acts of war
 premeditated + cold-blooded
  = aggressive, illegal, Nuremberg-class war

.. AusBC ...

  .. + Barker ...

    .. = filthy lies

Thesis/Subtitle: These criminals - US+Zs - are rampaging across the world. Add UK & Aus = Anglo/Judaic then France etc. = prime perpetrators, plus their snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on (SQSH-Os) regimes (like Denmark (NATO useful idiot) or Sweden (pursuing Assange)), all must be stopped. Our so-called 'leadership' has and continues to fail: Tumbrels.


Preamble: One *could* think, that the ME correspondent for 'our' AusBC might be just in 'the wrong place and/or time.' Wrong. For about the 1st half of my life, the AusBC was pretty-well my exclusive 'news' source. Around the time of the '67 aggressive Zionist war on the immediate Arab world, I was deliberately misinformed by same AusBC. Proof: I was prepared to argue *against* the hapless Palestinians' cause = attempting to reverse the violent dispossession of almost an entire nation by invading aliens. It wasn't 'brave David' facing down the 'ugly Arab/Muslim hordes' but fully reversed; the Zionists attacked first - as they did after UNGA181, see Plan Dalet (Deir Yassin massacre, etc.), and have been so doing, right down to the current moment (illegal settlements, internationally so designated) - in order to steal ever-more of Palestinians' land/property. The fact that the AusBC *dares* misinform U,WTP = us, we the people convicts the AusBC as accessory to murder for spoil, there/then to here/now Palestinian soil. Ditto for murder for Afghanistan pipeline routes, Iraqi & Libyan oil, current subversion of Syria then Iran as next target - all to 'enable' US/Z murdering theft.


Trigger article 0:

Video Interview, Democracy Now
March 23, 2007
  «"We're going to take out seven countries in 5 years, starting with Iraq, and then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and, finishing off, Iran" --
General Wesley Clark. Retired 4-star U.S. Army general, Supreme Allied Commander of NATO during the 1999 War on Yugoslavia.»
[democracynow via globalresearch/Amy Goodman]

Comment: It's called 'telegraphing their punches;' so hubristic were they (still are), that they told us (those who heard *and* listened) in advance. Not just Clark but well before him, PNAC = criminal US/Z cabal.


Trigger article 1:

Monitors hear pleas for intervention in Syria
By Middle East correspondent Anne Barker and wires
Updated December 28, 2011 11:02:50
  «"The regime used the last several days as an opportunity to escalate their attacks on several ... neighbourhoods in Homs and other cities prior to the deployment of these monitors," State Department deputy spokesman Mark Toner said.» 
[AusBC 'news'/111228, 11:02:50]

Comment 1: Associated video showed the monitors being harassed by 'activists.' One news broadcaster looked dreadfully crestfallen that no 'smoking guns' had been found; see another headline "Observers say 'nothing frightening' in Homs." Note: AusBC is now in the 'business' of revising history; what they publish may be replaced by a 2nd or 3rd ... 'bite,' so originally published content may be 'lost' to the world.

Comment 2: The cited text shows just who's 'pulling the strings' here. Other reports say 'no independent observers can confirm ...' - IMHO, *totally* giving the game away. One should not go to war on (lying) propaganda-rumours - ooops! - they already did, in this past year, in (hapless, oil-rich & previously high HDI) Libya.

Trigger article 2:

Iran threatens to block Strait of Hormuz
By Middle East correspondent Anne Barker and wires
Updated December 29, 2011 11:52:36
  «US State Department deputy spokesman Mark Toner had dismissed Mr Rahimi's threat as another attempt "to distract attention from the real issue, which is their continued non-compliance with their international nuclear obligations".
The United States and other Western countries accuse Iran of using its uranium enrichment program to build nuclear weapons, a charge which Tehran denies.»
[AusBC 'news'/111229, 11:52:36]

Comment 1: "... their continued non-compliance with their international nuclear obligations" is an outright lie. If the US had any such real evidence, they would have obliterated most of Iran a very small few micro-secs after trumpeting same to the world.

Comment 2: According to the considered, collective verdict of all US 'intel'-agencies, Iran had abandoned any attempt at building a bomb, latest 2003. Yet almost every 'report' from Barker includes the above *unsupported* allegation in some form or other. Filthy propagansiste!

