" according to the Huffington Post.

He had a hand in shaping the careers of at least two prominent Illinois politicians, one of which was Barack Obama. The other was Rod Blagojevic.

(Image: Rahm Emanuel, US Chief of Staff. May contain traces of Mossad.)

Article in the New York Times on Emanuel's influence on Obama

The story may be a week old, but it's worth posting about. Anyway, I don't read eeverything on the Internet daily, especially from mainstream 'left/right' outlets.

"Early this month, Barack Obama was meeting with the House speaker, Nancy Pelosi, and other lawmakers when Rahm Emanuel, his chief of staff, began nervously cracking a knuckle.

Mr. Obama then turned to complain to Mr. Emanuel about his noisy habit.

At which point, Mr. Emanuel held the offending knuckle up to Mr. Obama’s left ear and, like an annoying little brother, snapped off a few special cracks."

He wrote that "the untainted Republican has not yet been invented" (probably never met Ron Paul then).

The article tries to play down Emanuel's behaviour towards Obama as playful or brotherly. I for one do not buy that assertion. He is quite clearly demonstrating, in his own warped way, his 'ownership' of Obama. Nobody does that to el Presidente and gets away with it. But Emanuel is far from a nobody.

Emanuel's father was a Jewish terrorist in Palestine with the 'Lehi' Zionist terror group, which carried out such acts of terrorism as bombing hotels and killing British soldiers. (If the Zionists want to twist the meaning of 'terrorism' to include violence against soldiers, then so will I.)

(Image: Israel proud of their terrorist ancestors.)

Learn about Lehi. Did you know they wanted to intervene in WWII on the side of Nazi Germany, in exchange for assistance with fighting the British in Palestine? That they wanted to create a totalitarian Jewish state, based on the model of Nazi Germany? That Israel praises the actions of these 'people'? Well, now you do.

This guy is someone who, apparently, Obama allows to speak 'first and last', and wields considerable power on behalf of the Zionists, over the President, who is supposedly "the most powerful person in the country".

It's All Happening Too Fast

For me to blog Big Brother's latest moves.

"School Children Complain of Obama Worship During Lessons"

"Taking Photos of Police Officers Could be Considered a Crime"

"Plans Target Digital Britain Push"

"Every aspect of our lives...will be dependent on the services that the digital network provides" - Gordon [never elected] Brown, PM

Yes he did say 'dependent'.

"Chemicals 'may reduce fertility'"

What the report doesn't say is that the chemicals in food, water and air, are serving population reductive purposes by sterilising us, giving us cancer and other diseases, and that this is no accident.

Thursday, 29 January 2009

URGENT: FEMA Camps, For Real!

HR 645 IH


1st Session

H. R. 645To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations.


January 22, 2009Mr. HASTINGS of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.


A BILL To direct the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish national emergency centers on military installations.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,


This Act may be cited as the `National Emergency Centers Establishment Act’.


(a) In General- In accordance with the requirements of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security shall establish not fewer than 6 national emergency centers on military installations.
(b) Purpose of National Emergency Centers- The purpose of a national emergency center shall be to use existing infrastructure–
(1) to provide temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance to individuals and families dislocated due to an emergency or major disaster;
(2) to provide centralized locations for the purposes of training and ensuring the coordination of Federal, State, and local first responders;
(3) to provide centralized locations to improve the coordination of preparedness, response, and recovery efforts of government, private, and not-for-profit entities and faith-based organizations; and
(4) to meet other appropriate needs, as determined by the Secretary of Homeland Security.


(a) In General- Not later than 60 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate not fewer than 6 military installations as sites for the establishment of national emergency centers.
(b) Minimum Requirements- A site designated as a national emergency center shall be–
(1) capable of meeting for an extended period of time the housing, health, transportation, education, public works, humanitarian and other transition needs of a large number of individuals affected by an emergency or major disaster;
(2) environmentally safe and shall not pose a health risk to individuals who may use the center;
(3) capable of being scaled up or down to accommodate major disaster preparedness and response drills, operations, and procedures;
(4) capable of housing existing permanent structures necessary to meet training and first responders coordination requirements during nondisaster periods;
(5) capable of hosting the infrastructure necessary to rapidly adjust to temporary housing, medical, and humanitarian assistance needs;
(6) required to consist of a complete operations command center, including 2 state-of-the art command and control centers that will comprise a 24/7 operations watch center as follows:
(A) one of the command and control centers shall be in full ready mode; and
(B) the other shall be used daily for training; and
(7) easily accessible at all times and be able to facilitate handicapped and medical facilities, including during an emergency or major disaster.
(c) Location of National Emergency Centers- There shall be established not fewer than one national emergency center in each of the following areas:
(1) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions I, II, and III.
(2) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IV.
(3) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions V and VII.
(4) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region VI.
(5) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Regions VIII and X.
(6) The area consisting of Federal Emergency Management Agency Region IX.
(d) Preference for Designation of Closed Military Installations- Wherever possible, the Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the Secretary of Defense, shall designate a closed military installation as a site for a national emergency center. If the Secretaries of Homeland Security and Defense jointly determine that there is not a sufficient number of closed military installations that meet the requirements of subsections (b) and (c), the Secretaries shall jointly designate portions of existing military installations other than closed military installations as national emergency centers.
(e) Transfer of Control of Closed Military Installations- If a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Defense shall transfer to the Secretary of Homeland Security administrative jurisdiction over such closed military installation.
(f) Cooperative Agreement for Joint Use of Existing Military Installations- If an existing military installation other than a closed military installation is designated as a national emergency center, not later than 180 days after the date of designation, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Secretary of Defense shall enter into a cooperative agreement to provide for the establishment of the national emergency center.
(g) Reports-
(1) PRELIMINARY REPORT- Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site–
(A) an outline of the reasons why the site was selected;
(B) an outline of the need to construct, repair, or update any existing infrastructure at the site;
(C) an outline of the need to conduct any necessary environmental clean-up at the site;
(D) an outline of preliminary plans for the transfer of control of the site from the Secretary of Defense to the Secretary of Homeland Security, if necessary under subsection (e); and
(E) an outline of preliminary plans for entering into a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f).
(2) UPDATE REPORT- Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site–
(A) an update on the information contained in the report as required by paragraph (1);
(B) an outline of the progress made toward the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);
(C) an outline of the progress made toward entering a cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and
(D) recommendations regarding any authorizations and appropriations that may be necessary to provide for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.
(3) FINAL REPORT- Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, shall submit to Congress a report that contains for each designated site–
(A) finalized information detailing the transfer of control of the site, if necessary under subsection (e);
(B) the finalized cooperative agreement for the establishment of a national emergency center at the site, if necessary under subsection (f); and
(C) any additional information pertinent to the establishment of a national emergency center at the site.
(4) ADDITIONAL REPORTS- The Secretary of Homeland Security, acting jointly with the Secretary of Defense, may submit to Congress additional reports as necessary to provide updates on steps being taken to meet the requirements of this Act.
This Act does not affect–
(1) the authority of the Federal Government to provide emergency or major disaster assistance or to implement any disaster mitigation and response program, including any program authorized by the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.); or
(2) the authority of a State or local government to respond to an emergency.
There is authorized to be appropriated $180,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2009 and 2010 to carry out this Act. Such funds shall remain available until expended.
In this Act, the following definitions apply:
(1) CLOSED MILITARY INSTALLATION- The term `closed military installation’ means a military installation, or portion thereof, approved for closure or realignment under the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note) that meet all, or 2 out of the 3 following requirements:
(A) Is located in close proximity to a transportation corridor.
(B) Is located in a State with a high level or threat of disaster related activities.
(C) Is located near a major metropolitan center.
(2) EMERGENCY- The term `emergency’ has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122).
(3) MAJOR DISASTER- The term `major disaster’ has the meaning given such term in section 102 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5122).
(4) MILITARY INSTALLATION- The term `military installation’ has the meaning given such term in section 2910 of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990 (part A of title XXIX of Public Law 101-510; 10 U.S.C. 2687 note).


