Politically Confused

Zero vision in the BBC's climate 'debate'

2009-12-08T19:11:00.003Z

I am reminded of what Noam Chomsky said about how best to control the masses' thoughts - by allowing vigorous debate, but within predefined limits constructed by the propagandist.

I was listening to Official State radio (aka BBC) this morning, and they were discussing whether short haul flights should be banned or taxed more, to discourage people from using them, because of 'climate change'.
(Plane Stupid logo)

Predictably, on the one side, there was your common quasi-militant environmentalist, from (I think I recall correctly) the group 'Plane Stupid' that opposes, amongst other things, proposed expansion of London Heathrow airport.

And the talking points he put forward were the usual carbon-guilt environmental style. We all like to fly but perhaps we have got used to this privilege a little too much, and we should make sacrifices to save the Earth. All of our short haul flights are the most polluting and we should take the train instead. More taxation is needed on the polluting airlines.

On the other side, the laypersons had varying reactions, but of course carefully staying within politically correct boundaries. One said he liked the convenience and speed of flying from one end of the country to the other, and said trains take too long. Another said that shutting down short haul flying would worsen overcrowding on the train system.

Everybody in the discussion carefully and dutifully remained within the accepted discussion area - idealistic environmentalists versus ordinary people who say saving the planet is too much of a sacrifice. No questioning of the fundamentals of the debate - that manmade carbon dioxide is adversely affecting the world's climate and weather systems, and the only way to solve that problem is to deindustrialise. There was a vigorous debate, yet at the same time there was no debate. Propaganda.

Nobody mentioned the new technology that could change the way we travel forever: magnetic levitation trains ('maglev' trains). See here for more info

These would, of course, render the entire debate irrelevant. They are faster than short-haul flying (if you count the check-in time), if co2 is a concern then these would be a fantastic solution, and since they are incredibly efficient both in terms of energy and time, they would surely be chosen by people in the free market without requiring government financial cattle prods in the form of subsidies, or taxes on other means of transport.

To be fair, plans are underway to build 'high speed rail' in Britain, but this is conventional rail, not maglev which, let's face it, would be more awesome. The Germans, Japanese and Chinese all have their own (for now, small) maglev tracks - the Japanese and Chinese projects actually operate commercially.

I suspect the future of long distance transportation lies in the maglev train. Perhaps even the (as of yet hypothetical) vactrain.

Whether you consider yourself an environmentalist or not, these developments would certainly constitute a great advancement for humanity. A new, cleaner, bigger, better, industrial age. (There Is Life After Oil)

(Can you imagine the potential of this combined with geothermal and concentrated solar energy?)

But if the elites are allowed to strangle us all to death over the very life gas we breathe out, then that future is irrelevant.

50 Internets says you haven't heard of this war

2009-12-08T12:00:00.006Z

Thanks for keeping me informed, MSM. Or not.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeqM5gRJdNHNRlp-RQV98p_SfVXhLM4Mg

Yemen rebels accuse Saudi of launching major attack
By Hammoud Mounassar (AFP) – Nov 23, 2009

SANAA — Shiite rebels in northern Yemen accused Saudi forces of launching a major cross-border ground and air attack on Monday, a day after an alleged failed incursion.

"The Saudis began an attack along many fronts on the Yemeni border," said the Zaidi rebels, also known as Huthis.

The Saudis are using "all types of ground and air weapons," including tanks, artillery, rocket launchers, Apache helicopters and jet fighters, the rebels said in a statement.

Witnesses from the northern border town of Razah also told to AFP that the Saudis began an offensive on Monday.

"The Saudi army launched a vast offensive against Huthi positions in the border region," said one witness, who asked not to be identified.

But a Yemeni official denied that a Saudi assault was taking place.

"These are allegations and lies that the rebels often repeat to expand the scope of the conflict, and also to give themselves more importance than they really have," he told AFP.

A local military commander in northern Yemen told AFP that the Yemeni air force continued its raids on rebel positions on Monday and targeted the house of one of the rebel leaders in the Jawf region, killing four people.

He said the Yemeni military employed artillery against rebel positions in the north of the Harf Sufyan area, near the Saada region, which is a rebel stronghold.

The Huthis released a statment accusing Saudi Arabia of bombing north Yemen villages on Sunday and through the night, following what they called a failed Saudi incursion.

"The (Saudi) air force began bomb and missile attacks on various villages in the Malahidh, Shedah, Hidan and Razah areas" of northwest Yemen, the rebels said in the statement.

Saudi aircraft also bombed Saqin near the city of Saada, they said, as well as Saada suburbs and a central security building inside the city. The city of Dahyan was also targeted, according to the insurgents.

Sunday's attack was led by "around 50 Hummers" supported by helicopters and fighter jets, before the Saudis were repelled and "the aggressors suffered heavy losses," the Shiite rebels said.

The Saudi-owned pan-Arab newspaper Al-Hayat on Monday quoted the Saudi military's southern command as saying it had captured 965 Yemeni infiltrators over the previous two days.

The infiltrators were captured in Jebel al-Dukhan, Al-Doud and Al-Rumayh, the paper said.

It was not possible to verify the number with the Saudi military.

The main clashes in northern Yemen over the past three months have pitted the Huthis against the Sanaa government, which on August 11 launched "Operation Scorched Earth," an all-out assault against the insurgents.

Saudi forces entered the conflict on November 4 after the rebels, protesting against alleged Saudi backing for Sanaa, killed a Saudi border guard and occupied two small villages inside Saudi territory the previous day.

The rebels have been clashing with Yemeni government forces on and off in the rugged mountains of Saada province and surrounding areas since 2004.

They complain of being marginalised and oppressed by the government, which accuses them of seeking to reinstate a form of clerical rule that ended in a republican coup in 1962. The rebels deny the claim.

Aid agencies estimate that the violence has caused 150,000 people in northern Yemen to flee their homes in the five years since the fighting first broke out.

And of course, you never let a good crisis go to waste, do you?

Yemen Sees ‘Mounting Evidence’ Iran Is Arming Rebels

Meanwhile, you know something's wrong when you rely on Iranian news sources over your own:
http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=112947

So here we have another group of non-governmental 'rebels' who just happen to be fighting both Yemen and Saudi. Fourth Generation Butchery. How convenient. Who bankrolls this stuff?

From the pamphlet War Is A Racket by Gen. Smedley Butler:

I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.

I helped make Mexico, especially Tampico, safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefits of Wall Street. The record of racketeering is long. I helped purify Nicaragua for the international banking house of Brown Brothers in 1909-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for American sugar interests in 1916. In China I helped to see to it that Standard Oil went its way unmolested.

