Dissent Blog

Blog Moving to totalitarian.eu

2009-03-20T10:42:00.000-07:00

To my valued readers:

I am in the process of moving articles from this blog to
www.totalitarian.eu, the new home for the Dissent Blog.

Four reasons for moving

To eliminate unwanted pop-up advertisements.
To reduce the risk of censorship.
To offer a flexible and professional blog design.
To give my readers a better online experience.

Please place future comments and suggestions on totalitarian.eu.

Thank you for reading and participating.

Peter Neideck
Editor, Dissent Blog

EU bans use of ‘Miss’ and ‘Mrs’ (and sportsmen and statesmen) because it claims they are sexist

2009-03-16T07:09:00.000-07:00

By Daily Mail Reporter
Last updated at 10:39 AM on 16th March 2009

Using ‘Miss’ and ‘Mrs’ has been banned by leaders of the European Union because they are not considered politically correct.

Brussels bureaucrats have decided the words are sexist and issued new guidelines in its bid to create ‘gender-neutral’ language.

The booklet warns European politicians they must avoid referring to a woman’s marital status.

This also means Madame and Mademoiselle, Frau and Fraulein and Senora and Senorita are banned.

‘Political correctness gone mad’: The European Parliament has banned MEPs from using ‘Miss’ and ‘Mrs’ because it claims they are sexist

Instead of using the standard titles, it is asking MEPs to address women by their names.

And the rules have not stopped there - they also ban MEPs saying sportsmen and statesmen, advising athletes and political leaders should be used instead.

Man-made is also taboo - it should be artificial or synthetic, firemen is disallowed and air hostesses should be called flight attendants.

Headmasters and headmistresses must be heads or head teachers, laymen becomes layperson, and manageress or mayoress should be manager or mayor.

Police officers must be used instead of policeman and policewoman unless the officer’s sex is relevant.

The only problem words that do not fit into the guidelines are waiter and waitress, which means MEPs are at least spared one worry when ordering a coffee.

They have reacted with incredulity to the booklet, which has been sent out by the Secretary General of the European Parliament.

Scottish Tory MEP Struan Stevenson described the guidelines as ‘political correctness gone mad’.

He said: ‘This is frankly ludicrous. We’ve seen the EU institutions try to ban the bagpipes and dictate the shape of bananas, but now they seem determined to tell us which words we are entitled to use in our own language.

‘Gender-neutrality is really the last straw. The Thought Police are now on the rampage in the European Parliament.

‘We will soon be told that the use of the words “man” or “woman” has been banned in case it causes offence to those who consider ‘gender neutrality’ an essential part of life.’

West Midlands Conservative MEP Philip Bradbourn is calling on the Secretary General to reveal who authorised the publication of the booklet and how much it has cost.

He described it as ‘a waste of taxpayers’ money’ and ‘an erosion of the English language as we know it’.

‘I will have no part of it. I will continue to use my own language and expressions, which I have used all my life, and will not be instructed by this institution or anyone else in these matters,’ he said.

‘I shall also expect the many translators who sit in the European parliament to translate accurately the language I use. I find this publication offensive in the extreme.

‘The Parliament, by the publication of this document, is not only bringing itself as an institution into more disrepute than it already suffers, but it is also showing that it has succumbed to the politically correct clap-trap currently in vogue.’

German Chancellor Merkel Calling for Raids on Homes

2009-03-15T12:15:00.000-07:00

By Peter Neideck, Dissent Blog

Today, German Chancellor Angela Merkel demanded even tougher gun control measures relating to storage of firearms and ammunition in Germany. With an audacity that defies belief the former East German communist also called for unannounced raids on homes and offices of registered firearm owners. In an interview with the Deutschlandfunk Merkel said: “We must do everything to prevent children’s access to firearms.” As a further consequence of the recent mass shooting in Germany Merkel wants citizens to be more alert and pay particular attention to young people.“ However, Germans Secretary of State Wolfgan Schäuble in an interview with the German State TV station ARD warned against overregulation of already tight firearm laws in Germany.

If Merkel was so concerned about the children, why would she not call for a ban on prescription of antidepressants, such as Prozac or Xanax. All mass shootings, including the latest German tragedy, have been connected with pychotropic drugs. SSRIs (selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors) are excessively prescribed to children and young people and cause violent and irrational behaviour in people. SSRIs are big business for big Pharma and for the politicians who are sponsored by the pharmaceutical industry. Who are you working for, Frau Merkel?

Germans have no constitutional right to bear arms. Politicians like Merkel are now pressing further their global agenda to making private gun ownership a social taboo worldwide. Politicians and media are pushing for gun control and victim disarmament with slogans such as “More guns -- more ‘gun crime’” and out of Kingdom Britain: “Tough on Knife Crime”. However, such correlation does not exist and facts prove that firearms left in the hands of law abiding citizen prevent crime.

Here are some examples of factoids used by the ruling class to disarm the ruled, factoids that prove that gun ownership in reality increase everybody’s safety.

Globalist rhetoric:

“More guns lead to more ‘gun crime'”
“Tougher restriction on firearm ownership lowers ‘gun crime’”
“Tougher gun control leads to reduction of gun ownership in the population”

The facts:
(Prof. Lott, University of Illinois, More Guns, Less Crime 1998)

States with lower number of firearms have higher murder rates than Texas, where weapon density is highest. States with nearly the same number of private firearms (than in TX). E.g Vermont, have a 20 times lower murder rate.

(CFC 1998)
The notion that tougher access to guns will lower gun related crimes is also easily disproved. Consider this: New York with its gun bans still has one of the highest crime and murder rates. Vermont, with its liberal gun laws, has low crime and murder rates. Vermont citizens own three times as many guns as those in New York State.

It is not only probable but very likely that the recent spurs of mass shootings are coordinated efforts by criminal elements within government to garner public tolerance for the introduction of unconstitutional search and seizure operations by the state and the legislation of draconian laws designed to restrict the freedom of its citizens. Germany has one of the toughest gun control laws in Europe, yet it is the law abiding citizen who is subject to further restrictions and control.

A different paradox is emerging out of Great Britain. After the “Handgun ban” the number of weapons in private possession did not sink as expected. Gun owners switched to those firearms, which were still legal in Britain. At the same time, custom records show an increase of illegal weapons import (pistols, revolvers) into Great Britain. At the same time, numbers of armed robberies in Britain are drastically on the rise. According to the Lott-Study (More Guns, Less Crime), the opposite correlation is correct. In the 40 states, in which carrying a concealed weapon is legal, violent crime is the lowest. Lott proves in his study that numbers of victims of violent crimes are greatly reduced in those states that allow carrying of concealed weapons.

Furthermore, the notion that stricter gun control legislation leads to lower numbers of private gun ownership can easily be disproved. Only law abiding citizens will surrender their weapons thus render themselves defenceless against criminals. For example, Germany with the toughest gun laws has the highest number of illegal gun ownership. Similarly in Britain: Despite the ban of handguns, the number of illegally owned guns is rising.

Of course, every country has a legitimate interest to guarantee its safety and that of its citizens. That is one more reason to recognize the importance of the verifiable connections of gun ownership and crime and investigate the effect of disarmament on the safety of the people. Restrictions for the sake of it are neither legal (Germany, Britain or elsewhere) nor in the best interest of the people.

Calling for Merkel’s Resignation and Arrest

The logical conclusion therefore is that Merkel’s calls for even tougher gun control and her criminal proposal of illegal raids on homes of German citizens is not introduced to protect Germans but to control them. If only the government is armed, any civil disobedience can easily be crushed by governments, as it is happening in Britain since 1997. Rogue politicians like Merkel are not working for the German people. She clearly is in the pockets of the global banker elite. Merkel, with her criminal comments, has lost her legitimate right to hold office. The people of Germany must call for Merkel’s immediate resignation, consequent investigation and her arrest for treason. If they don’t, and if Merkel gets her way, Germans will see history repeat itself in their own country, when SS style police SWAT teams in black uniforms with machine guns raid their homes and are, without judge and jury, guilty until proven innocent.

Further reading
BBC: Prozac ‘may encourage Suicide

Infowars, Paul Joseph Watson
Psychotropic Drugs & Gun Free Zones Again The Cocktail For A Killer

Infowars, Steve Watson
Another Shooter With A History Of Anti-depressant Use

Sources:
German State TV http://www.ard.de/
The German Gun Club http://www.fwr.de/

Hersh: 'Executive assassination ring' reported directly to Cheney

2009-03-13T12:10:00.000-07:00

By Muriel Kane

Investigative reporter Seymour Hersh dropped a bombshell on Tuesday when he told an audience at the University of Minnesota that the military was running an "executive assassination ring" throughout the Bush years which reported directly to former Vice President Dick Cheney.

The remark came out seemingly inadvertently when Hersh was asked by the moderator of a public discussion of "America's Constitutional Crisis" whether abuses of executive power, like those which occurred under Richard Nixon, continue to this day.

Hersh replied, "After 9/11, I haven’t written about this yet, but the Central Intelligence Agency was very deeply involved in domestic activities against people they thought to be enemies of the state. Without any legal authority for it. They haven’t been called on it yet."

Hersh then went on to describe a second area of extra-legal operations: the Joint Special Operations Command. "It is a special wing of our special operations community that is set up independently," he explained. "They do not report to anybody, except in the Bush-Cheney days, they reported directly to the Cheney office. ... Congress has no oversight of it."

"It’s an executive assassination ring essentially, and it’s been going on and on and on," Hersh stated. "Under President Bush’s authority, they’ve been going into countries, not talking to the ambassador or the CIA station chief, and finding people on a list and executing them and leaving. That’s been going on, in the name of all of us."

Hersh told MinnPost.com blogger Eric Black in an email exchange after the event that the subject was "not something I wanted to dwell about in public." He is looking into it for a book, but he believes it may be a year or two before he has enough evidence "for even the most skeptical."

Stories have been coming out about covert Pentagon assassination squads for the last several years. In 2003, Hersh himself reported on Task Force 121, which operated chiefly out of the Joint Special Operations Command. Others stories spoke of a proposed Proactive, Preemptive Operations Group.

As Hersh noted in Minnesota, the New York Times on Monday described the Joint Special Operations Command as overseeing the secret commando units in Afghanistan whose missions were temporarily ordered halted last month because of growing concerns over excessive civilian deaths.

However, it appears that Hersh is now on the trail of some fresh revelation about these squads and their connection to Vice-President Cheney that goes well beyond anything that has previously been reported.

Eric Black's blog posting, which includes an hour-long audio recording of the full University of Minnesota colloquy, is available here.

Story: http://rawstory.com:80/news/2008/Hersh_US_has_been_running_executive_0311.html

Your Network.TV

2009-03-13T01:37:00.001-07:00

Turn Off Your TV -- Turn On to This

UK Jewish MP: Israel acting like Nazis in Gaza

2009-03-12T23:21:00.000-07:00

from Enasni http://www.tubereject.com/play.php?vid=496
Related link: http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2009/jan/15/gaza-israelandthepalestinians

\"Israel was born out of Jewish Terrorism\" Tzipi Livnis Father was a Terrorist\" Astonishing claims in the House of Parliament. SIR Gerald Kaufman, the veteran Labour MP, yesterday compared the actions of Israeli troops in Gaza to the Nazis who forced his family to flee Poland.

