UGLY is - as UGLY does - EU as ugly thugs

.. it's not what they say ...

  .. but what they do that counts ...

    .. the EU is supporting al-Qaeda criminals

Thesis/Subtitle: suppress the truth ...

Concomitant: ignore all dissent ...

Corollary: cripple democracy ...

-=*=-

Preamble:

How ugly is ugly? Let me count the ways:

1. Ask Catherine Ashton's mirror. Normally, what a perpetrator *looks* like is not a topic, nor do we usually 'do' ad-homs. But times have long gone *anti*-normal. On 'her face,' she'd be unelectable; what's she got to get her this job?

2. Ask Guido Westerwelle's boyfriend. Normally, a perpetrator's sex life is not a topic; wiki includes "openly gay person" - but Westerwelle's behaviour is a slur on the ('otherwise normal') gay community. Westerwelle talks with Turks, Jews and Jordan etc., all *against* Syria. IF you're not with ... "Germany has provided funds totalling 125 million euros in assistance for the Syrian people since the Syria crisis began." Q: To which side? A: Silly question.

3. Ask any other EU-official. They *collectively* implement sanctions & no longer ban arms delivery. As if any EU-ban ever stopped Saudi Arabia and Qatar delivering Croatian arms sourced via F+UK/NATO-smashed Libya to so-called (mostly foreign jihadi incl. al-Qaeda) 'rebels?'

4. Ask Ban Ki-moon, and any other UN-official. Fact is, the 'Western proxy' attacks on Syria could be stopped in a heartbeat - except the UN (+ other agencies, like here the EU) both 'allow' and actively support the so-called 'rebels,' and the subsequent vicious slaughter and destruction to continue.

There are many more uglies, but none uglier than the US/Zs.

End preamble.

-=*=-

Mainstream article:

US senator John McCain visits Syria as EU lifts arms embargo
Updated May 28, 2013 09:31:04
  «US senator John McCain, one of the strongest advocates of US military aid for the Syrian opposition, has crossed into Syria to meet with rebel leaders.
Mr McCain's visit came as British foreign secretary William Hague announced that the European Union (EU) has agreed to lift an arms embargo in order to be able to supply weapons to the rebels.» 
[AusBC/'news']

Comment 1: Think about it. This *publicly* demonstrates that the US has such open access to so-called 'rebel' areas, that one of their 'highest' representatives can freely come and go. With CIA support, of course - *exactly* how the rebels are getting their arms and the foreign jihadi mercenaries are getting freighted in.

Comment 2: Seems that only Austria stood in the way: «"It's unfortunate we have now found a common position," said the Austrian Foreign Minister Michael Spindelegger in a negotiation break. He was angry that British and French [and] the other 25 EU states would seek to impose their position."» There you have it; F+UK 'leading' the warmongering, Germany amongst the more-war majority.

-=*=-

Alternative article:

US Makes Syria an ‘Offer it Can’t Refuse’ - again
By Finian Cunningham
May 27, 2013
  «In Mafia terms, it’s called “making an offer that can’t be refused”. The “offer” is not one of free choice between options that may benefit the object party. In reality, it is about setting up a scenario of duress, under which the object party is coerced to capitulate to detrimental terms of extreme prejudice determined cynically by the other party.
...
Last month, the Iranian FARS news agency reported that Syrian envoy to Iran, Adnan Mahmoud, disclosed that as far back as March 2011 - when the conflict was kicking off in Syria - that the then US Secretary of Defence, Robert Gates, had starkly told the Damascus government that it faced “a choice”.
The Syrian envoy to Iran was quoted by FARS as saying: “Of course, in the very first weeks of the conflict in Syria, the US Secretary of Defence [Robert Gates] sent a message to the Syrian government, and said we should have cut our ties with the Islamic Republic of Iran if we wanted to stop the war, and stressed that if we did so, they [the US] would provide us with whatever we want”. In other words, Washington was making Syria back then “an offer it couldn’t refuse”.» 
[ICH/Cunningham]

Comment 1: Absolute shocker; to get the 'full effect,' read it all.

Comment 2: There're more than a few important points here; that the so-called 'pro-democracy revolution' went almost immediately violent, that the US *boasted* (covertly, now outed) that they could control = stop the violence, that the 'real' objective was to attack Iran. And so it goes; as soon as we hear "diplomacy" or "strategic," we know we're hearing from or about criminals.