During those years, I had, as the boys in the back room would say, a swell racket. Looking back on it, I feel that I could have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.

100 Dead British Soldiers in 2009 in Afghanistan

2009-12-07T22:44:00.001Z

A single death is a tragedy. Is a hundred just a statistic?

Here's what the frontmen in suits have to say about this...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/8400529.stm

"My thoughts and prayers are with the family and friends of the soldier killed on Monday - as they are with all the families of those who have given their lives in this war." - David Cameron

"This is yet another grim milestone in the record of sacrifice made by our brave troops in their mission in Afghanistan." - Nick Clegg

"All of them are heroes and, in paying our respects and making our tributes, I believe we must keep at the forefront of our minds why our people are in Afghanistan and the progress and achievements they have and continue to make alongside our international partners." - Bob Ainsworth, Defence Secretary

Now of course, they say what they say, but all have few issues with continuing and extending the war. So it's all words.

If you want to know how our rulers support the troops with their actions, why not take a look at the fine memorials designed as tributes to our fallen soldiers.

Wait, why do loads of war memorials feature phallic symbolism? Isn't that an insult?

Figure that one out on your own.

Some of the troops are wise to the trick (only too late)

150 Characters to Tell COP15 the Truth

2009-12-07T21:10:00.021Z

Here's my take...

Proposed carbon tax policy will increase co2 emissions, and it will also cripple western civilisation. Forget 'save' the planet - it will enslave it!

Adam, United Kingdom

Have a shot yourself.

Not sure they'll post it (or even read it), but you never know do you.

Copenhagen: Board the Gravy Train of Death

2009-12-06T14:34:00.003Z

I thought I'd do something a little different today, but still Co2penhagen-related...enjoy.

Board the Gravy Train of Death

Yes the weather's changing
Temperatures are ranging
Climate change is here to stay

Bought and paid for science
Says that man's behind this
We create reality

Peer reviewed corruption
Massive money suction
Board the gravy train of death

Train of death

Sin of existence
People should resist this
No Gaia idolatry

Post-Soviet Marxists
Took control of Greenpeace
Marching under cloaks of green

With carbon taxes complete
New World Order's concrete
Board the gravy train of death

Train of death

Then depopulation
Tearing through our nation
Cull the herd fifty percent

TV says that it's good
Solve shortages of food
Wonder where our morals went

No kids without a permit
Prove yourself to earn it
Board the gravy train of death

Train of death

"The threat of environmental crisis will be the 'international disaster key' that will unlock the New World Order." - Mikhail Gorbachev

Imagine There's No Global Warming

2009-12-06T00:37:00.017Z

Tee hee.

Also, remember that fearmongering ACT ON CO2 advert? Fixed.

Is There Life After Oil? Uh...YES!

2009-12-05T00:38:00.352Z

Can you imagine, back in the 1700s or so, some Malthusians (heck maybe even Tommy himself) or whatever they were called back then, bemoaning how the forests were running out and how we'd have to do without fire in the future, and cut our population?

Now everyone knows they would have been wrong. Because human ingenuity found a new energy source. Fossil fuels. This rendered the old energy source pretty much obsolete, over time.

Now nobody worries about forests running out (except rainforests, but that's a whole other story). It is laughable. If you are cold, are you going to go outside and cut down a tree for firewood? No, you'll most likely turn on your gas or electric heater. Because we have developed technology that increases our standard of living and reduces our required effort. In fact, if the new technology didn't do these things, we wouldn't have widely used it.

(Image: To me, it is not real 'peak oil', but artificial scarcity of oil, which is a very real problem in our world today. There is potentially plentiful, non-polluting/less-polluting energy, but the oil cartels don't want this to be devloped as it isn't profitable and controllable quite like oil is)

The same rubbish is being spewed in a different era, by the same people - parasitic rich elites who want the rest of us to be more like medieval serfs than 21st century (fingers crossed) free citizens. They want us to feel guilty that we exist, that we use energy, that we are supposedly some kind of cancer on the Earth. This is to control us. Simple.

Peak Oil, in the short term, simply isn't happening, except in the minds of Malthusians and oil company press releases (nothing like artificially high oil prices for good old profits, eh?)

BUT the other notion about Peak Oil/post-industrial society plays on real concerns about pollution and so on. How do we reduce pollution? (and by this I don't mean co2, which is an essential life element, not a pollutant)

Do we have to shut down industrial society and go back to the land to dig out a living?

As absurd as it may seem, it is what many Malthusian/Marxist environmentalists (called Malthusian/Marxist to distinguish them from real environmentalists) say we ought to do. As an aside, it's funny that some people don't see that everything about socialism/Marxism is about putting the peasants to work as quasi-slaves, not 'liberation' of 'the working class'.

SO, is this the only way? Are we to convert our cars into horse-drawn ploughs, and switch computers for shovels, and work the land like serfs once more? Or is there some way that industrial civilisation can survive fake crises like Peak Oil and Global Warming, and real ones like The New World Order?

First, I do not deny or try to hide from the shortcomings of fossil fuels. They do cause pollution at many points (oil spills, coal contamination of water, coal releases radioactive particles, etc). However, it is generally agreed upon that they are a useful energy resource.

But for the future?

I'm telling you, fossil fuels will be obsolete before they 'peak'. Probably long before. Look at the potential of nuclear power and geothermal power. As long as the Earth is, you know, very hot (though not quite 'millions of degrees' like Al Gore says), you can drill deep enough anywhere on the Earth's surface and pipe water down towards the mantle to boil it, then drive the resulting steam through a turbine on the way back up. Power. No burning fuels needed. As for nuclear, it should be the backbone of 21st century energy, duh! The issue of waste is much politicised but not that significant since even nuclear may be a stepping stone to bigger and better things. (as an aside, I reckon most other 'renewable' methods are a bit rubbish for mass production, but what do I know)

Hydrogen engines are in my opinion something of great potential. This will replace the petroleum engine I am sure. Just takes time. Processing the hydrogen from water requires electricity, which we can generate using nuclear or geothermal power. In the engine hydrogen is converted into energy leaving water as the only waste product. Hurrah! Life without oil; cleaner, in-the-long-term cheaper, and bountiful standards of living for all, without global carbon taxes or depopulation!

Food is a major issue today. Some Malthusian minded people think there is going to be global food shortage as a result of overopopulation. Well if that happens it would largely be down to biofuel cultivation, not 'too many people'.

