webdiary_libre

important information for the UN/Ban Ki-moon: clean out your own nest 1st!

2012-01-15T17:47:00.000+01:00

.. the UN tolerates ...

  .. assists & even encourages ...

    .. the equal worst rogue-regimes = US/Israel

Thesis/Subtitle: What I once disputed, I now embrace: The UN is as useless as an ashtray on a motorbike - but far more cancerous, and far, far more criminal.

-=*=-

Trigger article:

UN chief renews attack on Assad, amid amnesty
Updated January 16, 2012 00:42:23
  «"Today, I say again to president Assad of Syria: Stop the violence. Stop killing your people. The path of repression is a dead end," Mr Ban said in a keynote address at a conference in Beirut on democracy in the Arab world.»
[AusBC/'news']

Comment 1: Ban's "Stop killing your people" is based on allegations which almost every report, also from those 'stenographed' by 'our' AusBC, includes text such as: "reports [by self-interested 3rd parties?] cannot be confirmed."

Comment 2: Ban's imperative dovetails into and follows the same pattern as was recently deployed vis-à-vis the rape of Libya, another 'innocent' target 'obliterated' in the same way as Iraq was, namely many innocents killed and their infrastructure destroyed by US &/ NATO in the name of 'regime-change.' As if even the pushed-propaganda paradigm dumbed-down (ppp-dd'd) sheople don't notice?

-=*=-

From a recent article of mine:
  «The Zs' infamy may be considered to begin with Herzl (1897), then via Balfour, Jabotinsky, the alien invading terrorists = Irgun, Lehi, Stern Gang, Haganah et al., leading to the Nakba ('47/8, genocidal ethnic cleansing of Palestine) and the regular if random continuation of more of the same terrorism right down to the current moment; amongst latest outrages Gaza '08/9 (~1400 mainly civilians slaughtered), high-seas murdering piracy against the peace-fleet = Israel flotilla raid '10, live-ammunition/sniper attacks on non-violent protesters in Golan Heights, '11.
The US' infamy is longer, try starting with a list of interventions for “regime change” here, which notes 1st such in 1893 against Hawaii.
Long-story short: The list of US+Zs' depredations is as long as it is filthy.»

Comment 1: The US started its criminality long before the UN, even before the League of Nations. Both of these latter 'international organisations' were predicated on 'no more war,' both have failed. Worse, the UN assists criminality; starting no later than its cynical approval of UNGA181; the UN has utterly failed to restrain the murdering-to-steal Zionists rampant in the ME (dispossessing the hapless natives of their land/property), let alone the US rampant ditto (dispossessing other hapless natives of their oil &/ sovereign resources), across the wider world (approaching 1000 military bases, no-one is safe.)

Comment 2: The UN did not 'approve' the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the UN (via Kofi Annan) belatedly declared the invasion of Iraq in 2003 as illegal, and the UN actually 'green-lighted' the 'no-fly invasion' = rape of Libya in 2011. (Shame!) Now Syria is on the line, possibly next Iran. The US is not the world's policeman, that job is assigned to the UN - failing = corrupt. 'Bottom line' is that the UN is ineffective; the UN/Ban Ki-moon has earned no right to lecture anybody. Sooo, Ban, STFU!

Fazit: IF some agent supports/argues for an erring ideology AND that erring ideology is engaged in some crime (worst = murder for spoil; Zs for soil & US for oil) THEN that agent is a prime perpetrator, accessory or apologist, depending on degree of involvement in the crime, and that agent makes her/himself equally guilty.

Corollary: IF some agent's task is to prevent some evil AND that evil is not prevented (let alone is tolerated, worse assisted or absolute worst encouraged) THEN that agent makes her/himself equally guilty - how do you plead, UN/Ban Ki-moon?

the curious incident of the dog in the night-time the dog did nothing in the night-time that was the curious incident

2012-01-01T16:51:00.001+01:00

.. ME propaganda ...

  .. without Anne Barker ...

    .. I'm utterly desolated (not!)

Thesis/Subtitle: IF you don't like the message THEN shoot the messenger.

-=*=-

Trigger article:

Arab body calls for monitors to leave Syria
Updated January 02, 2012 00:18:46
  «In an online video a man who appeared to be a monitor in the southern town of Deraa said he saw snipers in the town.
"We saw snipers in the town, we saw them with our own eyes," the observer said in Arabic, visibly concerned.
"We're going to ask the government to remove them immediately. We'll be in touch with the Arab League back in Cairo."»
[AusBC/anon]

Comment 1: We have no way of knowing whether these jerky, out of focus videos, conveying little more than confusion, are genuine - or 'made in Hollywood' as lying propaganda. Rogue-regimes which mass-murder for spoil (= kill to steal, see Iraq etc., multi-mios dead) will hardly quibble about lying, in fact lies are a *requirement* of all crime. (Proof: No lies = truth, which would self-convict the crims.)

Comment 2: The 'business' of snipers is to shoot from cover - by definition [fire shots from hiding, usu. at long range [POD]]. It means that seeing a sniper in action would be *highly* unlikely, all the more so since these Arab League imposed interlopers are accused/assumed to be accompanied by 'helpful' government guides - the group being thusly as about as inconspicuous as dog's balls. Not only that, IF govt snipers were active THEN they'd be fully informed of the interlopers' progress, as a simple matter of 'standard operations.'

More from the same article:

  «But Mr Dabi later told the BBC: "This man said that if he sees, by his eyes, those snipers, he will report them immediately and he will tell the government. But he didn't see."
He also infuriated some observers by suggesting he was reassured by first impressions of Homs, one of the main centres of unrest.»
[AusBC/ibid.]

Comment 1: This Mr Dabi is head of the Arab League observer mission.

Comment 2: The same Mr Dabi has already been attacked elsewhere:

Human Rights | 30.12.2011
Grave doubts hang over head of observer mission to Syria
  «Human rights activists have criticized the choice of Sudanese General al-Dabi as head of the observer mission to Syria. Al-Dabi served under Sudan's President Omar al-Bashir and is linked to war crimes in Darfur.»
[dw-world/'news']

Comment 1: Deutsche Welle is like 'our' AusBC, tax-payer funded. Human rights activists lost their credibility latest in Libya, and allegations passed-on soon become 'factoids' = possibly still the original lies just 'massaged' by 'Chinese whispers.' Boo! The tax-payer funded broadcasters need to present us with *proof* (or else.)

Comment 2: Another thing such 'stories' contain are things like this: "International journalists are mostly barred from Syria, making it difficult to confirm accounts from conflict zones." So, Q: Where do all these reports originate? A: At least 3rd hand, via self-interested parties, so-called NGOs amongst them, then see previous comment and comments on lying further above.

Comment 3: The voters in a democracy need accurate information; how else are we the people to make informed choices - at the ballot-box, say? It is one of the functions of tax-payer funded 'news' organisations to so inform us. IF such broadcasters lie, THEN they are a) violating their remit and b) if by doing so, they assist criminals, then they make themselves criminals, by the accessory mechanism.

-=*=-

Fazit: US/NATO smashed Libya in 2011 based on precisely the same sort of lies as are now being spread through the corrupt & venal MSM, including and actively assisted by tax-payer funded 'news' organisations like 'our' AusBC and Deutsche Welle. Where are the reasonable people, truth & justice seekers like me but with the power to stop the criminals = anti-democratic tyrants, like B, B & H then and now Obama, Netanyahu, Cameron, Sarkozy & Gillard et al.?

-=*=-

PS Q: What's about dogs not barking? A: Perhaps there's actually nothing much for independent observers to see in Syria? After all, the Arab League is now long 'in bed' with US/NATO; why would such a sensitive observer position go to anyone not trusted to 'do the business' on Assad?

PPS As previously elsewhere mentioned, psychological propaganda may include 'trigger words' aimed at causing revulsion in the intended audience; such a trigger-word is 'snipers.' Other words are 'so-many killed, including children.' A new twist is adding +ve words; we now learn that the 'rebels,' 'militants,' 'activists' etc. from two competing anti-Assad factions have agreed to agree, and will now work for a 'democratic' outcome. Oh, how jolly - that would make them goodies, eh? But only if you believe the rubbish the likes of the AusBC are serving us up, recalling that belief is what many do in the absence of evidence.

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

2011-12-29T16:51:00.002+01:00

.. 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

2011-12-16T09:59:00.002+01:00

.. 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.»
[AusBC/Barker]

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.»
[AusBC/'news']

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

2011-12-06T14:14:00.000+01:00

.. 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.»
[AusBC/'news']

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

More:

  «"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?

More:

  «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.

More:

  «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?

More:

  «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

2011-12-04T17:49:00.001+01:00

.. 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.

More:

  «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.

-=*end*=-

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.

-=*=-

Ref(s):

[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]

I can't complain nobody listens

2011-11-29T12:12:00.002+01:00

.. but not only ...

  .. does nobody listen ...

    .. nobody ever improves anything

Thesis/Subtitle: The so-called 'world leadership' are not 'merely' corrupt & incompetent - they are viciously criminal, why is this *allowed*?

Musing: Each day goes by, little different from the preceding. No problem seems to change unless it gets worse; consider the themes of the day ... year ... century: Most important, excess-CO2 climate-change catastrophe, then war, economy, politics and so on down to family-life, health & education, jobs etc.. (another 'merely;' like basic survival issues.)

-=*=-

1. Climate/survival. Google: climate conference durban 2011

About 6,460,000 results

Hit #1:

Divergent views signal tough climate talks ahead
  «US chief delegate Jonathan Pershing said the United States, which shunned Kyoto as unfair, would accept legally binding emissions limits in the future as long as all major emitters took on equal legal obligations.
...
Opposition in Congress, which includes outspoken climate skeptics and a Republican majority generally considered climate-unfriendly, has prompted a widespread belief that US negotiators are foot-dragging on emissions issues. ...»
[dawn/AP]

Comment: Instead of pursuing the only possible effective strategy - sharply *reduce* digging coal, sharply *reduce* pumping oil, then keep reducing the fossil-carbon burn until CO2 drops *below* a safe level, they haggle over details, all shouting "You first!" - But hardly anyone acts, so far nobody effectively, as is *proven* by the following:

Trigger article 1:

Scientists sound alarm over Southern Ocean warming
AM
By Bronwyn Herbert
Updated November 29, 2011 14:20:38
  «He says satellite measurements show the Southern Ocean has been warming by about 0.2 degrees Celsius per decade.
"One of the impacts of a warming ocean may be that the ice that flows off Antarctica into the ocean may melt more rapidly," he said. ...»
[AusBC/'news']

Comment: Idiotic 'climate sceptics' shout "Prove it!" - Melting Southern ice proof enough? Perhaps not, so:

Trigger article 2:

Arctic sea ice is melting at its fastest pace in almost 40 years
  «Arctic sea ice has melted to a level not recorded since satellite observations started in 1972 – and almost certainly not experienced for at least 8,000 years, say polar scientists.
...
Last year (2010) tied with 2005 as the warmest year on record.»
[guardian/environment]

Comment: That's both north & south ice; perhaps no amount of proof will ever be enough for some sceptics, but that should not stop properly clever, *real* leaders - from saving our once jewel-like planet's comfortable life-sustaining ecosphere.

-=*=-

2. War/murder for spoil. Google: Syrian forces murder, torture and rape

About 1,300,000 results

Hit #3:

Syrian army murdering, torturing, raping: UN
By North America correspondent Jane Cowan, wires
Updated November 29, 2011 13:53:42
  «The UN commission of inquiry interviewed more than 200 victims, witnesses and defectors.
It concluded Syrian military and security forces had committed crimes including murder, torture and rape. ...»
[AusBC/'news']

Comment 1: Further down in the story, this: « ... and grant access to media, aid workers and human rights monitors.»

So, to a Q: IF they are demanding access, THEN they don't have it (or don't have enough), so how can they «... interview more than 200 victims, witnesses ...?» Throughout this whole 'Syrian saga,' reports have repeated that reports cannot be verified - looping, on *no* information. Which itself strongly suggests that the UN is believing something (here, the worst about Syria) - in the absence of evidence. Or simply lying outright.

Comment 2: Not just the AusBC which is corrupt & venal, but most of the (mainly 'Western') MSM as well; they retail lies but not only, they embellish = assist the lying, criminal perpetrators, here the aggressors preparing to strike Syria.

Comment 3: Other stories mention snipers - as did the stories about Libya, and children being killed. Snipers are by definition hidden; how to the reporters presume to prove their allegations? In clear text, how would anyone know that snipers were active? If children are in the demos - unlikely, even less likely to be targeted by government forces, why are children there at all? (Possible A: To flash V-for-victory signs for the Hollywood camera teams.) What of parental responsibility?

Comment 4: Stories of snipers, rape etc. are *most likely* to be nothing but lying propaganda, because of the revulsion the stories are designed to invoke. Good one, AusBC.

Comment 5: Here, of course, I'm not blaming Syria, but the gathering murder-for-spoil vultures about to add to this (post 9/11) list: Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya and after Syria is destroyed, Iran next. All ME, all Muslim/Arab, all oil-owners and/or in some way 'enemies' of Israel, that illegitimate and murdering land/property thief foist upon the world by the I/J/Z-plex, with 'great' power support = UK + US, 'allowed' via the corrupted UN - and apparently tolerated when not sycophantically supported by the majority - of so-called *leaders* (as distinct from we, the people.)

-=*=-

3. Economy/erring ideology. Google: obama US help EU but no money

About 46,300,000 results

Hit #1:

Obama offers EU support, but no money
(Nov. 28)

  «Wary of Europe's deepening debt crisis, President Barack Obama said Monday the United States stands ready to do its part to help the continent, even as the White House ruled out any financial contributions from U.S. taxpayers. ...»
[washingtonpost/video]

Comment 1: How can the US help, without moving some $s? Cheering? - "C'mon!" - Yeah, that would just about do it.

Comment 2: The fact that the EU has a crisis, and even more, the fact that the world got the GFC thrust upon it/us, means that the economic theories they 'adhere' to are nothing other than *bloody rubbish*.

Comment 3: That the economic theories they 'adhere' to are *rubbish* has been long known (to this observer); we can see how neoliberalism, 'economic rationalism,' globalisation; all together = race to the bottom for workers, wages & conditions has worked - see immediately prior comment 2 - yet I hear no so-called 'leader' deny neoliberalism, only ever doing 'more of the (neoliberal) same' = known disaster. Why? Are they all sooo stupid?

-=*=-

4. Life, the universe and everything.

Dear reader, by now you might have seen my point; the penny might have dropped. I could go on, but I'm assuming you don't have all day to read an ever-longer litany of woes. Either your family-life, health & education, jobs etc. are all under control or not, and let us not get 'hung up' on individual stories, but look to a bigger picture. Which is grim, and exactly my point.

-=*=-

Fazit; long story short: Our so-called 'leaders' are not 'stand-alone,' they have advisors, whole government departments, university faculties, private think-tanks etc., all churning out, one might expect, the best possible advice.

Ignoring what they say, in favour of inspecting what they actually do, one may see that what they, our so-called 'leaders' are producing are utter disasters, as good as everywhere we look.

Recalling 'the best possible advice,' and think of the computing GIGO = garbage-in, garbage-out, it can only mean that the orders to the advisors are specifically to create the criminal-chaos we see resulting.

Dear reader, you may now make your own conclusion to this, my sad tale.

the leaky bucket vs. the magic pudding- somebody is lying

2011-11-28T16:51:00.001+01:00

.. we, the people are immersed in a lie-cloud ...

  .. namely, the pushed-propaganda paradigm ...

    .. forcibly dumbed-down - but what about the liars?

Thesis: OWS blames the 1% (= ultra-rich) for the troubles inflicted on the 99% (= we, the people).

Me: I blame a wider group, namely the M/I/C/4a-plex[1]; of course, these are mainly 'front' organisations for the actual beneficiaries, the aforesaid (possibly fewer than) 1% = the obscenely rich - who, oddly enough, just can't get enough (here $s), so they drive the M/I/C/4a-plex to make the mostly already rich *ever richer*, partly by ripping us (we, the people) off but not only; they rip much of rest of the world off as well (like any/all resource-owner/producers, especially oil, or in the criminally tragic case of stolen = invader-Z improperly-alienated Palestine, soil). And if the resource-owner/producers don't immediately capitulate/surrender their patrimony, then in goes the US (or Z) military (see Perkins' "Economic Hit Man").

-=*=-

I don't need to prove my above assertions; all any fair person needs to do is a) open their eyes and b) *look* - all obvious (once the 'normal,' usually TV-propagated 'ppp/dd conditioning' is bypassed/abandoned).

Also obvious, is that US-style capitalism (no other style currently permitted) - seems to *need* rip-offs and criminal violence up to and including mass-murder for spoil (prototyped in pre-'48 Palestine (Plan Dalet, Deir Yassin massacre, etc.), all the 63+ years to today passing illegal invasions of Iraq, latest Libya and Iran next?) - in order just to struggle along. Surely, if they didn't need it, they wouldn't do it? (Risking Nuremberg-class punishment, say.) Looks like they do it, not 'merely' because they can, but because they *want* to. To save our world, the 1% + M/I/C/4a-plex cannot be allowed to so continue.

-=*=-

So, what's about 'the leaky bucket vs. the magic pudding?'

Well, that's another thing the 'new economics' seems to need - permanent growth, i.e. a 'magic pudding.'

Seems to need - but doesn't exist, because of the 'leaky bucket' twice; once since we have a finite planet ("Limits to Growth," 1972), and 2nd because of 'leakage' = 2nd law of thermodynamics = everything wears out, full-stop. Part of the leakage & 2nd law combined is pollution; IF we poison the planet THEN we all stand to die sooner, if carried too far then the human race itself may be endangered. CO2 is a pollutant, it is going / has gone into excess, the Arctic ice is melting; no coincidences, please.

-=*=-

One glaring, outright & deliberate lie[2] is all one needs to derail the 1%-wagon, and 'needs - but doesn't exist' is such a grievous lie exposed, twice. Of course, there are many other lies, outrageous on their face, like “increasing productivity by reducing workers' wages & conditions is good for you!” Shame, also twice, a) that they push such lies, then b) that such lies are apparently 'accepted' (then recall 'ppp dd' = pushed-propaganda paradigm dumbed-down.)

Another glaring, outright & deliberate lie is that 'the market knows best,' and so it goes. *All* these pernicious neoliberal lies are culminating in economic collapse almost everywhere, to which the currently preferred 'fix' is austerity - which will only drive the collapses further, faster.

Previously mentioned, and cannot be ignored, is the excess-CO2 climate-catastrophe cliff, which the 1% + M/I/C/4a-plex are driving the world over - aka down the tor-let.

-=*=-

Only a few of the lies we are immersed in have been mentioned, but the lying, on important topics, is practically seamless (indeed, the lies form a coordinated, 'narrative' guided - but nevertheless false - tapestry). Since we are lied to, we cannot make rational electoral decisions (possible exception: Choose your preferred liar.) Since the so-called 'representatives' once elected proceed to abuse our interests, any so-called 'democracy' we may be offered is a total sham. So we, the people have no effective input, are allowed none.

Long story short: The rulers are stuffing the world up.

Q: Where is the countervailing force, the truly smart people who could stop the vicious, lying & criminal 1% + M/I/C/4a-plex killing our once jewel-like planet, dragging *all* of us down with it?

-=*end*=-

Ref(s):

[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]

you don't know what you've got ‘Til it's gone - google's lying cache

2011-11-28T09:21:00.000+01:00

.. one thing I condemn ...

  .. *more* than censorship ...

    .. is deliberately damaged data

Thesis/Subtitle: Lying is a crime; it's the entry crime enabling progress to cheating, theft & murder.

-=*=-

Q: Why do crims rob banks?

A: It's where the money is.

Similarly, crims cannot have (successful) lives of crime without lying about it - for to admit to a crime is (normally) a one-way ticket straight to gaol (*un*-normal = if the cops are corrupt pigs and/or the laws are rigged. Hmmm, think about corrupt cops & rigged laws for a few secs. Our so-called 'leadership' has a lot to answer for - only just laws may earn respect; only cops on our, we the people's side can properly support just laws.)

Point: IF google sabotages its own cache THEN it means that the cache/index is not correct; that means a google search is *not* guaranteed to return correct results - which is a crime against truth.

I have proof of such errors, i.e. that the cache -> index is not correct.

Note: *One* data/cache/index fault = error puts *all* into question;

- one cannot know what is *missing* from any search.

  .. you don't know what you've got ‘Til it's gone...

if US democracy has any meaning at all, then it's this: ABO; means Anyone But Obama

2011-11-23T16:51:00.002+01:00

.. IF reps play up ...

  .. THEN no option but ...

    .. de-elect (Note: *after* the damage is done!)

Thesis/Subtitle: One must *never* reward such malfeasance.

-=*=-

Trigger article:

Obama’s Pepper Spraying Cops
November 22, 2011
Dave Lindorff
OpEd
  «The Obama presidency has been one of the greatest disasters for progressives in modern history, as a man who ran for office promising change and a new respect for the Constitution, almost immediately picked up where his predecessor had left off, escalating the country’s illegal wars, enlarging the share of the nation’s wealth going to the Pentagon and to the secret intelligence services, shoveling money to the biggest banks, endorsing the torture abuses at Guantanamo and at the many CIA black-sites around the world, authorizing the summary execution of American citizens abroad, and ignoring the looming catastrophe of global climate change.»
[eurasiareview/Lindorff]

Comment: Agreed without the 'almost;' Obama's villainy began even before his 'reign' started by his refusal to condemn the then-current Z-atrocity, being the slaughter of ~1400 Palestinians, mostly civilian, in the 08/9 illegal, full-on military attack on the (open-air prison) Gaza.

For the entire world, Obama's been a one-way, *bad* trip.

He should not be allowed to stay, full stop.

euthanasia of the rentiers

2011-11-23T10:41:00.001+01:00

Keywords: Out-sourcing, off-shoring, down-sizing, lean- & mean-ing.

Had the already rich fat-cats not been sooo greedy, they might have got away with it.

Starting with Thatcher and Reagan, neoliberalism = globalism, economic rationalism, voodoo economics, whatever you like to call it, but 'the system' was successively changed, with the current chaos as the result, with the 1% ripping-off the 99% and governments going broke = forced into austerity incl. privatisations plus toll-booths being forced onto the commons almost everywhere. What the WB/IMF = "Economic Hit Men" forced onto the 3rd world, what US "Shock'n Whore" brought to Iraq and now Libya, is now being forced onto the 1st world by the US-regime, WB/IMF & the EU, to the benefit of Wall St & other private banks and the mostly already obscenely rich fat-cat shareholders who stand behind them.

Now every questionable practice, and that includes every little neoliberal thing, needs to be closely examined.

The direction is not now and probably never was sustainable - due to extremism of the neoliberal program. It's only common sense, that if taxes are cut, mainly to benefit the rich, that wages and conditions are reduced, jobs shipped overseas and expenditures = 'benefits' for the very less well-off are reduced if not eliminated, then happiness/contentment stands to be reduced in parallel. Yet those reductions were exactly what were and still are being forced upon the 99%. The only 'excuses' offered (that I'm aware of) were that 'a smaller share of a larger pie may in fact itself be larger' and 'a rising-tide lifts all boats.' Didn't happen; some baubles (= wide/flat TVs, say) got 'cheaper' - largely because of sweat-shop labour & ignored externalities (like pollution = destroying habitat, but only "not in our (immediate) backyard.")

Productivity is one thing, but anything which causes a shift of wealth from the people to the already rich fat-cats is - basically - wrong, because egalitarian implies at least sharing, and that fairly. (The extension after 'at least' is transfers to the needy - i.e. would you let someone bleed to death for lack of cash, or would you staunch the bleeding 'for free' = community cost?)

Consider cost-plus vs. the rip-off that economic-rent is.

The cost of digging Iraqi oil up is estimated at ~$1,- but crude oil is traded at between $91 (Texas) and $121 (Tapis) and 'no,' I can't explain the vast difference. But $91 to $121 - $1 = $90 to $120 'profit' = resource- = economic-rent. Q: Who does this 'profit' belong to, a) the resource owners (we the people) or b) the miners? Why? (Note that "because that's capitalism" is not a good answer, because equity[1](= the 'justice' aspect) must be part of any acceptable answer. Because we the people = 99% are civilised.)

As for Iraqi oil, so Aus coal & iron-ore etc.. Hence the attempt at an MRRT by Labor, now successful but at a too-low % & coverage.

Some of the problems are lies[2] (venal MSM incl. big bits of the AusBC), vested interests (the miners and their fat-cat shareholders) and outright corruption (so-called 'representatives' who sell us, we the people, out.)

Another (big, bigger, BIGGEST) problem is that the greedy neoliberals do not stop with self-enrichment, they - because they also just happen to control the world - are driving us off an environmental cliff = down the excess-CO2 climate-catastrophe tubes = down the tor-let.

Recall that "Foxes do not soil their own nests."

Which makes foxes smarter than the 1%.

Solution? Please refer to my headline.

-=*end*=-

PS Kindly note, that we the people are *not* to blame.

A principal tenet of democracy theory is "You get the government you deserve." Oh, really?

This is wrong in at least three ways; 1) dumbed-down electors (lying MSM), 2) dumb choice of candidates (bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic), then 3) even dumber representatives - who sell us out to vested interests = lobby-ocracy.

It means that 'the system' is broken; just as we didn't vote our way in, having been falsely informed(bad), given false choices(worse) then being betrayed(worst) - so we can't vote our way out (even if now better = internet informed), hence an OWS-type methodology, perhaps.

Economic theory has effectively become a monoculture of erring ideologists - thanks to Friedman-Hayek&Co and corrupt 1% patronage, see here for more on the vile & criminal M/I/C/4a-plex = corrupt & undemocratic tyrannical plutocracy. After the rentiers, then rest of the guilty. Warm up the tumbrels.

-=*=-

Ref(s):

[1] equity n. (pl. -ies) 1 fairness. 2 principles of justice used to correct or supplement the law. 3 a value of the shares issued by a company. b (in pl.) stocks and shares not bearing fixed interest. [Latin aequitas: related to *equal] [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.]

position vacant - applications called for

2011-11-21T13:51:00.000+01:00

The US/Zs attack at leisure. No one is safe.

Iraq and Libya had high HDIs, now both bombed back to the stone-age.

At the same time, the world is going down the tubes (fig. being flushed down the tor-let), by excess and still climbing atmospheric CO2 concentration.

Most 'Western' nations, plus other psychotic sycophants, not only do not resist, they collaborate. (i.e. Rasmussen/DK, Gillard/Aus, say - but why Merkel/D? Is she / are they sooo stupid?)

Democracy is a 'non-starter' (= doesn't work, not allowed to work) - so don't blame us, we the sheople.

What's needed is a countervailing *force* (recall 'pen mightier than sword') - to turn our ecosphere's outlook around = save the planet ...

.. and not just BTW, restore sanity & justice to the world, starting with honouring the hapless Palestinians 'right of return' = all Zionists, dependants & descendants *out* & back to whence they came.

Bonus available for an elegant, more for a quick, *effective* result.

Envisaged solution to include gaol/tumbrels/gallows for all irresponsible lying / cheating / thieving / murdering perpetrators & accessories, also apologists & pro-war trolls.

you know it's wrong by the unjust results; all known in advance

2011-11-20T16:51:00.002+01:00

.. coincidences ...

  .. could happen; ...

    .. this is conspiracy

Key quote: "Bad news, boys."

'Conspiracy[1]' theories:

Elvis is still alive ... and living somewhere in exile.

UFOs, ETs, area 51, alien abductions & flying saucers.

The CIA was intimately involved in the JFK assassination.

The invasions of Iraq & Libya were murders for spoil.

The world is 'run' by mostly Jewish bankers.

9/11 was an 'inside' (CIA/Mossad) job.

Some deity promised it to us[3]!

Disclosure: My aim is best described as IDWT = I Don't Want Trouble, not for myself personally, not for my family & friends, nor for truth, peace & justice seekers any/everywhere. But I *do* want trouble (including with 'extreme prejudice') for dickheads everywhere who rip-off their neighbours and otherwise indulge in unjust and/or cruel, often criminal behaviours.

Preamble: The absolute worst of the worst dickheads are those who are *failing* to prevent the excess-CO2 climate-change catastrophe.

The 2nd worst of the worst dickheads are those who murder for spoil, primarily the US & Z rogue-regimes, plus those who are *failing* to prevent the thieving carnage.

The 3rd worst of the worst dickheads are those who are *reversing* previous progress towards 'the Enlightenment.'

Thesis: That all these dickheads are in the one 'boat' named so-called 'leaders,' and that they are involved in a conscious conspiracy against us, we the people.

-=*=-

Discussion: I don't care a fig for Elvis or ETs, except to note that a) such conspiracy theories are obviously nutty, and b) the nuttiness is pushed onto *all* conspiracy theories, as a way of dismissing both any substance and the theorists themselves - not quite fair and in fact viciously fallacious, especially when a 'conspiracy theory' offers a better explanation than the 'official line' does. I.e. the *three* 9/11 towers did *not* fall due to jet-fuel fires alone (if to fires at all); the three towers had 'help' of some explosive kind, planted by agents unknown (but see five dancing Israelis jumping for joy in Liberty State Park) - either totally missed (= inconceivably criminal incompetence) or actively assisted by the CIA or such, say. See my "9/11 as test of 'belief'." That *someone* knew is supported by the far too many odd coincidences (recall "We don't do coincidences"); like none of the four allegedly hijacked planes 'squawked' the appropriate hijack codes, NORAD was effectively 'stood down,' the incredible accuracy of the flying, etc. - and WTC7. IF anyone knew THEN the CIA, in addition (to Cheney, say) or (less likely) alone.

I don't care to discuss the JFK assassination, except for two observations, 1) the CIA operates covertly; secrecy is an enemy of democracy (not IF but WHEN misused), a covert agency is the *obvious* place for a 'secret government' = crooked conspiracy and 2) the sometimes alarming inaccuracy & incompleteness of the 'official explanation' leaving room for massive suspicion = conspiracy theories (now looping, but applies to 9/11 'in spades.')

That the invasions of Iraq & Libya were murders for spoil should not be seriously in doubt; even if oil is not the whole story, we know that the US legislature is 'owned' by the Zionists (who hated Saddam [About 1,230,000 results] & Gaddafi [About 6,870,000 results]), and then there's US hegemony. Back to oil, sure they (US+) could just buy it, but they always want the lot = control (to deny China, say) and max-$s = economic rent. Then Greenspan told us.

If the world is run by mostly Jewish bankers is a bit moot, both on the Jewish (hoist with their own Zionist petard[3]) and the running; what we can see is the world going ever deeper into debt to the banks, who are now strangling whole countries almost everywhere (currently working on the PIIGS), be the stranglers WB, IMF, EU or Goldman Sachs&Co = Wall St.. Concomitant with strangling is the grabbing of wealth from the 99% = us, we the people for the benefit of the already obscenely rich 1%, ergo OWS.

Call it neoliberalism, globalisation, economic rationalism or whatever, the most notable aspect is the near-simultaneous application almost everywhere, bipartisanly = un- & anti-democratically, and the lack of any definitive argument let alone countervailing theory. All too simply done; promise tax-cuts to the voters then cut taxes mostly off the rich, allow social-service 'benefits' to bankrupt the governments, then rip the people off via privatisations AND slashing benefits. The 'austerity' being demanded will drive the spiral ever lower.

One thing on the political/financial system should be observed above all: It is *not* operating in we the people's interests, again ergo OWS.

Proof: By the nature of conspiracies (= secret criminal plan), proof is a bit hard to come by, especially when lacking sufficient leaks/whistle blowers, say. [Imagine a CIA defector, and how long s/he might 'last.'] So we turn to less direct methods, here circumstantial evidence; Q: Who is visibly doing what to whom, and then ask cui bono?

A: Possibly for some, a surprise answer; look carefully at national broadcasters = publicly-financed, like 'our' AusBC. The lies[2] have to reach us somehow, and it is no surprise at all that Murdoch's theAus has been lying to us for longer than I can recall (with a noteworthy early episode being the 100+ day attack on Whitlam & his govt..) That 'private enterprise' may lie in pursuit of profit is a 'given;' it is one of the holiest of capitalist 'principles.' But 'our' AusBC was (repeat *was*, still *is*) expected to be different; as publicly-financed, I expected the truth, the whole truth & nothing but the truth. Wrong, both my naïveté & their modus operandi. In a nutshell, 'our' AusBC lies to us, deliberately (they are so-called 'professionals' = many Uni graduates, after all - and to our cost. Point: They should know lie from fact, it's their *job*). The proof of AusBC's perfidy is their biased = lying, pro-Zionist reporting. Shocker. They should not lie at all, yet they lie to support a foreign, criminal project. But then thinking; Q: Why, how come? A: The AusBC's *specific* task is to propagandise = lie to us, with bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic support. Nothing else fits.

IF one can accept that, THEN all the other pieces start falling into place. It means that Lib/Lab are proven to collude, for if not then at government change-over, the AusBC would be slaughtered for supporting l'ancien régime. (In fact the AusBC seems to prefer Liberal, an utter outrage against 'balance' - and Q: You wonder why Labor tolerates it? A: Because Lib, Lab + AusBC all lie together in the same - conspiracy. This is not a loop, it's an observable fact.) Similarly from country to country, the leaders of the minnows collude/cave in to their 'masters,' the US & Z rogue-regimes. The only question becomes how freely they cave vs. the degree of coercion. That coercion exists is clear; look no further than the Zionist 'possession' of the US legislature. Watching the pro-Israel grovelling is truly sickening.

The charges are serious (= deliberately disadvantaging us, we the 99%), and as the dirty deeds include mass-murdering for spoil (Iraq, Libya, Iran next?) - so should the penalties be; warm up the tumbrels.