Full article by Paul Joseph Watson at Prisonplanet

Did you get all that? Well, you didn't have to. It's pretty clear in the second section that FEMA camps, which have quite obviously existed for a long time (Google REX84), are now legal for any purpose as determined by the Dept of Himeland Security. Including death camps, if the DHS says so!

Combine this with the executive powers created during the Bush administration, and all of the following would be legal:

- Declaring a National Emergency of any kind
- Arresting any American citizen without a warrant, seizing guns, detaining people indefinitely under 'terrorism' charges, which is now defined as, among other things, any act deemed to have the intention of threatening others (ie just about any small-time offence). Read section #802 of the United States Code which was amended by the USA PATRIOT Act.
- Detaining people in FEMA camps 'for their safety' indefinitely
- Declaring the President dictator (which automatically happens in a state of national emergency)
- Even, potentially, killing citizens 'charged' with 'terrorism'.

But most people will, unfortunately, still believe this doesn't exist. It's just a hoax by conspiracy nuts.

Did you know local residents were generally not aware of the Nazi death camps during WW2 that were on their doorstep? Or that most of the Jews, blacks, 'criminals', gypsies, homosexuals, etc. had no idea where the train was taking them? Ignorance is bliss, I guess. That comfortable doubt that government could ever do something so awful. But as the laws stand, they could if they wanted.

Combine this with:

FEMA red/blue/yellow lists, FBI 'terrorist' watch lists

FEMA buys 500,000 plastic coffins, stores them near Atlanta, Georgia

http://www.welfarestate.com/pamphlet/ The infamous FBI terrorism pamphlet. Amongst those who are now terrorists are people concerned with animal rights, people who refer to defending America from the UN, people who refuse to identify themselves (even though they have no constitutional obligation to do so), people with "Christian identity", and "individuals who make numerous references to the US Constitution".

Who is the terrorist? YOU ARE! Now go to the 'love camps' and the 'fun camps' and remember that government still loves you. Lovely lovely gas chamber!

Tuesday, 27 January 2009

BBC Propaganda: Today's Highlights

We must be dumb here in the UK, because we pay the government to spoon-feed us with propaganda. So, in the spirit of sheepleness, here are some of my favourites from today's BBC reports:

(Image: BBCone's graphic design. They have circles. But if they reported on it, they may try to convince you those were squares)


Global Warming is Irreversible! Oh no!

Of course it's irreversible, because we cannot have such a great impact on forces, like climate, which are beyond our control! We didn't cause warming, and we definitely can't undo it (but the Sun will).

It's interesting that the study which claims warming is irreversible, was funded by the US Dept of Energy and the Obama administration (cough-the prospect of carbon taxation represents a conflict of interest-cough)

Classic "Problem, Reaction, Solution" in action. In fact all three of these stories are.


Because profit is indeed a dirty word.

OK, so short selling is hardly a 'moral' way to make money. But the entirety of the stock market and all those abstract 'assets' is one big casino/Ponzi scheme. So, some people win and others lose. Too bad.

But the solution to the problem is...not sound money or getting rid of the central bank...but more government and global financial restrictions! The cause of the problem shall now be the solution!

If you were prescribed drugs and they made you ill, chances are unless the doctor is Dr Mengele, you will not be told to increase the dosage. But that is exactly what we are told about globalism, private central banking and government financial restrictions.


Yay, parents who don't pay child support will lose their passports! Except, this already happens. Just through proper legal means - you know, a COURT OF LAW. But now, government can remove someone's passport and driver's licence WITHOUT going through legal processes! What a triumph for liberty.

Oh, and I love the justification for this - that this is "faster, simpler and easier for the taxpayer". Simpler in that it gives more power to the authorities. "If this were a dictatorship, it'd be a helluva lot easier." - George W Bush

And the horrible irony of Labour party members and their 'quangos' talking about lightening the burden on taxpayers. Priceless.

Monday, 26 January 2009

Trailer for "The Obama Deception"

An Alex Jones film you can watch without being labelled a conspiracy nut!

(Caution: Downside is you will instead be labelled by Obamanoids as a right-wing white-trash racist. Even if you're black.)

Definitely one I am looking forward to. I was a sucker for the Obama-ganda at first, but I woke up pretty sharpish when it was obvious nothing was changing. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.

The danger is, this 'new boss' has such a cultish following that fascism and globalism all of a sudden seem so...appealing...must go to sleep and be a sheep...must OBEY.

If you are still on the Kool-Aid. Please do us all a favour and wake up. Now not later, when it's too late and America becomes the HQ of the fascist globalist 'new world order'.

Saturday, 24 January 2009

Gearing up for Iran 'Engagement'

What do you think?


'an attitude towards engagement [with Iran] that might bear fruit'.

Call me crazy, but doesn't that sound like 'an attitude towards military engagement that might bear profit'? Hopefully, I have read a bit too much between the lines, and they are referring to diplomatic engagement.

(Images: Above, a photoshop satire of Fox's reporting of a future nuclear war on Iran - I presume the author is suggseting Fox would mistranslate Ahmadinejad? Below, graffiti putting it all into perspective. "Remember, it is just as scared of you as you are of it".)

Iran is probably not pursuing nuclear weapons at this time. Or at least, the IAEA doesn't acknowledge any proof of such activity (ie non-civilian nuclear development).

But really, what have you got to fear if Iran does develop muclear weapons? 'Oh no, the TERRORISTS are coming!!!'

