Forum Replies Created

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 331 total)
  • Author
    Posts
    • Fri, Sep 23, 2011 - 10:38am

      #35

      Vanityfox451

      Status Gold Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 28 2008

      Posts: 373

      count placeholder0

      Rome Wasn’t Burnt in a Day

    I always learn something from your posts ao. And here is one I found today that I thought I’d print out and paste up – made my day and reminded me of your work : –

    [Link]

    Rome Wasn’t Burnt in a Day

    Why is it that self-termed progressives are in full retreat (and have been for decades) from the witless army of angry clowns and hack illusionists of the U.S. rightwing?

    One contributing factor involves the sterile cultivation of the persona of the "reasonable liberal," a type favored and rewarded by the status quo-protective power brokers of the Democratic Party and by corporate media organizations that find useful his trait of rendering himself feckless (e.g., the current occupant of 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue) by the passion-annihilating (but self-serving) device of his preening amiability?

    But in so doing, the self-gelded liberal has sacrificed libido and discarded sacred vehemence for careerist privilege. Worse, the rest of us are advised to follow suit; that, in order to gain credibility, one must slouch towards center-hugging irrelevance.

    We are counseled that in order to navigate this age of corporate dominance that one’s irascible apprehensions and unruly aspirations must be suppressed, for such passions are deemed too radical for mainstream sensibilities, and are therefore regarded as impractical as they are untoward by the crackpot realists of the corporate bottom line whose dictates dominate the political discourse and economic arrangements of our time.
     

     

    "Prune down [a human being’s] extravagance, sober him, and you undo him."

    – William James                                  

    Yet these self-termed "realists," by means of their ad hoc machinations and hidden-in-plain-sight schemes, are responsible for the creation, promotion and maintenance of a financial system (and its attendant economic, political and ecological consequences) that is as sound as the flight plan of Icarus.

    When a nation displays this degree of a noxious mixture of mass ignorance and official mendacity, an age of peace and plenty becomes as possible as holding a tea dance in a tsunami.

    Yet facing folly is difficult. Stunned by the implications of one’s mistakes and misapprehensions, initially, one will reel in the direction of a familiar road–or be seized by an impulse to retreat from the casuistry-sundering fury of the larger world. Yet, as Thomas Paine averred, "A long habit of not thinking a thing wrong gives it a superficial appearance of being right." And as Albert Camus counseled, "Freedom is the right not to lie."

    With this in mind, shall we blunder off-road into the landscape of unquestioned narratives?

    For example, the following is a topic, when broached, that rarely fails to incur the manipulative rage of the perpetually adrenaline intoxicated right and causes liberals to drop to their knees in penance for sins never committed: The questioning of this culture’s reverential, unflagging "support of our troops" blunderbuss and attendant comic book hero-level palaver, such as, "all good Americans stand firm in our support of our troops and our war against the forces of international terrorism."

    A bit of personal perspective as to why I demur: Forty-eight years ago, this month, four young girls were murdered in the bombing of the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham Ala. At the time of the tragedy, I was a child living in Birmingham. I remember the event to this day. My father, freelancing as a photojournalist at the time, arrived on the scene not long after the blast. I remember him coming home shaken and pale. The event is seared into my memory…how the blind hatred of the vicious can erupt into daily life and inflict irreparable harm and abiding sorrow.

    Accordingly, this is why I can not abide U.S. wars of imperium e.g., its Shock and Awe bombing campaigns; the same modus operandi of those despicable, redneck bombers.

    The dead of Iraq, Central Asia and Libya were no more responsible for committing acts of terrorism against the people of the U.S. than those little girls, readying for a choir performance in the basement of that church in Alabama, were guilty of any crime perpetrated against the "white race."

    Moreover, the attacks staged on 9/11/2001 did not "œchange everything." The event merely sped up the trajectory of the national security state/military industrial complex towards the landfill of history.

    For more than a century, whether the propagandists of U.S. Empire promulgate the subterfuge of fighting "to make the world safe for democracy" or defending against "the evil empire," or waging a "war on terror"–the objective remains, to secure resources for the U.S. homeland. And that is what we, the populace of empire, can "thank a veteran" for providing.