-=*end*=-

PS Q: How wide is the conspiracy? A: Recall Eisenhower's warning about the Military-Industrial complex. Now that the politicians = so-called 'leaders' are in, now that the publicly-financed broadcasters are in, a further addition is academics (they brew up and/or do not challenge 'voodoo economics' = neoliberalism, others brew up psychological manipulations = pushed-propaganda paradigm), we get military, industrial, Congress (US for parliament), 4th estate = corrupt & venal MSM incl. national broadcasters and finally academics, all together the vile & criminal M/I/C/4a-plex. Oh yeah, add in the militarised cops = pigs.

-=*=-

Ref(s):

[1] conspiracy  n. (pl. -ies) 1 secret plan to commit a crime; plot. 2 conspiring. [Latin: related to *conspire] [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] This one is not so much a conspiracy as a risible, lying gambit. Its interest lies in deploying an imaginary being (as a feeble 'excuse') to a real-world, criminal circumstance, namely the premeditated theft of an entire country by aggressive, armed invading aliens (= Zionists) from the hapless, mostly Palestinian erstwhile legal owner/occupiers = ELO/Os. This Zionist outrage has the potential to bring shame and dishonour to every Jew on the planet, only those who do their utmost (and succeed) in restoring justice to the Palestinians, including proper compensation and the revesting of all improperly alienated land/property or more and acceptable compensation, may hope to escape such shame and dishonour.

no choice = no chance; effective action required

2011-11-19T09:51:00.001+01:00

.. business as usual = current trends to continue ...

  .. ever more war & CO2 = catastrophe ...

    .. that all OK with you?

Subtitle: None should doubt the seriousness of the problems facing us, nor the apparent and total inability of our so-called 'leaders' = usurping puppet/tyrants to even recognise the problem, let alone moving to save our once jewel-like planet's comfortable life-supporting ecosphere.

[update, 19Nov'11]

Disclosure: My aim is best described as IDWT = I Don't Want Trouble, not for myself personally, not for my family & friends, nor for truth, peace & justice seekers any/everywhere. But I *do* want trouble (including with 'extreme prejudice') for liars, cheats, thieves & murderers = US-regime, Israeli-regime (aka Z-ray-hell), plus all SQSH-Os = snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on and their filthy accessories, apologists and propagandistic = lying, criminal internet trolls. Also *professional* liars, aka the corrupt & venal MSM, including big bits of the AusBC.

-=*=-

Trigger article 1:

November 17, 2011
The Good Old Days – They Were Simpler
Menu for Today’s Tricky Planet: Use Your Head
by Gabriel Kolko
  «The first and most important consideration is that the world’s status quo is heading toward disasters - political and military, ecological, and economic. Violence both between and within countries and ethnic groups is more and more common. A handful of dominant nations - the United States being the preeminent - control the world’s future to a large degree, ... »
[counterpunch/Kolko]

Comment: The US *rogue* regime, plus its illegitimate side-kick Israel dominate the world via lies and coercion = ultimately physical violence. They dominate not to lead but to rip-off, hence their ultimate modus operandi: Murder for spoil. That is not the pinnacle of human intelligence but its nadir.

Trigger article 2:

Desktop “Militants” And Public Intellectuals
By James Petras
17 November, 2011
  «In the context of the rise of neo-liberal ideology and policies, many progressive writers argue about the “decline of the public sphere”. This argument overlooks the fact that the “public sphere” has increased its role in society, economy and politics on behalf of capital, especially financial capital and foreign investors. The “public sphere”, specifically the state is much more intrusive in civil society as a repressive force, particularly as neo-liberal policies increase inequalities. ...»
[countercurrents/Petras]

Comment 1: Almost the worst 4-letter word on the planet: "Neoliberalism." If ever there was an erring ideology, this is it. Neoliberalism may not be our only problem, but it certainly is a key contributor, along with lies, cheating and theft, ending with murder for spoil.

Comment 2; a Q: How did we get neoliberalism? A: Bipartisanly.

Proof:

1. The UK; started by Thatcher, continued by Blair.

2. The US; started by Reagan, continued by Clinton.

3. In Aus; started by Hawke/Keating, continued by Howard.

But: Bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic (no choice, see?)

-=*=-

Then: It's the same with support for the US, Israel, wars in general and fossil-fuel burning in particular. We the voters cannot choose a way out, for both Lib/Lab give us essentially the same bipartisan result; choosing Green or some lesser 3rd party is to retreat to the margins.

More: Our so-called 'democracy' is sham; a) lied-to voters (we are) cannot make informed choices, b) as above; bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic = no meaningful choice of candidates, and c) when elected, our so-called 'representatives' more often than not work against our, we the people's interests.

With no action, all we'll get is more of the same = catastrophe.

With no choice we have no chance - unless we the people ourselves begin and complete the effective actions required to save our planet. Perhaps OWS is trying to show us a way; man the barricades, prepare the tumbrels.

-=*=-

^
Update, 19Nov'11; PS Whereas the prime threat to humans' continued existence on roughly the current scale (~7bio+) is the excess-CO2 caused climate catastrophe, the biggest moral threat comes from the rogue regimes of the US and Israel.

Trigger article 1:

UN passes fresh Iran nuclear resolution
Posted November 19, 2011 07:27:42
  «That in turn is likely to disappoint Israel, which has not ruled out military action against its arch-foe if diplomatic means fail to stop a nuclear program which the Jewish state sees as an existential threat. ... »
[AusBC/'news']

Comment 1: Israel may have 200-300 nuclear weapons, the US is known to have 1000s (like 5,113, say). Both are in breach of UN laws; if anyone is under nuclear-threat it is the entire non-US/Z world. Consider the statement from Obama: 'All Options on the Table' Over Alleged Iran Plot (or even if Iran looks sideways, one assumes). It is a crime to threaten - aggressive war the worst.

Comment 2: Consider the intemperate language: arch-foe. It is not, never has been, that Iran is threatening anyone; exactly the opposite - as Israel [and/or the US] "has not ruled out military action" *proves* (over and over again). 1st the UK (starting when they began to switch their navy from coal to oil fuel), then the US and now Israel (plus a few other immoral externals like France) are the ME-aggressors.

Comment 3: Like Nuremberg-class war crimes ("To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole"), this 'story' from the AusBC contains within itself accumulated evil by the bucket-full.

1. In the 1st instance, Israel has no right to exist - since it sits on land violently stolen from the mainly Palestinian erstwhile legal owner/occupiers (ELO/Os), and similarly has no right to defend such improperly alienated land/property. The immoral, illegal Z-project should have been terminated - by the UN - no later than Plan Dalet including the Deir Yassin massacre, etc. outrages showed the world what filthy, murdering criminal thieves the invading Zionists were (and still are). Israel cannot be de-legitimised, since it was from the very beginning an outlaw-construct, i.e. never legitimate (= immoral) - the UN had/has no valid authority to allow the violent dispossession of almost an entire country. The 'creation' of Israel was nothing other than a slow-motion war of aggression = Nuremberg-class war crime.

1a. The incredibly biased, pro-Israel reporting by the AusBC - over all the years that I can recall - provides absolute *proof* that the AusBC is itself another rogue.

2. In the 2nd instance, there is no proof of Iran's intent, and even if there were, so what? Iran is already under heavy surveillance (while no one is allowed so much as a peep into Dimona - but many thanks, Vanunu.) Given the asymmetry (many 1000s to 1), Iran could never do a "1st use" - but it could retaliate, such nuclear-gaming was and still is behind the MAD-doctrine. In a nutshell, having just one nuke would effectively prevent a US/Z attack - must be a 100% +ve, yes?

2a. More language: "Last week's IAEA report presented a stash of intelligence ..." - both the US and Z-ray-hell are known to 'invent' = lie; see 'reports' about 'stolen (Iranian) laptops,' say. Use of "stash," even if merely 'stenographed' by the AusBC shows its unprofessionalism.

3. That the UN can so act *proves* (over and over again) that the UN is itself corrupt. From 1948, allowing the horrible travesty that is Israel, from not stopping the aggressive, "Shock'n Whore" attack on Iraq 2003, then 2011 = now allowing the US/NATO(F+UK) rape of Libya, the UN shows itself as part of the problem - exactly the opposite of its stated purpose. When someone says one thing and does another, that's the exact definition of "Liar!"

4. "The IAEA's 35-nation board passed a resolution with a clear majority ..." illustrates how democracy is perverted, by US/Z coercion of the SQSH-Os = snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on. These people, so-called 'diplomats' are much better briefed (one would think) than I can ever be, yet they collude with the world's worst rogues against a hapless picked-upon oil-owner = Iran, just because the US can't bring Iran 'to heel' (why should it?) - and Israel continuously quivers in its illegitimate boots - because Israel knows it's 100% in the wrong, and deserves one day to be brought to justice. Best, soonest.

-=*=-

Trigger article 2:

Arctic sea ice is melting at its fastest pace in almost 40 years
John Vidal, environment editor
guardian.co.uk, Sunday 11 September 2011 22.20 BST
  «Arctic sea ice has melted to a level not recorded since satellite observations started in 1972 – and almost certainly not experienced for at least 8,000 years, say polar scientists. ... »
[guardian/environment]

Comment: As long as there remains just a bit of ice in the Esky, the beer can remain cool. The Arctic ice is going, soon to be gone.

-=*=-

Fazit: The world is warming dangerously, most probably catastrophically - due to a) human action = burning ever-more fossil-carbon, but more importantly b) due to a total lack of effective action from our so-called 'leaders,' who prefer to play at war = murder for spoil, than work on our behalf to save the planet. Time they, as all other criminals, were brought to justice. Best, soonest.

[«back»]

brutality vs. brains those with bigger guns 'win' greedy, antediluvian troglodytes

2011-10-17T12:51:00.002+02:00

.. lies ...

  .. theft ...

    .. mass-murder

Thesis/Subtitle: The criminally smart-arse Americans' M/I/C/4-plex does not win by being brainy, they dominate by being brutal.

The I/J/Z-plex is equally criminal, equally foul; the US+Zs' main modus operandi is lying, cheating, then murdering theft for spoil.

-=*=-

Instead of working together with all the world's people, hopefully towards a post-WW2 golden age, the US+Zs have turned into greedy, grovelling grave-robbers, grabbing oil (US), soil (Zs), and any other resource they can get their grubby little fingers onto. Every ghastly, isolated carrion-eater for him/herself!

Perhaps the worst bit is that the 'rest of the West' regimes align themselves with the worst of the worst = US+Z rogue-regimes. Why? Not a decent bone in any body amongst them, not in the lead-gangsters, banksters or the rest of the immoral herd = Anglo/Judaic + snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on (SQSH-Os) - regimes, as opposed (shock, horror!) to the mostly decent people = the electorate.

Part 1, military:

I often start my history of the US with the dual A-bombings of Japan; they were *not* as portrayed = "saving myriad US soldiers' lives" but far more sinister-prosaically, a demonstration to the Soviets of American power and - yes, brutality, some (more) revenge on the Japanese (although many consider that the US provoked Japan to attack the US, by resource-isolating Japan - yes, including the perennial oil), plus the desire to get 'live data' on the nuke-damage to real (~¼mio, almost exclusively civilian) people.

The Zs' infamy may be considered to begin with Herzl (1897), then via Balfour, Jabotinsky, the alien invading terrorists = Irgun, Lehi, Stern Gang, Haganah et al., leading to the Nakba ('48, genocidal ethnic cleansing of Palestine) and the regular if random continuation of more of the same terrorism right down to the current moment; amongst latest outrages Gaza '08/9 (~1400 mainly civilians slaughtered), high-seas murdering piracy against the peace-fleet = Israel flotilla raid '10, live-ammunition/sniper attacks on non-violent protesters in Golan Heights, '11.

The US' infamy is longer, try starting with a list of interventions for “regime change” here, which notes 1st such in 1893 against Hawaii.

Long-story short: The list of US+Zs' depredations is as long as it is filthy.

The really big question is Q: Why does the rest of the world tolerate this evil, without ever making a real protest, let alone an effective one?

Part 2, economics:

Theme; Q: Best use of resources to maximise peoples' life-experience?

A: Not for the Zs (utterly inhumane treatment of Palestinians), not for the US (impoverishing rip-offs, exhaustive exploitation, casino-capitalism), not for their snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on (SQSH-Os) - regimes.

Three bits of 'evidence;'

Article 1, a very short history of parts of neoliberalism:

How Did Economists Get It So Wrong?
By Paul Krugman
September 6, 2009
  «When it comes to the all-too-human problem of recessions and depressions, economists need to abandon the neat but wrong solution of assuming that everyone is rational and markets work perfectly. The vision that emerges as the profession rethinks its foundations may not be all that clear; it certainly won’t be neat; but we can hope that it will have the virtue of being at least partly right.»
[nytimes/Krugman]

Comment 1: Too much to summarise; recommend reading it all (I did.)

Article 2, some detail on FIRE:

Theology and Neoliberal Economics
The Friedman Institute Upgrades Theology to Condone Neoliberal Greed.
By Prof. Michael Hudson
May 23, 2010
  «The problem with the Friedman Institute is that its economic doctrine rose to notoriety in the Pinochet period, the high tide of the Chicago Boys in Chile. Privatization of public enterprise, “freeing” markets from usury laws and promoting deregulation is the antithesis of nearly all religions, whose guiding purpose after all was to socialize their members and create a moral state.»
[globalresearch/Michael Hudson]

Comment 2: Ditto.

Article 3, some detail on banksters:

Publicly-owned Banks as an Instrument of Economic Development: The German Model
by Ellen Brown
October 13, 2011
Web of Debt
  «The example of Germany shows that even success is no guarantee in the face of a relentless onslaught of propaganda by large privately-owned banks interested only in making money for their CEOs, wealthiest clients and shareholders. But peering behind the propaganda, the public banking model that helped underwrite Germany’s economic success might be the fast track to a U.S. banking system that serves Main Street rather than Wall Street.»
[globalresearch/Ellen Brown]

Comment 3: see comment 1.

Part 3, ethics:

Theme; Q: Cooperation is better than confrontation?

A: Not for the US, not for Zs.

Once, there was a movement towards "The Enlightenment" typified by "Liberté, égalité, fraternité" whereby the aim was, loosely translated, a fair go for all. Not anymore; now we have what may be called 'social Darwinism' = the rich get richer by preying on the 'less well-off' and the predators claim to be 'better, more appropriately evolved.' In fact, they are all vicious crooks with a self-serving (erring!) ideology as (obviously!) feeble 'excuse.' Plus, of course, they've got the law (best Congress $s can buy = corrupt) and force (military murderers, thuggish police = pigs) on their payroll.

We see it demonstrated daily; the US military expenditure and hostile, murdering-theft operations across the world, concentrating on (oil-owning!) Muslim/Arab ME, the Zs' continuing illegal occupation and ever-increasing theft of Palestine land and property.

The US 'voodoo economics,' aka economic rationalism or neoliberalism, dating from both Reagan & Thatcher (hear "TINA" - run!) - have been implemented 'at home' (US, UK), forced onto some by war (starting, say, with the 1973 Chilean coup d'état against Allende, lately Afghanistan, Iraq & now Libya, Iran next?), onto others via the IMF (mainly '3rd world,' see Perkins, "Economic Hit Man") - and far worse in a way, 'voluntarily' by 'Western' regimes, like in Aus (Boo! Hiss! Shame - traitors!) Amongst the many crimes against us are the vile privatisations of the people's natural monopolies - like water supplies, sewage, elec. Etc.. This is nothing other than theft to enrich the already obscenely wealthy, it loads the utilities up with debt we the people must finance through higher charges, and reduces the delivery by abandoning preventative maintenance via the 'rationalising' = lean-and-meaning job cuts.

The marauding US+Zs continue their crimes, as all the while excess CO2 builds up in our atmosphere; decent people the world over are preoccupied with surviving the US+Zs' onslaughts, as our once jewel-like planet's comfortable life-supporting ecosystems are trashed.

Thanks, but "No, thanks!" to the US+Zs & their SQSH-Os rogue-regimes.

Musing: We simply have to get rid of the criminal predators.

Fazit: Perhaps OWS et al. can find a redeeming way.

-=*=-

PS It's easy to prove my above assertions of villainy:

1. We the people are being lied to, continually and not just with 'little-whites,' by our so-called 'leaders' and their puppet-masters (military-industrial complex), via the (corrupt & venal) MSM, including big bits of the AusBC (Boo! Hiss! Shame - more traitors!) In addition, universities have gone degenerate, turning out graduates, notably in economics (voodoo, casino = rip-offs) and psychology (propaganda = scientifically developed lies), graduates who are contributing to the crimes against us.

2. Lies are deployed to deceive [lie2  -n. 1 intentionally false statement (tell a lie). 2 something that deceives. [POD]]

3. We are being deceived to conceal crimes - partly against resource-owning targets, partly actually against us, we the people.

4. We see the results; carnage in US target countries, corrupt and degenerate capitalism dependent on swindles (Wall St.) when not outright theft (Palestine as ME beachhead, Iraq & Libya, etc.), mainly oil but also economic rents (MRRT shemozzle in Aus, say), growing grief amongst subject populations typified by unaffordable health system for many = 10s of millions in the US lower income groups and spreading unemployment -> poverty - now ~46mio in US on food-stamps. Then there's the GFC & continuing EU debt crisis - so-called leaders - and even the banksters themselves - almost everywhere are demonstrating that they just don't have a clue. Bah! Warm up the tumbrels...

PPS, 13:51 - try fixing this, Obama! (Haven't yet; bet ya can't):

a picture 'worth' more than a squillion words.

2011-10-16T15:51:00.002+02:00

The Wanton Destruction Of Sirte

Criminally foist on a negligently insouciant world by US+NATO(F+UK)

All those who did not / do not resist such evil are culpable.

the murder of the social contract the forced end of the Enlightenment neanderthal rulers = troglodytic tyrants

2011-10-01T11:01:00.002+02:00

.. just one lie ...

  .. kills all credibility ...

    .. only one lie? - squillions!

Thesis/Subtitle; Q: Newton's 3rd law = no action without an equal & opposite reaction - so where is the effective opposition?

A: Apparently none available in our so-called 'democratic system' = DIY is a *must*.

Musing 1: Always, the complications. Nothing - or very little - is truly simple, even so-called 'elementary' particle/entities (photons, electrons, protons etc.) act in complex ways - but any system can be broken down into ever smaller aggregates, with accompanying behavioural simplification - until of course, some Heisenberg-indeterminacy or Gödel-incompleteness limit is reached. It doesn't mean that our problems are insoluble - where there's a will, there's usually a way (in general = try harder, hardest).

-=*=-

Trigger article:

Schoolchildren rampage over holiday cut rumour
Posted October 01, 2011 05:58:42
  «Several hundred French schoolchildren went on the rampage after false rumours spread that president Nicolas Sarkozy's government wanted to take away a large slice of their school holidays.
...
The UNL however "warned the government not to touch summer holidays at all" and said in a statement it wanted to protest austerity measures that amounted to "a catastrophic new term" in 2011.»
[AusBC/'news']

Comment 1: A 'good' one; shows us that some children are not so stupid that they can't see a 'current danger' (bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic so-called 'leaders' neoliberalising our social contract to death), that 'austerity measures' are the newest tool to be deployed against us, we the people, and that the student body feels so under attack that they are running an organised campaign in opposition - itself showing a perceived lack of effective 'representation.'

Comment 2: Note the language, "false rumours" [rumour = "general talk, assertion, or hearsay of doubtful accuracy" [POD]]. In fact, the 'rumours' are most likely true; they are *fully* compatible with the Sarkozy&Co's (erring!) neoliberal ideology, and it's really just a matter of time before such policies are indeed implemented - unless someone stops the neoliberal-juggernaut [Hindi Jagannath, = lord of the world [ibid.]]

Musing 2; Q: What is it with the so-called 'wo/man in the street,' that they apparently accept the continual degradation in societal morals - demonstrated by the West's = 'our' murdering wars for spoil and the continual degradation in societal conditions - demonstrated by 'our' corrupt governments' continual destruction of the social contract?

A: Apparently, it's like the 'frog in the (ever-warming) saucepan of water,' the average wo/man in the street seems too 'desensitized' to notice (= dumbed-down; prime-suspect TV-infotainment as psychologist-manipulated 'PR' = brain-washing) - except for a few small groups like the little Froggies in my citation, good for their still accurately functioning perceptions.

Fazit: There's only one way I can see out of this, and that's widespread, organised and effective revolution, starting with we, the few who can see, then recruiting the masses. Otherwise, total disaster will be forced upon us - by our bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic rulers, as described in my headline - troglodytic tyrants.

9/11 as test of 'belief'

2011-09-11T09:11:00.009+02:00

.. just ...

  .. one lie ...

    .. kills credibility

Preamble: 'Believing'[1] is what they do in the absence of evidence.

To say: "That's unbelievable!" - reveals credulity[2]; better might be: 'Especially preposterous[4] assertions require substantiation, please supply proof.'
End preamble.

Disclosure: I don't want trouble.

But: As a seeker of truth, I must a) follow where the evidence leads, and b) expose any and all lies that I detect along the way. In addition to truth-seeking, I advocate for justice, as in "Fair go, ya mug!"
End disclosure.

[update 110916, update 110917.]

-=*=-

Consider the confusing: 'The exception proves the rule.' In fact it *doesn't*, since there's a bit left out, namely: 'the existence of;' altogether: 'A specific exception proves the existence of some general rule.' This points to the necessity for precision; both in science as in logic, an exception = contradiction or counter-example *disproves* the applicable thesis.

One assertion I make is that we are being propagandised {n. 1 organized propagation of a doctrine by use of publicity, selected information, etc. 2 usu. derog. ideas etc. so propagated.[POD]}, by which I mean more specifically, *lied* to. Since lies are deployed to deceive {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.[ibid.]}, we are forced to ask 'Why are we being deceived?' - to which the obvious answer is: 'To be ripped-off in some way or other.' In this context it is useful to ask after motive, plus cui bono = who benefits?

Lies are difficult things to handle; by definition they differ from the truth = reality but worse, the differing may be divergent (i.e. capable of producing contradictions which would expose the lies - considered a bad thing, especially by the caught-out liars = disgrace, then possibly gaol or gallows.) A propaganda technique is to associate lies with a *narrative*, thus allowing coordination = apparent consistency.

When (note: Not 'if') we suspect we're being lied to, we may inspect the underlying narrative; any 'strong' lie (note again: Even 'little-white' lies are still lies) - any lie will act to disprove the underlying narrative. Examples: "Saddam has WMDs; we must disarm him!" (Result = Iraq destroyed, 1mio+ dead etc.), "Gaddafi's mercenaries (on Viagra) are attacking (and raping) citizens; we must save them!" (Result = Libya destroyed, 50k+ dead - so far - etc.). It's not too hard to see the lies; I suspect that the dumbed-down sheople are not all that dumbed-down that they can't see through the lies; propaganda is deployed to 'manufacture consent' which really means to club the electorate into (ever greater) subservience.

Now consider this narrative: “19 Saudi/Muslims (learnt to fly light planes in US, organised via Germany from ObL's cave in Afghanistan), hijacked 4 airliners, crashing 1 into a field, 1 into the pentagon, 2 into WTC 1 & 2, the latter *2* crash-and-burns causing WTCs 1, 2 and 7 = 3 towers to collapse (uncannily as if demolished); 'we' [= the US rogue-regime] give ourselves permission to attack any country - especially Muslim/Arab ones, starting with Afghanistan before 'moving on' to Iraq!” Latest is Libya; Syria or Iran next? On an informed guess, it would be the US/Z's preference to attack Iran; it has more oil.

Trigger article 1:

Robert Fisk: For 10 years, we've lied to ourselves to avoid asking the one real question
Saturday, 3 September 2011
  «By their books, ye shall know them.
I'm talking about the volumes, the libraries – nay, the very halls of literature – which the international crimes against humanity of 11 September 2001 have spawned. Many are spavined with pseudo-patriotism and self-regard, others rotten with the hopeless mythology of CIA/Mossad culprits, a few (from the Muslim world, alas) even referring to the killers as "boys", almost all avoiding the one thing which any cop looks for after a street crime: the motive.»
[antiwar/independent/Fisk]

Comment 1; note: "international crimes against humanity," interesting comparing ~3000 WTC-dead against the US-regime's 'score' in Iraq alone = 1mio+ dead and the Z-regime's theft of almost an entire country, lying and ethnically cleansing as they genocidally go.

Comment 2; note: "rotten with the hopeless mythology of CIA/Mossad culprits," see McGovern next (and more to come).

Comment 3: Fisk's answer to the motive Q: "US support for Israel as a root cause of al-Qa'ida's opposition to the United States."  IMHO, Fisk gets at least that correct; the Zs rank equal 1st with the US as world's worst evil-doers.

Trigger article 2:

Neither ink nor air
Did Tenet Hide Key 9/11 Info?
By Ray McGovern
August 17, 2011
  «Bulletin for those of you who get your information only from the New York Times, the Washington Post and other outlets of the Fawning Corporate Media (FCM): Former White House director for counterterrorism Richard Clarke has accused former CIA Director George Tenet of denying him and others access to intelligence that could have thwarted the attack on the Pentagon on 9/11.»
[ICH/Consortiumnews/McGovern]

Comment 1: McGovern goes on to give some proof that Tenet is a liar. No real surprise given that Tenet was a political appointment to the CIA and "All politicians lie," thanks, but "No, thanks!" - to JWHoward et al..

Comment 2: More serious is the report on some evidence known to have been so withheld: "If, as Tenet says in his memoir, it was the Aug. 6, 2001, PDB that prompted his visit on Aug. 17, what might have brought him back on Aug. 24? I believe the answer can be found in court documents released at the trial of Zacarias Moussaoui, the fledgling pilot in Minnesota interested in learning to steer a plane but indifferent as to how to land it."

Comment 3: This approaches 'he said, she said ...' etc.. One BIG problem is that once someone is proven to be a liar, *nothing* s/he says can be trusted = they've killed their own credibility. (Note that incomplete and/or contradicting reports were a big feature of the ObL-slaying-raid narrative - and no proof produced there either, rather some body/thing allegedly dumped into the Arabian Sea.)

Trigger article 3:

September 2, 2011
CounterPunch Diary
The 9/11 Conspiracists: Vindicated After All These Years?
  «We’re homing in on the tenth anniversary of the destruction of the Wall Street Trade Towers and the attack on the Pentagon. One in seven Americans and one in four among those aged 16-24, (so a recent poll commissioned by the BBC tells us) believe that there was a vast conspiracy in which the U.S. government was involved. But across those ten years have the charges that it was an “inside job” –– a favored phrase of the self-styled “truthers” — received any serious buttress?
The answer is no.»
[counterpunch/Cockburn]

Comment 1; note: *His* answer is no.

Cockburn goes on: «"The conspiracy virus is an old strand. The Russians couldn’t possibly build an A bomb without Commie traitors in the U.S.. The Russians are too dumb. ... JFK couldn’t have been shot by Oswald — it had to be the CIA." [Quoting some university person:] “I think the problem of conspiracy nuttery has got worse, and is part of a general trend. ... There wasn’t a single serious question about 9-11. The main engine of the 9-11 conspiracy cult is nothing political; it’s the death of any conception of evidence.
This probably comes from the decline of Western power. Deep down, almost everyone, across the political spectrum, is locked in a bigotry which can only attribute that decline to some irrational or supernatural power. The result is the ascendency of magic over common sense, let alone reason.”»

Comment 2a: Apart from any reservations there might be over the Russian A-bomb getting 'indirect' US/UK 'help,' or the Kennedy slaying being not what the 'official version' alleges, lumping those conspiracies in with 9/11 is a deliberate (nasty, fallacious) tactic designed to discredit - and as such hardly belongs in 'civilised discourse.'

Comment 2b: Bringing in unrelated information can be termed 'red herring' and/or non sequitur = both fallacious, and attacking an opponent is called the 'ad hominem' fallacy. Descending into fallacy -> kills credibility.

Then, consider a) "There wasn’t a single serious question about 9-11" and b) "the death of any conception of evidence."

Comment 3a: Interesting; it may well be 'technically' correct to say: "There wasn’t a single serious question" (emphasis = mine) - on the basis that there were/still are *many* serious questions...

Comment 3b: The two dare discuss 'evidence' while attempting to support the 'official version,' which itself goes out of its way to obscure, deny or outright ignore evidence.

-=*=-

There are three aspects to 9/11 evidence; 1) what's in the public domain (mostly 'news' videos), 2) what's *not* in the public domain, namely what was destroyed = WTC-wreckage (hastily sent to China as scrap), Pentagon-wreckage (incomplete, to say the least = no wings, say[7]) and Pennsylvania-wreckage (only a smouldering hole in the ground = non-existent? [8, 9 & 10]) and 3) what has been deliberately suppressed = hidden (we can't know what or how much, i.e. Pentagon = no film available - to us, we the people; why not?)

-=*=-

It's now 10 years; some Qs were immediately obvious 'back then' - like those prompted by the pictures of the smouldering holes in the Pennsylvania field (alleged UA93) & the Pentagon (alleged AA77). The first videos we saw were of the burning twin-towers, 'live' on our TV, with replays of jet-impacts. Then, one by one, the *3* towers collapsed - suddenly, symmetrically, compactly into their respective own footprints - highly 'unnatural' to say the least; here[5] are some videos, sourced via ae911truth (tip: To d/l your own copy, try <r-click>; 'save target as').

The most obvious Q is: 'How did they do it?' - where 'they' = 19 Saudi/Muslim alleged hijackers, and 'it' = *3* WTC symmetrical-collapses. They are, if you like, 3 *burning* questions; makes many a structural engineer go 'Hmmm,' such never happened before nor since - where 'such' = jet- or diesel- fuel fires causing structural-steel in 2*110-story & 1*47-story buildings, to melt then collapse the towers into great clouds of steel-lengths and concrete powder, and that Oh, so symmetrically, and at partly approximating free-fall speed to boot. (Free-fall speed would occur if all support immediately *below* was suddenly, totally removed = explosively demolished; ~working hypothesis. Watched any videos?)

These questions plus others, like the alleged mobile call from an hijacked plane - that turned out to be of zero-sec length[6](!!?) and not so BTW violating the cell-phone system's supposed capabilities, the fact that no air-to-air interceptions were made, that NORAD was (apparently, allegedly?) stood-down, that Bush continued reading fairy-stories to children -> approaching myriads of *BIG-Q*s, none of which have been *properly* addressed, if they were ever addressed at all; the 'official' enquiry was a fizzer - as, we find are most/all such enquiries = whitewashes. Nobody (who might be effective) seems to care, it's just 'Move on!'

-=*=-

Fazit, 1: The problem is that we *can't* just move on, because 9/11 *did* change our world, and (IMHO at least), for the *worse*. Consider Fisk's 'hopeless mythology of CIA/Mossad culprits.' The CIA, as the FBI, knew *something*, see the pilot-training stories. Mossad also knew *something*, see the The Five Dancing Israelis Arrested On 9-11. All, note, *before* the event. Others knew; there're the stories of (Israeli!) workers warned off going to work at the WTC-towers, massive Wall St. 'puts' against airline-stock, etc.. All this is so-called 'circumstantial' and vis-à-vis the actual perpetrators, no 'smoking gun.' Conned A'Sleeza (a specific Ms Rice) spoke of 'joining the dots' - mostly in the sense of having failed to do so; and/but: I'm *not* suggesting anything (excepting the odd extrapolation), basically letting the evidence we can see, plus what we might surmise as evidence 'destroyed/missing/hidden' - to speak for itself.

The most persuasive evidence I've seen is in the videos[5], and the Oh, so 'perfect' symmetry + ~free-fall speed. It was quite literally 'Wham, bam (pause, fire reducing); tower straight down.' WTC7, of course, was not struck, but had a minor fire - burnt out = stopped. Then pause; 'Wham, tower straight down.' A *thesis* (not at all mine alone), is that the *3* collapses so resemble 'controlled demolition' that it 'beggars belief' that it could have been anything other than that = controlled demolition - and that requires careful, thorough, beforehand *preparation* steps on *3* buildings = *not* 2 aircraft impacts on their own. Note that I just wrote 'belief' as part of an expression. I'm *not* a believer; believing is what others do in the absence of evidence.

The most unlikely evidence I've heard of is an alleged hijacker's passport that supposedly came fluttering down ('unsinged') out of the inferno.

IF you, dear reader, wish to believe that the 3 towers were caused to collapse by jet- or diesel-fuel fires, THEN you're welcome - and please move on; nothing (more) to see here - for you.

Fazit, 2: Preparation means pre-loading the towers with explosives plus associated detonator control systems, most likely would have been delivered via trucks to the loading-docks, access to columns & under-floors via ceiling crawl-spaces. The lift-system had recently seen maintenance-activity. Someone knew; it must have been seen & allowed - given that the towers had years-ago been internally bombed, security would have existed in the attempt at preventing a recurrence. If anyone knew (security company), so also the CIA/FBI *should* have known (who knows), but see Tenet = liar above. The concept of a 'black flag' attack by internal US operatives already 'had form,' see Operation Northwoods. Then, recall the five dancing Israelis. A 'CIA/Mossad as culprits' theory is not at all far-fetched (at least at the LIHOP level), but I always come back to the preparation; that was *certainly* not done by anyone with Arab/Muslim 'identities' = *authorisation*. Then, having 'primed' the towers, how convenient (no coincidences, please!) was it, for 19 Saudi/Muslim dead-beats to hijack 4 planes? Then perform amazing feats of airmanship, all practiced = 'perfected' in Cessna 150s/172s? "Wham!" - smack in the middle; at least one on a curved-approach (proven by visible bank-angle, see videos.)