During a Commons debate on the fighting in Gaza, he urged the government to impose an arms embargo on Israel.

Sir Gerald, who was brought up as an orthodox Jew and Zionist, said: \"My grandmother was ill in bed when the Nazis came to her home town a German soldier shot her dead in her bed.

\"My grandmother did not die to provide cover for Israeli soldiers murdering Palestinian grandmothers in Gaza. The present Israeli government ruthlessly and cynically exploits the continuing guilt from gentiles over the slaughter of Jews in the Holocaust as justification for their murder of Palestinians.\"

H e said the claim that many of the Palestinian victims were militants \"was the reply of the Nazi\" and added: \"I suppose the Jews fighting for their lives in the Warsaw ghetto could have been dismissed as militants.\"

He accused the Israeli government of seeking \"conquest\" and added: \"

They are not simply war criminals, they are fools.\"
Category: News & Politics

/>

GOOGLE LAUNCHES “INTEREST-BASED ADS”

2009-03-12T21:42:00.000-07:00

Marketing/Advertising/Brand/PR

From brand.com.au

Google is introducing a new form of advertising it has dubbed “interest-based advertising” using information it garners from internet users’ website visits to target them with ads that are likely to be of interest.-based advertising, often called behavioural targeting, was launched overnight in the US in its beta, or testing, phase and Google is expecting to launch the ads later in the year in Australia.

While Google admitted other online operators are already using similar methods, it claims the extent of its reach and content network will be a unique opportunity for advertisers.

Google’s vice-president of product management Wojcicki announced the new ad form in a posting on its Public Policy blog, saying: “To date, we have shown ads based mainly on what your interests are at a specific moment. So if you search for “digital camera” on Google, you’ll get ads related to digital cameras. If you are visiting the website of one of our Adsense partners, you would see ads based on the content of the page. There are some situations, however, where a keyword or the content of a web page simply doesn’t give us enough information to serve highly relevant ads.”

To add to these systems Google will now “associate categories of interest – say sports, gardening, cars, pets – with your browser, based on the types of sites you visit and the pages you view. We may then use those interest categories to show you more relevant text and display ads.”

Google insists it is using measures to ensure transparency and privacy, and to give users a choice about whether they want to be targeted in this way. Wojcicki said users can click on ads to see how they are served, combined with an “ads preferences manager” which lets users view and delete categories associated with a user’s browser. Users can opt out of the Google Adsense network also, with a plug-in for their browers, she added.

Comment by Think:

This new product of Google's AdSense line requires web masters to make changes to the privacy policy of their web sites, which raises my concern. Can Googles be trusted not to misuse such intimate information for Big Brother purposes? Many governments and illegitimate Super States, such as the European Union, have introduced unethical laws that allow city bureaucrats, state employees and feds to track profiles of our intimate preferences and habits based on our online activities in the name of fighting a illusive "War on Terror".

While I see a legitimate use for the product in an open society, the fact remains, that this product will make it even easier for Big Brother to profile its citizens. The legal implications have yet to be investigated, and the fact remains: Governments are only able to carry out their activities with the complicity of the people. How easy will we make it for them?

Think and Stay Safe!

Bankers and Politicians: The Global Crime Syndicate

2009-03-12T10:42:00.000-07:00

"I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around [the banks] will deprive the people of all property until their children wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered. The issuing power should be taken from the banks and restored to the people, to whom it properly belongs."

Thomas Jefferson

Letter to the Secretary of the Treasury Albert Gallatin (1802)

Private banks issuing your Money:
The Federal Reserve (US)
The European Central Bank (EU)
The Bank of England (GB)
and most other "State" Banks.

FBI intimidates Alex Jones Show

2009-03-11T14:23:00.000-07:00

Houston, TX

Alex Jones on this syndicated radio show today revealed that the FBI is “throwing fishing lines through the windows of his office”. The FBI called Mr. Jones’s studio during yesterdays broadcast with intimidating interest but was refusing to state the reason for their investigation. With the release of Alex Jones’s masterpiece documentary “The Obama Deception” imminent, President Obama and his team have good reason to be nervous. The documentary will present Barack H. Obama’s statements and links his words to his actions as then US Senator and now President. Main stream media reports and interviews deepen the plot, casting reasonable doubt on President Obama’s sincerity and authenticity.

The FBI called Alex Jones’s office on Tuesday, 10^th March while he was on air and unavailable to take the call himself. Studio staff who answered the phone was asked by the FBI if this was indeed Alex Jones’s - the Broadcaster’s office, and where the office was located. The agent also demanded to know where exactly their CDN Servers (CDN - Content Distribution Network) are located. When Alex called the FBI back to clarify the nature of their inquiry, the FBI agent refused to say why the FBI had such a sudden and specific interest in Mr. Jones’s office and server locations.

Alex states that these “snoopy questions” are being asked to intimidate his staff and himself, and that the FBI’s interest is to “98% related” to the imminent release of his documentary “The Obama Deception”. Alex referred the FBI to legal counsel and asked for a subpoena before willing to give any information the FBI.

As a result of this incident, Alex will release his wake-up movie one week before the scheduled release date and as early as tomorrow. The movie can be purchased on DVD from Prisonplanet.com, downloaded in high quality on Prisonplanet.tv or watched for free in lower quality on Google or YouTube. Mr. Jones’s fear that the release of his movie may be blocked by the White House is warranted.

President Obama has crippled Free Speech before. During his presidential campaign he colluded with Missouri State officials and police and threatened to arrest anyone who would criticise then Presidential Candidate Obama. Matt Blunt, Gov. MO , later issued a statement to the Obama campaign charging them with “abusive use of Missouri law enforcement.” See this article.

Think, and stay safe!

Reviving this Blog

2009-03-10T14:18:00.000-07:00

There is plenty of good information out there, such as Rense, Infowars, Mathaba to name a few. Websearch any of them for wide spectrum geopolitical news and analysis. It is for this reason that I have concentrated on reading and learning, not writing in these past few months.

However, the enemy has stepped up their plight to enslave humanity. Their relentless campaign of disinformation and brainwashing continues. Their criminal efforts increase exponentially. The changes upon us intensify in strength, frequency and madness.

As the bankers and compliant politicians plunder the world of their assets (that's what you own), the need for even more wide spread information is greater than ever before. No one who is awake can in good conscience remain quiet. Too much is at stake.

I look at today's children, and imagine their colorless future in a feudalistic society, micro-chipped controlled and enslaved by a ruling elite. What drives me back to revive my blog today? I care for the innocent people, for our and all children. I cry for the Ignorant. For your refusal to make an effort to think for yourselves enables those who do not have your best interest at heart. You choose to believe them. You choose to comply. You choose to give away your sovereignty and that of the next generation. These may be some of the last true choices you will ever have. Liberty, freedom of choice and happiness will no longer be known to the serving class (that's you, too) in just a few decades. Is this your choice? Is that you?

Please bookmark this blog, or follow me on Twitter. Start to break free and help others to do the same.

Think! and most importantly: Stay Safe!

BBC's (S)Hit Piece

2008-05-05T03:27:00.000-07:00

Intro

The military industrial complex owned media are working over time to spread lies, dis-info, and subject the masses to compliant thinking propaganda. Goebbels would have been proud of BBC tactics. So, what are you going to do?

For one, know your enemy and know their MO (Modus Operandi). It does not take a genius to figure it out, as the (very effective tactics) are the same used over and over again. It works well in conditioning us to accept wrong-doing, lies, deception and fraud. Things that were unthinkable decades ago, are readily accepted today. Torture is good. Giving up your freedom means securing liberty. The government is good. Terrorists are everywhere.

The dirt bags at the BBC are shameless charlatans, who play the public as if we were three year olds. Well, BBC, it does not wash any longer. People are waking up.

BBC’s Bacons
A case study on Deception.

What is the Modus Operandi (MO) of government dis-information?

1. Deny knowledge of established or provable facts.
2. Make unsubstantiated statements appear to be factual, often state the exact opposite.
3. Bring in “experts” who back-up by opinion these incorrect statements.
4. Couple lies with truths or half-truths to making it sound reasonable.
5. Establish a false logic (‘non-sequitur’ “it does not follow”), which is then accepted as established, creating a parallel or false reality.
6. Create dictatorial rules, regulations and unnatural laws around that false reality with the sole purpose of controlling and financially raping the population.

Alex Jones, a popular Texan radio host with his nationally syndicated radio show and millions of listeners, was invited to a BBC Radio 5 program, where five professional 9-11 debunkers geared up to assassinate the notion that Western governments were involved in the mass murder of 9/11.

Mr. Jones immediately offered a number of substantiated facts, his accurate logic following along this line:

Governments stage terror attacks and do so against their own people. History has proven exactly that.

Hitler set fire to the Reichstag (27th February 1933) blaming it on Marinus v. Luebbe. This event led to introduction of dictatorship (Hitler was elected, so was Bush, Gordon Brown was not!).
Hitler attacked his own Radio Station in Gleiwitz (31 August 1939), which led to the invasion of Poland, and thus WWII.

The US has been caught on several occasions to stage terror attacks. Here Mr. Jones cites two incidents:

The Gulf of Tonkin incident August 1964, which led to the Vietnam War, was a lie. The government alleged a provocation by Vietnam boats on US destroyers (NSA declassified).
The attack of the USS Liberty by Israeli Air Force (8th June 1967)

Mr. Jones then reasons that it is therefore not inconceivable to think that the US government was involved in the mass murder on 9/11 (and 7/7 I might add). However, Mr. Jones barely got his points across. His total airtime tallied less than that of a caller who bored listeners with an irrelevant Joan v. Arc theory. Alex Jones was interrupted, faded out, dismissed, and made fun of in a manner that bore strong resemblance to staged political trials. The BBC’s operations are rigged and their dishonesties are obvious to the observer who cares to pay attention.

Continuing on: Richard Bacon establishes his non sequitur and continues to build up propaganda around his false reality: “Surely, governments are not capable of carrying out such evil; therefore 9/11 could not have happened with the involvement of the government.” He and his debunkers go full circle by adding “scientific” disinformation pertaining to the collapse of the World Trade Center Towers 1, 2 and 7, calling Mr. Jones a liar.

While Mr. Bacon continues to cast doubts on official and declassified stories, he plays to Human goodness by stating: “Do you really believe this (nonsense)? Surely, the government would never do such evil!” Of course, Mr. Bacon would have us believe the government loves us. Our government would never harm us... Sure they wouldn’t!

True, it is hard to believe what criminal elements in our governments have conspired to do to us. It is hard to digest the density of evil that is acting against the people, against you and your families, against your neighbors, and against your daughters and sons and grandchildren. Reasonable Human Beings, people with a conscience, will have difficulty accepting its existence. Doing so is life changing and painful.

However, the BBC’s Bacon knows that he is covering up for the BBC/the government: He states on-air that the BBC reported that WTC 7 had fallen before actually it happened. Bacon even admits that previously “lost” tapes of that BBC broadcast had been found, proving the fraud.

He, however, does not care and refuses to follow logic. Richard Bacon of the BBC is a liar. He is complacent to those who do not have the best interest of the people at heart. That, Mr. Bacon, makes you a criminal!

Go on then, believe The BBC’s bacons and what comes out of their orifices... Sure, your government loves you!

