The Revictimization Relief Act. Mind-bogglingly unconstitutional. These protestors know. The country, and Pennsylvania apparently, sleeps. I thought I saw everything. But nothing compares to this, as Sinead might intone. Herein are my protestations and objections as well as a disquisition on cognitive dissonance and the pursuit of relative truth. Remember: Truth is relative. So is incest. (Ahem.)
It’s very simple. Thought. Idea. Motive. Inclination. That which propels or drives or inspires. That is the essence of ideation and when you penalize it, directly or indirectly, you’ve created thought crimes. And that is the subject of this disquisition for your edification and review.
Why bother? That’s antithetical to common thought, I know. But it’s true. Look at how Obama’s abnegated virtually everything he originally and allegedly stood for. His most ardent acolytes and apostles have jumped ship. Here’s more of Quigley’s quote that forms the basis of my belief system. sadly, I admit.
“The argument that the two parties should represent opposed ideals and policies, one, perhaps, of the Right and the other of the Left, is a foolish idea acceptable only to doctrinaire and academic thinkers. Instead, the two parties should be almost identical, so that the American people can ‘throw the rascals out’ at any election without leading to any profound or extensive shifts in policy” (Georgetown University Professor Carroll Quigley, Tragedy and Hope, 1966.)
By perpetuating this canard through voting for the “lesser of two evils” (who, last time I checked, is still evil) we just ask for more of the same and we get it. We’re being held hostage for a two-party system that’s two sides of the same coin.
Video, anyone? This might explicate in a different way.
Remember when you were a kid? It was the last time you truly wondered aloud. You imagined and played and daydreamt. You pretended and played make believe. You can do that today as an adult. To a point. It’s called religion. But I digress. I ever stopped daydreaming. About everything and anything. And while I can’t fathom imagining about created doxies and superstition and mythology, nothing is more truly awe inspiring that EBEs and ETs and space and time and particle physics and the entire lot of dark energy. Visitable by free energy. Am I making sense? (I didn’t think so.)
Limpid. Pellucid. Got it. Notwithstanding the crudeness of the message, it’s perfect in explicating the sense of abandon that I feel. A loss of contact and reality. Not with my reality. But yours. Because if you’re like virtuously everyone I come into contact with, you’re happily ensconced in a parallel universe where everything’s happy and nice. I’m awash in the benighted. Defined as “in a state of pitiful or contemptible intellectual or moral ignorance.” Incapable of understanding just how horrid the human condition can be.
CNN may finally have gotten it right. Recently when the presenter infra from CNN spoke anent Ebola, the following lower third appeared which caused quite the stir among the mynah birds in the unimaginative media. I must share a confusion as to what this message actually connoted, but it nonetheless highlighted the naïveté that the doddering dolts suffer from in a world of avowed eugenicists and Malthusian madmen. Now, I’m not saying Ashley knows any of this and ditto for the MSM-bots who chimed in like bleating sheep, but the notion of bioterror used as a vehicle for depopulation is nothing new.
His Royal Virus. In my circle we’re most aware of this feller, Prince Phil. Actually a Greek, but after all, with the multi-generational inbreeding what do you expect, Phil is forever famous for this beaut of a quote. And he wasn’t kidding.
So, who’s the conspiracy theorist now? Now, I know this is too much for most to grasp. It’s heady and nasty stuff, granted. But be on the lookout for a host of issues to arise anent Ebola — bioterror, the weaponization of the virus, the utilization of pathogens for depopulation and the like. And where would we ever get ideas like that? History. Google “depopulation.” I’ll wait.
Who’s afraid of Naomi Wolf? The NYPD apparently. Here she is arrested in 2011 at Occupy Wall Street for standing lawfully on the sidewalk wearing an evening gown. I didn’t even know that was against the law.
This is the way you treat the author of “Vagina: A New Biography”?! Yep. Naomi Wolf suggested the following on her Facebook page infra. It dares to call into question the authenticity of portions of the ISIS beheading narrative. It happens to repeat the hypotheses and theories of many others. It’s not particularly novel or earth-shattering to you and me, lovers of truth. But it is to the benighted and the profoundly nescient. And who might that be? The media, of course.
This was followed by her clarification in view of the reaction Wolf received. She had to back up and back down, spew apologias and pretend to be contrite if she dared hurt anyone’s feelings. This, of course, is the requisite reaction to anything that may be sound or valid. Just ask Joe Biden who apologized for speaking the truth anent ISIS paymasters. You see, even Joe can’t go off the official storyline. That’s a no-no, Joe-Joe.