Give me a break. This mythical Al-Qaeda have ties to, conveniently, just about every regime that will not comply to the Western-globalist agenda. Coincidence? Nope. In fact, if YOU start saying that war for oil is wrong, and Israel commits genocide, soon enough 'clear evidence' will emerge linking you to Al-Qaeda.

Ok, so it isn't that extreme, but 'Al-Qaeda' appears to be everywhere today - Iraq, Iran, Syria, Sharia councils, Local mosques, Under your bed. Everywhere. Be afraid, be very afraid. And be ready to sacrifice liberty, otherwise the terrorists will win...

More to the point, what if Iran does develop nuclear weapons? Will they use them against Israel or the West? -inhales- NAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH. Why? Because nobody would be that stupid. Even Kim-Jong Il, the 'dear leader' of North Korea, has never used his nuclear weapons (you know, if he's still alive).

And to those who may say, "But, Iranians are fanatical extremists!" I would say, "The only fanatics are the ordinary fools who get tricked into being suicide weapons by the politicians, who are much more aware and devious than to destroy their own country and themselves by starting nuclear war".

In fact, the only country to ever have used nuclear weapons in a war was the US. I think it's important to remember that. (But let's be fair, the full effects of nuclear weapons were not at the time known, which lifts some of the moral burden I guess)

Some people have horrendously short memories. All of this baseless fear-mongering is just like the run-up to Iraq. I remember '45 Minutes', and I was 11 at the time ffs!

I would say the best thing for Iran is to develop nukes ASAP before we con ourselves into another mindless elite-manufactured 'regime change'. Then again, if they do (or even if they get close) there might be a nuclear 'false flag' op blamed on them. Aah, the possibilities...

Anyways, time to consider. Is authority the truth? Will we all be a sucker for the next mad rush to war by ruthless elitist powers? Hopefully not, mainly because the American military is at full extent already in the Middle East. But if by some fluke those behind Obama get the draft reinstated over there, who knows?


'Democratic' Monarchy

I knew Obama was descended from the President of the Confederacy, but I didn't know he was Dick Cheney's 8th cousin and George W. Bush's 11th cousin.


The elites are one big dysfunctional family.

Linked to at We r 4 Peace

Thursday, 22 January 2009

The Messiah: Yes He Can

I think the first thing that has to be focused on about this whole Obama episode is the rabid, contagious fanaticism. Are you a devout worshipper of The One, or are you a racist backwards bigot? Simple choice. SUPPORT THE LEADER. Obey. It's OK. Authority is for your own good and loves you. Go back to sleep. And hey, if you don't like it, you can vote for Romney in four years' time.

(Image: Very Soviet. Also, notice the posters to the left - looks like the 'Illuminati' seal? But upside-down?)

In a way, believing in the left-right paradigm is comparable to being plugged into the Matrix. It is two football teams, two rival gangs. But we all somehow rationalise it, as if our gang is justified. I know because not three months ago I was there. I sat in front of my computer watching the US election results come in (McCain didn't give his concession until about 4.30 am UK time) and I was delighted Obama won.

Fastforward to December, and Obama's appointments. All Clinton, Bush, Israel lobby people. Every one of 'em, neo-cons or globalists, whatever you want to call them. Doesn't really matter.

The Change was bull. Guantanamo will go, but secret camps/illegal detainment practices are carried out throughout the US and around the world anyway. Gitmo was just the public figurehead of state-sponsored torture - which is extremely dangerous, because 'mainline' left-partisans really think closing Guantanamo Bay will end US illegal detainment programs. (probably not fair only to implicate US secret ops in this; but since I am not the all-seeing eye, I don't know how many other groups are involved.)

The economic Change is indeed rearranging the deckchairs on the Titanic: bailouts, socialism, corporate welfare, inflation, debt. And a recession thus becomes a depression, yay! Not to mention the inevitable dollar collapse that is imminent - presumably the Ameros are already prepared...

None of the politicians who cater for the sheeple mainline mention that at the heart of the causes of the economic crisis is the policy of central banking and the fractional reserve system. This criminal fraud, possibly the greatest in history, needs to end. Alarmist? Misguided? Maybe...

“It is well enough that people of the nation do not understand our banking and monetary system, for if they did, I believe there would be a revolution before tomorrow morning.” —Henry Ford

The final nail in the coffin for any sign of Obama being substantially different from Bush, Clinton, Bush... is that his Israel stance is just as identical and weak as any previous Prez. Which is roughly: 'we're going to fund your military, let you blackmail us with nuclear threats, then defend you when you start unjustifiable conflicts'.

The point of all this? That the two main parties in America certainly (and I would argue Labour and the Conservatives in Britain too) are essentially the same, with little more than token, superficial differences in their messages. Yet they continue to be capable of manipulating and dividing the people down tribal lines. Are people that shallow and easily tricked?

I was for a time. But I woke up once it was obvious Obama was a fraud. The danger is, this false dawn will either brainwash an entire generation beyond repair, or disillusion them with politics for life. And the last thing the Western world needs is even LESS citizen responsibility than we already have.

Oh, and here are some Obama Youth:

Monday, 19 January 2009

Just Watched 'The Great Global Warming Swindle'

Dishing out a few inconvenient truths to those who advocate a carbon tax.

Just to clarify what I think, I am not an anti-environmentalist. In fact I am very much for anything which truly benefits humanity and the world we live in.

I believe we need alternative energy, especially geothermal (and nuclear in the short term), not because fossil fuels are 'warming the planet' but because it is an empirical fact they will run out eventually. I challenge you to google 'peak oil'.

This CO2 nutjob frenzy, however, is not about the environment. The government and scientists have a conflict of interest in skewing the evidence. Carbon taxation would make for even bigger government than we have now, and scientists receive government/UN approval and funding if they toe the line.

And worse, biofuel development done in the name of combating 'climate change' is a disaster for world food production. Food prices up, output down:
Food rioting and shortages:

I don't like to complain about alarmists. The way I see it, at least some people give a damn about something enough to shout about it. What bothers me more is the vast numbers of people out there who either don't care or understand about anything substantial.

However, the global warming-carbon hypothesis is just as over-extended as the 1960s panic over global cooling being related to coal burning. And the fear-mongering is rife - terrible weather disasters, polar bears getting used to swimming, maybe even the end of humanity.

The persecution of so-called 'deniers' shows the ignorance of the climate change crowd; this 'disdain for intellectualism' is one of the 14 defining characteristics of fascism.

"They must find it difficult...those who have taken authority as the truth, rather than truth as the authority."-G. Massey, Egyptologist

US Bailout = $8.5 TRILLION

That's the bare minimum.


And before you can say 'Weimar', hyperinflation is almost inevitable.
And before you can say 'Amero', the dollar will collapse.

