Thursday, April 26, 2012

moral confusion

http://www.projectcensored.org/top-stories/articles/1-more-us-soldiers-committed-suicide-than-died-in-combat/For the second year (2010) in a row, more US soldiers killed themselves (468) than died in combat (462). “If you… know the one thing that causes people to commit suicide, please let us know,” General Peter Chiarelli told the Army Times, “because we don’t know.”  Suicide is a tragic but predictable human reaction to being asked to kill – and watch your friends be killed – particularly when it’s for a war based on lies.  Perhaps being required to bag the mangled flesh of fellow soldiers could be another reason that some are committing suicide.
Body Bagging… ever heard the term?  Marines in the Corps’s Mortuary Affairs unit at Camp Al Taqaddum, Iraq, are assigned the job of collecting and cataloging the bodies of dead Marines. They sift through the remains and effects, from prom photos to suicide notes and love letters, and put them into a bag, then into a metal box and then into a refrigerator to await the flight home. One soldier, Jess Goodell, recounts a Marine brought into the unit still breathing. She frantically called to her superiors, who replied simply, “Wait.” She watched while he died. When she returned to the US, Goodell, like many others, was diagnosed with deep depression, substance abuse, PTSD and anxiety.
Sources:
“Death and After in Iraq”, Chris Hedges, Truthdig, March 21, 2011. http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_body_baggers_of_iraq_20110321
“More US Soldiers Killed Themselves Than Died in Combat in 2010,” Cord Jefferson,  Good, January 27, 2011.
http://www.good.is/post/more-us-soldiers-killed-themselves-than-died-in-combat-in-2010
“Can You Face the True Consequences of War? The Horror of Bagging Soldiers’ Bodies in Iraq,” Chris Hedges, Alternet, March 21, 2011.
http://www.alternet.org/world/150322/can_you_face_the_true_consequences_of_war_the_horrors_of_bagging_soldiers%27_bodies_in_iraq/?page=1
“Ten Reasons the Iraq War Was No Cakewalk,” Medea Benjamin and Charles Davis, Alternet, March 18, 2011.  http://www.alternet.org/world/150297/ten_reasons_the_iraq_war_was_no_cakewalk
Student Researcher: Bay Ewald, San Francisco State University
Faculty Evaluator: Kenn Burrows, San Francisco State University. 

keep fighting good fight.  with your mind as weapons!!

.................................................kosmicdebris......................................

Monday, April 23, 2012

One more

This was in 1969

IS THERE A POWER, A FORCE OR A GROUP OF MEN ORGANIZING AND REDIRECTING CHANGE?

EVERYTHING IS IN PLACE AND NOBODY CAN STOP US NOW

PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO GET USED TO CHANGE

THE REAL AND THE STATED GOALS

POPULATION CONTROL

PERMISSION TO HAVE BABIES

REDIRECTING THE PURPOSE OF SEX

CONTRACEPTION UNIVERSALLY AVAILABLE TO ALL

SEX EDUCATION AS A TOOL OF WORLD GOVERNMENT

TAX FUNDED ABORTION AS POPULATION CONTROL

ENCOURAGING HOMOSEXUALITY

TECHNOLOGY

FAMILIES TO DIMINISH IN IMPORTANCE

EUTHANASIA AND THE 'DEMISE PILL'

LIMITING ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE MEDICAL

PLANNING THE CONTROL OVER MEDICINE

ELIMINATION OF PRIVATE DOCTORS

NEW DIFFICULT TO DIAGNOSE AND UNTREATABLE DISEASES

SUPPRESSING CANCER CURES AS A MEANS OF POPULATION CONTROL

INDUCING HEART ATTACKS AS A FORM OF ASSASSINATION

EDUCATION AS A TOOL FOR ACCELERATING ONSET OF PUBERTY AND EVOLUTION

BLENDING ALL RELIGIONS, THE OLD RELIGIONS WILL HAVE TO GO

CHANGING THE BIBLE THROUGH REVISIONS OF KEY WORDS

THE CHURCHES WILL HELP US

RESTRUCTURING EDUCATION AS A TOOL OF INDOCTRINATION

MORE TIME IN SCHOOLS, BUT THEY WOULDN'T LEARN ANYTHING

CONTROLLING WHO HAS ACCESS TO INFORMATION

SCHOOLS AS THE HUB OF THE COMMUNITY

BOOKS WOULD JUST DISAPPEAR FROM THE LIBRARIES

CHANGING LAWS

THE ENCOURAGEMENT OF DRUG ABUSE TO CREATE A JUNGLE ATMOSPHERE

ALCOHOL ABUSE

RESTRICTIONS ON TRAVEL

THE NEED FOR MORE JAILS, AND USING HOSPITALS AS JAILS

NO MORE SECURITY

CRIME USED TO MANAGE SOCIETY

CURTAILMENT OF AMERICAN INDUSTRIAL PRE-EMINENCE

SHIFTING POPULATIONS AND ECONOMIES - TEARING THE SOCIAL ROOTS

SPORTS AS A TOOL OF SOCIAL CHANGE

SEX AND VIOLENCE INCULCATED THROUGH ENTERTAINMENT

TRAVEL RESTRICTIONS AND IMPLANTED ID

FOOD CONTROL

WEATHER CONTROL

KNOW HOW PEOPLE RESPOND - MAKING THEM DO WHAT YOU WANT

FALSIFIED SCIENTIFIC RESEARCH

TERRORISM

FINANCIAL CONTROL

SURVEILLANCE, IMPLANTS, AND TELEVISIONS THAT WATCH YOU

HOME OWNERSHIP A THING OF THE PAST

THE ARRIVAL OF THE TOTALITARIAN GLOBAL SYSTEM


IS THERE A POWER, A FORCE OR A GROUP OF MEN ORGANIZING AND REDIRECTING CHANGE?

There has been much written, and much said, by some people who have looked at all the changes that have occurred in American society in the past 20 years or so, and who have looked retrospectively to earlier history of the United States, and indeed, of the world, and come to the conclusion that there is a conspiracy of sorts which influences, indeed controls. major historical events, not only in the United States, but also around the world. This conspiratorial interpretation of history is based on people making observations from the outside, gathering evidence and concluding that from the outside they see a conspiracy. Their evidence and conclusions are based on evidence gathered in retrospect. I want to now describe what I heard from a speaker in 1969, which in several weeks will now be 20 years ago. The speaker did not speak in terms of retrospect, but rather predicting changes that would be brought about in the future. The speaker was not looking from the outside in, thinking that he saw conspiracy, rather, he was on the inside, admitting that, indeed, there was an organised power, force, group of men, who wielded enough influence to determine major events involving countries around the world. In addition, he predicted, or rather expounded on, changes that were planned for the remainder of this century. As you listen, if you can recall the situation, at least in the United States in 1969 and the few years there after, and then recall the kinds of changes which have occurred between then and now, almost 20 years later, I believe you will be impressed with the degree to which the things that were planned to be brought about have already been accomplished. Some of the things that were discussed were not intended to be accomplished yet by 1988. [Note: the year of this recording] but are intended to be accomplished before the end of this century. There is a timetable; and it was during this session that some of the elements of the timetable were brought out. Anyone who recalls early in the days of the Kennedy campaign when he spoke of progress in the decade of the 60's": That was kind of a cliché in those days - "the decade of the 60's." Well, by 1969 our speaker was talking about the decade of the 70's, the decade of the 80's, and the decade of the 90's. Prior to that time, I don't remember anybody saying "the decade of the 40's and the decade of the 50's. So I think this overall plan and timetable had taken important shape with more predictability to those who control it, sometime in the late 50's. That's speculation on my part. In any event, the speaker said that his purpose was to tell us about changes which would be brought about in the next 30 years or so, so that an entirely new world-wide system would be in operation before the turn of the century. As he put it, "We plan to enter the 21st Century with a running start." [emphasis supplied]

EVERYTHING IS IN PLACE AND NOBODY CAN STOP US NOW

He said, as we listened to what he was about to present, "Some of you will think I'm talking about Communism. Well, what I'm talking about is much bigger than Communism!" At that time he indicated that there is much more co-operation between East and West than most people realise. In his introductory remarks, he commented that he was free to speak at this time. He would not have been able to say what he was about to say, even a few years earlier. But he was free to speak at this time because now, and I'm quoting here, "everything is in place and nobody can stop us now." He went on to say that most people don't understand how governments operate and even people in high positions in governments, including our own, don't really understand how and where decisions are made. He went on to say that people who really influence decisions are names that for the most part would be familiar to most of us, but he would not use individuals' names or names of any specific organisation. But that, if he did, most of the people would be names that were recognised by most of his audience. He went on to say that they were not primarily people in public office, but people of prominence who were primarily known in their private occupations or private positions. The speaker was Dr. Richard Day, a doctor of medicine and a former professor at a large Eastern university, and he was addressing a group of doctors of medicine, about 80 in number. His name would not be widely recognised by anybody likely to hear this. The only purpose in recording this is that it may give a perspective to those who hear it regarding the changes which have already been accomplished in the past 20 years or so, and a bit of a preview to what at least some people are planning for the remainder of this century, so that they would enter the 21st Century with a flying start. Some of us may not enter that Century. His purpose in telling our group about these changes that were to be brought about was to make it easier for us to adapt to these changes. Indeed, as he quite accurately said, "they would be changes that would be very surprising, and in some ways difficult for people to accept," and he hoped that we, as sort of his friends, would make the adaptation more easily if we knew somewhat beforehand what to expect.

PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO GET USED TO CHANGE

Somewhere in the introductory remarks he insisted that nobody have a tape recorder and that nobody take notes, which for a professor was a very remarkable kind of thing to expect from an audience. Something in his remarks suggested that there could be negative repercussions against him if it became widely known that indeed he had spilled the beans, so to speak. When I first heard that, I thought maybe that was sort of an ego trip, somebody enhancing his own importance. But as the revelations unfolded, I began to understand why he might have had some concern about not having it widely known what was said although this was a fairly public forum where he was speaking. Nonetheless, he asked that no notes be taken, no tape recording be used. This was suggesting there might be some personal danger to himself if these revelations were widely publicised. Again, as the remarks began to unfold, and heard the rather outrageous things that were said, I made it a point to try to remember as much of what he said as I could and to connect my recollections to simple events around me to aid my memory for the future, in case I wanted to do what I'm doing now - recording this. I also wanted to try to maintain a perspective on what would be developing, if indeed, it followed the predicted pattern - which it has! At this point, so that I don't forget to include it later, I'll just include some statements that were made from time to time throughout the presentation. One of the statements was having to do with change. The statement was, "People will have to get used to the idea of change, so used to change, that they'll be expecting change. Nothing will be permanent." This often came out in the context of a society where people seemed to have no roots or moorings, but would be passively willing to accept change simply because it was all they had ever known. This was sort of in contrast to generations of people up until this time where certain things you expected to be, and remain in place as reference points for your life. So change was to be brought about, change was to be anticipated and expected, and accepted, no questions asked. Another comment that was made from time to time during the presentation was. "People are too trusting, people don't ask the right questions." Sometimes, being too trusting was equated with being too dumb. But sometimes when he would say that "People don't ask the right questions," it was almost with a sense of regret as if he were uneasy with what he was part of, and wished that people would challenge it and maybe not be so trusting.

