2008/06/26

there are lies, there are trolls ...


  .. and there are war crimes

    .. that grouping is observable

Preamble: I'm interested in justice via truth. I call this 'reflexive altruism;' I wish to be left in peace, and ask only the same from and for my neighbour. Naturally enough, this should automatically rule out any and all aggression[1]. Q: What goes wrong? A: Socialization[2], more accurately, the failure of same.

I like to consider 'binary splits,' so when I speak of 'being left in peace' I mean (1) in the physical sense; i.e. me'n my near&dears, our possessions etc., then (2) in the mental sense, i.e. my mind. My mind is also subject to a binary split, namely (1) into thoughts aka rationality (mostly, and largely 'under voluntary control') and (2) into emotions aka feelings (often reactive).

I 'package' the previous in my own attempted formalisation the chezPhil morality which includes 'do unto others,' and a corollary 'do no harm.' Some basic moral tenets are no lies, no cheating, no theft and no murder. There're others one could add, like 'love thy neighbour,' say ... but here a few hasty words: my morality is wholly independent from, even hostile to - all religion. Any similarities could be due to ancient plagiarisms, i.e. not mine; I claim 'common sense' as a sufficient source.

Then I pause; "Why this?"- "Why now?" - and the answer is because we (most sheople®) and our once jewel-like ecosphere both - are up s**t-creek, and again I fall into ennui[3]. Actually, from the choices there offered, the German Weltschmerz seems to fit best.

One other thing, in his 'robotics' musings, Asimov considered a 'positronic potential' which motivated his robots; this potential, generated in the robot 'brain' based on its observations, could be negative - to inhibit certain (harmful) actions or positive, to encourage certain (helpful) actions. He was, of course, describing an analogue of a net mental state of (normal!) humans, namely our sense of right and wrong. Only when this sense is disabled and/or corrupted is immoral behaviour possible.

End of preamble; a summary of my rationale (n. fundamental reason, logical basis. [neuter of Latin rationalis: related to *rational] [POD]).

-=*=-

The problem: as above, we (most sheople) and our once jewel-like ecosphere both - are up s**t-creek.

The 'usual' four points:

1. The greedastrophe®; the coming excess CO2-caused climate collapse.

2. The US regime's criminality, typified by the illegal invasion of Iraq; murder for oil.

3. The Israeli regime's criminality, typified by the illegal invasion of now largely ex-Palestine and surrounds; murder for land and water.

4. Out of control, mostly US-inspired capitalism. This is 'behind' all of (1) to (3) and more: this out of control capitalism is also ripping us (we the sheople) off.

-=*=-

The claim is that mostly US-inspired capitalism has triumphed over all alternatives, my counter-claim is that while this capitalism may be in the ascendency, it is actually in the process of failing - and in the worst ways; a) it's 'leading' us over the greedastrophe cliff towards a deliberate apocalypse, and at the same time b) it's 'leading' to ever more obscene inequalities. Here is an item in support of my counter-claim: The Poverty of Reaganism-Bushism by David Michael Green. One minor point that is made is that alternatives to capitalism were often if not exclusively attacked via personality attacks (like against the excesses of Stalin or Pol Pot et al.), and a point that is equally often missed is that alternatives to US-inspired capitalism exist and function well, see some European variations on social democracy.

That leads to the next claim, that 'democracy' has triumphed over all alternatives, and the reason for me using quotes around 'democracy' is my counter-claim here, that we (US, UK, Aus & Israel, say) do not have correctly functioning democracies at all. We simply do not have at least three critical requirements for a properly functioning democracy; (1) our so-called representatives do not represent us, we the sheople, as their ultimate priority (they have mostly sold-out to the 'big end of town'), (2) the vast majority of voters are not sufficiently engaged (side-tracked by TV, say) and are by no means adequately informed (see next), and (3) the full and frank discovery and dissemination of the requisite facts no longer takes place (assuming it once did), thanks but "No, thanks!" to the corrupt and venal MSM (incl. Big bits'a the AusBC & SBS; boo! Hiss!)

The above situation, i.e. the problem as described, has existed and evolved, since at least (my arbitrarily chosen starting point), the horrendous WW2 A-bombing of Japan (1945). The reason why these dual events, one at Hiroshima and the other at Nagasaki are not widely recognised as war crimes are two; a) the generation of so-called "victor's history" - another name for lies, and the dissemination of such lies as propaganda directed at the sheople by - ta ra! - the corrupt and venal MSM. The lie they try to 'sell' is that the A-bombing was to save soldiers' lives by shortening the war (an easily provable lie, some evidence given here (thanks JAS); look for July 21, 25th & 26th.) The real reasons are more likely to be a weighting of these four: (1) they could; they'd spent the dough and built the 'toys.' (2) They wanted to see the effect on a target population, in this case mostly (innocent!) civilians. (3) They wished to send Russia a signal: "See what we can - and will - do!" (4) They, the decision makers, were criminal. IF my analysis is true THEN we can call the A-bombing mass-murder for data and effect.

On a somewhat parallel track and time-frame, the modern 'nation' known as Israel was established as an armed camp on an arguably illegal basis (UN, 1947) and has been expanded fairly continuously ever since, mostly by violent means and always at the expense of the hapless legal owners of much of the land in and around the now sadly mostly ex-Palestine. I call this violent (Zionist) progress towards some wished-for "Greater Israel" murder for land and water.

-=*=-

The "Ah ha!" moments are two: (1) the internet arrived, and (2) GWBush&Co sent mostly US grunts into Iraq to pink-mist their way to capturing Iraq's 'patrimony,' aka murder for oil. The 1st (internet) enabled the discoveries prompted by the 2nd (B, B & H's criminality.) All - or hopefully most - is now revealed, see the problem description above. As a truth-seeker I've had my hands full now for over 5 years, a voyage of discovery I'd rather not have had to undertake, but needs must. On the way I've encountered some 'static,' namely people who, for whatever reason, fail to perceive or agree with the truths I've found and reported. Erroneous ideologues, I call 'em, and the worst of the worst are the inveterate liars - another ta ra! - the trolls.

Musing: it does seem that the liars are all on 'the other side' (well, what else?) - and worse, they lie without compunction[4]. That's as understandable as it's reprehensible, since they 'support' (= *they are*) the side (USrael) which murders for spoil. Just can't get worse than that.

Then: why lie? - Silly question; to attempt to hide or disguise their filthy, murdering misdeeds.

Fazit: we have recently seen a particular troll disgrace him/herself. Goodie. S/he clearly failed kindergarten (thanks JP), in other words, was not sufficiently socialized. As for the troll, so his/her 'keepers.' Any objection to "insufficiently socialized" could possibly be made on the grounds of outright psychopathic illness.

-=*end*=-

PS I intended at one point to extend this towards the Marx quote below. Some other time, perhaps.

Ref(s):

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

[2] socialize v. (also -ise) (-zing or -sing) 1 mix socially. 2 make social. 3 organize on socialistic principles.  socialization n. [ibid.]

[3] ennui

Ønoun
(French) an ennui bred of long familiarity
BOREDOM, tedium, listlessness, lethargy, lassitude, languor, restlessness, weariness, sluggishness, enervation;
MALAISE, dissatisfaction, unhappiness, uneasiness, unease, melancholy, depression, despondency, dejection, disquiet; German Weltschmerz.
-opposite(s): ANIMATION; CONTENTMENT.
[New Oxford Thesaurus of English]

[4] compunction
noun [MASS NOUN] [usu. with NEGATIVE] a feeling of guilt or moral scruple that prevents or follows the doing of something bad: they used their tanks without compunction. [POD]

[5] social —adj. 1 of society or its organization, esp. of the relations of people or classes of people. 2 living in organized communities. 3 needing companionship; gregarious. —n. social gathering, esp. of a club.  socially adv. [Latin: related to *sociable] [ibid.]

[6] socialism n. 1 political and economic theory advocating State ownership and control of the means of production, distribution, and exchange. 2 social system based on this.  socialist n. & adj. socialistic adj. [French: related to *social][ibid.]

[7] communism n. 1 a social system in which most property is publicly owned and each person works for the common benefit. b political theory advocating this. 2 (usu. Communism) the form of socialist society established in Cuba, China, etc., and previously, the USSR. [French: related to *common][ibid.]