    From the Blue Coats at Wounded Knee to the baby-faced tools of imperium at My Lai and Fallujah to the predator drones scouring Central Asia, the U.S. is the single largest perpetrator of terrorism worldwide. As all the while, guilty by their complicity citizens of the U.S. sit on their sofas, oblivious or unmoved by any event transpiring beyond their self-circumscribed field of reference. There should be a monument erected to the tragic legacy wrought by the acts of terrorism at "Ground Zero" — and it should be a statue representing a willfully ignorant fat-ass sitting on his couch, TV remote in hand, Cheetos crumbs stippled in the folds of his mouth.

    Granted, Lower Manhattan took a tragic hit, a decade ago, and many people suffered as a result (I know I live a couple of neighborhoods upwind) but none worse than the people of Iraq and Central Asia. Somehow, I suspected (and was proven sadly correct) that their experiences would not be evoked, as part of the 9/11 hagiography foisted and verbal monuments cast to sacred victimhood, as part of the official ceremony commemorating the event.

    Moreover, not long after 9/11, an attack was launched from Lower Manhattan that collapsed the global economy. I, for one, would like to hear a bit more about that.

    By parroting the self-serving hagiography of 9/11/01, as well as, "I support the warrior, but not the war" type fallacies, liberals continue to play right into the sustaining narratives of the national security state.

    Case in point, the empty, oft-heard, liberal pundit assertion, "My idea for a 9/11 tribute would involve bringing our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan home, with proper benefits." Nonsense. Worse than nonsense: Precious, cloying, self-congratulatory piffle. The statement is axiomatic of the feckless calls and specious cries common to that species of walking cliche known as "troop-supporting" liberals.

    As far as I’m concerned, "our troops" (human delivery systems of U.S. government sanctified terrorism–can walk home) that way, maybe, they might learn something about the larger world, other than their mission to kill the people they happen upon without question, and then share with their fellow belligerently ignorant countrymen what they learned about life (its sacred quality) on their long, Odysseusian journey home.

    Apropos, reasonable liberals counsel such declarations serve as "bad public relation" tactics. "Don’t you realize that you risk alienating Middle America? Remember, the reactionary fallout created by the radicalism of the 1960s?"

    The fact is: The passionate questioning of the entire war effort in Southeast Asia, the role of soldiers included, helped to bring an end to the war and factored into the soldiers’ rebellion at the later stages of the protracted conflict. In increasing numbers, the conscripts began to refuse to kill and die for a dubious cause…they went hippie on the ass of the military state.

    The activist left ended the war; self-serving liberals blew the peace.

    The "bad PR" involving "spitting on the troops" was after the fact, rightwing confabulation; promulgated to intimidate liberals into shamed silence, and, of course, liberals being liberals, it worked. True to form, they "distanced" themselves from the "troop-demoralizing radicals of the irrational left." In reality, they fled in fear from arrays of rightwing created strawmen.

    PR itself is the dubious craft of professional lying–corporate era legerdemain. In fact, the craft is the opposite of the resonate truth carried by deepening poetry, poignant prose and challenging political speech–the near exclusive domain of the left in the 1960s.
     
    You ask what makes me sigh, old friend
    What makes me shudder so

    I shudder and I sigh to think

    That even Cicero

    And many-minded Homer were

    Mad as the mist and snow.

    – William Bulter Yeats, except from Mad As The Mist And Snow     

    The inspired, enduring (very threatening to some) art, music and political action of the era were not the result of liberal accommodation and compromise. Antithetically, the cause of peace and justice (briefly) made some headway despite liberals not because of them.

    As a famous literary drunk once quipped, "Rome wasn’t burned in a day." Change will not come with a victim-centered view of the world…including viewing the nation’s toxically innocent, economic conscripts as mere victims of circumstance. Yes, young people make stupid choices–but treating them as victims does not serve them or the nation well.

    "Liberal compassion" should not be extended to countenancing acts of mass murderer. Time and time again, liberals play into rightist propaganda, by allowing the discussion of U.S. militarism to be framed as exclusively pertaining to the sacrifices of individual soldiers, whose fates, in the larger context of events, have been appropriated a device of imperial plunder. By truckling to this narrative, liberals play into the propaganda of those who prosper by the homicidal designs of the present day U.S. military state.

