'live,' on
  your TV

.. no truth ...

  .. no trial ...

    .. no justice

Thesis/Subtitle: No innocent has a chance, when confronted by committed criminals.

Corollary: One can't even call this 'trial by media,' since the 'Assad = guilty' verdict preceded all action.

[update, 11:11]


Trigger article:

Australian Government expels top Syrian diplomat
Broadcast: 29/05/2012
  «CHRIS UHLMANN: So, why did it take this long to act against Syria? This has been going on for quite some time now - about 10,000 people have died?
BOB CARR: The Kofi Annan peace plan was resolved in April - Kofi Annan acting on behalf of the Arab League and the United Nations, so he's a joint special envoy. He recommended, and it was adopted, a plan that emphasised a cessation of hostilities and political engagement; they're the best ways of summing up the six points. Since then, it's become clear that the Assad government will not cease hostilities, it will not give effect or a ceasefire. I think this terrible massacre has confirmed that.»

Comment 1: Carr's "I think ... has confirmed that" attempts to convict Assad on what amounts to *no* evidence. Or, at least no good evidence.

Comment 2: Throughout this vile saga, the 'unspoken allegation' is that the Syrian govt. is responsible for the majority of deaths, basically on little-to-no evidence other that of 'interested party' assertions.

Comment 3: Proof of Carr's own unbalanced assertions is here:

  «The regime would be afraid that if it winds down the military presence, takes the tanks and the cannon out of built-up areas, as Kofi Annan has been arguing, it will be overcome by popular opposition - that is, the resistance.» 
[AusBC/7.30 ibid.]

Comment 1: More than 50% of the Syrian people recently took part in an election - to which the 'opposition' had urged a boycott; *this* indicates that any opposition is in the minority.

Comment 2: Note that since 'it takes two to tango,' IF the govt. were to stop shooting THEN the opposition must do so simultaneously. BUT: the opposition rejects any ceasefire (as the 'rebels' in Libya), so unless both stop, nobody stops. And there is a difference; the Syrian govt. itself has the primary responsibility to protect its own citizens - here, from externally instigated & supported aggressive attack = Nuremberg-class war crime.


A so-called 'evidence' article:

28 May 2012 Last updated at 21:35 GMT
Syria Houla massacre: Survivors recount horror
  «Survivors who spoke to the BBC, and the local commander of the Free Syrian Army, said the people who carried out the killings were militiamen - shabbiha [me: shabiha? - spelling] - from nearby Alawite villages.
We can't confirm their accounts, but they are consistent with one another, and also with the reports given by activist groups on the ground in the immediate aftermath of the massacres.»

Comment 1: "He said, she said" = hearsay.

Comment 2: "Activist groups" are *not* disinterested observers; further, if the bbc can find one liar, they can find any number more to 'corroborate' each other. See (1) = "He said, she said" = hearsay.

'Balance' from the bbc:

  «But Syrian leaders will be giving Kofi Annan a different account in his talks in Damascus. They still insist that what they admit was a massacre was the work of hundreds of armed rebels who massed in the area, and carried out the killings in order to derail the peace process and provoke intervention by Nato.» 
[bbc/'news' ibid.]

Comment: See my note yesterday: It makes *no* sense for Assad to put his own neck into a noose. It makes *every* sense, for those who covet then murder, to make Assad look as bad as possible. There is a difference; the Zs have form, having stolen almost an entire country (Palestine), murdering as they went. US ditto, Iraq (B, B & H; 100s of 1000s dead) & Libya (F+UK/NATO). For mass-murderers-to-steal, lying is a snack; you work it out.

A confounding article:

Secret 2001 Pentagon Plan to Attack Lebanon
Bush's Plan for "Serial War" revealed by General Wesley Clark
by A Concerned Citizen
July 23, 2006
  «"As I went back through the Pentagon in November 2001, one of the senior military staff officers had time for a chat. Yes, we were still on track for going against Iraq, he said. But there was more. This was being discussed as part of a five-year campaign plan, he said, and there were a total of seven countries, beginning with Iraq, then Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iran, Somalia and Sudan... » 
[globalresearch.ca/quotes General Wesley Clark]

Comment: It's called 'telegraphing your punches,' a possible 'security breach' or outright hubris. But once this particular cat was out of the bag, no-one can say we weren't warned. Not as if any warning (or anything else - failing the citizenry rejecting their so-called leaders' criminality) could have stopped the Pentagon (NATO+SQSHsO = snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on, i.e. F+UK as in Libya) juggernaut.


Lemma: At any crime-scene, one examines 'means, motive, and opportunity,' modus operandi (= m.o.) plus 'cui bono?' = who benefits? One examines what facts if any available, suspects lies at every turn (recalling recent m.o.), then drawing conclusions based on the balance of probabilities.

Musing: All indicators point one way = war -> chaotic ruin; 2001 Afghanistan, 2003 Iraq, 2011 Libya, this week Syria then soon Iran. Who benefits? Certainly not the people of war-ravaged countries; 'democratisation by war' is a wicked, criminal cruelty - and (adding massive insult to mass-mortal injuries) doesn't work.

Fazit: The AusBC, if not smarter than I am, should at least be better informed (international correspondents network) - and doubly so for Carr&Co (spooks network; ASIO, CIA, etc..) Here, another "You work it out."


