Posts Tagged ‘government’

Coronavirus: Something Wrong Here

April 10, 2020

by R Vic Damico
April 10, 2020

THE GOVERNMENT TOLD US SURRENDER OUR LIVES TO THEM, AND WE DID JUST THAT: WHY ARE PEOPLE NOT QUESTIONING WHAT IS HAPPENING?

Let’s go back a couple of years and look at what happened in the year 2018. In 2018, there were 35,500,000 reported cases of the flu. 16,500,000 people actually received medical treatment for the flu. 490,600 people were hospitalized for the flu. A total of 34,200 people died from the flu. And this was exclusively here in America where these numbers were reported. Why did our government, and the mainstream media not tell us to stay at home? Why did our government, and the mainstream media not tell us to avoid being around other people? Why were people not waiting in lines at the grocery stores as they attempted to purchase food and other items which may or may not still be on the shelves? Why was our healthcare system not shut down and only accepting emergency patients? Why did we not move our society to a point of total chaos and confusion just because the government decided to basically shut down normal societal activities?

First of all, I do not accept the above numbers as being accurate, mainly because the source of these numbers cannot be trusted, just as is true with the numbers we are hearing today relating to the coronavirus. The government and the mainstream media has told us to basically surrender our lives, and put our freedoms on hold, and sadly, they are getting very little resistance from our collective society, nor do many even bother to ask questions relating to this very questionable societal disruption.

We are being fed these massive numbers daily, relating to coronavirus cases and coronavirus deaths, and people don’t question anything, as if either the government or the mainstream media have ever been a reliable source for the truth. We are told of long lines of people waiting to get tested or treated at hospitals for the coronavirus, yet, no one can find evidence of those long lines anywhere. People are staying at home because they have been told to do so, and unless we woke up in 1940 Germany this morning, this should be troubling to all of us. People are losing their jobs, businesses are closing down, and the stock market is being pushed to the point that we literally do not know what to expect from one day to the next, and this is all transpiring because the government is making it happen.

The world is being turned upside down because of a virus which is far less reaching into our society than the annual flu problem we have grown to anticipate every single year. It is like we are experiencing a global societal experiment to see how quickly and thoroughly our global society can actually be shut completely down. By the way, obviously the answer to that question is now “it can be shut down in just a few days.” Lives will be changed forever; some will never recover economically, and the small businesses, especially here in the states, will take a hit they may not have seen since that cold November of 1929. In the short time that our nation, and even the world has been shut down, people seem to have just accepted the fact that they are just supposed to act and behave as the governments tells them. We, as a collective society seem to be willing to forfeit our daily rights and freedoms when the government decides it is in our best interest. Like it or not; believe it or not; the government, along with the help of the mainstream media now know that they can shut us down completely whenever they wish to do so. And if you don’t believe it, maybe you should ask yourself why we are shut down as I type these words?

Vic Damico

MORE about Coronavirus and the way fear and panic is used by the elites

Who Would Want To Destroy The World? More People Than You Might Think

October 27, 2019

As well as megalomaniac tyrants woth access to weapons of mass destruction, mad scientists busy genetically modifying viruses and bacteria in order to weaponise the air we breathe and the water we drink, the corporate greed that drives companies to fill our food and environment with toxic shite in their quest for bigger profits, we have social justice warriors calling for the genocide of ethnic Europeans (having completely failed to notice that they, themselves, are mostly of European extraction, and eco – warriors claiming that the only way ro “save the planet” is through the extinction of humanity. Obviously these somewhat less than bright sparks have never heard that old riddle that goes, 2if a tree falls in the forest and there is nobody around to hear it does it make a sound. Here’s one p-o-v on that, which suggests that vibrations in the air as would be caused by a tree hitting the ground cannot be called a sound unless they collide with the eardrum of a creature that knows what a sound is.

So who wants to destry humanity and do they have a supportable argument?

Who Wants To Destroy The World

More people than you might expect — and new technologies might give them the power to do it

Authored by Phil Torres, Originally published at Medium.com

Photo: NurPhoto/Getty

FFor most of human history, the question of who would want to destroy the world didn’t much matter. The reason, of course, was that that no individual or group of humans could demolish civilization or cause our extinction. Our ancestors just didn’t have the tools: no amount of spears, arrows, swords, or catapults would have enabled them — even the most bloodthirsty and misanthropic — to have inflicted harm in every corner of the world.

