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...


http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/osama_dead.php

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)

Tuesday, 26 May 2009

Changing Minds: One @ a Time

To paraphrase Robert McNamara, "If we can’t persuade people with comparable values of the merit of our cause, we better examine our reasoning."


Some people are of the brainwashed variety. They will do everything in their rational and irrational attempts to avoid facts or morality, and conform to their masters. These are sadly a lost cause.

Others have not been successfully brainwashed, and just need access to the right information or opinion to snap them out of their semi-trance state. This description fits, among many other people, myself last year.

So it is the job of any good Infowarrior to spread the message of freedom such that as many people as possible may be awakened to what I believe is a great calling to humanity, the resistance against despotism, the Global War On Tyranny-ism. Tyrants, now there's some people who REALLY "hate us for our freedom".

I feel good today because I lit a metaphorical fire of freedom in the mind of a stranger.

What follows is a series of exchanges between myself and "Mr X" (yes genius, that's not even his real online alias). I hope it may encourage you that there are many of people out there who are receptive to the message of freedom and are eager to wake up (even if they don't know it).

Original text describes Mr X's (American) political outlook.

Mr X: (red from now on)

First of all, an ideal government for me would be a unitary government with a strong, large, and powerful federal government with weak state government. I consider myself socially far left and economic mid- left. I identify with the Democratic Party. Here are my views about the issues of International, Domestic, Economic, and Social concerns.

International:
I support an isolationist view on foreign policy. This means that I do not believe that we should engage in wars that do not pertain to direct self defense of America on US soil. I also believe that the US should take measures ensure that jobs stay in America instead of going to foreign countries. Although I believe in free trade, the government needs to better regulate the international job market. The government must also lift all trade embargoes on countries in order to promote trade. I believe in giving aide to foreign countries in need of help. For the matters of international conflicts, I think the UN should resolve them. We must also completely eliminate from out society, but until then, we must use American petrol. I feel open borders in necessary to a stable economy and the fundamental values of America. Immigrants ate vital to keeping prices of products down. With background checks, anyone has the right to become a US citizen.

Domestic:
I support strong gun control laws. I think the only weapons that should be allowed to be bought are rifles, shotguns, and handguns that are all single-shot. There must be an assault weapons ban and thorough background checks on all who wish to purchase guns. The united stated must regulate the environment strictly by overseeing companies and introducing legislation that would protect the environment. We must have a strong domestic agenda with much government programs to help the needy. We also need to reform our healthcare in a way that motivates doctors to want to work for the government and is better for the patients. I think that is also important to restructure social security in a way that allows more money to be put away. We must also have a strong infrastructure and government research along with a better space program so we can become leaders in the modern era of technology.

Economic:
I think that we should reduce military spending and increase spending money on the national debt until we eventually have a surplus. We must raise taxes so we can fund government programs. We should use a fair tax system instead of our current one. The government must regulate the economy to a degree where it is stable. There also must be strict government regulation of large corporations. I also support the idea of a national bank.

Social:
I believe that there should be no restrictions on abortion at all. There also should be no restrictions on gay marriage at all. There must be liberty, even if this sacrifices national security. There must be a strong separation of church and state. I do not support Affirmative Action. It is unfair to the most extent of the word. The death penalty should be abolished. It is ridiculous and barbaric.

Me: (blue from now on)

rofl @ the gun control fanatic.

Maybe research Lexington Green and the American Revolution...

...and Nazi Germany. In one, the citizens are armed to the teeth. In the other gun bans are in place. Which is which? :D

Don't you agree that there is no use for assault weapons but than to kill people. I support handguns. They are good for self defense. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. I feel that every family should have a gun for protection.

Assault weapons is a loaded term used by the gun grabbers, to make one 'type' of gun seem mysteriously deadly. All guns are designed to kill, that's true; as are the skeletal structure of the human fist. But we don't cut everyone's hands off, do we?

I agree with you about everyone owning guns for protection. Why not assault rifles? All that means, in the case of US gun laws, is a semi-auto weapon with over 10 rounds in the magazine. Hardly a WMD, eh?

Governments worldwide killed 200 million of their own people in the last century. I don't see any reason why they should be dictating to us what weapons we can carry. What about them? They actually use their weapons for mass murder, unlike most citizens, and they get away with it. Letting them push us around is a no-no, and in extreme cases that's where the guns come in.

America already has way TOO MANY firearms restrictions in place - registering all your guns, getting permits to concealed carry a handgun, no carry on campus (recipe for mass shootings, as we have seen).