The BBC knows that people are not reading; they are not informing themselves; they are not making the effort to question the official stories; and hola, the stage is set for more non-sequiturs. On they ramble, building their shaky disinfo-house with flammable lie-sticks. It will take a few sparks more, emanating from the words of inforwarriors all over the planet to burn the house of misinformation to ashes. It is for the people then to start over, to rise like Phoenix, building on the solid fundament of honesty and accountability.

Mr. Bacon: You and the Big Brother Corporation have become irrelevant. You are deliberately harming the Britain. You are abiding a treasonous enemy. You are the enemy, the enemy of the fine British People, the enemy of Humanity and free society!

Challenge for Mr. Bacon

Well Richard Bacon, do you not like the tone of this? Would you like to earn some respect from your listeners? Why not debunk on the Alex Jones Show? I challenge you to go on the AJ show for an hour and debate Mr. Jones. I am not talking for Mr. Jones, but I am certain that he will not line up five 9/11 Truthers or “conspiracy theorists against you to “debunk” you. He would not have to. Truth does not need unfair game.

Links:
BBC Conspiracy Show (Audio)
Original Story on Infowars.net

Food - The Ultimate Weapon Of The Ruling Elite

2008-04-29T13:55:00.001-07:00

Dear Friends,

If you read anything in this article., read the McNamara quotes; you will get an insight into the criminality of our governments! The stated goal is to declare Humans as the real enemy.
The modus operandus of the Elite's plan to exterminate 80% of Humanity is always the same: Create a problem -- offer a (false) solution -- pose as the savior -- usurp more power.

The original author if the article is Insaf Shaheen. I have edited some passages slightly.

Using food as a weapon is as old as the siege but today’s barbarians have upped the anté by several orders of magnitude.

“…There are only two possible ways in which a world of 10 billion people can be averted. Either the current birth rates must come down more quickly. Or the current death rates must go up. There is no other way. There are, of course, many ways in which the death rates can go up. In a thermonuclear age, war can accomplish it very quickly and decisively. Famine and disease are nature’s ancient checks on population growth, and neither one has disappeared from the scene … To put it simply: Excessive population growth is the greatest single obstacle to the economic and social advancement of most of the societies in the developing world.” — Speech to the Club of Rome by Robert McNamara, Oct. 2, 1979

“Overpopulation and rapid demographic growth of Mexico is already today one of the major threats to the national security of the United States. Unless the U.S.-Mexico border is sealed, we will be up to our necks in Mexicans for whom we cannot find jobs.” — Robert McNamara, then World Bank president, March 19, 1982

McNamara’s thinly veiled genocidal utterances took place over thirty years ago, echoing the wealthy and the privileged’s fear of the ’great unwashed’ when ‘over-population’ was the buzzword. So not much has changed has it, we’re hearing the same, tired old messages being rolled out once again by the ruling elites and their spin doctors. McNamara’s cries of fear about being up to his neck in Mexicans is exactly same as the current bogey doing the rounds in Europe, only now they’re Africans.

Thus the current explosions in Haiti, Egypt, Ivory Coast, Ethiopia, the Philippines, Indonesia and elsewhere over the rocketing price of basic foodstuffs such as cooking oil and rice prompted the BBC to describe them as first and foremost “a potential threat to Western security” (BBC News 24, 13 April, 2008), never mind the threat to human life, but then it reveals exactly where the BBC’s head is at, protecting the status quo.

To add insult to injury, the crétin Gordon Brown has the nerve to say,

“Rising food prices threaten to roll back progress we have made in recent years on development. For the first time in decades, the number of people facing hunger is growing.”

Progress? What planet does our glorious leader live on? Standards of living have been falling for everybody (except the rich who, as a consequence, have just gotten even richer by stealing even more from the working class), since the 1970s when the ‘neo-liberal’ agenda was initiated and not only have the poorest been the hardest hit but we’ve seen millions of the formerly ‘middle classes’ dumped unceremoniously back where they ‘belong’, with the poor. Social status doesn’t put food on the table. So much for the right to the pursuit of happiness.

These are the facts: net wages in the US have fallen since the 1970s. It’s reckoned that around 40 million Americans now live under the ‘official’ poverty level, but at least they can still eat something, not so the millions of people in the so-called developing world who already immiserated by so-called free trade, have been hit with a double whammy, nay, a quintuple whammy.

Whammy #1: ‘Free Trade’

The poor countries of the world have been ‘persuaded’ that growing food for export so as to earn foreign currency which they then have to use to buy imported food (guess where from?), is better than growing food in their back yard. And to make sure they live up to their end of the ‘bargain’, under WTO ‘rules’ they get punished if they try to control imports.

Countries grew their own food which not only fed them but also created employment, now grow food and things like flowers, for export in order to ‘earn’ the precious dollar which obviously they have to spend on importing the food they once grew. Worse, the subsidized food imports wipe out what remains of indigenous agriculture, it simply can’t compete. What an insane setup! It only makes sense when you realize that the managers who setup this ‘deal’ work for Big Business, they call the shots. If it were a ‘Mafia’ deal it would be called criminal extortion.

Of course, we in the West with our wealth subsidize the production of food, so the poor of the planet get hit with a whammy within a whammy. Not having the resources to subsidize their own food production, as the cost of importing food rises but not the price they get for exporting food to us, they are truly caught between a rock and a barren place.

And it’s the same IMF and World Bank policies which created the latest crisis to hit the poor of our planet that are responsible for creating such an unequal relationship in the first place.

Whammy #2: Energy

Of course, growing all these crops for export needs lots of energy and lots of water, and lots of fertilizer, and lots of pesticides, all of which must be bought with precious foreign currency (and until recently, only dollars would be accepted). With oil now selling at over $113 a barrel, the cost of producing anything has shot through the roof. The winners: The Big Oil Cartels. No need to tell you who the losers are.

But the actual cost of producing the oil hasn’t risen much at all, the entire responsibility for these increases has to be placed where it belongs, on the commodities speculators and the Big Five oilcos. In other words: on all those grimy gamblers in investment corps and pension fund managers. It’s the system.

Whammy #3: ‘Bio-fuels’

The latest addition to the armoury of food used as a weapon and perhaps the most obvious example to date, is converting production from food staples to so-called bio-fuels.

For rather than us just using less energy, we buy it from the poor of the planet in the form of ‘bio-fuels’. Brilliant isn’t it. What poor country needs to produce ethanol? It has no possible use except perhaps to make moonshine.

But we knew that this would happen and everybody told our cretinous, criminal leaders what would happen. They’re too busy producing wheat for export to feed all those damn cows, cows that we turn into hamburgers for our consumption, but now, instead of producing wheat for export to make burgers, we’re producing ethanol to put in our automobiles. Either way it’s madness!

And in any case, as a leaked EU report shows, bio-fuels do nothing to halt the production of greenhouse gases (they may even increase it), the entire ‘bio-fuels’ thing is one gigantic scam, largely to do with what is the most profitable crop to grow (see ‘Industry asks for bio fuels policy U-turn).

Whammy #4: Water

Fact: It takes 1,000-2,000 litres of water to produce 1 kilo of wheat

Fact: It takes 10,000-13,000 litres of water to produce 1 kilo of meat (Source: FAO)

And guess what gets produced the most, largely for Western consumption—burgers. And not surprisingly, the ‘neo-liberal’ agenda has seen the enforced privatization of water across the planet along with other key resources formerly held in communal ownership.

Whammy #5: Climate Change

Predictably, climate change impacts on those least able to deal with it, the poor. And lest we forget, the majority of the planet’s population are poor. The connectedness between everything must surely be apparent to you, the reader, the fact that messing up the biosphere the way we have been doing for the past two hundred years reverberates throughout the planet. And our political elites call themselves civilized!

Meanwhile, back in the land of the powerful, we’re busy planning for endless war in order to preserve our privilege, so even as our glorious leaders pontificate on about this or that crisis facing us, they’re spending billions on developing robots to shit bombs on the planet’s poor from a comfortable armchair some distance from the scene of the ‘action’.

“UAV Market to Top $13 Billion by 2014

Washington, D.C. (PRWEB) April 14, 2008 — The global war on terrorism has prompted the United States to pump significant amounts of money into its Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) programs, asserts Forecast International analyst Larry Dickerson.” — www.aviationtoday.com/webinars/2008_0417.html

How can anybody in his or her right mind not view these people and the entire class in whose interests they work so tirelessly, not see them not only as war criminals but as destroyers of life! These are truly barbarians in every sense of the word, for they destroy everything of beauty and value including entire countries in order to preserve their piece of the action.

No wonder the Hollywood obsession with ‘saving the planet’ but when will we see a movie about saving ourselves and our home from these predatory mass murderers?

So why is it that we turn away from the carnage ostensibly wrought in our name? After all, people give generously to so-called charities, so it’s not that people don’t care about the plight of others.

Again, I come back to the corporate/state media for surely without their active complicity in covering up the endless atrocities being committed would we stand for it? I think not, but then I’m an eternal optimist about the real nature of the human spirit once we stop fearing and start thinking and feeling.

The major reason is the media’s (never mind the politicians) failure to connect events with the underlying economics that drives them to act the way they do. Thus the ‘credit-crunch’ is so misnamed in order to hide the fact that it’s the economic and political policies of our governments in cahoots with Big Business that created the crisis in the first place (as it has all previous crises).

The ‘credit-crunch’ is merely symptomatic of a sick system that needs to be replaced poste haste.

The issue is really quite simple, as long as we have ruling elites joined at the hip to Big Capital, running the show, they will never, not in a million years entertain the idea of doing away with the present economic system—which is the cause of all our miseries—and replacing it with a saner and more modest way of earning a buck, there’s too much at stake and for so few, dammit! Only we, the so-called people, can do that, they won’t even begin to change things unless we either force them to or failing that: get rid of them!

A Call to Economic Arms

2008-04-06T08:11:00.000-07:00

Where have all the jobs gone?

Exerting Our Power means Discipline – Our Secret Weapon is Restraint

If we, the people, were to use our powers effectively to stop the decay of our economies that is engineered by our out-of-control governments, we would have to understand the root cause of its deterioration first. In order to act, we have to inform ourselves before making buying decisions.

Background

The Elite and their minions (and that’s criminal elements within our governments) announced, as documented in their very own papers, that the middle-class has to be destroyed, for it presents the greatest threat to Global Government (or call it tyranny). Here is how they do it:

(1) Firstly: They started by “encouraging” women to enter into the work force, to gain “independence”. Rockefeller started the Feminist movement and continues to fund it. Qui bono?

a. The state acquires substantial revenue through income tax;

b. The family unit is broken up gradually, (proclaimed goal of the globalists);

c. Our Youth is forced into government controlled day “care”, such as kindergartens, pre-schools and other state controlled institutions;

d. Traditional family values are not passed on onto our children as much as they should, e.g. mothers do not spend enough quality time with their children and we, the parents, are not teaching what’s good and bad. Instead, the government now forces their views onto our children. They teach that Globalism is good, Global Warming is man-made, that Humans are viruses, that torture is good, and that evil terrorism requires us to surrender all our civil liberties; In other words: Our children are exposed to Goebbels-style brainwashing, and the deliberate dumbing down of an entire population is progressing.