^ Update, 11:11; PS Offered on a 'take it or leave it' basis:

Atrocities Made to Order
How Wall Street & London Manufacture Tragedy to Sell War & Regime Change.
By Tony Cartalucci
May 29, 2012
  «Houla appears to simply be on a much larger scale, involving militants most likely not affiliated with local FSA fighters or the Syrian government, but foreign elements just as the Syrian government has claimed. Just as in Bangkok where protesters were taken as much by surprise as Thai troops at the arrival of Thaksin's militants, FSA fighters, Houla residents, and Syrian troops all seem baffled as to who exactly committed the atrocities.
And amongst all the finger pointing, it is the politically-motivated haste by the US, UK, France, Israel, and the Muslim Brotherhood to condemn the massacre, baselessly blame the Syrian government, and cry in unison for military intervention that is by far the most incriminating evidence yet as to who was really behind the bloodbath. Cui Bono? To whose benefit? NATO and its Middle Eastern proxies have made it abundantly clear it was to their benefit.
Clearly there is the distinct possibility that a third party took advantage of a prolonged engagement between the FSA and government troops in Houla, to manufacture a very real atrocity. With so few facts in hand, it would be the height of irresponsibility to lay blame on anyone so squarely that punitive actions are leveled. So while the Globe and Mail berates Russia for suggesting that "the blame must be determined objectively," it is by far, without debate, the most sensible course of action to take. If the West laments the distrust it now suffers, it has only itself, and its long history of running death squads in exactly this manner, to blame.
Tony Cartalucci at Land Destroyer»

Comment: There's far too much at stake to allow liars to range loose.



relentless evil
 everybody can hear
  but nobody seems to listen

.. if the wolf ...

  .. was at your door ...

    .. would you provoke it?

Thesis/Subtitle: Some leaders may be tyrants - but not all stupid.


Ripped open by metal explosion
Caught in barbed wire
Bullet shock
Throbbing meat
Electronic data processing
Black uniforms
Bare feet, carbines Mail-order rifles
Shoot the muscles

"... the killing of 108 people in Houla"
[update, 16:25]


Trigger article:

Annan visits Syria in wake of latest bloodshed
By Middle East correspondent Anne Barker, staff
Updated May 29, 2012 07:20:29
  «United Nations envoy Kofi Annan has arrived in Syria and said he is horrified by a massacre in the central town of Houla, which the Syrian government and rebels have blamed on each other.
The former UN chief's visit came a day after the Security Council condemned the killing of 108 people in Houla.»

Video: Syrian killings shock the world (Lateline)
Video: Foreign Minister Bob Carr on the options for Syria (Lateline)
Video: Nadim Houry from Human Rights Watch discusses the developments in Syria (7.30)

Comment 1: Usually, I don't 'do' video, but since most of the 'civilised' world does (with the occasional accompaniment of lots of 'wanna-Bs'), one's gotta be like, 'in it to win it' - or so they say.

Comment 2: Odd, how so many current affairs reporters are female - or is it? Q: Can females sound more 'believable' when relating atrocities = propagandising? Hmmm. Yet another instance of psyops at work, perhaps ... one reason for these videos (specially 7:30), is to observe the 'actors' at work.

(Partial AusBC list: Fran Kelly, Anne Barker, Lisa Millar, Eleanor Hall, Emma Alberici & Leigh Sales; 1st two might be the worst. I once thought Elizabeth Jackson was OK (plus Emma), now not too sure at all, c'est la vie.)

Comment 3: As is becoming boringly routine, the main antagonist is being demonised; latest takes his place in the target line-up amongst the sequence: al-Qaeda, Taliban, Saddam, Gaddafi, Assad & Ahmadinejad. Speculatively, we can extend the list by adding Putin & Hu Jintao.

(Each have attributes to hang demonisation on, starting with "not like us," and ending in some resource: Soil (Palestine, Golan Heights), pipeline routes (Afghanistan) and/or oil (most of the Arab/Muslim targets.) Recall: "He may be a bastard - but he's *our* bastard!" The US tolerates and may actively support any tyrant who 'sufficiently' toes the US-line (sufficiently = full, abject grovel + unimpeded access to resources, all the better to harvest any potential 'economic rent' (thus ripping-off sovereign owners) and/or access (for Z/IL, say) & control (against R, C, say)) - but when not sufficiently servile, watch out.

Comment 4: The 'barrage'[1] assembled against Assad is formidable; The US regime (of course, longer name = US-M/I/C/4a-plex with illegitimate sprog = Zionist Israeli regime, longer name = I/J/Z-plex lurking), NATO (the US regime by any other name, *plus* SQSH-Os = snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on), new (since the rapine of Libya) are NGOs like HRW, and now the UN apparatus itself, in the form of Ban Ki-moon and dragged out of ignominious 'retirement,' Kofi Annan. The so-called 'monitors' are led by a military-type = Robert Mood (apparently impeccable quals - except trained to kill - people, ending with "USMC School of Advanced Warfighting[11].")

Comment 5: As well as (4) above, the '4' in the 'M/I/C/4a-plex' = the 'messengers,' aka the '4th estate,' the (corrupt&venal) MSM, including big bits of 'our' AusBC - who transmit and *actively assist* the propaganda. Across much of 'the West' (as far as I know = AFAIK; can't be everywhere), the reporting is uniform, and uniformly biased - almost always pro-US, anti-current demonised target. Coincidence? Hardly. BTW, sameness *could* indicate coming from one truth (what they would say). But we've seen the lies cascade sooo many times ... of course criminals make crooked claims; the truth would self-convict 'em.

An alternate view:

Sunday, May 27, 2012
Syria Under Attack by Globalist Death Squad Experts
Brandon Turbeville
Activist Post
  «As the destabilization effort against Syria continues, the connections between the terrorist “opposition” forces and Anglo-American, pro-NATO governments are becoming more and more obvious, even as the mainstream media refuses to address the issue in any manner other than direct obfuscation.» 