    Instead, let us endeavor to disabuse the culture of the delusion that there exists noble sacrifice in the act of killing and dying for the agendas of empire. When an individual U.S. soldier begins to stagger in the direction of his own humanity (renouncing his complicity in the death-sustained system, as many did during the Vietnam era) then we should open our arms and embrace him with a fierce compassion.

    On a personal basis, my family had little money. And I made many self-destructive choices, but I also had tenacious mentors who challenged me…called me on my destructive nonsense; pointing out the bulwark of denial and hubris that sustained its shabby, ad hoc structure. Making a home in being lost, I took up residence in the enduring structure of poetry, literature and music: Whitman, Kerouac, Rilke, Dylan, the Allman Brothers, Leonard Cohen, Iggy Pop, Joe Strummer, and others too numerous to name taught me to question, as the expression went, "everything."

    This is not rocket science; this is far more important; this is the essential subject matter that informs the propulsion and guidance systems of the human heart. Withal, instruct the young how to build and inhabit the structure of a cogent argument and to navigate a soul-suffused landscape of poignant verse, lyric, and insight.

    To do so, one must not shy away from confrontation. During the Civil Rights Movement and Vietnam War era, before the left was manipulated into fearing the libido borne of sacred vehemence, stupid opinions were not coddled; they were challenged.

    Feelings were hurt. Egos were bruised. But an illegal war was shortened and a number of (long over due) rights were granted.

     Having come
    the bitter way to better prayer, we have

    the sweetness of ripening. How sweet

                                                        to know you by the signs of this world!
      – Wendel Berry, excerpt from ‘Ripening’      
       

    At present, among the things we can ill afford are fantasy prone kids, duped into believing modern soldiering bestows nobility and involves heroic sacrifice. Instead, the times call for brave misfits, encouraged to embrace rejection by a dysfunctional society and primed to endure the inherent bumps and buffeting inflicted from a culture that has gathered into the formation of a flying wedge of self-destructive, crash-fated crazy. 

     

    Paul

    • Thu, Sep 22, 2011 - 02:37pm

      #33

      Vanityfox451

      Status Gold Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 28 2008

      Posts: 373

      count placeholder0

      The Nuremberg Principles

    I’m reminded of a quote from George W. Bush’ presidential memoir – Decision Points, where he wrote :

    "That is the nature of the presidency. Perceptions are shaped by the clarity of hindsight. In the moment of decision, you don’t have that advantage." -G. Bush

    The currency on that sentence alone is enough for me to conclude he is the least worthy character in the world to put pay to the past history of the United States, and use it as best practice in warding off Neische’ eternal return, by learning from the mistakes of that history – since there is so much of it – and governing from that perspective.

    There again, in fifty odd years, if any form of society – based on the current delusions of the above sited presidential incapacities and flock of minion’ – still have anything of the appearance of their stature today – I wonder if the test of time will conclude the same appeal to Chomsky, who, more often : –

    "… according to a recent survey by the Institute for Scientific Information, only Marx, Lenin, Shakespeare, Aristotle, the Bible, Plato, and Freud are cited more often in academic journals than Chomsky…"

    In the nature of that, to quote Wikipedia : –

    Avram Noam Chomsky : – born December 7, 1928) is an American linguist, philosopher, cognitive scientist and activist. He is an Institute Professor and Professor (Emeritus) in the Department of Linguistics & Philosophy at MIT, where he has worked for over 50 years. Chomsky has been described as the "father of modern linguistics" and a major figure of analytic philosophy. His work has influenced fields such as computer science, mathematics, and psychology.

    Chomsky is credited as the creator or co-creator of the Chomsky hierarchy theorem, the universal grammar theory, and the Chomsky–Schützenberger theorem.

    Ideologically identifying with anarchism and libertarian socialism, Chomsky is known for his critiques of U.S. foreign policy, and he has been described as a prominent cultural figure. His social criticism has included Manufacturing Consent: The Political Economy of the Mass Media (1988), co-written with Edward S. Herman, an analysis articulating the propaganda model theory for examining the media.

    According to the Arts and Humanities Citation Index in 1992, Chomsky was cited as a source more often than any other living scholar from 1980 to 1992. He is also the eighth most cited source of all time, and is considered the "most cited living author. Chomsky is the author of over 100 books.