-=*=-

Interpretive article:

Why Disinformation Works. In America “Truth has no Relevance. Only Agendas are Important”
By Dr. Paul Craig Roberts
May 25, 2013
  «What I have noticed is that whenever a stunning episode occurs, such as 9/11 or the Boston Marathon bombing, most everyone whether on the right or left goes along with the government’s explanation, because they can hook their agenda to the government’s account.» 
[ICH/Roberts]

Comment 1: Surprise? Hardly.

Comment 2: Here, the 'lying narrative' would have a democratic revolution in Syria, opposed by a brutal tyrant. The truth is that the revolution is hardly democratic (except for a few deluded - US/NED, say – fomented fools), and the real tyrants are the US/Z rogue-regimes, plus their snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on, here the EU (except Austria).

-=*=-

Explanatory article:

European Union Directly Funds Al Qaeda Looting of Syrian oil
By Johannes Stern
May 20, 2013
  «According to a report yesterday in Britain’s Guardian newspaper, the European Union (EU) is directly funding US-backed Sunni Islamist terrorist groups fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s regime. These groups are looting oil in parts of eastern Syria that they control and then re-selling it to EU countries at rock-bottom prices.» 
[globalresearch/Stern]

Comment: Quelle surprise! (Not.) - Murder for oil - again? No, still.

-=*=-

Argument: There's no argument as to what's going on here; the 'Western' so-called 'leaders' are a) out of all control, specifically b) beyond our (we the people's = democratic) control, and c) engaged in criminal pursuits, namely murder for spoil. All together, 'Western rulers' = violent criminal tyrants.

-=*=-

Fazit: Gotta be stopped!

  (Newton's 1st law: No change without force.)

-=*end*=-

Ref(s):

[1] deceive  v. (-ving) 1 make (a person) believe what is false; purposely mislead. 2 be unfaithful to, esp. sexually. 3 use deceit.  deceive oneself persist in a mistaken belief.  deceiver n. [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.]

Abbreviations:

ELO/Os = erstwhile legal owner/occupiers

I/J/Z-plex; illegitimate IL squats on genocidally ethnically-cleansed = improperly alienated, mainly Palestinian ELO/Os' land/property = IL is an un-remedied crime-scene and *all* I/J/Z-plex (except any actively opposing) are guilty; sole remedy = reparations = revest where possible, adequate = acceptable recompense where not + *sincere* apology

M/I/C/$4a†-plex = military, industrial, Congress (US-speak for parliament); $ = banksters, 4 = 4th estate = MSM+PFBCs, 'a' = academia incl. think-tanks, † = the churches.

MSM = mainstream media (print and broadcast), aka 'corrupt&venal'

neoliberalism = 'economic rationalism,' 'supply-side,' (wicked) privatisations, 'small govt.' = minimised to no égalité etc. + globalisation = wage arbitration etc. = <1% rips off 99%+

PFBCs = publicly-financed broadcasters, like the AusBC

ppp-dd'd = pushed propaganda paradigm dumbed-down

PRopaganda = PR + propaganda, usual qualifier: 'lying'

SQSHsO = snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on

the Enlightenment well summarised by liberté, égalité, fraternité

US-MMH = Media (aka press, radio + TV), Madison Ave., Hollywood

US&/Zs = the US of A and/or Zionists; sometimes indistinguishable

XS-CO2-C*4 = excess CO2 climate-change catastrophe (one-way) cliff

Zionism (latest post-Jabotinsky, '23) = perpetual aggressive war

structural deficits big surprise? hardly

.. no surprise at all really ...

  .. only one question remains ...

    .. why did it take so bloody long?

-=*=-

Thesis/Subtitle: Reagan; voodoo economics -> smaller govt., cut taxes (mostly off rich), cut services - deficits don't matter! ...

Concomitant: Thatcher; ditto Reaganomics + there is no society, TINA! ...

Corollary: mostly lies, deliberately deployed to deceive

-=*=-

Musing: In real life (or on TV - No! It's *not* just a movie! - Observing 'faked' violence can damage minds) - re: some criminal investigation, one may encounter 'means, motive, and opportunity,' but a more complete list includes 'premeditation, presence, what modus operandi and cui bono?'

The basic crimes are 'things that do harm' = lying, cheating, theft and murder. Lying is attempted deception; apart from assaulting the audience's intellect = harm to the mind (='virtual'), deception may be deployed as a premeditated precursor to some intended actual (='real') harm. Lying is thus both a pre- and post-requisite to harm; else the perpetrator would self-convict.