Fazit, 3: Perhaps there's a *reasonable* explanation, but IF so THEN why doesn't the US-regime go after it? Save a lot of trouble, mostly for themselves. But when we talk about 'form,' we've since seen just how bad the US-regime can be (Afghanistan, Iraq, latest Libya) plus on reflection, just how bad the Z-regime is and has been all along, i.e. both murdering for spoil, one soil & the other oil - and lying about it, continually.

Now, you decide - believe in fantasies, or look to the facts.

-=*end*=-

PS This 'work' (truth-seeking, justice-advocating) is not easy. One result is truly horrendous, namely that it is not 'merely' that our so-called 'leaders' = tyrannical rulers lie to us (proven with Iraq, aggressive invasion thereof = Nuremberg = gallows), but that they *may* have at least tolerated, if not directly carried out (via some rogue-agency, CIA/Mossad = 'prime suspects') - a 'black flag' operation against some 3000 of their own (if agency = US) or allied (if agency = Z) innocents. Once on the crime-path (again *proven* by Iraq after Afghanistan, now Libya), no 'offence' (mainly against morality, since law is both arbitrary and often ignored) - is too outrageous. Only true psychopaths can perpetrate such vile crime(s). Makes me sleep poorly, when at all.

PPS Pragmatics; where to from here? Some 9/11 “truthers” (thanks, but "No, thanks!" to Cockburn et al., for the malevolently arrogant, *erring* vilification), call for some 'full & fair' new enquiry; will never happen - see 'whitewashes' above. All such enquiries are 'poacher as gamekeeper,' only differing by degree. 'Baddies' are in control and until *forcibly* removed, will continue their lying and murdering for spoil, damaging good people instead of moving to save our once jewel-like planet's life-support system. Same old same old, but someone has to keep on agitating (and someone needs to *effectively* act) - the alternative is to cave-in to evil - not me.

-=*=-

Ref(s):

[1] believe  v. (-ving) 1 accept as true or as conveying the truth (I believe it; don't believe him). 2 think, suppose. 3 (foll. by in) a have faith in the existence of (believes in God). b have confidence in (believes in homoeopathy). c have trust in as a policy (believes in telling the truth). 4 have (esp. religious) faith.  believable adj. believer n. [Old English] [POD]

[2] credulous  adj. too ready to believe; gullible.  credulity n. credulously adv. [Latin: related to *credo]

Usage  Credulous is sometimes confused with credible[3]. [ibid.]

[3] credible  adj. believable or worthy of belief. [Latin: related to *credo] [ibid.]

[4] preposterous  adj. 1 utterly absurd; outrageous. 2 contrary to nature, reason, or sense.  preposterously adv. [Latin, = before behind] [ibid.]

[5] (Me: All care ...) World Trade Center Buildings 1 and 2

CBS footage of World Trade Center Building 1 Collapsing
(9 seconds, 4.7 MB., MPEG Format)

World Trade Center Building 2 Demolition - South View
(1 min and 53 seconds, 53 MB, AVI Format)

World Trade Center Building Demolition - North East View
(45 seconds, 20 MB, MPEG-4 Format)

World Trade Center Building 2 - molten metal and base smoke
(2 min. and 43 sec., 72.7 MB, MPEG-4 Format)

WTC2 Demolition - South East View
(2 min. and 32 sec., 29 MB, MPEG-4 Format)

News Video of WTC2 Demolition Waves
(1 min. and 11 sec., 83.7 MB, Windows Media Format)

WTC1 - Explosions Highlighted
(5 min. and 31 sec., 30 MB, MPEG-4 Format)

WTC1 Collapse - North East View
(18 sec., 3 MB, MPEG-4 Format)

WTC1 Demolition
(56 sec., 70 MB., Windows Media Format)

WTC1 Collapse - CBS News Clip
(40 sec, 16 MB, MPEG-2 Format)

PBS Footage of WTC1 Demolition
(55 sec., 69.8 MB, Windows Media Format)

North View of WTC2 Collapse from ABC News
(36 sec., 15 MB, MPEG-2 Format)

World Trade Center Building 7

World Trade Center Building 7 Implosion
(18 sec., 9.2 MB., MPEG-2 Format)

Dan Rather from CBS News Reports about WTC #7
(25 sec., 4.4 MB, MPEG-4 Format)

-=*=-
^
[6]^Update 110916, 16:51; AA77 mobile phone and 'exit wound.'[7]^^
[8]^Update 110917, 09:51; UA93 crash site:[9]^[10]^[«back»]

Obama's you-beaut new economic suit

2011-09-10T13:13:00.002+02:00

[update]

-=*=-

Off-shoring jobs creates unemployment, long-term or short-term into lower-paid jobs.

Increasing productivity = getting more output from same or fewer workers or paying workers less in total - or both.

Increasing unemployment (US reported ~9% but more likely closer to 20%) shows direction. Increasing numbers onto food-stamps (~46mio), ditto.

With less income, people have less to spend (der...)

Purchases down mean increased profits can only come from wider margins.

Unless the workers' share goes up, the spiral-down will not stop, just cannot stop.

In a $14trio economy, $1trio spent on bombs-for-export = 7%, which when exploded remove that 'value' from the planet, along with all the innocent 'collateral' lives = murder. This 7% = outright loss, possibly 'compensated' for only if the US can 'harvest' much of the target countries' oil-income (Iraq, Libya (Iran next?), Afghanistan = pipelines, all = US hegemony targeted *at* Russia & China, *for* Israel.)

Of Obama's recent one-time $400bio economy goosing-proposal, only about $150bio is considered 'new' = might create things = 1% possible gain. Compare that to the 7% outright, year-on-year loss...

What else? The only other US exports I can see are from Boeing (more CO2 to f**k the planet's climate) and Microsoft (this article is being written on a lovely PC made in China, almost *crippled* by W7 = total s**t compared to XP, itself hardly problem-free.) Apple makes squillions on marking-up Chinese-made *toys* like iPods (an 8GB 'touch' sells for $10 less than my new netbook), iPhones (Yuppie-toys) & iPads (ditto but as a PC = very expensive, very poor joke.)

Oh, yeah, one other export = neoliberal economics (plus globalisation, supply-side, economic rationalism etc., Wall St. = casino; un-taxing the rich whilst strangling all less-well off = predator economics) - which is ruining the economies of most of rest of the world, as they 'ape' the 'great' US - idiots all.

-=*=-

More of the same?

The 2001 aggressive invasion of Afghanistan (Nuremberg-class), followed by the 2003 aggressive invasion of Iraq (also Nuremberg-class) did not help the US, nor any of its snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on (SQSH-Os) like the UK (and Aus, but Aus has mountains of minerals - for now). So why has the US+NATO, mainly F+UK, now done 'more of the same' = aggressive invasion (Nuremberg-class) to Libya?

US-aggressive-war is clearly (mainly, see hegemony + Israel above) only for $s - but the 1st two outrages did *not* appreciably better the economies of the attacker-countries, so what's up? Mainly-US predator economics seemingly can't live *without* war, but doesn't appear to benefit much *with* war either - more idiots.

Bush (the elder) called Reaganomics "voodoo," because (one thinks) he (+ advisors) could not understand how it might work. But now (been getting evidence all along; some was seen in advance), we have *proof* that it *doesn't* work - because most Western countries are descending into debt and other economic crises = chaos, suggested remedy = austerity (à la IMF SAPs - Perkins' "Economic Hit Man"), building & reinforcing a downward spiral. Looks to me like *no-one* understands it, even the head economist of the ECB has resigned in violent disagreement.

The proof is easy: IF neoliberalism worked THEN no crises. Hmmm?

-=*=-
^
Update 13:13; PS

There's an old expression: "Taxation is theft."

It *certainly* is, unless the money raised, every cent, is spent *responsibly*, on things which bring true benefit to the whole community, like water, sewage, electricity, public transport, roads, phones etc. - all the things capitalism failed at or didn't want 'back in the days,' and which means never to the benefit of anyone who does not strictly need 'community assistance.' Should be clear enough.

Just as "Taxation is theft" - except under strict conditions, so too "Privatisation is theft," where the benefit is *not* strictly to the entire community, exactly as for taxation.

Generally speaking, neoliberalism has skewed the taxation system to the benefit of one certain 'special interest' group = the mostly already (obscenely) rich. Privatisation has worked in exactly the same direction, adding costs (interest, bizarre 'management' fees and obscene CEO payments - whilst reducing employment), effectively robbing the community of egalitarian assets, whilst increasing the cost of the services - water, elec., etc. as above, at the same time reducing the availability (less or no preventative maintenance); if medicine for profit (privatising Medibank, say, or Medicare) - then it's approaching a Crime Against Humanity, and *is* a CAH if/when the poor simply cannot pay.

Again the proof is easy: The rich have made themselves filthy-richer.

THEN consider the 'democratic covenant,' whereby we, the people 'allow' representatives to 'govern' us, also, as for taxation, to the strict benefit of the *entire* community.

The representatives - from both 'sides' - bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic - have presided over the implementation of neoliberalism across 'the West,' with the consequences we can see, and some of us anticipated from '1st sight,' having been Thatcherism + Reaganism, morphed to neoliberalism and its fellow-travellers.

The representatives have put themselves beyond democracy, repeat bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic, and have thus turned themselves into both tyrants and our, we the people's enemy.

[«back»]

Declining Household Income
Real household income has fallen by about 10 percent since the start of the last recession, with a greater decline after the recession ended.

grinding our democracy (as mortally wounded as it is) -> all the way down into the dust

2011-08-26T09:41:00.000+02:00

The mining industry does not fear the MRRT; they are continuing to expand, also as they continue to ship 83% of their obscenely fat profits o/s = the (BIG) lions' share our patrimony gone, lost to us forever.

Citizens have been assured that they will not lose from the carbon tax, but the world will lose big-time if excess CO2 emissions are not reversed ASAP.

Abbott, Hockey, Pine & Co will cripple medicare & flog off medibank, re-introduce a more savage SerfChoices and discover a 'massive budget black hole' which will 'force' = enable them to sink Aus into austerity. If Cameron is doing it to England, Merkel wants to do it to Greece, why shouldn't Abbott want to do it to Aus? He/they will; it's a 'natural' part of neoliberalism = rip the people off, and depress their conditions.

Keep dreaming, pro-Liberal 'rebels' = rabble, just like in Libya.

Yes, you will be 'free' of Labor, this will assassinate them for a generation. But like a dog chasing a car, you don't know what to do (= will have done to you), when you catch it.

After the hung-parliament election, we watched Abbott's month-long tantrum in awe, then watched him + the Libs spit about great, big, new taxes, now the desperation of the Thomson pursuit.

What do they really want; put cui bono into reverse; what is Labor doing that's sooo bad? The Libs' pressure leaves no time to govern = actually run the country; this is worse than the Murdoch-led "Get Whitlam at any price" jihad. Problem for the Libs is that their haste is unseemly, and their methodology deeply injurious...

Lib = Lab in many ways; our democracy is mortally wounded by a) the deliberate dumbing down of the (risible) 'debate,' b) the deliberate lies told by most politicians, and c) the arrogance and out of controledness of representatives once elected, see this:

"Many federal politicians who have spoken about the views of their constituents on gay marriage say they resent being told how to do their job."

Allow me to remind them that their job is to implement the will of the majority while protecting all minorities, *not* just doing as they please. That's in the democratic covenant; representatives acting independent of their electorates' collective wishes are breaking the democratic law = are being outlaws. Tumbrels.

As corrupt as both sides are, nothing quite matches the viciousness of the Libs, they and neoliberalism have far more in common that just a similar name.

Abbott's next wail: "Rinse her blood off my toga!"

Amoral political thug.

it's the oil, stupid! well, of course it was plus US hegemony, as usual via bombs

2011-08-25T21:11:00.002+02:00

.. the pen ...

  .. is mightier ...

    .. than the sword (so they say - proof, please)

Musing, 1: I term myself a seeker of truth and an advocate for justice. I explain this in terms of inner-equilibrium; lies and injustice make me feel bad, so I try to minimise these bad feelings by pointing out the more egregious examples (come in, Sisyphus.)

Musing, 2: There is a tendency to favour 'the underdog,' it 'connects' with (M1) above. In the recent rape of Libya, Gaddafi was definitely at a disadvantage, but I favoured him for other reasons, including a) anyone opposing 'the great Satan' must be far more correct than not, b) Libya had the highest HDI in Africa and c) the Great Man-Made River ... "a network of pipes that supplies water to the Sahara Desert in Libya, from the Nubian Sandstone Aquifer System fossil aquifer. It is the world's largest irrigation project."

Gaddafi built it for 'his' people; no loans, not neo-liberalised. Yet.

"Today, high oil revenues and a small population give Libya one of the highest GDPs per capita in Africa and have allowed the Libyan state to provide an extensive level of social security, particularly in the fields of housing and education."

Now, change that to "Until the US+NATO bombardment ..."

-=*=-

Apart from the 120 or so cruise missiles, seemingly 'hastily' fired due to Sarkozy jumping the gun, the US took a low-profile (but high-power, 'back-room' directing) part in the 2nd oily "shock'n whore" in eight years (over 5 mths = slow-motion), but the damage - so far not shown to us - is, I expect, roughly comparable. A Gaddafi spokesperson was heard, 'they smashed everything. Everything.' Enough from me, get much more here:

Middle East
Aug 26, 2011
THE ROVING EYE
Sweet crude of mine
By Pepe Escobar
  «Meanwhile, from Benghazi to European capitals, the dancing is to the tune of a Guns 'n Roses megahit, now rebranded Sweet Crude of Mine. France and Germany are already pressing the "NATO rebels" leadership for juicy deals, Italy starts today (Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi is meeting Jalil in Milan) and the Brits and the Americans are about to join the fray.»
[atimes/Escobar]

Comment: Sad. Outrageous. That this tolerated is beyond me; the level of immorality of the US+NATO (F+UK et al.) and the un-protesting world is truly shocking. Words fail me.

gratuitous greed cretinous competition recipe for downright disaster

2011-08-22T15:27:00.000+02:00

.. a crime ...

  .. is a crime ...

    .. is a crime, ad infinitum

-=*=-

Preamble; Balzac: Le secret des grandes fortunes sans cause apparente est un crime oublié, parce qu'il a été proprement fait.

wikiquote: The secret of great fortunes without apparent cause is a crime forgotten, for it was properly done.

Me: The secret of great fortunes without apparent cause is some cunning, undiscovered crimes.

Discussion: Although "oublié" translates as "forgotten," it can't be correct since that contradicts "secret." Same with "proprement," a properly-done crime is an *initially* successful execution; the cunning[1] comes in with the undiscovered = permanent invisibility of the exploit. Also, one could replace "is" with "may be," conceding some (tiny) allowance for luck (since 'good management' would contradict "without apparent cause").

Note: Whatever; but a crime is a crime, discovered or not. End preamble.

[update 1, update 2]

-=*=-

Background: When I 1st heard 'greed is good,' I nearly had an attack of the vapours: How dare they?!! Then I heard that it came from an Hollywood film, as if that might be some sort of excuse. Well, we do know that Hollywood + TV portray all possible perversions over time, and here is a quote:

  «I am not a destroyer of companies. I am a liberator of them! The point is, ladies and gentlemen, that greed, for lack of a better word, is good. Greed is right, greed works. Greed clarifies, cuts through, and captures the essence of the evolutionary spirit. Greed, in all of its forms: greed for life, for money, for love, knowledge, has marked the upward surge of mankind. And greed, you mark my words, will not only save Teldar Paper, but that other malfunctioning corporation called the USA. Thank you very much.»
[wikiquote/Gordon_Gekko]

Comment: That worked out well, didn't it? The USA bit, I mean.

-=*=-

Trigger article:

Aug 17, 2011
Ben's promises are empty
By Martin Hutchinson
  «There are two opposing positions on government spending stimulus: the Keynesian position that it stimulates economic growth generally and the Austrian position that by crowding out the private sector it substitutes less efficient for more efficient use of resources and hence retards growth.»
[atimes/Hutchinson]

Comment: A nice, illustrative summary. Another extract is needed:

  «The Keynesian theory of fiscal stimulus, under which random government spending stimulates the economy, is bolstered by one enormous hidden advantage: Keynesians designed the principal measure of economic output, gross domestic product - or GDP.
Unlike private-sector output, which is measured by what markets are actually prepared to pay for something, government output is measured purely on a cost basis, with no accounting for that output's value. Thus if a dozy government wastes $1 billion on rubbish of no value, GDP is said to be increased by $1 billion. Naturally, with that kind of "cooking the books", stimulus can appear to stimulate.
It would be grossly unfair to say that no government output had any value. Indeed the most basic functions of government, national security and the preservation of order, often have a value far in excess of their cost, as sufferers from last week's British riots have discovered.»
[ibid.]

Comment: Now we start to see bias writ large; "random government spending," ... "if a dozy government wastes $1 billion on rubbish of no value..." There's another error here, namely a purported dollar for dollar GDP increase; this ignores the multiplier. I saw an estimate of 1.5 recently, on the low side (I learnt about 2.5), but possible if spending 'leaks' into imports (from off-shore - exactly where lots of jobs went). One more extract:

  «Nevertheless, many government functions have far less value than their cost; if this were not the case, they would already be provided by the free market, without any government intervention at all. Naturally, those government functions carried out as a result of an unplanned "stimulus" to boost an economy out of recession will tend to be less valuable than average, since if a need for them had been seen earlier they would already have been included in the annual budget.»
[ibid.]

Comment: As usual, fallacious arguments may contain true bits, like the bit starting with: "It would be grossly unfair" - but that is both a debating trick and a method of smuggling in more bias ("most basic;" see 'thuggish' below), then "if a need for them had been seen earlier" is outright misleading; often stimulus program-items have long languished in bottom-drawers, for the lack of budget priority.

Comment: Another attribute of the erring ideology (of the anti-government spending mob), is that they tend to condemn govt. as a whole (apart from their 'pet favourites,' like ever more thuggish police and the Pentagon's ultra-expensive toys and murdering for spoil military 'adventures,' and supporting criminal Zs.) Another also, Obama's 'stimulus' spending went mostly to bail-out the banks who caused the GFC and to supporting otherwise unsupportable entities like GM - rather than on useful infrastructure, say, whereby the hapless workers get jobs + $s they spend 100% of (multiplier), and afterwards, the country has 'something in the hand' - as with TVA, or national highway system, etc..

Backing up a bit, we see this: "crowding out the private sector it substitutes less efficient ..." - a, if not the, key argument; too bad that it too is fallacious. It's a govt. function to provide needed services that the private sector *won't* take on, and the argument is self-destroyed by the private sector's feral lust to privatise govt. entities. See Chicago's parking meters.

Swish! - Occam's razor-time.

If we date neoliberalism to Thatcher(1979+)/Reagan(1981+), she of "TINA!" and "there is no such thing as society," and he of "government is not the solution to our problem; government is the problem," we can see not much else but decline; a decline in the people's wages, conditions and service-deliveries, accompanied by the (mostly already) rich getting (ever more obscenely) richer. Recall that we don't do coincidences, and even if we some day might, this poor -> poorer and rich -> richer ain't one, not by a looong chalk. It may be that neoliberalism grew out of Friedman's monetarism, the 'Chicago School,' 'Harvard Boys' or any/all those & more, but wherever (the hell) it came from, what we *do not* hear much of is a) argument against it, let alone b) ways to correct its failures. Because fail it has, most spectacularly. Looks to me like most if not all the economic theories now in vogue are failing. Risk management? Sure, and there goes another stock-exchange crash. (US) house-prices? Crashing. Unemployment? Through the roof, along with medical costs, most other costs (privatised electricity, petrol, say. What was that Rupert? Iraq war = $20,- oil? Bah, and apologist/supporters of crime are considered equally guilty, via the 'accessory' mechanism.)

Another quote from Reagan: "I believe there are legitimate government functions." Bewdy; me too, mate; and those functions have to be properly funded. Problem is that government spending has become an 'easy' target; far too easy, any fool can (promise to) cut taxes, look no further than Abbott.

Swish! - Occam's razor again.

My point; fazit #1: Greed was *never* good (however as a 'driver,' it might work for some). Certainly, it is *not* anywhere near the top of the Darwinian pyramid, recall that human civilisation got its biggest boost with farming = collective, cooperative efforts. Cooperation is clearly preferable to confrontation - the latter being the only neoliberal menu item on offer to us, we the sheople. The ideal, so-called 'free' markets are as good as never free; see the "What's in it for me" voter-seduction/begging, and the myriad exceptions demanded via the lobbyocracy = corrupt political process. Our politicians lie to us, conduited and *actively assisted* by the venal MSM, incl. 'our' AusBC. Doing anything 'for profit' is a virtual guarantee of getting profit ahead of performance, they'll even tell you 'by law;' their task being to produce 'shareholder value' above all else - possibly deadly, if the for profit service is medicine. (No money or credit card? Sorry; and try not to get blood on our carpet on your way out.)

Swish! - Occam's razor, the last for now.

The calls for austerity, heard from almost every corner, are illustrating the bankruptcy of thought 'in power.' Like the old one about crims; Q: Why do they try to rob banks? A: Because that's where the money is. Which, coincidentally, is where lots of rich keep their dough. Wanna 'balanced budget?' - Tax the rich. Hard, but fair[2].

-=*end*=-
^
Update 110822, 08:18; PS Ah, yes. The moral aspect ... in the 1st instance, any moral condemnation, however 'well'-deserved, will bring nothing (but must be made, loud & clear), since the shadowy true rulers order mass-slaughters [Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, etc.] and not only tolerate vile crime, they actually encourage it [Israel, etc.]; they will in turn only respond to force. Speaking of Libya, the rogue-regimes of the US (300mio), France (65mio) & England (50mio) must feel inordinately proud of themselves, having laid waste to Libya (6.5mio) in almost exactly 5 months. Well done US+NATO, a certain Reich would be more than impressed; you have 'well'-earned the next number up (=4th) ...

[«back»]

-=*=-
^
Update 110822, 15:21; PPS I had to do a bit on Libya this morning, as my entry into mourning on Libya's behalf. Wiki: "Libya had the highest HDI in Africa;" since the UN+NATO destroyed Gaddafi (plus his society) for *nothing but $s*, the 'Libyan in the street' may expect some 'slight' fall in general living standards. Oh! Recall Thatcher: "... there is no such thing as society" - especially after such a "shock'n whore;" could be likened to shooting camels from a helicopter - but here it was hi-tech NATO against relatively peaceful, after the US 120 cruise missile assault, essentially unarmed Arabs.

...

But I should get back to the greed/crime theme; switching to another atimes article's concluding remarks:

  «Wall Street was the enabler, but Main Street was the addict. Americans stopped saving as long as home prices rose; when home prices started to fall, they started saving again.
...
That is why the national narrative that Westen proposes is ill-informed, innumerate, vituperous, malicious and false. American households levered a $6 trillion net inflow of foreign savings during the decade 1998 through 2007 into a bubble that benefited them far more than it did Wall Street. The impact of the bubble on the household balance sheet exceeds the growth in real-estate assets, moreover, because most small business expansion followed the housing bubble.
Americans, as I argued on August 2 (The collapse of America's middle class Asia Times Online, August 2) must adapted to a technology-driven global economy, after a decade and a half of riding the crest of the savings tsunami that flooded American markets during the bubble years.»
[atimes,Spengler]

Comment: Phew! Strong words (repeat; "ill-informed, innumerate, vituperous, malicious and false"); talk about bad manners, then blaming the victim. The theme morphs from the govt. planning (more the lack of, or outright error of) to the sheople, their relationship to business, the economy & and here, house-prices. The people must adapt (as if they had some choice), the people are to be *blamed* for housing inflation, blah, blah. Spengler also blames 'cheap imported $s,' causing another near-attack of the vapours. So-called 'cheap imported $s' are also implicated in Aus, but there is a vast difference; for the US they are printed $s being pushed back (nothing much else to do with them), in Aus they are sought after. In both cases, the interest leaves the country, but single-dwelling purchasers cannot benefit (until the final cash-out, perhaps). In the US 'no-doc' (=toxic) loans were a big factor, in Aus it was primarily Howard/Costello's ½CGT, plus the exhortation to 'create wealth.'

Swish! - Occam's still around.

My point; fazit #2: I've no doubt at all, that the 'Wall St. Wizards' think their greed is justified, even inside the law - or at the very least, know that there are no cops on their tail. Law is a construct anyway, and with the law-makers in Wall St.'s pockets, the law can be anything they want it to be. No one talks about justice or morals (except me'n me mates perhaps); but the simple fact is that the rich, mostly already so, just can't get enough, and what they're grabbing is from us, we the sheople (zero-sum 'game').

[«back»]

Ref(s):

[1] cunning  -adj. (-er, -est) 1 deceitful, clever, or crafty. 2 ingenious (cunning device). ... cunningly adv. [Old Norse: related to *can1] [POD]

[2] fair1  -adj. 1 just, equitable; in accordance with the rules. [ibid.]

capitalism's showcase the stock exchange is a gambling-den

2011-08-20T14:21:00.002+02:00

.. infested ...

  .. by speculators ...

    .. and outright swindlers

Thesis/Subtitle: Total failure of our so-called 'leadership' & economic system..

[update 1, update 2 (a bewdy).]

-=*=-

Trigger article:

Shares resume slide on US, Europe financial fears
Online business reporter Michael Janda
Updated August 19, 2011 18:59:14
  «More than $40 billion was wiped off the value of the market - the 3.5 per cent sell-off driven by a combination of weak US economic data and initial moves by Germany and France to introduce a financial transactions tax.
...
The net result of overnight action was a widespread return to the view that the US and Europe would double-dip into recession.
...
ANZ posted $4.2 billion in underlying profits for the nine months to June, a rise of 16 per cent on the previous year, but its profit growth had slowed in the third quarter due to consumer caution about borrowing.
...
ANZ's shares slipped 4.5 per cent to $19.50, while its main rivals posted falls between 2.9 and 3.6 per cent.»
[AusBC/'news']

Comment 1: Oh, dear! 'The market' is crashing - again? No, still.

Comment 2: Note "introduce a financial transactions tax;" it's always amused me that 'the pundits' offer some reason for 'market' movements - as if they could divine the mood of the (investor/speculator) masses (imagine eye-shades, smoky back-rooms), but this one additionally illustrates a propaganda technique, namely pointing the finger at something they don't like, laying the ground-work: “Well, just proposing xx caused a mini-market-melt-down, so we'd better not have any of that!”

Comment 3: The perverse reaction (= falling stock price) resulting from a +ve report (namely a 16% profit-rise as compared to last year) - illustrates the *irrationality* of the (investor/speculator) 'players.'

-=*=-

It gets worse. The 'transactions tax' is aimed largely at computer-trading, whereby computer programs written by the self-termed 'masters of the financial universe' monitor 'the market' (sometimes by outright illegal means, like seeing a big buy/sell order before execution, then trading in advance = insider-trading), exploiting any and all 'market' movements (sometimes quite small), with the clear intention of capitalising on those movements - and, note, thus 'skimming' any potential profit from more conventional trades. So far, (not) so good.

Then we get a few more true nasties, namely short-selling (including the 'naked' variety), and various 'derivatives' - like the CFDs I mentioned here. These nasties are more or less bets, noting that even if 'minimal,' a bet is still a bet = gambling.

More on betting; they say on the one hand, that the EU is coming under pressure, and on the other that speculators are active, not quite making the connection, namely that speculators are gambling against EU countries (PIIGS), and thus the EU itself - actually making an EU-crash more likely. What I don't know and can't imagine, is who these speculators are making their bets with; i.e. who are the mugs taking on the losing side of the bets?

Actually, we can sometimes see such mugs at work; both the Japanese & Swiss 'authorities' have made recent steps to 'protect' their currencies, in direct contradiction of so-called 'free market' theory, and especially in the Swiss case, an impossible task - 7mio Swiss trying to 'fight' the speculators from 300mio US & 500mio EU? Hopeless.

A neoliberal 'article of faith' is that 'the market' is all-knowing; apart from being an obvious absurdity on its face, the irrationality mentioned above disproves it. In like manner, most of neoliberalism can be disproved - yet our so-called 'leadership' continues to push the erring neoliberal ideology upon us, we the long-suffering sheople.

It only takes a moment's reflection on the growing numbers of unemployed, the similarly growing numbers in poverty, and the growing numbers lacking health-insurance (all especially so in the US), the general fear almost everywhere (keywords jobs! Jobs! Jobs!), the deliberately caused house-price inflation (Howard/Costello's ½CGT, say) - to see that since Thatcher/Reagan, things have been getting seriously buggered.

-=*=-

It gets even worse. The lessons learnt from 1929++, the measures developed to recover from the resulting depression, and the measures developed to prevent a recurrence of both have *deliberately* been ignored, negated and/or dismantled.

The stock market and associated banksters, plus a few other hangers-on (insurance, real-estate manipulators) form what's called the FIRE-sector. It is this sector which is *deliberately* destroying our economy, via depredations such as globalisation (= wage depression/job emigration), in addition to their erring neoliberal ideology (privatisations, down-sizing, leaning&meaning) and other terms like 'supply-side' and 'economic rationalism.' Starting sometime before/around/with Thatcher/Reagan, the rich via their agents have pushed the economy further towards a cliff, making life hell for the average wo/man in the street. All deliberate, all planned - with the connivance and active assistance of our so-called political 'leadership' - from both of the mainly two-party 'sides,' noting that bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic. In fact, these people doing us wrong, all mentioned in this paragraph - are our, we the sheople's enemies.
^
Update 110820, 10:51; PS It's not all doom & gloom; some 'people of substance' can see what's wrong, and offer ways out. But 1st, a little aside: There are two words one should be reluctant to deploy, namely 'unbelievable' and 'unacceptable.' Although it may be 'scarcely believable' that such villainy as neoliberalism could be forced upon us by our so-called 'leaders' = 'representatives,' it is nevertheless happening - and besides, believing is defined as 'accepting in the absence of evidence.' Although having neoliberalism forced upon us is definitely not acceptable, it's up to us, we the people to stop it. Sooo, here is a little reading-list containing both back-up for what I have written above (= substantiation), and practical suggestions to 'improve' the world's economic performance. To pre-empt a bit, allow me to repeat one of my 'moral planks,' namely 'do no harm,' and remind that we're all in this together; if a greedy minority were to destroy our world's comfortable life-support system, it's down the tor-let for us all. I locate the error to before/around/with Thatcher/Reagan; apart from "TINA!" (but there always was and still is), Thatcher said: "... there is no such thing as society" (but there is, ditto). Too many 'followed' Thatcher/Reagan, it's a big part of why we're in such a mess. And note that when the mess comes home to roost (recent London riots, say), the reaction from Cameron is the same as all along from our rulers, namely more and vicious repression - again, obviously wrong. The list, publ-time-ordered:

September 6, 2009
How Did Economists Get It So Wrong?
By PAUL KRUGMAN
  «When it comes to the all-too-human problem of recessions and depressions, economists need to abandon the neat but wrong solution of assuming that everyone is rational and markets work perfectly.»
[nyt/Krugman]

Comment: Plus, factor in greed and fraud, and note that if criminals can get away with theft, they will = restore proper regulation, and totally ostracise all immorality.

America for Sale: An Exclusive Excerpt from Matt Taibbi’s New Book on the Economic Meltdown
  «Our cash-strapped country is auctioning off its highways, ports and even parking meters, finding eager buyers ...»
[rollingstone/Taibbi]

Comment: "Cash-strapped" primarily because of tax-cuts, and those mainly off the rich. Any idiot can perform or promise tax-cuts - as Abbott shows us, ad nauseam. The problem is that there are *required* services which cannot be cut; *someone* (= the 'neoliberal' user, as opposed to the community) has to pay, which ignores egalitarian processes, extra unemployment and the introduced interest and gross management payouts; privatise to 'for profit' and expect profit before performance, possibly 'deadly' when it's medicine.

Why Banks Aren't Lending: The Silent Liquidity Squeeze
Friday 15 July 2011
  «Alone among states, North Dakota had the wherewithal to keep credit moving to small businesses when they needed it most. BND's business lending actually grew from 2007 to 2009 (the tightest months of the credit crisis) by 35 percent.»
[truth-out/Brown]

Comment: Truly intriguing; fiat $s are 'printed' at no cost but are loaned out at interest; if the state collects that interest it can use it to pay for *required* services and simultaneously provide the $s for the borrowers to pay their interest-bill, a 'balanced' circulation is possible and an inflation-rate of *zero* targeted, at the same time as lightening the tax 'burden.' May sound like magic, but works very well, for the fortunate North Dakotans. Yes, this implies nationalising the banks - and defeating rogue banksters' depredations at a stroke. No bad thing.

The Market Has Spoken: Austerity Is Bad for Business
by Ellen Brown
August 6, 2011
  «The budget crisis is an artificial one, and the current “solution” will only guarantee a deeper recession and more widespread suffering. Rather than obsessing over deficits and debt, the government needs to turn its focus to jobs, sales and quality of life.»
[globalresearch/Brown]

Comment: The smart-arse US (plus snivelling quisling sycophantic hangers-on) are attempting to defeat some of the immutable laws of the universe, such is their hubris. Of course, it's a fools' errand, but they have the guns - which implies armed theft; pretty close, and see my 'the world's worst terrorists.' Economically, they have in their sights welfare $s = socialism, treated as communism = a disease (in their minds, and as one 'economic argument' they point to Stalin's and/or Pol Pot's murdering and no, that makes no sense at all); other targets are Marx, Fordism & JMK = Keynesian theories. Austerity is not just bad for business, it is guaranteed to make things far, far worse - and is a condemnation of those who are trying to force it, being IMF, the target's own politicians or externals like Merkel & Sakozy et al.. The only viable countervailing solution to austerity may be tumbrels for the push-perpetrators.