Comment 3: It may well be, that Iran could legally close Hormuz, see here for confirmation. Hmmm. The oil 'price' (not value) may sky-rocket - this time independently of speculators; see here for some discussion (like ~60% of oil price could be due to speculation by hedge funds, banks etc.).


Trigger article 3:

Syrian violence continues despite observer mission
By Middle East correspondent Anne Barker, wires
Updated December 29, 2011 23:24:27
  «Human rights activists say in the latest violence, security forces killed 14 civilians including a five-year-old child in the city of Homs, where observers spent two days touring restive neighbourhoods.
He said people were going down into the streets in Hama to await the delegation. Security was heavy and marksmen were seen on rooftops.»
[AusBC 'news'/111229, 23:24:27]

Comment 1: This one's a real bewdie; one needs to read it all (with an appropriately jaundiced eye) to appreciate all the lying allegations. This s**t is called 'news?'

Comment 2: "... marksmen were seen on rooftops" was a propaganda technique also deployed before the NATO rape of Libya; it is effective because the (lying) allegation causes fear and revulsion - in the target *audience* = us, we the people = 'manufacturing consent' = we just shuddup & resign ourselves to yet another round of mass-murdering for spoil.

Comment 3: In general, any 'activist' opposing the US/Zs is called a 'terrorist' and may be summarily executed by drone, say = extra-judicial killing = murdered without due process, or any other process except the US/Zs' arbitrary say-so. On the other hand, all 'activists' opposing a US/Z-declared enemy are embraced by the AusBC & other criminally lying sycophants; we are to hang off their every (lying) word. Self interest, anybody? See what happened in Libya; one of the 1st changes was to establish a new (rogue) central bank, ??? Good system! Great for truth & justice!


Fazit: Our so-called 'leaders' are corrupt = criminal psychopaths and/or totally insane; spruiking lies as they send 'our boys' off to foreign = invasive wars grounded in lies. The taxpayer-supported AusBC is corrupt & venal, just like the commercial MSM - they not only transmit but actively extend the leaders' lies. In a so-called 'democracy,' the leaders are supposed to represent U,WTP = us, we the people, and implement the will of the majority whilst safeguarding all minorities. Concentrating the world's wealth into the hands of a fraction of 1% - by a crooked economics system = neoliberalism, including military intervention = mass-murdering for spoil is *not* in our interest: Tumbrels, for murder/theft-ordering leaders & pro-war liars both. And do not forget for the smallest part of a pico-sec that they are also driving us deep into unsustainability vis-à-vis resource depletion and deadly pollution (excess CO2 = climate-crash) both.


lies suspected when
 the reporter is
  Anne Barker

.. we just ...

  .. do not 'do' ...

    .. coincidences

Thesis/Subtitle: Just one lie = all credibility gone


Trigger article:

Syrian forces 'ordered to shoot to kill'
By Middle East correspondent Anne Barker and wires
Updated December 16, 2011 10:02:35
  «A report by Human Rights Watch (HRW) says Syrian soldiers were given orders to "shoot to kill" in the crackdown against anti-government protesters.» 

Comment 1: Notice how it's done; HRW "is an international non-governmental organization that conducts research and advocacy on human rights. Its headquarters are in New York City and" ... it is 'privately' financed and has neither official standing nor accountability. They, as anyone, are free to tell us lies, and producing 'activists' or 'lists of names' could all be totally fictitious.

Comment 2: To be effective, pro-war propaganda has to push some lie, and a good way of doing that is to shock the audience - as here, as earlier in Libya, by mentioning snipers. Any regime fearing US/NATO/Z attack would be mad to provoke such, so it is unreasonable to think that snipers would be deployed by a government against their own people. Whatever these alleged tyrants, be they US- or Z-claimed enemies are, they are not idiots, so all such sniper-talk must be considered outright lies ahead of any other explanation.


One has to consider demonstrated form, modus operandi and cui bono?

The world's #1 & #2 monster rogue-regimes are the US & Zs; instead of peace being allowed to break out after WW2 we got the twin A-bomb war crimes by the US against Japan (justified as 'saving US lives' = since proved to be total bullshit), then the incredible injustice of the aggressive, murdering invasion of Palestine by alien Zionists. Basically, the violence against civilian populations in resource-owning countries coveted by the US & Zs has not stopped since then. Latest victims are Afghanistan, Iraq & Libya, the aggression against Syria is being 'ramped up' and has been continuous against Iran since 1979, when Iranians broke free - by popular, largely violence-free revolution - from the US-puppet installed after the UK&US deposed the democratic Mossadegh (How the United States Destroyed Democracy in Iran in 1953.)

