Enlightenment:
A note to the non-ravers out there: codshit is
NOT a derogatory or insulting term and bears no relation in offensiveness to its four-letter
cousin, it's a word used to describe the nonsense that people sometimes talk
when they're off their heads.
Wisdom:
So there, we have figured it out, go back to bed America, your government has figured out how it all transpired. Go back to bed America, your government is in control again. Here, here's American Gladiators. Watch this, shut up. Go back to bed America, here's American Gladiators. Here's 56 channels of it. Watch these pituitary retards bang their fuckin skulls together and congratulate you on living in the land of freedom. Here you go America, you are free... to do as we tell you.
.: Bill Hicks :.
Americans have different ways of saying things. They say 'elevator', we say 'lift'...they say 'President', we say 'stupid psychopathic git'....
.: Alexi Sayle :.
If you confront the Universe with good intentions in your heart it will reflect that and reward your intent. It just doesn't always do it in the way you expect.
.: G'kar :.
Fascism is the merger of corporation and state, if that does not describe America in 2005 then I don't know what does. They may not fly the swastika but they are still fucking fascists!
Rumours of a link between the US first family and the Nazi war machine have circulated for decades. Now the Guardian can reveal how repercussions of events that culminated in action under the Trading with the Enemy Act are still being felt by today's president.
George Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.
The Guardian has obtained confirmation from newly discovered files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism.
His business dealings, which continued until his company's assets were seized in 1942 under the Trading with the Enemy Act, has led more than 60 years later to a civil action for damages being brought in Germany against the Bush family by two former slave labourers at Auschwitz and to a hum of pre-election controversy.
The evidence has also prompted one former US Nazi war crimes prosecutor to argue that the late senator's action should have been grounds for prosecution for giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
The debate over Prescott Bush's behaviour has been bubbling under the surface for some time. There has been a steady internet chatter about the "Bush/Nazi" connection, much of it inaccurate and unfair. But the new documents, many of which were only declassified last year, show that even after America had entered the war and when there was already significant information about the Nazis' plans and policies, he worked for and profited from companies closely involved with the very German businesses that financed Hitler's rise to power. It has also been suggested that the money he made from these dealings helped to establish the Bush family fortune and set up its political dynasty.
Remarkably, little of Bush's dealings with Germany has received public scrutiny, partly because of the secret status of the documentation involving him. But now the multibillion dollar legal action for damages by two Holocaust survivors against the Bush family, and the imminent publication of three books on the subject are threatening to make Prescott Bush's business history an uncomfortable issue for his grandson, George W, as he seeks re-election.
While there is no suggestion that Prescott Bush was sympathetic to the Nazi cause, the documents reveal that the firm he worked for, Brown Brothers Harriman (BBH), acted as a US base for the German industrialist, Fritz Thyssen, who helped finance Hitler in the 1930s before falling out with him at the end of the decade. The Guardian has seen evidence that shows Bush was the director of the New York-based Union Banking Corporation (UBC) that represented Thyssen's US interests and he continued to work for the bank after America entered the war.
Listen, governments commit acts of terrorism against their own people to justify repression and FASCISM! It happened here during the "troubles" in Ireland, it happened in Russia and you bet your ass it happened on 9/11. The REAL terrorists are those arrogant wankers in suits sitting in their ivory towers and looking down at the rest of us.
Beslan's increasingly restless residents were told yesterday that high-ranking Russian military officers who "were still at their posts" were suspected of helping Chechen militants seize the town's school last September.
Two men holding a rank "higher than a major and a colonel" were said to be involved in the plot and had apparently deliberately not fulfilled the functions for which they are paid, presumably in exchange for some kind of bribe.
The revelation, disclosed by the parliamentary commission investigating the atrocity, appeared to shatter the illusion that the tragedy was the isolated work of a small band of Chechen separatists.
It is likely to enrage the victims' mothers who are becoming increasingly vociferous in their demands that the president of North Ossetia, the republic where Beslan is located, should resign. Last week they blocked Beslan's main highway for three days to press their demands and are threatening to take further "illegal" action if Alexander Dzasokhov, whom they accuse of failing to protect their children, does not step down.
Alexander Torshin, chairman of the parliamentary commission looking into the bloodbath, said yesterday that "a terrorist act of such a scale would have been impossible to commit without accomplices."
This country gets scarier by the day, this is something we've been saying for years but now, finally, the people at the top are starting to realise it. The government INTENDS to create a police-state, the system will do it regardless of who is in power. Britain has never been a real democracy anyway and now the last remaining pretenses are being removed. Of course all the Sun reading yokels will think this is a good idea because that's what Rupert wants them to think. Mark my words, if we are not careful one day we'll wake up and we'll be living in Orwell's nightmare. THIS is what he was warning us about, like I keep saying; "1984" was a TYPO!
The home secretary, Charles Clarke, is transforming Britain into a police state, one of the country's former leading anti-terrorist police chiefs said yesterday.
George Churchill-Coleman, who headed Scotland Yard's anti-terrorist squad as they worked to counter the IRA during their mainland attacks in the late 1980s and early 1990s, said Mr Clarke's proposals to extend powers, such as indefinite house arrest, were "not practical" and threatened to further marginalise minority communities.
Mr Churchill-Coleman told the Guardian: "I have a horrible feeling that we are sinking into a police state, and that's not good for anybody. We live in a democracy and we should police on those standards.
He added: "I have serious worries and concerns about these ideas on both ethical and practical terms. You cannot lock people up just because someone says they are terrorists. Internment didn't work in Northern Ireland, it won't work now. You need evidence."
Mr Churchill-Coleman's team had to counter IRA cells which mounted the 1991 mortar attack on Downing Street. His criticism comes as Mr Clarke attempts to convince cabinet colleagues about the need for new powers.