This changed with the invention of the atomic bomb. While scholars often identify 1945 as the year that human self-annihilation became possible, a more accurate date is 1948 or 1949, since this is when the United States stockpiled enough nuclear weapons (about 100) to have initiated a hemisphere-spanning “nuclear winter.” (See this work in progress for why I’m focusing on 100 nuclear weapons as a threshold.) A nuclear winter occurs when soot from burning cities significantly reduces the amount of sunlight reaching Earth’s surface for a period of months or years, thereby causing temperatures to plummet and famines to ensue. Quite unsettlingly, it wasn’t until the 1980s — decades after we had enough nukes to blot out the sun — that the nuclear winter phenomenon was first identified, although lingering questions remain even today.

Thanks to new technologies, nonstate actors such as terrorist groups and lone wolves are getting in on the action, too, and might be more willing than national governments to push the proverbial doomsday button.

The U.S. monopoly on world-ending power didn’t last long: by 1953, the Soviet Union had likewise expanded to 100 weapons. Now there were two nations on Earth that could obliterate civilization. But again, this didn’t last very long. The United Kingdom joined the club of potential world-enders around 1962, China around 1971, and France around 1973, with Israel, Pakistan, and India becoming members of this club in the 2010s. Hence, in less than a century, the world went from containing zero actors capable of unilaterally destroying the world to eight.

This is a scary situation. Unfortunately, it’s getting worse — much worse. The reason is that states are no longer the only players in the game. Thanks to new technologies, nonstate actors such as terrorist groups and lone wolves are getting in on the action, too, and they might be a lot more willing than national governments to push the proverbial doomsday button.

My own research suggests that the percentage of people who would push a doomsday button, if it were placed within finger’s reach, is fairly small, but the absolute number is unacceptably high. Even a quick Google search seems to affirm this. Consider the following answers, taken from different online sources, to the question of whether one would destroy the world if one could (quoting typos and all):

“Yes. It is obvious that we gain nothing from living and there is a huge amount of human suffering that I find quite unjustifiable. The complete annihilation of the human race would be the greatest act of compassion ever.” Reddit.com

“Yes, we suck as a human race.” Reddit.com

“Yes. Because you all are assholes. And this is not a joke I would love to push something that ends humanity. I always thought about it and now there is the question about that topic and I am happy to say I want you all dead everyone single one of you fuckers. Please give me the chance to wipe out humanity.” Reddit.com

“My view is that Mankind is a plague… I vote to destroy mankind and let nature start over.” Debate.org

“The human animal is the only evil animal in the animal kingdom. We destroy everything… I email the president weekly and beg him to push the button and stop the madness already.” Debate.org

“In the short time we’ve been on this planet, humans have already destroyed so much. We destroy ecosystems, and kill off entire species of animals… The world would be better off without humans as a whole.” Debate.org

Of course, saying something definitely isn’t the same as doing it. Even so, can we be fully certain that not a single person in the world would attempt to follow through on his or her annihilatory fantasies? One way to approach this question is to look for historical examples of groups or people who both expressed a desire to kill everyone and committed some terrible act or acts of violence. The combination of these two phenomena implies that such people would be willing to act on their omnicidal (meaning killing everyone) impulses and willingly, perhaps even eagerly, push a doomsday button. So are there such examples?

Unfortunately, yes. Lots of them. And they seem to fall into a handful of basic categories.

Eric Harris mused, “I think I would want us to go extinct,” to which he added, “I have a goal to destroy as much as possible… I want to burn the world” and “I just wish I could actually DO this instead of just DREAM about it all.”

Consider the disturbing case of Eric Harris, the psychopathic mastermind behind the 1999 Columbine High School massacre. His journal is full of all sorts of genuinely horrifying, ghoulish fantasies. On several occasions, he explicitly mentions his burning desire to extinguish humanity. At one point. he writes: “If you recall your history the Nazis came up with a ‘final solution’ to the Jewish problem. Kill them all. Well, in case you haven’t figured it out yet, I say ‘KILL MANKIND’ no one should survive.”

Elsewhere, Harris mused, “I think I would want us to go extinct,” to which he added, “I have a goal to destroy as much as possible… I want to burn the world” and “I just wish I could actually DO this instead of just DREAM about it all.”

When Harris and Dylan Klebold, his partner in crime, perpetrated their massacre in Columbine, they were equipped with garden-variety weapons. Dangerous to be sure, but hardly capable of “burning the world.” Can there be any doubt, though, that if Harris — who was relatively intelligent and liked math and science — had had access to some of the advanced technologies of tomorrow, he would have, when committing suicide, tried to go out with a much bigger bang?

The Columbine massacre had a huge influence on later rampage shooters, some of whom also dreamt of omnicide. For example, in 2007, an 18-year-old Finnish student named Pekka-Eric Auvinen shot several people at his school, which he also tried to burn down. Like Harris, he wrote about “a final solution” as “the death of the entire human race,” and described his massacre as “an operation against humanity with the purpose of killing as many people as possible.” Yet another rampage shooter from Finland, Matti Saari, wrote in his suicide note, “I hate the human race, I hate mankind, I hate the whole world, and I want to kill as many people as possible.”