Comment, a Q: Where do the 'rebels' get their ammo, with what $s? A: Silly Q? - The US is the biggest arms manufacturer/supplier in the world, 'giving' as much to IL as they ask for. That's a pretty big arsenal. The US also prints $s, as many as they want, often more than they can justify.


US condemns Syria massacre and looks for Russian help to oust Assad
  «(guardian): "The UN team in Syria described the attack in Houla as 'indiscriminate and unforgivable' but declined to directly point the finger at Assad's loyalists."

And for good reason, Assad knows full well he faces a US-backed coup d'etat. The last thing he is going to do is commit an overt act that hands the would-be invaders an excuse to invade. Either the US-backed mercenaries fired on the civilians, or they launched an attack from within the civilians to trick Assad's military into shelling that location, to manufacture an incident used to sell yet another war to the world.»
[guardian/whatreallyhappened ed.]

Comment: what I said, i.e. "a US-backed coup d'etat."


Problem is, that as bad as the Syrian situation is, it's not the real problem; what we're getting - not just post-9/11, but certainly post the (M/I/C/4a-plex recovery period) after Vietnam, is *more* violence, inflicted *by* the so-called 'world-leader' = the US (Zs always in background), rather than ever any less. Coincidence? Hardly.


Prisoners in Niggertown
It's a dirty little war
Three Five Zero Zero
Take weapons up and begin to kill
Watch the long long armies drifting home

Fazit: So when will the US go home? (~1k bases occupying - and menacing - countries almost all over the world & still increasing - like Darwin, say, to threaten China, say.)


PS The idea that Assad would not 'kill his own people' seems to be striking some resonance - proof is a) the revving up of the 'atrocity-porn' (and the externally-supported insurgent attacks), and b) the 'manufacture' of a brand-new 'excuse,' namely it is now being alleged (note: Without even declaring it as 'allegation,' see Ashley Hall/worldtoday as soon as available[2]), that gruesome massacres in Syria are being performed by 'Assad-govt. related militias.' Recall that 'believing' is usually done based on *no* evidence. Or at least no *good* evidence; "If you ain't got the truth, you got no news at all" (freely adapted.)



[1] barrage n. 1 concentrated artillery bombardment. 2 rapid succession of questions or criticisms. 3 artificial barrier in a river etc. [French barrer *bar1] [POD]


^ [2] Update, 16:25; worldtoday transcript now available:

Diplomatic double act drives Syrian ceasefire plan
Ashley Hall reported this story on Tuesday, May 29, 2012 12:26:00
  «ASHLEY HALL: The Syrian government says the massacre was carried out by what it calls heavily armed gunmen outside of its control.
Analysts say the armed gunmen are most likely members of the shadowy militia known as Shabiha, who've been implicated in other violent attacks.
The director of the Middle East Centre at the London School of Economics, Dr Fawaz Gerges, says little is known about the structure and control of the group.
FAWAZ GERGES: If I really were to define the Shabiha, they're the semi-official enforcers of the regime. They're much more expendable than the skilled security forces and I think based on everything that we know, they have allegedly committed some of the most horrific and brutal acts.»
[AusBC/worldtoday/Ashley Hall]

Comment: No real data; surmising from afar, here London. Both interviewer & interviewee assume that it is Assad forces attacking Assad's 'own people,' on what grounds? Never any mention (well, hardly ever), that the prime instigators of this now year-long+ outrage are mostly imports = armed alien invaders, be they CIA, MI5, Mossad, al-Qaeda or whatever. Crossing any border armed and inbound = aggressive Nuremberg-class war crime. Some citizens may not be too happy with Assad - but that is never any reason to start massacring fellow-citizens. Yet that is what the MSM continually asserts, incredible madness.

Me, repeat: It makes *no* sense for Assad to put his own neck into a noose. It makes *every* sense, for those who covet then murder, to make Assad look as bad as possible. There is a difference; the Zs have form, having stolen almost an entire country (Palestine), murdering as they went. US ditto, Iraq (B, B & H; 100s of 1000s dead) & Libya (F+UK/NATO). For mass-murderers-to-steal, lying is a snack. You work it out.




ratcheting up the rhetoric
 keep on catapulting
  the propaganda

.. of course ...

  .. it sounds horrific; ...

    .. = works exactly as designed

Thesis/Subtitle: IF at 1st you don't succeed THEN lie, lie, lie again.

Corollary: It's the same (corrupt&venal) MSM, pushing the same (lying) propaganda, targeting the same (ppp-dd'd) populace = we the (voting) people.

Antithesis: Just as one can't get blood out of a stone, one can't get *informed* consent from a ppp-dd'd (= pushed-propaganda paradigm dumbed-down) electorate - so what they aim for is resigned (grudging) 'acceptance:' "Oh well; we can't stop them... they will do what they want to do anyway," where "what they want" = smash yet another country à la Iraq, Libya etc..


Trigger article:

World condemns latest Syrian horror
Posted May 27, 2012 05:43:11
  «World leaders demand action after a massacre led by Bashar al-Assad's forces in the Syrian town of Houla left 92 people dead, including 32 children.» 

Comment: Note language; no mention of 'alleged.'

Another 'snip:'

  «The UN mission chief in Syria, Major General Robert Mood, condemned what he described as a "brutal tragedy" in Houla, where he said 92 bodies, including those of more than 32 children, had been counted.» 
[AusBC/'news,' ibid.]

Comment; note: Report by a military-type. (Not noted for their honesty - or equilibrium; they are, after all, trained to kill - people, including children, themselves.)

Comment; language: Why "more than?" Reports should be absolutely accurate?