How do we feed the world? Tough question but here are my suggestions.
1. HEMP. The more I learn about this crop and its uses (food/medicines/textiles/paper etc), the more I am amazed that a) most people have no idea about hemp unfortunately, and b) it is often subject to legal restrictions on production even if it is drug-free. See here
2. ALGAE for food (some types are incredibly nutrient-dense). See this report on the subject
3. SEAWATER as non-polluting, nutritious fertiliser. This is an exciting area which I honestly know little about, but it seems to have great potential. See report here
And only if we are really in a tight spot:
4. CEASE ANIMAL FARMING AND FARM PLANTS ONLY. This would provide a significant increase to food output if it was really necessary to prevent some kind of famine. See here

I doubt that genetic modification, as some suggest, increases food yields in the long term. Much of this is mere propaganda put out by the biotech industry (the Monstrosity known as Monsanto). Besides, there's a lot more evidence that GM food causes cancer than there is that it increases output.

The point of all this rambling, which was set off by a comment someone left on my earlier Peak Oil post, is that people will look back on today, and ask 'did they see the potential shown by new technology and methods, or did they fall for the lies of Malthusianism?'

Imagine what things would be like today if, instead of being visionaries who looked for new ways to grow and expand humanity, our ancestors decided 'the forests are running out' and implemented one child policies and 'tree carbon taxes'. I think we'd know what to say to them!

Imagine if we could speak to our distant descendants. Or rather, they could speak to us. Would they want us to build and grow our species, or cull it and return to the dark ages? What future would they want us to leave them?

That choice, alone, represents the difference between real environmentalists, real human beings, and evil, negative, cancerous, anti-human Malthusians. There are solutions today, but the Malthusian doesn't care about whether solutions are there or not, they just want everyone else to think as backwardly as they do. Balance. Cull. Restrict. Limit. Neuter. Destroy. Die Off. Ex-ter-min-ate...

Malthusians, I used to think like you because that's how I was taught in school. Population bomb. Finite resources. But what of the infinite human potential! Somehow the masters of our little society here on Earth have stolen that thought from our minds. Or tried to steal it.

Poorly Placed Ad Of The Day: Greenpeace

2009-12-04T23:18:00.015Z

Took this screenshot while visiting the Minnesotans For Global Warming site today. Maybe they should rethink the sites they choose to advertise on? ;D

More stuff about Global Warming and Climategate

2009-12-04T01:01:00.004Z

UPDATE: Al Gore Cancels Copenhagen Visit.

Climate campaigner Al Gore has canceled a lecture he was supposed to deliver in Copenhagen.

The former vice president and Nobel Peace Prize winner had been scheduled to speak to more than 3,000 people at a Dec. 16 event hosted by the Berlingske Tidende newspaper group.

The group says Gore canceled the lecture Thursday, citing unforeseen changes in his schedule.

Gore spokeswoman Kalee Kreider says the decision was made because of "all the events going on with the summit." Dec. 16 is a key date for the meeting because that's when the ministerial segment starts.

Chief editor Lisbeth Knudsen says it's a "great disappointment" that Gore canceled and that all tickets will be refunded.

Here comes the government whitewash:
Chair for climate e-mail review (the standard BBC talking point is that 'sceptics' only point to ONE e-mail, the 'trick'/'hide the decline' one, when many others are incriminating too)
________________________________________________________________

'Sceptics' dominate an online poll, Climategate emails searchable database site, Vaclav Klaus and Tories are 'sceptical', Minnesotans For Global Warming make me laugh, Some old news stories discussing (allegedly) manmade global warming AND cooling.

________________________________________________________________

First of all, a delicious poll conducted by the pro-AGW theory sciencemuseum.org.uk. Called 'Prove It!', it simply asked respondents to give a positive or negative answer to the following statement:

"I've seen the evidence. And I want the government to prove they're serious about climate change by negotiating a strong, effective, fair deal at Copenhagen."

Respondents who were actually at their Museum (like, you know, out there in the real world) overwhelmingly responded positively, by 3408 to 626 (84% yes)

However, it gets interesting when we look at their internet poll results, which turned out 2650 in favour to 7612 against! (74% no)

This was summarised in a bemused manner by the director of the Science Museum:
“More work needs to be done to convince people of the reality of human-induced climate change and of the urgency with which we must agree an international solution. Public organisations, like the Science Museum, have a responsibility to lay out the evidence and open up public discussion.”

What it tells me is that the people on the Internet are better informed because they have access to hear all sides, rather than the limited amount of information spoonfed to those who rely on government or corporate 'news' sources alone.

Yep, just as long as the BBC/ITN keep talking about how man is causing those Himalayan glaciers to melt, a potential regional problem no doubt but not caused by humans, some misinformed people might feel gulity enough to believe the AGW lie.
________________________________________________________________

CLIMATEGATE EMAILS are now viewable in a convenient searchable database form at this site http://www.eastangliaemails.com/ (search 'hide the decline' for the most well-known email; also, the one about it being a 'travesty' that there was no evidence for recent GW is one of the most recent, on the last page of the database)
________________________________________________________________

Vaclav Klaus, the only Euro leader with any detectable backbone, on Global Warming:

Cameron hit by Tory backlash on environment

Leading figures including Peter Lilley, the former cabinet minister, Andrew Tyrie and Ann Widdecombe are openly questioning the political consensus on climate change.

And today David Davis, the former shadow Home Secretary, warns in The Independent that the policy of tough targets to cut carbon emissions, supported by Mr Cameron, is "destined to collapse". He criticises "the fixation of the green movement with setting ever tougher targets, in the face of failure to meet earlier promises". He adds: "The ferocious determination to impose hair-shirt policies on the public – taxes on holiday flights, or covering our beautiful countryside with wind turbines that look like props from War of the Worlds – is bound to cause a reaction in any democratic country."

I first heard of Minnesotans For Global Warming a few years ago when they were pictured with a sign saying "Global Warming = Beach Party". Back then of course I thought they were astroturf oil company loving fools. But little did I know, they were right!

________________________________________________________________

Old stories:
2008 was the year that manmade global warming was disproved

Easily one of the most important stories of 2008 has been all the evidence suggesting that this may be looked back on as the year when there was a turning point in the great worldwide panic over man-made global warming. Just when politicians in Europe and America have been adopting the most costly and damaging measures politicians have ever proposed, to combat this supposed menace, the tide has turned in three significant respects.

First, all over the world, temperatures have been dropping in a way wholly unpredicted by all those computer models which have been used as the main drivers of the scare...