Then, of course, there was Elliot Rodger, the incel psychopath who killed seven people and injured 14 in the 2014 Isla Vista killings. In a video shot one day before the rampage, he said in no uncertain terms: “I hate all of you. Humanity is a disgusting, wretched, depraved species. If I had it in my power, I would stop at nothing to reduce every single one of you to mountains of skulls and rivers of blood. And rightfully so. You deserve to be annihilated. And I’ll give that to you.”

School shooters and other lone wolves have idiosyncratic motives, such as a misanthropic hatred of humanity, or a desire to retaliate against women for perceived romantic and sexual slights. Together, though, they comprise a relatively cohesive category of omnicidal actors, and a relatively unpredictable one at that.

Another type of omnicidal actor comes in the form of apocalyptic terrorists who believe that to save the world, it must first be destroyed. ISIS, arguably the largest and richest terrorist group in history, is a paradigm case. While some members of ISIS probably didn’t hold apocalyptic beliefs, the leadership most certainly did — and they made strategic decisions based on these beliefs. The man who essentially founded ISIS, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, believed that Islam’s version of Armageddon was about to unfold around the small Syrian town of Dabiq. Hence, the name of the group’s propaganda magazine, Dabiq. After the U.S. military killed al-Zarqawi in 2006, leadership of ISIS transferred to Abu Ayyub al-Masri, a fevered apocalypticist who insisted that the Islamic end-of-days messianic figure, the “Mahdi,” was about to appear in Iraq. Like al-Zarqawi, he based his strategy on his apocalyptic belief — and it backfired. He soon met his end at the hands of Western forces.

Both of these individuals really believed that the end was nigh, and that it was their duty to use violence — catastrophic violence, to be more specific — to bring about the apocalypse. ISIS members talked about acquiring nuclear weapons, releasing deadly pathogens, and building dirty bombs. I personally haven’t spoken to a single terrorism scholar who doesn’t think that ISIS would have gleefully pushed a “destroy-the-world” button, especially if Western forces were marching toward Dabiq.

But ISIS is far from the only apocalyptic group. Famously, the doomsday cult Aum Shinrikyo attempted to trigger Armageddon by releasing sarin in the Tokyo subway in 1995. Here in the U.S., more than a dozen hate groups subscribe to Christian Identity, an apocalyptic worldview that endorses the use of catastrophic violence as a means of triggering a “race war” that will initiate the end of the world. And one of the bloodiest conflicts in human history, the Taiping Rebellion, involved an apocalyptic movement called the “Taiping Heavenly Kingdom.” This was led by a man named Hong Xiuquan, who believed that he was the brother of Jesus Christ, “commissioned by the Lord of Heaven to slay the devil-demons (Manchus) whose rule had brought ruin to China.”

A final type of omnicidal actor lingers within the outermost fringe of radical environmentalist, anarcho-primitivist, and Neo-Luddite ideologies. Ted Kaczynski, better known as the Unabomber, provides an example par excellence. Beginning in 1978, Kaczynski perpetrated numerous domestic terrorist attacks, killing three people and injuring 23 others. A former UC Berkeley mathematics professor and Harvard alumnus, Kaczynski didn’t wish for humanity to go extinct. Rather, he wanted to trigger a global revolution against industrial society, with the ultimate goal of causing its collapse. Kaczynski ultimately didn’t care whether his revolution would cause people to die, since in his utilitarian calculus the ends would justify the means. As Kaczynski wrote in 1995: “This revolution may or may not make use of violence; it may be sudden or it may be a relatively gradual process spanning a few decades. Its object will be to overthrow not governments but the economic and technological basis of the present society.”

In contrast, other actors in this category have explicitly embraced pro-extinction convictions. For example, the Gaia Liberation Front (GLF), an ecoterrorist group, holds as their mission “the total liberation of the Earth, which can be accomplished only through the extinction of the Humans as a species.” In advocating this, they argue that “if any Humans survive, they may start the whole thing over again. Our policy is to take no chances.”

How might they accomplish their omnicidal aims? GLF contends that bioengineering is “the specific technology for doing the job right of annihilating humanity — and it’s something that could be done by just one person with the necessary expertise and access to the necessary equipment.” They continue: “…genetically engineered viruses… have the advantage of attacking only the target species. To complicate the search for a cure or a vaccine, and as insurance against the possibility that some Humans might be immune to a particular virus, several different viruses could be released (with provision being made for the release of a second round after the generals and the politicians had come out of their shelters).”