Economic Hubris - Fixing the economy: We got it wrong
by Prof. James K. Galbraith
August 15, 2011
  «To go further, let's admit that our problem is not budget deficits or public debt — not now and not later. Let's agree that cutting Social Security and Medicare — inflicting pointless pain on the elderly — will not help. Let's build a new financial system to serve public purpose and private business. And let's start to act on our actual needs and problems: jobs, foreclosures, public investments, energy security and climate change.»
[globalresearch/Galbraith(son)]

Comment: Sound words.

August 19 - 21, 2011
Guard-Dogs for the Banks
The Case Against Rating Agencies
By MICHAEL HUDSON
  «To acquiescence in such economically destructive financial behavior is the opposite of fiscal responsibility. Cutting federal taxes and Social Security payments to obtain a more positive S&P “opinion” would give banks an ability to “pull the plug” and force privatization and anti-labor austerity plans by refraining from rolling over the U.S. debt – and cutting taxes Tea-Party style rather than funding spending by taxation on a pay-as-you-go-basis.»
[counterpunch/Hudson]

Comment: As usual; one should read all of the citations through - I did; not all may be pertinent and/or correct - but it's better than nothing, and nothing would be far better than neoliberalism - which is killing our economies, for all except the rich, super-rich & the obscenely rich.

The obvious place to start is to tax those rich back to reality, and restore social justice - even if that gets up the greedies' collective nose & bugger Reagan, Thatcher and all such neoliberal tyrants.

[«back»]
^
Update 110820, 14:21; PPS Examine this 'just in' one, at your leisure:

Titanic Battle or Insider Trading?
The S&P Downgrade and the Bilderbergers: All Part of the Plan?
by Ellen Brown
August 18, 2011
  «The latest bet was made on July 21 on trades of 5,370 ten-year Treasury futures and 3,100 Treasury bond futures, reported ETF Daily News.
Now the investor’s gamble seems to have paid off after Standard and Poor’s issued a credit rating downgrade from AAA to AA+ last Friday.
Whoever it is stands to earn a 1,000 per cent return on their money, with the expectation that interest rates will be going up after the downgrade.
...
The Securities Exchange Commission announced on August 8 that it is investigating the downgrade. According to the Financial Times, the move is part of a preliminary examination into potential insider trading.
Whatever can be said about the first two weeks of August, their market action was unprecedented, unnatural, and bears close observation.»
[globalresearch/Brown]

Comment: Have to laugh; includes/extends themes above + here, here, here & here. Note the word "bet," and the possible return; again one poses the Q: Who takes up the losing side of such bets, why, and in this case, how can they possibly pay up? Tip: Never gamble, if you can't afford to lose.

After you've read it all, make you go 'hmmm?'

[«back»]

the world's worst terrorists mostly infest the middle east as aggressive invaders, murdering for spoil

2011-08-20T08:15:00.001+02:00

.. Afghanistan - pipelines ...

  .. Iraq, Libya - oil ...

    .. Israel - soil

Thesis/Subtitle: If the boot fits, wear it.

[update]

-=*=-

The definitions of invade[1] and aggression[2] could not be clearer; IF some armed entity crosses a border inbound and proceeds to plunder, pillage, ransack, loot etc. the hapless target country, THEN there is neither excuse nor other words for it, it's criminal on the Nuremberg scale.

It's what the Zionists did and are still doing to Palestine following UNGA181; latest after Plan Dalet and the Deir Yassin massacre, the world community should have intervened and banished the aggressively invading Zionists back to whence they came. Elementary justice demands that be done.

It's what the US plus sycophants did and are still doing to Afghanistan following 9/11 (itself a whole topic of its own; three towers can *not* fall unassisted - no, not jet-planes, but pre-planted explosives); the US intent was even pre-publicised: 'Carpet of gold or bombs!'

It's what the US plus sycophants UK + Aus et al. did and are still doing to Iraq following a lying 'WMD' propaganda campaign.

It's what the US plus NATO sycophants F + UK et al. did and are still doing to Libya following an half-arsed 'revolution' and a lying 'protect civilians' propaganda campaign.

Fazit: There is no effective international law - the proof is obvious.

There are only smash and grab criminals (US, Z rogue regimes plus snivelling quisling sycophants) murdering for spoil.

The big question is Q: Why is this tolerated?

-=*end*=-
^
Update 110820, 08:15; PS Israeli terrorism did not end on Nakba Day, but has been relatively constant since the alien invading Zionists 'invented' modern terrorism; see outrages like King David Hotel bombing (91 people were killed and 46 were injured) and USS Liberty (killed 34 and wounded more than 170 crew members). Today we hear on our morning radio news bulletin that the IDF is performing revenge attacks on the hapless ELO/Os trapped in the open-air prison that is Gaza. The Zs are a primitive bunch, self-proclaimed victims of persecution who have now completely assumed the mantle of their persecutors; they have transformed themselves from victims to perpetrators of evil. What one can do is a total BDS against Israel, and it would not harm to inform any/all Js of your acquaintance that IL behaviour is depravedly criminal, and (repeat) that the aggressively invading Zionists and descendants should leave Palestine to return to whence they came, and revest all improperly alienated land & property = *all* of IL. That the UN, US, UK et al. do not terminate IL criminality and grant justice to IL's victims is a mark of utter corruption.

[«back»]

-=*=-

Ref(s):

[1] invade  v. (-ding) (often absol.) 1 enter (a country etc.) under arms to control or subdue it. 2 swarm into. 3 (of a disease) attack. 4 encroach upon (a person's rights, esp. privacy).  invader n. [Latin vado vas- go] [POD]

[2] aggression  n. 1 unprovoked attacking or attack. 2 hostile or destructive behaviour. [Latin gradior gress- walk] [ibid.]

'making' $s sounds good like turning lead into gold

2011-08-12T11:29:00.001+02:00

.. investing ...

  .. or gambling ...

    .. with your savings

Thesis/Subtitle: Money doesn't grow on trees - does it?

-=*=-

Trigger article:

ASIC seeks more disclosure on CFDs
Finance reporter Alicia Barry
Updated August 12, 2011 15:54:25
  «The corporate regulator is cracking down on providers of complex financial products called 'contracts for difference'.
CFDs, as they are known, allow investors to effectively bet on the price movement of a financial asset, without owning a share of that asset.
...
On a separate issue of financial market control, the corporate regulator says its not going to follow Europe's lead and ban short selling to reduce market volatility.
Short selling allows investors to effectively make bets on the price of stocks falling.»
[AusBC/'news']

Comment 1: Note the keyword: "Bet" = risk a sum of money on the result of a race, contest, etc. [POD]

Comment 2: 'Short selling' is where an 'investor' borrows a stock from someone then sells it to some 3rd, in the 'hope' (expectation?) that the price will fall, so the investor can buy the stock back and return it, pocketing the difference (less the cost of the borrowing, typically the interest on the 'value' of the borrowed stock, but as low as the interest on the deposit made with the original owner, if that owner allows 'deposit only' borrowing, aka a sort of 'leveraging.') The risk the investor takes is if the stock goes up; the hoped-for profit turns to loss, again the difference in price, plus the borrowing-costs. Another name for 'short selling' is speculation. It helps the speculator, of course, if the fall in price is assured = no risk! (Like insider-trading, say.) No discussion here of where any 'profit' might came from, i.e. who loses.

The next step is 'naked short selling,' whereby the borrowing is omitted and what's exchanged is nothing but a promise to deliver some 'asset;' if the turn-around is fast enough, no actual asset is needed. Naked short selling looks like CFDs and probably is not just 'like' but actually is; note that one of the ways to bamboozle people is to give some shonky racket a fancy, complicated name.

Observation 1: This story tells us that the ASIC allows gambling on the stock exchange.

Observation 2: This story also tells us, based on the timing, that gambling had a non-trivial part in the latest stock exchange crash; not stated is if gambling was all or part of the cause, or 'merely' all or part side-effect.

Observation 3: Gambling is deliberate exposure to risk; not something that I wish to have associated with my savings = part of our family's life support system.

-=*=-

More? - CFDs are 'derivatives,' not 'real' = physical things, but 'things based on things,' i.e. derived, hence the name. Easy? Well, the next step is to consider not just derivatives, but the 'money' used to trade them, as also 'not real' therefore virtual, and the fact that total derivative trading is estimated at some figure like 500Trio = orders of magnitude more than the GDP of the entire world, then this might explain why 'the Fed' stopped publishing the M3 statistic; it was becoming 'polluted' with some of these 'virtual $s.'

A big part of the recent GFC were 'derivatives gone wrong,' and one part-solution was the bank bailouts; those plus other 'fiddles' (the QEs, say, but more and not so visible) - are reputed to have 'pumped' something in the order of 15Trio into 'the financial system,' effectively replacing lost bets made largely in virtual $s - by 'real' $s, putting real in quotes because the Fed merely created the 15Trio on a computer keyboard = conjured it out of thin air. But recall that $s are fungible, which means that it is hard-to-impossible to discern between real $s & virtual $s.

Side note: With all these $Trios floating around, it's no wonder that the stock exchange goes mostly up. Think of unending supplies of 'funny money,' then think how hard you have to work, and how even harder it is to save for your non-working future.

Recently I used the term 'PPT' without explaining it; it stands for 'Presidential Plunge Team,' and means some shadowy US agency which can act as 'buyer of last resort' in an attempt to halt big slides on the stock exchange. Note that they don't even have to have any real $s, they can just keep buying, then selling again on the way up. IF it goes up, that is; Murphy tells us that if something can happen THEN it eventually will = one day, the crashing stock exchange simply won't recover, no matter how it's 'goosed.'

uk riots 1984 vs. clockwork orange

2011-08-11T16:51:00.001+02:00

.. what do ...

  .. each have ...

    .. in common?

A: Dystopian societies largely caused by oppressive governments[1,2].

-=*=-

Yes, rioting = berserking; smash and grabbing, etc. are criminal.

Yes, outrageous; hear the calls for 'tough measures,' and the cynical politicians' responses, and their (weak) excuses.

But #1: Rioting = berserking; smash and grabbing, etc. are *exactly* what the US, UK, Aus etc. did to Iraq, are now doing to Libya.

Sauce for the goose.

But #2: I read a comment:

  « ... The majority of people I have talked to in the streets (shopkeepers, small businessowners, waiters and cab drivers) point unequivocally to the causes being the rioters' overinflated sense of entitlement mixed with a complete lack of respect for others and a jeering contempt for authority, especially the police, who have been crippled and neutered by political correctness and a fear of offending the scores of competing minority groups.»

IMHO: Too much, too slick; obviously a propagandist/pro-oppression apologist-troll at 'work.'

Whatever the rioters' motives are, the riots themselves are proof of the UK government's total failure.

A long time ago, possibly before Thatcher but definitely since and including her, governments - plural, at least the regimes in US, UK, Aus and others, all regimes which ape the hideous, erring neoliberal ideology, such governments *chose* to oppose the people's interests, and things will only get worse until these tyrants are removed.

A proper "of, by, for the people etc." democracy requires at least these three; 1) an informed & engaged electorate, 2) full & free info-flows, and 3) a wide range of honest candidates who, if/when elected, represent the electorate by implementing the will of the majority, protecting any minorities. Our, i.e. US, UK, Aus and other such 'pretend democracy' rogue-regimes, fail all three. Deliberately dumbed-down citizens, distracted by trivia & disinformation on TV, corrupt & venal MSM (did anyone mention Murdoch?), and most representatives sell-out to the highest bidder, usually corporations but worst-case, the "Israel Lobby."

It gets worse. The 'democratic covenant' has been and is being deliberately violated; under such circumstances any laws a corrupt regime attempts to promulgate are invalid. Here, consider the 'war on drugs.' What any citizen chooses to imbibe in privacy is none of any 3rd party's business, consumption of drugs can only harm the user (see Abbott's support of 'big tobacco'), and there are plenty of laws against any 'drug-taker' side effects - just as there are plenty of laws against rioting.

It has already been alleged elsewhere, that the rioting is a result of cutting social spending; that's only a minor, if true, part.

It is the job of governments to arrange and run society, it's what they are there for.

Repeat: Whatever the rioters' motives are, the riots themselves are proof of the UK government's total failure - to do what they are there for; and the riots are just the merest sampling of the unhappy populace (those not dozing, sated on take-out/home-delivered pizza, before their flickering flat/wide TVs, that is.)

Since TINA-Thatcher at least, governments have worked for and on behalf of those with the most $s, namely the rich and the corporations (big end of town), and have, wherever possible, cut spending, reduced services both societal (medical, welfare, education) & infrastructure (privatisations), so much so that governments have become - made themselves - the public's enemy.

Governments know all about this, because they are doing it all on purpose. It also explains why the police = the enforcers, are being conspicuously militarised.

-=*end*=-

Ref(s):

[1] Dystopian societies feature different kinds of repressive social control systems, various forms of active and passive coercion. [wiki]

[2] oppress v. 1 keep in subservience. 2 govern or treat cruelly. 3 weigh down (with cares or unhappiness). oppression n. oppressor n. [Latin: related to *press1] [POD.]

borderline miraculous

2011-08-10T10:01:00.001+02:00

.. loaves ...

.. and ...

.. fishes, sort of

-=*=-

'The market' (= global stock markets, emphasise 's') has recovered, seemingly everywhere synchronised, reportedly based on a *non*-event, namely that 'the Fed' has committed to *not* changing its %-rate regime, and *not* embarking on a QE3 = printing ever more $s.

I've often suspected that the stock market is hardly more than a casino, and that reports attempting to explain its ups and downs were largely invented. Ho, hum; what about this spectacular 'market' recovery?

Even if it was a herd phenomenon, how did the herd synchronise?

Were the squillions of individual 'investors' (= punters) all just sitting around listening to their trannies, and then the signal of the Fed's non-event come through, and they all flipped from their panic/funk-sell mood into rabid buyers?

Mind you, optimism is under a bit of stress lately, due to lower than expected GDP growth, lower than expected employment = lower than expected demand, etc., but since the corporations are reporting profit growth and the wealthy are getting visibly even more wealthy, globalisation + neoliberalism are reducing the wages share by design (proof = otherwise the corporations wouldn't be doing it), it cant be too many 'workers' stimulating the stock market, or even able to buy much beyond basic food.

In the middle of this doom & gloom scenario, with stock-prices falling as much as 5% or so per day - suddenly a non-event triggers a buying spree everywhere. Talk about irrational exuberance.

Beats me. But then, I'm not a punter.

pigs

2011-08-09T21:39:00.002+02:00

'Trigger' article:

'No evidence' London man fired on police in riots catalyst
Updated August 10, 2011 04:46:46
«"At this stage there is no evidence that the handgun found at the scene was fired during the incident," said the Independent Police Complaints Commission (IPCC) in an update on last Thursday's fatal shooting in Tottenham, north London.
Reports initially suggested Mr Duggan had shot at police.
...
The IPCC said that two shots were fired by one firearms officer, and a post-mortem examination revealed that Mr Duggan received a gunshot wound to the chest, which killed him, as well as a second gunshot wound to his right bicep.
A bullet was found lodged in one of the police officers' radios and a non-police issue handgun was also recovered from the scene.
Ballistics tests have now revealed that the bullet lodged in the radio was police issue, "and, whilst it is still subject to DNA analysis, it is consistent with having been fired from a gun used by the police.
The handgun found at the scene was a converted an illegal pistol, but it was not used in the incident, the tests also reveal. Further examination is being carried out.»
[AusBC/'news']

Magic!

2011-08-09T15:33:00.001+02:00

{Spectacular share rally on stimulus speculation
Online business reporter Michael Janda
Posted August 09, 2011 17:02:44 | Updated August 09, 2011 20:37:32

The Australian share market and dollar staged spectacular turnarounds on speculation of more US stimulus.

Topics:business-economics-and-finance, markets, money-and-monetary-policy, international-financial-crisis, currency, stockmarket, futures, australia, united-states, asia}

The 'market' suddenly 'reversed' just after lunch ("well after noon") - from >-5%, ending +1%.

IF magic THEN one might suspect of the criminal type,

.. perhaps a local version of the PPT ...

.. or merely multiple G&Ts.

Nah, it was Clancy:

"And, Clancy, you must wheel them, try and wheel them to the right."

Clancy: "Sorry, mate - any further right, they're over the cliff..."

So they all turned left, and were saved.

We will do everything to restore order: Cameron snipers on the roof, tanks in the streets artillery pieces being positioned ..

2011-08-09T14:29:00.000+02:00

.. to fire on the citizenry ...

  .. "of all skin colours;" ...

    .. no Jihadis, please - we're English

-=*=-

[update]

30-40 years of - primarily abuse and neglect - dismantling social programs, letting speculators rip (house prices through the roof, rents closely following); Thatcher's TINA followed by Blair's class & justice treachery (not to mention war crimes, Cameron now also 'on board'), neoliberalism destroying whatever industry the poor poms could manage (recall Jaguar cars being sold with a one-button mobile-phone as 'cost-free' accessory? Push that button; tow-truck should arrive 'sometime after the boys finish lunch at the pub?')

England will now get a 'make-over;' it will finally resemble N. Ireland during the 'troubles' (caused primarily by the aggressive English invasion of the sovereign territory of the lovable potato-famine punished Paddies.)

The 'final solution' for apprehended miscreants will be transportation - the next 'asylum seeker' flood.

-=*=-
^
Update 14:29; It gets worse; try this:

  «"Let me completely condemn these sickening scenes; scenes of looting, scenes of vandalism, scenes of thieving, scenes of people attacking police, of people even attacking firefighters.
"This is criminality pure and simple and it has to be confronted...»
[AusBC/'news']

Comment: Cameron is talking about riots; one imagines triggered by some perceived injustice(s). What about the economic-crimes Thatcher, Blair and now Cameron don't merely permit, but actively encourage? More widely, the Anglo/Judaic regimes - there is neither difference nor separation between the US, UK, Aus & IL - have laid waste to *our*, we the people's civilisation, going back to the Greeks and forward through, now the neoliberal destruction of, the Enlightenment.

Yet where are those who will condemn, let alone bring to justice, our 'noble-lying' tyrants?

[«back»]

erring ideology cost push, demand pull takes two to tango: the tyrant and the snivelling quislings

2011-08-09T11:51:00.003+02:00

.. bad things are happening ...

  .. because good people ...

    .. don't speak up

Thesis/Subtitle: Effective countervailing power - where is it?

Preamble: As a friend says: "It is not simple;" but I know of no problem that cannot be broken down into ever-smaller parts until you get to the elementary 'binary-cut' situation, in fact that's exactly what digital computing is all about. Yesterday I wrote of one example, namely one form of either/or; here's another: Either most people are criminal or they're not. I prefer the latter, but the former are in control. Why that, and who will rid of us of these vile tyrants?

-=*=-

Musing: 'Narratives' are fake histories or actual plots; criminals use narratives to coordinate the lies we are continually being swamped with. Today is the 9th of August, 66 years since the 2nd atomic bomb was dropped on a mainly civilian target in Japan (Don't agree? Then you may try this.) The twin crimes against humanity, the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki plus the day before Nakba Day are days of wicked infamy, as 'local maxima' these have few peers.

-=*=-

Article 1:

Obama says US is still a AAA country
Updated August 09, 2011 05:04:22
  «"Markets will rise and fall, but this is the United States of America. No matter what some agency may say, we have always been and always will be a triple-A country," Mr Obama said.»
[AusBC/'news']

Comment: Obama sounded like Muhammad Ali: "Ah am the greatest!"

You try it: 'There is Amerika - the greatest!'

Answer: Perhaps. But greatest what?

Article 2:

Unesco chief criticises NATO attack on Libya broadcaster
Aug 8, 2011, 18:10 GMT
  «According to Unesco, three media workers were killed and 21 were injured in the July 30 attack on the Libyan broadcast facility.
The NATO military alliance justified the attack on the basis of protecting civilian population. The action against the pro-Gaddafi satellite television, NATO said, was a means of preventing the intimidation of the Libyan population and calls for violence against civilians.»
[monstersandcritics/dpa]

Comment 1: How odd is it, that the (corrupt & venal) MSM is not covering this story?

Comment 2: I mentioned *hearing* this story the other day, via a taxpayer-funded broadcaster; I found no transcript at the time. The lady-newsreader looked only slightly uncomfortable, before the scene-shift.

Comment 3: The major problem here is, of course, that the US/NATO (mainly F + UK, but DK, N & other 'rabble') - are out of all civilised control and are aggressively attacking (innocent) 3rd parties, mainly Arab/Muslim, at will.

-=*=-

My theme here is erring ideology, and the criminals forcing this disaster upon us. The disaster is doubled; war (aka geo-politics) and theft (aka economics, mainly neoliberal). The (mainly US) warmongers risibly claim to be "Making the world safe for democracy," and the (mainly US) economists + politicians claim TINA = "There is no alternative!" - but both claims are 101% bogus - as any *clear thinker* may see, assuming any such take the trouble to look.

I should not need to cite proof, but: on war/disasters, nearly 1000 US bases spread around the world, aggressive attacks becoming even more numerous (from Vietnam to Libya, a looong & dirty list), the Zionist armed theft of Palestine; on economics/disasters, neoliberalism almost everywhere; some forced by the IMF (Perkins' "Economic Hit Man"), some *voluntary*(!!?) (Aus, say, by *both* Lib & Lab; bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic), notably currently the debt-crises in USA, EU and probably almost anywhere else you care to look. As examples of economic chaos, The USA (as usual; world 'leader'), is hard to beat, with (my quick estimates from recall), 25mio un- or under-employed, 40mio without health insurance (most expensive, least cost-effective system in the world), and a similar 40mio on food-stamps.

I'll say it again: No more wars for spoil; *all* foreign-deployed forces to retire back to behind their own domestic borders, and *all* aggressively invading, land-thieving Zs (plus descendants & dependants) to return to whence they came. On economics, dump the pure-greed, rip-off voodoo, get back to civilised & enlightened JMK & JKG.

Article 3:

Bringing on the "Obama Recession" by Forgetting the Lessons of Keynes and FDR
Friday 5 August 2011
by: David Woolner
  «It is sad to think that history may be repeating itself. But the apparent decision of this administration to embrace cuts over spending may soon lead the President down the same path that FDR took in 1937. Only this time the “Obama recession” of 2011-2012 will most likely cost the current president his job.»
[truth-out]

Comment; Q: Who cares if Obama loses his job? He can be number 25mio+1. But note that voting someone out is almost perfectly useless, after they've done the damage... (and/but, it was far past time that Howard (so ignominiously) went; what took the mugs so long? That Abbott is now polling well shows no lessons whatsoever learnt, it's one reason and proof of why I write 'dumbed-down sheople.')

Comment 1: Of course, it's not just 'this administration' or even 'this Congress;' it's the multitude of economic berserkers running under the foul neoliberal flag.

Comment 2: It has been clear from the beginning, that down-sizing, lean&meaning, off-shoring, out-sourcing etc. was only ever going to lead to tears, and you can imagine the utter horror of any worker when the MBA-consultants turn up with their clip-boards to do their dirty neoliberal 'work' of destroying once-viable enterprises & teams of once happy workers. Austerity, like mass un- and under-employment, many in 'scraping the barrel' service jobs - all lower wages (the plan) and thus demand, which 1st leads to and then accelerates the downward spiral. Which is, by and large, where the US, 'the West' plus others are now. The wreckage left by 30-40 years of erring ideology = neoliberal destruction is visible - to those who bother to look.

-=*=-

It's all so screamingly obvious; if I can see it (basically a casual observer), what of the better informed and educated? Why do world so-called 'leaders' outside the US - like Merkel, say, accept the hideous 'perfect' storm of unjust resource-war & rip-off economic disaster? Are they all coerced and/or intimidated (snivelling quislings) - or do they actually agree (criminals) that their populations be devastated?

But few to no one listens.

I cannot accept that the criminals are the majority.

It's why I implore; where is the effective countervailing power?

binary cuts à la Occam's razor dump the deficit distraction

2011-08-08T10:51:00.001+02:00

Cut any object (with one swish! of Occam's razor, say), one gets two pieces = a binary cut, i.e. either/or.

Example of either/or: Either properly fix the idiot political/economic system or crash the planet, financially and environmentally.

I suspect a terminology ('framing') problem; to cut a deficit (as both Repuglicans & Dummocrats say, also Libs/Labs; bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic), one must reduce social spending; since one cannot possibly reduce US military spending (the US would have to stop murdering for spoil = oil, and the Zs ditto for soil), so they have to cut 'entitlements' = more or less required social spending = medical/dental (alternative = preventable illness, disease & loss of teeth or whole lives), income support (alternative = preventable 'malnutrition' = cat-food or starvation), education (alternative = preventable ignorance = dumbed-down idiocy), safety regulation (alternative = preventable accidents), financial regulation (alternative = preventable GFCs), etc..

We've had 30-40 years of voodoo economics = supply-side, economic rationalism, neoliberalism, globalisation, etc., and almost all the world is almost everywhere worse off - time to junk the voodoo. Idiots.

The blame may be attributed to three classes of idiots; 1) the economists, 2) the politicians, and 3) any voters who tolerate any part of the prior 1&2. But the voters can't wear much blame, since their dumbed-down idiocy was mainly deliberately inflicted upon them, via their (incomplete if not misleading) schooling, their TVs (Hollywood's portrayal of all possible perversions), and the corrupt & venal MSM, who both conduit *and* actively assist the almost continuous stream of lies coming from the above 1&2. Hollywood + MSM 'infotainment' = the pushed propaganda paradigm; almost nothing is as they say it is (i.e. 'making the world safe for democracy'); note what they do = resource-wars = murder to steal, and the mostly already rich are getting ever more obscenely richer.

Economic phrases we hate to hear: Balanced budget, tax&spend, deficits, then 'service-cuts' & privatisations. Arguments (not debate) are often simplistic to misleading, to the point of being insulting to aware intelligence. Any idiot can promise to cut taxes (see Tony Abbott, say.)

We might need some semblance of balance over the long-haul (but see % below), however the current practices are producing chronic deficits, possibly none larger that those of the US, both domestic & external.

"On Saturday China, the largest foreign holder of US treasuries, had slammed what it said was the US "addiction" to debt.
In a stinging English-language commentary carried by Xinhua, China said it had "every right" to demand Washington address its structural debt problems and safeguard Chinese dollar assets.
"To cure its addiction to debts, the United States has to re-establish the common sense principle that one should live within its means," it said."
[AusBC/'news']

Recall that whatever else the US govt. is, it *should* be able to afford the best possible advice on the planet - but what a spectacular failure they demonstrate.

Note: Common sense = *not* voodoo.

-=*=-

The voodoo system has *failed*, as we can all see, but all they talk about are cuts and austerity = misery for most.

But there is one simpler way (Occam's razor; swish!) = tax the rich.

Yep; that'd do it, swish! = slash them back to reality.

Forget about trying to lower the bridge (= cut required, civilised spending); provide a rising-tide with fat-cats' properly increased taxes.

By definition, governments (should) provide required services that private enterprise can't or won't; take fresh drinking-water for everyone, or sewage, electricity, phone lines, roads, railways & public transport... education, and vitally medical/dental. The basic principle is egalitarian, what the individual can't, or private enterprise won't, is provided collectively, paid for by *fair = progressive* taxation.

Also by definition, give (= flog-off for a comparative pittance) any function to private enterprise, you get a for-profit regime whereby profit will always be preferred over performance (see Telstra's 'service obligation' and how that's avoided/abused/refused.) Also see that extracting profit adds to costs, and any claimed efficiencies may be compromised by the lean&mean, see electricity-bills going through the roof, and trees falling onto that roof = power-outages after any storm over fart-strength.

But there is additional simpler way (Occam's razor; swish!) = nationalise the banks.

Yep; that'd do it, swish! = slash them back to egality.

Even before going off 'real money' = gold etc., all 'printed' money is fiat but not only, all (new) money exits banks as %-bearing loans. Some old money lands back in banks as deposits to 'earn' some %, always (on average) at some lesser rate. The banks live of the %-difference, and what a comfortable living they 'allow' themselves - but the % is rent on money, a sample of what JMK was referring to when he recommended 'euthanasia of the rentiers.' Very few seem to notice that *no* money is created to pay the interest itself, so the end result is that the interest-bill balloons.

But if the banks are nationalised, the government collects the interest, which it can then spend on required items (see above), simultaneously reducing the amount by which the rich must be taxed. (Q: Why tax the rich anyway? A: Because they've got most of the money.)

Also, one of the insulting voodoo/neoliberal 'debate' items alleges that the rich must be ever-better 'rewarded,' because they create the jobs - see massive unemployment in 1st-world nations, especially the US. That worked out well, didn't it?

Tax the rich & nationalise the banks = two 'easy' ways to save the (financial) planet. Then begin effective moves on reducing atmospheric CO2 to below 300ppm.

eternal war never-ending suffering who cares, as long as the rich prosper?

2011-08-07T17:11:00.001+02:00

.. keep jobs scarce ...

  .. keep education low ...

    .. never run out of 'grunts'

-=*=-

May d*g bless the thieving & murdering US, and all snivelling quislings. No one else will - nor should they.

Article 1:

Was the Bombing of Hiroshima Necessary? Three Myths Debunked
Oliver Lee (6aug'11)
  «The hard truth is that the atomic bombings were unnecessary. A million lives were not saved. Indeed, McGeorge Bundy, the man who first popularized this figure, later confessed that he had pulled it out of thin air in order to justify the bombings in a 1947 Harper's magazine essay he had ghostwritten for Secretary of War Henry L. Stimson.»
[antiwar/takepart]

Comment: Read it all; no further comment.

Article 2:

The Great Hiroshima Cover-up
Greg Mitchell
August 3, 2011
  «In the weeks following the atomic attacks on Japan sixty-six years ago this week, and then for decades afterward, the United States engaged in airtight suppression of all film shot in Hiroshima and Nagasaki after the bombings. This included vivid color footage shot by U.S. military crews and black-and-white Japanese newsreel film.»
[antiwar/thenation]

Comment: Read it all; Q: What did they have to hide?

Article 3:

The Hiroshima Myth
by John V. Denson
  «The best book, in my opinion, to explode this myth is The Decision to Use the Bomb by Gar Alperovitz, because it not only explains the real reasons the bombs were dropped, but also gives a detailed history of how and why the myth was created that this slaughter of innocent civilians was justified, ...»
[antiwar/lewrockwell]

Comment: Read it all; justified? IMHO not and never.

-=*=-

Fazit: Ask yourself this: Why do you accept the status-quo {US super-power; its war-machine plundering the planet (with illegitimate Z-side-kick plundering Palestine), its economics system = rip-off neoliberalism destroying our livelihoods and living-standards, its filthy lies smothering all (good) morality},

- and IF not THEN what are you doing about it - where 'it' = saving our once jewel-like planet?

moral cretins battle of ideas criminality wins - in US, is then exported

2011-08-07T12:39:00.001+02:00

.. do unto others ...

  .. never do harm ...

    .. it's not too hard - for normal people, i.e. *non*-psychopaths[1]

Thesis/Subtitle: The phrase "you're either with us, or against us" and similar variations are used to depict situations as being polarized and to force witnesses and bystanders to become allies or lose favour. The implied consequence of not joining the team effort is to be deemed an enemy.

-=*=-

Preamble: It's easy enough to identify villains; all one needs to do is observe somewhat carefully, seeing clearly what they do and not paying too much attention to what they say, since lying (for crims) is easy; lies are the entry-point to serious crimes like cheating, stealing & murder.

I like doing 'binary splits' as in 'with or against' above, but recall one of my mates: "It is not simple." Consider then, a 4-split: 1) with, 2) against, 3) don't know and 4) don't care.

Posit: When we're considering truth & justice, only 'with' counts; don't know and don't care merge with against. For emphasis: Only people who actively agitate *for* truth & justice are OK-people, all others, i.e. against, don't know and don't care = *enemies* - of humanity.

Objection(s)? We the people are forced to surrender our sovereignty by 'the system;' the bargain (democratic covenant) is that the leaders work in our interests. Since they're demonstrably not doing so, we have now to *force* them to behave. This forcing requires us to work together (looping); see 'with or against' above.

-=*=-

Villain article #1:

Truman Lied, Hundreds of Thousands Died
By davidswanson - Posted on 05 August 2011
  «On August 6, 1945, President Harry S Truman announced: "Sixteen hours ago an American airplane dropped one bomb on Hiroshima, an important Japanese Army base. ...
...
When Truman lied to America that Hiroshima was a military base rather than a city full of civilians, ...»
[antiwar/warisacrime]

Comment: In serious issues, a single lie destroys credibility completely. There were many more lies; IMHO the 'best-fit' theory includes a) they could and they'd payed for it, b) they wanted contrasting 'live' data Uranium vs. Plutonium, and (mainly) c) they wanted the USSR to see the US (bad) 'morality' in action.

Villain article #2:

Fighting Back Against The CIA Drone War
By: Muhammad Idrees Ahmad
July 31, 2011 "The Nation"
  «They call it “bug splat”, the splotch of blood, bones, and viscera that marks the site of a successful drone strike. To those manning the consoles in Nevada, it signifies “suspected militants” who have just been “neutralised”; to those on the ground, in most cases, it represents a family that has been shattered, a home destroyed.»
[ICH/nation.com.pk]

Comment: The US' barbarity knows no bounds.

Villain article #3:

Meet the Right-Wing Hatemongers Who Inspired the Norway Killer
Why were America's Islamophobes able to avoid accountability for so long?
By Max Blumenthal
August 03, 2011
  «Asymmetrical warfare has been witnessed in theaters of war across the Muslim world, leaving tens of thousands of civilians dead in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Gaza Strip. The strategy was formalized in the Dahiya district of southern Beirut in 2006, when the Israeli military flattened hundreds of civilian structures and homes to supposedly punish Hezbollah for its capturing of two Israeli soldiers.»
[ICH/alternet]

Comment: The Zs have been 'allowed,' by the UN (mainly US & UK influence) - to steal an entire country; deploying terrorism, ethnic cleansing and genocidal policies. The UN should have stopped the process, no later than Plan Dalet & the Deir Yassin massacre.