Sunday, 18 January 2009

Gaza-Israel: Conflict in Review

It's back to normal, whatever that means, for Gaza and Israel. The burial of the dead and the recovery of the wounded can go on in Gaza City, without the same risk of being the next innocent victim of the F16s. In Sderot, there will probably be no such let-up, and the sirens will continue to sound.

(Image: Sderot, after a rocket impact - nobody injured, but you try telling these folks it's not something to be bothered about...)

(Image: On the other hand, this is in Gaza. Obviously, there was a Hamas rocket set up on the roof...right? The dead women and children were stupid to let Hamas use their buliding, and that was why they were killed, right? Some Israel apologists really think like that too - shameful.)

The ceasefire has come in this conflict, just in time for OBAMA OBAMA OBAMA...and it will all be forgotten. Well, not by the Gazans, or the residents of Sderot, of course. Hamas fired six rockets, allegedly, after the ceasefire. What a surprise - as if the operations would halt rocket fire; they don't work as we've seen before with the 2006 Israeli-Lebanon war.

(Image: This conflict revealed the true nature of the incoming Obama administration - more Neo-Con hawks willing to support Israel unconditionally. The man is 'Change' like the USA Patriot Act was 'Change'.)

SOLUTIONS to the frankly childish situation we have:

1st...Israel must BACK THE HELL OFF of Gaza and Palestine. That does not just mean militarily. They have to get out of their settlements they have built illicitly in what is now designated Palestine.

2nd...The criminal and inflammatory trade restrictions and blockades MUST STOP. Gaza has been turned into an even more empoverished area than when Israel first invaded it. Stopping 'terrrorism' is not reason enough to seal off a neighbour, especially from the sea.

3rd...If Hamas continues to fire rockets on places like the beseiged Sderot, Israel or a UN, NATO etc. security force (the possibility of which should be discussed) should respond on a specific, individual basis. In other words, not waiting ten years to get all riled up then roll in the tanks. That was stupid. Instead, individual air strikes on REAL militant targets and not UN schools, which should be recorded and shown to the UN, the media etc. for utmost transparency.

The above three measures will restore Israel's 'good guy' image PROPERLY to the rest of the world (in other words, not through lies, but through truth and actions).

4th...The existence and validity of the state of Israel needs to be discussed. It is not anti-Semitic to do so, nor is it 'what the terrorists want'. Israel was a nation founded on military expansion, and it is doing what it has always done - fight, and talk about the Holocaust to make people feel guilty. What we now have is an 'apartheid' situation as described by UN officials, where racial segregation occurs, freedom of movement and opportunity for peaceful co-existence do not.

In the long term, do we go down the route of 'more segregation' and have the current two-state borders? Or one Palestine, in which Jews and Muslims could form a democratic government? The last seems far-fetched or optimistic, but so did the possibility of devolution in Northern Ireland - and look how far that has come in two decades!

Of course, we will go down neither, continue to worship Israel, and another conflict will erupt in two more years' time that the Western powers could have prevented.

(Image: Let's not be harsh on the individuals in the IDF, but the Israeli government? Hell yes, they do seem to think like this!)

We need to take down the myths surrounding this conflict. So, in review:

- Israel broke the ceasefire FIRST, killing 6 Gazans on November 4, the day of the US Presidential Election.

-Hamas responded with a resumption of the rocket fire which had essentially stopped during the ceasefire. Note here, the absence of significant rocket attacks until Israel's Election Night incursion. Followed up by a return to early 2008 levels of intensity.

- Israel used White Phosphorous, and regardless of the supposed way in which it was used, it burned people (ever seen We Were Soldiers?) For more info on the effects of WP Oh, and Israel used WP in Lebanon too = serial war criminals

- Proportionality: 10 Israeli soldiers, 3 civilians killed since the end of the truce. On the Gazan side, a minimum of 765 dead civilians and according to the IDF a minimum of 400 dead Hamas militants. Take those figures not quite at face value though, nobody will ever know the exact number of Gaza's dead.

- Israel has lied on several occasions that have not been discussed sufficiently. 1. An early air strike 2. Actually about 10 things at MPAC UK 3. 'They lie about everything!'

- Media have not been biased against Israel, because of the proportionality of their retaliation and their status as a vastly stronger military power Israel should have more responsibility than their neighbours. BTW more people die in road accidents in Israel than die from rockets.

- US media in particular has been biased in favour of Israel, citing their self-defence as justification for every war crime committed.

- People complaining about lack of coverage of Sderot and rocket attacks earlier, need to stop whining. The truth is that it isn't a big story in the eyes of corporate media. US and coalition troops were being killed regularly in Iraq in 2007, but reporting in US media (and UK media, imo) was almost non-existent. Does that mean the media was biased against their own troops? Naaaaaah.

Never forget the humanity, loss, persecution, subjugation, humiliation, and stealth genocide of the people of Gaza.

British Jewish Lawmaker likens Israel to Nazis

And that's coming from a man born into a Polish Jewish WW2 era family, who has relatives that have fought in the IDF.

It's impressive to see the minority, but significant minority, of Jews/Israelis speaking out against the genocidal practices of their government in Gaza. For those in the West who have forgotten the meaning of a 'patriot', these are people who truly put their country first, not their government first. Good people...the world could do with more of 'em.

Viedo reported at prisonplanet.com

Saturday, 17 January 2009

Think you know Left and Right?

I've been doing a little unscientific research into political stances of British and American leadership, using The World's Smallest Political Quiz as my guide.

I say unscientific because I did what I could to guess or read what Labour, the Conservatives, Obama and McCain said or did that might suggest an answer to each question. Consider that to be a disclaimer, since some of the results are unusual to say the least.

Starting with the US -

John McCain:

Barack Obama:

The main two British parties -



Yeppers, you saw it here first. Not only is Britain apparently dangerously close to total police state, our Conservatives are (on some things) to the 'left' of Labour! Also, this supports the idea that American 'liberals' [socialists] are comparable to European 'conservatives'.

And for comparison...ME:

I guess that's why I'm so pished at the current state of things. If only we'd abolish central banks, stop the spy state, stay out of foreign conflicts, stop state-controlled education, deregulate small arms completely, stop bailing everyone out, cut government size...

Seems I have become a little more libertarian recently - been reading too much Ron Paul stuff :-)

Take the multiple choice quiz here.

Join Obama's Brownshirts

You heard me. Sieg...

"In participating Starbucks stores across the nation, the American public will have an opportunity to pledge five hours or more of community service toward a local volunteer opportunity of choice. Starbucks will honor each person who pledges with a free tall brewed coffee beginning Wednesday, Jan. 21 through Sunday, Jan. 25."