Technologies such as gene drives, digital-to-biological converters, and CRISPR-Cas9 are making it increasingly feasible to synthesize designer pathogens that could be far more devastating than anything found in nature.

This parallels an anonymous article in the Earth First! Journal, published in 1989, meaning that this idea has been around for a while: “Contributions are urgently solicited for scientific research on a species specific virus that will eliminate Homo shiticus from the planet. Only an absolutely species specific virus should be set loose. Otherwise it will be just another technological fix. Remember, Equal Rights for All Other Species.”

While the most radical fringe of the environmentalist movement has avoided the limelight in recent years, some experts, such as the terrorism scholar Frances Flannery, expect a resurgence as climate and biodiversity crises worsen. This poses an obvious danger in a world replete with bullets and bombs; but it poses an existential threat in a world of cheap and easy gene editing. Technologies such as gene drives, digital-to-biological converters, and CRISPR-Cas9 are making it increasingly feasible to synthesize designer pathogens that could be far more devastating than anything found in nature.

Are there any solutions to the problems posed by virus-toting omnicidal maniacs? One hard-to-avoid — and completely terrifying — answer is mass surveillance. This could take the form of what the philosopher Jeremy Bentham called a “panopticon,” whereby the state (perhaps run by computer programs designed specifically to govern — a form of government called “algocracy”) monitors every action of its citizens. The obvious danger is that this could collapse into tyrannical totalitarianism, which itself constitutes an existential risk.

Another possibility involves what the science fiction writer, David Brin, dubs the “transparent society.” This would make surveillance egalitarian, so to speak: everyone would be able to see what everyone else is doing all the time, thereby enabling those watched to watch the watchers. Brin doesn’t argue that this is an ideal situation, only that it’s a better situation than one in which the state has all the power. Perhaps a total loss of privacy is the cost of existential security.

Alternatively, I have previously claimed that, in order to reduce the risks posed by malicious agents like those mentioned above, society should prioritize mitigating climate change and ecological destruction. Both phenomena are threat multipliers and threat intensifiers, which means that they’ll introduce new problems while making old problems even worse. Better environmental policies would lower the threat posed by ecoterrorists, whose fundamental complaint — “Humans are stupidly destroying the biosphere” — is scientifically accurate. Such policies would also decrease the number and severity of natural disasters, which could fertilize apocalyptic fervor among religious extremists. As the terrorism scholar Mark Juergensmeyer has remarked, “radical times will breed radical religion,” a hypothesis apparently supported by the rise of ISIS during the Syrian civil war.

Moving forward, people who care about human survival need to think hard not just about the various technologies that will become available, but about the types of actors who might try to use these technologies for catastrophic ill. The future of the human race could quite literally depend on it.

OneZero

 

Democracy in Europe threatened by ‘populism,’ (aka democracy) says Blair’s crony think tank

December 30, 2017

The upsurge of “populist” political movements across Europe as resistance grows to state sponsored mass immigration and European authoritarianism, is, according to globalist, neo – liberal think tank set up by former UK Prime Minister, traitor and war criminal Tony Blair,  threatens to destabilize democracy across Europe. However, its new report says nothing of the abject failure of multiculturalism, the importation of terrorism and third world lawlessness, the economic profligacy, murderous foreign interventions and general corruption of traditional parties of government whose ineptitude and cronyism is responsible for all this.

While globalists like Blair and neo – liberal world government advocates use the term populist scathingly as if it refers to something unthinkable in the free world, in fact is simply refers to politicians who listen and respond to public opinion, particularly the concerns of voters unhappy that their countries are being run by self styled elites who are totally out of touch with the realities of life.

Former UK Prime Minister Tony Blair’s Institute for Global Change said populism could become the “new normal” in Europe and “transform public policy in radical ways.” Would that be a bad thing, you might well ask.

Defining populist parties as those from the left and right that “claim to represent the true will of a unified people against domestic elites, foreign migrants or ethnic, religious or sexual minorities,” the report says their number has almost doubled in Europe since 2000, from 33 to 63, and their average vote share in elections nearly trebled from 8.5 percent to 24.1 percent.

Over the same period, the authors claim, the number of European countries with populist parties participating in government has doubled from seven to 14 – creating an unprecedented “populist belt” from the Baltic to the Aegean. And in larger nations including France and Germany, where socialists and conservatives, natural enemies among the mainstream parties, have conspired to keep parties such as Front National and Alternatif fur Deutschland out of power, the resulting chaos it exacting a heavy price economically and socially.) (Since the inconclusive German election in September, Chancellor Merkel has been unable to form a government.) After a blatant stitch up in Spain kept new anti – EU leftist party Podemos out of power, a separatist movement in the wealthiest province is finding a lot of support for its push for independence.