The Founding Fathers wrote the Second Amendment with absolute clarity - that every citizen is part of the Militia (citizen soldiers, defenders of the Constitution), and that their *right* (not privilege, so no permit should be required) to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Infringed upon, not removed, not reduced. These are the peoples' rights and woe betide anyone who steps upon these rights. That was the intention as enshrined in the 2A, and it's the #1 thing I admire about America.

Oh, and btw, I'm British, so I know a thing or two about what happens when these "reasonable gun regulations" are allowed to happen. It doesn't stop until all the guns are gone, believe me.

If assault weapons is a "term", then why was it was in the Federal Assault Weapons Ban of 1994? When would you need to use an assault rife that you can't use a handgun? The only reason someone would need to use one is for military purposes. I agree with you about the ridiculous law about 10 rounds. Although the US government is not entirely responsible (Iraq for instance) they are a hell of allot more responsible than the average US redneck. The fathers purposely wrote the constitution loosely in order to allow a wide range of interpretation. While some interpret it literally (judicial restraint) others, like me, interpret it loosely (judicial activism). The constitution also promises maintenance of public order. This can be provided by gun laws.

What I mean is "assault weapons" is a loaded term used as propaganda, that's all.

When would you need an assault weapon? How about when FEMA comes up your street rounding everyone up to go to camps? (okay, this is the worst of the worst case scenario, but that's exactly why the citizens in my opinion should be as well-armed as is needed to resist their government.)


Hmm I think you overestimate the responsibility of government and underestimate the responsibility of citizens. But...

It's not about responsibility because gun ownership isn't a privilege. You don't earn gun ownership as you don't earn the right to speak your mind, to keep your property, or the right to peaceably assemble. The right to defend yourself proportionately is part of your natural rights, that don't come from government or law, but from nature. Government has no authority to breach these rights, but of course every government does to an extent.

I doubt the Founding Fathers wrote the Constitution vaguely. It's pretty clear to me. SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Not even a little bit. No infringement or attempts to turn it into a privilege using 'regulations'. Only the modern usurpers of the Constitution claim it is ambiguous, such as the Bush regime suggesting torture could be Constitutional. There's nothing ambiguous about it if you ask me. Not in the name of maintaining public order or for any reason. I say again, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. Never.

I've never looked at it from that perspective. I've always trusted my government and expected it to work for me, as John Locke said in his writing of the social contract theory. But do you really think the US govt would turn on us it hasn't happended in a first world country ever i dont think. correct me if im wrong.

First world country: Germany 1933. :)

Not in modern times, but really America today is not entirely unlike America of maybe 1772 or 1773. The final spark of the American Revolution was when British Empire troops marched on a group of Patriots at Lexington Green and demanded they lay down their weapons. They refused, then the British fired the first shots of the Revolutionary War.

All I'm saying is, there's a lot of pissed off gun owners out there. The media mocks them as being paranoid about coming gun bans, but all I know is that many talk of revolution. They're not going to give up their guns. So the ball is in governments' court. Do they send in the black uniforms to come for the guns en masse at a 21st Century Lexington Green?

your right i only looked at things one way before

hey no problem mate. respect to you sir.

I didn't know that people really "always trusted their government" and "expected it to work for me". Really? But that's the key delusion that has to be tackled, especially when dealing with the controlled left. (The key with the controlled right is IMO two pronged: Satanism to make the Christians sit up and take notice, also their chickenhawk militarist delusions need to be attended to.)

The kid had a photo of himself, he's probably about 16 or so, which explains his humility. You wouldn't expect that from most adults. I would hypothesise that is because adults have spent longer in the delusion and so it's harder for them to face everything they'd believed in was a deception. That may sound extreme, but I tell ye, there's nothing like the waking-up process. Nothing like it.

So I hope that kid will go away no longer worshipping the Democratic party and (presumably) Obama, and maybe just maybe educate himself and others and learn of the New World Order.

The revolution will not be televised.

Message to a Bush Kool-Aid Drinker

Note: mmm, Kool-Aid. Another of those Americanisms that I didn't know what it meant until recently, so for anyone, particularly non-Americans reading, it was drunk by the inhabitants of Jonestown and the cyanide it was mixed with killed them. So of course, it means someone who blindly follows something, like the followers of Jim Jones.