(Images: Obama fans above, Nazi supporters at a Nuremburg rally below. This is not a suggestion Obama is like Hitler, that's crazy; however, it is a reminder that we humans can make terrible decisions in crisis times; especially when two awful main choices are presented. McCain/Obama, Nazis/Communists. The lack of real democracy is the comparison.)

Hitler's Sturm-Abteilung (SA), translation Stormtroopers, aka Brownshirts, were a volunteer force which acted as the strong arm of the Nazi party until their 1933 election, and for a short time after, until their leadership's destruction in the Night of the Long Knives.

Is it too much to make a Hitlerian comparison? With all the talk about drafts and national service over in America, along with the Obama-mania and fanaticism, I say nein.

Friday, 16 January 2009

So Sick Of 'Anti-Semitism'

That's right, it seems anti-Semitism is rife among the populace, and it's a growing problem.

In fact, use of the word is so common among Israeli supporters I am concerned for their psychological wellbeing.

(Images: Nazi and anti-Semitic hatred in literature, above, the memory of which is part of the mental justification for Israeli actions and the hatred of Islam seen centre and below. Real anti-Semitism is largely confined to history! But ask any Israel apologist and they will tell you it is everywhere...)

I had to write about this, because I just read someone today, claiming to be an Israeli, who had said that Gaza should be destroyed, and that 'only Jews and Christians...not Muslims' should exist.

They also mentioned that Israel had apparently killed a high-ranking member of Hamas today (well I guess if you bomb enough civilians, one of them is bound to be Hamas). They said Israel was fighting 'terrorists'. (Israel at war with itself???)

Anyways, someone else told them to stop the 'Zionist propaganda'. And they were met with the question 'Do you hate Jews?' What can I say, the Orwellian doublethink propaganda is evident.

You can hate Muslims (a high member of the Israeli government suggested nuking Gaza and compared it to the situation with Japan in WWII). That is fine. But you dare suggest Israel is lying, and oh boy are you a Holocaust denier!

By 'doublethink' Orwell meant to believe two mutually exclusive things to be true at the same time. The finest example today is "One World Government doesn't exist...Internationalism is good and needed to fight climate change and bring peace".

Hatred is evil, yet hatred is simultaneously justified. It just depends on who you hate. Can't the pro-Israel 'Bomb Gaza!' morons understand this logical flaw?

"...creating an objection against the Zionists doesn't mean that there are objections against the Jewish" - Iranian President Ahmadinejad. Note that he never said 'wipe Israel off the map' during his 'World Without Zionism' speech because there is no Persian word for Israel, nor is there an expression meaning to 'wipe from the map'. Oops! I guess the Zionist media just got something lost in translation...

"Jews are overrunning the Earth. They want to kill us, and we must fight them. They are vermin and they sneak into a country and attempt to take over it in stealth. The solution is to get rid of them all".

Thankfully, nobody said that. But replace 'Jews' with 'Muslims' and you've summarised the view of the mainstream right-wing in the West.

Meanwhile, in the real world, Israel perpetuates genocide and we try to justify it. How disgusting. Oh, and that UN school they bombed, killing 30 children? They have admitted no Hamas were inside, let alone firing from there.


"Don't sit back, Or hesitate to react, To the impact, They were takin' a nap; In fact, they would fake an attack, TO MAKE WAY FOR THE PATRIOT ACT"

Love it.

Song by "Conspirituality"

Thanks to Debunking the Debunkers for my awareness of this.

Thursday, 15 January 2009

I Drank The Kool-Aid

Yes sir indeedy, there comes a time when we have to hold our hands up and admit we were wrong, using a drug-abuse-suggesting Americanism. That time is going to be a few days from now, when President-Elect Barack H. Obama and his new puppy are inaugurated.

The truth is that Obama, whether or not he is a decent guy which he seems to be, is just the next globalist puppet. In fact, more than that, the Powers That Be love the guy. Henry Kissinger (on CNBC) said Obama's task is to create a New World Order, and that his election is 'a great opportunity' for such Change. He's a great guy, Kissinger. Really gives me faith in humanity.

Kissinger sees Obama's election as an opportunity for a New World Order (go to 2:45):

Raw Story report on Kissinger's comments (not in the censored MSM of course):

The elites' support for Barack is one reason I now am sure he will Change little, except for the worse (ban guns, bigger government, bring globalism).

Also, his reaction to the Israeli atrocities in Gaza has been pathetic, just showing how AIPAC and/or the elite has a stranglehold on US-Middle East policy. Just another puppet, I am afraid to say. You may tell me I was naive to believe otherwise, and you may be right.

I indeed drank the Kool-Aid on this one, as I believed to some degree in the partisan system, in spite of the obvious overall control from 'above'. In fact, this one US election has really proven beyond all doubt that the two major parties are in fact two sides of one coin. I suspect a similar reality to be in place in Britain too.

Think about the number of people who say things, about mainstream parties, like 'they're all the same'. Well I guess they're right.


You Spelt Genocide Wrong

Actually, Israel, the way I'm reading it, the letters seem to spell 'incursion'. Maybe it's just me...

Yes, it's been two weeks since the air bombardments began, and with over 1000 'martyred' (which means 80,000 virgins, right?), you would think that the politicians might give a damn.

(Image: I had to do it, didn't I? I had to include a photograph that forces us Westerners to confront our own dehumanisations towards the Arabic world. Turns out, they are really people like us! Who knew! I thought they all wore balaclavas and grunted 'Allah Akbaar' through gritted teeth! Maybe some slight sarcasm included here, by the way.)

Instead, they call for 'peace', and the need for Hamas to stop firing rockets. Great. Because that was what kicked it all off, right? Well, to believe that would be to ignore thirty years of Israeli occupation and subjugation of Gaza, and the obvious conflict of interest for the Israeli government with the forthcoming elections.

The governing party is likely to lose, so here comes their version of the US 'October Surprise'! They've been under rocket fire for years but they suddenly get angry now? Coincidence? Methinks not.

Now, that's not to say it isn't justified to want revenge when your area comes under rocket fire. Of course it is reasonable to defend yourself.

But yet again, Israel doesn't get self-defence. They pursue what they have always pursued; expansionism. Right from the day Israel was created it has been expanding by force. (though not entirely unjustified at first, as it was too small to defend itself.) This expansion ended after the Yom Kippur war in 1973, when for a time Israel took the entire Sinai desert from Egypt.

The perception by some in the West, that Israel is the little guy surrounded by enemies, is outdated and/or a lie. There was a time when Israel had to fight for its existence, but that time has long been buried in the annals of history. For the last thirty years at least, there has been no serious threat to Israel. In fact, due in part to the multi-billion dollar US military aid it receives, Israel has one of the strongest armed forces in the world. And a bloated, over-influential military industrial complex.