    Pretty low then, in describing Chomsky as simply sinistral, and Bush as Dextral, – when in truth they are achiral, not chiral – they do not mirror one-another if you look at both with objectivity, as neither you or I are night, to the others day — though I am left-handed.

    The Nuremberg Principles

    If you happened to read the Nuremberg Principles, from that you would deduce that it is in fact correct that each of the President’s sited have committed war crimes worthy of the same death sentence as those that the set Principles were designed for [Link] : –

    Principle I

    Principle I states, "Any person who commits an act which constitutes a crime under international law is responsible therefor and liable to punishment."

    Principle II

    Principle II states, "The fact that internal law does not impose a penalty for an act which constitutes a crime under international law does not relieve the person who committed the act from responsibility under international law."

    Principle III

    Principle III states, "The fact that a person who committed an act which constitutes a crime under international law acted as Head of State or responsible government official does not relieve him from responsibility under international law."

    Principle IV

    Principle IV states: "The fact that a person acted pursuant to order of his Government or of a superior does not relieve him from responsibility under international law, provided a moral choice was in fact possible to him".

    This principle could be paraphrased as follows: "It is not an acceptable excuse to say ‘I was just following my superior’s orders’".

    Previous to the time of the Nuremberg Trials, this excuse was known in common parlance as "Superior Orders". After the prominent, high profile event of the Nuremberg Trials, that excuse is now referred to by many as "Nuremberg Defense". In recent times, a third term, "Lawful orders" has become common parlance for some people. All three terms are in use today, and they all have slightly different nuances of meaning, depending on the context in which they are used.

    Nuremberg Principle IV is legally supported by the jurisprudence found in certain articles in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights which deal indirectly with conscientious objection. It is also supported by the principles found in paragraph 171 of the Handbook on Procedures and Criteria for Determining Refugee Status, which was issued by the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). Those principles deal with the conditions under which conscientious objectors can apply for refugee status in another country if they face persecution in their own country for refusing to participate in an illegal war.

    Principle V

    Principle V states, "Any person charged with a crime under international law has the right to a fair trial on the facts and law."

    Principle VI

    Principle VI states,

    "The crimes hereinafter set out are punishable as crimes under international law:

     

    (a) Crimes against peace:
    (i) Planning, preparation, initiation or waging of a war of aggression or a war in violation of international treaties, agreements or assurances;
    (ii) Participation in a common plan or conspiracy for the accomplishment of any of the acts mentioned under (i).
    (b) War crimes:
    Violations of the laws or customs of war which include, but are not limited to, murder, ill-treatment or deportation of slave labor or for any other purpose of the civilian population of or in occupied territory; murder or ill-treatment of prisoners of war or persons on the Seas, killing of hostages, plunder of public or private property, wanton destruction of cities, towns, or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity.
    (c) Crimes against humanity:
    Murder, extermination, enslavement, deportation and other inhumane acts done against any civilian population, or persecutions on political, racial, or religious grounds, when such acts are done or such persecutions are carried on in execution of or in connection with any crime against peace or any war crime."


     

    Principle VII

    Principle VII states, "Complicity in the commission of a crime against peace, a war crime, or a crime against humanity as set forth in Principle VI is a crime under international law."

    This then, is proof that there is enough truth in the statement that holds water against the criminal actions of each president of the United States over the past 70 years. Or are there two sets of rules in the world, where one is for the U.S., and one is for the rest? After all, in the case of those Principles, and against the back-drop of history, it isn’t the worth in the die cast by each sided political character, than to the merrit in the truth behind the actions of each nation under the spotlight of the laws provided to protect those nations. Here then is the opinions of Albert Einstein and Leo Szilard, "who had together spurred the first bomb research in 1939 with a jointly written letter to President Roosevelt. Szilard, who had gone on to play a major role in the Manhattan Project, argued:

    "Let me say only this much to the moral issue involved: Suppose Germany had developed two bombs before we had any bombs. And suppose Germany had dropped one bomb, say, on Rochester and the other on Buffalo, and then having run out of bombs she would have lost the war. Can anyone doubt that we would then have defined the dropping of atomic bombs on cities as a war crime, and that we would have sentenced the Germans who were guilty of this crime to death at Nuremberg and hanged them?