This is a copy of a comment I left on this post. Basically this awesome Anonymous tool had called 9/11 conspiracy theories 'drug induced' (despite the US government's 9/11 theories being the biggest conspiracy theories of all) and accused everyone on that blog of being 'left wing traitors'.

Needless to say, I wasn't going to miss a chance to have fun putting one of the few Bush supporters still in existence in their place. It's a sad testament to our dumbed down world that, at this point, I feel I must point out that me criticising Bush does not mean I like Obama. Change not the puppet, the President; but the puppeteer, the money masters.

Oh well, here goes anyway:

@ Anonymous: You are a koolaid drinking coward who is so heavily invested in the left-right paradigm that "your" leader W could literally eat a baby in front of you and you'd still re-elect him.

The author of this blog has his own opinions, personally I want nothing to do with "the left" as you say. Every 9/11 truther is a far left *traitor*? Interesting perspective coming from someone who clearly loves NAFTA, the NAU, and lying their way into wars.

You may think you support the troops, but the truth is that the troops no longer support you. More troops donated to Ron Paul than any other candidate in 2008. Why? Because he's the only real anti-war guy out there.

Believe me, I hate big government, gun grabbing, the tyranny of environmental "regulations", etc. In fact, I detest the bloated state so much that, unlike you, I actually advocate removing its source, which is the Federal Reserve.

Turn off the TV, and corporate talk radio for a minute. Read your Constitution, or if you can't stomach that 'Al-Qaeda human rights bullcrap', read a Bible or something. Within a few minutes I guarantee you will be smarter than Rush Limbaugh. Otherwise, I pity you more than anything else because you are the perfect citizen, a walking wind-up toy created and shaped by Rupert Murdoch (and the ones made by George Soros are no better, by the way).

If you read that, then at least you're literate. I doubt it though.

Maybe I could have been more civil? ;)

Monday, 25 May 2009

Should we trust scientists on cancer causes?

I mean, government-backed scientists have a track record of reliability, don't they? Don't they?

BBC - Britons 'wary over cancer advice'


(Image: Translates roughly as "Work gives you cancer", in case you're wondering.)

[quoting from above news article]
The UK public is deeply sceptical about scientific claims for what causes or prevents cancer, a poll suggests.

The YouGov survey of 2,400 people for the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) found more than half thought scientists were always changing their minds.

More than a quarter said health advice changed constantly and the best approach was to ignore it completely.

But the WCRF said its advice, including eating more fruit and vegetables, had stayed the same for more than a decade.

The WCRF says that most scientists agree about the steps people can take to reduce their risk of cancer - and that this advice has largely stayed the same for the last 10 years.

It is thought that about a third of the most common cancers could be prevented through eating a healthy, balanced diet, being physically active and maintaining a healthy weight.

Obesity, drinking, smoking etc...
No mention of Aspartame? High Fructose Corn Syrup? Chemtrails? Depleted Uranium? I could go on. No wonder all the scientific advice about which foods do or do not cause cancer is contradictory and essentially pointless, because real confirmed causes of the modern cancer/bad health epidemic are being ignored.

Russia Today reports on New World Order film

"The New World Order is a controversial new film that goes behind the scenes of the American anti-globalisation movement."

I should add at this point that, unlike what the disinfo Wikipedia articles say, anti-globalisation is not the same as anti-capitalism, nor is it anti-Semitic (what!!!). I am anti-world government, very much pro-capitalism, and don't want either freedom of trade, or national sovereignty, to continue to be destroyed by our corrupt slavemasters. That is all.

Obama's Hypocrisy and the Brave New World

Love this video. Obama speaks against materialism. It's like witches telling everyone not to use broomsticks.



Obama is the icon of people who have 'learnt' to love their own servitude and slavery. This "Brave New World" was forecasted by Aldous Huxley over half a century ago:



See 1:08 - 2:05 of the above video:
"I think, what is going to happen in the future, is the dictators will find, as the saying goes, that you can do everything with bayonets except sit on them. If you want to preserve your power indefinitely, you have to get the consent of the ruled. And this they will do, partly by drugs, as I foresaw in Brave New World, partly by these new techinques of propaganda; but they will do it by bypassing the rational sides of man, and appealing to his subconsciousness, his deeper emotions, and his physiology; and making him actually love his slavery. I believe this is the danger, that actually people may be in some ways happy under the new regime, but they'll be happy in a situation where they ought not to be happy."

Sunday, 24 May 2009

The irony of the obsessive "Anti-Racists"

Racism is the result of a delusional collectivist worldview, if you ask me. Those who view the world through a prism of good and bad peoples are looking at the world in a fundamentally flawed way. So why is it that so-called "anti-racists" constantly deride the 'white run' society in which they live?