Another 'snip:'

  «"I condemn the atrocities committed daily by Bashar al-Assad on his own people," Mr Fabius said. With these new crimes his murderous regime plunges Syria further into horror and threatens regional stability."» 
[AusBC/'news,' ibid.]

Comment: The new French FM, same narrative as the old FM. Note keywords "own people," then adds "Horror!" (Couldn't have more impact if designed?)

Last 'snip:'

  «"It is appalling that the Syrian regime does not put an end to the brutal violence against its own people," Mr Westerwelle said in a statement.» 
[AusBC/'news,' ibid.]

Comment; note: See how they line a 'coalition of the willing' up? First it was F+UK, now add D (whose military 'missed out' in Libya; boo hoo.)

Comment 1: It does *not* make any sense for Assad to hand the US+ a casus belli = 'justification' to smash him, his regime & destroy Syria; the allegation "kill his own people" must (95%+) be confected.

Comment 2: On the other hand, it makes *complete* sense for insurgents to massacre innocents - in this way, they hope to enable an external attack à la the US/F+UK/NATO rape of Libya.

Lemma: At any crime-scene, one examines 'means, motive, and opportunity,' modus operandi (= m.o.) plus 'cui bono?' One examines what facts if any available, suspects lies at every turn (recalling recent m.o.), then drawing conclusions based on the balance of probabilities.

More of the same:

1. It's the same sort (=generic) target as Iraq & Libya; an Arab/Muslim nation *not* prostrating itself before US-hegemony = resisting unfettered exploitation.

2. The reports from Syria strongly resemble those from Libya before the US/F+UK/NATO aggressive air-invasion (1st cruise-missiles to disable air-defences, then 1000s[!!?] of bombing runs. "We don't count innocent civilian casualties!") Result = possibly the best living conditions in Africa (keywords 'highest HDI') bombed back to the stone-age, regime routed (by amateur, ragged rebels in designer-T-shirts & US-Rambo-style Ack-Ack equipped pickup-trucks), regime replaced by chaos & failed services, Gaddafi foully murdered = lynched, just like Saddam but without even a kangaroo-court (dead men tell no tales...)

3. Syria is a neighbour of Israel (=IL) with territorial claims against IL, since IL (illegally) occupies the (Syrian) Golan Heights.

4. Syria hosts a Russian naval base, 'interesting' to the US since it is trying to encircle & isolate Russia (Putin is somewhat successfully opposing US-carpetbagging).

5. Syria may be considered to be on the road to Iran ("the road to Tehran runs through Damascus"); a long-time target of the US (+UK), recall the '53 UK+US coup against the democratic Mossadegh, installing the 'West'-friendly, tyrannical Shah, then after ~25yrs of Persian misery, the '79 counter-coup = slap in the US' face.

6. 'Unconfirmed reports' (what else, in a covert operation?) - indicate personnel (al-Qaeda types) and arms (Saudi Arabian = SA + surprise! - IL) being supplied to so-called rebel insurgents.

Comment: Far too many pointers, all strongly in the same direction to be coincidence = all carefully planned; a 'shock-doctrine' narrative in the implementation.

Most probable: Yet another 'regime-change' operation instigated, promoted & supported by the 'great Satan' = the US(Zs).


Musing: We, the (voting) people are not asked, except perhaps by 'public opinion poll' - and those polls must be not yet acceptable for a US-'led' attack, therefore the escalation in the horror-reports. Note that this latest comes from a UN-sponsored, Annan-led team - but Annan did not stop the rape of Iraq, just as Ban Ki-moon did not stop the rape of Libya. One must accuse the UN of being corrupt, and has been since earliest UNGA181 (allowing the alien-invading Zionists free rein to rape Palestine. Detect a trend?) Armed forces crossing borders inbound = Nuremberg-class aggression: Time this was stopped; the actual UN function as designed, has yet to be properly implemented.

Final note: The attacks on Syria (anticipated end-run = US/NATO, F+UK, now add D) are a perversion of democracy (against we the people-voters) but worse, far worse, a criminally wicked outrage against the hapless, innocent natives of yet another Arab/Muslim nation. Q: Where are the principled people who could effectively resist these ugly, murdering-to-thieve tyrannical criminal-oligarchies?

Repeat: It makes *no* sense for Assad to provoke an invasion which could lead directly to his own extinction - especially given the vivid examples of Saddam & Gaddafi. You work it out?


Fazit: US/Zs + SQSH-Os (= snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on), attack Syria at your peril; not in my name! 


proof of
 'extreme' perfidy
  = treachery against us, we the people

.. a ...

  .. real ...

    .. shocker

Thesis/Subtitle: who can save us, when?


Trigger article:

When the Respectable Become Extremists The Extremists Become Respectable: Colombia and the Mainstream Media
By James Petras
May 21, 2012
  «By any historical measure, whether it involves international law, human rights conventions, United Nations protocols, socio-economic indicators, the policies and practices of the United States and European Union regimes can be characterized as extremist.
The first decade of the 21st century has witnessed the West’s embrace of extremism in all of its manifestation both in domestic and foreign policy. Extremism is a common practice by self-styled conservatives, liberals and social-democrats.»

Comment 1: As usual, one should read the lot - and here it is a fair bit - but not too much; IF I can do it THEN so can you.

Comment 2: 'Liberal' is a most-misused word; many people claiming to be liberal or Liberal (lower- or upper-case) are not liberal[1] at all, rather much the opposite (like authoritarian, restrictive and/or vindictive, this list is looong; one thesaurus gives narrow-minded, bigoted + conservative, reactionary, say. 'Best' current example in Aus could be Abbott.) [Note that libre in this blog is as it says it is, namely 'free' + true.]