(Images: top and middle both from the recent pro-Gaza rally in London; bottom is from the Seattle branch of Jewish Voices for Peace. Yet more proof that anti-Semitism because of Israel's actions is just plain wrong and ignorant.)

The real Israel of today is more of a Goliath than the David it was when it began. It is the schoolyard bully who dumps misery on all those around it, and then has the gall to tell the teacher that 'he hit me first!'

The economic sanctions lorded over the Gazans, along with the blockades, is an atrocity and an act of occupation. The ramming of Cynthia McKinney's boat is a war crime. Who else could attempt to sink a civilian relief vessel and get away with it?

Understand that I do not believe any of this justifies firing rockets at civilians. Hamas' actions were disproportionate. (also, did you know Israel created Hamas?)

But Israel's response has been disproportionate in the extreme.

If we don't get to the roots of the conflict, we will not solve it. And in doing so we must appreciate Israel's long-term aim in Gaza. Which is, to rid the area of Palestinians by making their lives exponentially more uncomfortable. This involves blockades, trade embargos, causing food shortages, lack of basic medical care, and anger among the people, who protest by throwing rocks and in return get shot and gassed.

Israel's actions are tantamount to ethnic cleansing by stealth.

Australian-Palestinian Hero:

Deaths Total Comparison:

Palestinians Waving White Flags Shot In The Back:

Monday, 12 January 2009

Blasting the Big Brother Apologists

Read 'em and GET ANGRY about something!

Amnesty International advert against the 42 Day Detention Bill, defeated in October 2008:

"If you aren't doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to worry about."

I am so sick of hearing that tired, old excuse for the advances of the spy state. Just think about what that means.

'Wrong' is a loose term. Under post-9/11 terror law, 'wrong' can mean anything from excercising freedom of speech in protest, to just looking something like a terrorist (having a rucksack, or just being a bit brown like Jean Charles de Menezes).

So, what the quotation above implies is that, if you go along with the government, you won't have anything to worry about. What's the problem with doing what government wants, after all?
Well, it doesn't take a historian to think of several governments in recent times who have used this premise to control people and force them to do evil. Nazi Germany, Stalinist Russia and Maoist China spring to mind.

"Don't worry Jews, if you're not doing anything wrong you've got nothing to worry about! Now get on the trains like your government says, because Der Fuhrer loves you."

(Image: Mao in the Chinese Cultural Revolution. He was a good man, who had the interests of the people at heart, and...I can't keep that up any longer. So why can people keep repeating the myth that governments care about the people? Why would we be different to any other period in history?)

I can't stress this enough. Government does not love you, it holds power over you and enjoys doing so. Normally governmental power can be kept in check by an informed, determined public. However, what we have today is a herd of millions who repeat the childish fairytale every time government takes their freedoms away!

Government loves me, I'll put down my gun. Government loves me, it will spend the bailout money wisely (US at least $700bn, UK at least £250bn, created from nothing then borrowed from the central banks at interest, which we will pay in tax). Government loves me, and is setting up a police state for my own good! Oh Obama, the messiah, will deliver us from evil! He's not in any way another corporate puppet!

Military on the streets is not good for society. Why is it necessary? Police powers should not be extended by such laws as the Patriot Act (Orwellian doublespeak if I ever heard it). It is never 'for our own good', it's to strip us of our freedoms - realise that now and not later.

9/11: Freudian Slip #3

Rumsfeld said that Flight 93 was 'shot down', Bush said that the terrorists planted explosives in the WTC, now Tim Roemer of the 9/11 Commission can't decide whether the Pentagon was struck by a plane or a 'missile'.

The first 30 seconds are of Roemer on CNN. What follows are 'wtf' sayings of Bush, Rumsfeld, a clip of four 9/11 First Responders discussing the collapse of the WTC, and a Fox News interview at (according to the official story) the crash site of Flight 93.

Whoops! You're supposed to toe the official line, guys! It's unacceptable to lend credance to the 'outrageous conspiracy theories' which Bush says we must not tolerate...

What I think should also have been included was the Fox News clip in which the reporter says that the surrounding area following the Pentagon strike smelt of cordite - the signature component of military ordnance. That is part of Loose Change: Final Cut.

Also, if there is tons of other footage available of the Pentagon impact, why not release it and prove your point, Powers That Be? Unless you have something to hide, of course...

One thing I agree with the 'debunkers' of 9/11 alternetive theories on, is the incompetence of the Bush administration. I mean, no matter what the truth is about 9/11, these quotes demonstrate either blind stupidity, a Freudian slip, or an insult to the intelligence of the people.

Apocalypse Soon?

One of the illogical things about us humans is that, while we have built tremendous infastructure and 'civilisation', we have a morbid fascination with society being destroyed. In a way, we like to hear about times when the rules don't apply and anarchy occurs.

"Anyone, who truly wants to go to war, has truly never been there before!" -Larry Reeves

(Image: Part of an anti-Iraq War demonstration, Washington DC, 2007.)

Extending that concept from war, to all anarchic situations (where society and rule of law doesn't apply) such as natural disasters, terrible epidemics, stalking killers, alien invasion, and of course zombies, you can see how we are all interested in asking ourselves, 'how would we cope with the test'?

(Image: Here for no reason whatsoever other than that I liked both this and 28 Months Later.)

We write stories about them. We watch films, read books, and play games about them. We even pay close attention to potential real future anarchic situations. But would we really want these things to happen? Maybe the quote above explains the answer, that those of us who have not experienced a survival situation perhaps in some way want to be in one. But I don't have dozens of veterans, survivalists and natural disaster survivors to ask for verification.

I guess we are obsessed with apocalyptic scenarios because we are all animals. Our natural habitat is woodland, jungle, desert, plains etc. But most of us live in a world far removed from the settings we evolved/were designed for. (see? Open-minded on theories of human origin!)

Paved streets, central heating, street lighting at night, and TV - these are the modern human's habitat. So perhaps we would be naturally inclined to take an interest in possible situations where anarchy takes over and we have to survive, like we are all born prepared to do.

(Image: A hot spring in Yellowstone national park, USA. Someone took a hell of a photograph.)

Will Yellowstone erupt, covering the entire northern hemisphere in ash? Will a mysterious zombie outbreak force us to reach for our shotguns? Will there be a satanical New World Order to fight? The answer is: maybe, but not right now. (except Yellowstone, which experts say will erupt someday, but we don't know when.) But we will keep telling stories about such things, and as the Boy Scouts say, 'Be prepared'.

Sunday, 11 January 2009

Eugenics, anyone?

It's here, it's queer, and you'd better get used to it. That's almost the message of this BBC report about how great it is that embryos were screened for 'breast cancer' genes before conception.