    Mark Selden writes, "Perhaps the most trenchant contemporary critique of the American moral position on the bomb and the scales of justice in the war was voiced by the Indian jurist Radhabinod Pal, a dissenting voice at the Tokyo War Crimes Tribunal, who balked at accepting the uniqueness of Japanese war crimes. Recalling Kaiser Wilhelm II’s account of his duty to bring World War I to a swift end—"everything must be put to fire and sword; men, women and children; and old men must be slaughtered, and not a tree or house be left standing." Pal observed:

    "This policy of indiscriminate murder to shorten the war was considered to be a crime. In the Pacific war under our consideration, if there was anything approaching what is indicated in the above letter of the German Emperor, it is the decision coming from the Allied powers to use the bomb. Future generations will judge this dire decision…If any indiscriminate destruction of civilian life and property is still illegal in warfare, then, in the Pacific War, this decision to use the atom bomb is the only near approach to the directives of the German Emperor during the first World War and of the Nazi leaders during the second World War."

    Selden mentions another critique of the nuclear bombing, which he says the U.S. government effectively suppressed for twenty-five years, as worth mention. On 11 August 1945, the Japanese government filed an official protest over the atomic bombing to the U.S. State Department through the Swiss Legation in Tokyo, observing that:

    "Combatant and noncombatant men and women, old and young, are massacred without discrimination by the atmospheric pressure of the explosion, as well as by the radiating heat which result therefrom. Consequently there is involved a bomb having the most cruel effects humanity has ever known. . . . The bombs in question, used by the Americans, by their cruelty and by their terrorizing effects, surpass by far gas or any other arm, the use of which is prohibited. Japanese protests against U.S. desecration of international principles of war paired the use of the atomic bomb with the earlier firebombing, which massacred old people, women and children, destroying and burning down Shinto and Buddhist temples, schools, hospitals, living quarters, etc. . . . They now use this new bomb, having an uncontrollable and cruel effect much greater than any other arms or projectiles ever used to date. This constitutes a new crime against humanity and civilization."

    Selden concludes that despite the war crimes committed by the Empire of Japan, nevertheless, "the Japanese protest correctly pointed to U.S. violations of internationally accepted principles of war with respect to the wholesale destruction of populations."

    In drawing upon the above, I suppose you could say I have cherry-picked out of history one of a list of many that is discrimination enough to the actions of the United States, in proving my tolerants to your angle of argument. Yet you yourself cherry-pick out and away from the major issues surrounding Nixon and Cambodia time and time again, more often preferring to err on the side of some-such reasoning that the past two decades of actions against Iraq – when in truth there is a long list of duplicity on behalf of the U.S in acting as protecterate of its leader’s actions in the twenty years prior to the first Gulf war in the early nineties – that aids in proof through history of standing your continual argument on its head.

    The same proofs hold over Afghanistan upto the present – and it seems well beyond – where surely from your psychology background – in covering the illogical nature of nationalism – would put pay to that as a simple illusion, and therefore a mockery.

    I direct you to the three part documentary posted above.

    In a previous post on another thread, I noted your requirement for clarification over the righteous and covetous nature of the United States through the zelostry of its own religion over another. Your answers could be in part two.

    How Haliburton and the chair’s beside the Presidency intersect the profit through the illusions – peddled through a series of phony and escallating wars that are set to affect billions of people over the next century – can be found (through your choice) in part three.

    Your argument shouldn’t be directed at me, but with yourself …

    Paul

    • Wed, Sep 21, 2011 - 01:30pm

      #30

      Vanityfox451

      Status Gold Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 28 2008

      Posts: 373

      count placeholder0

      The Power of Nightmares: The Rise of the Politics of Fear …

    Here’s something that made me laugh out loud!!! Adam Curtis Wrote this in a recent blog of his [Link} : –

    Last week six Italian soldiers died in a suicide truck bomb-blast in Kabul. The deaths shocked Italy and a state funeral was held in Rome. At the funeral Prime Minister Berlusconi became the first western leader to call for the western troops to withdraw from Afghanistan.