Comment 3; note: The "self-styled conservatives, liberals and social-democrats" are the main-stream parties, challenged/eclipsed by few-to-no minor 'players' (possible exception but rightly increasingly, the Greens). The important point here is that 'common practice' can equate to bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic - since it offers the electorate *no viable choice*.

Comment 4: So far I've only quoted about regimes; multiple proofs of their perfidy are not hard to find; consider two, 1) the rotten neoliberalism - variously 'economic rationalism,' 'supply-side,' 'globalisation' and - possibly truest: 'voodoo economics' - deployed against us, we the people (note ruined US+EU/PIIGS domestic economies), and 2) the filthy militarism deployed against coveted resource-owning countries = murder for spoil; from Palestine (soil = ethnically cleansed Lebensraum[2]) through Afghanistan (soil, to lay pipelines across/under) to Iraq, Libya then Syria on the way to Iran (oil, plus US/Z-hegemony and the crippling of perceived opponents of the US' illegitimate sprog, Israel).

Comment 5: In the light of 4 (regimes); let's have an extract from Petras on the (corrupt&venal) MSM:

  «In the wake of the extremist policies of public officials, the respectable, prestigious print media [me: plus broadcast = radio, TV, moving to internet] have engaged in their own versions of extremism[1]. Colonial wars that devastate civil society and materially and culturally impoverish millions in the colonized country are justified, embellished and made to appear as lawful, humane and furthering secular democratic values. Domestic wars on behalf of oligarchies and against wage and salaried workers, which concentrate wealth and deepen despair of the dispossessed are described as rational, virtuous and necessary. The distinctions between the prudent, balanced, prestigious and serious media and the sensationalist, yellow press have disappeared. The fabrication of facts, blatant omissions and distortions of context are found in one as well as the other.» 
[ICH/Petras, ibid.]

Comment 1: In a nutshell, the regimes & MSM are co-conspirators (actually not surprising); the 1st could not carry-on as-is in the face of a properly-investigative MSM. Just as lies are often precursor but 101% post-requisite to crime (else self-incrimination), so the MSM lies to us.

Comment 2: Perhaps it was ever thus = nothing new under the Sun.

Comment 3: Apart from the wicked damage caused, worse (for us, we the people), lies are deployed to deceive; no electorate can make properly informed decisions when so deceived; lies are also un- & anti-democratic.


Fazit 1: It's not 'merely' the commercial MSM but also 'our' AusBC which transmits lies; ever, cascadingly worse, they *actively assist & extend* our tyrannical so-called leaders' pathological lies.

Fazit 2: The oligarchies are not just working against us, impoverishing a multitude to enable the mostly already rich to get ever filthily richer; the vicious plundering now endangers the planet (via an xs-CO2-ccc = excess CO2 climate-change catastrophe, say). Time *we the people* stopped them, and their horrific damage.


PS It may be OK for me to make my own assertions, can I give any proof? Well, consider the Zs' aggressive, alien invasion of Palestine, ditto (big gap; can't list all US-atrocities); US into Afghanistan, B,B&H's "Shock'n whore" into Iraq, the recent US/F+UK/NATO rape of Libya; none of this was 'self-defence' (or the Oh, so cynical R2P) - but rather the same-old aggressive war-for-spoil à la the 3rd Reich. You, dear reader, may either agree or not (that's freedom), but then me continuing; the corrupt&venal MSM (incl. AusBC; just one proof is Barker and her 'Iran suspected of wanting A-bombs') - the MSM+AusBC carries the predominantly US/Z-lies, almost as one voice. Sure, some dissidents are reported on, and some within the MSM object, but there was/is no *effective* resistance mounted, neither to the vicious Zionists' attacks from pre-'48 down to the 'current moment,' to the latest (mostly covertly 'West'-supported) aggressive attacks against Assad in Syria. *That* is the proof of MSM+AusBC perfidy; that the aggressors can carry out their violent crimes, and overwhelmingly, the MSM reports convey support.

By rights, the people should be rioting in the streets to demonstrate their objections - but as 'alert but not alarmed,' they've been ppp-dd'd = pushed-propaganda paradigm dumbed-down - thanks partly to 'our' AusBC.

PPS One picture to tell a story (see below; from AusBC today); why do we see 'two-finger salutes' again, in a different country, and from children? How do they learn this, where does it come from? (Tip: External TV broadcasts à la VoA?)



[1] liberal  -adj. 1 abundant, ample. 2 giving freely, generous. 3 open-minded. 4 not strict or rigorous. 5 for the general broadening of the mind (liberal studies). 6 a favouring moderate political and social reform. b (Liberal) of or characteristic of Liberals. ... [Latin liber free][POD]

[2] Lebensraum (German, 'living-space'): Nazi political doctrine claiming a need to acquire more territory in order to accommodate the expanding German nation. ... to enable the so-called Nazi master race to subjugate and colonize the Slavic peoples. [The OXFORD World ENCYCLOPEDIA]
Post UNGA181; replace Nazi with Zionist, German with Israeli, Slavic with Palestinian. 


 must be good -
  because (1st of x)

.. privatisation ...

  .. makes the user pay ...

    .. and fat-cats ever filthy-richer

Thesis/Subtitle; Q: But I don't see how this helps?


A: Simple; things costing more send '$-signals' which tend to lower consumption.

Q: But I still don't see how this helps?

Well, take electricity. In Aus it is mainly produced from coal; less electricity = less coal = less CO2 - 'saving the planet,' see?