The home secretary has already shown an appetite for the kind of political language favoured by his predecessor, David Blunkett, to justify the tools he says the state needs to fight the ongoing war against terror.
In an interview in today's Daily Telegraph, he warns of the need to monitor not only alleged terror suspects but their family, friends and acquaintances. They could be subjected to potentially daily searches even though they are not accused of any crime, he said.
He said: My first responsibility is to protect people. I don't regard their rights as absolute. There are serious people and serious organisations trying to destroy our society. We are in a state of emergency."
Mr Clarke appeared to be digging in for a long and potentially turbulent fight to achieve his new powers.
As criticism of the proposals grew, Mr Clarke gave a lengthy cabinet presentation on the plans. It is believed that some of the government's own law officers have reservations about the details of the new powers, which are needed to ensure it survives any expected legal challenge under the human rights convention.
Guy Mansfield QC, the chairman of the Bar Council, said yesterday that house arrest without trial was as damaging as imprisonment without trial and would breed resentment among ethnic minorities.
The leftwing Labour MP and QC, Bob Marshall-Andrews, called the proposals "the most substantial extension of the state's executive powers over the citizen for 300 years".
This week, grim ceremonies marked the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, where the Nazis murdered 1.5 million people. These remembrances of horror provoked extensive commentary, summed up in a single agonizing question: How could this have happened?
Answers -- some simplistic, others more nuanced -- were offered by various pundits and scholars: It was one man's madness; it was the result of unique historical circumstances; it was the inevitable byproduct of a totalitarian system, and so on. Implicit in these comments was the comforting notion that such deliberate mass atrocity is possible only under a tyrannical regime, led by brutal dictators, "madmen" like Hitler, Stalin and Saddam; it could never happen in a democracy, where a free people exercise its electoral will, and strong civic structures curb the excesses of state power. Indeed, in his "fire sermon" at the inauguration, U.S. president George W. Bush claimed that democracy is a divine system, created by God Himself. It could therefore never be an instrument of evil.
Does this stance correspond to reality, to history? To get at the deeper truth, perhaps the question we should ask is not, "How did Auschwitz happen?" but rather, "What exactly happened at Auschwitz?"
Well, here's what happened: Government leaders ordered the murder and torture of innocent people in the defense of "the Homeland" and the superior "moral values" of their culture. They produced copious justifications for their actions, including legal rulings from top government attorneys, while concealing the actual operational details from public knowledge in the name of "national security." When faced with undeniable evidence of atrocity, they blamed "bad apples" in the lower ranks.
Suddenly, viewed in this light, Auschwitz doesn't seem so strange, so otherworldly, so removed from us. For we have seen all of these things come to pass today, perpetrated by the world's greatest democracy, by elected leaders whose initially dubious hold on power has just been ratified by the free vote of a free people. We have seen these democratic leaders launch a war of aggression on false pretenses -- a deliberate action which they knew would lead to mass murder.
We know this war has killed at least 100,000 innocent people, according to a scientific study by the respected medical journal The Lancet. The overwhelming majority of these 100,000 have been killed by direct military action of the U.S.-U.K. coalition, most of them long after "major combat operations" ended, The Lancet reports. (It's fascinating to watch the Bushists quibble over this number -- "The death count's not really that high, it wasn't deliberate, it was collateral damage, it's anti-American propaganda," etc. -- like Holocaust revisionists disputing the reality of Auschwitz: "It wasn't really 1.5 million, it wasn't deliberate, it was disease, overwork, Jewish propaganda, etc.")
We know that thousands of Iraqis have been imprisoned unjustly; up to 90 percent of all detainees were innocent of any offense, the Red Cross reports. We know that many of these innocents have been tortured, using techniques and guidelines laid down by Pentagon chief Donald Rumsfeld and approved by Bush. We know that many people have died from this torture, as the pro-war Times of London reports, not only in Iraq but also in secret CIA prisons around the world, where thousands of people are being held without charges -- and where the administration's tepid restrictions on torture do not apply, as Bush's legal factotum, Alberto Gonzales, admits.
And we know that whenever fragments of truth about this widespread, thoroughgoing program of atrocity do manage to surface from the darkness, Bush and his apologists run for cover and cast the blame on underlings. "This so-called ill treatment and torture in detention centers ... were not, as some assumed, inflicted methodically, but were excesses committed by individual prison guards, their deputies, and men who laid violent hands on the detainees." These words have a familiar ring, echoed almost daily by a Bush official or a right-wing commentator -- but in fact the quote is from Rudolf Hoess, commandant of Auschwitz, as Scott Horton notes in the Los Angeles Times. Horton and other writers also unearthed statements by Nazi leaders and jurists declaring the Geneva Conventions "obsolete" for the "new kind of war" they were fighting against Bolshevik "terrorists" on the Eastern Front -- precise equivalents to the language used by the Bush White House in its "torture memos."
Today marks the first anniversary of the publication of the infamous Hutton report which led to my departure from the BBC and that of my chairman, Gavyn Davies. Looking back 12 months, and knowing what we now know, the saga has an unreal quality because, today, there is no doubt that the BBC story which led to our departures was fundamentally right when it said that Downing Street had sexed up the case for going to war in Iraq.
So, if this was true, why did such a bizarre series of events happen, events which led to the departure of the two top players at the BBC? Of course I am not unbiased, but I think the answer can be found in the combination of a conservative and naïve judge in Lord Hutton, a disingenuous Prime Minister, a talented but increasingly unstable head of the government information service in Alastair Campbell, and a gutless bunch of BBC governors who behaved like frightened rabbits.
However, 12 months on, a series of questions still need to be answered. How did Hutton get it so wrong? How did the general public know instinctively that his report was a whitewash? How damaged is the BBC? Did Dr Kelly kill himself? And the biggest question of all, how has the Prime Minister survived the political fallout from Iraq, Hutton and, in particular, the Butler report?