Populist parties are the strongest in Eastern Europe and currently hold power in eight countries – Austria, Bosnia, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, Serbia, and Slovakia, the report says.

The report highlighted British allies Poland and Hungary as run by parties that have begun to “dismantle key democratic institutions.”’ This is in fact not true, they have actually begun to dismantle the processes that give the unelected bureaucrats of the European Commission supremacy over the democratically elected lawmakers of the national assemblies.

Read more: Democracy in Europe threatened by surge of ‘populism,’ according to Tony Blair’s think tank

RELATED POSTS:

Soros Sponsored “Democracy Spring” Launches Program Of Civil Disobedience
So there you have it, the ‘radical left’ are sponsored by one of the nastiest, greediest corporate capitalists ever, a shameless advocate of global totalitarian government proposed by theelistist socialist group The Fabian society over a hundred years ago and towards which these supporters of ‘oligarchical collectivism’ have been working ever since.

Social Science Degrees Make Great Leaders? More Junk Science.
We’ve had junk science on climate change, genetically modified seeds, many types of medicines and social engineering. The junkiest of junk science however is always commissioned by public service organisations and is aimed at convincing the public that our public servants are doing a good job. Fortunately the public are not as gullible as our leaders suppose.

Protesters Gather Around Europe To Demonstrate Against Undemocratic Secret Agreement With USA

Virtual ID has arrived – why you should resist taking it up
We told you some years ago when our publication appeared under a different name that the then Labour Government’s plan for compulsory electronic ID cards was the step that would take us over the line from a seblance of liberal democracy into oligarchic fascism. Labour’s plan was derailed by public opposition but now it has been rehashed and is presented with fluffy window dressing. A vote for Labour, Conservative Or Liberal Democrat is a vote for fascism. You have been warned.


How the fall of France could accelerate the rise of UKIP
Don’t hold French stocks says former broker Farage as our Gallic neighbour sinks deeper into the Euroshite
The faltering French economy continues to stall under President Francois Hollande, which is boosting anti-EU sentiment across Europe particularly in Germany, where the efficiency worshipping taxpayers increasingly resent having to bail out their impecunious Eurozone partners.


Riots against police brutality in France after police put down protests against dictatorial Hollande

Another anti-police brutality protest turned violent in the French city of Rennes, with masked youths and police engaging in running street battles. The unrest follows the death of a young environmental activist earlier this week. Not long ago we were reporting riots in Spain as police were overly physical in dispersing peaceful protests against the government’s economic policies.

The Importance Of Free Speech And Freedom Of Information
The threat to free speech
The plan to silence discussion
Our New Unhappy Lords
Corporate bosses want to be beyond the law
The corporate media is murdering democracy
If you don’t conform its because you are insane
If you disagree they certify you insane. Is this democracy
European Union becoming a bureaucratic dictatorship
The tyranny of human rights law
Genocide of ideas as Though Police go on rampage
Don’t call me a conspiracy theorist
The birth of a Euronazi superstate
The Gods of copy book endings can save us
The Hate And Prejudice The Bourgeois Left Find Acceptable
Human Rights – A Straitjacket On Civil Liberty and individualism.
Why Are The Political Left So Sure They Have A Monopoly On Goodness And Truth
Progressive Liberalism is the new Fascism, Dare WEe Challenge Their Illiberal Code?
Politically correct index
Nanny State index

 

Virtual ID has arrived – why you should resist taking it up

November 4, 2014

Every human being (and their dogs) in Britain is to be provided with a government-backed virtual ID to store personal data online, file tax returns and apply for driving licences through a single portal, the lead story in The Times informs us today.

Now you may hear Labour supporters and others of the authoritarian left screaming that the plan exposes the intention of The Conservatives to create a police state, do not be taken in; this is the idea floated by Labour under Blair to compel us all to BUY and electronic ID card which would replace our passport, driving licence and be the only way of accessing government services to claim benefits, seek healthcare or deal with any government department. That plan was shelved due to firce and overwhelming public opposition but at the time sceptics and dissident organisations were warning bureaucrats never abandoned a plan to extend their tyrannical reach.

And now with the Conservative led coalition facing an election in less than twelve months and the civil servants and public service unions desperatle wanting a free spending (and borrowing), personal liberty curtailing, Labour government back in power because Labour always presides over a massive increase in the size of government, we see the ID card idea back with slightly less scary window dressing. Within a year of their launch, more than half a million people are expected to start using the new “Verify” scheme to prove their identity, under a radical expansion of public services available online.