    But Roberto Saviano the expert on the Neapolitan mafia – the Camorra – pointed out that Italy’s relationship to Afghanistan was far more complicated. The soldiers who died, he said, came from the south of Italy, an area where their life chances have been blunted by corruption and organised crime. Their only option out of the trap was the army – which had then taken them to Afghanstan. The country that produces 90% of the heroin in Italy and the rest of Europe.

    And it is that heroin that fuels the power and corruption of organised crime in Southern Italy.

    Anyway, I digress …

    If anyone were serious about getting a grip on the back-story through history in how and why the destruction of the Twin Towers came about, you couldn’t further your knowledge better than watching this excellent serialized documentary below.

    If you’re sick and tired of being out of the loop defending your stance – and wondering what the hell people are complaining about over American foreign policy – this could well be your answer in under three hours; under one if you just chose to watch the middle one, though I defy anyone could leave it there, what with it also blazing some of the blackest wit, and driest humour …

    Warning: Some of the information within will make you question your chosen (?) reality : –

    The Power of Nightmares:The Rise of the Politics of Fear

    Part 1: Baby it’s Cold Outside

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xGo1DqmfHjY

    Part 2: The Fantom Victory

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o0kNNqZk3mg&feature=related

    Part 3: The Shadows in the Cave

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qATc5jRbVOA&feature=related

    Paul

    • Wed, Sep 21, 2011 - 12:57pm

      #29

      Vanityfox451

      Status Gold Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 28 2008

      Posts: 373

      count placeholder0

      Digging into the Hypocrisy of the United States Presidency’

    It’s bad enough writing at this forum as it is, what with the internal politics raging away. Worse still when newbies stumble in without the knowledge of a couple of years experience to these politics like "a rose between two (or several) thorns"; or as a "lion in a room full of Daniels".

    Truthfully, we know damn fine why there has been no complete and honest criminal investigation to the twin tower attack. It cuts right across the board.

    Since this thread is called : – "What Does The CM Community Think About All the 9/11 Conspiracy: "Inside Job" Info Being Spread Underground?" – and I’m a member of this community, I thought I’d offer up a history lesson – though as you’ll see – not written from this overall groups concensus or perspective : –

    We can go back almost seventy years and see that every President of the United States should be put to death by use of the Nuremberg Principles for war crimes.

    Truman over Nagasaki.

    The Truman/ Eisenhower bombings in North Korea in 51′ and 52′, with Guatamala also reduced to a puppet regime; a tooth-pick, aiding the removal of chunks of that countries human flesh from the back molars of the United States empire.

    After a quick mouthwash and rinse, Kennedy’s attack on South Vietnam In 61′,  bombing villages and authorizing (Monsanto derived) napalm, along with attacks on Latin America, with the installation of Neo-Nazi gangsters; that with Kennedy’s demise, Johnson picked up the batten of.

    Or how about our good friend Nixon, massacring peasants in Cambodia, and helping create the basis for the Khmer Rouge – with what the CIA couldn’t hide, with the fact that 600,000 were killed in the course of those US actions.

    After a brief sojourn, the Carter years, and the Indonesian invasion of East Timor – started under Ford – that became the nearest thing to genocide since the holocaust, with upward of a third of the population slaughtered using the best part of 90% American arms, with Carter backing Somoza and his national guard.

    To continue, there’s the condemnation by the World Court during the Reagan administration for its aggression in Nicaragua, where In Central America alone, 200,000 people were slaughtered by US run programs. And in southern Africa, 1.5 million people were killed, according to the UN commission. 

    Bush senior, and the invasion of Panama, and Clinton bombing Baghdad without pretext , with half of military aid and training to Latin America under Clinton, by use of the School of the Americas – also used by previous president’s – as a matter of course.

    And on, and on, and on …

    Of course, many of the people that write in the main forum here have a totally hopeless understanding of their countries history, mainly because they’ve been educated through the self same media and schooling system that was provided from the same governmental media fed stance. So, there’s no mistaking the shock, dismay, or blatant opposition to the above, with plenty of denial, or outright aggression.

    But these are all crimes worthy of indictment that have yet to be acted upon, yet nothing has been done; and nothing will be done while the best part of the country remain unaware – or as an aware individual,  too repressed to stand up and fight for their own – and many a nations human rights – that have been shattered by the weight of their own countries empire building tactics.

    So I ask you, what would it take for any number of those countries to retaliate on the World Trade Centre?