Note: Whereas in the early stages of fashionable feminism, the “liberation” of women was a politically correct talking point (injected by the CIA/CFR/House/Rockefeller), it is now necessary for both parents to work full-time just to survive. So, the liberation scam was used successfully to enslave most of the female and children population. Ever increasing taxes and devaluation of our currency through artificial inflation by our governments are designed to keep it that way and to accelerate its detrimental impact on our societies and economies. The feminist movement was probably the Elite’s most ingenious move (that we know of), for its ramifications is touching every aspect of society and private life. Just think about the feminization of men and its consequences. Today’s men have become compliant wimps, chicken necks who are afraid to speak up at home, at work, at PT meetings, at City Hall meetings, in political discussions... but I am digressing. I need to do an article /Podcast on that subject. Watch for it in the next couple of weeks.

(2) Secondly: The deliberate removal of jobs from on-shore to off-shore locations;

a. This forces people into involuntary dependency on the state; this modern form of slavery through welfare gives state control at highest level. Do as I say or we will refuse you food, housing, and other living essentials. Note: A pattern is emerging: Doublethink perfected: Liberation of our Women really meant their enslavement. Welfare help really meant driving its recipients into state controlled dependency...

b. We see a steady increase in crime rates; the state enters ever rising numbers of people into state control via the criminal justice system (probation, jail, prison);

c. In conjunction with the newest streak of tyrannical anti-terror laws, petty crimes, and civil matters and, as documented in their own memorandums, civil dissent are now classified as terrorism. So you and I will soon be called terrorists for fighting corruption! Note: The government’s criminal attempt to suppress free speech will also be their downfall as the people are waking up to their lies and deception.

d. Massive job losses significantly reduce buying power of the population;

e. It increases poverty and the gap between the rich and poor.

Note: Traditional fully functional middle-class families are now losing their incomes, their housing, and social connections. They become homeless slaves of the state. The real news here is that these people are not just your standard alcoholics or the drug addicts. No, these people are your neighbors, your friends, and perhaps someone in your family.

(3) And thirdly: Let’s open our borders wide to unskilled, cheap immigrants and offer them welfare as soon as they enter our countries.

a. “Free“ medical care and welfare for immigrants, legal and illegal, are draining public services;

b. Cheap workers drive down wages, thus lowering the living standard of the working population on top of inflation;

c. Crime rates are steadily on the rise, as no background checks are performed on immigrants;

d. Conquer and Divide! Add all the compounds and society destabilizes further. Their secret: Create social unrest through forced diversity, whereby “political correctness” is used as tool to condition people into submitting to state control and censorship in every aspect of their lives. Note: The introduction of so called “hate crimes” opened the flood gates for unprecedented state control and suppression of free speech. Hate crimes are a fraudulent invention by Globalists and Fabien Socialists. Everyone should be equal before the law and enjoy the same protection through the law. Hate crimes place more value on some groups, which proves that it is a fraud.

There are many more ways with which the Elite create today’s catch-22, false economy. Today, decent and hard working people struggle to retain their standard of living or even to survive. We as consumers have to stop our ignorant and lazy compliance and start fighting back with the tools still tolerated by law. Consumers are powerful, more powerful than any machine-gun wielding police who try to intimidate travelers in airports. We must make informed decisions and support firms who manufacture goods or provide services on-shore.

Anybody Home?

Most of our service industries have moved to India and Eastern Europe. Call Centers, financial processing services, software development, IT support; many more fall under this category.

The majority of our manufacturing industries have moved to China and South America. From computer chips to pretzels, from electronics to clothing, from cosmetics to furniture, hardly anything we buy today in shops or online is produced or manufactured in our own cities and countries anymore. Try to find a label or sticker that does not state: “Made in China”. It is a time consuming task.

The Big-Wigs (and most Fortune 500 corporations) are guilty of conspiring against their own countries: JP Morgan, IBM, BT, Morgan Stanley, , Boeing, and Dymo, to name just a few, have moved job related operations en masse off-shore. Other companies are truly patriotic, such as Australian Rode (high quality microphones), Harley Davidson, SIA, Digi-Key and NCS. These folks are resisting the off-shore scam, and they do so with great sacrifice. Their numbers are far and in between. However, these companies do exist. It is our duty as citizens to seek and support those companies that manufacture and offer services from within our own countries. It is our civil duty to support honest businesses that provide jobs and revenue at home. It is our civil duty to boycott those firms who are filling their pockets through cheap off-shore labor. India and China are now seen as the new economic super powers. Whether this is true or not, it creates the illusion that the Elite here at home are hurting, that they are losing some of their power. Well, not so! China, India, North Korea, Vietnam and the rest are controlled by the same ingenious evil that controls our governments. I do give this to them: They are smart, very smart! And they are dangerous!

Despite the fact that some determined and powerful interests are trying to destroy our sovereignty and freedoms, we (that means you and I, your neighbor, your co-worker, your friend and your family) can and must put a stop to the sell out of our nations.

Strength and Weakness

Our power and our weakness are our wallets. We can and must force manufactures and service providers to respond to market demand. How do we do that? By altering our buying habits, call it a renaissance of our buying-philosophy. We must do this, regardless of the illegal market manipulations by, and treacherous economic policies of our governments. Our corrupt political “leaders” force businesses out of their own countries by imposing feudalistic taxes on businesses and workers, on value creators and value producers. Small businesses are driven out of existence; people in your home towns are losing their jobs.

The military-industrial complex then quickly takes over and moves the operations off-shore, leaving our local economies starved. In the welfare state, this is the recipe for deep and sustained depression. It is the beginning of the end of the middle-class.

The Party is over - It is time to Act!

Don’t you think it is time to fight back? I do! This is a call to economic arms! We must use our buying power as a weapon against the global elite, against those who are trying to destroy us.

Since almost everything we need or desire is manufactured off-shore, a consumer boycott of goods made predominantly at off-shore locations requires sacrifices on our part. We must force companies to either move operations back on-shore, or to suffer the consequences. We must move jobs and thus our buying power and the economic strength of our old country back to where it belongs – home! We must save ourselves from the lethargy that we have been indulging in for far too long. The party is over!

Each and every one of us has to make a simple but conscious decision every time we buy. The logic is simple: if we are to save our countries and our children from economic downfall and global enslavement, we have to act without delay. Refuse to buying goods and services from those companies who moved their operations off-shore. Note: Off-shore manufacturing is not to be confused with buying imported articles in a free market.

Have you noticed? Our countries are gradually acquiring third world status. A dying middle-class, extortionate taxes, rising inflation, the devaluation and elimination of our savings and pensions, the exponential rise of food and energy prices, and you guessed right: even more and higher taxes.

What am I supposed to do?

This call to arms may sound simple, but for many it will not be easy. If there is a product you must have (want or need), you have to check where it is being manufactured before you buy. The internet is your best friend. If the product you wish to buy is outsourced to off-shore manufacturing plants by a Western company, do not buy the item! Do three other things instead:

a. Try to source a similar product that has not been manufactured off-shore. This may be hard, but you will find an alternative product if you put time and effort into the search.

b. It is possible that the alternative product that has been manufactured here at home is more expensive than the off-shore item. However, it is also likely that the quality is better. It is here, where you will prove to yourselves that you are freedom-loving patriots who cherish your countries.

c. IMPORTANT: Do not skip this task! You must let the firm know why are not buying from them and explain the logic. This step is just as important as not buying the product itself. It will accelerate the message we are sending to those companies who sell out. An e-mail is usually the best way to get your message across. You can also save a template and change the product name and company details, as you will need it often, if you were to be consequential.

Just imagine how powerful this message is, if the majority of the people follow suit! Just imagine how quickly we would be able to change the things that are hurting us. Now, it is up to you! Let our wallets be our weapons. Do you want your neighbors to keep their jobs? Do you want crime rates to fall? Do you want to stabilize the society we live in? Do you want to live safer? Do you want to secure the future of your children and grandchildren? Do you want to safe your country? Then do your bit and show discipline and restraint with no exception.

Stay safe!

US attack on Iran imminent?

2008-04-04T01:49:00.000-07:00

Dear Friends,

Of course, you have not heard the real news from government slaves BBC, ABC and the like. Russian Intelligence leaked that an unprovoked attack of Iran by US military may be imminent (6Th April). Just a few months ago, US intelligence services confirmed this: Iran is at least nine years away from Nuclear Weapons capabilities. Now, the lying criminals in the White Whore House and 10 Downing Street Safe House want you to believe that Iran poses a threat to the US/UK.

And then, if you believe the Iraq had WMDs (Weapons of Mass Destruction), than you probably also believe the moon is made of cheese, and the earth is flat, and you would also believe the frivolous lies your "representatives" want to shuffle down our throats. How stupid do they think we are, Brown/Bush/Cheney/Rockefeller/Hart (CFR)/Kissinger and the rest of the war mongers?

Should criminal elements in the US government order the bombing of Iran, WW3 may be upon us. After all, Iran and Russia are allies. There are good military in the US and the UK. Some of the officials have resigned, knowing that powerful criminals in government will order the invasion/bombardment of Iran. I only hope that, in the spirit of the Nuremberg trial, military personnel with refuse orders on the basis of refusing to carry out war crimes and crimes against Humanity.

http://www.truthnews.us/?p=2135

Stay Safe!

The Dali Lama -- and then there was "Fun in Beijing"

2008-03-18T21:06:00.000-07:00

For the Dalai Lama to step down as head of the legitimate Tibet government seems to be a mistake, for the Dalai Lama is a god-like a symbol of freedom and liberty for many. The Dalai Lama is not after power! The criminal Chinese government is, the criminals, who invaded Tibet and exterminated the majority of its peaceful population and who reign with merciless tyranny over a country they unlawfully occupy.

The Dalai Lama wants to save lives, it seems. Is his warning to step down going to be heard? Is he gambling, hoping for the demonstrators to show restraint?

The time for unrest in Tibet is not right. The right time will be when the Olympics start; when the Western sports-minions selfishly rain down on Beijing to show off in the name of the nations the have been ordered to represent.

For Western governments to support the Olympic games in a country that massacres innocent people, violates every Human right imaginable and is treason against Humanity.

Brown, Merckel, Bush and the lot: You are as guilty as the the Chinese government and military. We, the People promise: You will have to answer to us in a court of law some day.

Here they come, the selfish sport minions who cant wait to go to Beijing:

Let me tell you something: You are nothing but trash! Where is your honor? Where is your dignity? You clearly have lost your body and soul to governments who are slaves to the Elites. Just be careful what you wish for -- you may just get it!

Work Idiot Work -- Pay Idiot Pay!

2008-03-10T07:37:00.000-07:00

Work, Idiot, work!
Pay, Idiot, Pay!

The hot talking point on government propaganda channel BBC and other corrupt media channels is the proposal of some politicians to replace the Council tax with an income tax.

The idea to penalize people for working and replacing the "council tax" (supposed to pay for local services) with a three percent income tax is as criminal as those people who shamelessly continue to exploit the working class. Liberal Democrats are neither liberal nor democratic; they are hard core socialists with only one agenda: To take the money from those who earn it and give it to those who don’t. The SNP is seriously delusional and, too, out of touch with the voters to even notice the serious flaw in this proposal.

The average worker pays 61% income tax, that is 40% income tax, 21% NHS tax (10% you, 11% employer), and if that was not enough we pay for petrol or diesel, and even to get to work. On top of that, Briton’s workers are burdened with a bogus sales tax called VAT. The value added tax should have more appropriately been called value diminishing tax. In other words, it is another scam perpetrated by the elites and carried out by their henchmen, the dishonest politicians with their specious smiles who to tell us: Oh it is for the good. You know, Hitler and Goebbels said that, too.