The criminal viciousness of the US & Zs is not often mentioned, let alone ever fully discussed in the corrupt & venal MSM, and the fact that I personally was wickedly ill-informed by the AusBC re: Israel is my proof of the AusBC's participation in the 'conspiracy of lies and silence' waged against us, we the people.

You can see AusBC propaganda in full-flight in almost any report on Iran by-lined by Barker (time of writing: 'About 354 results'), for example hardly an article goes by without her (by her own hand, or by 'stenographing' the reports of others, as with the above HRW's) - without the appearance of some arrangement of 'Iran is suspected of building an A-Bomb,' (try "The international community must stop, before it is too late, Iran's race for nuclear weapons which endanger the whole world"), when no one, including all US intel, can provide a single shred of credible evidence that it may be so.

Consider this AusBC report:

US military marks end of its Iraq war
Updated December 15, 2011 23:30:18
  «The withdrawal ends a war that left tens of thousands of Iraqis and nearly 4,500 American soldiers dead, many more wounded and 1.75 million Iraqis displaced, after the 2003 US-led invasion unleashed brutal sectarian fighting.» 

Comment: Specifically, this bit: "tens of thousands of Iraqis" dead.

A *credible* report by the Lancet published on 11 October 2006, methodology approved by the UK military, estimated 654,965 excess deaths - a vast difference from '10s of 1000s,' and other, more current estimates are well over 1.4mio dead, with 2mio+ internally displaced and another 2mio+ fled the country.

As for "sectarian fighting," no one knows how many of the terrorist bombings are 'black-flag' covert ops (CIA, Mossad, MI6) - recall the two Poms caught in Basra with their car full of bomb-making materials (caught red-handed with all the tools necessary to launch "suicide bombs" against the people); when they were incarcerated by Iraqis, the UK sent tanks in to bust them out of gaol.

Democracies simply cannot function properly with a deceived electorate - not to mention the deaths inflicted by the monster rogue-regimes in their filthy murdering for spoil (soil, oil.)

The world is facing an excess-CO2 caused climate-change catastrophe, but inaction prevails, partly caused all eyes keep being dragged back to the ME, all because of the deliberately inflicted presence of the criminal Zionist murdering for soil = land/property-thieves, and the US coveting of oil = ditto murdering-thieves.

It's wrong and it must be stopped; a good place to start is to stop AusBC/Barker telling us lies.


being wrong
 still doesn't stop
  erring ideologists - too bad

.. if at first ...

  .. you don't succeed ...

    .. keep trying 'more of the same?'

Preamble: "The sky is falling! Quick, do something!"


Trigger article:

Merkel, Sarkozy unveil tough eurozone plan
Updated December 06, 2011 13:29:45
  «The two leaders backed automatic sanctions against EU member states whose deficits go over 3 per cent of gross domestic product.
They also called for a "reinforced and harmonised golden rule" on deficits, which could oblige some states to enshrine the commitment to balance their public finances in their constitution or legislation.»

Comment: Typical neoliberal rubbish, here "balance their public finances."


  «"The goal that we have with the chancellor is for an agreement to have been negotiated and concluded between the 17 members of the eurozone in March, because we must move quickly," Mr Sarkozy said, warning of a "forced march to re-establish confidence in the euro and the eurozone".» 
[AusBC/'news,' ibid.]

Comment: Why the rush? To force action before others can think?


  «With debt contagion threatening to spread throughout the eurozone, Italy kicked off a critical week by presenting a draconian package of cuts, taxes and pension reforms to parliament as Europe tries to pick up the pace to keep the euro alive.» 
[AusBC/'news,' ibid.]

Comment 1: Typical neoliberal rubbish, here "a draconian package of cuts, taxes and pension reforms" = IMF-type SAPs.

Comment 2: IMHO, "debt contagion" is a furphy; as the speculators cripple one country (bankrupted by soaring interest rates [hereafter shortened to %s], aggravated when not actually caused by short-selling, say), the speculators move on to the next. That's not 'contagion' but serial crime.