...Secondly, 2008 was the year when any pretence that there was a "scientific consensus" in favour of man-made global warming collapsed. At long last, as in the Manhattan Declaration last March, hundreds of proper scientists, including many of the world's most eminent climate experts, have been rallying to pour scorn on that "consensus" which was only a politically engineered artefact, based on ever more blatantly manipulated data and computer models programmed to produce no more than convenient fictions...

...Thirdly, as banks collapsed and the global economy plunged into its worst recession for decades, harsh reality at last began to break in on those self-deluding dreams which have for so long possessed almost every politician in the western world.

2002 - The Ice Age Cometh

THE Earth's climate is changing in a dramatic way, with immense danger for mankind and the natural systems that sustain it. This was the frightening message broadcast to us by environmentalists in the recent past. Here are some of their prophecies.

The facts have emerged, in recent years and months, from research into past ice ages. They imply that the threat of a new ice age must now stand alongside nuclear war as a likely source of wholesale death and misery for mankind. (Nigel Calder, former editor of New Scientist, in International Wildlife, July 1975)

The cooling has already killed thousands of people in poor nations... If it continues, and no strong measures are taken to deal with it, the cooling will cause world famine, world chaos, and probably world war, and this could all come about by the year 2000. (Lowe Ponte, The Cooling, 1976)

1974 - Another Ice Age? (via One's Observations)

[Read the whole article, it's a mirror image of modern day climate alarmism, but here's the key point]

Man, too, may be somewhat responsible for the cooling trend. The University of Wisconsin's Reid A. Bryson and other climatologists suggest that dust and other particles released into the atmosphere as a result of farming and fuel burning may be blocking more and more sunlight from reaching and heating the surface of the earth.
_______________________________________________________________

We are all carbon-based life forms...carbon is not a pollutant!!!

If the Earth warms, you did it. If the Earth cools, you did it. If El Nino or La Nina is too strong or too weak or off by a year, you did it. If a volcanic winter occurs, you did it; and as the planet warms following aforementioned volcanic winter, you did it.

In fact, whatever the Earth's climate does, complex and difficult to understand even with modern science as it may be, we know one thing: you are responsible. And you must pay us money to offset your sin of existence.

Tomorrow this will be more than just a reality TV show

2009-12-02T21:50:00.129Z

Carbon Cops, an Australian show on the aptly named Sundance Channel (bloody Pagans).

The best bit is guilt tripping the lad into handing over his car keys at 3:40 and 6:10.

I consider it a chilling look into the near future if the tidal wave of Malthusian bollocks is allowed to continue unchecked. I'm thinking armbands and papers, commissars and informants. Detainees and holding centres.

The logical conclusion of the anti-co2 cause is genocide. Almost as if those with genocide in mind anyway would use the anti-co2 religion for their own ends, isn't it?

So what are you willing to give up to 'save the Earth'? I'll come and take your car, maybe. Or perhaps your heating system. I'm not stealing. I'm crusading to save the polar bears. You refuse? Global Warming Denier! I'm calling the Carbon Response Unit, you need to go to Carbon Camp to learn how to fight global warming. And no having any Carbon Monster babies without a permit, because you're obviously not fit for the purpose of raising them with your foolish beliefs about global warming not being manmade.

Whenever I read the comments section of The Guardian, I am reminded - unfortunately - that some people would actually support all of the above measures.

"Through clever and constant application of propaganda, people can be made to see paradise as hell, and also the other way round, to consider the most wretched sort of life as paradise." - Adolf Hitler

"Eugenics views itself as the fourth leg of the chair of civilization, the other three being a) a thrifty expenditure of natural resources, b) mitigation of environmental pollution, and c) maintenance of a human population not exceeding the planet’s carrying capacity. Eugenics, which can be thought of as human ecology, is thus part and parcel of the environmental movement." - John Glad, eugenicist

“Even though it is quite true that any radical eugenic policy will be for many years politically and psychologically impossible, it will be important for UNESCO to see that the eugenic problem is examined with the greatest care, and that the public mind is informed of the issues at stake so that much that now is unthinkable may at least become thinkable.” - Sir Julian Huxley, first director general of UNESCO (1946-1948)

I support environmentalism that is eugenics-free and Malthusianism-free. Overpopulation is not the problem. Totalitarianism is not the solution. If you think there isn't room on the planet for 'all these people', then here's a pistol. Lead by example.

An un-PC look at the UN

2009-12-02T18:10:00.156Z

Forget Islam, Internationalism is the real "religion of peace". And by "peace" I of course mean war

Ah, the United Nations. Formed after WWII to prevent such a horrible situation from ever happening again. Right?

Here's a question: does the UN benefit more from preventing war or from causing war?

If the UN prevents a war, they may get a pat on the back. Good PR. Not much else.

If the UN causes or allows a war however, the public will demand more powers for the UN to intervene in the conflict with 'peacekeepers', more funding for the UN to 'rectify' the situation, etc.

Thus the incentive is much greater for the UN to create crisis than to avert it. It's the old thing about government subsidising failure. It doesn't just work with the banks...our friendly world government gets richer and more powerful in a state of crisis too. (co2 anyone?)

Korea. Vietnam. Major conflicts both caused by global powers meddling in the affairs of small nations (arbitrarily cutting them in half, what did you think would be the result of that?) It should be noted that, while it wasn't the UN that split Vietnam, this decision was made at Geneva of all places. Here's a thought - why not leave the Vietnamese to govern themselves? As for Korea, the UN was actually a belligerent in that war. While neither of these wars was UN-caused, they were caused by non-UN global governance decisions to split these countries. World government will NOT mean peace, but endless war.

Iraq. UN sanctions kill a million Iraqis between 1991-2003, including 500,000 children. (the UN admits to this heinous crime by the way, those death tolls are their own estimates.) They also use Iraq as an oil whore in the oil-for-food scam...we starved you, now give us your oil and we will feed you. Who else could get away with this other than the untouchable UN?

I don't even want to get too much into the UN and mass murder. Disarming people and allowing genocide to happen. Isn't it funny that wherever the UN goes, genocide follows.

http://www.gendercide.org/case_srebrenica.html

If anyone thinks everything will get better if the UN is expanded to become an all-powerful global government, perhaps as a result of the manmade climate change scam, then consider what the UN's own Universal Declaration of Human Rights says. I have written in detail about this before, but basically it says you have no rights and are a slave to the UN's whims. (it annoys me when naive people hold up the Declaration as some kind of great document of freedom...it's the elites' sick joke on the rest of us, it is only the illusion of freedom)

Everyone, peaceniks especially, don't trust the UN! They are not a heralder of peace, unity or any such ideal, but old fashioned war and feudal slavery!