Their politically correct argument is: Scrapping the council tax and replacing it with a three percent income tax is a fairer system. Fairer to whom, may I ask? Fairer to the the those you are able to work but find it easier not to, or fairer to those who are the least likely to use largely unwanted council services in the first place, because they are too busy working to pay their taxes and cope with 30% inflation. Those who hold jobs do not want to end up in the welfare claws of an immoral state.

Without going into any detail: This is calculated step to break up and to destroy the middle class. All establishment parties, the socialist “liberal democrats”, the fascist control freak labour, or a non-existent faceless and gutless opposition party, the Tories, are the same; They have the same ideas, the same policies, the same puppet masters. They do not represent the people. They represent other interests, and their own. They cannot be trusted. None of the parties are fundamentally different. Most of the time the followers seem to mean well; but sadly, they have been brain washed and dumbed down. The yuppies are meshed-in to this false and deceptive multi-party paradigm. The party leadership are straw men and women who work for the financial, corporate and royal Elites.

But back to the surface!

That’s right: Let us discourage more people not to work. Let us put more people into the welfare trap. Let us punish working. Reality is: The more hours people work, the more money people earn (are entitled to), and the more of our property is taken from the people. The more the sheep are mummified in the sticky spider web of the welfare state, the easier their life gets. Just feed us. Just think for me. Just tell me what to do.

Whether a dumb population is paying feudalistic taxes or they are playing the welfare game, the population is enslaved. The workers are too busy to notice. This has been designed that way. Most welfare recipients are trapped in a system and find it impossible to break free. See, the state owns you and our children outright, and it is the state that controls you, whereas you, Mr. And Mrs. Stupid, should control the state!

The way communities should pay for their services are via one consumption tax, a fair sales tax, not via an hyper-inflated 17.5% VAT, plus an income tax, plus a council tax, plus a car tax, plus petrol duties, plus capital gains tax, plus death tax, plus another host of open and hidden criminal taxes that enslave today’s workers against their will. We need change, and we need change now. The practice that the politicians continue to harm the value producers of this country, filling their own pockets with tax payer’s monies and breaking up the middle class has to stop.

Enough is enough. No more! You can push us that far, just a little bit more, before we reach a tipping point......

Statement from Ron Paul On New Hampshire Recount

2008-01-13T06:24:00.000-08:00

Ron Paul
Sunday January 13, 2008

After a careful investigation, I have decided against seeking a recount in New Hampshire. I am confident that not asking for a recount is the right decision.

I carefully considered the arguments for and against a recount before instructing my campaign staff not to pursue it. Without a firm belief that vote fraud had taken place, and without the possibility that a recount would have increased the chances for success of our campaign, a recount would have diverted campaign resources, time, and energy away from crucial battles elsewhere.

We have taken concerns about vote fraud seriously. In Iowa, campaign volunteers carefully monitored the caucuses. Campaign staff placed Paul supporters in every precinct to watch and verify the voting and count. We had supporters phone in results from their precincts to a campaign hotline while others ensured that those numbers were reflected on the official display board at the Polk County Convention Center. The numbers our caucus watchers reported agreed with the official tally, and both results also aligned with the campaign’s internal polling. In relatively pro-Paul counties, our sampling pegged support at 11.5%. This is consistent with an overall 10% finish for the entire state.

In New Hampshire, while I would have hoped for a better result than eight percent, I am convinced that vote fraud played no role in this result. Rumors of vote fraud were investigated, and in the end they proved to be the result of errors in early media reports that were not reflected in the official numbers. In one notable case, when a campaign staff member contacted an individual who had on the evening of January 8 claimed that his vote had not been counted, the person said that he had made a mistake and that the next morning the error in reporting on a newspaper website had been corrected both in the media and -- most importantly -- in the official tally.

Many have expressed concerns that those ballots counted by machine yielded a 2% lower total than those counted by hand. However, machine counted vote totals were more than 2% lower for both John McCain and Mike Huckabee. Hand counted votes were more likely to be cast in rural areas. Results almost always vary between urban and rural areas.

My campaign staff and I have analyzed the numbers in New Hampshire and I have reached the conclusion that it was the high turnout -- not vote fraud or counting errors -- that left us with eight percent of the vote. Our total vote count of over 18,000 votes was well within what we projected given the efforts of our extensive statewide get-out-the-vote program, giving me no reason to believe that vote fraud played any role in the results of the Granite State’s primary.

In both Iowa and New Hampshire there is much to be proud of. Taking both states together, I am honored that over 30,000 people cast their vote for me -- more than either Rudy Giuliani or Fred Thompson. Unlike many other candidates’ efforts, our campaign for freedom is growing and our message is spreading.

Now is the time to redouble our efforts. Our resources must be spent on the upcoming primaries and caucuses, and on ensuring that, with your help, we organize every state yet to vote with our Precinct Leaders program.

We can't win primaries and caucuses that have already happened -- but we can win those yet to come. To become the Republican presidential nominee, a candidate must have 1,191 delegates. Iowa, Wyoming and New Hampshire determined only 32 delegates, so we have much opportunity remaining.

Today, I ask you to join me in focusing on the battles ahead as we continue our fight for liberty and our Constitution.

Sincerely,

Ron Paul

Alex Jones - Artists of the Year

2008-01-12T09:40:00.000-08:00

Alex Jones

by Steve Marsh

Texas isn't all bad. I mean, there's Austin. Austin's given us Willie Nelson, Dazed and Confused, Bottle Rocket, and a couple of okay Spoon records. And Austin broadcasts The Alex Jones Show, a radio show in which Alex Jones fights the New World Order for three hours a day.

"I'm tired of it," Alex will say in that deep-as-a-barbecue-pit boomer. He'll sigh—he's got a classic sigh—and he'll say, "I'm so tired of their propaganda, I don't know what to say anymore." Then he'll talk for three hours about the trans-American highway, the ruse of global warming, the use of psychotropic drugs in black ops, the mainstream media's attempt to discredit Ron Paul's candidacy, federally sponsored terrorism, the country's disgusting centralized food system, the devaluation of America's currency, and the general forfeiture of our sovereignty. He's transmitting a lot of unpleasant shit, so he needs that great radio voice, that basso profundo that rattles and soothes at the same time, like an expensive subwoofer in the trunk.

Just like a Radiohead album, or a Marvel comic book, or an Alfonso Cuarón movie, he proves that the gloomy truth doesn't have to be a snooze. Jones knows how to entertain. Each broadcast begins with the "Imperial March," from Star Wars. Duhn duhn duhn, duhn, duhn duhn. He's played clips demonstrating how Hillary uses different accents in different regions of the country, he had Charlie Sheen on to talk about 9/11, and he always spins incisive bumper music: Johnny Cash, Rage, Leonard Cohen, the Beatles. Sure, he gets excited, and he can kick up a bluster like Mean Gene interviewing Jesse the Body, but a champion has to keep his energy up when he's fighting global enslavement.

And Jones is only getting better. At 33, he's already been on the air for 12 years, and he holds his own against "serious" guests like David de Rothschild or Pat Buchanan. He's a documentary filmmaker, too, and this year's Endgame: A Blueprint for Global Enslavement was his best film yet, a comprehensive investigation of our brave new world that named names. And his new site, prisonplanet.com, is essential reading. So don't give up, people; we're on the march. And the Empire is on the run.

Steve Marsh is an associate editor at Mpls.St.Paul Magazine.

Letter from Ron Paul: Vote Fraud Not Beyond These People

2008-01-12T04:28:00.000-08:00

Ron Paul 2008
January 10, 2008

Did you see that funny YouTube where Mike Huckabee’s young Iowa spokesman endorsed me, “by mistake”? We know what was in his mind! Indeed, I am amazed at the friendliness of the supporters of other candidates. Many Obama voters, for example, in Iowa and New Hampshire are reading our literature, and studying our ideas. It’s just one of the reasons I am so optimistic about what we are doing, and where we are heading. And so were the 500 or 600 people at our New Hampshire rally after the primary. I talked to everyone there, and they are rightly enthusiastic about our movement.

This does not mean we will have an easy time of it — just the opposite, of course. After all, we are seeking to reverse more than a century of big government, of the warfare-welfare state, of Federal Reserve’s dollar manipulation, of a fat and happy military-industrial complex, of the subversion of our Constitution. So all the media and other “second-hand dealers in ideas,” as F.A. Hayek called them, who have a vested interest in the current order, will do everything possible to smear me. They will do and say anything to try to block our movement. Even vote fraud is not beyond these people.

And we have been successful. This movement has always operated on two tracks — intellectual and political, and must. The first and most important is the intellectual. Such heroes of freedom as Ludwig von Mises, Hayek, Henry Hazlitt, Murray Rothbard, and so many others like Rose Wilder Lane, John T. Flynn, Isabel Patterson, and Garret Garrett, have helped build the foundations of freedom, prosperity, and peace. We carry on their work, to change hearts and minds.

The other track is political. Here too, we have touched millions with our ideas, and recruited many, many thousands — not only in Meetup Groups and as voters, but as sympathizers and future voters too. Walter Block was kind enough to call this effort the most important in the long history of libertarianism. I don’t know about that, but I do know that even if we place a solid fourth, rather than the higher place we all want and are working so hard for, that is huge progress.

But we can never forget that this is a long struggle. Many great men and women have lived and died in this cause. I have been deeply involved in it all my life. It is a matter of educational work, and elections. We may not accomplish all we want, in one or even two elections. But we will accomplish it. Young people now living will see the free society that you and I dream of, as their everyday reality, an America at peace, prosperous and free, with the federal government chained down y the Constitution, as Jefferson said.

Does this mean our campaign has done everything right? No! We have made mistakes, and will make them again. Not only because errors are to be found in any human endeavor, but because an effort like this, to repeal a hundred years and more of evil, is brand-new on the face of the earth. But now is the time to stick together like the brothers and sisters we are, to stand side by side in this fight against the media toadies, warmongers, and Wall Street rip-off artists who stand against us, and who always remind me of Tolkein’s Orcs.

If you have suggestions for me to do better, I want to hear them. But beating back the enemy, teaching so many young people and others about liberty, that is our victory, and it is real and permanent. Won’t you link arms with me? We will have more vote victories too, if we stick together and do not let the enemy divide us.

As you know, and as our neocon enemies try to cover up, we are in a financial crisis. It may chug along at this pace, slowly into recession, or it might drop off a cliff, like the dollar. In that case, we will have the only coherent solution, and we must get our message out.

All my life, I’ve been working to make sure that when the Fed had done its work, and the special interests had looted the system to their hearts’ content, and there was a crisis, I would be in a position to speak the truth about why, and what to do about it. In this fight, I need your heart, your mind, your time, and your financial support. I also need you to become a precinct leader https://voters.ronpaul2008.com/grassroots/. What a fight we are in. What stakes there are. Together, we can build a new America faithful to the values of the framers. Bother the enemy, help the good cause: make your most generous contribution https://www.ronpaul2008.com/donate/, and let’s roll up our sleeves and get to work, together.