  «Prime Minister Mario Monti warned that Italy risks a Greek-style "collapse" if it is not adopted, as financial markets cheered the proposals.» 
[AusBC/'news,' ibid.]

Comment: Who is more important here, financial markets or the people?


  «It was hoped that the proposals would be seen as a credible guarantee that eurozone governments will at last bring their deficits under control and satisfy restive markets.» 
[AusBC/'news,' ibid.]

Comment 1: Is the correct description 'satisfy restive markets' OR 'ward off speculator attacks?'

Comment 2: This ('restive markets') is 'the crunch,' not the two others mentioned in the cited article; more on crunches below. Here is one more, a 'double' quote:

  «European Central Bank chief Mario Draghi has said he could then take action, and many hope the bank will intervene to protect European banks from a credit crunch and buy bonds to rein in soaring rates on government borrowing.
However, Mr Sarkozy said that Germany and France were "in complete agreement to say that eurobonds are in no case a solution to the crisis, in no case."
"How can we convince others to make the efforts we are making ourselves if we pool our debts as of now? None of this makes any sense," he said.»
[AusBC/'news,' ibid.]

Comment 1: Note that Draghi and Merkozy do not agree. As well as 'the crunch,' we have 'the controversy' = they can't agree = another way of saying that there is *no* acceptable theory. This doesn't necessarily mean no theory at all - after all, 'neoliberalism' is theory - but few and none effectively ('officially') contest this - IMHO *erring* - theory. What we can see is neoliberalism failing in practice, just that nobody ('officially') acknowledges the failure. I write "('officially')" to distinguish 'what they say' (OR what they don't say) from observable reality.

Comment 2: Another key here is "soaring rates;" the EU *on purpose*, does not have a facility like the Aus' RBA, which may set the 'official' %. Nooo, they in the EU have to go to 'the market' to borrow, and 'the market' sets the % = out of all control, except 'the market,' which may be (massive understatement) polluted by speculators, all of whom wish to get rich soonest, so it's in the interest of 'the market' to extract the biggest profit, fastest. Get my drift, here? Hint: What of the people's interests?

Comment 3: This illustrates one of the problems with 'economic rationalism,' namely they always try and often succeed to *sound* rational. Best example: We (the people) have to balance our budgets, so why not countries? It is, of course, a fallacious argument, *proven* by the US deficit, currently 'reported' at ~15trio (but what of the ~13-16trio 'given' to the WallSt. banksters' bail-outs?) The US has *no* intention whatsoever, of *ever* paying their deficit off.

Comment 4: Next, try "TINA!" (Thatcher's "There is no alternative!") There was then, just as there is now, some alternative. Tip: IF hear "TINA!" THEN run the other way. Merkozy (as others) claim threatening debt-bombs, but they were deliberately constructed, 1st by (neoliberalism) cutting govt. income (typically cutting taxes off the rich 1%) and trying to cut services (typically off us, the other 99% *non-rich* rest), but coming up short - and so 2nd, going into debt. A 3rd is the 'nature of the beast,' namely that all $s/€s/whatevers are a) now fiat and b) issued ('printed') as debt (consider the BND, mentioned elsewhere. But quickly, IF a government bank issues *all* the money, THEN that government also collects *all* the % and is in a *much* better budget position, including delivering services = to the %, effectively 'for free!')

Comment 5: Not for nothing, does the expression 'bankster' exist. Since 15Aug'71, when Nixon dropped the gold-standard (some say: The US went broke), all $s(€s/whatevers) are fiat = arbitrarily printed. Even when some money was 'real' (= gold, say), 'leverage' was used by the banks, this being called 'fractional reserve banking.' In a nutshell, this enabled 'trading' banks to issue a multiple, say 10*, of the 'real' money they had on deposit at the central bank, then loaning that out at some % = 'earning' massive, *unearned* profits! As for banksters, 'trading' banks have a literal 'right' to print their own money = a rip-off, and *proof* of the expression 'bankster.'

Comment 6: The sky never falls on its own; there is no Q: "Did it fall or was it pushed," it is *always* pushed. In this case by neoliberalism, cutting taxes off the 1% and loading charges onto the 99% - who, because of another charming aspect of our (actually, not 'ours' but 'theirs' = corrupt economists', banksters', politicians' et al., aka the filthy swindlers') erring ideology - because of a reverse = down-side of neoliberalism, namely globalisation (off-shoring, down-sizing, part-timing, sub-contracting, lean-and-meaning, etc.), we the people are more than a bit 'down-income' = poorer, and so can't compensate for the fat-cats' tax-cuts. Result is rich richer, govts, as us, poorer.