The New 'Green' Tactic. Guess what it is?

2009-12-01T23:12:00.028Z

Since Climategate is showing their junk science to be just that, how about...

Religion "holds key to saving planet"
Not long after a British judge ruled that environmental concerns are broadly equivalent to religious belief, I came across this interesting story in The Ecologist suggesting that conventional religions represent the best hope of meaningful action.

The story appeared before a conference organised by the Alliance of Religions and Conservation, described by the UN as "the biggest civil society movement on climate change in history".

Faith communities own between 7per cent and 8 per cent of the habitable land surface of the planet, run (or are involved in) half the world's schools and control more than 7 per cent of international financial investments.

Speaking at Lambeth Palace before the ARC conference at Windsor, the Archbishop of Canterbury said religions held the 'moral vision' and that ultimately their impact would have 'deeper roots' than anything achievable at the Copenhagen summit.

UN Assistant Secretary-General Ola Kjorven said with more than 85 per cent of the world's population adhering to a religion the commitments made at the Windsor summit had the potential to be, 'the biggest mobilisation of people and communities that we have ever seen on this issue.'

See, really it doesn't matter whether this much co2 is linked to this much temperature change or not. Malthusianism marches on regardless. Too many people! Too few resources! We need eugenics and genocide to save humanity! Fools. They're stuck in the Georgia Guidestones' playbook.

I'm So Scared Of Al-Qaeda, I Submit To Dictatorship

2009-12-01T16:29:00.066Z

Terror So Conveniently Leads The Public To Demand Totalitarian Government, It Almost Looks As If The Rulers Just Want It To Be There

Recommended Wikipedia reading:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attack_on_Gleiwitz_radio_station

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_flag#Examples_of_false_flag_attacks_as_pretexts_for_war

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strategy_of_tension

Just picture that suspended rag doll wearing a turban and declaring 'holy war' against the West. If you want me to spell it out.

But if that is the case, whose are the operating fingers? Look to history for answers.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/articles/CHO109C.html

"The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) using Pakistan's military Inter-Services Intelligence (ISI) played a key role in training the Mujahideen. In turn, the CIA sponsored guerrilla training was integrated with the teachings of Islam:

Predominant themes were that Islam was a complete socio-political ideology, that holy Islam was being violated by the atheistic Soviet troops, and that the Islamic people of Afghanistan should reassert their independence by overthrowing the leftist Afghan regime propped up by Moscow."

Sibel Edmonds' key testimony:

http://lukery.blogspot.com/2009/07/bombshell-bin-laden-worked-for-us-till.html

"In the interview, Sibel says that the US maintained 'intimate relations' with Bin Laden, and the Taliban, "all the way until that day of September 11."

These 'intimate relations' included using Bin Laden for 'operations' in Central Asia, including Xinjiang, China. These 'operations' involved using al Qaeda and the Taliban in the same manner "as we did during the Afghan and Soviet conflict," that is, fighting 'enemies' via proxies."

And one for the road:

http://georgewashington2.blogspot.com/2009/11/us-could-have-killed-bin-laden-in-2001.html

AGW and Peak Oil: A Two-Part Malthusian Myth

2009-11-30T17:50:00.098Z

If the theory of anthropogenic global warming is the first wave infantry assault on our common sense, then peak oil is the reserves that mop up any anti-Malthusian resistance remaining.

The recent Climategate email leaks have had a massive effect on the believers in AGW theory. Scientists churning out junk science! Who'd have thunk it?

(As an aside, this whole story has had a profound effect on Mike Adams of naturalnews.com, who is now something of a GW sceptic. But he should be, as his site knows what it's like to fight uphill against government-mandated junk science brainwashing.)

(Of course it's "the end of cheap oil", 'cause cartel-created artificial scarcity is driving up prices!)

But there remains another - less important, but nonetheless vital - deception to conquer. And that is Peak Oil.

This is the notion that oil production will, or has, reached a 'peak' as available reserves run out. It's what you get taught in school ('oh, we only have enough oil for 20 years' or whatever). But we are finding more all the time!

The Peak Oil argument is that we are not finding enough new oil reserves to continue our consumption for any significant length of time. There's only one problem with that...WE ARE!

http://seekingalpha.com/article/82236-the-peak-oil-myth-new-oil-is-plentiful

Quoted from that article - see JUST ONE example of how Peak Oil is a fraud:

"8. The United States holds significant oil shale resources underlying a total area of 16,000 square miles. This represents the largest known concentration of oil shale in the world and holds an estimated 1.5 trillion barrels of oil with 800 billion recoverable barrells – enough to meet U.S. demand for oil at current levels for 110 years. More than 70 percent of American oil shale is on Federal land, primarily in Colorado, Utah, and Wyoming. In Utah, a developer says his company already has the technology to produce 4,000 barrels a day using a furnace that can heat up rock using its own fuel. ``This is not a science project,'' said Daniel G. Elcan, managing director of Oil Shale Exploration Corp. ``For many years, the high cost of extracting oil from shale exceeded the benefit. But today the calculus is changing,'' President George Bush said. Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, said the country has to do everything it can to boost energy production. ``We have as much oil in oil shale in Utah, Wyoming and Colorado as the rest of the world combined,'' he said."

In other words, who's stopping the extraction of all this oil? The US government is. In collusion, I expect, with the oil companies. To drive up prices. A delicious cartel arrangement made much more profitable by the Peak Oil Fraud.

Now don't get me wrong, I'm not saying oil is infinite. But it's not running out anytime soon. If it was, then America would be Drilling Baby Drilling right now, believe me.

We will not run out of oil. Rather, new technology will simply replace oil in much the same way that fossil fuels replaced the use of trees for wood. Oil will be obsolete. It should already be. Cartels are keeping oil in place for their own interests. Where's that hydrogen powered car, eh? Nuclear tech/geothermal replacing coal fired power stations? Give it time.

PS: I don't believe human co2 production has much at all to do with global temps, but if you believe that then come on, support the new technology we do have (which happens to be non-co2 emitting) instead of bitching at Copenhagen that we need global carbon taxes and less children because 'we are a cancer on the Earth' or something. Malthusianism is the delusion of the defeatist, and the invention of the eugenicist.

How bad is Modern Warfare 2, anyway?

2009-11-29T09:12:00.002Z

You may want to read others' opinions on this matter too:
- Information Liberation
- Raw Story
- Infowars (mirror w/ comments)

Basically, there was a controversy over a paticular segment of popular videogame Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 2, in which the player participates in a terrorist massacre at a Russian airport. Russia actually banned the game as a result.