Villain article #4:

US calls for unity after credit rating cut
Updated August 07, 2011 09:02:45
  «Washington's allies in Europe and Asia rallied behind it, warning against overreaction to the downgrade, but China, the largest foreign holder of US treasuries, slammed US "addiction" to debt.»
[AusBC/'news']

Comment 1: Here, one might consider US 'allies' as snivelling quislings; these 'allies' support *and adopt* US economic policies, just as they support *and adopt* the US military policies.

Comment 2: It's been a shameful spectacle; the Republicans and Democrats together refusing to cut military spending, refusing to increase taxation (to target the filthy rich), Obama extending the Bush tax-cuts and wars-for-spoil, even starting new wars. All the time the US infrastructure decays, unemployment and poverty increases, not to mention the drastically expensive, for-profit medical system the less-well-off are excluded from, and the only expenditure either major party will cut is on social programs. The only policies either will support are pro-war and anti-enlightenment - and these are the so-called 'world leaders?'

-=*=-

Musing: Here, as with 'with or against' truth & justice, one may be 'with or against' US+Z murdering to steal militarism, 'with or against' US-inspired rip-off neoliberalism, then there's the excess-CO2 caused climate-change catastrophe, one may be 'with or against' excess-CO2 prevention/cure.

Fazit: The villains will not change themselves - they are getting all they want, from a system they've so constructed. We the people have to unite and force beneficial change - or lose the lot.

It's easy enough to see what needs to be done; start with eliminating the lies, cheating, theft & murder; take our democracy back.

-=*end*=-

Ref(s):

[1] psychopath  n. 1 mentally deranged person, esp. showing abnormal or violent social behaviour. 2 mentally or emotionally unstable person.  psychopathic adj. [POD]

economists with red faces politicians with blood on their hands voodoo = 'rational' theft, pentagon = murder for spoil

2011-08-06T16:51:00.005+02:00

.. stagflation ...

  .. supply-side ...

    .. 'rationalist' lies

Preamble, 1: A rising tide lifts all boats.

Preamble, 2: A smaller slice of a bigger pie can be larger.

Preamble, 3: Both of the above are premeditated, filthy lies.

Preamble, Q: Why do I have to do this?

Preamble, A: Because the economists both won't and can't; the academics/teachers have sold out and the graduates lie to us.

-=*=-

Trigger article 1:

US credit rating cut for first time ever
Updated August 06, 2011 14:25:44
  «The United States' credit rating has been cut for the first time ever, with Standard & Poor's lowering it from AAA to AA+, citing the country's looming debt and deficit burden.
S&P attached a "negative outlook" to the new rating, despite a push back from the White House which said its analysis of the US economy was deeply flawed.»
[AusBC/'news']

Comment; Q1: What took this rating agency so long? The US has been broke for years.

Comment; Q2: What would the White House know? It/they are part of the cause, and like all politicians, they lie pretty-well continuously.

Trigger article 2:

Better than expected jobs figures for US
Updated August 06, 2011 09:39:00
  «LISA MILLAR: On a more wider front do you think that the economy is changing at all? Is there any optimism out there for people like yourself?
DIANE PITTS: No, I don't think so. I think it's getting worse. I don't see anything changing.»
[AusBC/'news']

Comment 1: PITTS is a 'vox-pop;' basically a useless method of gaining information; contrast with professionally organised polling, whereby they need to carefully select a thousand of so interviewees. Nevertheless, "thinking it's getting worse" is 100% correct, and has been 100% correct since the 70s at least.

Comment 2: Expecting a 0.1% change out of 9% to be significant, *especially* when the 9% is considered by many to be a lie, with the correct number being around 20% is bizarre. The 0.1% could merely be a statistical artefact - but they talk it up = more lies.

Trigger article 3:

US job figures temper market free fall
North America correspondent Lisa Millar, wires
  «RBS Morgans private client adviser Ken Howard says the market is being driven by sentiment, which makes forecasting the future tricky.»
[AusBC/business]

Comment: What's sentiment got to do with anything; the neoliberal market is *supposed* to know all!!? But then there'd be *no* stock market crashes, eh?

Trigger article 4:

Market tumble sparks super fears
By Ashley Hall
Updated August 06, 2011 11:08:53
  «Fears of another global downturn wiped more than $50 billion off the value of the Australian share market yesterday - a slide that would have been particularly worrying for retirees and people planning to give up work soon.
People living on a superannuation pension or the proceeds of a share portfolio say they are already struggling to pay the bills.»
[AusBC/AM]

Comment 1: Slick-Johnnie Howard was a great one for encouraging share ownership, for one reason at least, he needed mugs to buy shares in privatised entities like Telstra. In other words, Howard pushed the people into gambling with their savings = future retirement funds, onto the stock market. Even if people don't buy in directly, their super funds do it for them - hence the widespread, *justified* fear.

Comment 2: One of the reasons given for privatisation was a alleged shortage of investment 'opportunities,' and getting the people to buy shares forces them to have an interest in how the privatised entities perform. Hence, as in the case of the monopolist Telstra and electricity, water, gas etc., when share-holders get ripped-off on their bills, they can offset that - but only minimally - by any dividends they may then get. The major factor in buying shares in some shonky operation is to get an interest in perpetuating the shonk. Do anything for profit and you'll most likely = 99.9% get profit before performance by default; service levels usually drop and prices go up. Maintenance is minimised, now any storm above fart-level blows lines down all over the place = service *outages*.

Comment 3: Another of the reasons given for privatisation is that public-servants can't run chook-raffles and bludge continuously - but after privatisation, many such are hired back on as sub-contractors; lower head-counts, lower wages, lean & mean; stress, stress & more stress - but the same now ex-public-servants. Oh yes; plus a few management-types also remain, again the same now ex-public-servants, but now fabulously rewarded for their 'genius.' You work it out.

-=*=-

It doesn't take much genius to see that neoliberalism is bad news for most, and after 30-40 or so years of it, the proof is in, well in. No surprise; it works as designed; the rich got/are still getting richer, and many of the poor are well on their way to serfdom - so Q: Why don't we have a revolution? A: Because those most affected are (no apologies) the dumbest; they got that way partly by choice (TV-watching is just sooo easy); but mostly by being deliberately lied to, i.e. "Competition/free markets are good for *all*!" (See Preamble 1 & 2, say.)

Disclosure: I'm not one of the poor serfs, but neither am I an obscenely rich fat-cat ripper-off type. It means that I'm *not* motivated by wealth-envy (as r-whinger trolls are apt to fallaciously assert), rather by outrage at the lies, unfairness & outright criminality of many of our 'leading citizens.' Also, whereas there are undoubtably some lazy, skiving public-servants and some unnecessary bureaucracy, it's no reason to paint all govt. black. Proper management would help, but the neoliberalist erring ideological thrust is to junk all government, kill-off all govt. services - all govt. everywhere - except the 'security industry' = police, spies & military = 'enforcement' thugs, liars & killers.

The rich got/are still getting richer by two main pathways, a) by benefiting from the general business shonkiness (greatly helped by deregulation, say, and typified by the motto 'greed is good' - but which isn't), and b) by being largely, newly untaxed. Both a&b arise from the rich having purchased the sell-out politicians, justifying it all by the sell-out academics/economists' and think-tanks' erring ideology. Nowhere is this more clearly and criminally illustrated than "The Israel Lobby."

-=*=-

Suck it up; move on!

If we imagine our situation as a brick wall, we started out with a largely white one, the white having been provided to us by history; influenced by The Enlightenment (Liberté, égalité, fraternité, say), the struggles for justice for workers (8-hr day, etc.), the fall-out of the 1929 stock exchange crash/depression, and the post WW2 'good times' of the 50s & 60s, and the then apparently-OK "of, by, for the people etc." democracy.

Each time we the people lost some 'skirmish,' a brick in the wall turned black. Keywords: Supply-side, economic rationalism, neoliberalism, globalisation. We had/have no effective choice; representatives purporting to be working *for* us either 'allowed' some change (deregulations, or simply bad laws - ½CGT, SerfChoices) or actually did the bad deeds (privatisations, service cuts etc.). The only effective say we are usually left with is to de-elect; note, *after* any damage is done. Too bloody late, mate! Yes, there were the odd occasions when the voters chose their own poison in advance; Howard's never-ever GST resuscitated being one of them. A regressive tax, sold with lies; to 'set us free?' Perhaps Howard meant following "Arbeit macht Frei." How he must have laughed! Now, our wall is mostly black; suck it up, move on!

-=*=-

Some way-points:

1. August 6 and 9, 1945, respectively; the twin atomic-bombing war crimes.

2. May 15, 1948++, Nakba Day. The UN, mainly US+UK, allowed the aggressive Z-invaders to steal an entire country = Palestine. 2nd greatest crime of the century.

3. August 15, 1971, the Nixon Shock = US-bankruptcy, end of Bretton Woods.

4. December 2, 1972, Election of the 1st Whitlam govt, plus subsequent construction of the original Medibank.

5. November 11, 1975, Aus' day of political infamy. Among the corrupt goings-on was a 100+ day campaign against Gough by Murdoch's theAus.

6. 1979-80, first TINA-Thatcher & voodoo-Reagan governments.

7. 1983 to 1996, Hawke-Keating Government, neoliberalism for Aus.

8. 1996 to 2007, Howard Government, aggressive invasion of Iraq.

9. March 19 2011, latest US (NATO; F, UK & +) attack against Libya.

10. August 06 2011, US credit rating cut for first time ever, exactly 66 years to the day since making themselves the world's #1 pariah; unlikely ever to be contested - except possibly by the equal #1, the I/J/Z-plex. After all, *someone* has to be 'top-shit.'

-=*=-

No free lunch?

From The Nixon Shock [ibid.]:
  «By the early 1970s, as the costs of the Vietnam War and increased domestic spending accelerated inflation,[1] the U.S. was running a balance-of-payments deficit and a trade deficit, the first in the 20th century.»

Q: What's changed?

A: Not much.

This is how the US$-racket works:

The US (Fed, other private banks) 'print' fiat-$s, conjuring them out of thin air = nowhere. The $s are loaned to trading entities, and are spent on local goods & services or imports; Mercedes cars or oil, say. Local $s go around in cycles, landing in banks as deposits, 'balancing' part of the loans, but 'earning' less % than the borrowers pay = 'normal' bank business, and what a good (= more than enough) business it is. Part of the (assumed) profit made by the borrowing entities is paid in interest, a 'normal' business expense always passed onto the customer (not incidentally, making things *more* expensive). So far so 'normal,' hardly different than any other country - BUT: The US, from those very same 70s, has been running an ever-widening trade-deficit (as their govt. now runs a chronic domestic-deficit.)

Deficits result from wanting more than you can pay for, but what gets Greece into trouble is 'business as usual' for the US; how/why?

The chronic govt. domestic-deficit should hardly need explaining; politicians simply *love* bribing voters, so there is always a demand-pull tending to expand govt. spending, and all people hate paying taxes, so there is always a cost-push depressing govt. income. Easy-peasy, and as Abbott repeatedly demonstrates, any idiot can promise to cut taxes, or oppose taxes like mining & climate taxes, which might a) get us a fair share of the mining boom, or even b) save the planet from an excess CO2 climate-change catastrophe. Ho, hum; thanks, but "No, thanks!" for your ultra-cynical populism, Tony. Not that Rudd/Gillard are actually delivering what we the people need, but some thoughts are there. Another note; 'best of a bad lot' is still bad, what we really need is the absolute best, fat chance in current environment.

Also please note: By no means all govt. spending is on bribes; specifically, egalitarian-access to necessary medical & dental services, plus income-support for all below an acceptable income-earning capacity is a *requirement* of any civilised society. (As is 100% govt. paid for, *truthful, comprehensive* education, as far 'up' as necessary. An education system, apparently as any other system, dependent on patronisation will go corrupt. Proof is our economists.) Any arguing against, or actually cutting services below a civilised minimum - should be 1st ostracised, 2nd locked up if not 3rd shot, as unfeeling, power-mad psychopaths. But that is *precisely* what most Republicans are demanding, and many Democrats (incl. Obama) are delivering; bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic. Again, they can only get away with such due to the dumbing-down of the public, via *and actively assisted by* the 4th estate = corrupt & venal MSM, incl. 'our' AusBC.

-=*=-

The chronic foreign-deficit can be explained partly so:

If the US had only one single industry left, it would be armaments. As it is they have a few other arrows left in their quiver; namely Boeing, Microsoft & Apple. Boeing's aircraft are not at all bad (my current favourite is 777, but the A380 is a winner.) Microsoft makes lots of $s, while delivering *extremely* shitty product (this article being produced *in spite of* W7. A beautiful piece of hardware, crippled by MS - boo!) Apple makes extremely successful = extremely expensive toys; the people are to be condemned for wanting = buying such marginally useful rubbish (excepting Nano-G3.)

To the Mercedes/oil case, as an example for generalisation.

The Germans make Mercedes cars, screwed together by Turks in Sindelfingen (me: Sifi.) They sell some to the US, getting $US in return. They, (all sorts of Germans), like zipping along their (some still non-speed limited) Autobahns, for which they need fuel = pay with $US. When the fuel is all gone, they have to go and make another few Mercedes cars, repeat.

The $US are traded for fuel from the multi-national oil companies; mostly US but some UK and F, instantly explaining the NATO attacks on Libya, B, B & H's attack on Iraq, Afghanistan for pipeline-routes - Iran next? But note, this ties in with 'murder for spoil,' the other major one being Zs' mayhem/plunder of Palestine.

The current price (note, not value) of oil is around $80 in EU/USA ($120 tapis; what's the diff?) The cost of FOB delivery in the ME was estimated in 2003+/- at around $1 only. The difference is the profit pocketed by the oil-multis, another explanation for Iraq, etc., and also called 'economic rent.' This is one reason why JMK called for euthanasia of the rentiers, and similar to what Rudd was aiming for with the MRRT.

The $s generated by the oil-trade are, not surprisingly, called petro-dollars, and even though the oil-resource owners get a miserable pittance (just like us, we the sheople in Aus, vis-à-vis the mining boom), still a lot of $s accumulate - which are often swapped for arms, mainly US, and when not then 'stashed' by buying US-treasury bonds.

Repeat this analogy with Chinese manufactures; US-jobs off-shored & out-sourced, big profits accumulating in China, Japan, etc. - again stashed as US-treasuries. In a word: Trillions.

All the $US sloshing around the world are effectively useless to the holders, and (recalling oil-burning = up in smoke, as exploding bombs) are roughly equal to the US external deficit = free lunch, not only but also breakfast, dinner & desert.

One more repeat: All those useless $s cost *zero* to print.

All the US bombs can do is blow things up = destroy and kill.

All this is neoliberalism = rip-offs + militarism = murder for spoil.

Fazit: *Despite* the free-lunch they've given themselves with the $US oil-racket, despite the *trillions* of otherwise useless $s held by supplier-nations, the US is still going broke - because, in the end analysis, they won't properly tax their corrupt rich. The purchased-politicians and the corrupt & venal MSM lie to us continuously, as the US & Z militaries continuously kill to steal. What a world!

Where are the effective, countervailing resistors?

-=*end*=-

ENOUGH! - NO (MORE) WAR!

2011-08-05T17:29:00.001+02:00

Would the aggressive invaders kindly return to behind their own frontiers, please?

Trigger article:

Gaddafi's son killed in airstrike, rebels say
Updated August 05, 2011 19:50:21
«A rebel spokesman said a NATO air attack killed 32 people, among then Moamar Gaddafi's son Khamis, who serves as one of the main commanders of the Libyan leader's military forces.»
[AusBC/'news']

Comment 1: IF Gaddafi's son Khamis is a commander THEN he's defending his country against a fake 'rebellion,' backed by alien invaders = NATO, itself a puppet of the US, with prime-poodles Sarkozy(F) & Cameron(UK).

Comment 2: Who will rid us of this pestilence (US, NATO(UK, F), Zs etc.)?

A: Not the UN (Ban Ki-moon, Russia, China et al.), they 'allow' it.

A: Not Germany; they 'tolerate/support' it.

A: Not England; they're in it.

A: Not France; they're in it.

A: Not Norway; they're in it.

A: Not we the people; we have no say.

But it's murder for spoil (again? No, still); at Nuremberg they hanged such wickedly criminal perpetrators.

Q: There must be reasonable people in this world; enough to call *effectively* for truth and justice;

WHERE ARE THEY AND WHY ARE THEY SILENT?

the economy is basically sound! rule: never talk it down but not this time

2011-08-05T13:59:00.001+02:00

.. Nixon: "I am not a crook!" ...

.. but Oh, yes he was ...

.. as are all his successors

-=*=-

"Earlier stock markets across Europe had all closed more than 3 per cent down as economists warned of the chance of a fresh global financial crisis sparked by the fear of European debt contagion spreading to Italy and a lack of confidence in the US economy."

Comment 1: Why are economists warning? No-one in this 'business' does anything without a plan, so why talk it down? Against all rules.

Comment 2: Please explain "European debt contagion spreading," i.e. exactly how/why what happens in one country (Greece, say) may affect another (here, Italy)? All these countries (PIIGS + B, UK, more?) are being *pushed* into crisis.

"Even so-called defensive stocks such as Telstra and Woolworths were down 2.4 and 2.7 per cent respectively, as investors fled shares for cash."

Comment 3: For every seller there's (still?) a buyer.

Comment 4: How does anyone know what drives the herd? Except to say that fear-mongering works.

What we know:

1. Since the US 'went broke' = off gold on August 15, 1971, effectively all currencies have been 'fiat;' money being created by the stroke of a pen, or these days on a computer keyboard (= 'printing').

2. The $US became the world's reserve currency, effectively backed not by gold but oil. Almost all oil is denominated in $US, notable exceptions being (temporarily) Iraq, say, and see what happened to them.

3. It is a 'normal' function of central banks to determine the quantity of money on the 'Goldilocks' principle, i.e. neither too few nor too many, but 'just right;' determined as a function of inflation. The RBA sets a 'headline' target of 2-3% - but why not zero?

4. The inflation figures are fiddled; substituting lower-cost items for increasers, like chicken instead of beef (end result for pensioners = tinned cat-food, anecdotally.) They also omit rents, as if sleeping under a bridge was an 'acceptable substitution.'

5. Asset inflation cannot be 'quarantined,' however much they might try; $s are fungible and any/all inflation means too many *printed* $s.

6. After inflating madly, Aus house-prices seem to have hit a 'natural' = affordability limit. (Inflating mostly thanks, but "No, thanks!" to Howard/Costello's ½CGT; Aus house-prices went through the roof, as are *privatised* electricity costs, etc..)

7. All bubbles eventually collapse, this having been known at least since 1929. Perhaps this stock-market 'correction' is a true collapse, but again, why are most/all commenters talking a crash *up*?

-=*=-

More:

1. 'Real' $s: There are none. Under 'fractional reserve banking,' the trading banks have 'real money' reserve-accounts (originally share capital, say) in the 'national reserve bank,' and are allowed to create some multiple of 'credit money' which they then loan out to customers, typically businesses (or home buyers.) All money loaned attracts some % = interest. Since $s are 'fungible,' no distinction can now be made between 'real money' and 'credit money;' all $s in circulation attract interest - even when deposited as a credit, any interest paid by banks is (on average) less than that charged on loans. Apart from minimal and reducing bank-overheads (function/jobs off-shoring, down-sizing, going ever-more lean&mean), loan-interest is a stealth tax, passed on to us, we the people, disguised as a 'cost of business.' Nevertheless, stealth or not, a tax is a tax, and fiat-$s cost *nothing* to print.

2. Speaking of taxes, ever since TINA-Thatcher and voodoo-Reagan, politicians have been cutting taxes, mostly off the rich, and at the same time cutting public services and privatising public enterprises, most despicably needed utilities like water, sewage & electricity = neoliberalising. The absolute worst is pushing privatised medicine; do anything 'for profit' and you will get profit before performance. All knowingly, cynically done; and when the doing gets tough, hand the job to the so-called 'progressives,' since they purport to be the people's friends; when progressives neoliberalise, the stunned people are more likely to 'accept' it. Note that bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic.

As a truly disgusting example, see the latest 'stunt' by Obama; cutting deeply into welfare whilst hardly touching the military, let alone requiring the filthy rich to shoulder even part of their responsibility-share.

3. Whatever; any idiot can cut taxes (see Abbott), but cutting services = neoliberalising takes longer so there's a lag; voila: Debt crises -> wicked austerity. All done on purpose.

-=*=-

Intermezzo: Anticipating Perkins below, the US plus hangers-on are increasingly attacking innocents, mostly Arab/Muslims in the middle-East, not by happenstance where lots of oil is, plus an illegitimate rogue state living on stolen land. These aggressive invaders, short-handed as the US-M/I/C/4-plex, their accessory-thugs NATO and the I/J/Z-plex are now killing with impunity to steal resources = oil, land & water.

The 4 stands for 4th estate, aka the corrupt & venal MSM. Even publicly financed broadcasters are 'in it' = relaying and *actively assisting* the propaganda, 'perfectly' typified by reporting on the vicious, illegal NATO bombing of Libyan TV; the newsreaders saying (my paraphrase; transcripts *not* available): "NATO had to destroy Libyan TV to protect civilians." Risible = criminal, the bombing and the reporting both.

Apropos the AusBC, it/they have drastically reduced the opportunity for feedback/comment; as one example of many, the unleashed-forum commenting time now cut to minimal tending to useless, favouring the quick-draw pro-war, pro-Z & pro-crime propagandist-trolls.

-=*=-

But what is the end-game? People going broke everywhere, following deliberately caused unemployment; the wages/salaries portion dropping like stones, govt-service reductions, costs soaring, always fewer $s for the people, going on ever increasingly expensive items.

Perkins' "Economic Hit Man" explains the process (IMF SAPs; forced onto 3rd world, same process being done *voluntarily* by so-called democracy-leaders); then when all else fails, send in the military - Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya, etc.; when Merkel dragged the IMF into the EU-crisis, I knew she was being bad, and nothing good would result. See 'as are all his successors.'

Most people's money has now long been committed; forced savings being their only possible savings, and most of the forced savings landing in the stock-exchange (or investment-housing for the better-off savers.) If stock- and house-prices now crash, affected savings will be wiped out - the people will have less for the future, as well as being on the limit now. Who's winning? Not us, we the people. Yet the financial system is presumably working 'as designed,' by the 'geniuses' in parliaments, Wall St & (corrupt!) universities. It must be so, since they *made* it so.

And the banks, with their fat-cat shareholders, are already obscenely rich - on printed = intrinsically worthless fiat-$s. Yet they still want more, and will probably get it - shortly after this current little 'shake-down' subsides.

no flash nags, please just for the record, we just want to get the facts

2011-07-31T17:51:00.001+02:00

.. how to ...

.. get rid of ...

.. 'install flash' nag

How to get rid of 'This website wants to install the following add-on: Adobe Flash Player'

Easy to do, but took some time to find:

W7/ie9: <l-clk> Tools, <l-clk> ActiveX Filtering [so it gets a tick].

Method found here, following tip in dslreports.

Thanks, Cudni.

[keywords added: windows 7 starter, chiliGREEN netbook N570]

portraying all possible perversions Manson ... Bryant, Breivik Hollywood 'pure'

2011-07-25T13:59:00.015+02:00

.. evil is as evil is seen to do ...

  .. follow the 'leaders' ...

    .. the US and Zs

Thesis/Subtitle: We suffer under 'leadership failure' in two ways; a) we are shown bad examples by our so-called 'leaders' and far worse b) leadership itself is absent in a tyranny - which is where we are.

Preamble: As if the tragedy in Oslo/Utøya wasn't bad enough, it is already being used - by villains - to further their own crooked agendas. This article is my reaction-response to these vultures (Newton's 3rd; seeking truth & justice). The very first thing to note is the outpouring of outrage/grief, some of it real and some of it confected. That's one big problem right there; Q: How can we know what's real and what's not? One A: As ever, consider cui bono?

(For some 'background,' see Musing.)

[updates, 110727; article continued, 110729; article concluded.]

-=*=-

Trigger article #1:

Huge explosion rocks central Oslo
Europe correspondent Rachael Brown
Updated July 23, 2011 02:25:40
  «A large explosion has hit the Norwegian government's headquarters in Oslo, killing at least two people and injuring fifteen.
...
Witnesses say the city is in panic, with people fearing further explosions. As yet, nobody has claimed responsibility for the suspected terrorist attack.
...
A gas leak was initially suspected to be the source of the explosion, but local police have since confirmed it was caused by a bomb.»
[AusBC/wires]

Comment: At that time, writing "suspected terrorist attack" may have been justified.

Trigger article #2:

Twin attacks leave Norway reeling
Updated July 23, 2011 05:47:02
  «Militants have staged twin bomb and shooting attacks in Norway, ... with police saying they have no clue who or what is behind the attack, but media reports the gunman behind the shooting has been arrested.»
[AusBC/AFP]

Comment: Note "Militants" and contrast with "police saying they have no clue."

Trigger article #3:

25 July 2011
This is not a crazed loner, this is a terrorist
Waleed Aly
  «When Jared Lee Loughner walked into a town hall meeting and unceremoniously gunned down a Chief District Court Judge and a Congress Democrat in January this year, the most conspicuously absent word in public response was "terrorism".
Hilary Clinton went close, calling Loughner an "extremist" and drawing a parallel with extremism in the Middle East. But overwhelmingly, Loughner was deemed dismissed as crazy - much like Norway's Anders Behring Breivik who has now admitted to killing 90 people on the weekend.»
[AusBC/unleashed]

Comment: There is now a 'terrorism industry;' the AusBC and Waleed Aly are 'players' = participants, as are most politicians, the MSM & police - and the burgeoning 'security' industry.

Note some keywords: Militants, extremist, Arab/Islam/Muslim, Middle East [About 381,000 results (0.28 secs)]

-=*=-

Intermezzo: It takes some time to draft a post such as this, but I'm forced to publish this 'momentarily' (i.e. now, to be completed later) and as is, by the arrival of another article;

Trigger article #4:

Media rushed to judgment in Norway attacks
PM
Ashley Hall
Updated July 25, 2011 21:05:33
  «In the aftermath of the twin attacks in Norway, there has been some strident criticism of the speed at which sections of the media linked the attacks to Islamic terrorism.
...
Mr McClellan, a former television current affairs reporter, says it is not only the tabloid media - the BBC and other organisations do it as well.»
[AusBC/news]

Comment: As for the BBC, so the AusBC - see 'Militants' above.

[more to come ... hint: Manson ... Bryant & Breivik are psychopaths, perhaps the biggest problem we the people face. No, not these (thankfully) few and rare bomber/killers, but other psychopaths - who are many, and in far more powerful positions.]

-=*=-
^
Update 110727, 15:39; blog item continues ... as a good friend says: "It is not simple." Here, think 'tangled web.'

Article #5:

Norway killer praised Australian conservatives
Jeremy Thompson
Updated July 26, 2011 20:35:27
  «Accused Norwegian mass murderer Anders Behring Breivik praised four Australian conservative leaders - including former prime minister John Howard - in his 1,500-page manifesto.»
[AusBC/news]

Comment: Also praised were Costello, often (erroneously) referred to by 'our' AusBC as 'Australia's greatest treasurer,' Windschuttle (of Howard's culture wars) and Pell (a so-called 'Christian leader.')

Article #6:

Exploiting a Tragedy
By Stephen M. Walt
July 25, 2011
  «Norway certainly did not buy itself much grace from the jihadis for staying out of the Iraq war, or for Prime Minister Jens Stoltenberg's demand that Israel open its borders with Gaza, or for his calls for a Palestinian unity government between Fatah and its terrorist cousin Hamas.
Norway can do all this and more, but in jihadist eyes it will forever remain guilty of being what it is: a liberal nation committed to freedom of speech and conscience, equality between the sexes, representative democracy and every other freedom that still defines the West. For being true to these ideals Norwegians have now been made to pay a terrible price.»
[ICH/Walt]

Comment: The 'snip' quoted by Walt was published by *Murdoch's* Wall Street Journal as part of an opinion piece, original article now modified - itself an act of vandalism; once published such rubbish should stay wherever it was put, as a record. As such a record, here is a photocopy thanks to Ali Gharib via ICH/Walt [ibid.].

Article #7:

The Greater Threat: Christian Extremism From Timothy McVeigh to Anders Breivik
By Pierre Tristam
July 25, 2011
  «Timothy McVeigh, meet Anders Behring Breivik. Those two jihadists—two right-wing reactionaries, two terrorists, two anti-government white supremacists, two Christians—have a lot in common, down to the way the massacres they carried out were first mistaken for the work of Islamists by an American press rich in zealotry of its own. And they have a lot more in common with the fundamentalist politicians and ideologues among us who pretend to have nothing to do with the demons they inspire.»
[ICH/flaglerlive]

Comment: We can see how 'not simple' = tangled - and fraught - our situation is.

One more article, #8:

Self-taught hacker charged over NBN attack
AM
Simon Santow, staff
Updated July 27, 2011 13:01:30
  «An unemployed truck driver who allegedly gave himself the online nickname 'Evil' has been refused bail over what police say could have been Australia's biggest hacking attack.»
[AusBC/news]

Comment: Note the "could." The article is full of conditional language; it seems that the 'alleged' hacker had not (yet) done any harm - although having boasted he 'could.' Clearly, prevention is better than cure ('see tiger = run'), but until actual harm is attempted, all we really have is a potential threat. The 'alleged' hacker was under observation, both by the 'target' and the police - but how far will the police venture with their 'observations?' Then, recall Murdoch's NotW telephone (and what other?) spying. In a different but associated direction, how far off are we from "thought-crime?"

-=*=-

Discussion; Stoltenberg:

"No one will bomb us to silence. No one will shoot us to silence. No one will ever scare us away from being Norway" ...

IMHO, it's an odd thing to say, but reminiscent of "We don't negotiate with terrorists!"

terrorist  n. (often attrib.) person using esp. organized violence against a government etc.  terrorism n. [French: related to *terror] [POD]

This article started with Manson ... Bryant, Breivik, now add McVeigh.

Manson (~1969) was no terrorist (... violence against a government), but he certainly was mad = crazy = psychopathic, as are all who set out to kill humans - with the single exception in the case of self-defence in the face of immediate & mortal danger (didn't apply to the aggressive 2003 invasion of Iraq, say, nor Libya 2011 ...). Interestingly enough, Manson was "convicted of the murders through the joint-responsibility rule, which makes each member of a conspiracy guilty of crimes his fellow conspirators commit in furtherance of the conspiracy's object."

Comment: Pay attention, all criminal accessories!

McVeigh (~1995) "later decided to bomb a federal building ... [which] was the most destructive act of terrorism on American soil until ..." [wiki]; he "sought revenge against ... hoped to inspire a revolt against what he considered to be a tyrannical federal government" [ibid].

Comment: Fits the terrorism definition, but not the usual MSM 'militant / extremist / Muslim / Arab' profile (AusBC -> WSJ).

Bryant (~1996) "was convicted of murdering 35 people and injuring 21 others in the Port Arthur massacre, a shooting spree..." quite (reversely) reminiscent of Breivik's (who has "admitted responsibility" - lawyer).

I assume any competent psychiatrist (assuming the existence thereof) would certify all of the above perpetrators as insane. Recalling 'prevention is better than cure,' Q: What, if anything, is being done to *prevent* insanity = psychopathy? A: AFAIK, *nothing*; to the contrary, by 'portraying all possible perversions,' TV presents incipient psychopaths with a convenient menu of 'means and motives,' that plus the politicians' 'hate speech' (Tampa, Haneef, etc.) means the crazies are left looking only for an opportunity. Backing up a bit, the use of TV as baby-sitter almost guarantees the failure or total lack of socialisation; a recipe for disaster (ever had to deal with a litter of unsocialised kittens?)

Refer my original statement: This article is my reaction-response to the vultures attempting to twist a catastrophe to their own advantage. I advocate for a *better* world, with cooperation instead of confrontation, less crime rather than ever more lying, cheating, theft & murder. The trends established by "the Enlightenment" have, sadly, been reversed; Q: How & why? A: By greedy psychopaths seizing power, to enrich themselves and/or their 'mates.'

[«back»]

-=*=-
^
Update 110729, 10:51; blog item concludes ...

Article #9:

Seeing 'Islamic Terror' in Norway
by Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR)
July 25, 2011
  «Right-wing terror suspect Anders Behring Breivik reportedly killed 76 people in Norway on Friday, by all accounts driven by far-right anti-immigrant politics and fervent Islamophobia. But many early media accounts assumed that the perpetrator of the attacks was Muslim.»
[globalresearch/FAIR]

Comment: As usual, one should read the article, in this case it's an extension to my list of articles vis-à-vis utterly biased MSM coverage, concentrating on the US. Competent people paying attention will be aware of the media's treachery; it's the unaware ones who are the worry. No democracy ("of, by, for the people etc.") can ever function properly if voters are deceived - as so many are, deliberately and with malice aforethought.

Article #10:

Homebuyers shut out until 2020
AM
By Sue Lannin
Updated July 28, 2011 14:24:52
  «Mr Phillips says housing in Australia has become severely unaffordable and will remain so for at least the next 10 years.
He says house prices in Sydney only increased 83 per cent, citing that a lot of their price increases happened in the 1990s.»
[AusBC/news]

Comment #1: On it's face, this article has nothing to do with Oslo/Utøya/Breivik, just as the 'Self-taught hacker' article has little to do with media or terrorism. But. My headline includes 'portraying all possible perversions;' trying to hack into some ISP violates the elementary injunction "Don't touch things not yours." Moreover, the perpetrator may not have intended harm but that's unlikely to save him; he will be made to feel "the full force of the law," as he's "the country's first solo hacker to be arrested." A 'message' must be sent, an example demonstrated.