Sincerely,

Ron

In 2008, a 100 Percent Chance of Alarm

2008-01-04T05:30:00.000-08:00

By JOHN TIERNEY

Published: January 1, 2008, NY Times

Correction Appended

I’d like to wish you a happy New Year, but I’m afraid I have a different sort of prediction.

You’re in for very bad weather. In 2008, your television will bring you image after frightening image of natural havoc linked to global warming. You will be told that such bizarre weather must be a sign of dangerous climate change — and that these images are a mere preview of what’s in store unless we act quickly to cool the planet.

Unfortunately, I can’t be more specific. I don’t know if disaster will come by flood or drought, hurricane or blizzard, fire or ice. Nor do I have any idea how much the planet will warm this year or what that means for your local forecast. Long-term climate models cannot explain short-term weather.

But there’s bound to be some weird weather somewhere, and we will react like the sailors in the Book of Jonah. When a storm hit their ship, they didn’t ascribe it to a seasonal weather pattern. They quickly identified the cause (Jonah’s sinfulness) and agreed to an appropriate policy response (throw Jonah overboard).

Today’s interpreters of the weather are what social scientists call availability entrepreneurs: the activists, journalists and publicity-savvy scientists who selectively monitor the globe looking for newsworthy evidence of a new form of sinfulness, burning fossil fuels.

A year ago, British meteorologists made headlines predicting that the buildup of greenhouse gases would help make 2007 the hottest year on record. At year’s end, even though the British scientists reported the global temperature average was not a new record — it was actually lower than any year since 2001 — the BBC confidently proclaimed, “2007 Data Confirms Warming Trend.”

When the Arctic sea ice last year hit the lowest level ever recorded by satellites, it was big news and heralded as a sign that the whole planet was warming. When the Antarctic sea ice last year reached the highest level ever recorded by satellites, it was pretty much ignored. A large part of Antarctica has been cooling recently, but most coverage of that continent has focused on one small part that has warmed.

When Hurricane Katrina flooded New Orleans in 2005, it was supposed to be a harbinger of the stormier world predicted by some climate modelers. When the next two hurricane seasons were fairly calm — by some measures, last season in the Northern Hemisphere was the calmest in three decades — the availability entrepreneurs changed the subject. Droughts in California and Australia became the new harbingers of climate change (never mind that a warmer planet is projected to have more, not less, precipitation over all).

The most charitable excuse for this bias in weather divination is that the entrepreneurs are trying to offset another bias. The planet has indeed gotten warmer, and it is projected to keep warming because of greenhouse emissions, but this process is too slow to make much impact on the public.

When judging risks, we often go wrong by using what’s called the availability heuristic: we gauge a danger according to how many examples of it are readily available in our minds. Thus we overestimate the odds of dying in a terrorist attack or a plane crash because we’ve seen such dramatic deaths so often on television; we underestimate the risks of dying from a stroke because we don’t have so many vivid images readily available.

Slow warming doesn’t make for memorable images on television or in people’s minds, so activists, journalists and scientists have looked to hurricanes, wild fires and starving polar bears instead. They have used these images to start an “availability cascade,” a term coined by Timur Kuran, professor of economics and political science at Duke University, and Cass R. Sunstein, a law professor at the University of Chicago.

The availability cascade is a self-perpetuating process: the more attention a danger gets, the more worried people become, leading to more news coverage and more fear. Once the images of Sept. 11 made terrorism seem a major threat, the press and the police lavished attention on potential new attacks and supposed plots. After Three Mile Island and “The China Syndrome,” minor malfunctions at nuclear power plants suddenly became newsworthy.

“Many people concerned about climate change,” Dr. Sunstein says, “want to create an availability cascade by fixing an incident in people’s minds. Hurricane Katrina is just an early example; there will be others. I don’t doubt that climate change is real and that it presents a serious threat, but there’s a danger that any ‘consensus’ on particular events or specific findings is, in part, a cascade.”

Once a cascade is under way, it becomes tough to sort out risks because experts become reluctant to dispute the popular wisdom, and are ignored if they do. Now that the melting Arctic has become the symbol of global warming, there’s not much interest in hearing other explanations of why the ice is melting — or why the globe’s other pole isn’t melting, too.

Global warming has an impact on both polar regions, but they’re also strongly influenced by regional weather patterns and ocean currents. Two studies by NASA and university scientists last year concluded that much of the recent melting of Arctic sea ice was related to a cyclical change in ocean currents and winds, but those studies got relatively little attention — and were certainly no match for the images of struggling polar bears so popular with availability entrepreneurs.

Roger A. Pielke Jr., a professor of environmental studies at the University of Colorado, recently noted the very different reception received last year by two conflicting papers on the link between hurricanes and global warming. He counted 79 news articles about a paper in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, and only 3 news articles about one in a far more prestigious journal, Nature.

Guess which paper jibed with the theory — and image of Katrina — presented by Al Gore’s “Inconvenient Truth”?

It was, of course, the paper in the more obscure journal, which suggested that global warming is creating more hurricanes. The paper in Nature concluded that global warming has a minimal effect on hurricanes. It was published in December — by coincidence, the same week that Mr. Gore received his Nobel Peace Prize.

In his acceptance speech, Mr. Gore didn’t dwell on the complexities of the hurricane debate. Nor, in his roundup of the 2007 weather, did he mention how calm the hurricane season had been. Instead, he alluded somewhat mysteriously to “stronger storms in the Atlantic and Pacific,” and focused on other kinds of disasters, like “massive droughts” and “massive flooding.”

“In the last few months,” Mr. Gore said, “it has been harder and harder to misinterpret the signs that our world is spinning out of kilter.” But he was being too modest. Thanks to availability entrepreneurs like him, misinterpreting the weather is getting easier and easier.

Correction: January 4, 2008

The Findings column in Science Times on Tuesday, about the way severe weather is tied to predictions of global warming, gave an outdated academic affiliation for Timur Kuran. He is a professor of economics and political science at Duke University; he is no longer a professor of economics and law at the University of Southern California.

George Orwell's supressed preface to Animal Farm

2007-12-31T00:31:00.001-08:00

Contributor: http://www.orwell.ru/library/novels/Animal_Farm/english/efp_go

I know that the English intelligentsia have plenty of reason for their timidity and dishonesty, indeed I know by heart the arguments by which they justify themselves. But at least let us have no more nonsense about defending liberty against Fascism. If liberty means anything at all it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear.

George Orwell

The Freedom of the Press

Orwell's Proposed Preface to ‘Animal Farm’

This book was first thought of, so far as the central idea goes, in 1937, but was not written down until about the end of 1943. By the time when it came to be written it was obvious that there would be great difficulty in getting it published (in spite of the present book shortage which ensures that anything describable as a book will ‘sell’), and in the event it was refused by four publishers. Only one of these had any ideological motive. Two had been publishing anti-Russian books for years, and the other had no noticeable political colour. One publisher actually started by accepting the book, but after making the preliminary arrangements he decided to consult the Ministry of Information, who appear to have warned him, or at any rate strongly advised him, against publishing it. Here is an extract from his letter:

I mentioned the reaction I had had from an important official in the Ministry of Information with regard to Animal Farm. I must confess that this expression of opinion has given me seriously to think... I can see now that it might be regarded as something which it was highly ill-advised to publish at the present time. If the fable were addressed generally to dictators and dictatorships at large then publication would be all right, but the fable does follow, as I see now, so completely the progress of the Russian Soviets and their two dictators, that it can apply only to Russia, to the exclusion of the other dictatorships. Another thing: it would be less offensive if the predominant caste in the fable were not pigs[*]. I think the choice of pigs as the ruling caste will no doubt give offence to many people, and particularly to anyone who is a bit touchy, as undoubtedly the Russians are.

* It is not quite clear whether this suggested modification is Mr... ’s own idea, or originated with the Ministry of Information; but it seems to have the official ring about it. [Orwell’s Note]

This kind of thing is not a good symptom. Obviously it is not desirable that a government department should have any power of censorship (except security censorship, which no one objects to in war time) over books which are not officially sponsored. But the chief danger to freedom of thought and speech at this moment is not the direct interference of the MOI or any official body. If publishers and editors exert themselves to keep certain topics out of print, it is not because they are frightened of prosecution but because they are frightened of public opinion. In this country intellectual cowardice is the worst enemy a writer or journalist has to face, and that fact does not seem to me to have had the discussion it deserves.

Any fairminded person with journalistic experience will admit that during this war official censorship has not been particularly irksome. We have not been subjected to the kind of totalitarian ‘co-ordination’ that it might have been reasonable to expect. The press has some justified grievances, but on the whole the Government has behaved well and has been surprisingly tolerant of minority opinions. The sinister fact about literary censorship in England is that it is largely voluntary.

Unpopular ideas can be silenced, and inconvenient facts kept dark, without the need for any official ban. Anyone who has lived long in a foreign country will know of instances of sensational items of news — things which on their own merits would get the big headlines-being kept right out of the British press, not because the Government intervened but because of a general tacit agreement that ‘it wouldn’t do’ to mention that particular fact. So far as the daily newspapers go, this is easy to understand. The British press is extremely centralized, and most of it is owned by wealthy men who have every motive to be dishonest on certain important topics. But the same kind of veiled censorship also operates in books and periodicals, as well as in plays, films and radio. At any given moment there is an orthodoxy, a body of ideas which it is assumed that all right-thinking people will accept without question. It is not exactly forbidden to say this, that or the other, but it is ‘not done’ to say it, just as in mid-Victorian times it was ‘not done’ to mention trousers in the presence of a lady. Anyone who challenges the prevailing orthodoxy finds himself silenced with surprising effectiveness. A genuinely unfashionable opinion is almost never given a fair hearing, either in the popular press or in the highbrow periodicals.

At this moment what is demanded by the prevailing orthodoxy is an uncritical admiration of Soviet Russia. Everyone knows this, nearly everyone acts on it. Any serious criticism of the Soviet régime, any disclosure of facts which the Soviet government would prefer to keep hidden, is next door to unprintable. And this nation-wide conspiracy to flatter our ally takes place, curiously enough, against a background of genuine intellectual tolerance. For though you arc not allowed to criticize the Soviet government, at least you are reasonably free to criticise our own. Hardly anyone will print an attack on Stalin, but it is quite safe to attack Churchill, at any rate in books and periodicals. And throughout five years of war, during two or three of which we were fighting for national survival, countless books, pamphlets and articles advocating a compromise peace have been published without interference. More, they have been published without exciting much disapproval. So long as the prestige of the USSR is not involved, the principle of free speech has been reasonably well upheld. There are other forbidden topics, and I shall mention some of them presently, but the prevailing attitude towards the USSR is much the most serious symptom. It is, as it were, spontaneous, and is not due to the action of any pressure group.