Fazit; the really BIG Q: Where are the decent thinkers, the clever, compassionate & countervailing force, to bring these crims (corrupt economists, banksters, politicians et al.) to justice? Oh yeah, whilst bringing those brigands to justice, don't forget the liars in the almost universally corrupt & venal MSM, incl. big bits of the AusBC.


IF in an 'ole
 THEN stop digging
  UNLESS erringly ideological

.. neoliberalism ...

  .. foist upon us 'unasked' ...

    .. bipartisanly = un- & anti-democratically

Musing: I recall some debate; contra = 'race to the bottom,' pro = 'a rising tide lifts all boats' and 'a smaller slice of a larger pie may actually turn out bigger.' Also, neoliberalism was sold as if it would enable the poverty-struck to pull themselves out of their misery. Well, we can see how well it all worked out; lots of the already-rich got richer, and many/most of the non-rich rest got viciously ripped-off = *further* impoverished.

There's only one 'real' question, Q: Did they know what they were doing?

Suggested A1: No, all the damage was 'accidental' = 'they' were pig-higorant = criminally negligent, or

Suggested A2: Yes, all the damage was deliberately inflicted = 'they' were outright criminal; but whatever, in both cases 'they' must be brought to justice.

As usual with major crime, we have the prime-perpetrators = 'they,' the string-pullers, the 'powers behind the throne.' 'They' are basically hidden, for it's not openly acknowledged that in our democracies, there may be 'outside influencers' - who have purchased 'special considerations.' But that's obviously what's happened; the prime-perpetrators have their accessories, first the so-called 'leaders' = politicians - of both 'sides' (bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic), here more often than not acting *against* our, we the people's interests. Then come the rest of the perpetrator/exploiter/accessories forming the M/I/C/4a-plex[1], and dragging along at the rear, the various apologists, including the pro-war + pro-crime = pro-corruption internet trolls. Since the perpetrators' modi operandi include deception, oppression and murdering theft, I see only one effective solution: Tumbrels, then a new start; this time down the correct, socially just path.


Trigger article 1, some history:

Debt and Democracy – Has the Link Been Broken?
By Michael Hudson
December 02, 2011
  «By giving taxpayers this voice in government, the Dutch and British democracies provided creditors with much safer claims for payment than did kings and princes whose debts died with them. But the recent debt protests from Iceland to Greece and Spain suggest that creditors are shifting their support away from democracies. They are demanding fiscal austerity and even privatization sell-offs.
This is being dictated by financial proxies euphemized as technocrats. Designated by creditor lobbyists, their role is to calculate just how much unemployment and depression is needed to squeeze out a surplus to pay creditors for debts now on the books. What makes this calculation self-defeating is the fact that economic shrinkage – debt deflation – makes the debt burden even more unpayable.»
[ICH, nakedcapitalism/Michael Hudson]

Comment: One could recall "no taxation without representation." It's no good for representatives to 'do what they want;' first they have to present a 'platform' then proceed to honour their 'mandate.' But not only, as our representatives they must do their best *for us*, not kowtow to just anyone offering them $s. Consider: The representative model's time has passed; time to stop the lies, cut out the politician middle-wo/men & move to 100% *direct* democracy.

Trigger article 2, some ideas:

Dec 1, 2011
ECB a barrier to crisis exit
By Ellen Brown
  «One solution might be for the publicly-owned banks of eurozone governments to exercise their right to borrow from the ECB at 1.25%, then use that liquidity to buy up the country's debt, or as much of it as does not sell at auction. (The Federal Reserve does this routinely in open market operations in the US.) The government's securities would be stabilized, keeping speculators at bay; and the government would get the interest spread, since it would own the banks and would get the profits back as dividends.» 
[atimes/Ellen Brown]

Comment 1: Note: "keeping speculators at bay;" why are we still being plagued by such scum?

Comment 2: There are few publicly-owned banks, i.e. Aus' C'wlth was privatised by Labor (traitors). So the first step is to nationalise the trading banks, whilst disbanding the investment banks (as being more than merely un- but counter-useful.) Whereas 'nationalise' may be synonymous with socialism, itself next to communism, the right-wing rhetoric becomes tiresome. Time to return to what's known to work, as opposed to the predominate US-brand of capitalism = mindless exploitation = *erring* ideology.