A perpetrator may lie by commission - or omission -> covert/secrecy. Secrecy is an enemy of, amongst others, democracy.

Due to deception, not all evidence may be visible, in which case 'elimination of the impossible' and 'balance of probabilities' may apply, and generally, little to no weight will be afforded to 'coincidence.'

A perpetrator may do harm alone, or may have help - accessories, apologists, even bystanders who do nothing to stop the crime(s); all such 'helpers' make themselves guilty (only Q is by what degree). Hence the rationale behind 'providing (material) assistance...'

The 'material' distinction is between active and passive; whereby "Der, s/he didn't think" may happen, ignorance is no (legal) excuse. Here, we may consider 'shooting the messenger' if the messenger deliberately conduits or (worse) actively assists the deployment of lies. (See AusBC, say, re IL, US, Lib/Lab, more...).

A basic morality is 'Do unto others...' and 'Do no harm;' any who do harm are not 'merely' criminals but are also immoral - and possibly psychopaths to boot. (Some prefer the term sociopath; that's harm to society; psycho- precedes socio-, and psycho- pins the problem where it arises, namely in the perpetrator's deranged mind.)

End musing.

-=*=-

Trigger article:

Joe Hockey defends Howard government tax cuts after reports say they contributed to structural deficit
 By chief political correspondent Emma Griffiths
 Updated May 22, 2013 14:45:30
  «Opposition Treasury spokesman Joe Hockey has defended the personal income tax cuts delivered by the former Coalition government, which were today cited in two official reports for contributing to an ongoing "structural" deficit in the budget.
The federal Treasury and the newly established independent Parliamentary Budget Office (PBO) have released fresh estimates of the structural budget balance, both painting a dire picture of the underlying position of the nation's coffers.» 
[AusBC/'news']

Comment 1: The funny thing is that this article exists at all, on the AusBC even, and more in 'argument' below.

Comment 2: One should read the lot; try to spot the lies, and from which directions.

-=*=-

Reference article:

Washington Consensus; Ten Points (=WC10Ps)
  «The consensus as originally stated ... included ten broad sets of relatively specific policy recommendations:
 1.Fiscal policy discipline, with avoidance of large fiscal deficits relative to GDP;
 2.Redirection of public spending from subsidies ("especially indiscriminate subsidies") toward broad-based provision of key pro-growth, pro-poor services like primary education, primary health care and infrastructure investment;
 3.Tax reform, broadening the tax base and adopting moderate marginal tax rates;
 4.Interest rates that are market determined and positive (but moderate) in real terms;
 5.Competitive exchange rates;
 6.Trade liberalization: liberalization of imports, with particular emphasis on elimination of quantitative restrictions (licensing, etc.); any trade protection to be provided by low and relatively uniform tariffs;
 7.Liberalization of inward foreign direct investment;
 8.Privatization of state enterprises;
 9.Deregulation: abolition of regulations that impede market entry or restrict competition, except for those justified on safety, environmental and consumer protection grounds, and prudential oversight of financial institutions;
10.Legal security for property rights.» 
[wiki/WC10Ps]

Comment 1: The 'blurb' contains "believed to be necessary for the recovery" - but as history has shown (see Perkins' "Economic Hit Man," say), pursuit of many of the ten cause chaos and ruin. The list of 'architects' includes "the Institute for International Economics, an international economic think tank based in Washington, D.C., ... the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and U.S. Treasury Department," which tells us most of what we need to know (to start prosecutions, say).

Comment 2: Some of the points appear innocuous, some actually +ve. But: It's no coincidence that the +ves are often neglected, or even contra-implemented.

-=*=-

A different sort of reference article:

Nineteen Eighty-Four
  «... on pretext of giving him a copy of the latest edition of the Dictionary of Newspeak, O'Brien gives Winston the Book, The Theory and Practice of Oligarchical Collectivism, by Emmanuel Goldstein, the infamous and publicly reviled leader of the Brotherhood. The Book explains the concept of perpetual war, the true meanings of the slogans WAR IS PEACE, FREEDOM IS SLAVERY, and IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH, and how the régime of the Party can be overthrown by means of the political awareness of the Proles.» 
[wiki/1984]

Comment: Who could have imagined, back in the good old 1960s, that we would end up *sooo deep* in the 1984 shit? Thanks, but "No, thanks!" mainly to the Yank/Zs & ilk.