(Note: Governments continue to privatise, looong after it has been *conclusively proven* that privatisation is *not* in our, we the people's nett-interests - Q: Why? A: Because they are not *our* representatives so much if at all; they tend to 'sell-out' to the highest bidder - namely, to those with the most $s = the fat-cats, those getting ever filthy-richer - mainly on our, we the people's dough (it's a vicious circle). This adds insult to injury as well, and since both 'sides' = Lib/Lab are 'ugly-twins,' it's bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic.)

Same with petrol (fleet now increasingly diesel, same argument); less vehicle-fuel = less CO2 - again 'saving the planet.'

(Note: Speculators can drive prices up; saw one estimate of +20%. Thnx, speculators, for also trying to 'save the planet.')

(Ditto with threats of war by US/Zs against Iran, say - another +20% on oil; 'saving the planet' never looked so easy!)

But I don't understand how it works with i.e. tomatoes or potatoes, though. The farmers are always going broke (Heinz (ketchup), McDonald's (freedom-fries) doing price-arbitrage, say) - the consumer-market-prices for many foods go up and up (the difference between the farm-gate and the consumer = 'super-profit' = economic-rent; why 'middlemen' get ever filthy-richer), but the people get ever-more obese?

Corollary: Since nothing is free (the usually non-accounted 'externals,' say), there is always some cost borne by someone, and here it's mainly the poor who do the bearing; IF they can't afford to eat, heat or drive THEN they go on a diet, put on a jumper and/or walk to their desired (non-remote) destinations (resulting in more possible +ves - they get thinner and/or fitter, and what doesn't kill 'em makes 'em stronger...)


PS It's actually worse, far worse, than the above portrayal seeks to illustrate. In the 1st instance, they are not even *trying* to 'save the planet' - which is why I put it ('such things') in single-quotes, to indicate various levels of irony. In fact, the proof is easy: Both in Aus and the US (and elsewhere but who cares?) - they are planning to *increase* CO2 emissions; Aus by ever-more mining, US(+Zionists; the Zs 'own' the US, Congress+military+MSM at least) - by ever-more murder for spoil - Zs for soil, US for oil. Note that 'increase everything' is another tenet of neoliberalism (eternal increase = absolutely impossible on a finite planet), and the proof of that is currently seen in both US & EU; despite 'skilled immigration' (= theft of talent from 'lesser' countries) and 'un-skilled immigration' (= cheaper than 'domestic' slaves) driving up local populations, 40+/- years of neoliberalism 'increasing productivity' = depressing wages and conditions -> ever-diminishing demand; both average & nett demand falling *plus* ever greater indebtedness (both bubbles and one-sidedly tax-cutting (mostly off the rich) -> inflating borrowings) -> a downward spiral, just as I (partly) envisaged all those years ago, on 1st hearing 'economic rationalism,' then realising what lies they were telling and the projected consequences there-from. But nobody stopped it, proof that the MSM (TV, radio, press) & parts of academia have also sold out; see next.

PPS It's actually worse, far worse (again = as well), almost to the power of infinity, in that it's not merely our faux-representatives, but it's also the MSM and selected bits of academia (economists, psychologists, communication/PR schools). We get our news from the MSM and a part of that is *our* AusBC; no-one, neither in the private nor publicly-financed MSM made any *effective* effort to truthfully report on neoliberalism and it's consequences (proof of that is that there was *no revolution* = the people were 'successfully' brought to be then kept dumbed-down.) We get our economics from 'the experts,' few and none effectively resist 'the message.' The 'news' = propaganda, often lies, is 'shaped' by the psychologists & communicators = 'spin-masters.' That all these go along with 'the program' = proof of a massive cooperation; since the aims of the program are to take $s from us without giving fair value = rip us off = theft makes the program criminal = conspiracy. Look for yourself; try squinting through the pushed-paradigm propaganda - only the (unspun!) truth can ever set us free.


sorry, Ms Merkel, but
 you are 101% dead-wrong

.. thanks, but ...

  .. "No, thanks!" to ...

    .. austerity; it *stinks*

Thesis/Subtitle: neoliberalism has had it's run, from TINA to the GFC and now debt-crises & austerity; all neoliberalism does is a) creates large-scale misery, while b) enabling the already filthy-rich to get obscenely richer. (The 99+% vs. the <1%)

Corollary: From the beginning, neoliberalism, partly 'the market' with globalisation (= exporting jobs) along for the ride, never even looked like it would work for us, we the people; leaving everything to 'the market' whilst a) cutting taxes (mainly off the rich), b) cutting govt. spending (i.e. required services & benefits), all the time c) 'flogging-off the family silver' = privatisations, these so-called 'economic reforms' have, as already said, produced mostly pain - for us, we the people = voters.


Trigger article:

Merkel steadfast on austerity as uncertainty rattles eurozone
By Europe correspondent Rachel Brown, wires
Updated May 07, 2012 23:56:40
  «Speaking one day after elections saw fellow austerity proponents turfed out of office, including her closest ally, French president Nicolas Sarkozy, Ms Merkel said she had no plans to change course.
"Rather, I think the core of the debate lies in whether we need debt-financed stimulus programs or whether we need growth measures that are sustainable and lead to an improvement of the economic strength of individual countries."»

Comment 1: It's called the 'false dichotomy fallacy;' offering a limited choice (= false alternatives) and worse, not including a real option = proper, progressive taxation.

Comment 2: In Aus, we were given no choice; neoliberalism along with globalisation was brought in by Labor (Hawke/Keating), extended by Liberals (Howard/Costello) & so on by Rudd/Gillard = bipartisanly. In case you haven't noticed, bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic, exactly because it offers us, we the people = voters *no* choice.