What is now clear is that the person who has suffered the most from Lord Hutton's report is Lord Hutton himself, a man now widely regarded as a joke figure. He was a virtually unknown law lord when he was selected to chair the inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly. He knew nothing of media law and the only inquiry he had held before was into the re-routing of a river in Northern Ireland.
So how come he was chosen? His name was reportedly suggested by Peter Mandelson, clearly as he believed Hutton was likely to support the establishment position - and that's exactly what he tried to do. One of Tony Blair's inner circle, his close friend and pollster Philip Gould, has said as much.
When extracts from my book Inside Story were published in The Observer and The Mail on Sunday in September last year I quoted Gould (now a lord) telling another Labour lord that everything was going to be OK with Hutton because "we appointed the right judge". Initially, Gould not only denied the story but threatened to take legal action. The issue only went away when he discovered we could prove he had said it.
So I think we can assume that Lord Hutton was chosen for particular qualities: as a Northern Irish Diplock judge, he both disliked journalists and had a close relationship with the security services who had protected him and his family many times. The latter is important because, if the saga is about anything, it is a scandal about MI6 and the efforts of people in the secret services to please Blair and Campbell.
Which takes us on to the second question; how did the public recognise the report was a whitewash so quickly? A poll in The Daily Telegraph two days after it was published found that 56 per cent of those interviewed agreed that: "Lord Hutton, as a member of the establishment, was too ready to sympathise with the Government and in the end produced something like a whitewash."
Members of the Government were genuinely shocked by this reaction; they thought they had been cleared, but the public decided otherwise. But, given that it was another six months before the concrete evidence which destroyed Hutton was published with Lord Butler's devastating critique of how Blair runs the Government, how did the public know so early that it was a deeply flawed report?
Here I suspect Lord Hutton was hoist by his own petard. He had held a ground-breaking inquiry: he ran it in a fair way, it was open to the public and all the evidence was available on the internet. The problem was that his findings did not line up with the evidence, which the public had seen and heard for themselves. So they instinctively rejected his ridiculously one-sided findings.
Of course, the BBC governors didn't take the same view as the public and decided to get rid of me as a result. It was a coincidence that they were meeting the day Hutton reported; it was not planned and I suspect if they hadn't met until the following week the outcome would have been different. There would have been no "rush to judgement". But much more important is: What impact has the affair had on the BBC?
Its reputation has been compromised and, as a result, its independence has been questioned, particularly overseas. Whenever I've travelled abroad in the past year I have found a strong belief that it was Blair personally who got rid of Gavyn and I as a means of pulling the BBC into line and to stop it challenging the Government in the future. The feeling abroad is that the BBC had gone along with this to preserve its future.
Now, I don't believe this to be the case but, until the new leaders of the BBC stand up and make their position clear on the Gilligan affair, people won't know for certain whether or not to believe these allegations. Other executives inside the BBC who were intimately involved in the Kelly affair have also gone remarkably quiet since. It is probably time for them to speak out too.
China and Canada signed agreements in Beijing today to help develop uranium mines and oil reserves, including Canada's oil sand deposits in Alberta, to expand trade between the two countries.
The agreements followed meetings between Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao and Canada's Prime Minister Paul Martin. Canada's Martin and Trade Minister James Peterson are on a six-day visit to China with representatives of 250 Canadian companies to boost commercial ties with its second-largest trading partner.
"Canada and China have decided to work together to promote cooperation in the oil and gas sector, including Canada's oil sands, as well as in the uranium resources field," the two governments said in a statement. No specifics were given on companies that may be involved, and details of the agreement weren't available on a Web site for Canada's prime minister.
Companies including Exxon Mobil Corp., Royal Dutch/Shell Group and Canadian Natural Resources Ltd. plan to spend billions during the next decade to develop Alberta's unconventional oil deposits as demand for crude rises and output from existing fields decline. Oil-sands output in Alberta may double to 2 million barrels a day by 2013, according to a presentation last week by Enbridge Inc.
Economics, not today's agreements, will decide whether China becomes an investor in the oil-sands projects, said Mike Tims, chairman of Peters & Co., a Calgary brokerage specializing in oil stocks.
"I wouldn't say that anything in this agreement is likely to cause anyone to do anything that isn't fully sensible on a commercial basis,"' Tims said in a telephone interview.
Enbridge, Canada's second-biggest pipeline company after TransCanada Corp., said last week that PetroChina Co. or China Petroleum and Chemical, the country's two biggest oil companies, will agree by next month to buy oil from Alberta oil sands to meet growing energy demand in China. Calgary-based Enbridge is proposing a C$4 billion ($3.25 billion) pipeline to export Alberta's oil to California, China and other markets
Shares of Calgary-based Husky Energy Inc. rallied in November after Toronto's Globe and Mail said China was negotiating to take control of the producer through a state oil company. Chinese buyers may be attracted to Husky because it is developing two oil-sands projects, some analysts have said.
Not much one can say about this one, I sure would love to know where Vialls gets his information from. Or is he making it all up...? I'll leave it for you to decide that one!
With 'Fortress Americas' now in tatters because of Russia's coalition with Brazil and Venezuela, Wall Street's neocons and other Zionist traitors will desperately try to avoid War Crimes Tribunals and the waiting hangman's noose, by fleeing aboard special jets to a little-known Australian island
by Joe Vialls
As the stolen Boeing 747 lumbered through the night sky on its way from America to Australia, it was difficult for the 250 unshaven occupants to comprehend how they had fallen so far so fast. Their eyes were red from lack of sleep, and from the sudden realization that as the most wanted war criminals in the world, the only place they might find sanctuary was a former penal colony on an obscure island south of Australia.