Depending on your sensitivity and/or satanic bloodlust, you may want to look away or watch intently.

Now, what I want to discuss, is what kind of influence this is going to have on people. Some discerning citizens reacted to this when it was posted at Infowars, saying it is a piece of propaganda portraying participating in a massacre of unarmed citizens as a good thing.

What you don't get from the video above, is the short video introduction to that level, providing the narrative background to this event, which to me is worse than the actual level. As I played this I couldn't help but think what was going through the heads of the guards at Abu Grahib...or a marksman positioning himself on the infamous Grassy Knoll.

General Shepherd is talking to Private Allen, the CIA operative whose character you assume for the above level. Transcript is as follows:

Two men took down an entire base. I ask much more from you now.

Yesterday you were a soldier on the front lines. But today, front lines are history.

Uniforms are relics. The war rages everywhere. And there will be casualties.

This man Makarov is fighting his own war and he has no rules. No boundaries.

He doesn't flinch at torture, human trafficking or genocide.

He's not loyal to a flag or a country or any set of ideals. He trades blood for money.

He's your new best friend.

You don't want to know what it's cost already to put you next to him.

It will cost you a piece of yourself.

It will cost nothing compared to everything you'll save.

At this point, it is important to discuss the issue of violence in videogames more broadly. Some may shrug this off as insignificant, because after all there is nothing new about machine gunning masses of innocent people in videogames (GTA?)

The difference is that in something like Grand Theft Auto, you are playing a CRIMINAL.

Call Of Duty series games are literally indirect military recruitment tools - violent, yes, but always moral. Respectable. "Patriotic". Heroic 'Merikans saving the world from the Newk wielding Terrusts. No civilians ever hurt by aforementioned heroic 'Merikans. All evil terrusts hater 'Merika, and they deserve a bullet between the eyes, which is just what they get. That's what you get when you mess wither 'Merika!!!111

The featuring of such grotesque scenes in an otherwise 'respectable' videogame (in which, usually, strict military 'morality' - i.e. invade somewhere and only shoot the people shooting back at you - is applied) leaves me uncertain as to what kind of effect this will have on the sheeple.

Either: BAD - People are being shown a scenario in which the CIA kills innocent people, but it's all 'for the greater good', just like in the movie The Watchmen
Or: GOOD - People are being introduced via videogame to the undeniable reality of false flag terror operations (historically and today).

I should add, because it's relevant context to this post, that the story (which is in many ways the antithesis of the good guy SAS and USMC against the ebil terrusts of the previous instalment) ultimately has the player killing General Shepherd. Long story short, the massacre at the airport (and the subsequent Red Dawn-style Russian invasion of America) had all been cooked up by him. Why? Essentially, he had a personal vendetta to raise Army recruitment, and write his own version of history.

I can't explain everything here, you'll have to read the plot to understand the propaganda fully:
http://callofduty.wikia.com/wiki/Call_of_Duty:_Modern_Warfare_2#Plot

So let me get this straight:
1. Player told to kill loads of innocent people 'but it will save many more'
2. Player is betrayed by Shepherd, the very man giving the orders for the above massacre
3. Player must surely realise how this relates to the real world? That they were being used then thrown away, much like real soldiers, by their boss? That their boss was willing to stoop to staging terror attacks to reach their own selfish ends? (now I know, here the General is staging terror, when in reality it would not be one man, but covert groups within the intelligence agencies as ex-CIA man Ray McGovern says)

"History is written by the victors. History is filled with liars." - another home truth players of MW2 are confronted with later in the game

Remind me again why people are complaining about MW2? Because, if the impression I got from the game is accurate, and I tried to think like a sheeple while playing, it is (intentionally or not) the most anti-NWO piece of propaganda I've ever seen from such a mainstream piece of media.

How's that for a surprise conclusion?
________________________________________________________________

IMHO: Someday I'll have to write about this in depth, but I believe the increased violence etc in media is the worst thing the elites have ever done to harm their cause. Desensitisation may have been designed for young soldiers, but to me it seems that by making cynics out of the rest of us, it actually helps people to understand more easily how the global control structure truly works. Less cognitive dissonance...people almost EXPECT to find true evil in power. Which, with the right information available to them, they of course will.

Shocking Flu Vaccine Miscarriage Stories

2009-11-28T10:38:00.042Z

Authorities have repeatedly insisted pregnant women need H1N1/regular flu vaccination to 'protect their babies'.

miscarriage.about.com: Some Pregnant Women Fearful of H1N1 Vaccine

Some of the comments on that story:

"I got the flu vaccine (regular not H1N1) at 8 weeks pregnant. Three days later I miscarried. I am not going to get the H1N1." - Jo

"i work in a hospital like setting and was told ‘the benefits outweigh the risks” 1am i got the vaccine, 3am i started bleeding and craming, 3pm miscarried. you decide" - :(

"I had the H1N1 vaccination and 24 hours later had a miscarriage." - Sue

"My daughter in law was 10 weeks pregnant and had the H1N1 vaccine on Friday that night she miscarried." - Linda Hill

"I was so ready to get the H1N1 vaccine last week and they were only giving them to pregnant women. I was 6 weeks along and got it and the next day I started cramping and miscarried. I already had two healthy pregnancies and never miscarried or had any problems. My doctors think I am crazy to think it was the H1N1 but if no one looks into this than other women will not know. I am so sorry that I got it." - SoSorry

"I also agree something needs to be done and looked more into with this vaccination because most women are being advised it’s just something that happens, but I also had two healthy children normal pregnancies and when I received this vaccination with my third pregnancy, my baby is gone." - Connie

"I received the H1N1 vaccine on October 16th and started experiencing cramping on the 22nd. I was nearly 17 weeks pregnant and gave birth to a stillborn baby boy on the 23rd. Like many of the other women here, the first thing I suspected was the H1N1 vaccine. I immediately asked a nurse at the hospital if that would have anything to do with it. Without hesitation, she told me “absolutely not.” I had reservations about getting the vaccine, but followed the advice of my long trusted family doctor. In a follow up appointment with my doctor 3 days after I lost my baby, I asked him if the vaccine would have had any adverse effects on my baby. He also said that it was not possible." - sioux falls, south dakota

http://organichealthadviser.com/archives/shocking-h1n1-swine-flu-vaccine-miscarriage-stores-from-pregnant-women-tell-your-doctors-that-vaccines-and-pregnancy-do-not-mix

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2009/11/28/Shocking-Swine-Flu-Vaccine-Miscarriage-Stories.aspx

Polanski The Kiddy Fiddler Goes Free

2009-11-28T00:43:00.014Z

Because If We Locked Him Up We'd Have To Have Armed Police Descend On Bohemian Grove Just To Be Consistent

Times: Sarkozy 'very effective' in securing Polanski release

Roman Polanski’s family yesterday praised the role played by Nicolas Sarkozy in securing the film director’s release on bail after two months in a Swiss prison.