Comment 3: It's the utmost stupidity of Merkel&Co to push austerity and 'bailouts' = *more* unemployment, *lower* incomes, *more* debt, since all lead to a spiral-down. It's why France & Greece are perhaps the 10th & 11th 'regime-changes' since the GFC. Idiots, all, *especially* the corrupt economist-advisors.

Comment 4: When Reagan was 'on the stump,' one of his then-opponents called Reagan's program voodoo economics - the opponent was correct 'back then;' Reagan's program approximated Thatcher's as similarly destructive for us, we the people, and nothing much has changed since then - except to get worse. Vast unemployment plus falling incomes in the US + lots of EU, plus economic-fear almost everywhere (jobs! Jobs! Jobs!) is *the proof* - of our misery.

Comment 5: Also in case you haven't noticed, so-called 'leaders' introducing 'reforms' which do us, we the people no good (actually, in the case of neoliberalism damaging us), is utter treachery.


Neoliberalism, along with globalisation, was largely *smuggled in* (also un- & anti-democratic), since had its import been properly explained - best beforehand (obviously, or even since), there could have been blood on the streets (namely politicians' and economists' both.)

It's not too late; let the tumbrels roll!


no 'specific' knowledge
 leads to a scenario of
  plausible deniability

.. but ignorance ...

  .. is no excuse ...

    .. under just law

Thesis/Subtitle: 'weasel words[1]' are a way of avoiding some (uncomfortable) truth - but IF it ain't 100% the truth THEN it's a lie[2].

Corollary 1: No worthwhile project needs a 'lie-screen.'

Corollary 2: Secrecy may be a requirement when justice is being sought against some criminal circumstance, but when secrecy is part of some crime that's conspiracy[3].
[update, 14:51]


Disclosure: This is an anti-Aus-Liberal diatribe, but given the multi-dimensional similarities, under 'comparable circumstances' it could equally apply to Aus-Labor. Far too often (once would be one too many), our so-called 'leaders' more resemble incompetent, *criminal* children than responsible adults. No wonder Aus continually seems to be going down the tubes (= tor-let.)


Trigger article 1:

Slipper accuser Ashby was secretly helping rival
Jessica Wright
May 5, 2012
  «Revelations of Mr Ashby's close contact with LNP members comes after a week in which the Liberal powerbroker Christopher Pyne was forced to alter his recollection three times over his dealings with Mr Ashby.
Mr Pyne has now conceded he may have sought the contact details of Mr Ashby after a late night drinking session in the Speaker's office.
Three days earlier, he said he had no reason to contact the staff member, and that he could not remember if he had.»

Comment: "alter his recollection three times" = confirming that he lied three times.

Trigger article 2:

Brough denies he lied on Ashby
May 6, 2012
  «Mr Brough was quoted in The Sunday Mail last weekend dismissing as "nonsense" any suggestion he knew of James Ashby's court documents before they were lodged.
He reportedly said he knew Mr Ashby as a local party member but had no previous knowledge of his civil suit.
But Mr Brough yesterday confirmed he had met Mr Ashby three times and sought legal advice on his behalf. Mr Ashby went to him for advice on how to deal with the allegations of sexual harassment and misuse of travel entitlements, he said, at the urging of Liberal National Party of Queensland member Val Bradford.»
[theage/Political News]

Comment: "no previous knowledge of his civil suit" after "he had met Mr Ashby three times" - no further questions, m’lud.

Trigger article 3:

Abbott denies 'formal complaint' made over Slipper
Posted April 23, 2012 21:59:39
  «Mr Abbott has also dismissed any notion that the Coalition helped Mr Ashby prepare his case.
"I had no specific knowledge of this until I read the newspapers on Saturday morning and to the best of my knowledge, no-one in the Coalition had specific knowledge of this until they read the newspapers," he said.»

Comment 1: Weasel words; "no specific knowledge," "to the best of my knowledge" and "no-one in the Coalition had specific knowledge."

Comment 2: As far as denialists go, is Abbott plausible?

Comment 3: What of Abbott's no 'formal complaint?' Well, this:

  «Mr Ashby's documents allege that Mr Nutt was told of the allegations "in or around mid-2003".
It says a former Slipper staffer, Megan Hobson, had seen a video in which Mr Slipper was observed to behave inappropriately but that Mr Nutt told her to "forget all about it".»
[AusBC/'news' ibid.]

Comment 4: The "behave inappropriately" was of the homosexual variety, "seen [in] a video" "in or around mid-2003". Yet Slipper was allowed to remain selected by the LNP and was subsequently re-elected - thrice.


Musing: Some people think this is 'all good fun,' and that anything that can be, will be used, to bring Gillard&govt down. The corrupt&venal MSM seem all too ready to 'kick someone already down' but worse - they collaborate in staging the initial fall. Murdoch, of course, is the absolute worst, but it is utterly outrageous not to mention disgraceful that the AusBC allows itself to go pro-Liberal partisan. A gaoling offence, IMHO - if not to be hung as traitors.

The grounds for wishing to 'ditch the witch,' to bring Gillard&govt down are ostensibly that Labor is determined to ruin the economy to fatten union-cats = socialism = next-best to communism - citing mining-tax (MRRT = a fairer share for we the people) and CO2-tax (trying (however (in)effectively) to save our once jewel-like planet's comfortable-life supprting ecosphere), plus the usual vilifying by lying shock-jocks. Over time it all works as planned; the people crumble to the psychologically constructed propaganda.