The El Al pilots on the Boeing's flight deck scanned the horizon nervously, looking for a pair of KC-135 aerial tankers, two of twelve stolen from American taxpayers in early 2003, and dotted along the route in order to keep the big birds and their Ziionist passengers aloft, long enough to reach the only island that might shield them from the hangman's noose.
Fuel was running low and everyone on board was jumpy, especially the pilots, who knew that by now they should be able to see the tanker on their cockpit TCAS (Traffic Alert Collision Avoidance System) screen, which uses secondary radar techniques to detect any other aircraft within 35 miles range, but only if the other aircraft is within a band of airspace extending 9,500 feet above and below the host aircraft. There was still nothing to see, and the El Al captain rapped his fingers impatiently on the cockpit coaming.
As the rising sun started to lighten the eastern horizon, a second aircraft started closing on the Boeing from behind, but in a very stealthy manner. THe light was still too weak to tell whether this smaller aircraft was an American F-15, a British Tornado, a French Mirage, a Russian or Chinese Sukhoi 27, or perhaps a Cuban Mig 29, though positive identification would make no difference to the final outcome. The hunter was well aware of the Boeing's TCAS limitations, and was thus flying at an invisible 12,000 feet below the Zionist Ark, fifteen miles to the rear.
In the dim red glow of the fighter cockpit, the pilot's white-gloved right hand reached out and selected "cannon" on the weapons panel, and then he smoothly slid the twin throttles through the afterburner gate with his left. The attack profile was simplicity itself: Maintain 12,000 feet separation until the fighter was only half a mile behind the Boeing, then chop the afterburners and pull up into a 45 degree climb. The Boeing's TCAS would thus give the El Al pilots less than one second of warning before a hail of high explosive cannon shells opened up the belly of their aircraft like a sardine can, hopefully scattering Zionist war criminal body parts across more than ten square miles.
We will have to wait and see whether the fighter pilot gets it right, and whether or not his colleagues manage to hunt down and destroy the other five Boeing 747 Arks, and eleven KC 135 tankers carrying similar payloads to the same destination. In order to assess the odds and expose the forward planning for this cowardly retreat from America, we need to go back a few years in time.
More than a decade ago, these same Zionists were well on their way to achieving a "New World Order", where theoretically everyone in the brainwashed and subjugated world would gladly kneel obsequiously before their self-appointed Wall Street overlords. The New York master race would not to be a group of tall elegant pedigree Americans or Europeans however. Instead, all Americans and others would be forced to bow the knee to a group of insignificant gray-haired mongrels of extremely doubtful parentage. These clinically insane designers of the N.W.O. were so sure they'd almost won, that they started partying at the Council on Foreign Relations, at the Trilateral Commission, and also at a number of other private mental asylums set aside for like-minded egomaniacs.
For them, the infamous 1990 Gulf War was merely an exercise to test the extent of Zionist control within the American political and military establishments, and it was judged a resounding success. More than 500,000 American service personnel were forced to attack Kuwait and Southern Iraq on trumped up charges, while at the same time powerful Zionist pharmaceutical lobbies ensured that all experienced servicemen were injected with innovative 'experimental' vaccines. The latter outrage ensured that those who lived and returned home to America, would be artificially undermined both physically and mentally.
So the the entirely one-sided 'Gulf War' was a Zionist win-win situation, with both the Arab Middle East and the U.S. Military severely weakened at one and the same time. You see, while the Zionists obviously wanted the massive oil reserves of the Middle East, they also had a very unpleasant trump card yet to play. The 'one true Zion' prattled on about by religious Jews was not in Palestine at all, but would eventually become the Americas. By way of explanation, I wrote in an earlier report:
"These were the 'Shock and Awe' tactics of David Ben Gurion, founding father of both Zionism and global terrorism. Though obviously clinically insane, this was the man who first drew up the plan for 'Zion', a 'Promised Land for the Jews', which most global citizens erroneously believed, and still believe, to be Palestine. But even as the first Jewish State was being formally declared in 1948, the arrogant Ben Gurion made it very clear that Palestine was not to be the one true Zion. Despite continual frantic urgings by religious Jews, he insisted that this first conquest be called 'Yisrael', and that its citizens, be they Jewish or not, would forever be called "Yisraelim".
"The final Zion, or Promised Land, would be determined by raw wealth and power rather than by mere religious symbolism. While intentionally leaking 'false Zions' including Australia and Argentina to the media, Ben Gurion and his Zionist cohorts ultimately intended to overrun and capture the Americas The problem was that back in 1948 they had no real power, and would have been easily overwhelmed by the vast resources of the U.S. Military in particular.
So conquest of the 'one true Zion', or 'New Zion', was to be a long drawn-out game, with Zionists lobbies in America gradually eating away at the fabric of society. Then, when resistance in the Americas was eventually undermined to a predetermined level, it would be time to strike militarily."
Despite their obvious insanity and arrogance, there were brief episodes of lucid thought, with a handful of Zionists aware that there was a slight chance (say one in a billion?) that Fortress Americas would fail, thus leaving them at the mercy of an outraged American public. This slight possibility caused considerable concern. With unpleasant memories of what England's King Edward I had done to their power-mad ancestors with an executioner's axe, Zionist Jews in particular ran nervous fingers around their collars, and demanded a foolproof exit strategy, which was eventually code-named "Project Ark".
In essence, Project Ark was modeled on the same plans and facilities used during the Cold War with Russia, where (officially), the American President and his advisors would board six specially equipped Boeing 747s at Offutt and Andrews air force bases, and conduct a thermonuclear war from the relative safety of U.S. offshore territorial waters, continually refueled in mid air by KC 135 aerial tankers. Well, that is the cover story that American citizens were asked to believe, and most of them did believe.