And how many years will it be before they are compulsory and beining outside one’s home without an official permit is an arrestable offence (bright sparks may recall this was part of the Labour ID card scheme)

Most people don’t have a clue what manner of government control over our personal liberty with personal electronic ID will pave the way for. A massive US government and corporate partnership has been developing “web ID,” a master password matching you with your online activities which the partnership hopes to sell to governments around the world. It is one gate by which all will enter. And one gate means one gatekeeper. The virtual ID is the final step into a world of global fascism. Why do you think the Obama administration in the USA has been so keen to try to subjugate nations whose governments are likely to resist its global hegemony?

The purpose of this scheme is to eventually be able to verify every single person who uses the web. You will have one master password for all of your use and transactions. It will link to your biometric ID which will include fingerprints, iris regognition facial recognition and voice patterns. The intention is that the system will track and store your every action, location and much more. Without it you will not be able to buy a radio or TV, take a flight, transact money, get a job, claim benefits, pay your bills or see your doctor. It will be a universal aggregator of your data.

And what do you think will become of your right to free speech or personal protest then? Too effing right they’ll disappear, faster than a white rabbit in a magician’s hat. And you too, think about it, the human you will cease to exist as far as the intitutions of state are concerned, no virtual ID, no you. Your online presence will be your only existence.

As the system rolls out it will become ‘internationalised’ (whatever that means, it can’t be good for our personal liberty). When Virtual or Smart ID becomes mandatory as it will because there is no point in these cards unless every human being is required to use one, privacy will be gone forever.

As Edward Snowden said GCHQ is more dangerous than the NSA and without Snowden we wouldn’t even be aware of the curently possible privacy breaches in the first place let alone a full-on biometric ID with all your personal data in the hands of government agencies. They will use it to control you, abuse it to rob you of your human rights and sell it to corporate interests so they may more easily steal from you. People are individuals not assets to be exploited and controlled, which is what this latest corporate – bureaucratic fascist abomination is about.

RELATED POSTS:
The Death Of Democracy
Computer brain Interface – Is this what’s next
The corporate fascism conspiracy
Government control versus individual freedom
Elitist plan global takeover
Free trade treaty nothing to do with freedom
Transhumanism part of the elite agenda
Technology and the Orwell – Huxley Dick Dystopia Index
Creating the technology for mind control
Cellphone fascism, the extension of surveillance through personal technology
Surveillance: compulsory rfid tattoos
Surveillance the tool of totalitarian states
The Panopticon: The arrival of the prison state

Propaganda and Journalism: A lesson for the left

July 27, 2014

W W 1 - a bloodbath justified by propaganda World War One – a bloodbath justified to the public by the kind of propaganda now being directed against Russia (source)

A few days ago I posted an article on the significant details regarding the downing of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 over Ukraine, and the inconsistencies in the US / EU narrative that the government propaganda was not discussing and that mainstream media were not questioning.

The article attracted a few comments and one troll, a wannabe intellectual bully who wanted to convince me that I had no right to question the ‘official’ (i.e. American) version of events. There have been swarms of such trolls around the web, citing spurious credentials in an effort to establish that their (politically-correct, oligarchic collectivist) opinions are somehow made more valid by the fact that they question nothing that comes out of the FUKUS axis propaganda machine.

This particular troll emphasised his lack of intelligence by accusing me of believing the Russian / Ukraine separatist version of events. All I had said in fact was that there was absolutely no evidence to support President Obama’s accusation made hours after the disaster, that the government of Russia was undoubtedly responsible. He chose to interpret this as implying that I accepted the Russian version of events which blamed the Ukrainian government in Kiev for shooting down flight MH17. Bizarrely he claims he is a scientists. Not the only scientist I’ve encountered who is in need of remedial education in reading and comprehension.

I accepted no such thing. And I was proved right (as always), when the US State Department was challenged to substantiate its claims, a spokesperson referred reporters to social media chit chat.

We still don’t know who was responsible, theories that point to both separatist rebels with Russian support and Kiev government troops with US/EU support are still circulating but no conclusive evidence has been produced either way.

This devotion to partisan propaganda is not confined to the left however. On a television news analysis today the veteran journalist Max Hastings, who identifies himself as a conservative, was talking about reactions from online readers to his articles for a top selling newspaper supporting the American / European line and damning Russia.

Hastings admitted that the line he had taken was “People must believe the west, we’re the good guys, they’re the bad guys.”

He then said that a theme repeated by many commenters from around the world was; Why should we believe the Americans and British, they are proven liars on Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, Syria, drone strikes on Pakistan and the overthrow of the elected Ukrainian government.