The French President “has been very effective” behind the scenes, according to the film director’s sister-in-law Mathilde Seigner, as Mr Polanski prepared to move from a cell to house arrest in his luxury chalet in the exclusive Alpine village of Gstaad.

Ms Seigner refused to elaborate on the nature of Mr Sarkozy’s assistance but the President may have been influenced by his wife Carla Bruni’s own connections with the chic Parisian artisic set to which Mr Polanski, his actress wife Emmanuelle Seigner and her sister all belong.

The Swiss authorities said that Mr Polanski would be allowed out once the agreed bail of 4.5 million Swiss Francs had been received. They have ordered that he should not leave his chalet - for fear that the first-rate skier might slip over the nearby border via a mountain pass into his adopted French homeland and escape US justice a second time.

“I wouldn’t go so far as to say that it is thanks to the President that Roman has been freed, but he has been super,” Mathilde Seigner told Le Parisien newspaper.

“The President has been very effective.”

The Only Question Is, Who Came On To Whom?

2009-11-26T23:42:00.057Z

Was it George the Conneticut Cowboy or Tony the Mayan Mystica? Possibilities ad nauseum.

Iraq inquiry: Tony Blair 'agreed to regime change' in meeting at George Bush's ranch

Sir Christopher, who was Britain's ambassador to the US between 1997 and 2003, said the April 2002 meeting in Crawford, Texas, appeared to be a major turning point.

He said in evidence: 'I took no part in any of the discussions and there was a large chunk of that time when no adviser was there.

'I know what the Cabinet Office says were the results of the meeting but to this day I am not entirely clear what degree of convergence was, if you like, signed in blood at the Crawford ranch.'

He said the change in stance was evidenced in a speech given by the Prime Minister the following day.

'To the best of my knowledge, I might be wrong, this was the first time that Tony Blair had said in public 'regime change', Sir Christopher said.

So maybe it was Tony after all. Well then this is dedicated to him. Only those in the know will get it.

(if the above content doesn't make sense, click here)

Israel: F' Yeah!

2009-11-24T21:25:00.010Z

The Middle East's only Democracy. Get them native brown sonsabitch Mooslim/Christian heathen terrorist Gentiles.

For A Change: Satanic Tom and Jerry

2009-11-23T23:36:00.011Z

Now why would I choose to blog about Tom and Jerry? You'll see.

And Before You Notice It, The EU Is A Country

2009-11-23T22:19:00.210Z

I pledge allegiance to the flag, and the dictatorship for which it stands; one nation under Baphomet, indivisible by popular vote and unaccountable to the serfs living herein.

OK, so the EU has a President now. Not like anyone had much of a say in this of course. Some Belgian chap. Who cares anyway? The puppet is irrelevant, do you know who the puppeteers are, that's what matters.

The thing is, I wonder how many people still sit absorbing the wonderful government news sources as they sit you down like a child for a bathtime story...yes I say bathtime because after all the MSM is telling you an appeasing fairytale while simultaneously looking for an opportunity to hold your head under the water long enough...just a little longer my fellow serfs, and then we can solve this nasty overpopulation problem...

And this, children, this is the new President of the EU, and he said that there are many challenges we in this European nation all have to face together [emphasis mine and theirs], such as the manmade fantasy of manmade climate change, and the global economic crisis that can only be solved by introducing a worldwide fiat currency controlled by the very people responsible for the crisis in the first place - the S.O.B.s, or Satanic Occult Bankers.

(Above: the Reverse Seal of the USA indicates the plan for globalisation, linked to various occult orders, is long in the making. Translates roughly as "He [the Eye of Providence] approves of our undertakings"..."New Order of the Ages", in other words "New World Order". Check your $1 Federal Reserve Notes, Americans! For more info on the reverse seal see here)

The thing that struck me most was the introduction of a post dealing with the EU's "foreign affairs". How do people not notice this? Are they in a fluoride induced stupor to the extent that they don't realise the EU IS a foreign affair of this nation? Only nations have foreign affairs! An international group should not need one person to deal with foreign affairs, because ALL they do is deal with the foreign affairs of the dozens of inedpendent European nations.

Now of course I know that isn't technically true. I know that most laws passed in this country and others are now EU directives that we cannot have any say on (as if our MPs would protect us from totalitarianism anyway, they'd more likely go Nazi on us and take the gold fillings from our corpses to pay for their second homes). But most people still falsely believe we are an independent nation, or that the power the EU wields is largely superficial.

I just think that when it becomes obvious that the EU is one nation now, most (sane) people will likely reject it outright. It's the doublethink that annoys me most.

United States!
United States!
Of Eura-sia!

(Above: Tower of Babel on the left, an EU poster on the right. Are we living in the new Babylon, a society of degradation and ultimately self-destruction? Below: The strange design of the EU Parliament building seems to suggest this too...)

Think Like A Psychopath: How To Get Away With Evil

2009-11-22T23:03:00.129Z

There are two key terms to getting away with evil, real evil: Compartmentalistion and Plausible Deniability.

Plausible Deniability refers to the ability of a psychopath or group of psychopaths to exploit the good nature of the people around them. So, for a very simple example, consider the robberies seen in Britain in the last few years where thieves pretend to be 'from the gas company' to inspect an elderly resident's meter. Then once they let in these 'gas men', things turn nasty and they get robbed or worse.

(for what it's worth, I don't believe you can tell someone is evil just from their genes, but nonetheless pure evil seems hereditary. Rockefeller?)

Fraudsters live on plausible deniability (in other words, the act of leaving enough doubt in the victim's mind that they conform to the social norms and do not suspect the criminal, because openly suspecting the criminal of wrongdoing seems like a paranoid thing to do). They actively seek targets who are gullible enough to remain suspended in plausible deniability while they are being robbed (they may say things like, 'oh he wouldn't do that').

But there is a section of the population that is much more able to scam, defraud and trick, than anyone else. And we are led to who this group is, when we look at WHO fraudsters choose to impersonate.