The reality was quite different. According to classified documents I had access to at that time, the actual Cold War plan was for the President and several hundred close 'advisors' (to be named directly by the White House before boarding), to travel via Ascension Island, and either Gan or Diego Garcia, to Pine Gap in Central Australia. The KC 135 tankers were there as back up, in the event that either of the two intermediate transit airfields were destroyed by nuclear weapons. Though we were specifically denied access to the passenger lists at my then security level, it is perfectly reasonable to assume the President's banking bosses in New York would be along for the ride, and able to start a new life down, under while ordinary Americans left behind in the U.S. were turned into roman candles by thermonuclear weapons
Back in the seventies, mainland Australia was fine as a destination, because Americans were generally liked by the locals, and even a cowardly defecting American President would have been able to buy a beer in a pub. But all of that changed with America's 1990 Gulf War, which brought into sharp focus America's apparent intent to rule the world by brute force. Australians in general do not like prima donnas, and they certainly don't like dictators, meaning that a far more secure destination had to be arranged for the Zionist Elite, because (perish the though), Australians don't like Zionists much either.
The final destination Project Ark settled on, was the small easily defended Australian Island of Tasmania, which has a climate and scenery not unlike New England, plus a very rich range of food and wine. But scores of subtle preparations had to be made over the years in America and Australia, to ensure that Project Ark would run like clockwork if activated.
When the Bush Doctrine of 2002 was implemented, that signaled the world that any country could be next, in our megalomaniacal quest, to own everything and everyone on the planet. At that moment, the rest of the civilized world began to put plans in place to marginalize the USA, to remove us from their horizons. When the theft of the last election became a fact their plans jumped to light-speed in order to be implemented. The entire world has begun to rearrange their priorities to cut us out of the global picture, and that's what awaits us now!
How many of the things you use every day were made in America? What kind of vehicle do you drive, and where was it made. You know that the fuel to operate it doesn't come from here; you can see that the buses, the trains, and most of the rest of what we take for granted are not made here: but what about all the smaller items? China bought out IBM's PC division, and most component parts, no longer come from here. We have outsourced our way of life, along with most of the real jobs, and all that's left are the few occupations that must remain here, because they require some physical act that cannot be done from abroad. We used to lead the world and now we're just one step from beggary.
Reagan began the privatizing that turned this nation into a pink-collar service, back in the 1980's. Bush has now finished off the process by outsourcing even that paltry shadow of an industry. India and China and other places, now have the jobs, to avoid regulations and to allow American owners to vastly increase their profits, with zero oversight. Tax-dodging corporations get corporate welfare to aid them in their quest for dominance over what's left of American business, and there are no discussions. This government has opened the floodgates to mergers and acquisions, and in every field there are ever fewer competitors. What happens when there's nothing left to buy or acquire. What happened to real competition? What will happen when Wal-Mart succeeds in crushing all the competition, we will see their prices soar when there is no longer any choice.
Today our "money" buys about half what it did (in the world), just two years ago. Most are unaware of this, unless they travel outside this country. Under Reagan the USA went from the world's largest creditor nation to the world's largest debtor nation during his term. Clinton reversed that and left the nation with a huge surplus a surplus that George W. Bush promptly turned into the largest debt that this country, or the world has ever seen. This was done while citing Reagan's view that deficits were unimportant., Now we've reached the point where we can no longer pay those debts, and we've begun defaulting on some of them. With nothing much to sell, and too few jobs, and an empty treasury besides - it appears that we're living now on borrowed time.
This situation, for those who have underwritten our obscene debt load has become impossible to bear, so they will soon begin to withdraw their invested capital, as well as their continued interest in our welfare. This is due directly to the policies of this administration, and has only been exacerbated by the arrogance and greed of those who have taken over USA incorporated. America is now known for belligerence and thugery, and that's a lousy business arrangement. Every U.S. taxpayer is also a silent partner with this government, having no say, and no choice in what will be done with either our money, or our military. Why have none of these changes ever been publicly discussed, before they became policies? Bush says it's because "we are at war." But the question lingers: who is the real enemy here?
For decades now, the Neo-Cons has have believed that the United States cannot be allowed to fail, because the entire world would go down with us. They cite the crash of 1929 as proof of that. But it's 2005 now, and money can be moved around the world in the time it takes to make a computer keystroke. We are no longer a manufacturing power, no longer a consumer bulwark, because we've lost too many of the jobs that were the backbone of this nation's health and wealth, in the world at large. Without good jobs there is no money to remain in the consumer class, much less rise to what we may have dreamed of. Because of the new policies of other nations and our own rush to unemploy this nation's working people, we are finding that there is now far less demand for "things American" around the planet.
The world has changed, and we have not kept pace, in fact we're going the other way at light speed. We make some weapons, and we export our garbage, literally. Beyond that this nation is barely a shadow of its former self. Most of these changes owe their existence to either presidential decrees or to shoddy and rushed legislation, with little or no debate. Aside from a handful of legislators, who really cares what happens to us?
Our corporatocracy has a long history or supressing any technology that threatens to undermine their power. JP Morgan did this to Nikola Tesla when he realised that Tesla's goal was free energy for everyone. Those same plutocrats have a strangle-hold on this planet, they profit from war and misery and the rest of us are forced to bear the cost. The fact that oil is running out means the bastards are acting out their end-game scenario. I'm sure they have a plan, I'm also sure us little-people want nothing to do with it because their plan is our enslavement.
The Ether Physics Paradigm of Hope Abundance Love and Equity
When one understands the concepts of Viktor Schauberger and Nikola Tesla, the doorways to "free thinking and free energy" will beunlocked. The lines of control which hold the unfortunate "dumbed down" victims of academia, will be broken. The mental prison of materialistic, scientific reductionism, will be properly dethroned and marginalized, then hope will finally prevail.