My letter to some news outlets:
“Dear Sir or Madam,
I see that the Sydney Morning Herald, Talking Points Memo and the Guardian are all addressing the fact that I, and my citizen journalism community on facebook, has asked for normal journalistic sourcing on the ISIS story.
Some of the coverage distorts the nature of my questions.
I am not asserting that the ISIS videos have been staged. No one can yet know anything for sure about the ISIS videos as they have simply not been independently analyzed, according to the news outlets which we have contacted for more information about the verification process. I am simply reporting what we have had confirmed by public editors of several newspapers: the fact that the videos have only one source and have not been independently verified. This second verification is – or used to be — a normal part of news investigation.
I certainly sincerely apologize if one of my posts was insensitively worded. I have taken that one down.
But that does not mean I don’t stand by the need for all journalists to have two independent sources confirming a major story before they release it as confirmed.
More importantly for journalism and for the long haul facing us as a planet as we react to these videos: I am not saying the ISIS beheading videos are not authentic. I am not saying they are not records of terrible atrocities. I am saying that they are not yet independently confirmed by two sources as authentic, which any Journalism School teaches, and the single source for several of them, SITE, which received half a million dollars in government funding in 2004, and which is the only source cited for several, has conflicts of interest that should be disclosed to readers of news outlets.
Why is this even controversial? There are plenty of reasons for the normal vetting process of news to take place here, as in any news story. There could be plenty of reasons that a violent extremist group may wish to manipulate what it communicates to the rest of the world, and the job of newspapers is independently to verify a news story that is driving massive change — boots on the ground — airstrikes — and most worrying to me, lasting suppression of critical liberties such as the bills that just passed in Australia threatening all journalists there with ten years in prison for national security reporting. I hope, finally, that the nation of my/our request for proper, normal news sourcing is clear.
I will add: a hundred thousand Iraqis and four thousand young and brave American men and women, US soldiers, died terrible deaths — deaths as awful as any depicted right now in these videos — because American reporters and editors did not check on a news stream full of assertions that turned out to be straight-out false, about WMD. At that time reporters and editors simply took dictation from government sources. The false story made it into several major respected news outlets, including one of our most august newspapers, New York Times.
And we rushed to war.
We are here again. It is of course terrible to see videos purporting to show assassinations; it is terrible that anyone is assassinated anywhere. But if we don’t do our jobs as journalists and citizens and check all the news on the basis of which we are being rushed into war — and on the basis of which Australia and Britain are being stripped drastically and speedily of historic freedoms, — then many worse things will happen to children and old people, and to our brave young men and women in that part of the world, than a hundred thousand videos will be able to document. Terrible deaths may be ahead for many innocent people, probably out of camera range, many many multiples of the deaths on the videos I am seeking to double source now, if journalists and editors do not independently verify the news now.
And it will be our fault, as journalists and editors. That is why we should do our job and double source the news.
Thank you — Naomi Wolf”
The gatekeepers speak. As an example of the heat directed towards Wolf, look to the scathing attack she was handed by none other than the literary titan and journalistic crown jewel Vox. Ouch.
Note also that Wolf has issued her response and clarification to the farfetched notion that what we think we know, we may not. That what is presented may require independent verification and dogged journalism. I mean, imagine that! What could ever possess this woman to think for a moment that what we’re told may not be the truth, that it might be exaggerated or obfuscated or bowdlerized or skewed? That something might be used deliberately to enrage and motivate a particular ideology or course of action.
Can you believe this? And while this may fall on deaf ears, questioning facts is not meant as disrespect for a family. But, with all due respect, even if it is, so what? Any inquiry and query based on suspicion or skepticism can and will be viewed as disrespect to someone — the government, society, America, whatever.
The Hegelian Dialectic personified. Klein also noted on Facebook: “The US benefits from … us being SO DAMN SCARED so that our intelligence agencies can take away the last of our freedoms on behalf of corporate interests the way intelligence agencies in the West are doing all over … Britain, Canada, Australia, next NZ … so there you are.”
I’m sorry, but is this supposed to be insane? This is precisely the goal of any government. Haven’t you read the papers, studied history? As Rahm Emanuel now famously put it: “You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it’s an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before.”
And notice that she even goes so far to question the who the folks are of the website SITE as did another dread “conspiracy theorist” of renown Alex Jones did through his website, that, by the by, is replete with source references, citation and links.
Since mid-August 2014 major news organizations have conveyed videos allegedly found online by the SITE Intelligence Group.Unsurprisingly the same media have failed to closely interrogate what the private company actually is and whether the material it promotes should be accepted as genuine.