The servility with which the greater part of the English intelligentsia have swallowed and repeated Russian propaganda from 1941 onwards would be quite astounding if it were not that they have behaved similarly on several earlier occasions. On one controversial issue after another the Russian viewpoint has been accepted without examination and then publicized with complete disregard to historical truth or intellectual decency. To name only one instance, the BBC celebrated the twenty-fifth anniversary of the Red Army without mentioning Trotsky. This was about as accurate as commemorating the battle of Trafalgar without mentioning Nelson, but it evoked no protest from the English intelligentsia. In the internal struggles in the various occupied countries, the British press has in almost all cases sided with the faction favored by the Russians and libelled the opposing faction, sometimes suppressing material evidence in order to do so. A particularly glaring case was that of Colonel Mihailovich, the Jugoslav Chetnik leader. The Russians, who had their own Jugoslav protege in Marshal Tito, accused Mihailovich of collaborating with the Germans. This accusation was promptly taken up by the British press: Mihailovich’s supporters were given no chance of answering it, and facts contradicting it were simply kept out of print. In July of 1943 the Germans offered a reward of 100,000 gold crowns for the capture of Tito, and a similar reward for the capture of Mihailovich. The British press ‘splashed’ the reward for Tito, but only one paper mentioned (in small print) the reward for Mihailovich: and the charges of collaborating with the Germans continued. Very similar things happened during the Spanish civil war. Then, too, the factions on the Republican side which the Russians were determined to crush were recklessly libeled in the English left-wing [sic] press, and any statement in their defence even in letter form, was refused publication. At present, not only is serious criticism of the USSR considered reprehensible, but even the fact of the existence of such criticism is kept secret in some cases. For example, shortly before his death Trotsky had written a biography of Stalin. One may assume that it was not an altogether unbiased book, but obviously it was saleable. An American publisher had arranged to issue it and the book was in print — 1 believe the review copies had been sent out — when the USSR entered the war. The book was immediately withdrawn. Not a word about this has ever appeared in the British press, though clearly the existence of such a book, and its suppression, was a news item worth a few paragraphs.

It is important to distinguish between the kind of censorship that the English literary intelligentsia voluntarily impose upon themselves, and the censorship that can sometimes be enforced by pressure groups. Notoriously, certain topics cannot be discussed because of ‘vested interests’. The best-known case is the patent medicine racket. Again, the Catholic Church has considerable influence in the press and can silence criticism of itself to some extent. A scandal involving a Catholic priest is almost never given publicity, whereas an Anglican priest who gets into trouble (e.g. the Rector of Stiffkey) is headline news. It is very rare for anything of an anti-Catholic tendency to appear on the stage or in a film. Any actor can tell you that a play or film which attacks or makes fun of the Catholic Church is liable to be boycotted in the press and will probably be a failure. But this kind of thing is harmless, or at least it is understandable. Any large organisation will look after its own interests as best it can, and overt propaganda is not a thing to object to. One would no more expect the Daily Worker to publicize unfavorable facts about the USSR than one would expect the Catholic Herald to denounce the Pope. But then every thinking person knows the Daily Worker and the Catholic Herald for what they are. What is disquieting is that where the USSR and its policies are concerned one cannot expect intelligent criticism or even, in many cases, plain honesty from Liberal [sic — and throughout as typescript] writers and journalists who are under no direct pressure to falsify their opinions. Stalin is sacrosanct and certain aspects of his policy must not be seriously discussed. This rule has been almost universally observed since 1941, but it had operated, to a greater extent than is sometimes realised, for ten years earlier than that. Throughout that time, criticism of the Soviet régime from the left could only obtain a hearing with difficulty. There was a huge output of anti-Russian literature, but nearly all of it was from the Conservative angle and manifestly dishonest, out of date and actuated by sordid motives. On the other side there was an equally huge and almost equally dishonest stream of pro-Russian propaganda, and what amounted to a boycott on anyone who tried to discuss all-important questions in a grown-up manner. You could, indeed, publish anti-Russian books, but to do so was to make sure of being ignored or misrepresented by nearly me whole of the highbrow press. Both publicly and privately you were warned that it was ‘not done’. What you said might possibly be true, but it was ‘inopportune’ and played into the hands of this or that reactionary interest. This attitude was usually defended on the ground that the international situation, and me urgent need for an Anglo-Russian alliance, demanded it; but it was clear that this was a rationalization. The English intelligentsia, or a great part of it, had developed a nationalistic loyalty towards me USSR, and in their hearts they felt that to cast any doubt on me wisdom of Stalin was a kind of blasphemy. Events in Russia and events elsewhere were to be judged by different standards. The endless executions in me purges of 1936-8 were applauded by life-long opponents of capital punishment, and it was considered equally proper to publicize famines when they happened in India and to conceal them when they happened in me Ukraine. And if this was true before the war, the intellectual atmosphere is certainly no better now.

But now to come back to this book of mine. The reaction towards it of most English intellectuals will be quite simple: ‘It oughtn’t to have been published.’ Naturally, those reviewers who understand the art of denigration will not attack it on political grounds but on literary ones. They will say that it is a dull, silly book and a disgraceful waste of paper. This may well be true, but it is obviously not me whole of the story. One does not say that a book ‘ought not to have been published’ merely because it is a bad book. After all, acres of rubbish are printed daily and no one bothers. The English intelligentsia, or most of them, will object to this book because it traduces their Leader and (as they see it) does harm to the cause of progress. If it did me opposite they would have nothing to say against it, even if its literary faults were ten times as glaring as they are. The success of, for instance, the Left Book Club over a period of four or five years shows how willing they are to tolerate both scurrility and slipshod writing, provided that it tells them what they want to hear.

The issue involved here is quite a simple one: Is every opinion, however unpopular — however foolish, even — entitled to a hearing? Put it in that form and nearly any English intellectual will feel that he ought to say ‘Yes’. But give it a concrete shape, and ask, ‘How about an attack on Stalin? Is that entitled to a hearing?’, and the answer more often than not will be ‘No’, In that case the current orthodoxy happens to be challenged, and so the principle of free speech lapses. Now, when one demands liberty of speech and of the press, one is not demanding absolute liberty. There always must be, or at any rate there always will be, some degree of censorship, so long as organised societies endure. But freedom, as Rosa Luxembourg [sic] said, is ‘freedom for the other fellow’. The same principle is contained in the famous words of Voltaire: ‘I detest what you say; I will defend to the death your right to say it.’ If the intellectual liberty which without a doubt has been one of the distinguishing marks of western civilization means anything at all, it means that everyone shall have the right to say and to print what he believes to be the truth, provided only that it does not harm the rest of the community in some quite unmistakable way. Both capitalist democracy and the western versions of Socialism have till recently taken that principle for granted. Our Government, as I have already pointed out, still makes some show of respecting it. The ordinary people in the street-partly, perhaps, because they are not sufficiently interested in ideas to be intolerant about them-still vaguely hold that ‘I suppose everyone’s got a right to their own opinion.’ It is only, or at any rate it is chiefly, the literary and scientific intelligentsia, the very people who ought to be the guardians of liberty, who are beginning to despise it, in theory as well as in practice.

One of the peculiar phenomena of our time is the renegade Liberal. Over and above the familiar Marxist claim that ‘bourgeois liberty’ is an illusion, there is now a widespread tendency to argue that one can only defend democracy by totalitarian methods. If one loves democracy, the argument runs, one must crush its enemies by no matter what means. And who are its enemies? It always appears that they are not only those who attack it openly and consciously, but those who ‘objectively’ endanger it by spreading mistaken doctrines. In other words, defending democracy involves destroying all independence of thought. This argument was used, for instance, to justify the Russian purges. The most ardent Russophile hardly believed that all of the victims were guilty of all the things they were accused of: but by holding heretical opinions they ‘objectively’ harmed the régime, and therefore it was quite right not only to massacre them but to discredit them by false accusations. The same argument was used to justify the quite conscious lying that went on in the left-wing press about the Trotskyists and other Republican minorities in the Spanish civil war. And it was used again as a reason for yelping against habeas corpus when Mosley was released in 1943.

These people don’t see that if you encourage totalitarian methods, the time may come when they will be used against you instead of for you. Make a habit of imprisoning Fascists without trial, and perhaps the process won’t stop at Fascists. Soon after the suppressed Daily Worker had been reinstated, I was lecturing to a workingmen’s college in South London. The audience were working-class and lower-middle class intellectuals — the same sort of audience that one used to meet at Left Book Club branches. The lecture had touched on the freedom of the press, and at the end, to my astonishment, several questioners stood up and asked me: Did I not think that the lifting of the ban on the Daily Worker was a great mistake? When asked why, they said that it was a paper of doubtful loyalty and ought not to be tolerated in war time. I found myself defending the Daily Worker, which has gone out of its way to libel me more than once. But where had these people learned this essentially totalitarian outlook? Pretty certainly they had learned it from the Communists themselves! Tolerance and decency are deeply rooted in England, but they are not indestructible, and they have to be kept alive partly by conscious effort. The result of preaching totalitarian doctrines is to weaken the instinct by means of which free peoples know what is or is not dangerous. The case of Mosley illustrates this. In 1940 it was perfectly right to intern Mosley, whether or not he had committed any technical crime. We were fighting for our lives and could not allow a possible quisling to go free. To keep him shut up, without trial, in 1943 was an outrage. The general failure to see this was a bad symptom, though it is true that the agitation against Mosley’s release was partly factitious and partly a rationalization of other discontents. But how much of the present slide towards Fascist ways of thought is traceable to the ‘anti-Fascism’ of the past ten years and the unscrupulousness it has entailed?

It is important to realise that the current Russomania is only a symptom of the general weakening of the western liberal tradition. Had the MOI chipped in and definitely vetoed the publication of this book, the bulk of the English intelligentsia would have seen nothing disquieting in this. Uncritical loyalty to the USSR happens to be the current orthodoxy, and where the supposed interests of the USSR are involved they are willing to tolerate not only censorship but the deliberate falsification of history. To name one instance. At the death of John Reed, the author of Ten Days that Shook the World — first-hand account of the early days of the Russian Revolution — the copyright of the book passed into the hands of the British Communist Party, to whom I believe Reed had bequeathed it. Some years later the British Communists, having destroyed the original edition of the book as completely as they could, issued a garbled version from which they had eliminated mentions of Trotsky and also omitted the introduction written by Lenin. If a radical intelligentsia had still existed in Britain, this act of forgery would have been exposed and denounced in every literary paper in the country. As it was there was little or no protest. To many English intellectuals it seemed quite a natural thing to do. And this tolerance or [sic = of?] plain dishonesty means much more than that admiration for Russia happens to be fashionable at this moment. Quite possibly that particular fashion will not last. For all I know, by the time this book is published my view of the Soviet régime may be the generally-accepted one. But what use would that be in itself? To exchange one orthodoxy for another is not necessarily an advance. The enemy is the gramophone mind, whether or not one agrees with the record that is being played at the moment.

I am well acquainted with all the arguments against freedom of thought and speech — the arguments which claim that it cannot exist, and the arguments which claim that it ought not to. I answer simply that they don’t convince me and that our civilisation over a period of four hundred years has been founded on the opposite notice. For quite a decade past I have believed that the existing Russian régime is a mainly evil thing, and I claim the right to say so, in spite of the fact that we are allies with the USSR in a war which I want to see won. If I had to choose a text to justify myself, I should choose the line from Milton:

By the known rules of ancient liberty.