From this free and enlightened vista of thinking the world view of abundance and a lifestyle of peace, prosperity, and freedom are the foundation. These virtuous aspirations transcend the dreary scientific and current religious/governmental/corporate/academic view of a world of scarcity. War and survival, financial ruin and the destruction of our personal freedoms and our environment are the fruits of this doomed view.
In a world of abundance and negentropy there is no need to fight over dwindling resources. Water can be desalinated and transported great distances to arid regions without the massive energy costs. There would be no "have nots". Everyone's basic needs would be assured. Starvation would cease to exist. If we all want it to. The technological possibilities are limitless with Tesla and Schauberger's insights and inventions relating to free energy. The Ether Physics they believed in, is the Physics of love, hope and abundance.
It is easy to imagine a world without war, because everyone would be working towards the goal of bringing civilization back into a harmonious relationship with nature for the sake of our mutual survival. We would see the end of the fossil/nuclear fuel age and an end to all of the cancer causing pollution of this insidious academic crime. Also, an end to the pyramid types of hierarchical political, financial, media and religous control, where wealth and power are dangerously concentrated into a hands of few jaded, impostors.
Look around you and you will see opportunity everywhere, because of the enormous destruction caused by corporate America and it's international allies.
Most of the dams will need to be torn down and the rivers restored to their natural states. All of the academic projects built by the Army Corp of Engineers, where they built straight canals to move water, will have to be rebuilt according to natural principles. This way, we won't have anymore multi-billion dollar failures of one of their "sceintifically" designed levy, canal or dam systems.
The entire infrastructure of pipes that move our water on this planet will have to be replaced if we want to reverse the present plague of Cancer. If doing things right, were the priority, there would be work for everyone. Just imagine the labor involved in this project alone.
With everyone's basic needs covered we could all go to work saving this world before we destroy it. With the vast array of new spin off technologies there would be fulfilling work for everyone. The war could shift from the phony excuses used now to the real threat we all are facing, which is the wholesale destruction of our beautiful planet.
Imagine soldiers planting billions of trees in our clear cut forests, instead of killing other unfortunate human beings, birds, plants and animals. We need to plant 100 billion new trees immediately if we want to turn the tide of our self made destruction. We would be fighting against the true "evil doers", those who wantonly destroy our small planet using deception and trickery for personal financial gain, vanity and power (The Federal Reserve, the corporations and media and their elected leaders ).
Imagine silent, hovering aircraft, dropping mineralized rock dust on reclaimed forests to fertilize them, rather than extremely noisey jets and helicopters dropping Napalm, Daisy Cutters, Depleted Uranium, Micro Nukes and other types of "Destructive Ordinance" on poor innocent victims, other wise known as "collateral damage". How much of the planet's natural beauty, forests and waters have been lain waste thanks to military actions? Just watch some war footage of bombing campaigns and you will get a glimpse of a fraction of the damage.
Or, these same silent craft tending to our agricultural needs by automated satellite control and managing unending fields of Cannabis Hemp for replacing oil, pharmaceutical, clothing and timber products, to name a few.
Viktor Schauberger was the pioneering environmentalist who discovered natural solutions to all of the most pressing problems relating to our poor health and continuing destruction of this planet through the ignorant and negligent treatment of our Earth, Air and Water.
His work should be required reading in all schools, because it is a virtuous foundation for life, health and sanity in an insane world. As long as Corporate America controls our schools with "sound science" the truth will never be taught.
Some good news to end the week on! I want to see Feith and his other neo-con friends arrested, charged, put on trial, convicted and sentanced to spend the rest of their (short miserable) lives cleaning up the DU they dumped on Iraq. The amount of fear and death they have caused must not go unanswered, they seek to use fear to control us and they must not be allowed to succeed.
Good Riddance, Douglas Feith
by Kurt Nimmo
Reuters reported last night that undersecretary of defense for policy, Douglas Feith, the third ranked civilian in the Pentagon, has announced his resignation, not due immediately, unfortunately. "Douglas Feith, the Defense Department's top policy officer and an architect of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, announced Wednesday that he would leave his job this summer for personal and family reasons," reports Reuters. "Before the Iraq war, Feith oversaw Defense Department officials accused of selectively using uncorroborated intelligence reports to build what turned out to be the false case that President Saddam Hussein had stockpiles of banned deadly weapons."
But here's what Reuters failed to mention: Feith may end up in the hoosegow "for leaking classified information to The Weekly Standard," according to Karen Kwiatkowski, who once had the misfortunate of working with the "arrogant" Strausscon. The memo, dated October 27, 2003, alleges Osama and Saddam were buddies, an accusation we know is pure horse feathers. Laura Rozen, writing for the American Prospect, however, believes it is "unlikely that Feith will face time for the leaked memo. But he may well be forced to look for a new job soon. As he knows all too well, regime change isn't pretty."
And so it appears this is what has finally happened. Naturally, when a politico is booted out because he is a political liability, it is politely described as a departure for "personal and family reasons."
Two down-the first being Richard Perle, who resigned as chairman of the Defense Policy Board due to "ethical problems" related to his shady dealings with Global Crossing, the bankrupt telecommunications company-and about half the Pentagon to go, or at least it's "civilians," who are almost exclusively Strausscons.
In the past, both Perle and Feith have been accused of passing classified information to Israel, a crime punishable by a firing squad in some countries. Due to his treachery, Feith was forced to leave the National Security Council, but he was soon back in government, his crimes apparently forgiven, or at least overlooked. In August, Feith's name was linked to Lawrence Franklin, who served in the military attache's office in the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv in the late 1990s. Franklin is suspected of passing classified information about Iran to the American Israeli Public Affairs Committee and Israel. Fore more background on the Lawrence Franklin espionage scandal, see Juan Cole's Pentagon/Israel Spying Case Expands: Fomenting a War on Iran.