The Search for International Terrorist Entities Intelligence Group (SITE) was co-founded by Rita Katz in 2001.
In 2003 Katz authored a book, Terrorist Hunter: The Extraordinary Story of a Woman Who Went Undercover to Infiltrate the Radical Islamic Groups Operating in America, which she published using the pseudonym, “Anonymous.”
The CIA manipulating videos?! I’m shocked! The CIA’s already and repeatedly admitted to forging and conspiring to forge a host of videos in the past. This is nothing new. Not to us, that us. The “us,” who reads the truth. Damn! That word again. Truth.
During planning for the 2003 invasion of Iraq, the CIA’s Iraq Operations Group kicked around a number of ideas for discrediting Saddam Hussein in the eyes of his people.
One was to create a video purporting to show the Iraqi dictator having sex with a teenage boy, according to two former CIA officials familiar with the project.
“It would look like it was taken by a hidden camera,” said one of the former officials. “Very grainy, like it was a secret videotaping of a sex session.”
The idea was to then “flood Iraq with the videos,” the former official said.
And you certainly must know of the workings of the Rand Corporation, especially in this exercise. (Just pretend you do.) In “Why the Iraqi Resistance to the Coalition Invasion Was So Weak,” you get a peak into the incredible imagination of these folks.
“According to histories of the 2003 invasion, the single most effective ‘information warfare’ project, which originated in the Pentagon, was to send faxes and e-mails to Iraqi unit commanders as the fighting began, telling them their situation was hopeless, to round up their tanks, artillery and men, and go home,” the article states. “Many did.”
Naomi’s not the first to question “ISIS” videos. The Telegraph reported that video of James Foley’s execution may have actually been staged, with the actual murder taking place off-camera. Experts noted that no blood could be seen, even though the knife is seen drawn across the neck area at least six times. “Forensic analysis of the footage of the journalist’s death has suggested that the British jihadist in the film may have been the frontman rather than the killer.”
“After enhancements, the knife can be seen to be drawn across the upper neck at least six times, with no blood evidence to the point the picture fades to black,” the analysis said.
Sounds allegedly made by Foley do not appear consistent with what may be expected.
During Foley’s speech, there appears to be a blip which could indicate the journalist had to repeat a line.
One expert commissioned to examine the footage was reported as saying: “I think it has been staged. My feeling is that the execution may have happened after the camera was stopped.”
However the company, which requested anonymity, did not reach a definitive answer.
It concluded: “No one is disputing that at some point an execution occurred.”
So, what’s the beef with what she said? What? I’ll answer the question. Nothing.
Melted and damaged mannequins after a fire at Madam Tussaud’s Wax Museum in London, March 1925
Hauntingly seductive. The Madame Tussaud’s fire was quite the story and originally published in the Manchester Guardian on 19 March 1925. How creepy is this? You thought these were real at first, be honest. Especially the heads strewn about on the floor. Shades of ISIS, right? Look how realistic these look. And look how easy it is to create the illusion of disaster. And using 1925 standards, no less. The symbolism of beheading transcends anything that the garden variety terrorist can invoke or convey. Much of what you see is illusion, I’m sorry to say. And illusion doesn’t necessarily connote creating something that’s really not there. It also represents exaggerating something into an imagery that fuels a heightened horror exaggeratedly.
Is POTUS safe? Are there not-so-veiled messages being given as to dissatisfaction with this administration. I’m not alone in asking this question. Foreign media, in particular. In my lifetime I saw a President struck down in broad daylight before the world. These incidents should shock this country to its core. Wake up. And now, after the umpteenth breach of the President’s security perimeter, our feckless and impuissant mainstream media stand around sucking their thumb and scratching their arse.
Rogue networks and dark forces lie within the recesses of government. They exist because we look the other way. We care not to wax conspiratorial or embrace the psycopathy of the ruling class. That’s scary and icky and it destroys the tissue thin veneer of our self-imposed delusion. I’m tired of coups, in my country. No more. No mas.
Watch my Twitter feed this week for more updates on this in particular. And pay attention. I fear the worst, if history means anything. Expose the internecine plotters. Open your eyes. This isn’t Game of Thrones. It’s even more medieval, more Machiavellian, more Venetian in its sinister basis.
The Corbett Report. I had a wonderful time visiting with the inimitable James Corbett of the eponymous report. I commend you to his site here. The subject was fascinating: Little Brother. But watch the twist, two ways to take and understand the concept. Most fascinating. James Corbett also references “suevaillance,” the means of attacking and addressing impermissible surveillance through the art of litigation. Pithy, eh?