Ever seen The Real Hustle or something similar? The best scams are when the con artists take on the appearance of authority figures. Who are authority figures? People we are trained to look up to. Those wealthier than ourselves. Professionals (not just 'gas men', try doctors, like Harold Shipman, who got away in a state of plausible deniability while killing scores of elderly patients). Most importantly, anyone who wields power. Police. Security. Officials in fine hats. You obey them like you are trained to, and have been trained to since birth.

So then, does it not follow, that if one small section of the corrupted percentage of our population seeks to pretend to be these people, do other corrupt types not seek such positions of authority for real? Can they not operate with maximum plausible deniability, when they are within the establishment?

What I am saying is that people believe government or big business (really government is little more than the biggest, most evil business of all) are out to help them and protect them at all times and can essentially do no wrong except when they make 'mistakes' (another example of plausible deniability, like when drug companies 'accidentally' contaminate vaccines with live bird flu and get away with it - oops!).

Thus criminal members of the establishment operate with unparalelled plausible deniability shielding them from account for their crimes. They can invade whole countries, kill over a million people, and then smile afterwards, give a good old shrug of the shoulders, say it was a mistake and that there was intelligence failure, then walk off like nothing happened, still covered by the mind-control-esque phenomenon where the public decides these crimes are plausibly deniable, therefore denies them.

Of course there is a price to pay for ignoring the fact that you have been scammed...which, obviously, is the fact that you will be scammed again. Probably by the same people in the same way.

Which is why one of my favourite quotes, coming from Ayn Rand, goes like this:

"We can evade reality; but we cannot evade the consequences of evading reality."

We cannot evade the reality that evil people in government, big business etc, historically and today, are exploiting the majority of people, under the cover provided by plausible deniability. It may be easier to pretend mass murder, large scale theft and fraud, are 'mistakes', but mark my words - the establishment is not incompetent. Rather it is genius. It is we that are incompetent, if we cannot see that they are evil. This is a simple truth, without the realisation of which, the problems of today cannot be solved.
________________________________________________________________

Next we must consider how the smartest criminals and psychopaths are able to operate their heinous deeds as part of a group, gang or such - manipulating others to do their bidding while remaining disconnected from the direct acts of evil themselves...therefore protecting themselves further from any attempt to hold them accountable by good people.

It's called Compartmentalisation, and I'll write about that soon.

And No Man Shall Be Able To Buy Or Sell

2009-11-20T13:01:00.001Z

Lest he hath received this mark...

BBC - Tiny chip could diagnose disease

(And look who is doing the research, it's the little Hitlers at IBM, which I swear stands for I Bury Masses, a tribute to their wonderful technology that helped inmates of concentration camps the world over get pretty numbers on their arms...yep, that was IBM. Genocide. IBM. Genocide. Don't forget that. That's what they mean by 'building a smarter planet'...even their ads subtly refer to eugenics! True evil is bold, in-your-face, and still gets away with it.)

http://www.ibmandtheholocaust.com/

Anyway, the story is that microchips inside the bloodstream could diagnose disease more efficiently. Aww, now these chips are really friendly and one of them is named George and the other is named Jessie and did I say they were really friendly? Don't worry, you can keep them after you're done seeing the doctor. Aww.

Radio
Frequency
Identification
Device

= Cancer and Slavery

Info on a recent H1N1 vaccine 'blunt needle' controversy...some suggested the only reason wider needles were being used in some places was so that chips could be placed in the needles...just something to be aware of as a possibility... click here

http://blog.puppetgov.com/2009/09/14/orwellian-tech-erasing-civil-rights-raising-h1n1-vaccine-questions/

Heck, you only need to look to the Georgia Guidestones...

"Maintain humanity under 500,000,000 in perpetual balance with nature...
Be not a cancer on the earth - Leave room for nature - Leave room for nature."

There's your smarter planet - genocide and 'sustainability'...but then I repeat myself.

Afghanistan: Why We Fight

2009-11-15T22:40:00.131Z

Maeks me wanna wave mah flag...AMERKUH!

(a bit closer to home, here's Gordon reciting the mantra that we must fight them over there so we don't have to fight them over here; I guess the truth of that depends on who 'they' are, doesn't it?)

"The prime minister said he rejected this because three-quarters of terrorist plots against the UK originated in Afghanistan and Pakistan." (source article)

- And four fifths of statistics are made up to give credence to an argument?

Here are some statistics that were not made up. This is a chart of opium production in Afghanistan (but please search images 'opium afghanistan' for yourself to confirm) which paints a slightly different picture of our motives for war there.

For what it's worth, I don't think Iraq is about the oil, but the oil is one factor - a bonus prize if you will. I think opium is just as significant (if not more) in Afghanistan - but not stopping opium, oh no. If the US/NATO wanted opium production to stop, they would have allowed the Taliban quasi-government of the late 90s continue to stamp out poppy cultivation as they were doing (see chart). But they seem more intent on increasing and protecting poppy cultivation and thus opium production. Instead of a 'war on drugs', which is bad enough, here we seem to have a 'war for drugs', which is even worse morally.

The Afghan 'government' under the autocratically selected warlord Karzai is transparently corrupt. There is nothing in that country that needs defending by foreign troops. Let the locals deal with it, believe me they don't need our help shooting at one another.

And as for the issue of radical Islam, a concerning cultural phenomenon (but, I would emphasise, a *domestic* issue not a foreign policy issue), we would be in a better position to criticise it effectively if we regained the moral high ground when complaining how 'Islam wants to impose its values on us', a *legitimate concern*, if we also acknowledged that while some foolish Muslims may make such threats, we (or our governments) have actually gone a step further and are carrying out similar such threats in trying to impose 'Western values' (ie fake elections, puppet rulers and corporate debt slavery) on the rest of the world.

Hypocrisy is best served at morgue temperature. With a crisp covering of flags and banners. Oh, and probably some roses too just to hide the foul stench of decaying morality. Follow it up with a nice Masonic phallus so that the elites can brag how they fuck you over even after your sacrificial death.

For we are, after all, mere pawns in their game. Are we not?

Now-recovered Cheerleader attacked by Big Media

2009-11-12T23:21:00.031Z

It's as inevitable as the sun rising in the morning.

Since multiple doctors confirmed Ms Jennings was injured directly due to the flu vaccine she received, there is no basis to the media/drug company claims that her illness was all in her head.

Vaccine Victim Viciously Attacked By Medical Establishment

The truth is, they are simply jealous that natural medicine, something they make no money off, succeeded where conventional medicine would have been powerless to do anything and admitted 'defeat' since no patented chemical can reverse dystonia. There's a pathetic truth for you.

Conventional medicine is one of the deadliest things on the face of the earth, actually