[8] Marx saw capitalists as expropriating the surplus value created by workers, and accumulating ever-increasing amounts of capital, as the workers (the proletariat) grew ever poorer.
[The OXFORD World ENCYCLOPEDIA]

Quote: "From each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."

  Critique of the Gotha Programme (written 1875, but of earlier origin)

The formula of Communism, as propounded by Cabet, may be expressed thus: - ‘the duty of each is according to his faculties; his right according to his wants’.

  in North British Review (1849) vol 10"
[The Oxford Dictionary of QUOTATIONS]

2008/06/23

Some Israel-Palestine questions.

I thought it worth highlighting this article titled Can You Pass The Israel-Palestine Quiz? There is the opportunity for people to compare their knowledge of the issue with the answers provided in the article and also with what is printed by some in the media and blogosphere.

Anyone wishing to take issue with the answers provided are invited to do so with reasoned, substantiated responses. Past experience shows that they usually fail to do so.

Now, a few examples to whet the appetite:

1. Who wrote the following in 1891? “We abroad are used to believing Eretz Yisrael is now almost totally desolate, a desert that is not sowed, and anyone who wishes to purchase land there may come and purchase as much as he desires. But in truth this is not the case. Throughout the country, it is difficult to find fields that are not sowed. Only sand dunes and stony mountains that are not fit to grow anything but fruit trees – and this only after hard labor and great expense …”

2. Who declared the following in 1930? “Land is the most necessary thing for our establishing roots in Palestine. Since there are hardly any more arable unsettled lands in Palestine, we are bound in each case of the purchase of land and its settlement to remove the peasants who cultivated the land so far, both owners of the land and tenants.”

3. Who, in 1919, wrote the following, in a secret memorandum submitted to the British cabinet? “For in Palestine we do not propose even to go through the form of consulting the wishes of the present inhabitants of the country [i.e., we do not accept the principle of self-determination for the Arabs of Palestine] … the four great powers are committed to Zionism. And Zionism, be it right or wrong, good or bad, is rooted in age-long traditions, in present needs, in future hopes, of far profounder import than the desires and prejudices of the 700,000 Arabs who now inhabit that ancient land …”

4. According to Mandatory Palestine's first modern census, conducted in 1922, approximately what percentage of the total population were Jews?

5. Approximately what percentage of Mandatory Palestine's inhabitants were Jews in 1947?

6. Approximately what percentage of Mandatory Palestine's land was allocated for the Jewish state by the 1947 United Nations Partition Plan (which supported the division of Palestine into a Jewish state and an Arab state)?

7. Approximately what percentage of Mandatory Palestine's land was owned by Jews at the time of the 1947 UN Partition Plan?

Over to you.


2008/06/19

I'm smarter than you are ...


 .. and I have this big - errr, stick, to prove it

   .. subtitle: but if you think you're smarter, then prove it: spot the error.

-=*=-

All show, and no 'go.'

One thing, and one thing only, can we thank GWBush for.

And that is, that he is just sooo stupid, that his stuff-up was no ordinary stuff-up; he let perhaps the world's *biggest* secret right out'a its bag. WYSIWYG.

Some people say that the US 'led' war against Iraq, 'enabled' by the US (+ UK, Aus) regimes' telling of at least 935 well-documented lies, 'enabled' by the complicity of a venal and traitorous corporate MSM (with BBC, AusBC & SBS et al. 'hanging on'), carried out despite the lack of a definitive UNSC resolution, and in the face of massive world-wide anti-war sentiment (the ignoring of which resulting in the eventual, ultimate disillusionment then however reluctant acquiescence of a great many of the US' + world's 'sheople®,') - that the US 'led' war against Iraq was a stuff-up, here referring to its *execution*. IMHO that's simply not the case, although corruption, war profiteering, mismanagement and outright incompetence undoubtedly are all present, even overwhelmingly so.

But no; the *real* stuff-up, also in Afghanistan, was the US&Co 'going in' at all. The illegal invasion of Iraq, now been morphed into a brutal occupation, each more criminally murdering that the other, did an important thing to me, and presumably to many other similarly concerned citizens all around the world. Sooo, just what is it, that GWBush's utterly stupefying idiocy did to me?

Why, it made me open my eyes, that's what.

-=*=-

There I was, just minding my own business (career, cars, fun, family, home), being perhaps a typical Ocker, one of the great Aussie unwashed, in short: a 'fully paid-up' member of the sheople. One could have said (although I didn't - and don't:) "Der, I didn't think!"

Whereas I never didn't think outright, one big thing that I didn't think was that many of the world's so-called leaders were not leaders so much as liars, and what they lied about were important things - like life and (arbitrary, criminally caused) death.

Another rather unpleasant surprise (massive understatement!) - was finding out - after being rudely jolted - that Israel was, is not - and never was the putative innocent, hardly done-by "David" being confronted, even surrounded by hostile and worse (Arab/Muslim) "Goliaths." The gruesome reality is quite different - in fact the exact opposite; Israel is and always was the aggressor, killing Palestinians and surrounding peoples (aka murdering) for land and water, in the (criminal) pursuit of some erring ideologue Zionists' dream of a "Greater Israel."

In a roughly parallel process, I also discovered that the world's economy, dominated as it is by the US&Co, is also largely a criminal enterprise, that is to say it is capitalism gone mad, with the 'buy low - sell high' scheme, always suspect, now taken to such obscene levels by out'a control neoliberal ideology, say, aka the Washington consensus, or the Chicago School, in short deregulation, globalisation, privatisation etc.; supposedly free - but mostly not - largely corrupt and/or captive markets also gone mad (think: oil price), that the perpetrators are now grinding down (could be called penalising - just for being alive), impoverishing so-called normal people - 'we, the sheople,' in contrast to 'them, the rippers-off and rulers' - impoverishing to the point approaching penury if not starvation for the bulk of the world's population, all with the feared excess-CO2 caused collapse of our once jewel-like planet's ecosphere looming.

Well may we say: "The end is nigh!"

But it doesn't help just being alarmist, we need a diagnosis and subsequent solution.

We need to know exactly the how and the why, and what to do to fix things.

Have you, dear reader, worked out the question posed by my title?

-=*=-

Fazit: "A flaw?" "The flaw?" - yes.

Re-stating: everyone thinks they're *right* - as in correct.

It's a corollary of 'cognitive dissonance[1];' sheople® (as opposed to 'thinking people') mostly tend to take the 'path of least resistance' (mad if ya don't), most end up in the rather dismal rut of so-called normal existence, but for a 'select few' it goes wrong. The effect probably begins in the (pre-)school yard, when a few 'hard cases' (aka psychopaths[2]) work out that it's easier to grab whatever from some 3rd, instead of actually working for it.

Ta, ra! Enter, the bully. A person who thinks that force can substitute for talent or brains or both.

That is "the flaw" - behind the miserable actions of both the US and Israel.

Like everyone else, they think they're *right* - as in correct.

But of course, they are wrong. So wrong, that not some merely trivial force is being applied, but murdering military (dishonourable!) force up to the level of genocide - for that is what's being done, to the hapless Palestinians, to Afghanis, to Iraqis. And in the wider world, by US-inspired capitalism gone mad, to us, we the sheople. The only difference is the mechanisms employed; in and around Israel, Afghanistan and Iraq it's direct, dishonourable military violence, for the rest of us it's slow deprivation and impoverishment.

Both the US and Israeli regimes, melded into a single monstrous entity I refer to as USrael, think themselves somehow exceptional - they think - and go so far as to say - that they are exceptional; i.e. somehow smarter than the rest.

BUT: They can't make it stick - without their big sticks, aka murdering violence and/or theft.

Let's face it, daaarlings - that's not smart, they are exceptional alright, but not as they claim; their exception is in being criminally, murderingly stupid.

It may not be a "small man's (?) problem", but it certainly is a "small minds problem." It's psychopathic.

No normal person needs to lie or steal. No thief, on the other hand, can get away his or her theft - for long if ever - without lying about it. That, then, is the mark of the psychopaths; i.e. lying, cheating and stealing. Finally, killing. Look around Israel, Afghanistan and Iraq, Q: What do you see? A: Lying thieving murderers at work.

A so-called open and shut case: QED.

Note: The psychopaths will never voluntarily stop, and certainly not when politely asked - since they only understand force, so a countervailing force is required. Incidentally, as the recent regime change in Aus shows, Lab is as good as indistinguishable from Lib, just as Dummocrats are from Repugs 'over there.'

-=*=-

Long story short: we the sheople cannot hope to violently resist, they would just start killing any who tried. No, we have to work - through the only mechanism peacefully available to us: i.e. the ballot box. We have to vote our problems out, and that means *both* the Lib/Lab ugly twins; put 'em both last - in your chosen order, natch - on every ballot. If 50%+1 of the voters everywhere did so, we'd be on our way out'a the disgusting dead-end we're in.

Well, it's a theory.

-=*end*=-

Ref(s):

[1] cognitive dissonance
noun [MASS NOUN] Psychology the state of having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioural decisions and attitude change.

[2] psychopath
noun a person suffering from chronic mental disorder with abnormal or violent social behaviour.
DERIVATIVES
psychopathic adjective
psychopathically adverb

the table of manipulated illiteracy

The table (refer to is this someone's (Fiona Reynolds'?) idea); the left is 1st copy, the right is 'final.' The font has been changed to a mono-spaced, and 'filler' characters (i.e. ^) have been added as appropriate, to make the comparison easier. Many changes are 'only' cosmetic, others go to the troll's illiteracy (but again, why change at all?) Note, the table is a looong way down; don't know why, but please scroll down.









































































































































   
[original] There's a little there for everyone[forgery?] There's a little there for everyone
in Guantanamo Habeas Corpus- the road to freedomin Guantanamo Habeas Corpus- the road to freedom
by Paul Morrella on June 17, 2008 - 5:21amby Paul Morrella on June 17, 2008 - 5:21am
Richard Tonkin, naturally the latest ruling is seen straight down the lens of political convenience; thus, rendering most opinions on it, completely meaningless.Richard Tonkin, naturally the latest ruling is seen straight down the lens of political convenience; thus^ rendering most opinions on it^ completely meaningless.
I'd add ruling against capital punishment as another reluctance shown by the Courts - though, I think you get the drift. Any person of the belief that this ruling negates the legality of holding the detainees is going to be sadly disappointed. Any person believing that American Courts; a bastion of soft liberal tenda^cies are going to be even more disappointed still. The decision of course makes absolutely no judgement on the detainees^ guilt or innocence. Now unless one comes from the school of terrorism is all a figment of the imagination; the odds are pretty good that at least someone will be found guilty, and to borrow a phrase: "they'll fry for their sins".I'd add ruling against capital punishment as another reluctance shown by the courts - though, I think you get the drift. Any person of the belief that this ruling negates the legality of holding the detainees is going to be sadly disappointed. Any person believing that American courts^ a bastion of soft liberal tendencies are going to be even more disappointed ^^^^^. The decision of course makes absolutely no judgement on the detainees' guilt or innocence. Now unless one comes from the school of terrorism is all a figment of the imagination; the odds are pretty good that at least someone will be found guilty, and to borrow a phrase: "they'll fry for their sins".
......
What does it mean politically? Well, that all depends on the luck of the draw - and^ of naturally^ the timing ^^ it. Whilst it's true mitigating circumstances of innocence haven't been public, neither have circumstances regarding guilt. This particular "cone of legal silence" will not persist in an American Federal Court. It doesn't automatically play that this is a good thing for any particular pol^tical stance moving into election 2008.What does it mean politically? Well, that all depends on the luck of the draw - and, ^^ naturally, the timing of it. Whilst it's true mitigating circumstances of innocence haven't been public, neither have circumstances regarding guilt. This particular "cone of legal silence" will not persist in an American Federal Court. It doesn't automatically play that this is a good thing for any particular political stance moving into election 2008.
Playing devil^s advocate, what does this mean for McCain? It means he gets down on his knees (find a God if he hasn't already got one), and prays. He prays the best (and not brightest) bunch of criminal cretins find their way to the head of the habeas corpus queue.Playing devil's advocate, what does this mean for McCain? It means he gets down on his knees (find a God if he hasn't already got one), and prays. He prays the best (and not brightest) bunch of criminal cretins find their way to the head of the habeas corpus queue.
In the case of such a events taking place the detainees will face the highest political Court in the land; ^^^ Court of public opinion, and trial by media. At such a time, constant references to Obama's voting patterns will find a very monotonous regularity of appearing. References to his middle name (not by McCain of course; most certainly not), will not be going MIA either.In the case of such a events taking place the detainees will face the highest political court in the land: the court of public opinion, and trial by media. At such a time, constant references to Obama's voting patterns will find a very monotonous regularity of appearing. References to his middle name (not by McCain of course; most certainly not), will not be going MIA either.
 
 
[original] The Saving Of Backsides[forgery?] The saving of backsides
in The troops come home, the lies are revealedin The troops come home, the lies are revealed
by Paul Morrella on June 13, 2008 - 5:07amby Paul Morrella on June 13, 2008 - 5:07am
Michael de Angelos^Michael de Angelos:
^My question really was where are our memorials for them- who we would not have won the war without?My question really was where are our memorials for them - without whom we would not have won the war?
Note: She actually changed a quote!
Well, if you were^ say^ from England/Europe you may have a point (before the USSR destroyed the goodwill). I highly doubt it was the reason Australia or the United States eventually won their respective battles. Still, you could argue Russia should think about a memorial to the lend lease program. If nothing eles, it'd be a nice touch.Well, if you were, say, from England/Europe you may have a point (before the USSR destroyed the goodwill). I highly doubt it was the reason Australia or the United States eventually won their respective battles. Still, you could argue Russia should think about a memorial to the lend lease program. If nothing else, it'd be a nice touch.
 
 
[original] The Never Ending War[forgery?] The never ending war
in The troops come home, the lies are revealedin The troops come home, the lies are revealed
by Paul Morrella on June 12, 2008 - 12:41amby Paul Morrella on June 12, 2008 - 12:41am
Richard:^ ^I haven't picked up on the Holocaust stuff and if I haven't I apologise.  Holocaust denial is quite rightly an unconsidered opinion base on Webdiary.  Interested in where you detected this.. I try to be on the lookout.^Richard:: “I haven't picked up on the Holocaust stuff and if I haven't I apologise. ^Holocaust denial is quite rightly an unconsidered opinion base on Webdiary. ^Interested in where you detected this.. I try to be on the lookout.
I don't think anyone has posted denial of the Holocaust on this thread. The allegation I've read (more than once) is that Jews use the Holocaust as an excuse for bad deeds upon others.I don't think anyone has posted denial of the Holocaust on this thread. The allegation I've read (more than once) is that Jews use the Holocaust as an excuse for bad deeds upon others.
There's never any proof given (I've never witnessed any), that Jews use this as an excuse for "apparent gains". Maybe I'm wrong, and someone can correct me, who knows? All I can say is that its ^^ not happened to date.There's never any proof given (I've never witnessed any)^ that Jews use this as an excuse for "apparent gains". Maybe I'm wrong, and someone can correct me, who knows? All I can say is that it has not happened to date.
The idea of an all powerful "Israeli Lobby" censoring descent is absolutely ludicrous. This particular subject would be the numero uno descent subject on the net. There are literally tens of thousands of sites pro and anti Israel. Everybody gets more than their fair share of "voice" on the subject.The idea of an all powerful "Israeli Lobby" censoring dissent is absolutely ludicrous. This particular subject would be the numero uno dissent subject on the net. There are literally tens of thousands of sites pro and anti Israel. Everybody gets more than their fair share of "voice" on the subject.
Richard:  Geoff was being facetious re an Israel Lobby, methinks. As for the quote, Paul, I've amended as that was mine.  Thanks, though, was worrying.Richard: ^Geoff was being facetious re an Israel Lobby, methinks. As for the quote, Paul, I've amended as that was mine. ^Thanks, though, was worrying.
 
 
[original] The Retribution In Heaven[forgery?] The retribution in heaven
in Hope and loss - a sad Iraqi connectionin Hope and loss - a sad Iraqi connection
by Paul Morrella on June 12, 2008 - 2:22amby Paul Morrella on June 12, 2008 - 2:22am
Michael de Angelos^ ^The Labor Party must be planning retribution and there is so much to choose from – simply getting at the truth is going to destroy a few careers over the next few years. Michael de Angelos: "The Labor Party must be planning retribution and there is so much to choose from – simply getting at the truth is going to destroy a few careers over the next few years."
Didn't the government just put him forward for the highest possible Australian award? The continual punishment (international speaking tours, and awards) must be just heart breaking for him.Next week; in a fit of rage, Mr Rudd, may give ^^^ the title Duke, and a fifty acre manor.Didn't the government just put him forward for the highest possible Australian award? The continual punishment (international speaking tours^ and awards) must be just heart^breaking for him.Next week, in a fit of rage, Mr Rudd, may give him the title Duke, and a fifty acre manor.
 
 
[original] Blogs And Life[forgery?] Blogs And Life
in Road to the Tropicsin Road to the Tropics
Submitted by Paul Morrella on June 7, 2008 - 6:10am.Submitted by Paul Morrella on June 7, 2008 - 6:10am.
......
And a brilliant blog weapon it can be (even when on the receiving end). Strangely enough, the masters of such a blog weapon, generally have the happy knack of knowing the line.And a brilliant blog weapon it can be (even when on the receiving end). Strangely enough, the masters of such a blog weapon  generally have the happy knack of knowing the line.
PS the most despicable thing I've "blog" witnessed (my eyes still can^t believe it) is a person (in living blog) go against people he once publicly swore loyalty toward; as-well, as make ^ public, private "correspondence". There are many words for this action (which I won't use); however, there are times, people take actions that well deserve the lable: Never to be trusted.PS the most despicable thing I've "blog" witnessed (my eyes still can't believe it) is a person (in living blog) go against people he once publicly swore loyalty toward; as well as making public, private "correspondence". There are many words for this action (which I won't use); however, there are times, people take actions that well deserve the label: Never to be trusted.
I assure this particular person (actually, I swear to this person), if I ever find myself in a situation of being helpful or hurtful toward you (may never happen, and hopefully for him it doesn't), I will make my full opinion known. There's an art to picking up friends, and there's a real art finding enemies - the test for you; has been past ^ with flying colors.I assure this particular person (actually, I swear to this person), if I ever find myself in a situation of being helpful or hurtful toward you (may never happen, and hopefully for him it doesn't), I will make my full opinion known. There's an art to picking up friends, and there's a real art finding enemies - the test for you; has been passed with flying colors.

2008/06/17

is this someone's (Fiona Reynolds'?) idea ...

.. of "Independent, Ethical, Accountable and Transparent?"

(And if not hers (my tip, 99%), then whose? But we do know exactly where...)

-=*=-

Disclosure: I term myself a 'seeker of truth.' The way I work is to gather as much information (web; MSM, blogs) as I practically can, and compare such info with 'reality' - as far as I can discern it. In this way I conclude, for example, that both the US and Israeli regimes continually lie to us, on their way to committing grievous crimes, which I characterise as 'murder for spoil.'

Apart from the impending greedastrophe® (threatening to end forever 'life as we would like to live it'), the biggest problems faced by the world are the two rogue states already mentioned, their heinous crimes and the lying propaganda they deploy as attempted 'camouflage.' But it's not 'just' the principals, there appear from time to time apologists and worse - active, lying trolls. I have personally encountered such, and I make no secret of my animosity towards same. What is particularly galling, is the 'assist' given to the principals by the venal MSM, and to the trolls by their 'hosts.' I now regard anyone telling lies on behalf of the principals as 'enemy,' and those who give assistance to liars are held in scarcely less contempt.

Q: Why does any of this matter #1?

A: In the first place, I think that truth matters. It the 2nd place, the troll attacks directed at me were outrageous - but worse, they had the active 'support' of the host's management. I "no longer felt safe" - and was not safe. I maintain the rage.

Part of my modus operandi is to 'archive' some items of interest. I was a bit surprised to find some such archived items were later changed. Without further comment, some before/after 'evidence:'

[Notes: I've moved the table to the end, so it may be perused in some comfort. When I've previously pointed out malignancies such as these, the 'evidence' dried up. It is thought - proof is offered - that the Eds now 'go over' the troll's input, in order to clean it up. It is - also evidently - at least some times a two-stage process, and the effects can be seen if one gets a copy as edited the first time, then a copy as 'finally' edited. I expect that this new evidence will also now dry up. See table below[1].]

Q: Why does any of this matter #2?

A: Apart from the obvious illiteracy revealed, there are a couple'a problems; 1) why do the Eds (yes, plural) change the troll's text? (Suggestion: to erase 'fingerprints.' Haw!) The illiteracy revealed resembles, within visible, realistic bounds, that of a banned former contributor, namely Jay White. Either Jay White or Paul Morrella - or both - are noms de plume. (Just A. Nobody: «...does it matter if PM is JW? After all JW was a non [sic] de plume as well.») As such, personal attacks are not to be allowed - and yet 2) exactly that, i.e. personal attacks from this troll were not 'just' allowed but were encouraged. Then, 3) the JW/PM imbroglio is not an isolated incident, there is another active troll known as CP/ER, (CP having been banned, ER appeared almost instantly - and was OKed by g*d herself, i.e. MK) - and yet a third, AC, whose 'unmasking' was an emergency action by the management. (How many anony-frauds are there, anyway?) At the very least, any noms de plume should be clearly identifiable i.e. visibly labelled as such. Anything else is unfair to honest posters operating under their actual names. Now I've wasted enough time - far more than it perhaps warrants - on this problem, although I have spent my time up to this point in the name of pursuing justice via truth. But time-wasting being one'a the prime troll objectives, I'm not gunna waste any more of mine on them. As for the trolls' hosts, IMHO, by these fingerprint-erasing actions actively 'enhancing' their whole troll saga, their claim to "Independent, Ethical, Accountable and Transparent" looks just that tiny bit shabbier (perhaps more like fraudulent - to say the very least, eh?)

[1] The table; the left is 1st copy, the right is 'final.' The font has been changed to a mono-spaced, and 'filler' characters (i.e. ^) have been added as appropriate, to make the comparison easier. Many changes are 'only' cosmetic, others go to the troll's illiteracy (but again, why change at all?) Further note, I moved the table to a new post. The table is a looong way down; don't know why, but please scroll down; you may see it here: the table of manipulated illiteracy ... (It should open in a new 'window.')

2008/06/14

the mortal danger of denial ...


 .. and no, it's not all about you!

   .. subtitle: what *really* matters.

-=*=-

Preamble: the systems that we have are not just wrong but are also outright bad.

Our 'democracies' (US, UK, Aus + Israel) are dysfunctional; of at least three prime requirements (switched-on electorate, free and fair information flows, valid choice of candidates) - we have as good as *none*. It's no good to say well, democracy is the worst form of government - except all others, when what we've got is just not democracy at all, it's *something else* masquerading[1] under the name of democracy. Quite clearly, something that is false is not the truth; 'not the truth' is - a lie.

Principle of exclusion:

1. If someone is ill-informed, or just does not think, then that person (many!) is excluded (from my consideration) - and such people (too many!) - form the sheople®.

2. If someone deviates from the truth, either by commission or omission, whether deliberately (by design) or 'just' accidentally(??!) - then such people are excluded (from my consideration) - and are termed liars. This obviously includes a lot'a people, not *just* the venal MSM (incl. big bits'a the AusBC & SBS) - but 'untruthers' everywhere, aka all filthy liars.

3. If a representative fails to properly represent their electors, as their absolute 1st priority, then such representatives are excluded (from my consideration) - and are termed traitors.

In the early days of my blogging, just as in the early days of my actual life, I decided lies were not for me; for both moral and practical reasons, I would be a 'seeker (now reporter) of truth.' But it wasn't then and it isn't now enough; I seek justice via truth, as in:

"Fair go, ya mug!"

To tie-up the principle of exclusion: if something is not truth, it/they (lies) are to be excluded. If something is not just, it/they (injustices) are also to be excluded. Obviously, lies and injustices abound, the task is a) to identify and then b) to eliminate each and every one.

To end my preamble, these two:

1. 'Man does not live by bread alone.' Totally stripped of any and all superstition (aka 'religion,' say), we have not just a physical existence but also a mental one (the latter depending solely on the former).

2. Sooo, my answer to Q: "What *really* matters?" is A: To live in peace; not just with adequate sustenance for physical existence, but also for mental peace as well: bread and justice.

-=*=-

Musing: "I think, therefore I am." We live for the moment, however that may be defined. The brain is a physical construct; it takes time for the electrical impulses thought to constitute thoughts to propagate (our 'software' functions), and more time for the swirling chemical (energy, hormone) fluids to circulate (hence 'wetware.') Well may we say 'carpe diem,' and recall a computer analogy: 'garbage in, garbage out.' We have needs (air, food, clothing & shelter) and wants (imaginings), our wants are manipulable (creating demand, worst = both religion and 'selling a war.') Obviously, people manipulating wants in 'support' of negative 'outcomes' (illegal invasion of Iraq, say; a dastardly crime of exactly Nuremberg proportions) - are also criminals themselves.

-=*=-

Specifics: Greedastrophe®, Israel, Iraq, Iran.

I had a friend (now dead, sadly) who used to say: "Ya don't bullshit y'r friends!" - Well, I don't BS anyone; what must be said here:

Greedastrophe®. If nothing is done or not enough (current apparent course), our life-sustaining biosphere may be damaged beyond its ability to sustain us. Drastic action is required (here I exclude so-called climate-change sceptics aka deniers); current 'leader/rulers' are failing us.

Israel. What can be said, about this middle-east malignancy? Not too much; WYSIWYG, an invasion (conventionally if not correctly identified as 'Zionist') of outsiders killing to steal the prior legal owners' land and water. That they 'hang' their arguments on the holocaust is obvious, what they don't see is that they now 'ape' their former persecutors in every important detail.

Iraq. Illegal invasion now been morphed into brutal occupation. 'Murder for oil' can neither be ruled out nor denied; usually war should pay for itself and in this case that's how. There can be no doubt, see Cheney's oily machinations. The lying-denying language is quite specific: geo-strategic concerns, also in this 'bucket' come advanced military bases, i.e. the US jackboot on the world's cowardly supine neck. Whether 'Zionist' desires for some "Greater Israel" played a part is superficially denied - but is also probably undeniable. Democratisation is a furphy, one cannot democratise by invasion at the point of a gun, and the self-proclaimed democratizers have no functioning democracies themselves. The murdering perpetrators and erring apologists both lie and deny - but to no good effect; we (truth-seekers) see all.

Iran. Any attack by USrael must be seen for what it would be, a criminal act of naked aggression.

-=*=-

Intermezzo: Why lie? Silly of me for asking; to deceive, to hide something - most likely, bigger crimes. The world's biggest criminals are two, the US and Israel. Together, via the M-W report's Israel Lobby, forming USrael, these crooks are lying, denying - and murdering for spoil. All the accessory/apologists, the professional (venal MSM) and amateur (erroneous ideologue) propagandists, all of these liars only try to conceal the vicious murdering-thief type USrael criminal actions.

-=*=-

Mechanics: Some way must be found to force the representatives to properly represent. Then if/when different, rulers must be made to rule wisely; either shit or get off the pot (detested Ameri-speak; spit!) Note the use of 'force,' 'must be made.' This is not a call for violent revolution - but since it appears that the 'power-grabbers' only understand force (apart from their lies (consider undoubted intimidation), almost their only other tool is a (military) hammer), then some form of violence must be used, and here I have but one slim hope: that the pen really is mightier than the sword. Sheople awake, demand your universal human rights!

-=*=-

Fazit: Truth will out; to attempt denial is to lie. In the end, we're all dead but it's what we do in the meantime that matters; my stance is clear: I advocate justice for all, via truth everywhere.

-=*end*=-

PS random thoughts:

Inclusive/exclusive, arrogance and ignorance, not just of youth.

Truth vs. lies; selective, hypocrisy, utterly lacking any sense of irony.

-=* =-

Ref(s):

[1] masquerade —n. 1 false show, pretence. 2 masked ball. —v. (-ding) (often foll. by as) appear falsely or in disguise. [Spanish máscara mask]

2008/06/13

Justice stands up.

G'day Phil, well five justices of the US Supreme Court stood up for the fundamental principles of justice in striking down a key part of the Military Commissions Act. From Glenn Greenwald (former constitutional lawyer):

In a major rebuke to the Bush administration's theories of presidential power -- and in an equally stinging rebuke to the bipartisan political class which has supported the Bush detention policies -- the U.S. Supreme Court today, in a 5-4 decision (.pdf), declared Section 7 of the Military Commissions Act of 2006 unconstitutional. The Court struck down that section of the MCA because it purported to abolish the writ of habeas corpus -- the means by which a detainee challenges his detention in a court -- despite the fact that Constitution permits suspension of that writ only "in Cases of Rebellion or Invasion."

As a result, Guantanamo detainees accused of being "enemy combatants" have the right to challenge the validity of their detention in a full-fledged U.S. federal court proceeding. The ruling today is the first time in U.S. history that the Court has ruled that detainees held by the U.S. Government in a place where the U.S. does not exercise formal sovereignty (Cuba technically is sovereign over Guantanamo) are nonetheless entitled to the Constitutional guarantee of habeas corpus whenever they are held in a place where the U.S. exercises effective control.

One of my first thoughts when I read of the decisions was about who voted yes, and who nay. %-4, well, I had a good idea of who the nays were. Greenwald on the matter (and with concerns I share):

Three of the five Justices in the majority -- John Paul Stevens (age 88), Ruth Bader Ginsburg (age 75) and David Souter (age 68) -- are widely expected by court observers to retire or otherwise leave the Court in the first term of the next President. By contrast, the four judges who dissented -- Antonin Scalia, Clarence Thomas, John Roberts and Sam Alito -- are expected to stay right where they are for many years to come.

John McCain has identified Roberts and Alito as ideal justices of the type he would nominate, while Barack Obama has identified Stephen Breyer, David Souter and Ginsberg (all in the majority today). It's not hyperbole to say that, from Supreme Court appointments alone, our core constitutional protections could easily depend upon the outcome of the 2008 election.

That justice should depend on partisanship is a concern but there are examples of how it has infected the US system, the Florida recount decision of 2000 might well be the prime example - and look what has resulted from that.

Such as:

In its decision, the Court emphasized (and revived) some of the most vital principles of our system of Government which have been trampled upon and degraded over the last seven years (emphasis added):
The Framers' inherent distrust of government power was the driving force behind the constitutional plan that allocated powers among three independent branches. This design serves not only to make Government accountable but also to secure individual liberty. . . .

Where a person is detained by executive order rather than, say, after being tried and convicted in a court, the need for collateral review is most pressing. . . . The habeas court must have sufficient authority to conduct a meaningful review of both the cause of detention and the Executive's power to detain. . . .

Security depends upon a sophisticated intelligence apparatus and the ability of our Armed Forces to act and interdict. There are further considerations, however. Security subsists, too, in fidelity to freedom's first principles. Chief among these are freedom from arbitrary and unlawful restraint and the personal liberty that is secured by adherence to separation of powers. . . .

The laws and Constitution are designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times. Liberty and security can be reconciled; and in our system, they are reconciled within the framework of law. The Framers decided that habeas corpus, a right of first importance, must be a part of that framework, part of that law.

In ruling that the CSRTs woefully fail to provide the constitutionally guaranteed safeguards, the Court quoted Alexander Hamilton's Federalist No. 84: "The practice of arbitrary imprisonments, in all ages, is the favorite and most formidable instruments of tyranny." It is that deeply tyrannical practice -- implemented by the Bush administration and authorized by a bipartisan act of Congress -- which the U.S. Supreme Court, today, struck down.


"... designed to survive, and remain in force, in extraordinary times" is point that needs emphasis as the Bush administration has torn away chunks of the Constitution (that "scrap of paper") under the cover of the :"war on terror". Of course, they are not the only ones who have so attacked their systems. he opportunity arose and some governments have been only too willing to exploit it.

For now, we can savour the moment when principle once again stood up. The hope is that it is more than a moment and that others will be inspired to restore and protect the fabric of their systems.

2008/06/11

hate-speak ...


 .. no excuses - not 'no more,' just none

-=*=-

It 'dawned' on me some-when - OK, I might'a been a bit slow - that the AusBC has been transmitting propaganda at us. I just examined my 'input' archive, a somewhat casual (i.e. not totally rigorous) record of my thoughts as submitted to various 'blogs,' including the old SMH webdiary and CT/HYS. Result: 369 occurrences of 'propagand' and the very 1st on 13May'03. Here's a (longish) 'snip:'


«IF somebody tells you that they are going to war BECAUSE another party has WMDs AND that party does not have any AND the invading 'power' knew it all along THEN that somebody (Bush, Blair and Howard, Powell, Straw, Downer, the whole sordid bunch) did lie. I don't care for dissembling, disingenuity, disinformation or propaganda (in all its forms and so the list goes on;) but with Howard we've got no choice - and as far as knowingly dishonest, and/or intended to deceive or all those together and more, never a truer word spoken in jest - and that's not fooling.»


[me/left, right, outright,13May'03]


-=*=-

That was 'back then,' this is now. But before we leave the past, there're still a few things to be recalled. Like, for example, 7.30's Kerry O'Brien going off to the US (immediately prior to that illegal invasion - briefing tour?) - and the subsequent 'make-over' the 7.30 program format received. Then, there was the endless stream of 'talking heads' (detested Ameri-speak - spit!) The coming war was 'talked-up,' basically 7.30 followed the US (venal!) MSM's lead.

So now, Q: What have we got?

A(1): We now know, what we suspected (99+%) all along, and that is, they lied. Not 'just' the politicians ("All politicians lie!") - but the MSM, including via the AusBC & SBS. Boo! Hiss!

A(2): At least 935 lies were deployed by GWBush&Co (if 'needed,' find the articles yourself.)

A(3): The endless stream of 'talking heads' were, on the whole, 'on the take;' the US versions have now been shown to have been 'fully briefed' by the Pentagon. Circularity, anyone? Even the truly liberal media 'caved in.'

A(4): The US Senate (Phase II report) has now 'chimed in,' confirming the distortions, specifically, that the 'intel' was not wrong; it too, was infested with deliberate lies, even 'sexed-up' in UK parlance. (If 'needed,' find the articles yourself. Also refer 'Downing St. Memos.')

I'm not doing links; anyone interested *knows* most if not all of this stuff, but it's interesting (even if 'only' for me), to take a bit of a perspective-view now and again. I have, over my 'blogging career' had various arguments, it turns out (IMHO!) that the simplest arguments work best.

I like to say WYSIWYG: 'What you see is what you get.' We could also call it 'the lens of reality.'

With the exception of 'the biggie,' aka the greedastrophe® - time for dealing with which is trickling away, partly - possibly mainly - due to our next biggest problems, which are these 'myths:'

1. The US: "Truth, Justice and the American Way!" (What utter BS.)

2. Israel: "Brave (little) David, confronting (murdering hordes of) Arab-Goliaths!" (Even worse BS.)

I contend - for me alone, who cares about 'the/any other;' i.e. "Stuff you Jack, I'm OK!" - I contend that these myths are exactly that and more: they are lies. Pure and utter lies - with no redemption, and no redemption possible. And I got those lies - partly, possibly wholly - from the AusBC (since that's almost all the MSM that I ever 'consume,' with only the tiniest of exceptions (F1).)

-=*=-

Sooo, what??! - Well, try this:




by Alan Curran on June 10, 2008 - 9:09pm


Angela, Hasbara (??????, also spelt Hasbarah) is a noun that literally means "explanation". Where does the word "goyim" come in? I have not heard that word for years.

I am at the moment looking through 438,000 Google hits on Palestinian propaganda. I will get back to you as soon as I can as there is a lot of garbage to wade through. I am reading about the so called peace activist Rachel Corrie. This is a story the Palestinians have twisted around.

The Arabs have got to realise that Israel is here to stay, and if they are not prepared to accept this they are going to finish up with a lot of martyrs.



It should be noted, that 'Alan Curran' is a nom de plume. There is no way to recognise such, merely fortuitously disclosed (perhaps only to those who actually witnessed the event), after the 'Curran' cyber-identity painted itself into a corner. Exactly who is this Curran? Just A. Nobody? (Haw! The "A" is for another - fraud.)

Then, this:



Anther reply to Roslyn Ross that the balanced WD team may well not publish:

Bigotry And The End Of Webdiary

Roslyn Ross.

Your repeated comparisons between Israel and Nazi Germany are beneath contempt, qualify your rantings as antisemitic by any accepted criteria or definition, underline a profound ignorance that permeates everything you write, disqualify you from any serious part in this or any other discussion and highlight the essential problem of Webdiary attempting to be taking seriously as a "moderated" site while at the same time hosting the likes of you.

The only "bitter irony" here is that WD has published without any apparent qualm, once again, your truly disgusting slur, and yet this reply may well be deemed to be unprintable by the moderator on duty. Again.

Your presence here disqualifies WD from any serious consideration anywhere. It has been responsible for the loss of a number of valuable commenters. It is appalling that your comments should be allowed publication without comment while the comments of those who take issue with your serial rubbish are cut or selectively criticised. That the rubbish you write has actually been described as "moderate" reflects badly on this site.

WD has become just another hate site. I've tried to stick it out longer than others who have pointed this out, in the hope a crisis might make this place see sense.

You are a racist and a bigot Roslyn Ross. You shame Webdiary. And you reveal why Webdiary does not deserve to survive in its current form.


Posted by: Geoff Pahoff | Thursday, August 03, 2006 at 23:03


My comment: Pahoff has been (most probably rightly) called an arch-Zionist.

Another comment: Here, Pahoff was/is right: "WD has become just another hate site." Just got the timing wrong.

Yet another comment: Pahoff has the nerve to call someone a bigot? Haw again, in spades.

Shortly following the Alan Curran spit, comes another:




by Geoff Pahoff on June 10, 2008 - 11:25pm


...
Then I have a quick look at what the Israel bashers are saying. And those who are pretending to be neutral. The anti-west bigots as driven as the ugliest lynch mob. Like above.
...


My comment: Anyone who wishes to side-step the venal MSM lying propaganda can see that Israel occupies land stolen from the hapless - legal owners, aka the violently, often murderously, dispossessed Palestinians.

What Israel is up to - quite visibly, see new settlements etc., is their own brand of murder for spoil, in this case for land and water. See Zionist (ugly! wet!) dreams of a "Greater Israel." It's all there out in the open (hidden in plain sight), for anyone who cares to properly look.

Now, not only do we get (lying!) propaganda via the AusBC and SBS, we now get it from the one place we once thought could have been our way out'a the filthy shit. No longer so, if it ever (eternal optimist!) was.

But note again, it's not 'just' propaganda, rather it's also hate speech. Pahoff 'taught' me almost all of what I know about hate speech (see blood libel, say), and it's a funny thing: that it is exactly those who rave and rail about anti-US this and/or anti-Israel that, who are the very ones who also rave about hate speech. We, the truth seekers, don't lie, we don't need to lie, we just don't do it. And we do not hate - US citizens, say, or even Zionists so much, but we do hate, with a true and purple passion - but with perfectly good reasons, so it's much more like deplore, the USrael murdering-thief type actions. The true haters, mateys, are the pro-war, pro-US, Pro-Zionist lying agitator/accessories, aka 'murder for spoil' apologists. But they are not 'just' haters, they are also the true sickos.

2008/06/10

Will they, won't they? The growing fear that Iran will be attacked.

G'day Phil, as has been noted in previous posts and elsewhere there are indications and fears of an attack by the US and/or Israel against Iran. On proposition is that Bush would launch an attack as a way of leaving his mark on history. It would certainly achieve that, but history would not be likely to as kind as Bush thinks. There has been the annual AIPAC conference in the US where the pollies show due obeisance and the rhetoric is hot and has little reality to truth. But then truth matters little when there are agendas and delusions in play. Nior does it matter to those who propagandise in other forums or to those who facilitate such activities, even though they say they are frightened by the possibilities this thread will examine.

A great deal of material has been posted in various places about this issue - a special note of appreciation for Craig Rowley's efforts at another place. Despite this, the liars continue to lie and the ignorant and prejudiced continue to exhibit their ignorance and prejudice despite the evidence that has been presented. Such people should read more and type less.

One inhibiting factor in the plans to attack Iran has been the military. Perhaps it is a case of "We need a new general".

WASHINGTON - Pentagon officials firmly opposed a proposal by Vice President Dick Cheney last summer for airstrikes against the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) bases by insisting that the administration would have to make clear decisions about how far the United States would go in escalating the conflict with Iran, according to a former George W Bush administration official.

J Scott Carpenter, who was then deputy assistant secretary of state in the State Department's Bureau of Near Eastern Affairs, recalled in an interview that senior Defense Department (DoD) officials and the Joint Chiefs used the escalation issue as the main argument against the Cheney proposal.

McClatchy newspapers reported last August that Cheney had proposal several weeks earlier "launching airstrikes at suspected training camps in Iran", citing two officials involved in Iran policy.

Has Cheney changed his mind?

WASHINGTON - Once again, notably in the wake of last week's annual American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) policy conference and the visit to the capital of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, there's a lot of chatter about a possible attack by Israel and/or the United States on Iran.

Olmert appears to have left the White House after meeting with President George W Bush and an earlier dinner with Vice President Dick Cheney quite satisfied on this score, while rumors - most recently voiced by neo-conservative Daniel Pipes - that the administration plans to carry out a "massive" attack in the window between the November elections and Bush's departure from office, particularly if Democratic Senator Barack Obama is his successor, continue to swirl around the capital.

When you're on a bad - and dangerous and criminal - idea, stick to it.
Note the usual suspects. A notable attendee at the AIPAC conference was Barack Obama. He does not fill one with confidence on matters related to the ME.

The failure by Barack Obama to chart another course in the Middle East, to defy the Israel lobby and to denounce the Bush administration’s inexorable march toward a conflict with Iran is a failure to challenge the collective insanity that has gripped the political leadership in the United States and Israel.

Obama, in a miscalculation that will have grave consequences, has given his blessing to the widening circle of violence and abuse of the Palestinians by Israel and, most dangerously, to those in the Bush White House and Jerusalem now plotting a war against Iran. He illustrates how the lust for power is morally corrosive. And while he may win the White House, by the time he takes power he will be trapped in George Bush’s alternative reality.

We need to get out of Iraq and Afghanistan. We need to stay the hand of Israel, which is building more settlements-including a new plan to put 800 housing units in occupied East Jerusalem-and imposing draconian measures to physically break the 1.5 million Palestinians in Gaza. We need, most of all, to prevent a war with Iran.

House Judiciary Chairman John Conyers, in a letter to President Bush on May 8, threatened to open impeachment proceedings if Bush attacked Iran. The letter is a signal that planning for strikes on Iran is under way and pronounced.

Might be a bit late.

Singing the same song.

A digression on the matter of investigations. McClellan to testify. So might Patrick Fitzgerald.

More on Obama - Chris Floyd and Arthur Silber.

On other ways of getting at Iran.

Of course, it's all the president of Iran's fault. Well, if you believe that ...







2008/06/09

he who laughs last ...


 .. what a sad and sorry tale

-=*=-

Three things:

1. Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki has tried to reassure Iran ... (that the 50+/- permanent US bases in Iraq, say, are no threat in the ME.)

2. Tales From Inside [a liberal] Editorial Board Room - a mechanism in the venal MSM's treason.

3. Aussies honoured on Queen's Birthday ... Former prime minister John Howard, gets a (tinsel!) Queen's medal.

The last laugh is to Howard, he'll never face the hangman.

Thanks, Mr Rudd. What ever else you do will just be commentary.

The rest of us (truth & justice seekers) may laugh or not, but we'll cry, alright.

2008/06/08

fact vs. lies ...


 .. goodies vs. bad

-=*=-

G'day Damian,

 .. and what a fine kettle of (rather stinky[1]) fish you refer to!

Without naming names - it's not *who* says it, so much as *what* is said, with the refinement that it's not only *what* is said but also heavily *how* - I'd like to reflect a bit, on the 'state of play.'

-=*=-

In the beginning was the revulsion, as the US planned "Shockin' whore" for Iraq was revealed.

Then came the howls of protest: "Leave it to Blix!" "No war!" - "Not in my name!"

But we the sheople®, our fine democracy's voters were spurned, called a mob.

And so the awful witnessing began; who knows how many murdered ('obliterated'), and others' lives destroyed, and how many hapless collaterals 'only' terrorised? But they are 'the other,' so little respected that (this time around) no body counts are revealed, if any done at all.

We 'tracked' the invasion (illegal), as it was morphed into occupation (brutal), we saw Bremer's orders promulgated and now we await the 'oil-law' (patrimony) and 'security pact' (sovereignty) to complete the stage-setting for the ultimate oil-theft. Of course it wasn't *only* oil - undeniable though it is but still a major key (aka war must pay); it's inseparable from the not-so-small matter of permanent military bases, and last but certainly not least, the Zionist (filthy, wet) dreams of a "Greater Israel." But what we see is what we're gunna get, and that is the Middle East dominated by the wannabe hegemon, its illegal sprog and poodle with dag hanging on.

-=*=-

So. Throughout, I have maintained that I am a seeker of truth; the idea being to expose the lies, reveal the truth, and thereby to seek the justice owing to all. Back now, to the kettle of rather stinky fish; I (as others) have encountered opposition during my quest for justice via truth, and it's always puzzled me, Q: "What's in it for them?"

Seems to me there are two possible answers:

A1: Money. (This involves corruption; any in this 'bucket' would naturally deny it, and feign outrage.)

A2: Not money, in which case, what then? Before we attempt an answer here, recall that as a seeker of truth, I claim to have discovered much, the largest aspect (IMHO) being 'murder for oil,' the others being mentioned above. So now, any (A2) answer involves lies (to spell it out, lies in opposition to my discovered truth), and I posit that only (erroneous!) ideology fits. But whatever. Here is a quote - thanks to Bob Wall and g'day! The quote is a bit long:

  «“They are so frightened of their own complicity in bringing death, disaster, destruction and ungodly sorrow to Iraq that they can now only resort to astonishing levels of self-delusion to maintain their sanity.”

America, and likely the human race, is undergoing a polarization today that looks suspiciously like the way cellular material gathers at both ends of its capsular playground just prior to mitosis. One camp is making the evolutionary bet that a cooperative enterprise, based on a recognition of universal rights and collective effort, is the way to go. Such beings display qualities of conscience: altruism, responsibility, even guilt. The other camp remains committed to the law of fang and claw, betting that their survival is best vested in dominance and destruction of their competitors i.e. everybody not themselves. We are in an ongoing process of speciation, which is to say that given time, we will evolve into two distinct animals unless one of us proves unviable. It will be easier to tell us apart when we become morphologically distinct and unable to exchange genetic material.

My point is that the belligerents of group 2 are congenitally without conscience or remorse for the sorrow and destruction they cause. It just isn’t in them. When you talk to them about these things - the plight of Mexican immigrants, the suffering of Palestinians, the victims of the Iraq occupation - you may get some boilerplate arguments and justifications, though these are oddly unaccompanied by even a hint of empathy or concern for their fellow man. Such concern is mere poetry to them. Hippie nonsense. They do not struggle with this, or repress their complicity or sandbag themselves behind delusional ideation. They sleep like babies. This is the sign of true monstrosity, that you do not know you are a monster. You go down to the mead hall, eat a half dozen vikings, then go back to your cave for a nice nap.»

[voxclamantis June 6th, 2008 1:58 pm]

-=*=-

So now we know some critical things about the anti-truth opposition - or at least, we can get a good idea from that quote. Following on from «eat a half dozen vikings», it may be worth something at this point to look up 'blood libel.' Although this in turn may well spur a few rants on anti-Semitism, it is not so meant; rather to fix/enhance the context which is criminal, bloody murder. Further: I make no accusations that do not automatically follow from that which is directly observable, which in this case is murder for spoil; i.e. murder for oil by the US in Iraq (Iran next?) - and murder for land and water by Israel in and around the now sadly, mainly ex-Palestine.

IF we have criminal, bloody mass-murder going on (I say directly observable) THEN who will bring the perpetrators to justice? UN? France? Germany? They all seem to have piked, but if it's not one of those three, then who?

I see only one real possibility: people-power. But then, see the referred-to opposition. Boo! Hiss!

-=*=-

To come full circle, and return to the fine kettle of stinky fish, I have a quote and a challenge:

1. Quote: «...old chap, does it matter if PM is JW? After all JW was a non de plume as well.»

2. You know who you are, so to the challenge:

a) IF this statement is not truthful, THEN you are a liar. (Add own qualifiers, i.e. filthy, bloody etc..)

b) IF it is the truth (my 'tip'), THEN how do you know, and what *else* do you know?

So which is it? Note: I do not expect an answer; IF the person were at all honest THEN s/he would'a cleared this up looong ago - or perhaps the whole sad story may never even have happened. The quote shows an utter liar (unlikely, why lie at all? Why this lie?) - or someone up to their armpits in a conspiracy; we know where that conspiracy originated, and where it was played out. I bring it up for the specific purpose of illustrating the gross ethical failures that *swamp* 'that other place, over there.'

-=*end*=-

Ref(s):

[1] «or a fine kettle of fish! - meaning that some awkward state of affairs has arisen.»

[cross posted]

2008/06/06

US' "Shockin' whore" ...


 .. was - still is - outright state terrorism

-=*=-

G'day Bob,

.. now finished trip#1 through your cited tinyrevolution/Bernard Chazelle's The Meaning of Shock-and-Awe.

Here's a (repeated) excerpt:

  «It's unambiguous. The goal is to use violence to inspire fear in a way that will shut down all or part of society. The objective is the same as that of 9/11: bring a society to its knees by using terror. (The Ullman-Wade book even mentions Hiroshima approvingly as an example of Shock-and-Awe.)»

Here's a comment:

  «The real tragedy here was that in 2003, HDTV sales were fairly low, correspondingly the prices were sky high, and I had to put up with shock and awe, red white and blue cgi graphics, and cheerleading military punditry in low def on a standard 27" teevee.
Oh, the agony.»


Here's a last comment (for now, and long):

  «Harlan Ullman, the military adviser who created the shock-and-awe doctrine, says he doesn't recognize it in action in Iraq.

"The current campaign does not appear to correspond to what we envisioned," said Ullman, principal author of the 1996 book, "Shock and Awe: Achieving Rapid Dominance."

"This bombing campaign did not immediately go after Iraqi military forces in the field, particularly the Republican Guard divisions and political levers of power, such as the Baath Party headquarters," explained Ullman, a defense analyst at the Center for Strategic and International Studies.

He says that if the air campaign had destroyed a big chunk of Iraq's ground forces, it's possible that Iraqi resistance might have been softened, and U.S. troops might already be in Baghdad by now.

Is it too late for shock and awe now? "We have not seen it; it is not coming," Ullman said flatly.»


I'm supposing that Ullman's implication was that 'his' shock and awe was not the same as what the US actually delivered as "Shockin' whore"; 'his' was prefaced on military objectives?

In other words, IF non-military (Ullman said so) THEN what else but at the whole Iraqi population-at-large. i.e. an utter, outright war-crime - of the 'ultimate' Nuremberg type.

-=*=-

What you see is what you get.

What the Iraqis got was their country's infrastructure as good as totally destroyed. (And it has as good as stayed that way.)

The basis for their civil society; laws, government etc. were also as good as totally destroyed.

Bremer's 'orders' allow for the rape of Iraq's everything, commerce, farming, services, resources, you name it.

The installed 'democracy' is a farce; only candidates who swore not to even try to dismantle Bremer were allowed to stand. The puppet government that resulted is under enormous pressure, even open bribery (threatened violence? Recall "Hit Man") - to sign away anything that remains of Iraq's sovereignty or 'patrimony' (read oil.)

-=*=-

All of this filthy corruption is happening 'in plain sight,' reported as anything but by (crooked!) 'Western' (actually mostly Anglo majors, Israel as poisonous minor) politicians relayed and amplified by their 'pet' venal MSM.

For example, some Australian soldiers are staying in Iraq "to protect the off-shore oil infrastructure." (A closer interpretation: 'Hold hostage?')

All of this from 'the World's policeman,' claimed freedom-loving US. HAW! (Hang all the order-giving bastards, and gaol all their criminal carpet-bagger rip-off followers - for ever.)

Truth must out; justice must be done.

2008/06/03

the (corrupt!) microcosm ...


 .. but it's *our* microcosm[1]!

  subtitle: squaring a few circles[2]?

-=*=-

It is slightly amusing, to watch a few WD-denizens Oh, so publicly devour each other. Especially delicious is that right at the centre of the storm - actually not 'just' at the centre but adding enormous (misguided!) energy to the maelstrom like the demented dervish she undoubtedly is, is none other than the self-promoting putative madam president[3] of the MK old bags club.

Taking account of possible paranoia and any tendency towards self-selection, it is an easy accusation to make, that the demented dervish deployed her dubious 'charms' against more than just a few of the honest truth-seekers now marked largely by their absence 'over there.' Interesting too, is that exactly the same technique of abuse she claims has her targeted, was the same as that which a certain lying troll directed at me. Did madam putative-president spring to my defence 'back then?' (Detested Ameri-speak - spit!) No, and not on your Nelly, she did not. Partly my fault; I once declared WD to be my workplace, the farmer/fishwife may well have decided to work towards having me ejected from exactly that point. (On grounds that WD is partly her possession, partly her play-pen, and how dare anyone disagree with her - however she may justify that stance. But even murderers (see next bit) - just as child-mind abusers, say - presumably *somehow* feel justified.)

But I tire of it: as Mme. Albright might'a said (but didn't) "The price just ain't worth it." Specifically, although attempts to weed the real nasties out'a WD had some initial success 'back then' (spit!), WYSIWYG (what you see is what you get), WD is now - not exclusively, but extensively, a playground open for such bigots and the aforesaid lying trolls.

The WD-nub: commenter to commenter abuse is OK, just as long as it's sufficiently well disguised (Paul Walter to Jenny Hume, Paul Morrella to me), telling any lie is also OK; the rules themselves may be arbitrarily abused (see looong discussions 'in here,' Damian's (g'day) and some less salubrious places (listening, Harr'äh?) - and in the end it all just becomes a corrupt power-play.

Just like 'real life' in fact, hence 'microcosm.' This, then, is the 1st circle that cannot be squared. Despite our hopes and expectations, WD has ground to earth, and is nothing more than a CWA-style Kaffeeklatsch, with neither the intention nor ability to change anything.

-=* =-

Just as some liars appear to prosper in WD (listening, Morrella?), so in the wider world. Try this story:


«US rejects Rudd's claims on 'flawed' Iraq intel
By Washington correspondent Michael Rowland

Mr Rudd told Parliament that the decision to go to war was based on flawed intelligence, a fact he said was not disclosed to the Australian public at the time.

He cited as an example the failure to find any weapons of mass destruction in Iraq.

In response, White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said the Bush administration was acting in good faith on the information it had in the months leading up to the invasion.»


[AusBC]


Well, of course, and kindly pardon my French, but what a pack of flamin' bloody lies!

Not what Rudd said (appears quite reasonable, even surprisingly so in the face of the "US alliance" position seemingly forced on our wide-brown), but what the White House spokeswoman dared to say. That, in the face of the 935 lies - and the recent revelations of McClellan. And all the rest of the evidence pointing to wilful, criminal mass-murder for oil. (Whilst 'helping' Israel's equally theft-by-murder intention of grabbing a "Greater Israel" from the hapless *legal* owners of ex-Palestine and surrounds.)

Hypocrisy hardly gets more breathless than this. And the AusBC regurgitates it without blushing. Shame!

I can't understand how countries like Germany or France can tolerate what USrael are doing. Forget about trying to square any circles, if the liars (all the filthy accessory/enablers, listening, Morrella?) aren't locked up and soonest, and the main criminal order-givers hanged by the neck until dead, then there's just no justice at all.

-=*end*=-

Ref(s):

[1] microcosm n. (often foll. by of) miniature representation, e.g. mankind or a community seen as a small-scale model of the universe; epitome.  microcosmic adj. [from *micro-, *cosmos] [POD]

[2] To square the circle Attempt the impossible:

Frustra laborant quotquot se calculationibus fatig:

"Futile is the labor of those who fatigue themselves with calculations to square the circle."

My comment: It doesn't exactly fit (haw!) - But I'm a bit sick of Sisyphean ennui.

[3] madam n. 1 polite or respectful form of address or mode of reference to a woman. 2 colloq. conceited or precocious girl or young woman. 3 woman brothel-keeper. [related to *Madame] [POD]

2008/06/01