    And more importantly – with the above factually drawn from recorded history that is more often publicised openly outside of the United States than within it – what more would be required with these type of national psychopathic tendancies – and without moral compass – to lay waste to a few buildings on Manhattan Island, killing a few thousand civilians to further escalate three-fold in the practice’ already learned?

    My thanks to Noam

    Paul

    • Tue, Sep 20, 2011 - 10:50pm

      #24

      Vanityfox451

      Status Gold Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 28 2008

      Posts: 373

      count placeholder0

      Hello AP,This is my

    Hello AP,

    This is my new-found playmate Juan Galt, who recently had the displeasure of meeting one of the site attack poodle’. I  just applied a salve for a  compression abrasion due to slobber gumming. If you have a mind, I’m curious if you could further the thread along with your usual eloquence, and just a tiny sprinkling of your finest soul candy?

    Best,

    Paul

    • Tue, Sep 20, 2011 - 04:41pm

      #22

      Vanityfox451

      Status Gold Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 28 2008

      Posts: 373

      count placeholder0

      Adam Curtis Blog

    Juan,

    I’m a huge fan of Adam Curtis.

    I sent you a post recently. I think that you’ll be in for a real treat if you watch through The Trap documentary series.

    In the mean time, these are the kind of taster’ I think you’ll appreciate: –





    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ae6vZE-gsAg

    Hopefully, these videos will entice you to go have a play in Adam Curtis’ BBC blog as well: –

    I’ll think of a few things and get back to you …

    Take Care,

    Paul

    • Tue, Sep 20, 2011 - 02:15pm

      #18

      Vanityfox451

      Status Gold Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 28 2008

      Posts: 373

      count placeholder0

      Crossing The Rubicon ~ by Michael C. Ruppert in PDF …

    Juan,

    Here’s a gift for you …

    A copy of Crossing The Rubicon ~ by Michael C. Ruppert in PDF [Link]

    An Amazon.co.uk independent Review of the book: –

    I have read this book twice, and returned to it for references on dozens of occasions. The central themes of this book are not 9/11 itself, but the Crises of War, Energy and Economy currently unfolding around us, much of which the author predicted and about which he is uniquely qualified to write. The author’s intention with his books and his From the Wilderness website, was to document how the world really works, as opposed to how we are told it works by the establishment.

    Recently on his blog, Mike Ruppert reiterated that he considers 9/11 a ‘dead issue’, with the ‘Truth Movement’ as it has become known, hijacked and co-opted by peripheral, unproveable or spurious theories – his reason for cutting ties back in 2005. The window of opportunity for ‘Meaningful Political Change’ has, he feels, also passed.

    Yet this book is still relevant, and its author still stands by it. As unchallenged as it has been ignored by the mainstream, "Rubicon" sits in the Harvard Business School Library, its documented and referenced material backed up by 1000 footnotes. Reader’s will not find any references to ‘physical evidence’ in this book, except an explanation by the author as to why, through hard experience, he concluded that such evidence never succeeds in overturning an established government lie in the minds of the populace as a whole, no matter how glaring it may be.

    Instead the book concentrates on a legally admissible case of Means, Motive and Opportunity. A central point relating to the author’s work, including this book, is that the events of the last ten years were not merely ‘business as usual’ for the American Empire, with the UK as its Junior Partner, but rather a massive leap forward in aggressive militarism, motivated by the knowledge that global oil reserves would soon no longer be able to supply demand as production plateaued, and that the US economy, overburdened by trillions of dollars of debt, was no longer sustainable.

    The US’s attempt to stave off the economic crash by ‘spending’ its way out of trouble and investing billions in its military machine, only delayed the inevitable for a few short years before a 500% rise in energy prices toppled the debt ridden economy, and the world’s along with it. Energy and Money are Siamese Twins in this paradigm. "Rubicon" lays out a foundation for these current crises by documenting the years of financial looting and corruption by Wall Street Elites, their connection to the CIA and its drug trafficking and money laundering operations, the relationship between drugs, money, oil and war and how hi-tech software and hardware has been utilised to manipulate the markets and spy on the public worldwide.