Comment #2: What house-prices do have to do with, is the governments (of both Lib and Lab in Aus, nominally left/right or progressive/conservative elsewhere) - actions *against* the people's interests. Time was, when an average house cost appr. ~2.5 times an average annual income; what the cited article shows is a range from over 5 to over 8 with 'outliers' of 4.3 & 10.2. The greatest 'kickers' to house prices were Howard & Costello's halving of the capital gains tax, plus (mainly imported) low interest rates, with Hawke/Keating's negative gearing fiddles only a side-show. Recall it was Breivik praising Howard & Costello, probably for their barbaric stance against 'boat people' = Tampa etc.. Not only is our situation 'not simple,' the forces arrayed against us are 'united' (bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic) as the M/I/C/4-plex, in a word: Fraught.

Comment #3: It's enough. Failing effective, countervailing action, we the people and our once jewel-like planet are headed down the tubes = into the tor-let.

[«back»]

-=*end*=-

Musing 1: It's always someone else's fault. We can see that the M/I/C/4-plex forms a closed circle, each with hands in others' pockets. There are two other subsidiary components, namely religion & academia; both 'cooperate' with the 'main actors' with religion smoothing the way (by rights, they should condemn aggressive war unconditionally, and forbid any believers to participate), and academia 'developing' *and* teaching the crooked theories = erring ideology. Here I refer mainly to neoliberalism; we can see the effects almost everywhere and 'prime proof' of its purpose is seen with the obscene enrichment of the mainly already filthy-rich, with 'intended' side-effect of govts going broke - even, or especially, the US; and the forced introduction of austerity = killing of 'welfare entitlements.'

Bah! So much for 'civilisation;' Hi ho, hi ho, it's off to serfdom we go (are pushed).

-=*=-
^
Musing 2: One attempts to understand how the world works; one observes, one ponders. The process begins at a young age, here's a great example:

"What's that Daddy?"

"It's a ship."

One notices that the answer is not particularly illuminating. Some may recognise that it's taken from a comedy sketch, broadcast over TV. It illustrates two problems; a) that the parent may supply insufficient information, and b) that far too many people use TV as their 'primary input source.' Q: What's wrong with TV? A: It's the easiest way to misinform people. Humans evolved under what one may term "The law of the jungle," one interpretation being "Eat or be eaten." Consider possible 'original' versions of the sketch, 'back then:'

"What's that Daddy?"

"Don't touch!"

(Case #1, Redback spider.)

...

"What's that Daddy?"

"Run!"

(Case #2, Sabre-tooth tiger.)

...

In each 'original' version, the answer is even less factually illuminating - but it may be life-preserving. But there's more to this, namely that the human 'input system,' mainly visual with accompanying audio, evolved to be unquestioning; i.e. see tiger = run - or be eaten. Could explain the expression 'seeing is believing' (to which I add: Believing is what some people may do - in the absence of evidence).

The survival impulse takes precedence (without getting too philosophical); it is the task of the infant to see/hear and obey, and the task of the carer to provide information otherwise unobtainable. TV defeats this process in two ways, a) by exploiting the 'vulnerability' of the human input system, and b) by presenting 'inappropriate' info = bad examples and worse, outright lies.

In addition to so-called 'factual' programs, there are the 'entertainment' ones; it is mostly through these that the aberrant ideas are acquired - the thousands of violent acts, from cartoon-shows through family violence to bloody massacres - the human 'input system' was never 'designed' to distinguish fact from fiction and no, it's not 'just a movie.' In the context of this article, we wonder how/where the Mansons, Bryants & Breiviks of this world get their ideas from; TV must be a 'prime suspect.' Of course, ideas may be acquired from books, newspapers or merely idle conversations, but TV is ubiquitous. This is not an appeal for censorship but a condemnation of a lacking context; what really is missing is the moral framework. Murdoch et al. - and 'primary carers' - kindly take note.

It stands to reason that abandoning infants to TV as baby-sitter is an abandonment of responsibility - and an extreme (mental) form of child abuse, only exceeded by subjecting a child to religious indoctrination.

Then, consider lies. On the 'criminal spectrum,' lies are the 'entry point;' lies are designed to deceive, who needs them/it = lies/deception?

End of musing.

[«back»]

criminal is as criminal does - Murdoch and the corrupt&venal MSM

2011-07-12T15:49:00.002+02:00

drafting - under review

.. democracy ...

  .. cannot live whilst ...

    .. being smothered by a lie-cloud

-=*=-

The Murdoch phone-bugging scandal is just the tip of a *very* dirty iceberg.

Examine this headline:

For Years, the Tabloids' Sting Kept British Politicians in Line
  «Fear of media harassment and political necessity have long underpinned the uneasy collusion between British politicians and the nation's tabloids.»
[nyt/110710]

Comment: NYT is itself corrupt, yet even they can't lie all the time.

That's not all. As well as running a 'political agenda,' Murdoch and the corrupt&venal MSM - including, to their ever-lasting shame & *damnation*, the AusBC - all together tell us outrageous lies.

The case should not need any further proof - only the totally brain-dead may still be unaware, but just in case:

1. That Murdoch's papers lie, proof = continuous malfeasance, from the current scandal all the way 'back' at least to the continuous, despicable and scurrilous '72-'75 campaign against the twice democratically elected PM Whitlam & his Labor party government.

2. That the corrupt&venal MSM lie, proof = Iraq's *non-existent* WMDs.

3. That the AusBC lies, proof = Israeli hasbara, conduited *and actively assisted* by the taxpayer-funded AusBC, including the un- & anti-democratic 'unleashed' moderators.

-=*=-

Now, always worth a repeat, "of, by, for the people etc." democracy *requires*, among a few other vital components, a fully and fairly informed electorate.

Smothering the people with a lie-cloud clearly falls more than just a bit short...

That's still not all. As we see with UK PM Cameron, there is a 'working relationship' between the corrupt&venal MSM and the government, as proved by Cameron hiring a Murdoch cast-off.

The 'full scoop' is that both 'opposing' parties in our predominately two-party system cooperate more or less fully with the MSM, the only exception being when some part or all of the MSM decides to attack one side or the other; in the case of Murdoch usually the 'nominally left' party = Labor in Aus, say.

One could say that being attacked is the fault of the party, since occasionally they are in power and could 'deal with' any rogue elements - yet they don't so deal; why not? See the nyt article, perhaps.

But that's still not all.

Our so-called 'leaders' are not leaders at all, they're *pushers*. They push 'the program' onto us, we the *supposedly* sovereign people, this pushing otherwise being known as 'engineering consent.' Here's another article (headline only):

Democratization Can't Save Europe
  «Despite the myriad problems currently facing the European Union, democratization is not the answer. Rather, the EU's elites need to improve -- and power has to be taken away from the periphery.»
[spiegel/110708]

Comment: Clear; disenfranchise the people even further. A dis-informed, mal-informed, outright deceived electorate cannot make rational voting decisions (except possibly to rebel); no consent may be 'engineered' = procured, from a deliberately dumbed-down populace.

Here's another article (headline only):

Brown takes aim at papers' 'criminal links'
  «Former British prime minister Gordon Brown has accused Rupert Murdoch's media empire of using criminals to obtain his private documents.»
[AusBC/110712]

Comment: Brown can now afford to snipe; he's a 'yesterday' person. Cameron has already ordered a public inquiry, but we all know that enquiries are *also* corrupt, and will only return 'pre-specified' results. Nevertheless, it's going to be 'touch and go' before some accommodation is found.

In a nutshell: The 'democratic covenant' is totally kaput; we the people are powerless passengers, and the so-called 'leaders' are leading us over several cliffs; economic (neoliberalism), war (murder for spoil) & environmental = excess-CO2 caused climate-catastrophe.

-=*=-

Fazit: Stop referring to our 'modus vivendi' as democracy; it ain't.

Where's my effective vote?

-=*end*=-

[more later - perhaps]

criminal negligence and breach of contract = divorce + punitive settlement!

2011-06-29T12:51:00.016+02:00

.. democracy ...

  .. totally illegitimate ...

    .. without *informed* consent

Thesis: "Do what we say, and nobody gets hurt!" = Mafia stand-over methodology, *exactly* what our so-called 'leaders' mean when they say 'There is no alternative!' = "TINA!" This is deception, because there is not no but some alternatives, i.e. *better* ones; by deceiving us they are lying, by denying us a better alternative they are cheating us, this is breach of their contract = corruption. It means that they, our so-called 'leaders' make themselves illegitimate; no legitimacy = no valid laws. We the people need to 'roll-back' the results of this corruption to get to a better deal (at least as good as what we once had) - and not coincidentally, to save our once jewel-like planet from the rulers' depredations = excess-CO2 pollution caused climate-change habitat chaos/disaster.

[update, 20:20]

-=*=-

Consider "of, by, for the people" = so-called 'representative' democracy.

We the people agree to be ruled = surrender control over our own destiny, for which we are to receive 'protection' from the rulers against some threat (who knows what? But see Hobbes, below.)

The social contract:
  «Social contract theory played an important historical role in the emergence of the idea that political authority must be derived from the consent of the governed.»
[wiki/Social_contract]

Comment, note: "... consent of the governed." The only meaningful consent is fully & fairly informed.

Leviathan or The Matter, Forme and Power of a Common Wealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil:
  « ... Hobbes argues for a social contract and rule by an absolute sovereign. Hobbes wrote that chaos or civil war – situations identified with a state of nature and the famous motto Bellum omnium contra omnes ("the war of all against all") – could only be averted by strong central government.»
[wiki/Leviathan_(book)]

Comment, note: "... absolute sovereign," also "the war of all against all."

Starting sometime before Thatcher, someone developed a 'new theory' = neoliberal economics, the names Friedman (monetarism, Chicago School) & Hayek ("Road to Serfdom") come to mind, then came Thatcher's "TINA!" Before Bush#41 allied himself with Reagan, he termed neoliberalism 'voodoo' economics; he was correct.

The Road to Serfdom:
  « ... the Austrian-born economist and philosopher Friedrich von Hayek (1899–1992) between 1940–1943, in which he ”warned of the danger of tyranny that inevitably results from government control of economic decision-making through central planning,”[1] and in which he argues that the abandonment of individualism, liberalism, and freedom inevitably leads to socialist or fascist oppression and tyranny and the serfdom of the individual.»
[wiki/The_Road_to_Serfdom]

Comment, note: "... tyranny that inevitably results from government control... " etc..

Monetarism:
  « ... is a tendency in economic thought that emphasizes the role of governments in controlling the amount of money in circulation. It is the view within monetary economics that variation in the money supply has major influences on national output in the short run and the price level over longer periods and that objectives of monetary policy are best met by targeting the growth rate of the money supply.»
[wiki/Monetarism]

Comment: Note that one of the neoliberal so-called 'reforms' (thanks, but "No, thanks!" to Costello), was to make the RBA 'independent' (of government), thus 'liberating' a lever of 'democratic' control (assuming it was ever democratic in the 1st place, IMHO an unwarranted assumption). But the upshot is that even the possibility of the control of money-creation is now totally beyond the hands of we, the (supposedly sovereign) people. Long-story short: Delegated power ditched; those who can't steer are (hapless) passengers; hope is a non-operative policy and controlling is infinitely better than trusting.

One more item for now:

Note that since Nixon 'crashed' the US$ (going off gold, Aug'71), the US$ is fiat = 'printed' - and this leads directly to the current shocking state of world finances, getting ever worse.

-=*=-

Bankers gone berserk: At least since the Weimar-wheelbarrows event, people have been aware of the printing = inflation danger; see Monetarism above. Under 'fractional-reserve' banking, money is 'printed' = created by key-stroke on banks' computers. Such control-mechanisms that exist (central bank, any remaining regulation) are *supposed* to ensure that printing does not depart from proper need - as measured by inflation, better the (desired) lack of it. In Aus, the RBA has an inflation-band target set at or under 3%. (Q: Why not 0% = *no* inflation? I am not aware of any valid reason; me at fault - or the fault of info we are 'allowed?')

That printing may be out of control is illustrated by inflation; in day-to-day living it is supposedly kept low (see 3% 'target'), but the figures are 'fiddled' by *not* including all factors (like house-rents, say), or substituting some falling priced item for a climbing one - a continually changed 'basket' makes comparison 'difficult...' Then, there're assets (stocks, housing, say.) The stock markets are *the* single indicator; funny how they continue to rise and rise - mostly, crashes excepted. (JMK, JKG & Co can explain/fix.) House prices in Aus doubled - coincidentally(??!) after Costello halved the CGT. Privatisation arose, in part, to supply more 'investment opportunities' - another part = "user to pay" = toll-booth the commons.

All money starts out as a loan; some entity borrows it, normally to start some business, the entity purchases things and services, the money paid out ends up back in the bank as deposits (however temporarily), and excepting here cash, which may (untraceably) wander a bit. But the borrowed money has a cost = interest, which accrues continuously. Another but, however much money is 'out there,' so interest is being paid by someone (from business profits, perhaps), and this interest is a) a drag on the system (usually at cost to the customer), and b) forms *unearned* profits for the banks (less overheads and the comparatively miserable pittance paid on deposits, i.e people 'in the black' - not too many of them, these days.)

Un-earned income is not the province of banks only; look to the resources sector (iron ore/coal mining, oil drilling etc.), say. Buy low/sell high is a capitalist principle which differs from 'cost-plus;' the difference over cost-plus is the unearned part = 'economic rent' and *might* be OK in the demand/supply frame, but is definitely *not* OK when the economic rent is being 'harvested' = ripped-off from we, the people - as it is with *our* minerals (we the sovereign owners), and the profits (often after extravagant = piggish deductions), going to shareholders (who by definition are not 'working' for the income), and especially when those shareholders are o/s = $s fleeing the country (83%!) Hence the correctness of economic rent taxes (RSPT or MRRT), which should be set at securing a fair 'share' for we the people - but typically are not - thanks, but "No, thanks!" to lobbyists & general political thuggery.

Un-earned income, equally if not more than earned income (what you and I get paid for doing something, call working or in modern-speak 'jobs, jobs, jobs!') - should be taxed, and that at a fair rate; it's part of the social contract, meaning the rulers are allowed to rule by us, on the understanding that they look after us - by providing *required* services (water, sewage, elec. etc.) - and especially health-services = Medibank, original '72-'75 version. Anything for-profit will preferentially generate profits - adding yet another drag on the people's cost of living, and egalitarian service-withdrawal = falling standard of living.

Now, to a *BIG BUT*, the so-called leaders are *un-taxing* income, *reducing* services, privatising = *flogging-off* 'the family silver' = govt. enterprises (water, sewage, elec. etc.), all the time screeching "TINA!" But it's not true = (mostly) lies. The non-lie part is 'tax-cuts,' the lie-part bit comes in when they preferentially un-tax the rich, whilst 'widening the tax-base' with *regressive* taxes = GST.

In other words and always worth a repeat, any idiot can cut or promise to cut taxes - what's *not* properly explained is that the cuts are heavily prejudiced against the people, to the advantage of the already-rich getting ever more obscenely richer - a demonstrable effect, as we can quite plainly see.

So far, I've described aspects of neoliberalism; adding to our woes is globalisation, and all the nasties which go with both, namely making the working person's life hell, and any unlucky to need 'welfare' services both poorer and sadder and those without sufficient $s for privatised medicine quicker and less comfortably dead - in the extreme case.

-=*=-

The facts are that neoliberalism/globalisation is by-and-large a swindle, see Perkins' "Economic Hit Man," IMF *forcing* their vile SAPs on mostly 3rd world countries, then so-called 'democracies' applying neoliberalism/globalisation bipartisanly = un- & anti-democratically, finally those countries which have so far resisted, now being forced by tax-cut deficits to SAP themselves - again by the so-called 'leaders,' *against* the interests of the people (increasing riots; what else to do but protest - then possibly cynically employed 'rent-a-mobs' to generate the (peaceful revolution destroying) violence?)

-=*=-

Fazit: We see that our so-called 'leaders' are leading us astray, the proof is before our eyes. "TINA" is a lie; most of the 'good bits' we once had are gone or being dismantled (see Ireland, Greece, Portugal, other PIIGS etc., plus; possible 'stand-out' = Iceland). The people most 'responsible' (actually, of course, irresponsible), are being traitors to us, we the people.

It used to be (Eureka Stockade, say) "No taxation without representation!" Well, we got representatives - who have betrayed us, very badly indeed.

Q: Where are the truly clever people, those who could provide effective countervailing force - to save us, and save our planet?

-=*end*=-

PS It is easy to see that democracy as we experience it is a total failure, one proof (of many) is the filthy lie-cloud = pushed-propaganda paradigm they mislead = dumb the people down with. What is hard to even contemplate is how sooo many can be sooo bad for sooo long; Q: What is their trick? What's their 'rationalisation?' What is their excuse, where did it come from, who maintains it?

Bah!

Then, there's the illegitimacy aspect; only *just* law may *earn* respect. A 'good' = bad example is anti-drugs laws; people may (more or less) poison themselves with tobacco, or drink themselves to stupefaction with alcohol, but even there the police are being given ever more power to harass. 'Recreational' drugs, some less harmful than T&A, should be an issue *only* for the user; heroin, even if taken as a known potential suicide-method, is no outside agent's business (apart from but especially so, in a deliberately maintained unemployment-plagued society). But whatever laws, IF the representatives are not working *for* us (my thesis), THEN they are working *against* us; *any/all* laws they may attempt are *invalid*.

One objective of neoliberalism is to 'downsize' government; tax cuts (mainly off the rich) = deficits and/or service-cuts and privatisations, *exactly* what they're forcing onto the Greeks this week. Ergo, government downsized, except for the tyranny.

This leads us back to Hobbes and Hayek; traitorous, un- & anti-democratic leaders are tyrants = Hobbes' absolute sovereigns, the neoliberalism/globalisation being forced on us = Hayek's serfdom. Hobbes' war against all others is the US+Zs resource wars against any/all substantial resource-owners = us, we the people. We are there = Hobbes' and Hayek's hell, also coinciding with Orwell's 1984, to boot:

  «But always--do not forget this, Winston--always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face--for ever.'»

We, the people's human face - under vicious tyrants' boots - for ever?

-=*=-

Ref(s):

[1] consent  -v. (often foll. by to) express willingness, give permission, agree. -n. voluntary agreement, permission. [Latin sentio feel] [POD]

[2] sovereign  -n. 1 supreme ruler, esp. a monarch. 2 hist. British gold coin nominally worth £1. -adj. 1 supreme (sovereign power). 2 self-governing (sovereign State). 3 royal (our sovereign lord). 4 excellent; effective (sovereign remedy). 5 unmitigated (sovereign contempt). [French so(u)verain: -g- by association with reign] [ibid.]

[3] absurd  adj. wildly illogical or inappropriate; ridiculous.  absurdity n. (pl. -ies). absurdly adv. [Latin: related to *surd] [ibid.]

[4] abstruse  adj. hard to understand, profound. [Latin abstrudo -trus- conceal] [ibid.]

-=*=-

Update, 20:20; PPS (Warning; discriminatory framing): 'Moaning' about the rich getting richer is denigrated by the status quo apologist/trolls as 'wealth envy,' an absurd[3] debating tactic (close to abstruse[4], as zu Guttenberg (aka zu Googleberg, aka a proven liar) deployed). To make any argument personal is an example of the ad hominem fallacy, as unnecessary as it's distasteful (not to mention *wrong*). IF a) our world were infinite AND b) all else were equal, THEN c) the status of the obscenely rich would be less than a trivial curiosity. BUT our world is very definitely *finite* AND the rich are - basically, not all of course but *largely* - criminals; the latter *proven*, especially by their neoliberal modus operandi = ripping us, we the people off. In contrast to 'moaning,' I advocate for social justice, so I query the motivation and methodology of our rulers, along with their (by definition in mufti = dodgy) string pullers. By now, we should all know about the big lie; we know we're being lied to, and that the liars give themselves an excuse, namely some noble lie. (Whatever that might be; secrecy = enemy of democracy, here we see a BIG reason why; the definition actually contains the warning: 'if uncovered ... noble lies ... would cause discord.') IF some people put themselves above us, we the people (as our so-called 'leaders' obviously do), THEN we have to consider some 'noble lie' *excuse* vs. some expected 'noblesse oblige' [n. privilege entails responsibility. [French] [POD]]. The so-called 'leaders' clearly fail (by their *demonstrated* irresponsibility) - leaving us, we the people - right in the shit. Note that their lies are *not* helping; the world is on a downwards-spiral to disaster. There's nothing élite about crime or criminals; their lies don't work so well anymore (MSM now bypass-able), much less their supposed but totally absent noblesse. To the so-called 'leaders:' Kindly cease, desist & disappear - or *be* removed; we'd be better off *not* being led at all, rather than suffer such disastrous, lying ... (fill in your own descriptor(s).)

[«back»]

yes, there is an alternative and it's called 'social justice,' à la liberté, égalité, fraternité

2011-06-24T15:59:00.001+02:00

.. simple really ...

  .. share all your toys ...

    .. don't touch things not yours

Thesis: Some learn such in kindergarten, others apparently never.

-=*=-

[update, 15:59.]

Possibly even earlier than Thatcher (TINA!) - right down through to today, the economic bandits are screeching "There is no alternative!" - as they set out to *force* privatisation and austerity onto Greece, say (as only one of the PIIGS; Portugal, Italy, Ireland, Greece, and Spain. Belgium & UK could be added.) Yes, Greece has borrowed, and yes, possibly over-borrowed, but the EU 'authorities' had every chance to stop them (chances possibly reduced by US-investment bank advice as to how to disguise/hide Greece's sins), and the banks or whoever, freely, willingly loaned them the money. Loaning money always carries some risk, but the risks are all being pushed onto the Greek people - who basically had nothing to do with the problems - except possibly by the so-called 'democracy' mechanism.

Note that democracy is defeated if the voters are deceived - as we continually and thoroughly are, thanks, but "No, thanks!" to the corrupt AusBC & the rest of the venal MSM.

The "Ah ha!" moment was made available latest with Perkins' "Economic Hit Man;" it turns out that the IMF is a vicious economic thug, pursuing policies which a) impoverish its targets whilst simultaneously b) enriching its patrons, namely the big banks, always 'led' by Wall St.

The IMF foist its policies 1stly onto under-developed nations by - ta ra! - *knowingly* making loans that the targets found hard to resist, then near-impossible to pay back. The IMF then imposed its SAPs, forcing government spending down and forcing governments to privatise things like electricity & water supply. Sound familiar? Now, when I heard Merkel include the IMF in the EU process, I *knew* what was coming.

One very odd thing is that some countries have implemented this shitty economic policy *voluntarily* - but not just, also bipartisanly - see Aus, D, many others. Note that bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic - since it offers the voters *no* effective choice.

Always worth a repeat: Any idiot can cut taxes, or even just promise to (look at Abbott - or perhaps better not); the dumbed-down and lied-to voters are seemingly too silly to realise that by encouraging the tax-cuts, they are actually cutting their own throats - as all can plainly see now, and some of us immediately anticipated back in the days - but see 'deceived' above.

Globalisation + neoliberalism = so-called economic 'rationalism' was deliberately constructed[1] to enable the mostly already rich to make themselves ever richer, and that to- and past- the point of obscenity, at the expense of rest of the world's people. The bi-product of these rip-offs now mortally threatens our life-supporting planet's ecosphere, via excess pollution, most importantly CO2 emissions and CH4 = methane release, triggered by global-warming (i.e. Arctic ice visibly reducing). They pushed economic 'rationalism' onto us, erring ideologists all; their "TINA!" was then, is now and always will be nothing but a lie.

Our world is spinning down into multiple catastrophes, as listed in my recent democracy, life & everything - just as easy as 1, 2, 3.

But contrary to what they screech, there *are* alternatives, and much better ones to boot:

1. Banking; nationalise them *all*, or at least the money-creation part. ALL money should be created ONLY by the government, and only sufficient for the economic-need, as precisely measured against a benchmark target of ZERO inflation. The interest raised would go to 'social-justice' type services, starting with single (government) payer medicine, à la the original '72-'75 Medibank, extending through fair welfare and including the natural, commons-based monopolies like water, sewage, elec., fixed-phone(NBN) & transport = mass-transit, roads, rail etc..

Note: Cooperation trumps confrontation, both Fordism (fairly sharing the fruits of labour) and Keynes (“euthanasia of the rentier”) were and remain correct.

2. Implement a properly-progressive, simplified taxation system. Mathematically easy; one merely graphs incomes by bracket, and distributes the remaining tax-needs (after the interest raised as in (1)) - in a fair way, namely those who can pay more, do.

3. All (modern) war is nothing more nor less than murdering-for-spoil; soil as in the improperly confiscated and occupied parts of Palestine (neither the UN nor anyone else had/has the authority to steal Palestinian land/property, *GIVE IT ALL BACK*!) - oil as in Iraq, pipeline routes as in Afghanistan, US+Z hegemony everywhere the US/NATO/Zs are attacking.

*All* military forces should be withdrawn to behind the owning-countries' borders, and the invading Zs (plus all dependents) should return whence they came.

-=*=-

.. simple really ...

  .. share all your toys ...

    .. don't touch things not yours

-=*=-

Each of the above 1, 2, 3 policies, or something very similar, would be chosen by a great majority of every 'wo/man in the street' - if properly informed & given a really free (= non-coerced, non-limited = wide-spectrum) choice - always, as usual and of course, IMHO. *That* would be true democracy in action; the great majority of we, the people are fair and decent - in stark contrast to our *oppressor/rulers*.

Then we could settle in to enjoy a just peace, whilst getting on with *not* burning ever-more fossil carbon, working towards a sustainable life on our once jewel-like planet; it's the only one we've got, bugger it and we're *all* up shit-creek in a barbed-wire canoe.

-=*end*=-

[1] Update, 15:59; PS "Deliberately constructed" not only implicates the so-called 'think tanks' built by 'sponsorship $s' as the probable 'inventors' of the wickedly erring neoliberal ideology - but also the universities, who now teach the rubbish as the 'unique non-alternative' - to the Enlightenment. The universities were initially corrupted by 'more of the same' neoliberal nonsense; they were partly or fully privatised, making them increasingly dependent on sponsorship - and therefore and not 'by the way' corruptible, but even further, now have to waste large amounts of time & effort scrounging for funds, instead of better using their brains on research, productive or 'pure' - whatever.

Academic independence was seemingly deliberately destroyed, the brains re-deployed - *for* evil. Well, academics? No sense, no feelings? Bah!

The malevolents' progress is incremental; they say (for example) 'Stagflation proves Keynes doesn't work - so here, take this neoliberalism (poison) pill & move on!' What they don't say is that stagflation was a 'natural' result of a) the Vietnam war winding down, b) an oil-crisis (possibly prompted, at least LIHOP) and c) on the whole (more but different) *erring* policy settings.

The Enlightenment represented the (good!) moral peak; the arseholes - mostly in the US, but 'echoed' by their corrupt quisling accessories (like Lib/Lab in Aus, say, or Cameron/Merkel/Sarkozy) - are deliberately destroying even the concept of governments working *with/for* the people. Then, they have the nerve to claim that we are sooo lucky, living in a democracy! Sooo lucky, that we bomb others (Iran '53, Iraq '91, '03, Afghanistan '01, now Pakistan, Yemen, Libya '11 - next Iran (again)) into pacified, abject, *fake-democratic* misery?

That anyone would deliberately set out to wind-back progress towards the Enlightenment tells us *loads* about the perpetrators themselves, but what of their accessories = our politicians, our so-called 'representatives?' That these 'representatives' can force obvious (when properly perceived & analysed) anti-people policies upon us tells us "It's time!" - to get rid of not just representative government, but the representatives themselves - who are definitely *not* our friends, rather they are our proven, fiendish enemies, let the tumbrels roll!

PPS One other thing: We are witnessing an ostensibly clever psyop, see any of my discussions of 'lie-cloud' = pushed propaganda paradigm - with an objection, there's nothing at all clever about crime. Crime, whether delimited by proper laws or enabled by corrupt law (only just law may earn respect), means unjust exploitation = rip-offs (= cheating theft, murder). All the facts are visible - but continually obscured by the corrupt & venal MSM. It means that those cooperating with the criminals, either as direct accessories or indirect apologists, make themselves as equally guilty as the prime perpetrators. Consider then Fraser's "Life wasn't meant to be easy," then answer the Q: "Who says the crims should be allowed to win?"

In other words, Q: Where are the decent people who could stop this corruption crippling our world?

[«back»]

democracy, life & everything - just as easy as 1, 2, 3

2011-06-22T10:29:00.002+02:00

1st 1, 2, 3:

1. fully & fairly informed

2. wide range of honest candidates

3. who if/when elected, properly represented

In the days of the horse & buggy, it *may* have made sense, but only if each 'leg' was adhered to. None is; 1 = dumbed-down, 2 = Lib/Lab = bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic, then 3 = reps doing what the *reps* want (or what $s want), not what *we* the people would decide - if (1st 1, 2, 3) were true; looping.

Some years ago the French deployed a 'smart-phone' system, practically to each home.

We, in our wide-brown, even resorting to fencing-wire modems, must be able to go at least 'one-up' on the Frogs?

Instant democracy is both possible and practical, and could once & for all bring 'of, by, for the people etc' to real-life.

It's *our* country, *our* lives, *our* future.

By *rights* we should have a say.

No say = possible suicide.

2nd 1, 2, 3:

1. Globalisation/neoliberal = economic rationalism is voodoo economics *designed* to make the rich obscenely richer at the expense of everyone else, and it's working.

2. Militarism (US+Zs) is rampant, building an empire designed to oppress the entire world, and it's mass-murdering - to steal.

3. The excess-CO2 climate catastrophe could, probably will lead to an extinction-event par excellence, taking out most of the 'top predators' (we the people, in case you didn't 'get it'), and it's accelerating, *being* accelerated. Only way to stop it is to reduce burning fossil carbon below 'sustainability' = achieve a falling CO2 concentration in our once jewel-like planet's air. Arctic ice is melting; it's visibly shrinking.

3rd & last 1, 2, 3:

Putting 1, 2, 3... next to names on a ballot every 3-4 years ain't never gunna save us - as the results over the last 63 years or so show = *prove* - see 2nd 1, 2, 3 = disaster; looping.

it's not enough that they're off mass-murdering - to steal oil (AfPak, Iraq, Libya; Iran next?) but they stoop to petty theft

2011-06-20T15:29:00.000+02:00

Trigger article:

Iraq hunting $17 billion missing after US invasion
Posted June 20, 2011 06:50:00
«Iraq's parliament is chasing about $US17 billion of Iraqi oil money it says was stolen after the 2003 US-led invasion, and has asked the United Nations for help to track it down.
...
"All indications are that the institutions of the United States of America committed financial corruption by stealing the money of the Iraqi people, which was allocated to develop Iraq, (and) that it was about $17 billion," said the letter sent to the UN with a 50-page report.
The committee called the disappearance of the money a "financial crime" but said UN Security Council resolutions prevent Iraq from making a claim against the United States.»
[AusBC]

Comment: We *know* that the US is corrupt[1], and we've suspected that the UN was not doing it's 'job' = preventing war. Well, 'optimists' held out hope for the UN - latest until they failed to prevent the plundering of Iraq, and now they've actually *approved* the plundering of Libya.

Nevertheless, with about $US3trio as the eventual total cost to the US tax-payer for the illegal invasion and subsequent brutal occupation of Iraq alone(and no end anywhere in sight for the hapless, suffering Iraqis (see 63+ years long Palestinian suffering)), you'd really have to wonder why the US bothers with stealing 'small-change' = $US17bio belonging to Iraq?

To *prove* that it was no mistake, and how *petty* they really are, they've confiscated $US30bio off Libya too, as they now demolish yet another ME oil-owner.

The *real* question is Q: Why is this outrageous (understatement; lying, cheating, theft & mass-murder = multiply, viciously criminal) behaviour tolerated?

Where the bloody-hell are the *decent* people?

-=*end*=-

Ref(s):

[1] corrupt -adj. 1 dishonest, esp. using bribery. 2 immoral; wicked. 3 (of a text etc.) made unreliable by errors or alterations. -v. make or become corrupt. corruptible adj. corruptibility n. corruption n. corruptive adj. corruptly adv. corruptness n. [Latin rumpo rupt- break] [POD]

no improvement without change no changes without force no force in votes

2011-06-17T16:51:00.008+02:00

.. criminals ...

  .. will not change ...

    .. they must *be* changed

Subtitle: 'Top down' or 'bottom up?'

Q: Where are the brains?

[update 18Jun'11]

Musing: It doesn't take much thought to *prove* that democracy as ~~we live it~~ foist upon us does not work (perhaps it simply cannot work? An 'unbelievable' narrative) - but in any case, the current system is 'leading' us into disaster = we're being pushed over several catastrophe-cliffs.

It hardly needs saying that lying to the people is wrong. A properly functioning democracy requires at the very least a) an aware & informed electorate, b) a wide range of honest candidates who c) if/when elected proceed to properly represent the people - as opposed to 'accommodating' vested interest/moneyed groups, say (= treachery) - or, far worse, caving-in to lobbies for some foreign power (= treason). Lying to the people is filthily un- and anti-democratic; misinformed = dumbed-down voters simply cannot make informed choices (assuming some effective choice = in the rule, not).

"All politicians lie" (thanks, but "No, thanks!" to JWHoward) - but one seriously wonders why this may be so - let alone apparently being tolerated; we only have the one reality, and lies tend to differ from this (massive understatement!) Living in a lie-cloud (= pushed propaganda paradigm) is literally living in la-la = fantasy land. No wonder things (Libya, Greece, climate) are crashing. End musing.

-=*=-

Q: What catastrophe-cliffs?

A1: The truth and justice cliff; we are being lied to, cheated, stolen from and many murdered (one would be one too many).

A1a: The war cliff; the US+Zs murdering for spoil (Zs = soil, US = oil.)