  «Europe is in the process of being "structurally readjusted" by a private banking cartel. If its people are to resist this silent conquest, they need to rise up and, using the ballot box and public banks, throw out the new banking hegemony before it is too late.» 
[Ellen Brown, ibid.]

Comment: One big, if not *the* biggest problem is that the people don't even realise the details of what's really going on (= threatening financial collapse and/or serfdom), thanks, but "No, thanks!" to the corrupt & venal MSM (including 'national' = taxpayer-funded broadcasters like the AusBC), misinforming the people = deliberately omitting info - when not telling outright lies[2]. I term this process the pushed-propaganda paradigm, dumbing the people down (i.e. the sheople are being ppp-dd'd.)

Trigger article 3, some reality:

By Marshall Auerback
Eurozone Catastrophe: How Saving the Euro Could Mean Blood on the Streets
The whole future shape of Europe must be resolved in a week or so. It’s a high-stakes game of poker that the Germans are determined to win--at the expense of misery for many.
December 2, 2011
  «The eurozone is facing two distinct, but related, problems: Problem #1 is a national solvency issue, which only the European Central Bank (ECB) can solve. Problem #2 is deficient "aggregate demand" (a fancy term for the spending power of consumers), which calls for a stronger fiscal policy response to offset declining investment and purchases in the private sector.
The only institution in the EMU that can spend without recourse to prior funding is the ECB. That is the consequence of the flawed design of the monetary system that the neo-liberal conservatives in Europe forced upon the member states at the inception of the common currency.
From what I can see, there's no chance that the ECB would fund and at the same time mandate the higher deficits needed for a recovery, because the Germans will never allow it. In which case the only thing that will end the austerity is blood on the streets in sufficient quantity to trigger chaos and a change in governance.»
[alternet/Marshall Auerback]

Comment 1: 'National insolvency' is a direct result of, primarily, deliberately reducing govt. income - by cutting taxes off the 1%, say. 'Deficient aggregate demand' is a direct result of, primarily, cutting wages, opportunities (via off-shoring), conditions & benefits from the 99%. Both govt. income & expenditure cuts result from the neoliberal *erring ideology*, as opposed to any *proven* theory. Proof is in the results.

Comment 2: We have the choice; wait for the damage THEN try to recover OR act soonest on what we can foresee, trying to save a lot of BIG TROUBLE in advance. Prevention is better than cure.

Fazit: the current result could hardly have been better for the 1%, or much worse for the 99%, and since we don't 'do' coincidences, I presume neoliberalism was thusly designed. Our so-called 'leaders' have sold us out = betrayed us; they are nothing other than filthy traitors. The 'normal' penalty for treason = execution, hence tumbrels. For both the string-pullers and the M/I/C/4a-plex order-givers, plus their should-know-better order-takers, and ditto for apologists = pro-crime + pro-war = pro-corruption internet trolls, say; off to gaol with the lot - some directly to death-row.


PS I, as a dilettante/dabbler with 'normal' allocation of brains and time, can see what's going on, as could anyone in my circumstances = able to bypass the 'info-gatekeepers' = the corrupt & venal MSM. IF I can see (proof = this article + citations), THEN what of the so-called 'leaders' = politicians with big-$ backing, supposedly clever staffs, not to mention the 'real' bastions of deep-thought = university departments (like economics, say?) The magnitude of the problems speak directly to the so-called leaders' (+ accessories', apologists') failures; once more: Tumbrels.



[1] M/I/C/4a-plex = Military-Industrial (as per Eisenhower), then Congress (US for parliaments), the 4th Estate = corrupt & venal (including lying) MSM and 'a' = whatever parts of academia wanted by the 1% and prepared to sell-out - which seems to be lots, starting with economics (neoliberalism, 'economic rationalism,' globalisation; all together = race to the bottom for workers, wages & conditions) and psychology (more lying = scientifically designed propaganda).

[2] lie2  -n. 1 intentionally false statement (tell a lie). 2 something that deceives. -v. (lies, lied, lying) 1 tell a lie or lies. 2 (of a thing) be deceptive.  give the lie to show the falsity of (a supposition etc.). [Old English] [POD]