Technically, this is not an assault weapon. No group annoys me more than the gun nuts. Those nuts about those nuts about guns. They have a disproportionate enmity and focus on that which they know absolutely nothing about. But why should any semblance of rudimentary knowledge be a part of forging and forcing an opinion on a subject of Constitutional significance? It’s so . . . oh, what’s the word. Yes, disproportionate.
The word comes to mind when I recall listening to yet another Middle East expert wax inane about, you guessed it, Israel and Hamas. Note, I said Hamas versus Gaza. And this expert repeated seemingly without surcease that her main objection was the disproportionate use of force. By Hamas, I asked? No, of course not, she stomped. As the discussion continued I asked whether the point of war was to be disproportionate. After all what is a proportionate or proportional war? The point of this example was to show how an argument can be crafted and culled and presented in a way that’s not so much critical thinking but the rote and patellar of catchphrases and shibboleths, all the product of a Pavlovian obeisance to the script. That’s not to say that these folks have not a valid basis of objection or concern, oh no. But it does say and show that so much of political concerns are expressed via the memorized rant. Take the Brothers Koch. How many times have you seen the internalized, rehearsed screed pour from the lips of the robotized opinionater? Too many to count, I’ll say.
This has absolutely nothing to do with anything. But that never stopped me. If you’ve ever worked in a corporate setting, you’ve undoubtedly seen the lifer. The never going to leave, never go to be replaced secretary, program director or corporate robot. Just once I’d love to hear this as an outgoing recorded phone message.
“You’ve reached ____, technically and theoretically the ____ of this institution. Well, that’s my title. Titular, to be sure. Actually I couldn’t hire or fire the cleaning woman as I’ve no real power. I’m just a corporate place setter. I don’t return calls or emails. I just lay low. Hoping no one realizes that I actually do nothing. If I make my way to the ladies room, I’ll carry a clipboard or box, something that conveys the idea that I’m doing something. I’ve done pretty well for myself considering the turmoil of the economy and the vicissitudes of real life. I’ve been through every incarnation of this company and seem to always survive the cut, primarily because no one knows I’m even here, to be honest. I actually took maternity leave and came back and no one knew I was gone. I leave my office door constantly open with the lights on and with a sweater on the back of my chair, like I just stepped out. I’m like herpes. I lie dormant for a while then flair up. Just to remind you I’m here. But I never go away. In fact, you can’t get rid of me because of the incredible paper trail I’ve amassed. I’ve got the boys upstairs by the short hairs and could nail the lot of them on racial, sexual, ethnic and/or age discrimination. Pick your poison. HR has a special division dedicated just to me. I’ve kept all the emails and late night drunken text messages. Just try to get rid of me. I dare you. After the tone, please leave a message and have a nice day.”
And now the star of the show. The podcast. The cast of pod. Listen, enjoy and sink neath the comfy percales of downy logic. Your welcome.
The never-ending, revolving door of terror bogeymen. I commend to you a most fascinating piece that highlights and details the deep-seated and internecine rudiments of the history of the latex chimera that’s been added to your horror palette. John McCain, Conductor of the “Arab Spring” and the Caliph by French intellectual, founder and chairman of Voltaire Network and the Axis for Peace Conference, Thierry Meyssan, an intellectual of the first order who dissects, deconstructs and denudes the multiple layers of fact and fiction unabashedly and valiantly. Why nothing from our own truth sentries, the self-appointed American media, who sink lower into the bog of bottom feeders by showing not a shred or iota of curiosity about anything. Oh, pardon me. No, I stand corrected. When it comes to sex videos of Neanderthal athletes, nude photos purloined from the clouds, celebrity deaths (within reason, mind you), anything that is relevance-shallow and sordidness-dense, they’re all over it and own it. But we shan’t worry about their puerile preoccupations, will we? No, we’re focused, laser-like on the relevant and what matters.
It’s a story as old as time. Since petro-imperialism emerged, Western ruling class members wanted to crush the British influence that was enjoyed in and around the Arabian Peninsula. And the easiest way to do that was the tried and true method of arming and organizing groups, factions, tribes and sects that posed a direct and lethal threat to those whom you wanted to depose or dispossess. The problem, as is evident to anyone with two neurons to rub together and working synapses, is that once a group is introduced to leverage against a foe, you’re more often than not unable to withdraw the group you’ve introduced. Look no further than UBL and the mujaheddin in Zbigniew Brzezinski’s war based on a massive hard-on he had for that which was the Soviet Union. The story made absolute sense and for a good movie. Problem is, Sparky, you create a monster in the mean time. But not to worry, that’s what the media are here for.