"Fascism should more appropriately be called corporatism because it is the merger of state and corporate power." - Benito Mussolini
This is indeed a fascinatingly and disgusting story - premised on absolute control over all people. Back when people were actually almost "free" (immediately after WWII), when public education was not just another empty promise - and the trend in life was toward a better tomorrow for everyone - at that time "control" was in retreat, and progress was the theme of every hour. Now what we have is control of every idiotic facet of everyday existence - rules for every waking act, every thought that is not controlled is seen as the enemy of the state (the corporatocracy).
Our entire way of life has been stolen and shall never return to the lazy and hopeful days of living and loving, of joy and promise, with the possibility for doing real and meaningful things with one's own life - not to mention being able to envision a better world for more and more people - whose lives were so far below the levels we enjoyed. Instead of that promise, instead of that possibility - what we have now is the outright worship of Mistrust, of Fear, and of Paranoia - along with obscene profits for those who have purchased all the politicians, and who control every facet of this once nearly free society.
If American life were a sporting event - today's game would be one in which all the officials and the referees had all been pre-purchased by what would obviously be the winning team. Now companies "police" their own activities, deciding for themselves when they've gone too far - or stolen too much. The original point behind government providing a watchdog over industry - was to keep the playing fields equal - between players and owners. Now the games continue but only the owners win anything - the players are degenerating from just being slaves to becoming everyday targets for anyone who hates their owners: Hence the Iraq's of this world will focus the herd's mind on what it really means to be an American today (a blood-stained thug, whether in a uniform or with a contract and a pen) - we are attempting to steal all that's still sacred - in what has become a profane and truth-less world.
Like Humpty-Dumpty we will never be able to put the world back together again - not here anyhow. Too much has been lost in too many generations that have passed through this new agenda of "me first, me only." In that process all guidelines have been destroyed, and there is no longer any "out-of-bounds" - everything is now fair game: and now the world KNOWS this for what it actually means, which is a rather subdued type of anarchy that favors only the very rich.
Whether nationally or internationally, what we have consecrated by our actions is the outlaw behavior of the corporatocracy - world wide. It is therefore not surprising that Bush would want to claim the mantle of 'Dictator for All the Known World,' even though he is nothing but the token puppet in the front row.
He can do this because the bought and paid for US Congress will not really give him any trouble (if they did they'd all be charged with aiding and abetting all the crimes committed so far) - and the courts have already made clear their preferences: so the only thing left in opposition is the besieged and downtrodden public. Those same people who must pay for all this criminality in dollars and in blood.
However - the public listens to the mouthpiece that has become the outlaws wholly owned whore. Completely owned and operated by those same interests that are behind the corruption - what they tell the world has little to do with actual truth, or the facts of anything that happens in the world today. If the public is to understand anything at all - then they will have to rely on their own gut instincts and what they can find on the net to corroborate or dispute what they suspect. This is why the games we play today are so fraught with corruption, deception and duplicity on nearly every side - but - humanity has survived before when threatened by empirical demands, so perhaps there may yet be an opportunity to reverse this insanity that has become a cancer on the world. . . If not then we'll all be returned to the Dark Ages once again (but this time on a planet that's been nearly destroyed by our lapsed custodianship) - because we are obviously unfit to manage for ourselves, never mind for others - in the real life of this world.
Bush talking about freedom is like Pinochet talking about human rights, or Hitler talking about multi-culturalism or Mao talking about agricultural reform, or Stalin talking about fucking labour rights. It's a fucking sham and he insults our intelligence with his bullshit. He must think that we're all as brainless and barbaric as he is. If you ask me Bush Jnr. is the Paris Hilton of politics!
If Bush wanted to tackle tyranny, he could start with regimes under US control. But liberty clearly has limits.
by Gary Younge
There is one tiny corner of Cuba that will forever America be. It is a place where innocent people are held without charge for years, beyond international law, human decency and the mythical glow of Lady Liberty's torch. It is a place where torture is common, beating is ritual and humiliation is routine. They call it Guantánamo Bay.
Last week the new United States secretary of state, Condoleezza Rice, listed Cuba, among others, as "an outpost of tyranny". A few days later President Bush started his second term with a pledge to unleash "the force of freedom" on the entire world. "The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world," he said
You would think that if the Americans are truly interested in expanding freedom and ending tyranny in Cuba, let alone the rest of the world, Guantánamo Bay would be as good a place to start as any. But the captives in Guantánamo should not ask for the keys to their leg irons any time soon. Ms Rice was not referring to the outpost of tyranny that her boss created in Cuba, but the rest of the Caribbean island, which lives in a stable mixture of the imperfect and the impressive.
In short, while the US could liberate a place where there are flagrant human rights abuses and over which they have total control, it would rather topple a sovereign state, which poses no threat, through diplomatic and economic - and possibly military - warfare that is already causing chaos and hardship.
Welcome to Bush's foreign policy strategy for the second term. His aim is not to realign the values at Guantánamo so that they are more in line with those championed by the rest of the world. It is to try and realign the rest of the world so that it is more in keeping with the values that govern Guantánamo, where human rights and legal norms are subordinated to America's perceived interests.
Under this philosophy, the Bush administration understands the words "tyranny" and "freedom" in much the same way as it understands international law. They mean whatever the White House wants them to mean. Bush is happy to support democracy when democracy supports America, just as he is happy to dispense with it when it does not. Likewise, when tyranny is inconvenient, he will excoriate it; when it is expedient, he will excuse it.
Take Uzbekistan, one of the most repressive regimes in central Asia. In April 2002, a special UN rapporteur concluded that torture in the country was "systematic" and "pervasive and persistent... throughout the investigation process". In the same year, Muzafar Avazov, an opposition leader, was boiled alive for refusing to abandon his religious convictions and attempting to practise religious rites in prison. In 2003, Bush granted a waiver to Uzbekistan when its failure to improve its human rights record should have led to its aid being slashed. In February 2004 the US secretary of defence, Donald Rumsfeld, visited the country's dictator, Islam Karimov, and said: "The relationship [between our countries] is strong and growing stronger. We look forward to strengthening our political and economic relations."