THE REAL AND THE STATED GOALS

Another comment that was repeated from time to time, particularly in relation to changing laws and customs was, "Everything has two purposes. One is the ostensible purpose which will make it acceptable to people and second is the real purpose which would further the goals of establishing the new system. Frequently he would say, "There is just no other way, there's just no other way!" This seemed to come as a sort of an apology, particularly at the conclusion of describing some particularly offensive changes. For example, the promotion of drug addiction which we'll get into later.

POPULATION CONTROL

He was very active with population control groups, the population control movement, and population control was really the entry point into specifics following the introduction. He said the population is growing too fast. Numbers of people living at any one time on the planet must be limited or we will run out of space to live. We will outgrow our food supply and will pollute the world with our waste.

PERMISSION TO HAVE BABIES

People won't be allowed to have babies just because they want to or because they are careless. Most families would be limited to two. Some people would be allowed only one, however outstanding people might be selected and allowed to have three. But most people would be allowed to have only two babies. That's because the zero population growth rate is 2.1 children per completed family. So something like every 10th family might be allowed the privilege of the third baby. To me, up to this point, the words 'population control' primarily connoted limiting the number of babies to be born. But this remark about what people would be 'allowed' and then what followed, made it quite clear that when you hear 'population control' that means more than just controlling births. It means control of every endeavour of an entire world population; a much broader meaning to that term than I had ever attached to it before hearing this. As you listen and reflect back on some of the things you hear, you will begin to recognise how one aspect dovetails with other aspects in terms of controlling human endeavours.

REDIRECTING THE PURPOSE OF SEX

Well, from population control, the natural next step then was sex. He said sex must be separated from reproduction. Sex is too pleasurable, and the urges are too strong, to expect people to give it up. Chemicals in food and in the water supply to reduce the sex drive are not practical. The strategy then would be not to diminish sex activity, but to increase sex activity, but in such a way, that people won't be having babies.

CONTRACEPTION UNIVERSALLY AVAILABLE TO ALL

The first consideration here was contraception. Contraception would be very strongly encouraged, and it would be connected closely in people's minds with sex. They would automatically think contraception when they were thinking or preparing for sex, and contraception would be made universally available. Contraceptives would be displayed much more prominently in drug stores, right up with the cigarettes and chewing gum. Out in the open rather than hidden under the counter where people would have to ask for them and maybe be embarrassed. This kind of openness was a way of suggesting that contraceptives are just as much a part of life as any other items sold in the store. Contraceptives would be advertised and also dispensed in the schools in association with sex education!

SEX EDUCATION AS A TOOL OF WORLD GOVERNMENT

The sex education was to get kids interested early, making the connection between sex and the need for contraception early in their lives, even before they became very active. At this point I was recalling some of my teachers, particularly in high school and found it totally unbelievable to think of them agreeing, much less participating in, and distributing of contraceptives to students. But, that only reflected my lack of understanding of how these people operate. That was before the school-based clinic programs got started. Many cities in the United States by this time have already set up school-based clinics, which are primarily contraception, birth control, population control clinics. The idea then is that the connection between sex and contraception introduced and reinforced in school would carry over into marriage. Indeed, if young people when they matured decided to get married, marriage itself would be diminished in importance. He indicated some recognition that most people probably would want to be married, but this certainly would not be any longer considered necessary for sexual activity.

TAX FUNDED ABORTION AS POPULATION CONTROL

No surprise then that the next item was abortion. And this, now back in 1969, four years before Roe vs. Wade, he said, "Abortion will no longer be a crime." Abortion will be accepted as normal, and would be paid for by taxes for people who could not pay for their own abortions. Contraceptives would be made available by tax money so that nobody would have to do without contraceptives. If school sex programs would lead to more pregnancies in children, that was really seen as no problem. Parents who think they are opposed to abortion on moral or religious grounds will change their minds when it is their own child who is pregnant. So this will help overcome opposition to abortion. Before long, only a few die-hards will still refuse to see abortion as acceptable, and they won't matter anymore.


ENCOURAGING HOMOSEXUALITY

"People will be given permission to be homosexual," that's the way it was stated. They won't have to hide it. In addition, elderly people will be encouraged to continue to have active sex lives into the very old ages, just as long as they can. Everyone will be given permission to have sex, to enjoy however they want. Anything goes. This is the way it was put. In addition, I remember thinking, "How arrogant for this individual, or whoever he represents, to feel that they can give or withhold permission for people to do things!" But that was the terminology that was used. In this regard, clothing was mentioned. Clothing styles would be made more stimulating and provocative. Back in 1969 was the time of the mini skirt, when those mini-skirts were very, very high and very revealing. He said, "It is not just the amount of skin that is exposed that makes clothing sexually seductive, but other, more subtle things are often suggestive." Things like movement, and the cut of clothing, and the kind of fabric, the positioning of accessories on the clothing. "If a woman has an attractive body, why should she not show it?" was one of the statements. There was no detail on what was meant by 'provocative clothing', but since that time if you watched the change in clothing styles, blue jeans are cut in a way that they're more tight-fitting in the crotch. They form wrinkles. Wrinkles are essentially arrows. Lines which direct one's vision to certain anatomic areas. This was around the time of the 'burn your bra' activity. He indicated that a lot of women should not go without a bra. They need a bra to be attractive, so instead of banning bras and burning them, bras would come back. But they would be thinner and softer allowing more natural movement. It was not specifically stated, but certainly, a very thin bra is much more revealing of the nipple and what else is underneath, than the heavier bras that were in style up to that time.

TECHNOLOGY

Earlier he said that sex and reproduction would be separated. You would have sex without reproduction and then technology was reproduction without sex. This would be done in the laboratory. He indicated that already much, much research was underway about making babies in the laboratory. There was some elaboration on that, but I don't remember the details. How much of that technology has come to my attention since that time. I don't remember in a way that I can distinguish what was said from what I subsequently have learned as general medical information.

FAMILIES TO DIMINISH IN IMPORTANCE

Families would be limited in size. We already alluded to not being allowed more than two children. Divorce would be made easier and more prevalent. Most people who marry will marry more than once. More people will not marry. Unmarried people would stay in hotels and even live together. That would be very common - nobody would even ask questions about it. It would be widely accepted as no different from married people being together. More women will work outside the home. More men will be transferred to other cities and in their jobs, more men would travel. Therefore, it would be harder for families to stay together. This would tend to make the marriage relationship less stable and, therefore, tend to make people less willing to have babies. The extended families would be smaller, and more remote. Travel would be easier, less expensive, for a while, so that people who did have to travel would feel they could get back to their families, not that they were abruptly being made remote from their families. But one of the net effects of easier divorce laws combined with the promotion of travel, and transferring families from one city to another, was to create instability in the families. If both husband and wife are working and one partner is transferred, the other one may not be easily transferred. Soon, either gives up his or her job and stays behind while the other leaves, or else gives up the job and risks not finding employment in the new location. Rather a diabolical approach to this whole thing!

EUTHANASIA AND THE 'DEMISE PILL'

Everybody has a right to live only so long. The old are no longer useful. They become a burden. You should be ready to accept death. Most people are. An arbitrary age limit could be established. After all, you have a right to only so many steak dinners, so many orgasms, and so many good pleasures in life. After you have had enough of them and you're no longer productive, working, and contributing, then you should be ready to step aside for the next generation. Some things that would help people realise that they had lived long enough, he mentioned several of these. I don't remember them all but here are a few, the use of very pale printing ink on forms that people are necessary to fill out. Older people wouldn't be able to read the pale ink as easily and would need to go to younger people for help. Automobile traffic patterns, there would be more high-speed traffic lanes that older people with their slower reflexes would have trouble dealing with and thus, loses some of their independence.

LIMITING ACCESS TO AFFORDABLE MEDICAL

A big item that was elaborated on at some length was the cost of medical care would be made burdensomely high. Medical care would be connected very closely with one's work but also would be made very, very high in cost so that it would simply be unavailable to people beyond a certain time. Unless they had a remarkably rich, supporting family, they would just have to do without care. And the idea was that if everybody says, "Enough! What a burden it is on the young to try to maintain the old people," then the young would become agreeable to helping Mom and Dad along the way, provided this was done humanely and with dignity. Then the example was - there could be a nice, farewell party, a real celebration. Mom and Dad had done a good job. Then after the party's over they take the 'demise pill'.

PLANNING THE CONTROL OVER MEDICINE

The next topic is Medicine. There would be profound changes in the practice of medicine. Overall, medicine would be much more tightly controlled. The observation that was made in 1969 that, "Congress is not going to go along with national health insurance, is now, abundantly evident. But it's not necessary, we have other ways to control health care". These would come about more gradually, but all health care delivery would come under tight control. Medical care would be closely connected to work. If you don't work or can't work, you won't have access to medical care. The days of hospitals giving away free care would gradually wind down, to where it was virtually non-existent. Costs would be forced up so that people won't be able to afford to go without insurance. People pay for it, you're entitled to it. It was only subsequently that I began to realise the extent to which you would not be paying for it. Your medical care would be paid for by others. Therefore, you would gratefully accept, on bended knee, what was offered to you as a privilege. Your role being responsible for your own care would be diminished. As an aside here, this is not something that was developed at that time; I didn't understand it at the time that it was an aside.

The way this works, everybody has made dependent on insurance and if you don't have insurance then you pay directly; the cost of your care is enormous. The insurance company, however, paying for your care, does not pay that same amount. If you are charged, say, $600 for the use of an operating room, the insurance company does not pay $600; they only pay $300 or $400. That differential in billing has the desired effect: It enables the insurance company to pay for that which you could never pay for. They get a discount that's unavailable to you. When you see your bill you're grateful that the insurance company could do that. And in this way you are dependent, and virtually required to have insurance. The whole billing is fraudulent. Access to hospitals would be tightly controlled and identification would be needed to get into the building. The security in and around hospitals would be established and gradually increased so that nobody without identification could get in or move around inside the building. Theft of hospital equipment, things like typewriters and microscopes and so forth would be 'allowed' and exaggerated; reports of it would be exaggerated so that this would be the excuse needed to establish the need for strict security until people got used to it. Anybody moving about the hospital would be required to wear an identification badge with a photograph and telling why he was there, employee or lab technician or visitor or whatever. This is to be brought in gradually, getting everybody used to the idea of identifying themselves - until it was just accepted. This need for ID to move about would start in small ways: hospitals, some businesses, but gradually expand to include everybody in all places! It was observed that hospitals can be used to confine people and for the treatment of criminals. This did not mean, necessarily, medical treatment. At that time I did not know the term 'Psycho-Prison' ­ they are in the Soviet Union, but, without trying to recall all the details, basically, he was describing the use of hospitals both for treating the sick, and for confinement of criminals for reasons other than the medical well-being of the criminal. The definition of criminal was not given.