Ted Baxter, the Patron Saint of the Insipid Media. Since the days of Operation Mockingbird it’s been obvious and evident that media sources were at the beck and call of the CIA and various government agencies.
“You could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month.” – CIA operative discussing with Philip Graham, editor Washington Post, on the availability and prices of journalists willing to peddle CIA propaganda and cover stories. “Katherine The Great,” by Deborah Davis (New York: Sheridan Square Press, 1991)
The groundwork was laid. The connections cemented. So, is it any wonder that the average American has at best a fanciful ideation of the realities that are the world? Go to any newsroom and look around. Gone are the seasoned vets, the vetted vets, the adults, the experienced, the schooled in history, the unabashedly brilliant and erudite, the delightfully suspect and skeptical. Look around the newsrooms of American media outlets today and what do you see? Under the stewardship of the recycled lifer, the has-beens of yore, the corporate shill, the bottom line watchdog, look and see the new crop of journalists. The 20-something per diem’d serfs, manning a gutted newsscape, shuttered resources and scuttled passions for unearthing and illuminating.
It’s no wonder America scratches its arse in bemused, confused and oddly amused superimposition of the bad guys and terrorists. That’s the cover for the bad guys, the ruling class. The asset-stripping jackals, globalist hyenas and predatory derivatives snake oil salesman who’s helped in creating this gossamer latticework, this tissue and veil of meaningless securities fictions that will most assuredly result in the implosion of world monetary systems through corrupt central banks and . . . under the protection of the duped media who divert the attention of the American people. Like a parent who jiggles her keys to quiet a squawking infant, wailing and lachrymating in fear.
Media branches are now feeder systems and pipelines for the government and the official story. They’re repeaters, not reporters. “Presstitutes,” using the Celente moniker.
Water, water, every where, Nor any drop to drink. The oft-misquoted line from The Rime of the Ancient Mariner by Coleridge. How appropriate and timely for neoimperialism will be the motivation and impetus of the next casus belli. After rare earth metals and lithium. But I’m getting ahead of myself.
A fascinating article on hydro-imperialism appeared in Global Research. Am I covering too many items, too many areas of concern. This I know your media have covered not.
According to the U.S.-based Center for Public Integrity, Western nations stand to make up to a US$1 trillion from privatizing, purifying and distributing water in a region where water often sells for far more than oil.
Although over two thirds of our planet is water, we face an acute shortage. This scarcity flies in the face of our natural assumptions. The problem is that 97 percent is salt water. Great for fish, not so good for humans. Of the world’s fresh water, only one percent is available for drinking, with the remaining two percent trapped in glaciers and ice.
Put differently: if all the water on earth was represented by an 11-litre jug, the freshwater would fill a single cup, and we can only access the last drop. [e.s.]
A ruling class need not be monolithic, however. In fact, most ruling classes are divided into two broad factions, which we may call the political class and the corporate class. The political class comprises those who are in direct control of running the state — politicians, civil servants, and the like; the corporate class, on the other hand, comprises the wealthy quasi-private beneficiaries of state power — the collectors of subsidies, government contracts, and grants of monopoly privilege. These two groups might be called the Bureaucrats and the Plutocrats.
“Can We Escape the Ruling Class?” by Roderick T. Long
I know. I know. You never heard about this in history class. Talk like this destroys any semblance of faith that you enjoyed. True. This doesn’t comport with your history. Double true. But as Tolstoy said, history would be a wonderful thing if only it were true. Such is reality, impression and the news. Wonderful if only it were true. True if only it were wonderful.
And I’ll be in Scotland afore ye. Who cares about Alba, right? I care. I cared that maybe this would strike a blow against globalism and the subjugation of sovereignty through the barbed wire of the dread Union. Globalists yearn for the future EUs. Now, look. Lest you be confused. The UK ain’t the EU. Dig. But there’s something that’s completely inconsistent with and antithetical to freedom and that is consolidation and shared sovereignty. The notion of shared and concomitant partnership are wonderful, but that’s not what I’m speaking of in this world we live.
The NFL is brain scrambled toast. I’d have never imagined that the bastion of maleness would capitulate like a bunch of little sissy boys especially under the tutelage and stewarding of Roger Goodell. Why must the NFL have a policy on domestic violence and child abuse? Tell me what Whole Foods’ policy is. Or GM’s. What utter rubbish. And what’s feint the maelstrom is social media. Yet again.
And behold miscellany. The myriad. The mosaic. The plenary and assorted and sordid. Stream of unconsciousness. Enjoy.