The word ancient emphasises the fact that intellectual freedom is a deep-rooted tradition without which our characteristic western culture could only doubtfully exist. From that tradition many of our intellectuals arc visibly turning away. They have accepted the principle that a book should be published or suppressed, praised or damned, not on its merits but according to political expediency. And others who do not actually hold this view assent to it from sheer cowardice. An example of this is the failure of the numerous and vocal English pacifists to raise their voices against the prevalent worship of Russian militarism. According to those pacifists, all violence is evil, and they have urged us at every stage of the war to give in or at least to make a compromise peace. But how many of them have ever suggested that war is also evil when it is waged by the Red Army? Apparently the Russians have a right to defend themselves, whereas for us to do [so] is a deadly sin. One can only explain this contradiction in one way: that is, by a cowardly desire to keep in with the bulk of the intelligentsia, whose patriotism is directed towards the USSR rather than towards Britain. I know that the English intelligentsia have plenty of reason for their timidity and dishonesty, indeed I know by heart the arguments by which they justify themselves. But at least let us have no more nonsense about defending liberty against Fascism. If liberty means anything at all it means the right to tell people what they do not want to hear. The common people still vaguely subscribe to that doctrine and act on it. In our country — it is not the same in all countries: it was not so in republican France, and it is not so in the USA today — it is the liberals who fear liberty and the intellectuals who want to do dirt on the intellect: it is to draw attention to that fact that I have written this preface.

1945

For some reason in their 2000 edition, Penguin decided to publish this preface (the only one) as Appendix with small intro. But it is preface? Preface for Ukrainian edition of Animal Farm was printed also as Appendix (II). (O. Dag)

____
By Penguin:

APPENDIX I

Orwell’s Proposed Preface to Animal Farm.

Space was allowed in the first edition of Animal Farm for a preface by Orwell, as the pagination of the author’s proof indicates. This preface was not included and the typescript was only found years later by Ian Angus. It was published, with an introduction by Professor Bernard Crick entitled ‘How the essay came to be written’, in The Times Literary Supplement, 15 September 1972.

____BD____
George Orwell: ‘The Freedom of the Press’
First published: The Times Literary Supplement, September 15, 1972.

____
Machine-readable version: O. Dag
Last modified on: 2004-12-19

Published: http://www.orwell.ru/library/novels/Animal_Farm/english/efp_go

Creeping Fascism: From Nazi Germany to Post 9/11 America

2007-12-30T08:58:00.001-08:00

"Americans today are seeing the same sheepish submissiveness that characterized Germany after the burning of the Reichstag." Is democracy slowly disappearing? Hitler and Franco did it in Germany and Spain. Is Bush doing it in the USA?

Added by Think!:
Is Brown doing it in the UK? Are the Globalists doing it to everyone of us who is not member of the elite cartel, the same powers who have founded and are directing the UN, the Bank of England, the Federal Reserve? Are these the same unelected people who set the agenda of your government? Are these the members of the Bilderberg Group, the CFR and Trilateral Commission and their fascist-globalist minions? Much of the evidence speaks for it.

S. 1959 OUTLAWS PATRIOTS AS HOMEGROWN TERRORISTS

2007-12-30T07:44:00.001-08:00

A proposed law with far-reaching consequences for American patriots now classified as Homegrown Terrorists! And gives cause to censor the internet as never before! They are coming!

Added by Think!
(picture from www.dw-world.de)

Can we remain convinced that this is just a conspiracy theory? Any rational thinking person will have to, at least, suspect that the motives behind this bill, that allows the state to suspend due process and declare anyone a terrorist who has a different opinion; Anyone who is against the war, or higher taxes, or personal surveillance, or anyone who simply stands up for the US constitution?

Dissent and disagreement with government is the live's blood of Human freedom, not merely because it is the first roadblock against ... tyranny. It is also essential, because every once in a while it is right and the power to which it speaks is wrong.

- Keith Olbermann

Western Intelligence Services behind Bhutto Murder?

2007-12-28T06:32:00.000-08:00

Dictatorships quick to blame “Al Qaeda” for Bhutto assassination

(photo Mathaba.net Dec 28 2007) Let me express my condolences to the family, friends, and supporters of Benazir Bhutto, who was murdered on 27^th December 2007 by criminal elements and their powerful interest groups. There can not be any justification for killing people because of their political views or legitimate leadership. And those who murder to further their interests will be brought to justice.

Let us look at the facts and possible motives behind the assassination of the first female Prime Minister of a Muslim country.

Dissent and disagreement with government is the lives’ blood of Human freedom, not merely because it is the first roadblock against ... tyranny. It is also essential, because every once in a while it is right and the power to which it speaks is wrong.

- - - Keith Olberman

A major event was needed to renew the perceived terrorist threat, on which the erosion of liberty and civil rights, in other words, the rise of Fascism, are built on and justified with. UK’s ITV News yesterday boldly stated that Intelligence Services or Terrorists may be behind Bhutto’s assassination. I can only guess that this was a slip of the tongue, or was it? After all, we are seeing western governments blatantly admitting to their criminal agendas much more frequently in recent months. They are taking their gloves off. It does not matter what you think; Torture is good, Assassinations are justified, and Fascism is our new way of life – only do they not call it Fascism; they call it their New World Order under the Reichstags Parliament of the United Nations. The government is your friend!

Qui Bono?

Who benefits from Bhutto’s death? It was easily predictable that Bhutto’s assassination would create unrest in Pakistan just after a period of Martial Law, and shortly before major elections are to be held in Pakistan. Not surprisingly, it was the CIA who pushed for Bhutto's return to Pakistan, while the Bush administration is supporting military dictator Musharraf.

Let’s face it! This is not about a corrupt politician or her husband, who were arrested and convicted for pocketing millions of taxpayers’ money for their own gain, twice! Benazir Bhutto’s assassination has nothing to do with her policies; it is not about some political strategy that could interfere with some terrorists plans to freely roam and plot “Al Qaeda” attacks in Pakistan, as government controlled “news” will make us believe. Western intelligence Services and criminal elements of their governments already provide safe havens for terrorists on Western soil, as proven in the remarkable documentary Terrorstorm, by Alex Jones (infowars.com). This assassination is about creating unrest and instability in an already volatile region. This is about pushing CIA grown “Al Qaeda” into the news again. Neocons and globalist were desperate to bring the words “terrorists” and “threat” back into the headlines to justify further erosion of our freedoms and civil liberties. The lame terrorist talking points have awoken to new life.

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety. deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

- B- Benjamin Franklin

Today’s dictatorial western governments need you to be afraid of terrorists, so the mighty government can save you. They need you to be afraid of Muslim unrest, so Martial Law can be justified again in Pakistan and perhaps next time in a town near you. Fear is what Elites’ puppets Bush, Brown and Merkel & Co. want you to feel. Fear is the life-blood of their political careers. But fear we will feel not! Of course, there is the rest of society, the dumbed-down consumers of mass media, who are carefully conditioned to getting used to assassinations of political figures, so that elimination of US statesmen Ron Paul, who is spoiling the establishment’s 2008 US presidential elections, is digested easier, forgotten quicker. Be alert and pay attention to the concerted effort of powerful elites and their Muppets to continue their age-old dictatorial strategy: Divide and Impera! Divide and Conquer! Divide and create Unrest! Only this time, Neocons and cronies, and “elite” Scum, you are exposed, as the people are waking up the dark nature of your intentions. Only this time, the people are no longer falling for your self-serving propaganda and unlawful deceit. This time, you are losing, and this fight spells the downfall of dictatorship and fascism and our return of a free world, based on Sovereign Constitutional Republics.

Ruled by Puppets of the Criminal "Elite"

2007-12-27T01:42:00.000-08:00

Image from private-eye.co.uk

From Hitler to Brown

Where Hitler left off in 1945, Anthony Blair, Angela Merkel, Gordon Brown and their comrades continue today. Adolf Hitler would turn in his grave in perverse excitement about the skillful implementation of fascist, zero-tolerance, police states under the umbrella of a totalitarian Europe. George Orwell's peek in the future "1984" depicts a reality that is a walk in the park compared to what the globalists have in stock for you and your children. For those of you who think that the government is good and has your best interest in mind, I would like to say this:

It is not only your right, but it is also your duty to:

Educate yourselves, your friends, family, colleagues and your neighbors
Learn
Read
Compare
Analyze
Conclude
Act

The problem is that most of us, including myself, have been conditioned by the corporate controlled media to accept whatever government script is read on air, or printed on paper. If it is on TV, the BBC, CBS, or Fox, it must be true... Of course, mainstream reporters do not tell you that they get their marching orders from the White House or 10 Downing Street. The local news anchors, those who we tend to trust, regurgitate whatever the puppet masters prescribe in their daily marching orders. It is called Yellow journalism.

BBC English, modern: Big Brother Corporation, propaganda tool of the globalist elite, deceitful

What is at stake?

A strong statement, indeed. For those of you who have not woken up to reality, these news are disturbing. For many it all seems far-fetched and unbelievable. How do we know if we do not verify the claims made and allow ourselves to consider all information. Do you think that your freedom, your health, your well-being and your life are worth this effort?

power corrupts, absolute power corrupts absolutely (cliché)

Are you one of those men who go and vent all your natural warrior energy by watching and cheering football games? Have football, or television soaps become an important part of your life? If it has, it has been done TO you by design. By focusing you on sports, soaps, the X-Factor or Strictly Come Dancing, you are neutralised, your natural survival instincts are turned off the moment you turn your TV on. It has been designed by the industrial-military complex to deliberately divert your natural warrior instincts for liberty and self determination into something that does not interfere with the globalist-elite's plans to enslave you and your family.

Criminal Elements

Many politicians are good. Most are corrupt. The majority of these are humanoids: selfish and corrupt. We, the people, have successfuly been conditioned to accept this as a way of life, something that just IS. It is working. You ARE accepting it as something that cannot be changed. That's just the way it IS... Right? While this is bad in itself, I am not talking about the general politician scum that parasitically lives off your hard earned money, stealing your rightful property under the legal cover of self serving laws.

I am talking about the puppets in highest places of government -- the criminal elements who sell their soul for a couple of coins. I am talking about the Muppet's who are knowingly deceive you, the people. I am talking about the criminal elements who attend the Bilderberg meetings or send representatives on their behalf to receive marching orders from unelected elites. I am talking about those minions who wage war and kill in your name. I am pointing to those who erode our liberties.

We are officially living in tyranny!

(to be continued)

My Christmas Wish(es) 2007

2007-12-16T04:46:00.000-08:00

Is it too late already?

I do not care this year about getting the latest gadget.
I do not care this year about what you may think of me.
I do not care about giving traditional presents this year.
I do care about giving the gift of waking up those who do not know. Join me and many others in this quest.

Much is at stake this time; things are happening that affect us all. More importantly, today's tendencies toward totalitarianism and intolerance of political dissent will affect our children and grandchildren, who are paying the ultimate price: Living and dying in tyranny, beacause you felt football and soaps were more important, perhaps easier to live with than reality and things that matter. How do you look into the eyes of your offspring and explain when it is too late?

What do I really care about this Christmas?
Everyone needs to wake up.

Here is the incomplete list of my Christmans wishes for 2007:
(1) We end the war in Iraq and leave.
(2) We do not start war with Iran.
(3) We get the governments out of our lives.
(4) We get the governments out of our pockets.
(5) We install checks and balances that allow the people to hold their government accountable.
(6) We expose the propaganda and lies the government and mainstream media are raining on dumbed down populations.
(7) We all read (alternative news) and challenge the status quo.
(8) We expose the left-right paradigm (divide and conquer).
(9) Everyone asks questions, demands answers. Everyone thinks.

Is that too much asked? It boils down to one simple requirement: Holding our government accountable for its actions. How can we possibly trust those who deliberately lie to the people?

History shows that we cannot.