ELIMINATION OF PRIVATE DOCTORS

The image of the doctor would change. No longer would he be seen as an individual professional in service to individual patients. But the doctor would be gradually recognized as a highly skilled technician - and his job would change. The job is to include things like executions by lethal injection. The image of the doctor being a powerful, independent person would have to be changed. He went on to say, "Doctors are making entirely too much money. They should advertise like any other product." Lawyers would be advertising too. Keep in mind, this was an audience of doctors; being addressed by a doctor. And it was interesting that he would make some rather insulting statements to his audience without fear of antagonizing us. The solo practitioner would become a thing of the past. A few die-hards might try to hold out, but most doctors would be employed by an institution of one kind or another. Group practice would be encouraged, corporations would be encouraged, and then once the corporate image of medical care gradually became more and more acceptable, doctors would more and more become employees rather than independent contractors. Along with that, of course, unstated but necessary, is the employee serves his employer, not his patient. So we've already seen quite a lot of that in the last 20 years. And apparently more on the horizon. The term HMO was not used at that time, but as you look at HMO's you see this is the way that medical care is being taken over since the National Health Insurance approach did not get through the Congress. A few die-hard doctors may try to make a go of it, remaining in solo practice, remaining independent, which, parenthetically, is me but they would suffer a great loss of income. They'd be able to scrape by, maybe, but never really live comfortably as would those who were willing to become employees of the system. Ultimately, there would be no room at all for the solo practitioner after the system is entrenched.

NEW DIFFICULT TO DIAGNOSE AND UNTREATABLE DISEASES

The next heading to talk about is Health and Disease. He said there would be new diseases to appear which had not ever been seen before. Would be very difficult to diagnose and be untreatable - at least for along time. No elaboration was made on this, but I remember, not long after hearing this presentation, when I had a puzzling diagnosis to make, I would be wondering, "Is this a case of what he was talking about?" Some years later AIDS developed. I think AIDS was at least one example of what he was talking about. I now think that AIDS probably was a manufactured disease.

SUPPRESSING CANCER CURES AS A MEANS OF POPULATION CONTROL

Cancer. He said. "We can cure almost every cancer right now. Information is on file in the Rockefeller Institute, if it's ever decided that it should be released. But consider - if people stop dying of cancer, how rapidly we would become overpopulated. You may as well die of cancer as of something else." Efforts at cancer treatment would be geared more toward comfort than toward cure. There was some statement that ultimately the cancer cures which were being hidden in the Rockefeller Institute would come to light because independent researchers might bring them out, despite these efforts to suppress them. But at least for the time being, letting people die of cancer was a good thing to do because it would slow down the problem of overpopulation.

INDUCING HEART ATTACKS AS A FORM OF ASSASSINATION

Another very interesting thing was heart attacks. He said, "There is now a way to simulate a real heart attack. It can be used as a means of assassination." Only a very skilled pathologist who knew exactly what to look for at an autopsy, could distinguish this from the real thing. I thought that was a very surprising and shocking thing to hear from this particular man at that particular time. This, and the business of the cancer cure, really still stand out sharply in my memory, because they were so shocking and, at that time, seemed to me out of character. He then went on to talk about nutrition and exercise sort of in the same framework. People would have to eat right and exercise right to live as long as before. Most won't. This in the connection of nutrition, there was no specific statement that I can recall as to particular nutrients that would be either inadequate or in excess. In retrospect, I tend to think he meant high salt diets and high fat diets would predispose toward high blood pressure and premature arteriosclerotic heart disease. And that if people who were too dumb or too lazy to exercise as they should then their circulating fats go up and predispose to disease. He also said something about diet information would be widely available, but most people, particularly stupid people, who had no right to continue living anyway, would ignore the advice and just go on and eat what was convenient and tasted good. There were some other unpleasant things said about food. I just can't recall what they were. But I do remember having reflections about wanting to plant a garden in the backyard to get around whatever these contaminated foods would be. I regret I don't remember the details about nutrition and hazardous nutrition.

With regard to exercise, he went on to say that more people would be exercising more, especially running, because everybody can run. You don't need any special equipment or place. You can run wherever you are. As he put it. "people will be running all over the place." And in this vein, he pointed out how supply produces demand. And this was in reference to athletic clothing and equipment. As this would be made more widely available and glamorised, particularly as regards running shoes, this would stimulate people to develop an interest in running as part of a whole sort of public propaganda campaign. People would be encouraged then to buy the attractive sports equipment and to get into exercise. In connection with nutrition he also mentioned that public eating places would rapidly increase. That this had a connection with the family too. As more and more people eat out, eating at home would become less important. People would be less dependent on their kitchens at home. And then this also connected to convenience foods being made widely available - things like you could pop into the microwave. Whole meals would be available pre-fixed. And of course we've now seen this. But this whole different approach to eating out and to previously prepared meals being eaten in the home was predicted at that time to be brought about. The convenience foods would be part of the hazards. Anybody who was lazy enough to want the convenience foods rather than fixing his own also had better be energetic enough to exercise. Because if he was too lazy to exercise and too lazy to fix his own food, then he didn't deserve to live very long. This was all presented as sort of a moral judgement about people and what they should do with their energies. People who are smart, who would learn about nutrition, and who are disciplined enough to eat right and exercise right are better people - and the kind you want to live longer.

EDUCATION AS A TOOL FOR ACCELERATING ONSET OF PUBERTY AND EVOLUTION

Somewhere along in here there was also something about accelerating the onset of puberty. And this was said in connection with health, and later in connection with education, and connecting to accelerating the process of evolutionary change. There was a statement that "we think that we can push evolution faster and in the direction we want it to go." I remember this only as a general statement. I don't recall if any details were given beyond that.

BLENDING ALL RELIGIONS

Another area of discussion was Religion. This is an avowed atheist speaking. He said, "Religion is not necessarily bad. A lot of people seem to need religion, with it's mysteries and rituals - so they will have religion. But the major religions of today have to be changed because they are not compatible with the changes to come. The old religions will have to go especially Christianity. Once the Roman Catholic Church is brought down, the rest of Christianity will follow easily. Then a new religion can be accepted for use all over the world. It will incorporate something from all of the old ones to make it more easy for people to accept , and feel at home. Most people won't be too concerned with religion. They will realise that they don't need it."

CHANGING THE BIBLE THROUGH REVISIONS OF KEY WORDS

In order to do this, the Bible will be changed. It will be rewritten to fit the new religion. Gradually, key words will be replaced with new words having various shades of meaning. Then the meaning attached to the new word can be close to the old word - and as time goes on, other shades of meaning of that word can be emphasised. and then gradually that word replaced with another word." I don't know if I'm making that clear, but the idea is that everything in Scripture need not be rewritten, just key words replaced by other words. The variability in meaning attached to any word can be used as a tool to change the entire meaning of Scripture, and therefore make it acceptable to this new religion. Most people won't know the difference; and this was another one of the times where he said, "the few who do notice the difference won't be enough to matter."

THE CHURCHES WILL HELP US

Then followed one of the most surprising statements of the whole presentation: He said, "Some of you probably think the Churches won't stand for this," and he went on to say, "the churches will help us!" There was no elaboration on this, it was unclear just what he had in mind when he said, "the churches will help us!" In retrospect I think some of us now can understand what he might have meant at that time. I recall then only of thinking, "no they won't!" and remembering our Lord's words where he said to Peter, "Thou art Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church, and gates of Hell will not prevail against it." So yes, some people in the Churches might help and in the subsequent 20 years we've seen how some people in Churches have helped. But we also know that our Lord's Words will stand, and the gates of Hell will not prevail.

RESTRUCTURING EDUCATION AS A TOOL OF INDOCTRINATION

Another area of discussion was Education. In connection with education and remembering what he said about religion, was in addition to changing the Bible he said that the classics in Literature would be changed. I seem to recall Mark Twain's writings was given as one example. But he said that the casual reader reading a revised version of a classic would never even suspect that there was any change. Somebody would have to go through word by word to even recognise that any change was made in these classics, the changes would be so subtle. But the changes would be such as to promote the acceptability of the new system.

MORE TIME IN SCHOOLS, BUT THEY WOULDN'T LEARN ANYTHING

As regards education, he indicated that kids would spend more time in schools, but in many schools they wouldn't learn anything. They'll learn some things, but not as much as formerly. Better schools in better areas with better people, their kids will learn more. In the better schools Iearning would be accelerated. This is another time where he said, "We think we can push evolution." By pushing kids to learn more he seemed to be suggesting that their brains would evolve, that their offspring would evolve; sort of pushing evolution where kids would learn and be more intelligent at a younger age. As if this pushing would alter their physiology. Overall, schooling would be prolonged. This meant prolonged through the school year. I'm not sure what he said about a long school day, I do remember he said that school was planned to go all summer, that the summer school vacation would become a thing of the past. Not only for schools, but for other reasons. People would begin to think of vacation times year round, not just in the summer. For most people it would take longer to complete their education. To get what originally had been in a bachelor's program would now require advanced degrees and more schooling. So that a lot of school time would be just wasted time. Good schools would become more competitive. I inferred when he said that, that he was including all schools - elementary up through college - but I don't recall if he actually said that. Students would have to decide at a younger age what they would want to study and get onto their track early. It would be harder to change to another field of study once you get started. Studies would be concentrated in much greater depth, but narrowed. You wouldn't have access to material in other fields, outside your own area of study, without approval. This seem to be more where he talked about limited access to other fields. I seem to recall this as being more at the college level perhaps. People would be very specialised in their own area of expertise. But they won't be able to get a broad education and won't be able to understand what is going on overall.

CONTROLLING WHO HAS ACCESS TO INFORMATION

He was already talking about computers in education, and at that time he said anybody who
wanted computer access, or access to books that were not directly related to their field of study would have to have a very good reason for so doing. Otherwise, access would be denied.

SCHOOLS AS THE HUB OF THE COMMUNITY

Another angle was that the schools would become more important in people's overall life. Kids in addition to their academics would have to get into school activities unless they wanted to feel completely out of it. But spontaneous activities among kids; the thing that came to my mind when I heard this was - sand lot football and sand lot baseball teams that we worked up as kids growing up. I said the kids wanting any activities outside of school would be almost forced to get them through the school. There would be few opportunities outside. Now the pressures of the accelerated academic program, the accelerated demands where kids would feel they had to be part of something - one or another athletic club or some school activity - these pressures he recognized would cause some students to burn out. He said. "The smartest ones will learn how to cope with pressures and to survive. There will be some help available to students in handling stress, but the unfit won't be able to make it. They will then move on to other things." In this connection and later on with drug abuse and alcohol abuse he indicated that psychiatric services to help would be increased dramatically. In all the pushing for achievement, it was recognized that many people would need help, and the people worth keeping around would be able to accept and benefit from that help, and still be super achievers. Those who could not would fall by the wayside and therefore were sort of dispensable ­ 'expendable' I guess is the word I want. Education would be lifelong and adults would be going to school. There'll always be new information that adults must have to keep up. When you can't keep up anymore, you're too old. This was another way of letting older people know that the time had come for them to move on and take the demise pill. If you got too tired to keep up with your education, or you got too old to learn new information, then this was a signal - you begin to prepare to get ready to step aside.