-=*=-
 
  Argument: Our once jewel-like planet is in big trouble (see 4x4 apocalypse-matrix below [*]). Q: What to do? A: Fix it. First, identify the perpetrators, make them stop the destruction, then repair the damage.

The above trigger article is to do with government policy, specifically Aus' so-called 'democratic' government's economic policy. Q: What are governments for? A: *Not* to enable the already rich <1% to rip us, we the people off, but to *look after* our country and we the people [democratic covenant: The people surrender power to *representatives*, who govern for the common good (About 7,470,000 results)], which does not (necessarily) imply *rule* - but that's what we're getting; rulers in place of governors, and *tyrannical* rulers - to boot.

In 1984-speak, 'liberal' is a 4-letter word. To misquote a misattribution: "When I hear the word liberal, I reach for my Browning!" (But I don't actually 'do' violence...)

Now libre in this blog's title = ‘freedom, liberty’ - is correct and it works, whereas liberal - as in the WC10Ps above = neoliberalism (and as in Aus' Liberal party) - is misleading. Proof: We are getting neither freedom nor liberty from any such 'liberalism' - rather, the crash is upon us - proof of that ranges from the GFC, EU-PIIGS + B, F+UK etc. all getting forcefully austeritied, ~47mio in US on food-stamps - and the above trigger article, all just for starters. It's relatively easy to prove that many/most of our 'Western' democracies are sham. Proof = we the people are being lied to = misled electorate(s), false-dichotomy two-party system, often bipartisan = *totally* un- & anti-democratic since there is *zero* effective choice, and when elected, many/most 'representatives' sell-out = work *against* the 99%+ interests. There's another misused word, 'sovereignty,' as in a (proper) democracy, the voters are sovereign - well, we are clearly *not*. Together, liberal + sovereignty = we the people are being deceived and ripped-off = getting screwed.

The next easy-to-see thing is the reason for 'structural deficits.' IF neoliberalism arrived even half-fully-formed in Thatcher&Reagan's wicked hands, THEN it is because it was trialed in Chile, after the murdering-coup against Allende. (Date: An earlier 9/11, namely '73.) What we know now is that neoliberalism was quickly onto the tyrants' menu, since some people accuse M.Fraser of having wasted time. So it was up to Hawke/Keating to kick neoliberalism off in Aus, '83+, followed in '96+ by Howard/Costello (a more apt aphorism: Cheating/Smirk), then Rudd/Gillard, '07+. What all these tyrants did was to accept then follow the WC10Ps, cutting both taxes (mostly off the rich) and services (off we the people). M.Fraser was perhaps not so slow; recall "Fraser/Lynch razor-gang." Cutting taxes is much easier and more popular than cutting services, so deficits easily & quickly arise. Here we could try "Der, they didn't think;" it becomes a Q: Did they know exactly what they were doing (i.e. to damage the economy + we the people) - which would make them *deliberate* traitors, OR did they act largely out of ignorance = make themselves 'accidental' = *negligent* traitors? Repeat for emphasis: Both options = treachery. Which, note: bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic treachery = QED for debilitated democracies.

Note that the villainy is not just across political parties, but across the (Western) world. Q: Was the now-evident shovelling from the 99%+ to the <1% clearly explained to you, and were you thus able to vote for it? Or did you vote for some spiv in a suit who then accepted the "Washington Consensus," thus liberating the entire country from economic-policy self-determination?

Recall "No taxation without representation;" IF misrepresented THEN resulting taxation is theft, as is privatisation in all cases; theft from we the people, followed by being toll-boothed into penury. Proof = privatised electricity, worst = medicine for profit.

None of this is new, nor did it go unremarked at the time. Re: 'economic rationalism (= neoliberalism with a fancy 'sales tag');' "We'll all be rooned!" - some of us cried, but we were ignored, just as we were when we cried "No war for oil!" Such ignorings are signs of tyranny. Then when they kill to steal (pre-UNGA181 Palestine then 66+ more bloody years (on-going, un-remedied, supreme international crime), from Korea through Vietnam to Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, now Syria, Iran next?) - it's vicious, criminal tyranny. Recall: Those who do harm are psychopaths.