"The parents will have been spared the risk of inflicting this disease on their daughter", said the doctor who carried out the 'treatment'.

WHAT?!? The parents would have INFLICTED breast cancer on their child? No more than when a child is born, its parents have already inflicted inevitable death on it. It's that ridiculous.

Suggesting having 'bad' genes is the fault of the parents is just as disgusting to me as racism, sexism or any other kind of persecution. What gives you, Mr. Scientist, the privilege to start dictating what is and isn't 'right' about people? Or which aspects of people you'd like to 'change'?

Eugenics has arrived in this 'free' country. Doctors and scientists need to realise their job is not to experiment with the population, and control people; it's to conduct ethical research and TREAT people with the individual soverignty they possess that no-one should ever take away.

Just another example of how authority is drunk on power and wants to control us all. Where's our guns, just incase we need to defend ourselves against authoritarianism? Oh right...the authoritarians took them.

Saturday, 10 January 2009

I am a Socialist, and so are you!

Yes, that's right, the Western world has been steamrollered by socialism and communism.

(Image: 'Communist' Russian doll, Prague Museum of Communism)

Think you are a free-market worshipper, who wouldn't touch the Red Dawn side of the spectrum with a barge pole? Maybe you'll be in for a surprise as I expose Western society's loony left ways.

Marriage Communism!

Think about it. A long time ago, polygamy was the norm, and if one guy had ten wives, another would probably have none, maybe because he was a slave. Oh well - that's the Marriage free market principles coming back to bite you. But wait...revolutionaries in that communist organisation, the Christian Church, decided you could only marry once. Share the partners around, one each, they said. And we did; thus began the age of Marriage Communism.

Voting Communism!

One vote each? I say, let the free market decide! You can earn votes in the free market by working hard, and freely trade in votes without protectionist government regulations. After all, we don't want a system where there is no incentive to work harder; that's what capitalism is all about. Vote creation, not vote sharing...

Food Socialism!

When there is a famine in the Third World, we socialist Western societies always make the same mistake - bailing out unsuccessful people with food. It was their irresponsibility that caused this in the first place, by having more children than the land can support and by living in poor climates; now we have to give some of our hard-earned food to support them? I say no to the food bailouts, they reward bad decision making.

Military Socialism!

Time and time again it has been proved that the free market runs businesses the best. However, Western governments still drag their feet on privatising the oldest government-owned industry, the Armed Forces. It has been proven that Halliburton and Blackwater are more efficient than the socialist armies of today. I say, give the free market a chance...

This indisputably proves that the West couldn't get Redder if it were under a hammer and sickle. We spent decades fighting them, but it turns out we were Commies all along!

Friday, 9 January 2009

Banking for Dummies...

...well, I could understand it. Want to know how you are being screwed financially?


There are a lot of reasons for the economic crisis of late, but one fundamental of our money system that no politician talks about, or wants to talk about (except libertarians like Ron Paul) is fractional reserve banking, and central banks.

(Image: Might it be illegal for me to make my own money and then lend it out with interest attached?)

Fallen asleep yet? I wouldn't blame you - but this is boring in an important way, if that makes sense.

The link at the top of this post provides a simple analogy for how fractional reserve banking works. It's a good way to gain a basic understanding of how we are perhaps not as prosperous as we could be - and why.

It's not our irresponsible borrowing, or too much or too little regulation (as the 'wingnuts' always argue over). It's more fundamental. While we argue about socialism and capitalism, or government intervention, we have forgotten to notice who controls the money supply.

(Image: Bank of England, London - to be honest, I didn't know, until recently, that it wasn't part of the government. It has been government-owned since 1946, but the people who create the money and lend it out are not part of the government. In the foreground btw is a memorial to those who died in the Great War.)

The answer? Central banks, which are not operated by the government - they are controlled by private bankers. As the American saying goes, "The Federal Reserve is about as Federal as Federal Express".

If you or I created money from nothing, we would be arrested for counterfeiting. And rightly so. However, in the central bank system, private bankers are given special privilege to not only CREATE money from nothing (most of it is digital, not paper); they then LEND that new money to the government. We then have to pay back the interest through our taxes.

However, due to the interest, we cannot ever pay back the debt we now have with the bankers, because even if we gave them ALL of the money available, it would not cover our debt.

That is part of the reason why the national debt is so high among developed nations. Not so much because we took out too many credit cards and mortgages, and not so much because stock traders were irresponsible; but because of the private banksters who are the hidden leech sucking on the wealth created, through goods and services, by the people.

Thursday, 8 January 2009

Defining 'Liberal'

Yes, it's the second part of my thoughts on how language is manipulated.


Liberal originally was derived from the Latin 'liber', meaning 'free, not slave'. Now, you wouldn't get many partisan tribalists using that definition today, from the left as well as the right. And that's just the thing - the word 'liberal' originally was used to designate what we now call libertarians.

(Image: Is Canada really that 'liberal'? Because it seems more of you voted Conservative in your election, than for any other party, right?)

If you were a 'classical liberal', you were neither from the right nor left. The Nolan chart explains the concept of this 2-D spectrum best.

(Image: THIS IS NOT MINE but this is what results from The World's Smallest Political Quiz look like. My results are very similar though, (done this a few times) usually Personal 80-100, Economic 40-60 depending on how I answer that day.)

The main split between free-market liberalism and social liberalism seems to have occurred around the Great Depression, and the New Deal in America, along with many other intervention policies during the first half of the 20th Century. Some liberals, such as Roosevelt, favoured these policies; others, such as Milton Friedman and the Austrian School of economics (the influence of which is evident in Ron Paul's views) see intervention as the cause of the problem, not the solution.

In the 1940s and 50s, Social Democracy and Socialism became the dominant ideology in Western Europe, in varying degrees from country to country. Parties today are not afraid to call themselves socialist or social democratic, either in their name (SDP in Sweden, or Socialist party in France), or their description (the UK Labour party calls itself social democratic).

However, across the Atlantic, the word 'socialism' or 'socialist' was and is a political taboo, presumably because it sounds like the evil Red enemy. But the same kind of policies being taken up by western Europe, were also being embraced - maybe not as much, but still - by America and Canada. The word taken to mean left-wing, therefore, was 'liberal'.

Thus, a whole new culture of interpretation and misinterpretation was born. Sometimes, I laugh when I hear, in the US, liberals being described as 'anti-American' as I did during the 2008 election campaign. This is not because I am a partisan lefty (I am not), but it is because the Founding Fathers were liberals! (by the old definition I guess.)

(Image: I think the definition of 'liberal' might have changed over time. What do you think, Abraham Lincoln?)

The term 'liberal' is today both ambiguous and essentially meaningless here in Britain; it's definition is inconsistent, between the old 'libertarian' type of meaning, and the Americanism which means 'left-wing'.