Yet the US continues to shower the country with aid, docking a mere $18m last year (around 20% of the total) after expressing its "disappointment" that Mr Karimov had not made greater strides towards democracy. Pan down the shopping list of tyrannical states in Ms Rice's in-tray (Iran, Burma, North Korea, Zimbabwe, Belarus and Cuba) and you will find no mention of Uzbekistan. Why? Because Uzbekistan, with an estimated 10,000 political prisoners, hosts a US military base that offers easy access to Afghanistan and the rest of the region.
So for every tenet that Mr Bush claimed last week to hold dear, it was possible to pick out a country or place he is bankrolling or controlling that is in flagrant violation, and where he could improve conditions immediately if he wished. The point here is not that the US should intervene in more places, but that it should intervene consistently and honestly or not at all.
Bush's inauguration speech was packed with truisms, axioms, platitudes and principles that appear reasonable at first glance. The trouble is they are contradicted by the reality he has created and continues to support.
Never ignore anyone! Just take what they say with a grain of salt. Mike's book is excellent and still worth reading, anyone who says it should be dismissed probably has not read it.
Never forget, young padawan, that you're in Chapel Perilous, stay alert at all times and MAKE YOUR OWN MIND UP ABOUT EVERYTHING TO SEE, HEAR, READ AND FIND ON THE INTERNET!
In my opinion, Mike Ruppert is at best a blowhard gatekeeper who only cares that he is the ultimate mouthpiece of the alternative and Internet media, cashing in big time, or at worst, he is is a disinformation agent for one or more of our international alphabet soup intel agencies. When he first came to my attention, I bought his early 9/11 video.
I was impressed, though a little bothered over how he gloated over getting CIA Director Deutch's goat at the Compton meeting, a meeting inspired by Gary Webb's "Dark Alliance" series in which Mike inserted himself as the star.
What bothered me even more in that same video is how he totally dismissed the possibility of ANY Israeli or Mossad involvement with 9/11. He never expressed that as an opinion. He authoritatively made it into a fact, despite so many reports involving Israeli spies posing as art students, suspicious moving vans with traces of explosives, the high-fivers with the Israeli moving company that promptly disappeared, and on and on. Not to rush to judgment, Mike, but those are critical areas to investigate ...unless there is an agenda NOT to.
Back to Ruppert's association to Gary Webb. Neat job of positioning on that meeting, which was assembled due to Gary's diligent journalistic efforts. Mike got the sound bite. Stole the show. Very impressive, and useful too. As Mike Ruppert eulogized Gary Webb's recent demise, all the while asserting it was a suicide and calling anyone who dared challenge that verdict as "Internet trailer park trash", I was reminded of a politician eulogizing an important figure more to grandstand than express true loss and regret.
As Mike waxed on with his "tribute" to Webb, he constantly inserted himself as someone who was a virtual buddy and prodigy of Gary in real life, urging us to be Webb like and not make hasty conclusions about Gary Webb being assassinated. Here's what Gary Webb himself said about Mike Ruppert, from a Boston Globe article on Ruppert a while back:
** Gary Webb, whose explosive 1996 ''Dark Alliance'' series in the San Jose Mercury News alleged CIA complicity in the Los Angeles crack epidemic, says, ''Mike is a real conundrum. I think he's a sincere guy, concerned about the right things, and he was quite supportive of my efforts to expose the interplay between the CIA and drug traffickers. But he's also written stories expounding a theory about the genesis of my Mercury News series that were, quite frankly, ridiculous.''
George Bush's grandfather, the late US senator Prescott Bush, was a director and shareholder of companies that profited from their involvement with the financial backers of Nazi Germany.
Beslan's increasingly restless residents were told yesterday that high-ranking Russian military officers who "were still at their posts" were suspected of helping Chechen militants seize the town's school last September.
The home secretary, Charles Clarke, is transforming Britain into a police state, one of the country's former leading anti-terrorist police chiefs said yesterday.
This week, grim ceremonies marked the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz, where the Nazis murdered 1.5 million people. These remembrances of horror provoked extensive commentary, summed up in a single agonizing question: How could this have happened?
Today marks the first anniversary of the publication of the infamous Hutton report which led to my departure from the BBC and that of my chairman, Gavyn Davies. Looking back 12 months, and knowing what we now know, the saga has an unreal quality because, today, there is no doubt that the BBC story which led to our departures was fundamentally right when it said that Downing Street had sexed up the case for going to war in Iraq.
China and Canada signed agreements in Beijing today to help develop uranium mines and oil reserves, including Canada's oil sand deposits in Alberta, to expand trade between the two countries.
As the stolen Boeing 747 lumbered through the night sky on its way from America to Australia, it was difficult for the 250 unshaven occupants to comprehend how they had fallen so far so fast. Their eyes were red from lack of sleep, and from the sudden realization that as the most wanted war criminals in the world, the only place they might find sanctuary was a former penal colony on an obscure island south of Australia.
When the Bush Doctrine of 2002 was implemented, that signaled the world that any country could be next, in our megalomaniacal quest, to own everything and everyone on the planet. At that moment, the rest of the civilized world began to put plans in place to marginalize the USA, to remove us from their horizons. When the theft of the last election became a fact their plans jumped to light-speed in order to be implemented. The entire world has begun to rearrange their priorities to cut us out of the global picture, and that's what awaits us now!
There is one tiny corner of Cuba that will forever America be. It is a place where innocent people are held without charge for years, beyond international law, human decency and the mythical glow of Lady Liberty's torch. It is a place where torture is common, beating is ritual and humiliation is routine. They call it Guantánamo Bay.