SOME BOOKS WOULD JUST DISAPPEAR FROM THE LIBRARIES

In addition to revising the classics, which I alluded to awhile ago and with revising the Bible, he said, "Some books would just disappear from the libraries." This was in the vein that some books contain information or contain ideas that should not be kept around. Therefore, those books would disappear. I don't remember exactly if he said how this was to be accomplished. But I seem to recall carrying away this idea that this would include thefts. That certain people would be designated to go to certain libraries and pick up certain books and just get rid of them. Not necessarily as a matter of policy - just simply steal it. Further down the line, not everybody will be allowed to own books. And some books nobody will be allowed to own.

CHANGING LAWS

Another area of discussion was laws that would be changed. At that time a lot of States had blue laws about Sunday sales, certain Sunday activities. He said the blue laws [Sunday laws] would all be repealed. Gambling laws would be repeated or relaxed, so that gambling would be increased. He indicated then that governments would get into gambling. We've had a lot of state lotteries pop up around the country since then. And, at the time, we were already being told that would be the case. "Why should all that gambling money be kept in private hands when the State would benefit from it?" was the rational behind it. But people should be able to gamble if they want to. So it would become a civil activity, rather than a private, or illegal activity. Bankruptcy laws would be changed. I don't remember the details, but just that they would be. And I know subsequent to that time they have been. Antitrust laws would be changed, or be interpreted differently, or both. In connection with the changing anti-trust laws, there was some statement that in a sense competition would be increased. But this would be increased competition within otherwise controlled circumstances. So it's not a free competition. I recall of having the impression that it was like competition but within members of a club. There would be nobody outside the club who would be able to compete. Like teams competing within a professional sports league; if you're the NFL or the American or National Baseball Leagues - you compete within the league but the league is all in agreement on what the rules of competition are - not a really free competition.

THE ENCOURAGEMENT OF DRUG ABUSE TO CREATE A JUNGLE ATMOSPHERE

Drug use would he increased. Alcohol use would be increased. Law enforcement efforts against drugs would be increased. On first hearing that it sounded like a contradiction. Why increase drug abuse and simultaneously increase law enforcement against drug abuse? But the idea is that, in part, the increased availability of drugs would provide a sort of law of the jungle whereby the weak and the unfit would be selected out. There was a statement made at the time: "Before the earth was overpopulated, there was a law of the jungle where only the fittest survived. You had to be able to protect yourself against the elements and wild animals and disease, but if you were fit you survived. But now we've become so civilised - we're over civilised - and the unfit are enabled to survive only at the expense of those who are more fit." The abuse of drugs would restore, in a certain sense, the law of the jungle and selection of the fittest for survival. News about drug abuse and law enforcement efforts would tend to keep drugs in the public consciousness. And would also tend to reduce this unwarranted American complacency that the world is a safe place, and a nice place.

ALCOHOL ABUSE

The same thing would happen with alcohol. Alcohol abuse would be both promoted and demoted at the same time. The vulnerable and the weak would respond to the promotions and therefore use and abuse more alcohol. Drunk driving would become more of a problem; and stricter rules about driving under the influence would be established so that more and more people would lose their privilege to drive. Again, much more in the way of psychological services would be made available to help those who got hooked on drugs and alcohol. The idea being, that in order to promote this - drug and alcohol are used to screen out some of the unfit - people who otherwise are pretty good would also be subject to getting hooked. And if they were really worth their salt they would have enough sense to seek psychological counselling and to benefit from it. So this was presented as sort of a redeeming value on the part of the planners. It was as if he was saying, "You think we're bad in promoting these evil things - but look how nice we are - we're also providing a way out!"

RESTRICTIONS ON TRAVEL

This also had connection with something we'll get to later about overall restrictions on travel. Not everybody should be free to travel the way they do now in the United States. People don't have a need to travel that way. It's a privilege! It was kind of the high-handed the way it was put.

THE NEED FOR MORE JAILS, AND USING HOSPITALS AS JAILS
More jails would be needed. Hospitals could serve as jails. Some new hospital construction would be designed so as to make them adaptable to jail-like use.

Got more to post. digest this first.

keep fighting the good fight, with your minds as weapons!!

...........................kosmicdebris..................................

A New Record is Set for Military Spending
The Shame of Nations

By Lawrence S. Wittner

April 23, 2012 "Information Clearing House" --- On April 17, 2012, as millions of Americans were filing their income tax returns, the highly-respected Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) released its latest study of world military spending. In case Americans were wondering where most of their tax money — and the tax money of other nations — went in the previous year, the answer from SIPRI was clear: to war and preparations for war.

World military spending reached a record $1,738 billion in 2011 — an increase of $138 billion over the previous year. The United States accounted for 41 percent of that, or $711 billion.

Some news reports have emphasized that, from the standpoint of reducing reliance on armed might, this actually represents progress. After all, the increase in “real” global military spending — that is, expenditures after corrections for inflation and exchange rates — was only 0.3 percent. And this contrasts with substantially larger increases in the preceding thirteen years.

But why are military expenditures continuing to increase — indeed, why aren’t they substantially decreasing — given the governmental austerity measures of recent years?
Amid the economic crisis that began in late 2008 (and which continues to the present day), most governments have been cutting back their spending dramatically on education, health care, housing, parks, and other vital social services. However, there have not been corresponding cuts in their military budgets.

Americans, particularly, might seek to understand why in this context U.S. military spending has not been significantly decreased, instead of being raised by $13 billion — admittedly a “real dollar” decrease of 1.2 percent, but hardly one commensurate with Washington’s wholesale slashing of social spending. Yes, military expenditures by China and Russia increased in 2011. And in “real” terms, too. But, even so, their military strength hardly rivals that of the United States. Indeed, the United States spent about five times as much as China (the world’s #2 military power) and ten times as much as Russia (the world’s #3 military power) on its military forces during 2011. Furthermore, when U.S. allies like Britain, France, Germany, and Japan are factored in, it is clear that the vast bulk of world military expenditures are made by the United States and its military allies.

This might account for the fact that the government of China, which accounts for only 8.2 percent of world military spending, believes that increasing its outlay on armaments is reasonable and desirable. Apparently, officials of many nations share that competitive feeling.

Unfortunately, the military rivalry among nations — one that has endured for centuries — results in a great squandering of national resources. Many nations, in fact, devote most of their available income to funding their armed forces and their weaponry. In the United States, an estimated 58 percent of the U.S. government’s discretionary tax dollars go to war and preparations for war. “Almost every country with a military is on an insane path, spending more and more on missiles, aircraft, and guns,” remarked John Feffer, co-director of Foreign Policy in Focus. “These countries should be confronting the real threats of climate change, hunger, disease, and oppression, not wasting taxpayers’ money on their military.”

Of course, defenders of military expenditures reply that military force actually protects people from war. But does it? If so, how does one explain the fact that the major military powers of the past century — the United States, Russia, Britain, Germany, France, Italy, Japan, and China — have been almost constantly at war during that time? What is the explanation for the fact that the United States — today’s military giant — is currently engaged in at least two wars (in Iraq and Afghanistan) and appears to be on the verge of a third (with Iran)? Perhaps the maintenance of a vast military machine does not prevent war but, instead, encourages it.

In short, huge military establishments can be quite counterproductive. Little wonder that they have been condemned repeatedly by great religious and ethical leaders. Even many government officials have decried war and preparations for war — although usually by nations other than their own.

Thus, the release of the new study by SIPRI should not be a cause for celebration. Rather, it provides an appropriate occasion to contemplate the fact that, this past year, nations spent more money on the military than at any time in human history. Although this situation might still inspire joy in the hearts of government officials, top military officers, and defense contractors, people farther from the levers of military power might well conclude that it’s a hell of a way to run a world.

Lawrence S. Wittner is professor of history emeritus at SUNY/Albany. His latest book is “Working for Peace and Justice: Memoirs of an Activist Intellectual” (University of Tennessee Press).

This article was first published

at Counterpunch

keep fighting the good, fight, with your minds as weapons!!

.....................kosmicdebris...........................................

Sunday, April 22, 2012

kony2012

http://i.imgur.com/f3CLL.jpg

keep fighting the good fight, with your minds as weapons!!

....................................kosmicdebris..............................................

Gonzo!!

Prostitution and Empire

By Jim Panyard

April 21, 2012 -- "And now, this breaking news…American government employees and members of the U.S. military in Cartagena, Colombia have been using the services of native born prostitutes."
WOW!!! Oh, the horror, the scandal.
At this writing, three U.S. Secret Service members have been canned and blowhard politicians are promising more will be punished.
I am certain no one has undertaken an objective study, but I would venture to say U.S. government employees have for decades been the single largest and most identifiable group using foreign born prostitutes. No other nation has as big a military presence around the globe as the United States and the military is certainly the largest user of these services. Ask any veteran who has served abroad.
The self righteous prigs in Sodom on the Potomac are also saying the prostitutes "may" have been "exposed" to classified information, which makes the situation even more severe. Was it a secret President Obama was going to be visiting Cartagena?
Who knows what the fornicators themselves were "exposed" to? If they contracted a sexually transmitted disease will they still be covered by their tax paid health care or workers’ compensation insurance?
Laudably, there has been no news report that American taxpayers paid for the sexual misadventures of the Secret Service personnel or the military who accompanied them. Apparently, they picked up their own tabs with the taxpayer dollars representing their personal income.
Many and many a year ago, in a kingdom by the sea (the Pacific Ocean, that is), I served at a top secret military installation with about 1,000 other Army and Air Force personnel. Aside from providing maintenance to the station, the biggest income center for the locals had to be the prostitution and black market industries. This is true of nearly every military installation around the globe, whether it is for intelligence gathering, placating or killing the natives or simply providing a landing strip for aircraft.
The term "Ugly American" was created by Americans, mostly in the 18- to 25-year-old demographic, stationed overseas drinking themselves into stupors, degrading the natives and having paid sexual relations with the local girls. The natives frowned on these activities, of course, but the money was too good to pass up.
The maltreatment of conquered or co-opted nations is as old as the history of wars and empires. The occupying forces have forever taken advantage of the natives and prostitution is as much a part of empire building as creating supply lines.
Some wag once irreverently referred to the U.S. Marine Corps as "underpaid, oversexed teenage killers." This could be said for all military occupiers and their civilian and military superiors.
If you take hundreds of young men and make them part of an occupying force thousands of miles from home, whether in a combat zone or not, the inevitable happens.
It is not an aberration as the current news from government officials suggests any more than finding a deer in the woods is an oddity.
Ask the call girls in D.C.
Jim Panyard is the retired President of the Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ Association, a onetime candidate for the GOP nomination for governor of Pennsylvania and currently vice chairman of the Constitution Party of Pennsylvania.