    The book goes on to explain US policy in the Middle East and Central Asia in relation to oil reserves and strategic positions and the coercion of erstwhile allies such as Saudi Arabia. It also details the ambiguous relationships between prominent US Elites and Saudi’s connected to ‘Jihadist’ terrorism and the role of ‘Proxies’ such as Pakistan’s ISI. It references Zbigniew Brzezinski’s "The Grand Chessboard" as the blueprint for US strategy of hegemony in these regions, and documents the increase in surveillance and suppression of dissent domestically. Read in conjunction with his latest book "Confronting Collapse" (on which a recent documentary film "Collapse" is based), and his various blog and website resources, "Rubicon" presents a metaphorical "map" of world events with which readers can understand what is happening, what is likely to happen and how they can prepare for a future with declining energy resources, crumbling infrastructure, collapsing governmental control and an uncertain economic climate.

    This talk by Ruppert aligns well with the book and is very prescient indeed, when you realise when it was filmed : –









    All that remains to be said is, go buy the book for a more permanent future reference …

    Paul

     

    • Tue, Sep 20, 2011 - 01:53pm

      #17

      Vanityfox451

      Status Gold Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 28 2008

      Posts: 373

      count placeholder0

      What a pleasant thread …I

    What a pleasant thread …

    I thought you’d written that you’d chosen to leave out journeying down to the basement Rick?

     

    • Tue, Sep 20, 2011 - 12:25pm

      #61

      Vanityfox451

      Status Gold Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 28 2008

      Posts: 373

      count placeholder0

      Legacy …

    I often wonder to myself what it is that people believe they are defending. What is more, if they can even begin to percieve the larger picture, living in a world that offers benefits that skew an incredible imbalance in favour to 311 million of their own kind, with an energy advantage that is fairly twenty times more than almost 70% of the rest of the world, in support of their lives.

    This luxury surely colours perception, yet more often means that those least able to empathise are those with the most power to cause the greatest changes with this advantagous excess.

    A fair comedy also, in the idea that what is written here by people will become some kind of official mandate through their scribbling, in creating the necessary changes required to make this world – our percieved world – a better place to live for everyone.

    This is simply not the case, as the number of people who will read this thread – and most every other – are so small as to be insignificant – as to the percentage in the possibility there is a Satre, a Russell, a Berlin, a Marx, a Friedman, a Stalin or a Mao in the making, that will carry the future to whatever conclusion, in support of whoever held the strongest winning ideology in this forum.

    The changes afoot in the world today are merely the metaphorical openings of a first chapter. A first chapter premise to the outcome of the rest of a book yet to be written, but with its conclusion fraught with a certainty through knowledge gained from The Crash Course – if you will – where the high possibility that upward of six of the seven billion human inhabitants of the planet today – along with most of their descendant – will die through famine, drought, and ultimately war – no matter what we do over these next fifty to eighty years – due to global geological energy constraint.

    What is clear in my mind though, are the chances that with enough comprehension, our lives – and the lives of our families and our friends – will be a part of that one billion who survive through the legacy from our hard-gained, fought and won common understanding at this forum.

    So …

    Questions have been asked, and sides have been aligned and allied to. But who is DK? Is he a villain who is trying to harvest the minds of the innocent, any more than Chris Martenson? is Goes211 backing the legacies of Pinochet, Nixon, Reagan or Thatcher, any more or less than Safewrite – any more than means for accusation; and by what ends? In other words, was the idea in creating this forum simply a means to find fault in everything, or to find means in developing new understandings of old foe, and a value in gaining better answer to the deepest questions that we have, by finding best comfort in both number and agreement in kind?

    Beyond accusation, we only have ourselves to blame if the outcome of our entire lives was plainly drawn from our own ignorance, instead of through enlightenment.

    I want to be taught, and I wisht to teach. I want to continue to be directed to great minds of our time and of our past. To books, documentaries and articles, written and created with the best of intention. I want their help in proving and disproving, and I want those with the greatest minds to help influence, with my self improvement and survival in mind.

    Paul

    • Tue, Sep 20, 2011 - 01:52am

      #57

      Vanityfox451

      Status Gold Member (Offline)

      Joined: Dec 28 2008

      Posts: 373

      count placeholder0

      Cake or Death

    Getting back on track …

    Milton Friedman : Cake or Death ~





    Paul

     

Viewing 10 posts - 1 through 10 (of 331 total)