A1b: The economic cliff = globalisation + neoliberalism = rich getting obscenely richer by swindling ever more.

A2: The excess-CO2 climate-change cliff; ever more fossil carbon burnt = ever more CO2 pollution, ever higher atmospheric CO2 = increasing green-house effect = more and more vicious weather = storm damage + melting ice (proof: see it from space) = possibly poorer harvests and certainly higher oceans = use your own imagination. Not at all trivial, but being resisted by a) carbon-profiteers and/or b) troglodytes.

-=*=-

Q: What lies?

A: Legion.

That we're being lied to can't seriously be contested (except by liars themselves), and we recognise those by what they do and not by what they say - except the broadcasters, who not only conduit lies, but (worse) often actively assist lies (once would be once too often).

My personal proof of perfidy by publicly-financed broadcasters (i.e. the Australian ABC = AusBC), is my previous perception vis-à-vis Israel, which turned out to be *completely false*. Again, use your own imagination: IF false perception THEN false reporting (there being nothing wrong with my hearing nor comprehension ability.) Given that the 4th Estate has the *responsibility* to inform the voters, IF they deceive us (they do), THEN they're not merely failing their remit, but crippling democracy to boot. And so it is; many AusBC reporters are Uni-graduates, and 'news' is their chosen profession - IF they transmit lies, more ominously IF they assist/augment such lies, THEN it's either through sheer ignorance = idiocy or deliberate malice = idiocy; you choose (they already have = traitors).

-=*=-

Q: Any specific lies?

A: Almost infinite.

The 'noble' lie - mainly government.

The 'big' lie - mainly war; most if not all wars.

Many statistics. Jokes aside, consider US unemployment; they quote around 9% yet it's more like 20%. The concentration of wealth is no joke at all, and has accelerated of late (post Thatcher/Reagan, say, but started earlier.) That the rich get richer at the cost of the poor is contested by the globalists + neoliberals = economic 'rationalists' - but see 'except' above.

The current Greek 'experience' is both typical and instructive; any fool can cut taxes (Costello's ½CGT = house-prices promptly doubled), any fool can widen the tax-base (Howard's GST = regressive; hits poorer harder), any fool can promise to cut taxes further (Abbott). Tax-fools, as neoliberal fools, are not just on the one side; Lab is just about equally as neoliberal as Lib and bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic. After the tax cuts, mainly reducing the rich's contribution, services are much harder to cut (reduce pensions & benefits, sack govt. workers, close schools, public hospitals, *privatisations*?) - and so rising deficits are a 'natural' result. Collectively called 'race to the bottom;' thanks, but "No, thanks!" to economic 'rationalists.'

That the 'big' lie - mainly war, is a total lie can't seriously be contested; neither the US 'excuse' = "Bringing democracy" nor the Zs' = "Some imaginary being promised it to us" pass the 'giggle-test.'

That the 'noble' lie - mainly government ("We know what's good for you, so shuddup!") - is utter bullshit is shown by the results, namely the catastrophe-cliffs we're being pushed over.

-=*=-

Fazit: I had a friend once, who said: "Don't like your life? Change it." Current trends are not just 'not to like,' but are *real* disasters on the way; action, *effective* action, is urgently needed.

Globalisiation + neoliberalism = economic 'rationalism' is a swindle, proof: TINA! is an outright lie; we can get back on the Enlightenment track by a properly progressive tax reform, whereby 'reform' doesn't mean some cynical fiddle, but effectively spreads 'the burden.' A more radical suggestion is that *all* money-creation be done *only* by the state; the accrued interest may be enough to cover all 'responsibilities.' (More to come on this - eventually, perhaps.)

Democratic reform? Forget it; the sheople doze before their flat-wide TVs, dumbed-down by the content (including all possible perversions = venal MSM incl. AusBC, then DVDs, youtube & etc.), contented with their home-delivered pizza + 6-pack. Dumbed-down voters don't have a clue, can't have a clue, and aren't given any real, let alone effective choice anyway. Worst of it all is, most don't even know what they, our so-called noble-lying 'leaders' are getting us into - possibly on the 'no sense, no feeling' model.

So it can't be 'bottom up' - where are the clever planet-savers?

-=*end*=-

PS Some say, that the sheople get the government they deserve. Odd. What if the sheople are deceived? Of course, it's not 'what if' or even 'when,' because they are deceived, and that continuously. From "Bringing up Baby," it's always someone else's fault; in this case the so-called 'leaders' (aka politicians = apologist/accessories), plus the actual perpetrators (corporations) and their collective 'enforcement arm' = spys, military and police, not forgetting the 'erring ideologists' = *purchased* think-tanks, plus universities = academia. Note the oxymoron: 'security forces;' in all the so-called tyrannies currently being targeted for 'democratisation' (= resource-theft), it's mostly the 'security forces' being accused of atrocities like 'snipers hiding on roof-tops' or 'viagra-assisted girl-raping;' earlier ejecting premature-babies out of incubators onto cold, stone floors.

Q: Can we have more truth & fewer lies, please?

A: Of course not; lying is a trivial transgression, compared to mass-murdering theft. Note another thing, the *alleged* atrocities are *so* shocking, as to inhibit most, if not all rational thought. Surely not accidental, and most likely = 99.9% untrue, but lies need only to be effective *propaganda*, even if briefly = in the short-term. That's a *misuse* of cognitive science; once again thanks, but "No, thanks!" to academia prepared villains, this time to the psy-ops boys (and girls, no doubt equal-opportunity evil).

So quit blaming us, we the sheople, for the failures of the lying, so-called 'élite;' when it comes to 'Who dunnit,' where 'it' = hopeless disaster, the 'who' = the smart-arses pulling the strings, and all those who could have acted to save the planet - but did *SFA* instead. Letting disaster happen - LIHOP; think 9/11 hijacks (the *3* towers were pre-primed) - is not very smart; letting the world go 'down the tubes' - basically, by inaction - is not smart at all. Well?

PPS IF the electorate is deceived (they definitely are, so it's not 'if' at all), THEN *no* representative elected by a deceived electorate has *any* mandate whatsoever. It follows that so-called 'representatives' without mandates may *not* make legislation, and any that they do slip through *cannot* be valid (so empty the gaols, now? Only for victims of injustice, like most drugs users - say.) Think about deceptions for a few secs, then think of non-mandated politicians sending 'our boys' off to war; no mandate = no legitimacy, any killing the ADF does 'in our name' = illegal = murder. Which it *doubly* is; since forces crossing borders inbound = aggressive, Nuremberg-class invaders; pay special attention I/J/Z-plex - 63+ murdering, thieving years, and no just end anywhere in sight for the hapless Palestinian ELO/Os.

Fazit (2nd): The issues I raise are serious, but hardly over-complex; there's nothing 'élite' about criminality, the *voodoo* economics being forced upon us is based on erring ideology - and doesn't work, as we can plainly see; the resource-wars are pure evil (UN knackered, actually now counter-useful) - and the lies are often achingly obvious. Bad things can happen, when good wo/men ...

Always worth a repeat - where are the clever planet-savers?

-=*=-

Update, 18Jun'11; Q: What's wrong with war? Or neoliberalism?

A1a: Re: War; if you have to ask, then this is the wrong place for you, by-ee! - Oh, but wait! Before you go, consider this: War is nothing other than murdering theft. Proof: There is *always* an aggressor - otherwise people all stay home. The aggressor seeks to gain something otherwise unobtainable, with armed force = the *exact* definition of armed theft. Note to Pentagon + Zionists. 2nd note: Get out of Palestine, get out of Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, Libya, Yemen, ... Yanks go home; Zs return whence you came - or at the very, very least a) honour UNGA194, b) revest the stolen land/property & c) say a *loud & sincere* SORRY!

Then, think about all the 'laws of war' bullshit. Tip: Replace the two letters UN (plus all their yak-yak and squillion-word texts) with just these two words: NO WAR! - What idiots - Q: Is this really the best we can do? A: Better not be; it's only criminality, corruption, etc. etc. Normal people are much better than that. Bye-bye, pro-wars.

A1b: A better question is Q2: What's *right* with Neoliberalism?

A2: About the only thing 'right' is that it's right-whinger extremism. Of course, on principle I don't 'do' left/right, but that doesn't stop others. For 'right-whinger' then, read 'unscrupulous capitalist or apologist for same.' The prime purpose of neoliberalism is to make the rich even richer, and if that means the poor get poorer, well, that's just a) too bad and b) evolution in action (or so they say). To be poor, one must be less-well genetically endowed - or so social-Darwinism or some-such idiocy would presumably have it. I call it un- and anti-egalitarian; it doesn't mean that the rich should be *totally* impoverished, just that they shouldn't be allowed to further enrich themselves at the expense of we, the people and/or our once jewel-like planet.

Take just one neoliberal example, the recent privatisation of part of the electricity system in NSW. Repeated attempts at privatisation by *Labor* failed, until Ms. Keneally managed 'the 1st stage;' she was then voted out and what do we see next but electricity prices going up 17% in one dirty blow:

Electricity: the long fight to get rid of it
Updated December 14, 2010 11:31:00
  «NSW Premier Kristina Keneally has finally achieved what her two more electorally-successful predecessors couldn't do, and privatised the NSW electricity grid.»
[AusBC/TheDrum]

Comment: Labor is supposed to be on the people's side; Lib for the bosses, Lab for the workers. But here is Lab, privatising the people's property = 'the family silver' - for a few measly shekels, and then what? Well, this is what:

Power price hike of 17pc hits NSW
Updated June 14, 2011 14:58:00
  «IPART says nearly half of the increase is due to increased network costs.
The regulator says much of the rest is due to increased costs because of the Federal Government's Renewable Energy Target scheme.»
[AusBC/justin]

Comment 1: There's no guarantee that anything they say is true, but "increased network costs" just after privatisation sounds *extremely* fishy, and then a swipe at the Fed. Govt.'s MRET *must* be almost purely political.

Comment 2: They tell us, that "at least, you can vote them out" - which simply *doesn't* help, after the damage is done.

Comment 3: We *must* have responsible, responsive representatives, it's the only way an "of, by, for the people" democracy can work. That we don't have the former means that we can't = don't have the latter.

I have a friend who told me "It is not simple," and he's by-and-large correct.

There are many parts to the puzzle; here are a few:

1. Government enterprises are inefficient (or so they say); they have too many 'workers,' whose wages are too high, take far too many holidays and they never work hard enough (if they work at all) = they're all worthless slackers, bludging on the rest of us (i.e. we, who all work nightmare hours for a miserable pittance and never take a single day off, ever, much less a 'smoko.')

2. Private enterprises are super-efficient (or so they say); they will get rid of the slackers and 'encourage' (= enforce) higher productivity, here it helps to have competition to 'drive' the process, end result is a 'cheaper' product, obviously a boon to all. Artificial competition, by the way; on a previous public monopoly, either means faked competition, or useless, senseless duplication, then the pointless, obscure advertising, 'selling' us something we *need*. To use a bit of detested US-speak: "Big whoop!"

3. What actually happens is a) the new private owners demand a profit (where little profit, none or even a subsidy was previously present); the new owners may have borrowed to buy the people's (fire-sale priced?) asset, and thus interest is gouged 'up front,' profit + interest is an added cost to the consumer = some of the 'down-side.' Then b) on the supposed 'up-side,' large numbers of slackers are 'made redundant' = fired (unemployment up), maintenance programs, as the enterprise in general, are 'down-sized' (reducing overheads, you see); the enterprise is forced to be 'lean & mean' (even leaner if some asset-stripping takes place). Public 'store-fronts' may be replaced by out-sourced 'call-centres,' possibly off-shored to India, say. The many laid-off workers are replaced by a handful of over-worked-to-near-death sub-contractors (their houses on the line to finance their vehicles/toolkits). The infrastructure begins to decay; power-masts which were previously replaced if suspect are now allowed to 'age (un)gracefully,' and may be blown down in a storm = black-outs. Charges, previously controlled by the politician/voter interaction are now 'freed' (cynical 'free market'); the prices so freed *will* sooner or later rise, typically just short of the point of 'getting blood out of a stone.' The more remote parts of the network will suffer extreme neglect, see the Telstra experience. A typical quote: "The government is hindering us leveraging our monopoly." By far the most cynical bit of neoliberalism is medicine for profit; profit will always take precedence, and this quite literally means that people will die for lack of $s.

Task for the reader: Explain why any of (3) is desirable.

Most importantly, you *know* it's wrong when you discover some non-trivial lie, and note that *all* lies = deception, and deception always occurs shortly before someone gets ripped-off. Like crying "TINA!" - when there always was an alternative, i.e. cooperation instead of confrontation, progressive taxation instead of tax-cuts followed by service cuts; when the latter are inadequate (virtually guaranteed), then deficits grow (economy spiralling down), followed by financial rape - err, plundering, as they are now forcing Greece to submit to. Note that some of the Greek people can see what's coming, and are demonstrating (until recently peacefully; what changed? Violence is *always* bad, note to Pentagon + Zionists.) IF the politicians do not listen to their electorate (another thing virtually guaranteed), THEN the plundering = raping will be done un- & anti-democratically - and many Greeks will get very, very sad.

This is the 'modern' world; the Enlightenment being demolished, piece by piece, thanks, but "No, thanks!" to neoliberalism.

[Aside, vis-à-vis sad. Contrast Harvie Krumpet's "Carpe diem!" = Seize the day (sub-text: Enjoy every second!) - with Fraser's "Life was not meant to be easy" - then neoliberalism's 'misery for the masses.'

Recall the old joke; Q: Why do crims rob banks? A: That's where the money is. In fact, all our (fiat) money is 'created by keystroke' - in banks; now the banks look like they're 'going for the lot.' Neoliberalism drives people/countries into debt, then the banks foreclose (see US, so-called 'world leader,' and their own real-estate = housing market = collapse.) Then, there's the so-called 'GFC' = global finance crisis; apparently the only ones to benefit were those who actually caused it in the 1st place, namely Wall St banksters. Assuming this process is pushed to its obvious limit, once the banksters own *everything*, what then?

Tip: There's something exceedingly *dark*, going down here.]

One final note for now: Above, I wrote "We *must* have ... an 'of, by, for the people' democracy," which would be a +ve, for us and our planet. The EU (Merkel + Sarkozy), ECB & IMF say "They *must* have ... neoliberalism imposed," which will be an utter disaster for most Greeks.

Spot the difference in intent and results? Oh yeah; then there's the story of matching Greek tax-returns to swimming-pools in back-yards. Turns out the match is not quite 'perfect' (haw!) Once EU, ECB & IMF have privatised everything they can get their greedy, grubby, $-grabbing hands on, Greece will probably go broke anyway - it's said that the debts are already unpayable; either go broke or the money-lenders 'take a haircut.' That's another charming thing about neoliberalism, all the lovely new words (like, lean and mean, man!)

[«back»]

suppressing information like failing to index a blog is also un- & anti-democratic

2011-06-15T16:51:00.002+02:00

.. censored inputs ...

  .. indicate systemic bias ...

    .. and may lead to poster radicalisation

-=*=-

[update, 17Jun'11, update, 19Jun'11.]

A funny thing happened after recently submitting what I regard as a *fair* comment and having it censored; my corresponding blog-report here has so far not been indexed; I don't suppose we really have to wonder why?

"This happened once before
when I came to your door
No reply
They said it wasn't you
but I saw you peep through
your window"

- democracy's the loser...

Censored inputs indicate systemic bias and may lead to poster radicalisation.

-=*end*=-

PS It's not all inputs that are censored (just one would be too many), but what is censored indicates the (erring!) ideology of the censors. That AusBC is tax-payer supported and they dare to un- & anti-democratically censor anything is proof of their corruption and treachery both.

-=*=-

Update, 17Jun'11; Progress. From the google cache @ appr 07:30, this post and the preceding 'message' post have now been indexed, but the home-page cache is still old = down-level. If one wonders how they do that, I'd say 'bad fingers.'

It can be proven that I submitted a comment (I keep the receipts), and that indexing was interfered with. The question only becomes: Whose bad fingers?

[«back»]

-=*=-

Update, 19Jun'11; Progress? Not much, if any; still some down-level indexing. This article is deliberately duplicated, partly as a test.

A bit of nontrivia: Consider auto-da-fé[1], then heretic[2], a thesaurus entry for which is listed below[3]. If we dump all the supernatural implications (as totally invalid), the issue then is truth vs. lies. I advocate for truth & justice; in that frame it is the liars (commission/omission) who are the heretics, aka recusants (recalls Marxisant. Haw!)

Interfering with free-speech is a crime against democracy, and invalidates the perpetrator-platform.

-=*=-

Ref(s):

[1] auto-da-fé  n. (pl. autos-da-fé) 1 hist. ceremonial judgement of heretics by the Spanish Inquisition. 2 public burning of heretics. [Portuguese, = act of the faith] [POD]

[2] heretic  n. 1 person believing in or practising religious heresy. 2 holder of an unorthodox opinion.  heretical adj.[ibid.]

[3] ›noun
he was condemned as a heretic and executed at the stake
DISSIDENT, dissenter, nonconformist, unorthodox thinker, heterodox thinker, apostate, freethinker, iconoclast, schismatic, renegade; sceptic, agnostic, atheist, non-believer, unbeliever, idolater, idolatress, pagan, heathen; separatist, sectarian, revisionist; rare tergiversator, recreant, recusant, nullifidian; archaic paynim.
-opposite(s): CONFORMIST; BELIEVER. [New Oxford Thesaurus of English]

[«back»]

the so-called 'noble' lie meets Newton's third law - where's the countervailing force?

2011-06-08T12:37:00.003+02:00

.. surely ...

  .. they can't *all* ...

    .. be wicked psychopaths[1]?

[update, 16:51]

Preamble: There's a 'them' and an 'us;' the 'us' is we the people; since they tell us that we are not as clever as they claim to be, we are followers much as sheep, so it's us, we the sheople. The 'them' are those who rule us (Congress = US for parliaments), those who inform us (4th Estate), those who run the corporations (industry), those who 'defend' us (military, these days mostly offensive); reordered = M/I/C/4-plex. In addition, there are those who teach us (educators) and those who manage the money (banksters). There are a few other groupings, like scientists, say, or more broadly technologists, those who search for or apply 'pure' knowledge. I write 'pure' because knowledge itself is abstract and value-free (in ideological terms), but the searching for, or application of, may be heavily ideologically biased = crooked, if not outright harmful. Here I'm looking primarily at climate-change research, economics and propaganda (the good, the bad and the ugly). The scientists, technologists and educators work under the direction of the M/I/C/4-plex, but the banksters are full M/I/C/4-plex partners - if not the ultimate string-pullers.

-=*=-

Things we can see if we bother to look:

The first odd thing to notice is that the M/I/C/4-plex operates in both an extremely well coordinated and almost totally uncontested way. It's as if they have achieved some sort of comfortable consensus, proof = no real boat-rocking, next to no 'debate.' Latest proof of this 'coordinated consensus' contention is shown by the current US/NATO attack on Libya; this is a Nuremberg-class = aggressive war crime in developing progress - without a peep of (effective) protest, even Russia and China having 'signed on' at the UNSC. Germany did not so sign-on - but Merkel is currently being fêted by Obama, silky-smooth smiles all round. Merkel said something like 'Germany has no better friend than the US.' (Old saw: With friends like the US, who needs enemies?) Merkel, as other such sycophants, is a quisling.

The next thing to notice is that we the sheople are being lied to, and not just with 'little whites.' The 'excuse' for attacking Libya is given as 'protecting civilians,' whereas we *know* that they're after Libya's oil and subservience both. Gaddafi's 'prime-sin' is to refuse US hegemony - a sin not to be tolerated by any US regime (= the Empire). The lies are conduited to us via and with *active assistance* from the 4th Estate = corrupt & venal MSM (including taxpayer-funded broadcasters like the AusBC). Saying one thing ('protecting civilians') whilst doing another (murdering for spoil) is called hypocrisy, and a criminal act colluded in secret is called conspiracy. So far, not too many have been killed in Libya (starting as a 'restricted' air war, escalating daily), but then there's Iraq; 1mio+ dead before 2003 (UN=US sanctions, Albright's ½mio 'worth it' kids) and 1mio+ dead after 2003, 2mio internally & 2mio externally displaced. The casualties are horrendous.

The 3rd thing to notice is that they don't care a fig about us, see the economic wreckage they're creating almost everywhere with their 'economic rationalism' = neo-liberalism + globalisation (see my TINA!) This should be enough for the sake of my argument here, and anyone paying attention will have seen it all plus more - wicked depredations on a daily basis.

Q: How did we get here?

A: Tyranny by stealth; every little surrender followed by the next.

One can hardly imagine that Merkel set out to be a bad person, perhaps it's true that power really does corrupt. Whatever, we see the result. One of the nasty pro-war trolls asserted that no one gets chosen as a leader who's not prepared to go to war. (Q: How would s/he know? By what imaginable process?) Since *all* wars involve at least one guilty party, namely those who attack, *and* there are now no enemies, only 'investment opportunities' (Afgh/Pak, Iraq, Libya, Iran next? Perhaps the most illegitimate, the 63+ bloody years of Zionist theft by murder of Palestinian land), our wars (we, 'the West') are all criminal - and the leaders with them.

Musing: The mind boggles, that sooo many people (M/I/C/4-plex) are being sooo bad = psychopathic. There must be decent ones amongst them, and they secretly 'coordinate' by sharing their so-called 'noble' lie. Such secrecy is un- & anti-democratic but worse, the result is almost all *bad*. Bad for the killed, bad for the ripped-off, bad for the oppressed everywhere. It means = *proves* that their so-called 'noble' lie is anything but 'noble' = criminal.

Fazit: The criminals will not stop voluntarily, they'll have to *be* stopped.

Q: Where's the countervailing force?

-=*end*=-

Ref(s):

[1] psychopath  n. 1 mentally deranged person, esp. showing abnormal or violent social behaviour. 2 mentally or emotionally unstable person.  psychopathic adj. [POD]

[2] Newton's third law: The mutual forces of action and reaction between two bodies are equal, opposite and collinear. This means that whenever a first body exerts a force F on a second body, the second body exerts a force -F on the first body. F and -F are equal in magnitude and opposite in direction. This law is sometimes referred to as the action-reaction law, with F called the "action" and -F the "reaction". The action and the reaction are simultaneous. [wiki]

-=*=-

Update, 16:51; PS Obviously, I don't/can't know, what their 'noble' lie is, not being (and not wishing to be) of the 'anointed élite' - but we can see that whatever it is, it's *complete bullshit*. Here's some proof:

  «In restricting knowledge to an élite ruling class of “the few”, obscurantism is fundamentally anti-democratic, because its component anti-intellectualism and elitism exclude the people as intellectually unworthy of knowing the facts and truth about the government of their City-State.»
[wiki/Obscurantism]

Comment #1: There's nothing at all élite about criminality.

Comment #2; note: "fundamentally anti-democratic," then think about one of their 'biggest, boldest' claims, namely to be bringing democracy to the 'heathen (Muslim, Arab) &/ ignorant savages.' IF they, the so-called élite don't have democracy (they don't; *we the sheople* certainly do not), THEN they can hardly bring what they themselves don't have, anywhere. Ho, hum, just another lie; one that 100% destroys their credibility - all over again.

Comment #3: Consider the expression "race to the bottom," and compare to where we appear to be heading (= over the climate-catastrophe cliff). IF the so-called 'élite' had a plan - a convincing one, that avoided the excess-CO2 caused climate-change catastrophe, THEN all they'd have to do is say so, and we could all go "Phew!"

Comment #4: That they don't say so (that they have a once jewel-like planet's comfortable life-supporting ecosphere-*saving* plan, so that we are shoved into and remain in 'fear-mode'), means that they simply don't have one, full-stop. In addition to 'believing' in their so-called 'noble' lie (recalling that 'belief' is what's done *in the total absence of evidence*), not only do they keep idiotic secrets, but they really don't have a clue (apart from enriching themselves, and their already obscenely rich 'mates'). Repeat: Tumbrels! Note that when our ecosphere collapses = drastically reducing food production, and the oceans start to rise = permanent flooding of low-lying land, $s are neither very edible, nor do they float too well.

[«back»]

TINA! = wicked lie = democracy raped

2011-06-06T17:51:00.003+02:00

.. There Is No Alternative ...

  .. means surrender to greed ...

    .. violating the 'democratic covenant'

Thesis: The root-problem is corruption[1], driven by greed and enabled by irresponsibility.

Preamble: The basic 'democratic covenant' is that we the sheople surrender power to those who would rule us, on the understanding that those rulers will protect our, we the sheople's best interests. It is not working; to the contrary, our so-called 'democratic' rulers have 'allowed,' when not actively connived in introducing, an economic system definitely *not* in our, we the sheople's best interests. We have been lied to; these lies[2] being deployed to deceive[3], in turn for villains to take wicked[4] advantage and in addition, a deceived = misinformed electorate, apart from a) possibly (actually, definitely) being ripped-off, b) cannot possibly 'vote straight,' this in turn means that any representative elected via deploying lies has *zero* mandate. As a by-product, any/all laws made by such deceptive rulers are invalid.

-=*=-

Trigger article:

Hewson takes swipe at parties over climate
Posted June 6, 2011 00:05:00
  «Dr Hewson said vested interests were buying influence in Canberra and leadership was needed to take them on.
"We [also] need leadership to challenge the scare campaign that's been led by one of my ex-staff members," he said, referring to Mr Abbott.»
[AusBC/'news']

Comment: Any idiot can promise to cut taxes, or screech "No new taxes!" - as Abbott repeatedly demonstrates. It's often called 'populism,' and is denigrated by saying that those out of power can say such things because they don't actually have to implement their 'promises' = irresponsibility. Tax-cuts are easy, but reducing *required* services is not quite so easy - proof is what we see; less socialised medicine = sicker (lower-income) people, for example. But it gets worse.

-=*=-

Thatcher's cry of "TINA!" was early-on in the march of neo-liberalism which, accompanied by globalisation, has somewhat of a by-product of ruthless, tending to exhaustive exploitation, brought our world to the brink of total disaster = the approaching excess-CO2 caused climate-change catastrophe. That our rulers have so far taken *no* effective steps to avoid having our once jewel-like, comfortable-life sustaining ecosphere being crippled by climate-change is the proof of their ultimate irresponsibility. Even if Gillard/Lab gets a CO2-tax up, it will almost certainly be too little, too late - unless the rulers across the planet cooperate, and *all* stick the price up high enough to get the needed reduction everywhere. Not just as a BTW, *someone* must pay, namely who else but the consumer? Of course the 'polluter must pay' - at the point of emission, but that *real cost* of doing business will be then passed 'down-stream.' IF some market-based solution THEN the 'price-signal' must be clearly & *honestly* visible. Then, any compensation thought justified (for the 'less affluent' amongst us) can only come via taxes - a topic to be expanded below. By correctly taxing = pricing CO2, the externality it represents will finally be included - as opposed to being short-sightedly, apparently cost-free dumped into the commons, to the detriment of all. Climate-change is the final irresponsibility, but there are others, also highly important.

Idiots have been cutting taxes, *mainly* off the rich, at least from the Thatcher-era. One dishonest campaign was to 'broaden the tax base' = add a regressive GST = consumption tax, a tax which impacts the poorer far more that the rich. Not so incidentally, Lab experimented with negative-gearing, while Lib halved the capital gains tax = ½CGT; it was the latter action which lead quick-time to house-price doubling, let there be no doubt (a little well-directed research will *prove* this). One 'general principle' behind lowering taxes on upper income brackets is that the (already mostly rich) capitalists need ever-more profits to make them, the capitalists work, in so doing increasing economic activity = jobs & income to the masses. That's the greed theory; in fact they'd work anyway, so let them 'earn' their squillions - but then tax those same squillions progressively à la the Beatles; one for the rich, nineteen for the country.

Whereas there may be something in greed (clever, 'white' lies = 'good' propaganda, such will be more 'believable' than outright, naked lies = Saddam's (non-existent!) WMDs, say - all the while noting that 'believing' is what people do in the absence of evidence); the proof is in = income inequality widening to the extreme = the already mostly rich getting obscenely richer. Note another piece of pushed-paradigm propaganda; they allege complaining about the rich = 'wealth-envy' - actually, not. Just as the end-user must pay the cost of all externalities, *someone* has to pay taxes, and it only makes sense to get more off those who can pay more. The rich may get any 'extra' rewards in heaven (bi-i-ig perhaps), meanwhile they should pay a fair, progressive income tax. Because:

Consider the PIIGS; Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece & Spain. Following the 'tax-cuts for the rich' formula, they have run up *serious* deficits. The neo-liberal bankster-vultures are swooping, demanding their blood-money. The economies will be driven into ruin by austerity, as the people's patrimony is privatised. Again we hear "TINA!" - from both political sides, but bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic. The PIIGS tax-cuts, as in Aus, along with the rest of the neo-liberal rubbish, *forced* onto some (usually 3rd world) countries by the IMF, were implemented *voluntarily* by both sides - again, bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic = treachery.

Fazit: Whole countries, across the world, even including the US, are having wages and conditions reduced or destroyed by the so-called 'economic rationalists' = neo-liberalism + globalisation. That this is *not* in we the sheople's interests is so obvious one needs not illustrate it further, but it proves that the 'democratic covenant' is totally, knowingly & bipartisanly violated. Such rulers belong, however briefly, on tumbrels.

Of course, there is an alternative; reverse the deregulation which enabled the GFC, but 1st & foremost, restore progressive taxation, to pay for the sheople's deserved = human rights amenities = infrastructure (water, sewage, elec. etc.), get back on the track to the egalitarian Enlightenment, and vis-à-vis CO2, get sustainable. Start all that by stopping the lies. It may be a truism, but cooperation is better than confrontation; time to de-militarise the cops (to lose the appellation 'pigs'), stop attacking other countries (Nuremberg, cf. tumbrels) and for our rulers to start working for/with us, instead of against us.

-=*end*=-

PS We can see it happening; in Aus & elsewhere (not just in the PIIGS but 3rd world & other 1st world = US, say). As it was being introduced, we could see it was 'non-optimal;' take off-shoring, out-sourcing, down-sizing, lean&meaning and privatisations as some of 'the worst.' Job off-shoring quite clearly reduces both jobs available & incomes, pointedly of those laid-off. Privatisation hands the people's patrimony to the vultures for a pittance, our once-egalitarian state-monopolies to be viciously exploited as 'toll-booths.' Promised new jobs ('service industries' = hamburger-flipping, hair-dressing, plus all the 'no-shows') either a) paid far less or b) never even materialised at all. I saw some/most of it happening & screeched: "Madness!" Some, claiming to be 'professional economists,' said things like 'a rising tide lifts all boats' and 'a smaller share of a bigger pie could be larger' - but such 'weak excuses' were outright, probably premeditated lies. IF I can see the troubles THEN so can others, presumably equal-to or smarter than I. Sooo, are those in power, those forcing neo-liberalism + globalisation on us (we the sheople = democratic electorate), are these rulers a) not so smart or b) deliberately malicious? I tip (b), but there's never any accounting for idiocy, especially corrupt idiocy. See Hewson's comment: "vested interests were buying influence ..." A democracy 'for sale' = a corrupt democracy = a dead duck; where is my vote?

I have heard of the so-called 'noble lie,' whereby the rulers claim a) to know best and b) to be doing the best. Fail, as excess-CO2 shows, and the economic depredations visited upon us, we the sheople *proves*. Their 'noble lie' is a stinker; nothing other than a weak but truly filthy lie - 'worthy' only of common criminals. All else failing, may they rot in hell - they have certainly well and truly damned themselves. As probable (99.9%) psychopaths, they probably couldn't care less, and will not reform themselves - but it matters, seriously, to us and our world, that they *be* reformed.

-=*=-

Ref(s):

[1] corrupt  -adj. 1 dishonest, esp. using bribery. 2 immoral; wicked. 3 (of a text etc.) made unreliable by errors or alterations. -v. make or become corrupt.  corruptible adj. corruptibility n. corruption n. corruptive adj. corruptly adv. corruptness n. [Latin rumpo rupt- break] [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] 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. [ibid.]

[4] wicked  adj. (-er, -est) 1 sinful, iniquitous, immoral. 2 spiteful. 3 playfully malicious. 4 colloq. very bad. 5 slang excellent.  wickedly adv. wickedness n. [origin uncertain] [ibid.]

O104 EHEC

2011-06-01T17:25:00.007+02:00

It can't be food - far too many female victims.

[update]

It can't be *only* female, a few male victims.

It must be something mostly women use.

My tip: Lipstick, perhaps?

-=*=-

Update; Well ... after ruining many a cucumber-farmer (mainly in Spain), closely followed by lettuce and tomato farmers almost everywhere, they say that they *definitively* traced it to sprouts, usually served as part of a salad. IF so THEN it would appear that 'leaf-eaters' are overwhelmingly female. No offence, ladies... and lipstick can make you look prettier, no danger there.

tax-cuts for the rich service cuts for the sheople

2011-05-26T09:19:00.007+02:00

.. fool me once ...

  .. shame on you[1] ...

    .. but fool the voters, over and over?

-=*=-

GWBush: "They hate us for our freedoms!"

Me: Err, what freedoms does he mean, exactly?

One absolutely vital freedom is to have some influence on your future, where 'some' is defined under an "of, by, for the people" democratic system as 'implementing the will of the majority whilst protecting any minorities.'

Q: How are we doing?

[update, 17:51, update, 27May'11, update, 13:11.]

-=*=-

Trigger article:

Abbott warns manufacturers of carbon tax 'death'
Posted May 26, 2011 06:51:00
  «Mr Abbott says he is confident there will be a manufacturing industry in the future because he does not believe there will be a carbon tax.»
[AusBC/justin,26May'11]

Comment: "Read my lips; no new taxes!"