Copyright © 2012 by LewRockwell.com.

Saturday, April 21, 2012

Chomsky, anyone else get it?

The Simple Truth in Chomsky's Words

By Geoff_Kennedy

April 21, 2012 "
Information Clearing House" --- I rarely employ long quotes in these essays. I prefer my own words to express my own ideas. But this time I make an exception. The simple words at the end of Noam Chomsky’s 1992 book, “What Uncle Sam Really Wants” are even more relevant after our experience in the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, the threat of global warming, the government’s role in forcing the American people to reward Wall Street bankers for their crimes, and the more recent Arab Spring and the Occupy movements:

“In any country, there’s some group that has the real power. It’s not a big secret where power is in the United States. It basically lies in the hands of the people who determine investment decisions—what’s produced, what’s distributed. They staff the government, by and large, choose the planners, and set the general conditions for the doctrinal system.

“One of the things they want is a passive quiescent population. So one of the things that you can do to make life uncomfortable for them is NOT to be passive and quiescent. There are lots of ways of doing that. Even just asking questions can have an important effect….

“If you go to one demonstration and then go home, that’s something, but the people in power can live with that. What they can’t live with is sustained pressure that keeps building, organizations that keep doing things, people that keep learning lessons from the last time and doing it better the next time.

“Any system of power, even a fascist dictatorship, is responsive to public dissidence. It’s certainly true in a country like this, where—fortunately—the state doesn’t have a lot of force to coerce people. During the Vietnam War, direct resistance to the war was quite significant, and it was a cost that the government had to pay.

“If elections are just something in which some portion of the population goes and pushes a button every couple of years, they don’t matter. But if the citizens organize to press a position, and pressure their representatives about it, elections can matter….

“The struggle for freedom is never over. The people of the Third World need our sympathetic understanding, and, much more than that, they need our help. We can provide them with a margin of survival by internal disruption in the United States. Whether they can succeed against that kind of brutality we impose on them depends in large part on what happens here.

“The courage they show is quite amazing. I’ve personally had the privilege—and it is a privilege—of catching a glimpse of that courage at first hand in Southeast Asia, in Central America and on the occupied West Bank….

“There’s a growing Third World at home. There are systems of illegitimate authority in every corner of the social, political, economic and cultural worlds. For the first time in human history, we have to face the problem of protecting an environment that can sustain a decent human existence. We don’t know that honest and dedicated effort will be enough to solve or even mitigate such problems as these. We are quite confident, however, that the lack of such efforts will spell disaster.”

Geoff Kennedy lives in Anchorage, Alaska.

This article was first published at Anchorage Daily News.


keep fighting the good fight, with your minds as weapons.


.....................................kosmicdebris.........................................................

Does anbody get it?

Roy
this particular piece received 2 million, yes, two million global hits!!...a few more than my local news source, about 1,992,000 or so more. gannet wishes, larry fishes. this one....even more.


Arundhati Roy……
The trouble is that once America goes off to war, it can't very well return without having fought one. If it doesn't find its enemy, for the sake of the enraged folks back home, it will have to manufacture one. Once war begins, it will develop a momentum, a logic and a justification of its own, and we'll lose sight of why it's being fought in the first place. The Algebra of Infinite Justice September 29, 2001.

Where there is oppression, it will always be challenged by those of us who will challenge it with greater intensity, you know? So that's why I don't believe that there can ever be peace without justice, you know? The two go together. And there cannot be peace in the world with full-spectrum dominance or, you know, nuclear warfare or any of those things. They won't help, because always there will be people who demand dignity, who demand justice, who demand their rights.

She goes on to say "Nationalism of one kind or another was the cause of most of the genocide of the twentieth century. Flags are bits of colored cloth that governments use first to shrink-wrap people's brains and then as ceremonial shrouds to bury the dead."

I expect the dems will go for a tandem American leadership where the line between veep and la’ prez get blurry, post convention. They know for sure they can win popular in landslide fashion and the media cannot stop it, save self destruction. The dems also have populace Edwards for a “kenedi-esq.,” wild card, if either obami or hilly are too damaged post convention.

The thing that bothers me about the split ticket pez, truth is….. they make the most ripe targets for assassins, by so many different factions, together someone could make it happen. Mydoom martyrdom, sort of a bloodless French revolution….ghandi-mlk style. Obama-Billery ticket.

If we have a McCarthy like era targeted at the media, audio visual, news print photo editors, could get messy, considering all the lies and incompetence. Like I said before…this gross breach of public trust cannot easily be repaired. I have nothing to hide, but am bound by conscience to speak out when I witness something unjust, and certainly not knowingly or fraudulently finance some dubious enterprise…

To advocate withholding almost thousand year old magna carta rights? Attention media…did you really think the public was that stupid? Just remember, none of us are as stupid as all of us without your (mainstream media’s) help…you might want to report information as fact before someone comes for you and you have no oracle to speak.

“…It explicitly protected certain rights of the King's subjects, whether free or fettered — most notably the writ of habeas corpus, allowing appeal against unlawful imprisonment. The magna is the historical default document for handling humans when one kingdom or city state conquers or surrenders another.”


As far as I know, as long as there is a monarchy, then it is still on the books and in full effect, to this day, in both England and whales. I thought ours, the us constitution and the bill of rights, was even better at protecting humans. At least more humane, advanced further than medieval Spain.
Justice for Dead Journalists | War on Iraq | AlterNet Justice for Dead Journalists

By Amy Goodman, King Features Syndicate. Posted May 15, 2008.
A military whistle-blower has come forward with information that contradicts the government's official story about the deaths of two journalists.

This is why I am ashamed of my government, because this does not represent me, the is not what my own government taught me. Yes, I was mad when I realized I had been duped by the people I trusted……but I can get over that. What I cannot let go of is the fact I can no longer trust my government to tell me the truth. That is what makes me want to rebel, this is where I have a problem controlling my passions, when I see cover-up and collusion by institutions I plead my loyalties, was willing to bleed and die for those ideals.

(my guess is the pharma industry has a pill for truth long developed by now, negating the need for torture! Which is more profitable?, the rack or the apothecary? KBR…Kellogg-brown-root or ely lilly, s.c Johnson, dow?)

"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murderer is less to fear. The traitor is the plague.".... Marcus Tullius Cicero


The Communist regime of the Soviet Union has been considered to be evil by a number of western liberal democracies, especially under the rule of Joseph Stalin for its mass persecutions of political opponents, religious, and cultural minorities (e.g. the Cossacks). Also the political writings of Niccolò Machiavelli in The Prince often used by Hitler and Mussolini, are considered to be a source of evil in politics, as they often speak of ignoring accepted morals for the pursuit of ultimate power, as "the ends justifies the means".

Machiavelli favored a prince creating a climate of fear in order to rule a population, rather than relying on popular support. Machiavelli supports the use of deception and manipulation as means to increase a prince's personal power. The following statements in The Prince on how to gain control of a principality show little concern for traditional moral and ethical considerations.

Will history add George W. Bush to the list? ...the ends justifies the means... The world consists mainly of vulgar people and the few who are honorable can safely be ignored when so many vulgar rally around the prince….' '…..Benefits must be conferred gradually so they are appreciated more thoroughly and harm should be inflicted all at once. Both harm and benefits should not serve as quick solutions to problems. Force is the most effective and efficient means to do something and the virtuous prince will employ its leverage. History marches on….truth is truth, a duck is……..to deliberately lose a trick; a cunning action or plan that is intended to cheat or deceive.


The liberal left or the religious right are not off the hook…..Authoritarian, totalitarian, and elements of religious fundamentalism regimes tend to hold a common view that liberal-democratic regimes are evil and blame liberal democracy for high crime rates, profiteering, corporate crime, materialist individualism replacing common bonds of similar people, destruction of culture and its replacement with sleaze. All of which, the regimes claim will result in the destruction of humanity if liberal democracy is not restrained. Therefore, liberal democracy provides the ideal environment for corruption to thrive, greed at all levels of society becomes to rule rather the exception. In other words, we become so open-minded our brains fall out, leaving a fertile breeding ground for state sponsored exploitation of the masses. This is why the u.s. constitution is so important. The constitution protects 'we the people' from our own government. The bill or rights is the guarantee.

Machiavelli wrote: "...there will be traits considered good that, if followed, will lead to ruin, while other traits, considered vices which if practiced achieve security and well being for the Prince," (dub'ya) truth is truth. A duck is….is found all over the world, with the exception of Antarctica, but the prince doesn't care, for that reason we should send him there. History marches on….

The international relations theories of neo-conservatism (neocon), advise politicians to explicitly disavow absolute moral and ethical considerations in international politics in favor of a focus on self-interest, political survival, and power politics, which they hold to be more accurate in explaining a world they view as explicitly amoral and dangerous. Neocons usually justify their perspectives by laying claim to a "higher moral duty" specific to political leaders, under which the greatest evil is seen to be the failure of the state to protect itself and its citizens, not protecting the citizens from the state. Truth is truth, a duck is…. what ever the state labels it. History marches on……


There is a back door to circumvent free speech and the original ideals America was founded on. Dumb down America by omission of certain schools of thought, thereby limiting critical thinking to only the facts presented and imbedded in the education system as a whole. One of the best tools is to limit the information being taught in public schools is not to teach it to the teachers to teach. Every generation is gradually being short changed. I clipped the next piece a couple of years ago to research, some of the items may be dated. I have added to it from things I have found, reading a few books, rereading history, hundreds of hours on the internet, but things have only gotten worse.

I found this trend startling and set out to disprove, I could not, I have now not only confirmed this downward spiral, it is one of the main reasons I have become so political to do my part to reverse this national (international?) conspiracy.

Just because we are told America is number one does not make it so. This is why I stress independent thinking and common sense (rational thought), and the need to become better informed in all areas. Like I said before above: we have become so open-minded that our brain fell out, and developed and an appetite for destruction of the truth. Go look for yourself like I did, a caveat: government statistical data is not a reliable source, tends to only report the positive, withholding negative data is the norm because of political and bureaucratic job security.

Truth is truth, a duck is a….what's a duck? What's that quacking nose? A duck is what politicians do to avoid answering tough questions, avoid lying or telling the truth, whatever is convenient to conceal or promote hidden agendas, dedicated to self service. History marches on….

credit steve ventura....for education work, all verifiable data. my vetting process is much simpler, does what i see match what i hear against what i know? truth somewhere there?

Statistics on American education tell a dreadful story. No concept lies more firmly embedded in our national character than the notion that the USA is "No. 1," "the greatest." Our broadcast media are, in essence, continuous advertisements for the brand name "America Is No. 1." Any office seeker saying otherwise would be committing political suicide. In fact, anyone saying otherwise will be labeled "un-American." We're an "empire," ain't we? Sure we are. An empire without a manufacturing base. An empire that must borrow $2 billion a day from its competitors in order to function. Yet the delusion is ineradicable.

We're No. 1. Well...this is the country you really live in: the story of an advanced technological society slipping back to a state of ignorance and superstition. If that sentence seems extreme, consider these facts:

The United States is 49th in the world in literacy (the New York Times, Dec. 12, 2004).

