2007/07/02

credibility ...1927

Submitted on July 2, 2007 - 12:54pm.


 .. some have it, others don't.

-=*=-

Pаul Mоrrella is only the latest in a series of posters who say that they don't agree with 'murder for oil,' but when challenged to disprove it, they toadally® squib it:


«Phil, you ask me to "exclude oil theft" as a motivation. It is not possible for me to comply with this request; at this time.»


Q: Why won't anyone disprove murder for oil?

A: Because (IMHO) it's a fact.

I reiterate, that the time for arguing any of this is over. I have spent a big bit'a the last four-plus years documenting the evil progression starting with the filthy, premeditated WMD lies, through the illegal US/UK/Aus invasion of Iraq, then turned brutal occupation, and ending (for the moment) with the greedy rip-off plans embodied in the attempt to force US-prepared legislation (the 'oil law') onto the puppet Iraqi government - however successful this foul attempt may eventually be. (Hopefully, not.)

Another reiteration; that unsubstantiated statements dis/prove nothing; any person is free to try to disprove 'murder for oil' at any time, so far nobody successfully has - and I never expect anyone to do so, on the simple grounds that (IMHO) it's just not possible. Mr Mоrrella, in objecting without providing substance, is doing nothing more than deploying a time-wasting distraction.

Not content with that distraction, Pаul starts another over M3. His three consecutive bites at the M3 cherry can be seen above; almost nothing but more confusion. (Oh! Only IMHO, of course!) Pаul's mangling of M3 could be compared to an unlamented other's toadal® failure to justify his otherwise unfounded objections to the "Economic Hit Man."

As far as hiding inflation goes, it's not being hidden (see SMH Jun30/Jul1, here: "There have been four consecutive years of 20 per cent-plus returns" and here: "During the great boom housing prices went up by an average of 150 per cent", say.) It's the possible US' printing money contribution that's being obscured by dropping M3 reporting. Any flippant mention of any difference between headline, and core inflation is only more futile distraction; what we see are rampant price increases (houses, stocks), the exact definition of inflation[1].

Pаul Mоrrella: "What exactly am I lying about?"

Well, Pаul, it's like this: the kleptocracy immerse us in lies. "All politicians lie!" - is the MSM 'excuse,' say, for Howard's seeming inability to tell us the 'truth of any matter.' The MSM itself lies, both by omission and commission, in their daily reporting. Attributing almost all violence in Iraq to sectarian or Al Qaida cannot be true, but that's what they do. I call the collective bumf that the kleptocracy wants us to know (as distinct from and opposed to the truth), the pushed paradigm propaganda.

When someone tells us "A tax cut is the equivalent of a pay rise," then they are simply parroting the pushed paradigm propaganda. The fact of the matter here is that a) the tax cuts in Aus at the moment are nothing of the sort, being merely the government taking less than what they had planned to take, and b) worse and conclusive, the tax-share of GDP is rising while the wages-share is falling, and that by so-called increasing employment. Y'can probably work that one out for yourselves!

Sooo, were one to parrot the pushed paradigm propaganda, one would possibly be retailing (admittedly others') lies. The only question then is Q: consciously (aka with malice aforethought), or not?

-=*end*=-

PS We now know exactly why you are 'chatting' with me Pаul; you told us so, on June 28. Nice. And for how much longer?

Ref(s):

[1] inflation n. 1 inflating. 2 Econ. a general increase in prices. b increase in the supply of money regarded as causing this.  inflationary adj. [POD]

No comments: