.. 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]
2008/06/26
there are lies, there are trolls ...
2008/06/23
Some Israel-Palestine questions.
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
| [original] There's a little there for everyone | [forgery?] There's a little there for everyone | |
| in Guantanamo Habeas Corpus- the road to freedom | in Guantanamo Habeas Corpus- the road to freedom | |
| by Paul Morrella on June 17, 2008 - 5:21am | by 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 revealed | in The troops come home, the lies are revealed | |
| by Paul Morrella on June 13, 2008 - 5:07am | by 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 revealed | in The troops come home, the lies are revealed | |
| by Paul Morrella on June 12, 2008 - 12:41am | by 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 connection | in Hope and loss - a sad Iraqi connection | |
| by Paul Morrella on June 12, 2008 - 2:22am | by 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 Tropics | in 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 ...
(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.
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. . . .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.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.
"... 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.