The United States ranked 28th out of 40 countries in mathematical literacy (NYT, Dec. 12, 2004).

Twenty percent of Americans think the sun orbits the earth. Seventeen percent believe the earth revolves around the sun once a day (The Week, Jan. 7, 2005).

"The International Adult Literacy Survey...found that Americans with less than nine years of education 'score worse than virtually all of the other countries'" (Jeremy Rifkin's superbly documented book The European Dream: How Europe's Vision of the Future Is Quietly Eclipsing the American Dream, p.78).

Our workers are so ignorant and lack so many basic skills that American businesses spend $30 billion a year on remedial training (NYT, Dec. 12, 2004). No wonder they relocate elsewhere!

"The European Union leads the U.S. in...the number of science and engineering graduates; public research and development (R&D) expenditures; and new capital raised" (The European Dream, p.70).

"Europe surpassed the United States in the mid-1990s as the largest producer of scientific literature" (The European Dream, p.70).

Nevertheless, Congress cut funds to the National Science Foundation. The agency will issue 1,000 fewer research grants this year (NYT, Dec. 21, 2004).

Foreign applications to U.S. grad schools declined 28 percent last year. Foreign student enrollment on all levels fell for the first time in three decades, but increased greatly in Europe and China. Last year Chinese grad-school graduates in the U.S. dropped 56 percent, Indians 51 percent, South Koreans 28 percent (NYT, Dec. 21, 2004). We're not the place to be anymore.

The World Health Organization "ranked the countries of the world in terms of overall health performance, and the U.S. [was]...37th." In the fairness of health care, we're 54th. "The irony is that the United States spends more per capita for health care than any other nation in the world" (The European Dream, pp.79-80). Pay more, get lots, lots less.

"The U.S. and South Africa are the only two developed countries in the world that do not provide health care for all their citizens" (The European Dream, p.80). Excuse me, but since when is South Africa a "developed" country? Anyway, that's the company we're keeping.

Lack of health insurance coverage causes 18,000 unnecessary American deaths a year. (NYT, Jan. 12, 2005.) That's six times the number of people killed on 9/11.

"U.S. childhood poverty now ranks 22nd, or second to last, among the developed nations. Only Mexico scores lower" (The European Dream, p.81). Been to Mexico lately? Does it look "developed" to you? Yet it's the only "developed" country to score lower in childhood poverty.

Twelve million American families--more than 10 percent of all U.S. households--"continue to struggle, and not always successfully, to feed themselves." Families that "had members who actually went hungry at some point last year" numbered 3.9 million (NYT, Nov. 22, 2004).

The United States is 41st in the world in infant mortality. Cuba scores higher (NYT, Jan. 12, 2005).

Women are 70 percent more likely to die in childbirth in America than in Europe (NYT, Jan. 12, 2005).

The leading cause of death of pregnant women in this country is murder (CNN, Dec. 14, 2006).

"Of the 20 most developed countries in the world, the U.S. was dead last in the growth rate of total compensation to its workforce in the 1980s.... In the 1990s, the U.S. average compensation growth rate grew only slightly, at an annual rate of about 0.1 percent" (The European Dream, p.39). Yet Americans work longer hours per year than any other industrialized country, and get less vacation time. Economic slavery.

"Sixty-one of the 140 biggest companies on the Global Fortune 500 rankings are European, while only 50 are U.S. companies" (The European Dream, p.66). "In a recent survey of the world's 50 best companies, conducted by Global Finance, all but one were European" (The European Dream, p.69).

"Fourteen of the 20 largest commercial banks in the world today are European.... In the chemical industry, the European company BASF is the world's leader, and three of the top six players are European. In engineering and construction, three of the top five companies are European.... The two others are Japanese. Not a single American engineering and construction company is included among the world's top nine competitors. In food and consumer products, Nestlé and Unilever, two European giants, rank first and second, respectively, in the world. In the food and drugstore retail trade, two European companies...are first and second, and European companies make up five of the top ten. Only four U.S. companies are on the list" (The European Dream, p.68).

The United States has lost 1.3 million jobs to China in the last decade (CNN, Jan. 12, 2005).
U.S. employers eliminated 1 million jobs in 2004 (The Week, Jan. 14, 2004). Since 04, who knows? Government data lag time 2 years, estimates range from 3 to 7 million jobs, depends which duck is quacking, today 07 estimates are conservative. This includes jobs created minus jobs lost, the trend is about 2 million net loss per year and dropping, that is jobs lost increasing. Accurate data impossible to confirm. Shush, don't tell nobody, might create a panic. 17 million illegals just might have jobs here, ya think? Most of them pay federal income tax, is I should say the tax is deducted from their paychecks most of the money stays with the employer who knows the undocumented worker will not file for refunds with the feds, and actively reminds Pedro to do so risks deportation by the la migra offeciosos. Por qua? No la guardia, see.

Three million six hundred thousand Americans ran out of unemployment insurance last year; 1.8 million--one in five--unemployed workers are jobless for more than six months (NYT, Jan. 9, 2005). Does not count illegals and those that quit looking, also day labor, nor those working for cash, drug trade, e.g.

Japan, China, Taiwan, and South Korea hold 40 percent of our government debt. (That's why we talk nice to them.) "By helping keep mortgage rates from rising, China has come to play an enormous and little-noticed role in sustaining the American housing boom" (NYT, Dec. 4, 2004). Read that twice. We owe our housing boom (bust today) to China, because they want us to keep buying all that stuff they manufacture. American poison toys, conspiracy? To narrow trade gap, who knows, more to the point who's not telling? Wal-Mart toys Chinese lead, ignorant children, stupid adults: connection or coincidence?

Sometime in the next 10 years Brazil will probably pass the U.S. as the world's largest agricultural producer. Brazil is now the world's largest exporter of chickens, orange juice, sugar, coffee, and tobacco. Last year, Brazil passed the U.S. as the world's largest beef producer. (Hear that, you poor deluded cowboys?) As a result, while we bear record trade deficits, Brazil boasts a $30 billion trade surplus (NYT, Dec. 12, 2004). Rainforest is the planets lungs, declining at 10%(?) annually feeding fat Americans.

As of last June, the U.S. imported more food than it exported (NYT, Dec. 12, 2004). Relabeled and sent back as u.s. relief aid, you think I'm kidding. Go look. Product of china, labeled u. n for relief not to be sold. I have got a feeling the food stuff is relabeled again and sold back to us, that one boat load of rice has been around the world ten times, meanwhile fewer hungry, less humans, bigger banks, morbidly obese Americans.

Bush: 62,027,582 votes. Kerry: 59,026,003 votes. Number of eligible voters who didn't show up: 79,279,000 (NYT, Dec. 26, 2004). That's more than a third. Way more. If more than a third of Iraqis don't show for their election, no country in the world will think that election legitimate. Al Gore won the last one here. Us *plebs still lost. *….common people of ancient Rome: the ordinary citizens of ancient Rome, as distinct from the (re)patricians, wealthy

One-third of all U.S. children are born out of wedlock. One-half of all U.S. children will live in a one-parent house (CNN, Dec. 10, 2004).

"Americans are now spending more money on gambling than on movies, videos, DVDs, music, and books combined" (The European Dream, p.28). Future native American survival.

"Nearly one out of four Americans believe that using violence to get what they want is acceptable" (The European Dream, p.32) that one already got his that way.

Forty-three percent of Americans think torture is sometimes justified, according to a PEW Poll (Associated Press, Aug. 19, 2004). As long as it's not themselves,100% agree torture hurts.

"Nearly 900,000 children were abused or neglected in 2002, the last year for which such data are available" (USA Today, Dec. 21, 2004). These are only what's reported to social services. Dead ones don't count, 70% plus of incarcerated adults where also neglected or abused. Psychological abuse accounts for 80% of mental illness, including addictions. Allowing children to be raised by schools and television is abuse and the root cause to me.

"The International Association of Chiefs of Police said that cuts by the Bush administration in federal aid to local police agencies have left the nation more vulnerable than ever" (USA Today, Nov. 17, 2004). The plan is working.

No. 1? In most important categories we're not even in the Top 10 anymore. Not even close.
The USA is "No. 1" in nothing but weaponry, consumer spending, debt, and delusion. Denial
The United States once ranked first in the world in high school graduation rates. We have slipped to 17th (the New York Times, Feb. 1).

Respect for the free exchange of ideas is dimming among our young. USA Today, Jan. 31: "One in three United States high school students say the press ought to be more restricted, and even more thought the government should approve newspaper stories before people read them." Which means that our Bill of Rights often is taught poorly or not at all--a very dangerous sign for the future of our liberties.

The United States is 49th in the world in literacy (NYT, Dec. 12, 2004). Those who can read and don't are equal to the man that cannot read.

We rank 28th out of 40 countries in mathematical literacy (NYT, Dec. 12, 2004). Accounts for acceptance of the 38% tax rate, that's means you only get to keep 62 dollars for every $100 you earn. If you tithe faithfully you get to keep$56 gross dollars or $52 net to buy food, shelter, clothes, heat, electric, petrol, insurance, health care…add sales tax….wondering why you can't save anything or seem to get ahead? If you forgot to vote, that's ok they assume you don't mind the taxes then.

"Our students, a new report has found, are lagging far behind the pace set by scientific whiz kids in Europe and Asia, and the number of Americans choosing science as a career continues to dwindle" (Los Angeles Times, quoted in The Week, Jan. 14).

Thomas L. Friedman reports "a mounting crisis" (NYT, Dec. 5, 2004). "Because of the steady erosion of science, math, and engineering education in U.S. high schools, our Cold War generation of American scientists is not being fully replenished. We've been filling the gap with Indian, Chinese, and other immigrating brain-power. But...many of those foreign engineers are not coming here anymore." He adds that many who had emigrated here have recently chosen to leave, and there aren't enough Americans with sufficient knowledge to replace them. The Chinese lead toy generation.

The Christian right's influence in Congress is no doubt the source of headlines like this: "Money to Fix Space Telescope May Be Cut by House" (NYT, Jan. 23). The Hubble is our most successful space project to date. The Hubble "established the age of the universe at 13 billion years.... Every week, the Hubble transmits about 120 gigabytes of data...the equivalent of 36,500 feet of books on a shelf. More than 2,600 scientific papers based on these findings have been published so far" (The Week, Jan. 21).

Hostility to science exists at the highest levels of our government. "With rising intensity, scientists in and out of government have criticized the Bush administration, saying it has selected or suppressed research findings to suit preset policies, skewed advisory panels or ignored unwelcome advice, and quashed discussion within federal research agencies" (NYT, Oct. 19, 2006).

These stats combine to paint the portrait of a poorly educated people seeking to compensate for their ignorance with beliefs that spread such ignorance further--while the rest of the developed world laughs in pity or contempt, and leaves us behind.