(Images: Yeah, white people with cigars. Mostly old white people. Damn those Whiteys. That's not racist.)

Where is this white run society? I haven't been told about this. Apparently Western society is run by whites, for whites, with the aim of sticking the boot in to all 'minorities' - forever. You're telling me that society is run exclusively for my benefit and I haven't been taking advantage of it? I am white after all. Do I run things? Do I get special privileges? It'd be great if I do, please, any opressed 'minorities' who know how these white advantages work, I'd love to know about them, here I thought I was merely an ordinary citizen (or should that be subject in these times).

Okay, so society is in the hands of a few wealthy and powerful men. True. Also, most of them are indeed white, Saudi oligarchs excluded. The global elite are also incredibly racist, I'd definitely say that, just look at their "charitable policies" of abortion and vaccination eugenics in Africa.

That said, do you really think that white people are going to get some kind of special privileges under the NWO? Nope, the world population, should these nutjobs get what they want, will be under 500 million, probably under 300 million. Room for all white people in that number? No. What about the white people living in tents because the economy, built on a house of cards, is collapsing, and our paper currency will be reduced to toilet paper? Nothing for them either.

In fact, when addressing the typical obsessive 'anti-racist' mindset, it becomes necessary to tackle a whole web of interlocking ideas about who runs society. Apparently, the world is run by WASP capitalists, who cling to guns and religion. According to the typical self-described 'progressive', this is our enemy.

It's a dangerous delusion, not least because attempts to 'rectify' the 'problem' actually help the REAL elite.

Those white people giving themselves jobs. We need affirmitive action/"positive discrimination" policies.

Those religious people and their delusions about the value of life. We need to expand "a woman's right to choose" and "the right to die".

Those other religious people and their bigotry towards homosexuals. We need not only to legalise gay marriage, we need to let gay couples adopt and raise children, and encourage the normalisation of homosexuality in culture.

Those capitalists are so selfish and they're harming the environment. We need socialist wealth redistributive policies, and we need government to tax everything heavily that "harms the environment".

Those gun nuts are crazy, and their obsession with these deadly weapons, as well as the support from the evil capitalist big gun companies and lobbies, is putting the public in danger. Look at what the gun culture has done to 'minorities', we need to ban them all. Only the state, a subsidiary of the good anti-racist UN, can own guns.

Nationalism is a code word for racism (in America, States' Rights is also code, for the right to enslave minorities). Therefore we need to support good anti-racist, anti-nationalist, internationalist/federalist big centralisations of power, like the UN and the EU.

Of course, the irony is that many so-called 'progressives' ARE the racist eugenicists they supposedly hate. They support population control to 'deal with global warming'. They have a seething hatred for white people, Christianity and nationalism (a word so often misunderstood).

I could go into more detail refuting each point of the so-called 'progressive' agenda and how it ties in with the New World Order (yes, the small number of mostly white men who really run things) and their aims. But I think this is a sufficient introduction to understanding the (warped) left wing wannabe "anti-fascist", "anti-racist" mindset, which is actually heavily racist and fascist in nature. All in the name of oxymoronic "equality".

Saturday, 23 May 2009

The Communist Manifesto

Ten Conditions for Transition to Communism, as outlined by Marx/Engel's Communist Maifesto of 1848. Enjoy the links, comrades.


1: Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

2: A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

3: Abolition of all right of inheritance.

4: Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

5: Centralisation of credit in the hands of the State, by means of a national bank with State capital and an exclusive monopoly.

6: Centralisation of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the State.

7: Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the State; the bringing into cultivation of waste-lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

8: Equal liability of all to labour. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

9: Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of the distinction between town and country, by a more equal distribution of the population over the country.

10: Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production.

Waterboarding isn't torture, it's fun

Mancow Muller, conservative talk show host, gets waterboarded, but remember it isn't torture, it's "enhanced interrogation".



Kind of like how twisting pro-lifers' arms isn't torture, it's "pain compliance".

I quote from the above PDF link, Page 6, "I noted [argued] that the La Mesa police had used pain compliance techniques severe enough that it caused some of the rescuers (rescuer = anti abortion protestor) to pass out."

If we're going to have a rational debate about torture, then all the people who think waterboarding is somehow not serious need to accept it for what it is. It IS torture. Now you can argue about whether torture yields success or can be morally justified in circumstances, though you won't find much agreement from me, but stop playing silly semantic games with terms like "enhanced interrogation". We know what you mean.