Q: Anything else wrong? A: Yes. Briefly, as part of WC10Ps, FDI is sucking resource-owners dry (i.e. in Aus ~83% of mining profits go o/s = get permanently lost). "Broadening the tax base" usually means replacing progressive (income) taxes with (flat = regressive) sales taxes. Deregulation mainly means freeing criminals from rules; the list of neoliberal sins is long. A new nadir has been reached in the banking system, whereby banksters may now gamble with depositors' savings, see Cyprus. Could it happen elsewhere/here in Aus? Yes. Banksters with their private fractional reserve banking are continually sucking interest out of our economies; they and miners, say, are economic-rent rippers-off. Keynes advocated "the euthanasia of the rentier, of the functionless investor," (absolute antithesis of US/Z capitalism); that's why we are largely prevented from using Keynes' known good solutions, and so it goes. The US/Zs and quisling accessory-hangers-on, in their greed and hubris, are world-wreckers.

Q: Anything else? A: Yes. Consider the M/I/C/$4a†-plex:

M/I/C/$4a†-plex = military, industrial, Congress (US-speak for parliament); $ = banksters, 4 = 4th estate = MSM+PFBCs, 'a' = academia incl. think-tanks, † = the churches.

Each component contributes to we the people's + the planet's grave problems.

military = mass-murdering for spoil

industrial = lean&meaning; off-shoring, out-sourcing, down-sizing etc.; all pricing above cost plus a fair mark-up = unearned income = economic rent (see euthanasia)

parliament = traitorous politicians, as above

banksters = the 'created money loaned at interest' rip-off

4th estate = MSM + PFBCs = conduiting and *actively assisting* lies

academia incl. think-tanks = developers + apologists for erring ideology

the churches = mostly guilty of silence in face of above criminality (note that rather than condemning wars = murdering for spoil, they are apologists for so-called 'just war' - which isn't at all; all wars have at least one aggressor = guilty party (prevent such = no war), then there's the 'opiate of the masses' aspect - based on impossible to prove assertions = wishful thinking to avoid 100% certain death)

One last Q: Why are they so bad? A: Ask them. By definition, psychopaths have no feelings. Perhaps they want to be rich and/or famous - or just like to watch we the people suffer. The scale of the conspiracy is truly vast, but most people, most of the 99%+ are decent people wishing themselves and others peace & happy lives. The <1% and their co-conspirators can never have those.

-=*=-

Fazit: Recall Newton's 1st law: 'An object at rest or in uniform motion remains just so, unless acted upon by a force.' The only peaceful force we have is through the ballot box; in Aus we have an advantage = preferential voting. IF 50% + 1 voters in every electorate put Lab/Lib last (in your own preferred order, as safe se... err, voting), THEN no Lib/Lab would be elected; any random leftovers could not possibly make things worse (since Lab/Lib are already doing that) - rescue would then be possible.

-=*end*=-

PS Remember the good old 1960s?
 When things were so uncomplicated?
 I wish I could go back there again
 And everything could be the same.
[ELO, adapted]

-=*=-

Ref(s):

[1] deceive  v. (-ving) 1 make (a person) believe what is false; purposely mislead. 2 be unfaithful to, esp. sexually. 3 use deceit.  deceive oneself persist in a mistaken belief.  deceiver n. [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] [ibid.]

Abbreviations:

ELO/Os = erstwhile legal owner/occupiers

I/J/Z-plex; illegitimate IL squats on genocidally ethnically-cleansed = improperly alienated, mainly Palestinian ELO/Os' land/property = IL is an un-remedied crime-scene and *all* I/J/Z-plex (except any actively opposing) are guilty; sole remedy = reparations = revest where possible, adequate = acceptable recompense where not + *sincere* apology

M/I/C/$4a†-plex = military, industrial, Congress (US-speak for parliament); $ = banksters, 4 = 4th estate = MSM+PFBCs, 'a' = academia incl. think-tanks, † = the churches.