And that acknowledgement, plus perhaps the fact that as days count down to the hundredth anniversary of the opening shots in World War One, explains why new media and many clear thinking, honest writers in mainstream media are taking a different line. People who have read a little history are remembering how as the world stumbled into that senseless bloodbath with governments on both sides lying to their citizens and the media of the day repeating those lies:

The World According to the Mainstream Media: Russia and Palestine are Guilty until Proven Innocent
Timothy Alexander Guzman
RINF Alternative News

They accused the Russian government and the Anti-Kiev militias in East Ukraine for its direct involvement in the downing of Malaysian Airlines MH-17 without any hard evidence to support their claim. US intelligence agencies did admit that Russia was not directly linked to the Malaysian Airlines incident, but they managed to blame Russia indirectly. They claimed “that Russia was responsible for “creating the conditions” that led to the shooting down of Malaysia Airlines Flight 17, but they offered no evidence of direct Russian government involvement” according to ABC news.

The accusations against Russia were baseless. What is important to the families of the Malaysian Airlines tragedy is for them to find out the truth about those responsible for the crimes. Blaming actors who are not responsible for the crime will not bring peace to the families. The MSM has been actively defending Israeli actions against the Palestinians in the Gaza Strip declaring that it was Hamas that murdered the three Israeli teens, an accusation that was also never proven. Regardless of the facts on the tragic deaths of those teenagers, Israel had declared a “revenge” war on the Palestinians. The MSM is following Washington and Tel Aviv’s talking points.

The bias reporting on the situation in Gaza is shameful. The death toll surpassed 800 for the Palestinians and for the Israeli’s it’s close to 40 casualties. The US and their Western partners along with their Israeli counterparts are working in conjunction against their political adversaries through its MSM Empire. They want war and they will do anything even have their media lie to the public in order to go what they want. What had occurred in the last couple of weeks concerning events in the Ukraine and Palestinians in the Gaza Strip are both tragic incidents, but the point I am making reflects on the MSM itself and their lack of journalistic principals.

Read all the article on the loss of journalistic and academic integrity in RINF

white hat back hatWhite hats versus black hats – reality is seldom that simple (source)

Here’s another view of the Malaysia Airlines controversy authored by two people whose names alone are guaranteed to kick off an irrational two minutes hate session from the neo – fascist left, Chris. Booker and Richard North:

Could Barack Obama have prevented the MH17 disaster?

US intelligence would have known the separatists had captured missile-launchers, and where they were being used

Christopher Booker in The Daily Telegraph

The most alarming unanswered question over the shooting-down of Malaysia Airlines flight MH17 is so fearful to contemplate that it has scarcely even been asked. Had President Obama in fact been better placed than anyone else to prevent that disaster from taking place? When, in his statement 24 hours after the plane was downed, the President stoked speculation about the involvement of President Putin, did he deliberately obscure the fact that, days earlier, he had already learned enough from his many intelligence sources to know that the 55 international airliners travelling every day along that flight path over eastern Ukraine faced the threat of precisely such a disaster? If so, why did the US authorities not make it a top priority to ensure that such flights were immediately halted?

In all the initial confusion over what Mr Obama called “this outrage of unspeakable proportions”, there was a hysterical rush to pin the blame on Russia’s president. “Putin’s killed my son”, as one newspaper front page had it. But, over the days that followed, as ever more information emerged about this story, the US government appeared to be backtracking on its original narrative.

Read full article at The Daily Telegraph

I don’t necessarily agree with Booker but he presents information that is worth considering as we classical liberals, libertarians and freethinkers consider all aspects of the case and form our own individual opinions. The notion of presenting an argument we may not totally and utterly agree with is incomprehensible to the knee jerkers (and wrist jerkers?) of the neo – fascist left of course. They love to march in lockstep, chant the slogans, and embrace the causes along with the rest of the crowd.

BUK missile launcher - infographicBUK Missile Launcher -NB people who think mathematical modelling is involved in aiming and firing these, it’s a radar guided system, sorree.

The spectacle of the progressive left or progressive liberals exposing inner fascist as the support authoritarian governments and clamour for war is becoming a major topic for freethinkers, radicals and true liberals. In this and my other blogs I have constantly taken an anti war line, the troll referred to in the first part of this article accuses me of being a right wing extremist (I suppose the scum sucking spawn of a pox whores scablouse thinks he is insulting me – well I said he’s not very good at English,) yet over the past few years he has consistently been in favour of war and military intervention by the FUKUS axis in the domestic affairs of sovereign states. It’s supposed to be the left who are pacifists and the right who love war, yet the neo fascist left seem to be mad for war and slaughter.