But whatever it is, it ain't (proper) democracy; a deceived electorate cannot make informed decisions. As if that wasn't enough, numbering candidates on a ballot once every 3-4 years is totally risible as a method of determining we, the people's wishes. No proper people-sovereignty = illegitimate representation = no mandate for laws, no right to tax, no right to fight wars - of any sort (except defensive; doesn't happen) and especially no right to go off murdering-for-spoil, as US+UK+Aus in Afghanistan, Iraq & (F+UK/NATO/US) in Libya, next Syria with Iran in planning - again. Then there's the Nakba; those aiding crime make themselves into accessories, those who tolerate crime = accomplices, those arguing support = apologists, all = guilty.


"Order! The 'honourable' member will resume his seat!" (About 7,960 results)


PS If it wasn't all so boringly repetitive. I first experienced it against Whitlam, and the poison still clings in many minds (again, one would be one too many). People don't seem to learn, but some must, and many would be too clever to fall for lying propaganda in the first place. Q: Where are the truly clever, truly honourable ones, those who could rescue us from these dire circumstances?


^ Update, 14:51; PPS Two new-ish items:

Article 1:

Hockey calls for silence on Slipper allegations
May 6, 2012 - 11:18AM
  «Senior coalition frontbencher Joe Hockey has called for an end to the public commentary over the sexual harassment accusations made against Speaker Peter Slipper.» 

Comment: Note the time; 11:18AM.

Article 2:

Labor accused of Slipper staffer smear campaign
Posted May 06, 2012 21:06:34 | Updated May 06, 2012 21:09:05
  «Opposition Treasury spokesman Joe Hockey says the Labor party is smearing the staffer who accused embattled Speaker Peter Slipper of sexual harassment.» 

Comment 1: One might hardly credit that both articles were based on the same source/input (AusBC's Insiders), and that the AusBC item was posted 'only' about 10hrs later than theage's (so much for 'AusBC news').

Comment 2: I hardly need to point out, the difference in 'slant?'

Comment 3: In case you hadn't noticed, there's a moral aspect: In order to desire 'plausible deniability,' one first needs something to deny.

Q: What's Abbott's excuse? (Tip: Recall that the 'captain' is 'responsible' for the entire shebang.)




[1] weasel word  n. (usu. in pl.) word that is intentionally ambiguous or misleading. [POD]

[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] [ibid.]

[3] conspiracy  n. (pl. -ies) 1 secret plan to commit a crime; plot. 2 conspiring. [Latin: related to *conspire]

conspiracy of silence  n. agreement to say nothing.

conspirator  n. person who takes part in a conspiracy.  conspiratorial adj. [ibid.]

[4] deniable
adjective able to be denied: the government did agree to play a limited and deniable role in the rebellion.
deniability noun
deniably adverb.


Brough at Slipper
 via Ashby equals
  sleazy Liberals

.. what ...

  .. else ...

    .. is new?

Thesis/Subtitle: Some born-to-rule Libs' (homosexual/power) games


Trigger article:

Labor seizes on Brough-Slipper link
Posted May 05, 2012 15:58:15
  «Mr Brough is seeking Liberal National Party pre-selection to run against Mr Slipper in the seat of Fisher at the next Federal election, and this morning confirmed he and his wife met Mr Ashby.
He is the second senior Coalition figure to admit to having contact with Mr Ashby before the claims were made public.
Last week it emerged Opposition frontbencher Christopher Pyne met with Mr Ashby three times during the staffer's time in the Speaker's office, and had requested Mr Ashby's email and mobile phone number.»

Comment: Oh, what a tangled web they weave...

Related Story: Brough denies conspiracy against Slipper

Comment: Never believe anything - until officially denied.

Related Story: AFP launches probe into Slipper allegations

Comment: (Terrorising) cops raiding (homosexual) bedrooms.

Related Story: Government pounces on Pyne over Ashby link

Comment 1: Hold on, wasn't Pyne up to his armpits in the Grech affair, along with Abetz? Try this google: Pyne Grech affair Abetz, amongst about 3,450 other 'juicy' ones, see "Abetz admits Turnbull fed him leaks from Grech | The Australian," or was that Minchin? (Oh, he's gone; funny that. Perhaps Heffernan? All blurs together; sooo many bad names, sooo little time.)

Comment 2: By 'word-association' (aka google), we now have Brough, Pyne, Abetz & Turnbull to which we could add the current arch born-to-rule and very peripatetic Abbott.

Comment 3: If the polls are to be believed, the great Aussie-unwashed are intending to vote this rabble right in, very next opportunity. The Aus voting public (poor little ppp-dd'd darlings that they are), plus all non-voters (*involuntarily*, boo hoo) will get what they 'deserve;' think something similar to being (homosexually) raped with a (Sunshine Coast) Peta-Pyneapple. [ppp-dd'd = pushed-propaganda paradigm dumbed-down. Lied-to voters are incapable of making properly informed decisions; resulting representatives have *no* mandate, *no* mandate = no valid law, no right to tax us, or to send us to war. In sum, *no* mandate = illegitimate - just like Israel (improperly dispossessed almost an entire country by genocidal ethnic-cleansing - now *that's* illegitimate - just like lying politicians; looping.)]


Note: Brough is ex-army, that nest of 'honourable defenders' currently aggressively invading Afghanistan, some having detoured through Iraq (another mass-murder-for-spoil US+UK+Aus-adventure) on the way.


Fazit: Brough is after Slipper's seat. Abbott is after Gillard's job. Murdoch is after Aus' = our PM & govt. Oh, goody - this is how our democracy works - or doesn't work, as the case may be. Cui bono?



[1] sleazy  adj. (-ier, -iest) squalid, tawdry.  sleazily adv. sleaziness n. [origin unknown] [POD]