I believe one cannot claim to be a cultured human being without knowledge of the great religions, their histories, and scriptures. The Bible hit America's shores 300 years before the Constitution and no one unfamiliar with the Bible can claim to understand America (which disqualifies many so-called intellectuals). The great religions should be required study in every high school and college, if only because there is no greater historical force than religious passion. But religion should be taught as religion, not as science. Interesting to note the last pope, John Paul II, held the position that creation and evolution do not conflict with current Catholic doctrine.

Makes no difference to me when we got here only what we can do to stay here and advance our society. How to keep adapting to our changing environment with a moral compass pointing toward goodness, the light, away from darkness and ignorance. Hostility to science is spreading, like an infection, to history...

The Politically Incorrect Guide to American History, by Thomas Woods Jr., "is being snapped up on college campuses and helped along by plugs on Fox News... Was No. 8 on the New York Times paperback nonfiction bestseller list." The book features far-right revisions of the Civil War, the Marshall Plan, Jim Crow, and the New Deal . It is "one of a wave of books like this." They include Michelle Malkin's In Defense of Internment, which claims that the World War II internment of California's Japanese-Americans was justified and benign; also, a booklet used in a North Carolina school called Southern Slavery: As It Was, claiming slavery to have been "a relationship based upon mutual affection and confidence." This isn't history. This is propaganda. You don't justify old internment camps unless you hope to build new ones. That's how I found that list from the friends of liberty website, newly built idle camps waiting to be housed, no one told me I had to go find the truth.

The teaching of history is usually slanted one way or another, but not long ago the blatant distortion of science would have been unimaginable. The Soviet Union, Nazi Germany, and Maoist China excluded or distorted whole branches of science that conflicted with their ideologies; not long ago no thinking person imagined it could happen here. But it is happening. On a massive scale. From the highest levels of government to the littlest rural school. Power-savvy factions are spreading an easy-to-digest but ultimately fatal ignorance. Poorly educated, well-intentioned, fearful people, craving order in a chaotic world, are eating it up. They're no more or less stupid than the well-informed, but they haven't the resources for research and they've no body of knowledge by which to weigh what they're told. The poorly skilled and scantily educated have nothing to judge information by except whether it satisfies their emotions. If it makes them less afraid, it must be right.

Sam Adams, like many of our founders, believed democracy would flourish "as long as education was extended to the masses." An ignorant people cannot remain a free people.

keep fighting the good fight, with your minds as weapons!!
...............................kosmicdebris.....................................................................

Friday, April 13, 2012

Guess

This post censored by???"?

human rights unite!!

We are ordinary people from around the world standing up for humanity and human rights. Our purpose is to protect individuals wherever justice, fairness, freedom and truth are denied. 

http://www.amnesty.org/

dems or dones

Which party is this one today??


The poor man who takes property by force is called a thief, but the creditor who can by legislation make a debtor pay a dollar twice as large as he borrowed is lauded as the friend of a sound currency. The man who wants the people to destroy the Government is an anarchist, but the man who wants the Government to destroy the people is a patriot.
The humblest citizen in all the land, when clad in the armor of a righteous cause, is stronger than all the hosts of error.

There are two ideas of government. There are those who believe that, if you will only legislate to make the well-to-do prosperous, their prosperity will leak through on those below. The Democratic idea, however, has been that if you legislate to make the masses prosperous, their prosperity will find its way up through every class which rests up on them. You come to us and tell us that the great cities are in favor of the gold standard; we reply that the great cities rest upon our broad and fertile prairies. Burn down your cities and leave our farms, and your cities will spring up again as if by magic; but destroy our farms and the grass will grow in the streets of every city in the country. Having behind us the producing masses of this nation and the world, supported by the commercial interests, the laboring interests and the toilers everywhere, we will answer their demand for a gold standard by saying to them: You shall not press down upon the brow of labor this crown of thorns, you shall not crucify mankind upon a cross of gold. WJB

keep fighting the good fight, with your minds as weapons!

................................kosmicdebris.................................................................

Wednesday, April 11, 2012

five years lator.

Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable..JFK
Category: News and Politics
Address before the American Newspaper Publishers Association. April, 27 1961. John F Kennedy. "The very word "secrecy" is repugnant in a free and open society; and we are as a people inherently and historically opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths and to secret proceedings. We decided long ago that the dangers of excessive and unwarranted concealment of pertinent facts far outweighed the dangers which are cited to justify it. Even today, there is little value in opposing the threat of a closed society by imitating its arbitrary restrictions. Even today, there is little value in insuring the survival of our nation if our traditions do not survive with it. And there is very grave danger that an announced need for increased security will be seized upon by those anxious to expand its meaning to the very limits of official censorship and concealment. That I do not intend to permit to the extent that it is in my control…."(we all know what happened the day the music died November 22, 1963……bye, bye American pie.
While we Americans enjoy our self indulgent lifestyles, oblivious to the consequences, the rest of the world is telling us we are going to get what we deserve. All my life I have been a optimist and refused to entertain the thought that our government could be working against our best interests. I set out to prove the dissenters wrong, that America is great and the gloom and doom people were just misinformed(lying). After four years of searching for the truth I have come to the shocking discovery that we Americans are being fed a steady diet of bullshit, our nationally broadcast news media is nothing but a giant corporate propaganda machine churning out misinformation, false leads, red herrings, rumors and the like, the real intent being to shield the unknowing populace into a false sense of security based on what now appears to be a very fragile house of cards. While we American Romans dance with the stars the rest of the world is watching our great nation burn. Some of the things I have learned are downright terrifying, one of the more significant things I learned has to do with our telecommunications via satellites, if two or three of these are taken out, economic collapse of finance and banking…your plastic will be useless as well as your paper, as well as your cell phone, the internet, our communications from the outside world would stop……and the way things look our so called enemy will not be the source, next or simultaneously power grids gone…. As in no electricity, no gasoline, no heating oil, no radio waves, jammed except state sponsored propaganda. Has anyone else ever wondered why so many survival shows on the history or discovery channels, and others these days, why would such a modern society need such information? We may be building walls around our country to keep illegals out, but walls would also serve to keep us inside. There is a very good chance within the next two years many unspeakable horrors are going to be a reality, this is not a prophesy but history already in motion. Problems cannot be fixed ignoring the signs, like a leaky roof when the rain starts to fall we will realize it is too late. To protect those we love we have got to become better informed and learn to think independently outside political divisions about what is best for all of us. If we nuke Iran we can never go back and un-ring the bell.
These comments were gleaned from different sites around the country and the world.
The People speak….
…….Palestine, Lebanon, Iraq and then Iran? I reckon there is a limit to what the huge, decent majority of the world's Muslims will take. A strike like this wouldn't guarantee oil supplies, but it would assure eternal Muslim hatred of the west. Cruel, unnecessary and a damned stupid idea.
…….Maybe there will be an outside chance that when an order to war is issued it will be ignored. On the other hand maybe we need to get the war started so that the next civilization can start over. It would seem that we are a failed species and are incapable of making the proper connections to live within our environmental limits.
……….Of course they will attack Iran. They will also ignore Museums and head right to the oil fields to protect goo as they did in Iraq.
Incidents such as the flying of LIVE nuclear weapons over the US are staged to get us used to the idea that these weapons may be used. Can't wait for the fallout. Its obvious that the end of easily obtained Oil is coming. Bush/obama, hilly will have to move to an island to be safe after his pres-dent-cy is over, if ever. He and the heartless one truly are Devils.
…….I am nearly overwhelmed by feelings of hopelessness and helplessness. No one outside of the neocons and Christian millenialists want a war with Iran, yet no one with any power seems capable or even interested in preventing it. I have yet to hear a Democrat stand up in Congress to demand that the President obtain Congressional approval before starting such a war, nor have I heard any threats of impeachment if he proceeds without it.
…….Anyone who thinks that the United States is still a democracy needs to be shaken vigorously until he comes to his senses.
…….Hey, here is a chilling thought: what if prez declares martial law in the middle of his next self-manufactured crisis and suspends the constitution? Voila, it's not longer an election year and he can have all the power he wants. Can't happen here you say … that is exactly why it CAN happen here; too many people are complacent with this power grabbing, lying, duplicious administration. We get the government we deserve if we are not willing to stand up and do something before it's too late. Don't count on those spineless democrats. The window for political solutions in this nation is rapidly closing, leave us with only a revolutionary one. God help us all.
……It appears to me that the elite of both parties running the US Government apparently have decided that the American people will refuse to tolerate the inevitable decline in our quality of life and national power as the oil starts to run out. They are certain that it will cost them their power and wealth, so they want to defend that with all of their power.
Of course, many of us already understand the implications of Peak Oil and want to start working on preparing for the post-petroleum world now. That is not in the elite's interest, so they will fight it tooth and nail.
Therefore, they will continue to invade until the entire Middle East is either under US control or the whole thing blows up in their faces and into a shooting war: World War III. This, of course plays into the hands of the military-industrial complex, as well as the easily manipulated far Right Fundamentalists with their fears/hopes of Armageddon. Remember, their sick theology "predicts" this, so they will be cheering loudly as the blood gets deeper and deeper.
……I think that this situation may already be far outside the control of the American electorate, even if they knew what all of this really means.
As far as where the US would get the troops, it is already well-established that the US has been quietly arranging for a new draft for a few years now. A long bombing campaign gives them time to hurry a bunch of cannon fodder through basic training and into place. Remember, we have about 2 years of Dubya's administration left to go. That's ample time to do this if they start soon. Thus, no matter who is voted in after Dubya will face a fait accompli. The US will "own" 60% of the remaining oil in the world, and the US Dollar will be secured as the only currency for petroleum, thus securing its position and stability.
……The Democrats understand Peak Oil as well as the Republicans do, which is why they will make lots of noise but will be 'unable' to stop the current push towards war with Iran by the Republicans. They can 'blame' it all on the Republicans if they are elected, and if they lose there will BE no blame. Of course, many involved are in effect neck deep in what is essentially treason, but they think that they won't be caught or punished.
……..I believe Americans who oppose
Our illegal, immoral and unethical actions, resulting in the murder of tens of thousands of innocent people, should start bringing this government to a halt. We should 1. refuse to pay taxes, 2. take to the streets in mass protest, 3. block access to US government buildings, especially those relating to war…how long are we going to tolerate this evil? The Democrats are worthless. We elected them IN January to end the war and they are more agreeable than the Republicans in handing Bush on a silver platter anything he wants.
1. The boundaries that we see on world maps marking the territories of countries are just what we see: lines on a piece of paper. Iranians are not confined to lines drawn by European powers decades ago. Iranians live not only in Iran but also, en masse, in all the countries in the region. Certain parts of Iran's neighbors even speak dialects of Farsi. So if the United States bombs Iran, since there is no way they have any intentions of invading, they would be declaring war on parts of every country surrounding Iran. This would mean that the United States would be at war with every country in the region since civil war would breakout in all the US installed puppet regimes. This could explain why the United States has created a new map of the middle east.
2. Not only are Iranians spread out in the region, they are also living, en masse, in the rest of the world. The Iranian Diaspora Population map shows that approximately 2.5 million live in the US alone, 700,000 in the Canada, 300,000 in the UK, and 2 million in India. If a war breakouts between the US and Iran then what transpired with the internment of Japanese Americans and Canadians during World War II will become a distant memory and a travesty that will be repeated. Unfortunately it appears that the United States is prepared for this scenario, since it has already built 800 FEMA prison camps which are fully operational and ready to receive prisoners.
3. Iran could stop exporting oil and/or "get tough and close down all oil-tanker traffic that comes within range of (its) missiles–which would mean little or no oil from Iraq, Saudi Arabia, or the smaller Gulf states". This is a very likely scenario, but what exactly does this "global oil rationing, industrial shutdowns, and the end of the present economic era" mean? One way to fully understand the impact of such an event is to look at Africa. The population of Africa at the present is approximately 1 billion. According to a recent presentation at a United Nations conference, it is estimated that "nearly 75% of the continent could come to rely on some sort of food aid by 2025". If there is "global oil rationing" then it is safe to assume that feeding Africans would become a low priority operation for the rest of the world. This would mean that 750 million people could starve to death in Africa.
4. Just to put things into perspective, making sure that it is fully understood what the impact of an attack on Iran really means, consider this. The United States has already stated that they will use nuclear weapons in an aerial bombardment campaign against Iran. Since the creation of the atomic bomb, it has been accepted that once nuclear weapons are used again in any war, then they will continue to be used until there is no one left to kill. As the saying goes, you do not bring a knife to a gunfight, so once a nuclear weapon has been used on any country then that country and its people have a right to use unclear weapons in retaliation. Albert Einstein once said, "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones". I personally hope that we will not fulfill Einstein's prophecy.
WW3 Has Already Started or: 18 Ways To Stop The Bomb
On April 17 2006, Seymour M. Hersh, "an American Pulitzer Prize winning investigative journalist and author based in Washington, DC", reported in 'The New Yorker' that the United States is considering the use on "bunker-buster tactical nuclear weapon, such as the B61-11, against underground nuclear sites" in Iran. This story was also carried on CNN.
It was reported that on January 7 2007, an Israeli attack squadron comprising of three IAF F-16s, each carrying "conventional munitions—as well as a single 20-kiloton nuclear bomb" on a bombing raid to Iran were turned back by "U.S. planes under threat of missile interception."
On August 27 2007, MIT Institute Professor Noam Chomsky, a world renowned American linguist, philosopher, political activist, author, and lecturer, published an essay on ZNet entitled: Cold War II. In this article, Chomsky concludes that Washington's intentions to install a "missile defense system" in Europe "ratchets the threat of war a few notches higher, in the Middle East and elsewhere, with incalculable consequences, and the potential for a terminal nuclear war. The immediate fear is that by accident or design, Washington's war planners or their Israeli surrogate might decide to escalate their Cold War II into a hot one – in this case a real hot war." To put it more simply, Chomsky is predicting Nuclear War. Terminal Nuclear War. The End Game.
Two articles this month, one by Project Censored award winning writer Dave Lindorff entitled "Was That Nuclear-Armed B-52 Flight Destined for Iran?", and the other by Dr. Michael Salla, an international politics scholar, entitled "Was a Covert Attempt to Bomb Iran with Nuclear Weapons foiled by a Military Leak?", are both reporting that the recent B-52 Incident in the United States was an attempt to start Nuclear War with Iran. For those unfamiliar with the story, "A B-52 bomber mistakenly loaded with six nuclear warheads flew from Minot Air Force Base, N.D., to Barksdale Air Force Base, La., on Aug. 30, resulting in an Air Force-wide investigation."
Both, Dave Lindorff and Dr. Michael Salla, are reporting that Vice President Cheney was behind the incident. The same person who believes that "the US should not be pursuing a diplomatic path with Iran", but rather should "establish the policy and pathway to bombing Iran."
We have been lucky, according to Dr. Michael Salla, "the world has been spared a devastating nuclear war by courageous American airmen who revealed the true contents of an otherwise routine B-52 landing at Barksdale, AFB headed for a covert nuclear mission to the Middle East." However, this appears to be just the beginning.
The people in the United States administration are planning on attacking Iran, and they are doing everything in their power to do so. When Noam Chomsky, who is known for his ability to present an unbiased perspective by using the Scientific Method, is stating that we are close to a "Terminal Nuclear War", as in terminal cancer, we must take heed.
Why would the most distinguished linguists of all time and a world-renowned historian delve into the field of soothsaying, predicting a dismal radioactive future for us all? This seems to be absurd, until we fully grasp the implications of what the news reports linked above are stating.
We, as a world community, have come close to destroying ourselves. We are in trouble when Albert Einstein, one of the scientists "instrumental in facilitating" the development of the Atomic Bomb states: "I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones", while the people in control of the largest nuclear arsenal in the world are stating that "all options on the table".
When every leading political figures in the United States is stating that "all options are on the table", then it is likely that nuclear weapons will be used when the United States bombs Iran "back to the stone age" as it threatened to do to a nuclear Pakistan.
Consider this: Technology is developing in such a way that it is becoming easier and simpler to create. From growing food, to making babies, to developing weapons: we are able to make them faster and better. In time, one society will always catch-up with its predecessor, especially in their
technological abilities. Hence those that have at the present must be wise enough to share what is needed with those that require, and cautious enough not to flaunt or misuse things that others desire.
For us to be able to prevent this nuclear Armageddon that the United States proposes we must be as diligent as those who propose it. If they are intend on using all options to contain Iran, then we must consider all options to contain them. The first step in resisting is to educate ourselves and those that follow us. War is no longer an option if humanity is to survive.
Below are some suggestions and resources to help in bringing about a positive change:
1. Spend time with who and what you love. Surrounding ourselves with love should help us to remember the beauty of life.
2. Learn to filter and recognize propaganda. It is corporations that profit from wars, not individuals. Always apply the filter: 'Ownership determines content.' "If we accept that it is desirable for individuals to practice moral agency as fully as possible, then we should seek to create a different kind of media system."
3. Your body, your voice, your mind, and your spirit are required at peace rallies for us to reach critical mass. Additional information at the following news sources: CODEPINK: Women for Peace, Raging Grannies, ANSWER Coalition, Stop War, United for Peace, Move On, Anti War, Common Dreams, bellaciao, PEJ News, OpEd News, Information Liberation , Project Censored , Information Clearing House , Global Research , Prison Planet , The Raw Story , Gush Shalom, and Truthout.
4. Stop watching corporate news on TV, they do not provide information, just propaganda. Frequent legitimate unbiased news sources such as: The Real News Network, Democracy Now!, International News Net, Sub Media TV, Free Speech TV, Link TV, and Alternative Radio: Audio Energy of Democracy.
5. Stop supporting corporate education and entertainment. Learn about your rights, how society functions, what we have done, and are doing to each other and the planet. Watch and learn from movies and documentaries such as: Earthlings, America: Freedom to Fascism, Fallujah: The Hidden Massacre, Chemtrail: Aerosol Crimes, The Oil Factor: Behind the War on Terror, The Future of Food , Liquid Crystal Vision, Marcus Garvey: Look for me in the Whirlwind, The Doomsday Code, Iraq For Sale, Plan Colombia, The Revolution will Not be Televised, Freedom Downtime: The Story of Kevin Mitnick, Zeitgeist, and Loose Change.
6. Learn about the financial institutions that have been established to profit from the ultimate consuming machine known as war. Watch and share: ZEITGEIST, The Movie: Part 3 of 3 (47:05), and the animated Money As Debt (47:07).
7. Stop supporting mass media that has been the voice of government and corporate propaganda and the driving force behind the recruitment, promotion, and continuation of the war agenda. Begin to acquire your news from actual people blogging and reporting on the true nature of life. News blogs such as: What Really Happened, Ya Ya Canada, Dahr Jamail's MidEast Dispatches, Desert Peace, Daily Kos, plus countless others available on the Internet.
8. Write, call, and personally contact your representatives in government, demanding that they begin to represent you and your family, not corporate money. Realize that most of our representatives have not even begun to grasp the "terminal" path that we are on.
9. Not only should you be consuming less and locally, but also producing locally. Corporations over the years have destroyed the infrastructure of local economies, but it is time for us to rebuild. Additional information at Post Carbon Institute, People and Planet , BALLE, 100 Mile diet and numerous other sources available on the Internet.
10. Reduce your dependency on oil by using public transportation and or alternative means of transportation. See Critical Mass for additional information.
11. Downsize your car and/or convert to hybrid transportation. The sooner you do this the better. This will not only save you money on fuel, it will also allow you to sell your large gas-guzzler before the rise in fuel prices reduces the value of your car to nothing. And you better hurry, because the waiting lists for hybrid cars are long and used models are selling for more then the new cars.
12. If you are working for an organization which is actively supporting war then try to find a different occupation which does not require of you to promote the destruction of humanity.
13. Begin to invest in yourself instead of Stock markets who launder money while profiting from war.
14. Begin to work with nature and not against it by learning about natural resources available in your area. Additional information at: World Changing, Planet Friendly network, and NI Business Info.
15. Make healthy eating choices. Studies have found that most bankruptcies are due to medical bills, and since the passing of the Bankruptcy Bill you will no longer be cleared of your debts if you declare bankruptcy in the US, which means that you will become a slave to the banking institutions. This will take away your freedom and force you to abide by their agendas, the main agenda of which is war.
16. Support artists against the war and boycott those that support the war. There are many who have officially spoken out against the war and are proactive in their attempts to bring us peace. Google your favorites see where they stand….morals or money?
17. Participate in civil disobedience. Peace organizers are now advocating "people in the antiwar movement to move from protesting to performing acts of civil disobedience that 'get in the way of the war machine.'"
18. Understand that we are one people occupying one planet, and that we are and will be held accountable for the actions of our governments. Learn about our history by reading books such as: Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace, A People's History of the United States, Hegemony or Survival, Wilhelm Reich in Hell, Mass Psychology of Fascism [PDF] , Pirates of the Caribbean: Axis of Hope, The Shock Doctrine, Ghost Wars: The Secret History of the CIA, Afghanistan, and Bin Laden, and War Is a Racket written by America's most decorated general US Marine Corp Major General Smedley Butler. (I have tried to make sure the links listed work, the dancing frog phenomena may apply and prevent some from working so Google the subject being careful to screen the source. I encourage everyone not to take my work or word go look for yourself…… independently.)
In short, we must face problems which do not lend themselves to easy or quick or permanent solutions. And we must face the fact that the United States is neither omnipotent nor omniscient, that we are only six percent of the world's population, that we cannot impose our will upon the other ninety-four percent of mankind, that we cannot right every wrong or reverse each adversity, and that therefore there cannot be an American solution to every world problem. JFK…Speech at the University of Washington, Seattle, 16 November 1961.
………………………Kosmicdebris...............................might don't make it right..........reset moral compass's now, else say goodbuy..................your mind is the weapon, fight with light.


This generation shall not pass away, till all be fulfilled.