-=*=-

Foreign article:

05/12/2011
Opinion
German Voters and the Virus of the Right
By Jakob Augstein
  «The FDP is now preparing for life without Guido Westerwelle, the current foreign minister who recently resigned as vice-chancellor in Merkel's cabinet and leader of the Free Democrats. The party needs a new identity; but it must beware of right-wing sentiment left over from its recent transformation from a classic European liberal party to a neo-liberal self-service shop.»
[spiegel.de,12May'11]

Comment 1: A good question is what's behind this (sinister) drift to the so-called 'right?' One *big* thing is migration; people with some drive, living 'on the margins' somewhere, typically '3rd world,' will tend to go to where they think life might be better. Naturally, that 'impacts' the 'up-level' locals, since people starting from 'a low base' will work for less, taking job opportunities from those locals. An electorate in turmoil is an easier electorate to fool? What's never mentioned is that IF we're *forced* to have so-called 'free' markets, whereby jobs and production are 'off-shored,' THEN we must also have free migration, and this migration should *not* be a) seen as a threat by the locals, nor b) exploited by cynical, mostly r-wing politicians. In short, it should be a non-topic; "Suck it up!" - OR, if it is to be a topic, as in Aus, we should a) ban *all* immigration (equality before the 'law,') and b) could advocate machine-gunning the 'illegal immigrant' boats.

Remember Tampa!
(We will decide ...)
Remember SIEV-X!
- 353 died.

Comment 2: It could be, that the German voters who took the FDP 'tax-cuts' bait have woken up to neo-liberalism and are now widely rejecting the FDP. If so, it's a *great* sign; pity Aus voters are apparently not so clever.

-=*=-

Idiocy article:

Carbon tax needs to leave out fuel: Oakeshott
By Jeremy Thompson
Updated May 18, 2011 11:41:00
  «Independent MP Rob Oakeshott says including petrol in the carbon tax would be unfair for rural Australia.»
[AusBC/justin,18May'11]

Comment 1: No further comment on Oakeshott's idiocy.

Comment 2: IF a carbon tax AND valid price-signals are desired (Q: What else?) THEN it must be uniformly applied across the economy, people (and world); one of the gravest failures of 'modern-day economics' is to ignore so-called 'externalities,' especially (or even only) when such externalities can be dumped somewhere, usually 'the commons' - at no immediate cost to the polluters. A carbon tax will only work to reduce CO2 pollution when the price of polluting gets high enough to a) be painful, causing b) a *significant* reduction, hopefully c) saving our once jewel-like planet's ecosphere.

-=*=-

General comment 1: That the so-called 'debate' is so poor, indicates one of two things, 1) they are not serious about CO2 reductions = save the planet, or 2) they are incompetent. In any case, a poor/incompetent debate dumbs the voters down; even if we the sheople had an effective choice (we don't; effectively Lib = Lab and bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic) - IF dumbed down (and lied to!) THEN no informed vote possible. Then, when elected, our so-called representatives may do what they want without further consultation. Sooo, where're our votes? Where's our freedom to decide our future?

General comment 2: That the same debate is occurring world-wide, with the same non-result, indicates a) a wide-spread malaise and b) collusion; our so-called 'rulers' are flying in close formation - better thought of as lemmings leading the pack over the (excess CO2 caused climate-change catastrophe) cliff.

Fazit: That the politicians almost everywhere are a) running the same foul, non-representative 'game' means that b) they are we the sheople's *enemy*.

-=*end*=-

Ref(s):

[1] "There's an old saying in Tennessee I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee--that says, fool me once, shame on--shame on you. Fool me-- you can't get fooled again."
President George W. Bush, Nashville, Tenn., Sept. 17, 2002

Comment: "There is nothing worse than aggressive stupidity"--Johann Wolfgang von Goethe

-=*=-

Update, 17:51; PS I got an offline question: "What would I do?" - and a 'tip' about a new Whitney.

Looking to my headline, the (neo-liberal) tax-cuts benefit mostly the already (obscenely) rich, and the service-cuts affect the country in general (rotting infrastructure not maintained/restored, say), and any dependent on welfare = the poorer in particular. There is a lag, it's easy to cut taxes but hard to reduce spending, so deficits quickly result. Along with welfare, deficits are a neoliberal sin, and so we come to the PIIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece & Spain.) All are in deficit, all now have huge state-debts. Back to Whitney.

ICH has our 'tip' Whitney here, globalresearch has a later one here, similar themes; Greece & what the EU and IMF are planning.

Some things may be said:

1. Whitney reported/forecast an Iran switch to EUROs for oil, and an Iran oil exchange. Whether the failure to get either going was his or Iran's fault doesn't matter (much), but over the years Whitney has made a great deal of fuss and little if anything he forecast ever happened. Having said that, it *does not mean* that we don't read him, just 'with a pinch of salt.' It's still thnx for the tip.

2. However we can 'slight' Whitney for *2* other reasons:

2a) He tries to argue *within* the pushed-propaganda paradigm = PPP = lie-cloud, and

2b) His suggestions are of a sensible and/or Keynesian nature, not wanted by the world's tyrant, neo-liberal, rip-off rulers.

Others fall for (2a), like Chomsky & 9/11, say. It works like this: IF anyone tries to contradict even a minor part of the PPP THEN s/he is immediately 1) reprimanded with a mallet, and then 2) expelled from 'polite society.' Proof = best recent example; Obama: "... anyone who would question that ... needs to have their head examined."

The problem for the PPP is that it's partly (self-serving) lies, partly pure fantasy - but approaching 100% divorced from reality *and*, therefore, all logic. Another quote: "You're either with us or against us!" Another thing about the PPP is that it is arranged around 'narratives;' these serve two purposes, 1) it keeps the lies all 'flying' in a coordinated fashion, thus reducing the chance of contradictions, and 2) it sets out their agendas, like 'neo-liberalism is good for you!' and 'bringing democracy to ignorant savages!' In this way they are 'creating their own reality.' (Sadly, to the world's people's cost.)

Looking at (2b), we assume Merkel&Co plus Lagarde are not idiots, but *are* quisling US-bots. They will have certain latitudes within their own countries, but will be fenced with US 'red lines' in all cases.

Neo-liberalism started out under a different name = 'economic rationalism' (ER) and has been embraced (more or less) by both 'sides' = Lib & Lab, but bipartisan = un- & anti-democratic *because* it offers the voter *no* choice. ER itself was pushed, say, by Thatcher crying "TINA!" = 'There Is No Alternative!' But the results, perhaps not immediately obvious, always obscured by the lying-PPP smoke-screen, are now more and more out in the open, still lied&denied but *are* awful (as we and others predicted; you and I discussed many such dirty-deeds as they were revealed/underway). Yet the ER = neo-liberal, rip-off *shit* 'conditionalities' are being pushed onto the PIIGS in broad daylight. You work it out; all documented in Perkins' "Hit Man."

Back to Merkel&Co not being idiots, they are unlikely to actually 'crash the system' - since that would get the German voters terminally pissed off. I think that they'll take it so far (see next) then back off a bit. Nevertheless, the end result will still be ruined PIIGS, but on some sort of draconian 'life support.' Like a 'service economy' = slaves = serfs, lots of hair-dressers, hamburger-flippers, house-cleaners, gardeners (for the rich estates) - thanks, but "No, thanks!" to JWHoward. Bastard.

What I keep hearing is "privatisation," hot on the heels of "austerity," both are neo-liberal keys. The 'drivers' of all this have their plans, quite possibly in 'exquisite' detail; the visible effects, everywhere you look, are a) rich getting obscenely richer, b) the rest abandoned to ever reducing 'terms and conditions.' Clearly, when most people are bankrupted down to the level of the simplest subsistence - even starving to death ('proof of concept' trial under way in Gaza) - they will have no more to be ripped off. At that point, the rich will own almost everything - to what imaginable purpose? They cannot drive more than one Porsche or Ferrari at any one time, and attempting to eat a metric tonne of oysters followed by the same of hot buttered lobster-tails a day ain't too flash on the digestion, not to mention the ½tonne of sweet-and-sour pickled/candied humming-bird tongues for desert. But nevertheless, grabbing *THE LOT* seems to be the plot.

It gets worse, because the same tyrants are actively mass-murdering for spoil; Zs soil & US oil.

Back once more to Whitney, arguing *within* the pushed-propaganda paradigm. He seems not to 'get it' - that our tyrant-rulers are doing what they are *deliberately,* with 'perfect' planning and dedicated, utterly *evil* intent. That the doing includes mass-murder (after Afgh, Iraq & Pak, Libya now under way, next?) means wide-spread *psychopathy*. As it was said of Bush, he may have sounded absolutely idiot-crazy but he (or his puppet-string pullers) actually achieved a lot - like the complete destruction of Iraq (100s of 1000s if not 1.4mio+ dead (ICH = "1,455,590")), followed by *full privatisation* - see? Obama is moving to the next 'level,' assuming that the sheople swallowed all the lies to date; the 'excuses' are getting weaker. The killing-to-steal is accelerating on the one hand, while the 'serfing' of the sheople proceeds on the other, and all the while, the obscenely rich fat-cats get ever more obscene.

Q: What would I suggest?

A: Create a proper, progressive tax structure; get those to pay who can *best* pay. Simpler - or better is not to be found.

[«back»]

-=*=-

Update, 27May'11; PPS Looking for help in all the wrong places ...

.. I theorise but cannot prove (not a mind-reader), that everyone tries to "Do their best!"

I certainly expect you (hypothetical reader) to be one such 'everyone;' I don't have to offer you any 'benefit of the doubt.'

Similarly certainly with "we ... hold and spend currency and we also have savings (pension-plan)" in the real world; what else?

That is 'the real world' = so-called pragmatism; IF all was ok THEN we could have a relax.

IF I'm allowed a 'but' (or three), THEN these:

Preamble; but #1: We agree that things aren't all OK, so we can't have the relax; we *theorise* what might be. To be practical - again pragmatic - what we might offer, a) obviously has to work AND b) have some chance of 'getting up.' My opinion is that things have gone so inflexibly bad that even considering 'glass half full' (= Obama not sooo bad, say) just doesn't, *can't* help.

2. Whitney proposed fixes in the globalresearch article, which I commented on as I read the article, see below[2].

3. Obama is a "lesser of two evils" choice, a) any selection from a pool of evils is *still evil* and b) that evil is *putrid*, notwithstanding any cited items of 'progress.'

3a. The Egyptian 'revolution' is struggling against 'the accumulated evil' of decades of US-sponsored tyrant-dictatorship and may - repeat may - and *despite* Obama, get some success, but Obama&Co will throw *anyone* under a bus to prevent *any* country making itself independent of the vile US empire. Just remember that it is the (US-supported) miliary currently running the Egyptian show; if throwing a few crumbs (Mubarak = 80+ and just about finished anyway) to the sheople keeps Egypt on the US-line, the 'price is worth it.' Recall that Obama (Libya) = Bush (Iraq) = mass-murder for spoil. All their ducks in a single row.

3b. As for the Israel pre-'67-war border thing, we already have Netanyahu's response which was "Get lost!" - to multiple standing ovations from the US congress = cowardly quisling traitors. So the Obama gambit is 99% BS = all show and no go (for which he has 'form'), what one would actually expect from this so-called 'peace-process' = anything but. This Oh, so cynically so-termed 'peace-process,' also by AusBC = 63+ bloody years long and nothing to show for it but Israeli 'borders' expanding ever outwards, more cynically so-called 'facts on the ground.' As well as the single-digit salute, Netanyahu also totally gave the game away: Pre-'67-war borders would be "indefensible." Q: IF you made peace = end to war, THEN why would you need to 'defend' anything from your now peaceful neighbours?

A different perspective; Q: IF you had been 'ethnically cleansed by genocidal attacks' = Nakba = Deir Yassin-type attacks = booted out of your house & land at the point of a gun (assuming you'd survived the Zionist mass-murdering terrorist attacks), banished to living crammed into non-coveted land = effectively naked, sterile sand, THEN could you ever 'forgive & forget?'

Everyone 'does their best' (even criminals, but their aims are - well, criminal, so best = worst = 1984), and tries to 'enjoy every minute;' even me. But I can't ignore the realities - which are truly awful. Yes, Obama/Gillard may be preferable to some Repug/Lib - but given the way things are, it's not a matter of IF but only WHEN the badness is overwhelmingly thrust upon us. We see that trying to work *within* the system (Bob Brown, say) brings nothing at all significant. It's *the system* itself that has to go, not farting around within it. Because, quite frankly, the baddies look to have the current system sewn up. A final quote:

"First, we've asked the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund to present a plan at next week's G8 summit for what needs to be done to stabilize and modernize the economies of Tunisia and Egypt. Together, we must help them recover from the disruptions of their democratic upheaval, and support the governments that will be elected later this year. And we are urging other countries to help Egypt and Tunisia meet its near-term financial needs."

Comment: "IMF" says it all = the full neo-liberal rape. A final nail: On the radio this morning, a grim word for post-Mladic Serbia: "Privatise!" No let-up, no escape, nowhere, nohow.

Any not seeing where the wind is blowing "... needs to have their head examined."

Q: Where are those who could save our planet?

-=*=-

[2] Whitney proposed fixes, my comments:

1--The EU needs to show that it's taking steps to become a viable political union with supra-national fiscal policymaking authority.

[me: not what neo-liberals want]

2--The ECB needs to be willing to spend whatever is needed to avert another meltdown.

[me: not what neo-liberals will allow]

3--Policies should be put in place for the orderly withdrawal of countries that don't fit within the EU's economic schema.

[me: = removing the EU's raison d'être?]

4--Regulations on shadow banking, derivatives, and repo transactions should be drawn up to avoid another market crash.

[me: no; neo-liberals 'believe' in status quo]

5--The EU should develop a strategy for providing long-term fiscal stimulus throughout the eurozone until unemployment falls, aggregate demand picks up, and household balance sheets show signs of improvement.

[me: Keynes = 'opposite' to neo-liberalism; despised & forbidden = never, no more (unless, of course, to rescue some big-$ mates ...)]

[«back»]

-=*=-

Update, 13:11; PPPS (and last.)

To call a spade a bloody shovel, one should never underestimate the shittiness of the situation, nor the evil = utmost wickedness of the criminal perpetrators in power (lies, cheating, theft & *mass-murder*; ho hum, just another day at the office.) As throwing Mubarak to the wolves clearly demonstrates, *no-one* is safe, not even faithful, long-serving, old men. It's not just the fear-factor, it's the vilest of terror, and it 'sends a message' to all the other quisling/collaborators: "IF stuff-up THEN watch out!" Gives a whole new perspective to "hire & fire;" perhaps 'play with predators, be prepared to pray?' Haw. To end:

Oderint dum metuant

To which the only possible rejoinder is:

Carthago delenda est (figuratively only, understand?)

[«back»]

XS-CO2->C3! excess CO2 pollution = climate-change catastrophe

2011-05-24T11:21:00.002+02:00

.. ice ...

  .. melting ...

    .. arctic multiplier

-=*=-

As everyone with a beer-Esky knows, as long as there's still a bit of ice in it, the beer stays deliciously cool.

Once the ice goes, the beer starts to warm - it's the law! (2nd, thermodynamics; entropy tends to the max. = heat flows from hotter to cooler.) It helps to keep the Esky in the shade; that may slow the warming - but can't stop it.

The *rate* of warming of the ice-free beer is dependent on the temperature difference between outside of the Esky and its inside (and how good the insulation is), but generally, the higher the temperature difference, the faster the warming - which happens a) in high-summer and b) just after the last of the ice melts.

-=*=-

Our once jewel-like planet is warmed by the Sun; the surface is heated during the day, and cools a bit at night - because some heat radiates away into space (*very* cold out there), and the *rate* of heat-flow is dependent on the temperature difference, exactly as in the Esky example. (Same thermodynamics laws, just a slight difference in scale.)

CO2 is a so-called 'green-house' gas; it acts like the Esky insulation, slowing the cooling of the surface out to space.

The warming of the surface by the Sun is different when the Sun is high above, compared to when it's lower - this gives us the summer/winter variation in daily maximum temperatures.

This difference also explains the temperature difference between the tropics (higher sun-angles) and the poles (lower sun-angles), and that difference in turn drives our major weather systems. There is a net flow of heat from the tropics where the highest rate of warming takes place (insolation), towards the poles, where the highest rate of cooling takes place. Previously, it cooled enough to form the more or less permanent Arctic sea ice-cover.

Increasing the CO2 content of the air increases the green-house effect, *more* heat is retained locally = temperatures increase, and that in turn increases the pole-wards flow - basically, giving us more, and more energetic weather (like storms, say). More heat moving = impact on previous, steady-state balance.

The extra pole-ward heat flow starts melting the ice, but the poles stay approximately the same degree of cool - until the last ice melts.

The low sun-angle at the poles, coupled with the Arctic sea ice-cover (reflects sunlight very well) was a steady = equilibrium state.

Now that increasingly more of the Arctic sea-ice is melting in the northern summer, the sunlight that used to reflect away is being absorbed into the now open arctic water - forming a positive feed-back = warming loop...

The scientists *know* about all the above - it's *exactly* their business to so know. Yet the so-called 'climate-change sceptics' - like Abbott - keep yammering = blocking any effective, corrective action - why? ("Abbott one day questions the science and the next declares that man made climate change is a reality.") What's in it for Abbott? Exactly how will he - let alone we, the sheople - benefit from an excess-CO2 caused climate-change catastrophe?

Trigger article:

Time running out for climate action: report
By environment reporter Sarah Clarke, wires
Updated May 23, 2011 09:31:00
  «The report warns global warming could cause global sea levels to rise up to one metre by the end of the century. (Reuters/University of Colorado: Konrad Steffen)»
[AusBC/justin]

Fazit: With the ice gone, the beer starts to warm up... fastest.

the numbers 'game;' 9/11 = 1939 + 1984, and 'staying the course' to catastrophe

2011-05-19T09:19:00.003+02:00

drafting - under review

Obama: «... the one thing I didn't lose sleep over was the possibility of taking bin Laden out. Justice was done. And I think that anyone who would question that the perpetrator of mass murder on American soil didn't deserve what he got needs to have their head examined.»

1. "taking bin Laden out[*]" was murder (intentional unlawful killing of a human being by another [POD]); alternates = extrajudicial killing, assassination, summary execution = lynching of an uncharged (and unarmed) *suspect*.

*[mini update, 18:19]

2. "Justice was done" is wrong; justice = warrant obtained, arrested, charged, tried before an impartial jury who may convict and only then sentenced. The US attacked in the middle of the pitch-black moonless night, dropping out of the sky in stealth helicopters, guns blazing, blowing holes in walls, kicking down doors to shoot five people dead, only one of whom may have been armed, and he plus also alleged 'crossfire' killed female companion in an entirely separate building. Two bodies were then flown 1000+km and dumped into the Arabian Sea.

3. "the perpetrator of mass murder on American soil" is wrong; the FBI admitted there was no 'presentable' evidence - if any at all, IMHO *none* - involving ObL. Whereas *some sort* of aircraft crashed, ObL&Co could *not* have pre-loaded *3* WTC towers with high-explosives + coordinated detonating systems (unless they had permission, say).

4. "needs to have their head examined" is the standard threat and warning: Any who dissent from the US-regime's 'narrative' are branded conspiracists & are ignored and isolated; all pro-wars put coffee-beans into their ears, not listening!

Means, motive, and opportunity [are] the three aspects of a crime needed to convince a jury of guilt in a criminal proceeding; look at where the US/Zs attack. It is 1939, and new 'Polands' are being created; Palestine (from '47/8 continuously to today; Lebensraum = soil), Libya (1986 bombing, oil), Iraq (1991, oil), Afghanistan (2001, pipeline routes), Iraq (2003, oil), Libya (2011 bombing, oil) and ever more likely, Iran (oil) next?

All pro-wars put coffee-beans into their ears, not listening!

The coming catastrophe is that caused by excess-CO2 pollution; growing all the while, unhindered as the criminal US/Z (plus cowardly quisling accomplices UK, F & Aus et al.) regimes play their killing/thieving war 'games' = alien invading murderers for spoil = AIMs4S.

The propaganda campaign is pure 1984, conduited and *actively assisted* by the corrupt & venal MSM, including taxpayer-financed broadcasters like the AusBC.

AusBC censorship of fair comment *proves* that they're in it up to their quivering bottom-lips. [see AusBC unleashed censored inputs]

The 9/11 false-flag black- & psy-op *swindle* = 1939 + 1984 = doomsday, coming to our once jewel-like, life-supporting ecosphere, soonest.

All those who do not resist are almost as equally guilty as the perpetrators, all having no one to blame but themselves.

-=*=-

Mini update, 18:19; PS We do *not* know, who or even *if* anyone was "taken out" in the Abbottabad 'heroic action.' Given that the whole ObL saga was/is based on 9/11, itself of extremely dubious provenance - means that I think the plane-hijacks/crashes was a LIHOP at max, and that the WTC demolitions themselves was a deliberate false-flag, black- & psy-op, so too could the Abbottabad spectacular have been. When we factor in form (plus the faked or true Whitehouse confusion, probably deliberate lies to mislead), it *must* be that Abbottabad was another false-flag, black- & psy-op = stunt. Then recall the Raymond Davis incident.

What *was* killed off = ended, was ObL as an active stage-prop - but that wont spoil their 'fun.'

The 'heroic action' will be trumpeted ad nauseam, as will the putative extra-legal assassination - to show the world *exactly* what villainy they can 'get away with.' It's called rubbing our noses in it, aka gloating.

The US/Z rogue-regimes will continue their murdering to steal.

Ho hum.

[«back»]

and when they were bad, they were horrid [US&Z rogue regimes - propaganda, black- & psy-ops = lies]

2011-05-16T16:51:00.006+02:00

.. the 'winning' ...

  .. doesn't really end ...

    .. until the gloating is done

Subtitle, 1: Out of the mouths of babes - err, crooks.

Subtitle, 2; Q: Who's to blame?

[update, 17May'11]

-=*=-

Thesis: Those who murder for spoil have zero qualms about lying; proof = no-one (in their right-mind) admits to crime, so lie the guilty ones must. Lying is per definition done to deceive, and when deceived by politicians, voters may not make properly informed voting decisions at least in the lying context, and not at all if the credibility of the candidate is deemed vital (what else? Vote for a liar?) Thanks, but "No, thanks!" to JWHoward, we in Aus had the super-cynical mantra "All politicians lie!" imposed upon us - the 'all' may tend to hyperbole, but the particular was repeatedly demonstrated (i.e. the baseless 'Saddam uses people-shredders!' allegation = 'misleading the house' - and with it, the country) - why is it so? No worthwhile project ever requires propaganda-camouflage, yet we are continually being assaulted with lies. The lies are organised around 'narratives,' to keep them on-song and (often imperfectly) non-contradictory, like the lame fog-of-war 'extenuations' recently deployed; the 'lie-cloud' forms the pushed-propaganda paradigm = the perpetrators' own created perversion of reality.

The 'standard' crimes are cheating, theft and murder; lies are both the gateway and a give-away to criminal depredations.

-=*=-

Trigger article:

- TOP NEWS -
Israeli Troops Fire as Marchers Breach Borders
  «Israel's borders erupted into deadly clashes as thousands of Palestinians marched from Syria, Lebanon, Gaza and the West Bank.»
[nytimes/eml]

Note the nytimes' language; "Breach," say. It is a 'biased' term[1] with ideological/aggressive 'baggage,' also with its alternates[2], a more neutral and simpler 'crossed' would work better = be more accurate. But propaganda uses such 'coloured' terms for the desired (usually as here -ve) effects, although the opposite = +ve also occurs; i.e. "Land of the free, home of the brave." Oh, yeah: Free as in free to be denied medical treatment without a credit card, and/or to have their jobs shipped o/s, brave as in shooting unarmed civilians - not 'just' ObL (or ersatz?), but the 100s of 1000s if not millions who have been killed/slaughtered as hapless 'collaterals' resulting from US wars for spoil. Here, the hyped +ves are actually -ves; more lies.

Comment 1: The headline is enough at the moment. 'Normal' people, even if traumatised by 63+ bloody years of murderingly violent dispossession and oppression, are nevertheless assumed to be non-idiotic; any demonstrator carrying anything that even remotely looked like a weapon would be seeking their martyr-hood in a hurry. Ergo, we can assume that the 'invading' Palestinians were unarmed, and were carrying out a peaceful demonstration; perhaps calling out "Return *our* land to us ELO/Os, the erstwhile legal owner/occupiers! - Observe UNGA181 & UNGA194, like you *promised* to, in UNGA273!" Also possibly "All AIMs4S (and descendants) to return to whence they came!"

Comment 2: Some say that Israel sits on stolen land; can we confirm/deny? Generally, land&property are alienable (adj. Law able to be transferred to new ownership [POD]), the 'normal' way is by *voluntary* exchange; $s for soil, say. UNSCR242 includes the "inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." Under the principle of "A fair exchange is no robbery," Q: Why are the Palestinians still trying to get their improperly alienated land/property back = revested (reinstate, restore, return)? More: "Revesting and restitution of property on conviction." (Aye, there's the rub: Actually achieving justice.) IMHO, 'confirmed.'

Comment 3: No burglar or violent home-invader may declare him/herself independent of justice; no alien invaders may ethnically cleanse via genocidal attacks - and remain 'legal' - let alone moral. Latest with the vile Deir Yassin massacre and such-like terrorist attacks (similar continuing down to today - or if not exactly today, then some immediate yesterday and tomorrow), the UN should have halted the crime that is the Zionist project (the UN did attempt a recovery with UNGA194, sadly failed = lack of application); *unless* the UN gets serious and stops wars & injustices, THEN it is what it appears to be, namely a total sham and worse, actually in the service of - *rogue* regimes, see the current neo-colonialist, UNSC-sanctioned attacks on Libya. As I wrote on 20Mar'11 in Shockin' Whore Mk2, it's Iraq (murder for oil) all over again, this time in slow-motion (AusBC: "Britain wants NATO to ramp up attacks against Moamar Gaddafi's regime in Libya by attacking electricity grids, roads and even oil supplies.") Me: Gives new meaning to 'revolting.' These *aggressive attackers* are out of all control. Why? Who lets 'em? Not me, matey.

-=*=-

Propaganda is old; a mini-review:

This story may begin with a deployed lie: "Making the world safe for democracy!" This was a 'mantra' used by Wilson during WW1 to 'convince' the US public that joining the war against "the Boche" was a good idea. Water well under the bridge, but the real questions are two: Why did Wilson have to 'sell' the war anyway, with the 2nd, more sinister Q: Why did Wilson himself want war? A: Same-old same-old, see the modern, wicked M/I/C/4-plex; this tiny minority gets *richer*, while lots of the cannon-fodder gets *killed*, not to mention the squillion *innocent* collaterals. The significant thing is that Wilson's "Making the world safe ..." was a trick then, as it still is a trick today; proof = it's still being deployed. But it's not 'merely' a trick; it's also a lie, easily proven: A tricked = deceived electorate cannot vote 'straight' (hence the derived jibe: JWHoward ‘couldn't lie straight in bed.’)

Bernays was fascinated by the Wilson mantra, and even more so because of its effects. He was sooo fascinated that he turned it into a career, morphing 'propaganda' into PR = public relations, because of the extremely negative connotations of propaganda; usually rotten lies. Bernays was successful; perhaps his most infamous stunt was convincing women that they could smoke tobacco & get away with it. Note that a lot of "convince ... get away with" is still going on.

To illustrate some negativity here, consider this:

  «In his 1928 book, "Propaganda," he wrote:
"The conscious and intelligent manipulation of the organized habits and opinions of the masses is an important element in democratic society. Those who manipulate this unseen mechanism of society constitute an invisible government which is the true ruling power of our country."»
[frugalmarketing/John Forde]

Comment: As for an electorate deceived, so for one 'manipulated.' Bernays based his thinking on some of Freud's work, he of the 'un- and sub-conscious.' The theory went that the 'free' masses, with their unconscious drives would (somehow??!) run amok, so the masses could not be allowed to be free, and that meant crippling 'democracies' by the aforesaid manipulations via deceptions = propaganda = lies. A neater, more self-serving policy could hardly be imagined, proof = this one is still 'running,' and how.

Next bit:

  «First is simply that this kind of deeper selling to the subconscious can be used in all kinds of ways, not all of them good.
Joseph Goebbels, for instance, would later use another Bernays book, "Crystallizing Public Opinion," to sway desperate Germans toward Hitler's murderous agenda.»
[frugalmarketing/John Forde, ibid.]

Which leads directly to "The Big Lie."

[Pause, for reflection...]

Q: OK, how big?

A: Humongous!

-=*=-

A "Big Lie" doesn't even have to be prima facie 'believable' - just as long as it has enough 'shock value' to 'flip' the listeners into an *emotional*, outraged state. It's the essence of Freud's 'un- and sub-conscious' but in reverse; recalling that 'belief' is done in the absence of *evidence*, here 'belief' is invoked (via lies) in the absence of *intelligence*, any available intelligence having been *switched-off* (another 'novel' = newly deployed propaganda-construct) - by the emotional shock. Example: Dumping babies out of incubators to steal such incubators away, abandoning the babies to death on a cold, stone floor. The story was 'presented' (= conduited, assisted) by the MSM as 'news' = truth - but was later proven false, demonstrating the 4th Estate's corrupt & venal modus operandi. Example: Saddam's totally non-existent WMDs. Example: Libyan snipers, firing on innocents from roof-tops. Example: Women (wives!) as 'human shields.' Example: IMF chief rapes hotel-maid. Q: Are they mad? A: Yes; those who murder for spoil have zero qualms about lying. And they can do all of these viciously criminal things because they are psychopaths, possibly resulting from faulty socialisation, *OR*: Are they deliberately, malevolently 'produced' by deliberate 'manipulation' of their 'un- and sub-conscious' *immature* minds? Whatever; vile monsters is what they are.

And apart from their murders for spoil (Zs = soil, US = oil), they are killing our once jewel-like planet's ecosphere, by revving-up CO2 production, instead of going sustainable.

I realised the other day that I keep asking questions like "Why," precisely because we're all being kept mostly in the dark - by being told outright lies, as well as having critical info withheld. Q: Why? A: Beats me (rich getting richer in the face of utter catastrophe tends to 'flip' me into an *emotional*, outraged state) - and that ain't too flash, I'll tell ya - 'for free.'

-=*end*=-

PS; Q: Who's to blame?

A: All the liars.

The M/I/C/4-plex = Military, Industrial, Congress (US for 'parliament'), the 4th Estate = corrupt & venal MSM + AusBC et al..

The I/J/Z-plex should be self-explanatory; criminal key is Zionism.

The AIMs4S = alien/aggressor invading-murderers for spoil.

The schools producing the psychologists = PR-types.

The schools producing the economists = banksters.

The sheople for their damnable 'incuriosity.'

But not me; I see the evil, and blog it.

It's the best I can do - and you?

-=*=-

Ref(s):

[1] breach  -n. 1 (often foll. by of) breaking or non-observation of a law, contract, etc. 2 breaking of relations; quarrel. 3 opening, gap. -v. 1 break through; make a gap in. 2 break (a law, contract, etc.).  step into the breach help in a crisis, esp. as a replacement. [Germanic: related to *break] [POD]

[2] breach verb
1 the river breached its bank
BREAK (THROUGH), burst (through), rupture, force itself through, split; informal bust.
2 the proposed changes breached trade union rules
BREAK, contravene, violate, fail to comply with, infringe, transgress against; defy, disobey, flout, fly in the face of; law infract. [New Oxford Thesaurus]

-=*=-

Update, 17May'11;

Israeli Troops Kill Unarmed Palestinian Protestors On Borders
By Patrick O’Connor
Israeli soldiers yesterday killed at least fifteen Palestinians and wounded many more as they suppressed protests held at border posts facing Syria, Lebanon, and Gaza to mark the 63rd anniversary of the founding of the Zionist state
[http://countercurrents.org/oconnor160511.htm]

Nakba Sunday At Maroun al Ras
By Franklin Lamb
10 Palestinians were killed by Israeli snipers and more than 120 wounded, some critically. None of the demonstrators had weapons. Those murdered were all civilians from the camps and were shot in cold blood as they nonviolently placed Palestinian flags at the fence and gave the peace and victory sign
[http://countercurrents.org/lamb160511.htm]

Protesters Shot Dead For Shouting:
Nakba Remembrance Day 2011
By Brenda Heard
The Lebanese Army has confirmed that 10 protesters were shot dead and 112 wounded in Lebanon on Nakba Remembrance Day
[http://countercurrents.org/heard160511.htm]

Israeli Violence Marks Nakba Day
By Stephen Lendman
Israeli viciousness marked Nakba day commemorations, assaulting peaceful demonstrators in Gaza, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and along the Lebanese/Syrian borders. Mounting deaths, injuries and arrests were reported
[http://countercurrents.org/lendman160511.htm]

The Nakba: What Does It Mean In Human Terms?
By Sonja Karkar
The Nakba is the Palestinian catastrophe. It means upheaval, violence and cataclysmic loss; it describes the terror, which drove almost one million people out of their homeland, as well as the perpetual terror in exile –displaced, dispossessed, stateless, lost and forbidden to return; it remains the multiplying injustice of another people's sin burgeoning in our collective silence
[http://countercurrents.org/karkar160511.htm]

Israel's Attack On Humanitarian Ship To Gaza
By Michel Chossudovsky
The Spirit of Rachel Corrie (officially known as FINCH) carrying a humanitarian cargo to Gaza was attacked by an Israeli naval patrol within the so-called Palestinian Security Zone on May 15, at 10.54pm EDT
[http://countercurrents.org/chossudovsky160511.htm]

Comment: Explain 63+ bloody years of this vs. US/NATO attacking Libya.

NB: "Unarmed Palestinian Protestors ... Israeli snipers."

[«back»]