Perhaps this article goes some way to explaining why liberals and left wing thinkers hold the masses is such contempt:

How did liberals become so elitist and contemptuous of the public?

liberal democrat brain
The new left brain does not collect and process information in a logical,orderly, reasonable, and objective manner. Rather, liberal thinking is dominated by an obsession with power, and use of that power to preserve and or advance elitist advantages. (source)

How did liberals become so elitist and contemptuous of the public?

Daniel Ben-Ami
Journalist and author

10 July 2014

iberalism is one of a select band of troublesome political concepts that has multiple meanings. Indeed, ‘liberalism’ as used in one context can be the opposite of what it means in another.

The attitude of liberalism to freedom provides a prime example of these contradictory meanings. Classical liberalism, which was to the fore in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, typically placed a heavy emphasis on the importance of individual autonomy and liberty. In sharp contrast, contemporary liberalism tends to be deeply intolerant and elitist.

Fred Siegel, a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute, a conservative think tank based in New York, has provided an enormous service with his innovative history of modern American liberalism, The Revolt Against the Masses. It helps put many of the most retrograde trends in the US into their proper context. It also helps shed light on parallel developments in other countries, including Britain, even though they are outside Siegel’s remit.

For Siegel, a defining feature of modern liberalism is its attachment to what he calls the clerisy – a technocratic elite which he identifies with academia, Hollywood, the prestige press, Silicon Valley and Wall Street. Despite its professed attachment to equality of opportunity, this elite holds the mass of the American public, what Siegel refers to as ‘the middle class’, in contempt. The clerisy sees itself as superior to the rest of the population on meritocratic grounds.

As the reach of the state has burgeoned, the clerisy has taken on an increasingly important social role. Over the years, American government has grown vastly, commanding more resources and employing more people, than ever before. As Joel Kotkin, one of the sharpest observers of contemporary American politics, has pointed out: ‘Since 1990, the number of government workers has expanded by some five million to some 20million. That’s four times the number who were employed by the government at the end of the Second World War, a growth rate roughly twice that of the population as a whole.’ Members of the technocratic elite present themselves as impartial experts, but their interests are closely tied to the fortunes of this vast state apparatus.

Read full article at Spiked

So there you are. Once you stop yourself being caught up in the medieval witch hunt tactics of the ‘left’, take a step back and view the bigger picture and start thinking for yourself, a very different picture emerges to the one painted by our hysterical leftie trolls as they clamour for the global war their bankster sponsors want for purposes of increasing their control, grabbing even more money and reducing the global population. Now are you still prepared to believe these facists because they tell you they are the cuddly side of the argument.

Black Hat Biotech and World Domination

January 18, 2013

 

 

Image

A few years ago the campaign to make us eat GM foods looked to be in sorry shape, public mistrust, some damning results from independent research on genetically modified crop yields and the political implications of putting control of the global food supply in the hands of a few corporations whose ethical record made Dr. Evil look like a saint had but the g m lobby on the backfoot. Since then, after the collapse of the anthropogenic global warming scam that aimed to enslave us all, the government / science / corporate propaganda machines have gone into overdrive.Here Ian analyzes the state of play in his usual no-hold-barred style …Read the full post on Black Hat Biotech at scribd

 

 

Tax Eaters Face Dole As Quangos Axed

September 24, 2010

 Quangos Face The Axe In Coalition Cuts

Not before time we have a government that is willing to take action to reduce the size of the bloated public sector:
from BBC 188 Quangos to be axed
Proposals to abolish 180 quangos (quasi autonamous national government organisations) and merge a further 124 have been seen by the BBC’s Politics Show. The Renewables Advisory Board and Museum, Libraries and Archives Council are among taxpayer-funded bodies proposed for abolition.The list, dated 26 August, includes groups linked to all major government departments.

The Cabinet Office has ordered a leak inquiry and says it regrets any “uncertainty” for employees. The list of public bodies up for abolition, mergers or other reforms was included in a letter from Cabinet Office Minister Francis Maude to other ministers.

also on this story from The Daily Telegraph:”http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/politics/8021739/Quango-cuts-177-bodies-to-be-scrapped-under-coalition-plans.html”>177 Quangos To Be Scrapped

Throughout their years in power Labour used expansion of public sector employment to mask the true level of decline in our industrial and commercial base. This employent policy lies behind the structural financial deficit that is dragging our economy from recession into stagnation and slump. Appointing another tax eater does not help grow the economy it helps grow the deficit.

For thirty years under both Conservative and Labour governments, quangos  have become the personal bureaucratic empires of ‘special advisers’ costing a fortune to run and achieving nothing except the creation of lots of paper for the recycling industry.

If the coalition can dump a few of them it can only be good. And the tax eaters they employ will cost the nation less on the dole.

More contrarian Comment In The Daily Stirrer