I thought I had better explain why I happily refer to myself as a 'liberal' then. It's because my beliefs fall somewhere between the left, and the libertarians. Ergo, whatever definition is used, it works out ok.


Terror vs Shock 'n' Awe

Part 1 of today's lesson on the English language and how it is manipulated.

"One often hears, for example, that one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter"

The term "terrorism" was originally used to describe the actions of the Jacobin Club during the "Reign of Terror" in the French Revolution. "Terror is nothing other than justice, prompt, severe, inflexible," said Jacobin leader Maximilien Robespierre. (Source: Wikipedia: Terrorism)

(Image: Between 18,000 and 40,000 people were guillotined during the French Revolution, during which the Jacobin Club operated.)

The term "terrorism" comes from Latin terrere, "to frighten." (Source: Wikipeia: Definition of Terrorism)

Now, from the Wikipedia article on Shock and Awe:

"[The doctrine will] impose this overwhelming level of Shock and Awe against an adversary on an immediate or sufficiently timely basis to paralyze its will to carry on."

The doctrine of Rapid Dominance (aka Shock and Awe) also includes disrupting "means of communication, transportation, food production, water supply, and other aspects of infrastructure."

The water supply? Food production? Sounds...terrorist? Yeah, SHOCK AND AWE those dang Mooslims!!! They won't be laughing when we drop all this sh** in their wells...

(Image: Apparently this was stuck on the gates of the White House. It was probably the work of some America-hating Liberal Terrorist sympathiser...)

Okay so I may be getting a little carried away. But 'terrorist' is indeed a very subjective word. And the Western media will use it in one way, Middle Eastern media in another, etc etc and it lacks real meaning because its use is inconsistent. So, what is a terrorist?

“A terrorist is someone who has a bomb, but doesn't have an air force” - William Blum

Israel Using Depleted Uranium?

I disapprove of Israel's actions in Gaza for three reasons:

- It's disproportionate. Many times more Gazans have been killed in a few days than Israelis killed in a decade.

- It's a humanitarian crisis, and Israel isn't helping themselves: this will radicalise another generation of Palestinians into being committed to resisting Israel, and they know it.

- Israel fails to acknowledge their part in provoking this bloodbath: they have laid siege to Gaza (by proxy, through roadblocks, trade restrictions etc) for decades. Why do people keep fighting Israel? It's not just hatred of Israel or hatred of Jews.

(Image: There ya go! It's not anti-Semitic to criticise Israel.)

People forget that Palestine was once an entirely Arab country, with a Jewish minority, and that people were forcibly moved or killed in the process of forming Israel. That doesn't mean I am anti-Israel; overall, it's for the best historically that the Jews get their own homeland to avoid the centuries of persecution they did receive, culminating in the Holocaust; however, punishing the innocent Palestinians by taking most of their land hardly set a good precedent for the aggressive military rulers of Israel. The reality is that the long-term aim of Israel's activity in Palestine is to force the Arabs to leave, by making their life as miserable as possible.

(Image: Ain't no Katyusha could have done this. Dead Hamas Police Officers in Gaza.)

Press TV is reporting that traces of depleted uranium have been found by Norwegian medics, in some of the bodies of the wounded in Gaza. It's 'alpha-radiation' is highly dangerous when it is extremely close to human tissue.

Now, bear in mind Press TV is Iranian, and would have motive to report a negative story about Israel. However, since Western media is so anti-Palestine (they refuse to acknowledge Israel's blockade/siege of Gaza, and its part in starting the conflict), I don't trust that DU hasn't been used, just because they aren't reporting it.

Wednesday, 7 January 2009

Richard Gage Makes The Case

Architects and Engineers for 9/11 Truth founder Richard Gage, back in April, making his case in a Vancover TV interview. He explains scientific evidence for the official conspiracy theory of 9/11 being flawed, and why a new investigation is needed.


I also can't emphasise enough the need, regardless of your views on 9/11, to read the AE9/11Truth slideshow presenting its evidence. If you're a Truther, it will give you valuable ammunition; if not, it might just convince you. It certainly worked for me.


Tuesday, 6 January 2009

The Left-Right Division is about Gender

Well, kind of. At least that is the way Sharon Harris of the Advocates for Self-Government sees it. What gender of parent do you want government to be?

(Image: A fair criticism of Obama, but the hypocrisy is that ever since 9/11, under supposed right-wing government, police and military have steadily intruded on Western citizens' lives with the pretence of 'giving' security. Martial law might allow them to 'take away' every freedom we have.)

"Conservatives want the government to be your Daddy: a strict, authoritarian Daddy who forces you to be "good" according to his personal and often idiosyncratic definition of "good" -- even though you're an adult and may disagree with that definition. This Daddy punishes you severely for engaging in peaceful activities he condemns as sinful or unwise."

"Liberals want the government to be your Mommy: a smothering, obsessive, guilt-ridden, wildly overly-protective Mommy who, in order to protect you from any conceivable harm or error, constantly and severely restricts your freedom. This authoritarian Mommy also wants to force you to be "generous" to others. Should you disobey, this Mommy will punish you just as severely as her authoritarian conservative Daddy counterpart."

"In other words, both liberals and conservatives treat you like... a child. Libertarians, in stark contrast, want to treat you like an adult: free to make personal and economic choices for yourself. Which do you prefer? To be treated like a child, or like an adult?"

Older Posts

Undebunkable Chemtrails Video That The "Debunkers" Ignore...

...and yes, Chemtrails interfere with weather

(but why they are used, no-one fully knows...)

And You Tell Me There's No Suppressed Technology?

It's another of those 'conspiracy theories' that good citizens don't notice. Imagine the standard of living if all the secret technology was released to the public...we'd be "free and independent" as JFK said! No more poverty anywhere! Can you imagine being sick enough to withhold such technology from society just to maintain your position of control? (Bearing in mind that we don't know just how much technological capability is being withheld, because, duh, it's secret.) What did Nikola Tesla really develop?

Individual Liberty? But that's "selfish"!

No, we need to look after each other voluntarily without having a government do all that at gunpoint. Sounds absurd at first but soon you realise that the reason it sounds so is because of the very unfree nature of our current existence. Envision greater possibilities! Ok, some kind of massive wake-up would be needed before this kind of free, responsible, uncontrollable society could emerge. And that's what we are seeing day by day in the world - a massive waking up of the previously enslaved masses (including myself I must add!)

I'm Already Against The Next War

I'm Already Against The Next War
Stop the propaganda before it's here. If some kind of terror attack happens in the West, Iran probably didn't do it. They have no history of imperialism and would be suicidal to attack the West. Think who benefits. No bombing of Iran.