The National Security state is being turned against the people. It's not as if we weren't warned. Now, however, the terrorist is you. Another stupid piece of word manipulation, they don't need to take your rights directly anymore, they just need to reasonably suspect you of terrorism, for example if you have a terrorist Ron Paul sticker, there go your rights. Waterboard that man!

All you zombies who supported the torture, monitoring of communications, databases, etc. know this. You are the target of the schemes you supported. You are the terrrorist that the TV news made you afraid of. You are the next one to be waterboarded 180 times. Or, maybe me. Or someone else. But let me assure you, it isn't "just the brown people" any more.

Friday, 22 May 2009

The deadly Terrorists we are fighting

As usual, a bunch of "semi-retarded potheads" who were set up by the government. It's called false flag, people, and this is how it works. It's very simple. Government funds, radicalises, encourages, even causes, a bunch of broke nutjobs to do some crazy stuff (sometimes real, in this case just threatened) and then they blame the resulting crisis on their political enemies.


Timothy McVeigh and Oklahoma City, oh yeah and the FBI (ssshhhh it doesn't exist)
1993 WTC bombing, oh yeah and the FBI AGAIN (sssshhh now they really don't exist)
7/7 Prior Knowledge, oh yeah and the FBI YET AGAIN (no, be quiet, unpatriotic patriot!)

I love how it's always a handful of rogues. Always a coincidence. Well, if you're not going to scratch the surface of what is said, then these criminals will keep getting away with it!


It's so horrifically simple, and yet people still believe there are scores of "terrorists" hiding under some bush, or maybe in some cave, just waiting to attack you and your family because "they hate us for our freedom" (lol, you're not even free anyway!). Get over it please, the CIA created Al-Qaeda. Want to find people who hate freedom? Why not take a look-see at, for example, the Bilderberg Group, who met last week.

One little-known non-secret about Al-Qaeda is that they are now carrying out attacks in Iran at the behest of the US government. They were used in the Balkan wars of the 90s. They were originally a database of CIA assets in Afghanistan, who carried out attacks against the Russians in the 80s. Now they are still under US command it seems. Or were they just not under US command for ONE day? I leave that to you. Make of it what you will.

Oh, and any neocons reading, when I say "US Command", I'm not being "anti-American" or "blame America first". Your country has been hijacked by the New World Order scum, who ironically were based in Britain and other European countries. I do not blame America, but I damn sure do blame these elitist crooks. I only refrained from saying "CIA command" because I don't know if it's the CIA still commanding them, nor do I really care. The point is that Al-Qaeda is an asset of the US shadow government.

I know, I'm a crazy "conspiracy theorist", nothing of what I wrote is true, it's all unpatriotic lies cooked up by whatever wackjob I've been listening to on that crazy internet, only what gets onto TV is factual, TV is right about everything. You're right and patriotic, just like the Founding Fathers, who knew that whatever government says, goes.

I'll end the sarcasm if you end the denial :)

"The truth is, there is no Islamic army or terrorist group called Al Qaida. And any informed intelligence officer knows this. But there is a propaganda campaign to make the public believe in the presence of an identified entity representing the 'devil' only in order to drive the 'TV watcher' to accept a unified international leadership for a war against terrorism. The country behind this propaganda is the US and the lobbyists for the US war on terrorism are only interested in making money." - Pierre Henri Brunel, French intelligence insider

"The greatest purveyor of violence on Earth is my own government" - Martin Luther King

Fun with O.B.A.M.A.

Inspired by the now well-known acronym for "One Big Ass Mistake America", as demonstrated by my ally in the blogosphere NobodyOfValue, I decided to see what I could get for myself, so without further or do, here goes.


Oppose
Bush
Agenda?
My
Arse
-
Others
Believe
A
Messiah
Arrived
-
Open
Borders
And
Mexican
Amnesty
-
Our
Battle's
Against
Marijuana,
Again
-
Only
Ban
All
Military
Arms
-
One
Bilderberger's
Aim:
Marxist
America

Hope (!) you likey. And add your own if you have any!

We're gonna spread happiness,
We're gonna spread freedom,
Obama's gonna change it,
Obama's gonna leeeeead 'em,

We're gonna change it,
And rearrange it,
We're gonna change the world.

- Song sung by wide-eyed, indoctrinated children in one of the infamous Obama Youth videos.

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.