MSM = mainstream media (print and broadcast), aka 'corrupt&venal'

neoliberalism = 'economic rationalism,' 'supply-side,' (wicked) privatisations, 'small govt.' = minimised to no égalité etc. + globalisation = wage arbitration etc. = <1% rips off 99%+

PFBCs = publicly-financed broadcasters, like the AusBC

ppp-dd'd = pushed-propaganda paradigm dumbed-down

PRopaganda = PR + propaganda, usual qualifier: 'lying'

SQSHsO = snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on

the Enlightenment well summarised by liberté, égalité, fraternité

US-MMH = Media (aka press, radio + TV), Madison Ave., Hollywood

US&/Zs = the US of A and/or Zionists; sometimes indistinguishable

XS-CO2-C*4 = excess CO2 climate-change catastrophe cliff
 (in the short term at least, one-way)

Zionism (latest post-Jabotinsky, '23) = perpetual aggressive war



^ [*] The 4x4 apocalypse-matrix (lines 3-5 prioritised):

colour	white	red	black	pale
wiki	Conquest	War	Famine	Death
world	xs-CO2-c*4 ecosphere destruction	militarisation; mass-murders for spoil	sham democracy, lies	rip-off economics
politics	traitorous rep-'leaders'	corrupt intellectuals	MSM + PFBCs' lies	dumbed-down sheople
economics	banksters' rip-off	neoliberalism	privatisation	globalisation

[«back»]

incremental criminality

Submitted as comment to: "AUMF, Never-Ending War, and America’s ‘Instruments of Tyranny’", here slightly revised.

Consider 'incremental criminality;' as soon as anyone gets away with some crime, limits start dropping off; the same or new perpetrators will repeat - and most likely extend - the un-remedied = now 'acquiesced-to' crime. (Due to often 'arbitrary' law, I define crime as anything which harms; i.e. lies, cheating, theft and/or murder.) The public has been systematically propagandised (= conscious manipulation of public opinions (US + quislings and coerced, mostly 'Western')); since latest Bernays' observation of how well the risible 'war to save democracy' meme worked. 'Naturally,' as the lie-cloud (pushed-propaganda paradigm) took hold, the rest of the crimes followed, each step easier than the previous. Two of the first (very!) *visible* steps in the US war on the USSR took place on "on August 6 and 9, 1945, respectively." Shortly thereafter, LeMay: "Over a period of three years or so, we killed off — what — twenty percent of the population of Korea," and such massacres continued (on various 'killing fields') through April 29, 1975 and beyond. Then 'catastrophe' struck (mostly for the M/I/C/$4a†-plex); the DDR-wall fell in 1989, and the USSR started to wither away. (Speaking of walls, the same sort of mass-murder for spoil was occurring other-where, behind an 'iron wall;' also ongoing, un-remedied and 'Nuremberg-class,' keywords: Pre-UNGA181 Palestine, Zionists = aliens, aggressive invasion.) Then on 9/11, the loss of the USSR as visible enemy was rectified. (What luck? - thinking cui bono, at least for the M/I/C/$4a†-plex - and just who 'believes' in luck?)

There are a couple of problems with the Glaser article; hopefully 'only' due to something like faulty sub-editing, say:

"would evaporate" could/should read "would *be* evaporated" - thnx Newton's 1st; no change without some force.

"much less apt to grant" assumes that the electorate may have some control; *not so* in our 'Western' sham democracies. (Proof = misled electorate(s), false-dichotomy two-party system, often bipartisan = *totally* un- & anti-democratic since there is *zero* effective choice, and when elected, many/most 'representatives' work *against* the 99%+ interests.)

Not so BTW, "Al-Qaeda’s unlikely success on 9/11" ignores any possible 'cd' component (= 'controlled demolition'). Anyone who asserts/accepts that steel-framed buildings can be symmetrically felled by jet-fuel fires a) defines their stance, b) their audience and c) their credibility. 'Yes,' planes crashed, 'yes,' WTC 1 & 2 burned, but *all 3* (WTC 1, 2 & 7) collapsed 'straight down;' 1 & 2 from the crash-sites, spitting fire & neatly-cut girders, and 7 from the bottom, all partly, at times fully, in 'free-fall' mode. The only way that can happen is if support suddenly vanishes - by explosives, say - simply no part of any plane-crash scenarios. As for passports surviving such an inferno unscathed, fluttering down practically into someone's hands - well, pure Hollywood-script, some might say.

The Zenko/Cohen para identifies some of the tyrant-cabal (what I call the M/I/C/$4a†-plex = military, industrial, Congress (US-speak for parliament); $ = banksters, 4 = 4th estate = MSM+PFBCs, 'a' = academia incl. think-tanks, † = the churches), and one of their eternal modi operandi = scare the subjects shitless, then promise to save them.

As a corollary to Newton's 1st, it's not what they say, but what they do that counts. What the ruling tyrant-cabal does is mass-murder for spoil; they won't stop unless forced to stop.